Radium metal halide bulbs will not be produced anymore!

[ogasman]

Of course, Here is the info. This is the ballast that works great for both 250W 20k Reef Bright Bulbs and 250w 20k Radium bulbs (both bulbs I have on hand to test)
Label on Ballast S50 internals (In the Grow industry a magnetic ballast rated for high pressure sodium HPS bulbs are the ballast we want)
Again here is a link to this ballast $25

https://www.htgsupply.com/products/agrostar-250w-hps-ballast/

They Also have a 400w version of this ballast $69 and I might pick up 3 of those as well to keep on hand. here is that link

AgroStar 400w HPS Ballast | HTG Supply Hydroponics & Grow Lights

The AgroStar 400 Watt High Pressure Sodium ballast is manufactured by High Yield Lighting, a leading manufacturer of horticultural lighting fixtures and bulbs. It features high-quality components as well as an efficient design to ensure optimal performance in the indoor garden. Electrical...

www.htgsupply.com

Inside shot of the internals:

Powering a Reef Bright 200w 20k Bulb without issue

Powering up a Radium 250w 20k Bulb without issue

Below is the ballast not to get its the M58 and did not power these bulbs here is that link

AgroStar 250w MH Ballast | HTG Supply

Shop our AgroStar inventory for a selection of lighting ballasts that suit your needs. HTG Supply has optimal ballasts for your next project. Get one today!

www.htgsupply.com

Hopefully this helps

Any chance you have one of the 400w ballasts and opened it up to see what lives inside?

Paul

 

[Z Burn's Reefing]

Weird to me too.. Needs an answer why..

Not really...when the early epidemiologic studies found that lung cancer was caused by smoking, the biological mechanism was unknown. We just knew a relationship existed, we didn't know how or why.

Many experts in the hobby suggest, by experience, that acropora would appear to react to MH lighting differently than other light sources; they observe different coloration and different growth rates.

They may not be able to explain the mechanism by which this occurs, but that doesn't mean it is not happening.

 

[Minifoot77]

Corals have deeper, richer colors under halides and the “flesh” is thicker and less translucent. You can clearly see that they are healthier. This cannot be explained away.

All you need is a 4 -6 hour peak with halides to get the benefits. My primary lights are LED.

This is what I want to try 4 hour peak

 

[Troylee]

This is what I want to try 4 hour peak

Mine have been set for 4-5 hours a day the last year with just reefbrite bars running for 11… I just 2 weeks ago bumped the halides up to 7 hours a day cause I hate staring at a windex tank and my tank looks boring under blues since I have daylight corals. What I saw so far in those 2 weeks is a slight increase in growth not much but my ph went way up “about 1.5” which is telling me the corals are growing much faster and alk started dropping a lot the last couple days which is a good sign! I’m gonna run them 7-8 hours a day and see what happens.

 

[Z Burn's Reefing]

Mine have been set for 4-5 hours a day the last year with just reefbrite bars running for 11… I just 2 weeks ago bumped the halides up to 7 hours a day cause I hate staring at a windex tank and my tank looks boring under blues since I have daylight corals. What I saw so far in those 2 weeks is a slight increase in growth not much but my ph went way up “about 1.5” which is telling me the corals are growing much faster and alk started dropping a lot the last couple days which is a good sign! I’m gonna run them 7-8 hours a day and see what happens.

I run my MH 8 hours. Any longer than that and the increase in pH starts to plateau some, so I think 7-8 hours is a pretty good target if you are using them as your main light source. I agree with others, if your primary light source is led, then a few hour MH blast is all that is needed.

 

[njreefkeeper]

Weakened or just haven't produced enough " sunscreen"?
Are you weaker without sunscreen?
Sure more susceptible to cancer.
Also could be the zoo clade that is dominant from the old lights. Speculation.
Seems corals are very slow in adjusting to drastic changes of light intensity and spectrum or so I read.


How does one determine " true" color?
Aren't shallow water corals mostly just brown in nature?
Some pink/violet chromoproteins and green.

There is plenty of " white light" in white LEDs. People just don't use it.
The white light is usually a poor quality for color rendering though.

Except for the 6500k-ish t5's most of the
color pop ones from the RGB trick of creating white . Or in their case more like blue green mostly amber. This is the " whitest" ati bulb I believe.
High k mh are similar.

Just food for thought.

I’m not a scientist…but I’m glad you touched on this. And, not being a scientist I get to speculate and form my own conclusions through observation and application of what I’ve learned. I think some interesting factors are at play here when comparing LED’s to halides.

Firstly, I don’t believe SPS corals “need” UV to grow. And when I say UV, I don’t just mean UV color spectrum is represented. True UV output. Halide has it…LED has none even 1” below the surface. That said, when people started bleaching corals under LED’s I found it interesting that I was producing more par under halides but still bleaching those same corals under LED’s. We can discuss the semantics of optics and lenses being more focused but with all the flow turned off I was still generating more par under halides at any point where corals were.

My point…I don’t believe UV is necessary to grow corals, but it’s my opinion through observation that they sure as @&$& need it to signal photoinhibition and develop that sunscreen that produces a more rich, deep coloration. It’s my opinion that corals never receive that UV signal under leds, and therefore bleach out. Halide most closely mimics the sun in both output, color rendition and radiant energy. If I put my arm a foot under my halide reflector for a half hour I most definitely will have a sunburn…or halide burn rather. I can leave my arm a foot under an led fixture all day long and never see a hint of sunburn. No, it’s not scientific, but it’s enough for me to see a vast difference. I’ll take corals that look absolutely amazing under leds and move them under 14k ushios and they look drab and more pale. I’ve heard the discussions of how expensive true UV is to emit on a diode and believe it will be some time before that tech comes down in price to be able to be included in our led fixtures. Until then, I believe it’s the missing link in leds matching halides.

Lastly, there are also algae types that develop under leds that I’ve never seen under halides. And I’ve seen this same algae in other peoples tanks. It’s a dark red (almost black) velvet to the touch algae. I think halide and t5 UV output destroys this algae; much like the sun.

My .02

 

[ogasman]

Mine have been set for 4-5 hours a day the last year with just reefbrite bars running for 11… I just 2 weeks ago bumped the halides up to 7 hours a day cause I hate staring at a windex tank and my tank looks boring under blues since I have daylight corals. What I saw so far in those 2 weeks is a slight increase in growth not much but my ph went way up “about 1.5” which is telling me the corals are growing much faster and alk started dropping a lot the last couple days which is a good sign! I’m gonna run them 7-8 hours a day and see what happens.

More temperature tests. I have seen multiple people state that Radiums run hot. The last test was pretty underwhelming. I could not find much difference in the bulbs tested. I theorized that the reflector in the pendant was good at reflecting IR as well as visible light. May be a reason I did not see a difference between the bulbs tested. Time for a different setup.
In the new test I ran a black target about 20 inches under the light. Target was a piece of opaque black plastic that was placed over a bucket to provide an air gap. I ran a digital temp probe attached on the top of the target. A 400w Reefbrite ballast was used. Each bulb was allowed enough time to heat soak the target (about 4 hours) until the temperature to stabilize. The new Reefbrite 20K stabilized at 117.4 F, the new Hamilton 14K was 117.5 F, the old Ushio 14K was 119.4 F, the old Radium was 119.3 F. Finally a difference. Anybody have a 400w Hamilton 20k I could test? It would be nice to know how they compare if they really become available again.

Paul

 

[Troylee]

More temperature tests. I have seen multiple people state that Radiums run hot. The last test was pretty underwhelming. I could not find much difference in the bulbs tested. I theorized that the reflector in the pendant was good at reflecting IR as well as visible light. May be a reason I did not see a difference between the bulbs tested. Time for a different setup.
In the new test I ran a black target about 20 inches under the light. Target was a piece of opaque black plastic that was placed over a bucket to provide an air gap. I ran a digital temp probe attached on the top of the target. A 400w Reefbrite ballast was used. Each bulb was allowed enough time to heat soak the target (about 4 hours) until the temperature to stabilize. The new Reefbrite 20K stabilized at 117.4 F, the new Hamilton 14K was 117.5 F, the old Ushio 14K was 119.4 F, the old Radium was 119.3 F. Finally a difference. Anybody have a 400w Hamilton 20k I could test? It would be nice to know how they compare if they really become available again.

Paul

I run 250w hqi which I believe are the hottest of them all but doesn’t really affect my tank as I run an open top and they can breath. I have phoenix 14k bulbs. My temp goes up about 1.5° and I’m not even sure it’s the lights causing the temp increase as my skimmer line is ran outside so it pulls hotter air as the day goes on.

 

[oreo54]

I’m not a scientist…but I’m glad you touched on this. And, not being a scientist I get to speculate and form my own conclusions through observation and application of what I’ve learned. I think some interesting factors are at play here when comparing LED’s to halides.

Firstly, I don’t believe SPS corals “need” UV to grow. And when I say UV, I don’t just mean UV color spectrum is represented. True UV output. Halide has it…LED has none even 1” below the surface. That said, when people started bleaching corals under LED’s I found it interesting that I was producing more par under halides but still bleaching those same corals under LED’s. We can discuss the semantics of optics and lenses being more focused but with all the flow turned off I was still generating more par under halides at any point where corals were.

My point…I don’t believe UV is necessary to grow corals, but it’s my opinion through observation that they sure as @&$& need it to signal photoinhibition and develop that sunscreen that produces a more rich, deep coloration. It’s my opinion that corals never receive that UV signal under leds, and therefore bleach out. Halide most closely mimics the sun in both output, color rendition and radiant energy. If I put my arm a foot under my halide reflector for a half hour I most definitely will have a sunburn…or halide burn rather. I can leave my arm a foot under an led fixture all day long and never see a hint of sunburn. No, it’s not scientific, but it’s enough for me to see a vast difference. I’ll take corals that look absolutely amazing under leds and move them under 14k ushios and they look drab and more pale. I’ve heard the discussions of how expensive true UV is to emit on a diode and believe it will be some time before that tech comes down in price to be able to be included in our led fixtures. Until then, I believe it’s the missing link in leds matching halides.

Lastly, there are also algae types that develop under leds that I’ve never seen under halides. And I’ve seen this same algae in other peoples tanks. It’s a dark red (almost black) velvet to the touch algae. I think halide and t5 UV output destroys this algae; much like the sun.

My .02

Lot to unpack there
Unfortunately l'll defer to the peanut gallery that this isn't the place to unpack that.

But just to give a picture of what you are talking about, spectrum wise. One example. That doesn't look like sunlight at any depth really.

 

[njreefkeeper]

Lot to unpack there
Unfortunately l'll defer to the peanut gallery that this isn't the place to unpack that.

But just to give a picture of what you are talking about, spectrum wise. One example. That doesn't look like sunlight at any depth really.

Lot to unpack there
Unfortunately l'll defer to the peanut gallery that this isn't the place to unpack that.

But just to give a picture of what you are talking about, spectrum wise. One example. That doesn't look like sunlight at any depth really.

If this halide discussion isn’t the place to “unpack that” where then should I unzip the bag? I think comparing the spectral plot of a Phoenix 14k (which is VERY blue by halide standards) isn’t an accurate representation. We’ve all heard the hype and pomp about corals absorbing more usable energy in the blue spectrum, yet anyone who’s ever run a 250 watt iwasaki 6500k halide will attest to (quoting Adam from Battlecorals) “‘much more vigorous growth”. It’s also a VERY yellow to the eye bulb that I’ve never seen any led fixture on the market able to match even when every channel is tuned to 100% Why? Why with every fixture on the market putting more and more blue in their mix does this old school 6500k grow sticks faster? It flies in the face of all the data championing the blue heavy light craze. All fixtures these days (save maybe the Philips Coral Care) skew blue even at 100% output…which Sanjay Joshi has stated as well.

And to be clear, I’m not only referring to spectral plot comparisons and visual aesthetics when saying “halides most closely mimic the sun”. I’m speaking of UV output (led has none) and radiant energy. Of the three light options available, (Halide/T5/LED) all tests I’ve seen show halide produces the most, followed by some measurable output in t5 and a goose egg from LED. Maybe there’s more we don’t know? That’s how science evolves. Maybe other organisms and supportive photosynthetic components of the benthic chain are stimulated under a halide’s UV output. So while the corals may be absorbing “mostly from the blue spectrum”, other soldiers are absorbing through other spectrums and possibly creating food sources (energy) and possibly eliminating certain bacterial strains that hinder/harm coral health in the long run. I think there’s a lot we still don’t know.

Lastly, to go back to the Phoenix 14k…all these hobby terms for color temps are not scientific; but hobby driven. My 400 watt Ushio 14k bulbs in Lumenmax Elite reflectors driven by old school Galaxy ballasts are pure white light (almost yellow) with no hint of blue to the eye whatsoever. A 14k Phoenix 250 watt would look like an actinic bulb next to the Ushio.

Finally, I wasn’t arguing. I was sharing my observations and opinions over years of using all the technologies.

Another observation and opinion:

Tridacna clams do better under halides. I think that’s why we see so few in aquariums these days whereas 10-15 years ago almost every SPS dominant aquarium had at least one.

 

[dieselkeeper]

Strawberry shortcake acro has always been a real finicky coral to color up and like to go brown and nobody knows why.. I got one cheap from a radion lit tank.. first pic. under halides it glows!

How long did it take for all that growth? I would also like to see some growth times if any body keeps track. I think a comparison would show that halides are worth keeping around.

I had a 40 gal breeder frag tank setup. Went cheap on the whole setup. I brought the ballast new on sale. Put together the fixture with a spider reflector. All corals, SPS included, grew really well. Still use it today. Used on the treatment tank for two carpet anemones. They loved the strong light.

 

[Troylee]

How long did it take for all that growth? I would also like to see some growth times if any body keeps track. I think a comparison would show that halides are worth keeping around.

I had a 40 gal breeder frag tank setup. Went cheap on the whole setup. I brought the ballast new on sale. Put together the fixture with a spider reflector. All corals, SPS included, grew really well. Still use it today. Used on the treatment tank for two carpet anemones. They loved the strong light.

This is 1 month. But I’m also feeding them a bacteria concoction I make so that’s helping I believe!

 

[oreo54]

If this halide discussion isn’t the place to “unpack that” where then should I unzip the bag? I think comparing the spectral plot of a Phoenix 14k (which is VERY blue by halide standards) isn’t an accurate representation. We’ve all heard the hype and pomp about corals absorbing more usable energy in the blue spectrum, yet anyone who’s ever run a 250 watt iwasaki 6500k halide will attest to (quoting Adam from Battlecorals) “‘much more vigorous growth”. It’s also a VERY yellow to the eye bulb that I’ve never seen any led fixture on the market able to match even when every channel is tuned to 100% Why? Why with every fixture on the market putting more and more blue in their mix does this old school 6500k grow sticks faster? It flies in the face of all the data championing the blue heavy light craze. All fixtures these days (save maybe the Philips Coral Care) skew blue even at 100% output…which Sanjay Joshi has stated as well.

And to be clear, I’m not only referring to spectral plot comparisons and visual aesthetics when saying “halides most closely mimic the sun”. I’m speaking of UV output (led has none) and radiant energy. Of the three light options available, (Halide/T5/LED) all tests I’ve seen show halide produces the most, followed by some measurable output in t5 and a goose egg from LED. Maybe there’s more we don’t know? That’s how science evolves. Maybe other organisms and supportive photosynthetic components of the benthic chain are stimulated under a halide’s UV output. So while the corals may be absorbing “mostly from the blue spectrum”, other soldiers are absorbing through other spectrums and possibly creating food sources (energy) and possibly eliminating certain bacterial strains that hinder/harm coral health in the long run. I think there’s a lot we still don’t know.

Lastly, to go back to the Phoenix 14k…all these hobby terms for color temps are not scientific; but hobby driven. My 400 watt Ushio 14k bulbs in Lumenmax Elite reflectors driven by old school Galaxy ballasts are pure white light (almost yellow) with no hint of blue to the eye whatsoever. A 14k Phoenix 250 watt would look like an actinic bulb next to the Ushio.

Finally, I wasn’t arguing. I was sharing my observations and opinions over years of using all the technologies.

Another observation and opinion:

Tridacna clams do better under halides. I that’s why we see so few in aquariums these days whereas 10-15 years ago almost every SPS dominant aquarium had at least one.

Mw to mw ( or par) 6500k iwasakis have more blue than most other bulbs. Well more of everything compared to other higher k mh's.
Phoenix is more a "20000k" class bulb.
See here is catch. WHY they called it 14000k is baffling
If you go to 6500k mh's your comparison would be an led tank that ran....6500k exclusively and like 600par at the surface.
Who does that?
Or even a pure RGB emitter tank


As to clams:
Now there does seem to be an issue if one starts with " little size" clams.
Personally I'd look to bad strains or a pathogen as a culprit. But just a guess.
Clams seem to not have a light saturation point, at least a layer like 300par one.

Light saturation level is obtained at 2500 PAR under HQI for T. maxima (That's a lotta PAR). Growth is limited when both Ca2+ or PO43- is not available. Concentration of nutrients only moderately benefits zooxanthellae concentrations and only optimal lighting conditions.Jan 29, 2013

There are plenty of clams under led.
Borrowed images...

From light source to light source or tank to tank some things do do better.

You want a " thesis" on crappy white LEDs? Best just do that on or something.
Let's just say some just use warm whites effectively.
Has nothing to do w/ mh's

There's def a lot " we" don't know.
A" coral" seems to be a complete biosphere all on its own
A collection of fungi, algae, bacteria, archae and viruses to say the least.

Are you referring to IR when you use the term radiant energy?

Because you can't see blue is meaningless
Your eye is a horrible quantifier.

As to UV as long as one sticks to uv-a (380-400) cost isn't too bad. Problem is lifespan and efficiency ATM.
Getting better though
Just an example. This store has high prices and certainly not what a manufacture would pay. Loose diodes start around $11. Lot cheaper in bulk

385nm LUXEON Z Ultraviolet on a Saber Z1 10mm Square Base - 325 mW @ 500mA

The Quadica Developments SZ-01-U1 has been discontinued, but we still have stock available. Order online now. No minimums. Shipping Anywhere.

luxeonstar.com

But nobody's quantified which nm or range is " important".
Just a shotgun approach.

 

[BeanAnimal]

More temperature tests. I have seen multiple people state that Radiums run hot. The last test was pretty underwhelming. I could not find much difference in the bulbs tested. I theorized that the reflector in the pendant was good at reflecting IR as well as visible light. May be a reason I did not see a difference between the bulbs tested. Time for a different setup.
In the new test I ran a black target about 20 inches under the light. Target was a piece of opaque black plastic that was placed over a bucket to provide an air gap. I ran a digital temp probe attached on the top of the target. A 400w Reefbrite ballast was used. Each bulb was allowed enough time to heat soak the target (about 4 hours) until the temperature to stabilize. The new Reefbrite 20K stabilized at 117.4 F, the new Hamilton 14K was 117.5 F, the old Ushio 14K was 119.4 F, the old Radium was 119.3 F. Finally a difference. Anybody have a 400w Hamilton 20k I could test? It would be nice to know how they compare if they really become available again.

Paul

A watt is a watt is a watt. “Hot” is ambiguous. Total power current * voltage) transferred through the bulb tells you what you need to know.

Different ballasts will drive different amounts of power through the same bulb. Those different amounts of power will produce different arc signatures and different sound. Emitted wavelengths will vary and therefore what absorbs them or reflects them (stored as growth, heat or transferee to motion, etc) will vary by material, density, color, etc).

Hot is “ambiguous”. A watt is a watt.

However, one arc may produce more IR than another, and thus “heat” local objects (black body) more. It is kind of a pointless conversation. We are not comparing the “heat” from a 100w resistance coil (mostly IR) to an 100w full spectrum arc. Both hanging above the tank will heat it differently, but both in insulated boxes will “heat” them at the same rate and to the same endpoint.

 

[ogasman]

A watt is a watt is a watt. “Hot” is ambiguous. Total power current * voltage) transferred through the bulb tells you what you need to know.

Different ballasts will drive different amounts of power through the same bulb. Those different amounts of power will produce different arc signatures and different sound. Emitted wavelengths will vary and therefore what absorbs them or reflects them (stored as growth, heat or transferee to motion, etc) will vary by material, density, color, etc).

Hot is “ambiguous”. A watt is a watt.

However, one arc may produce more IR than another, and thus “heat” local objects (black body) more. It is kind of a pointless conversation. We are not comparing the “heat” from a 100w resistance coil (mostly IR) to an 100w full spectrum arc. Both hanging above the tank will heat it differently, but both in insulated boxes will “heat” them at the same rate and to the same endpoint.

I am not worried about how much power a 400w bulb will require, or "heat" produce in a closed system, your box. I am trying to see how much of the arc signature of the bulb is IR, and transferred into the tank resulting in a temperature increase in the system. The way I look at it in our situation, IR is a waste byproduct of light production. If I have a few MH bulbs to choose from, will one require the use of a chiller and will one not depending on the amount of IR produced? Am I looking at this wrong? I currently run Radiums, and since I increased the surface area, and volume of the system the chiller runs much less now. If I switch to the Reefbrite bulbs will the chiller still be needed? They seem to emit less IR the way I tested them.

Paul

 

[BeanAnimal]

I am not worried about how much power a 400w bulb will require, or "heat" produce in a closed system, your box. I am trying to see how much of the arc signature of the bulb is IR, and transferred into the tank resulting in a temperature increase in the system.

For the same lamp on any compatible ballast, the black body radiation will likely be very close, only different by the actual power transferred through the bulb. Yes, the amount of radiation at each wavelength may vary slightly, but I don't think it will be enough to meaningfully measure for an aquarium (or black plastic bag).

The way I look at it, IR is a waste byproduct of light production. If I have a few MH bulbs to choose from, will one require the use of a chiller and will one not depending on the amount of IR produced? Am I looking at this wrong?

No - all MH lamps for a given real consumption (not label wattage) will be very similar watt for watt, the arc may differ a bit based on ballast and so will the phosphors and gas mixture and arc characteristics depending bulb, but in the end they will be the same. Sure a "20K" lamp and a "6K" lamp will have further spread, but both are going to "heat the tank" similarly via radiation and convection.

 

[oreo54]

I am not worried about how much power a 400w bulb will require, or "heat" produce in a closed system, your box. I am trying to see how much of the arc signature of the bulb is IR, and transferred into the tank resulting in a temperature increase in the system. The way I look at it in our situation, IR is a waste byproduct of light production. If I have a few MH bulbs to choose from, will one require the use of a chiller and will one not depending on the amount of IR produced? Am I looking at this wrong? I currently run Radiums, and since I increased the surface area, and volume of the system the chiller runs much less now. If I switch to the Reefbrite bulbs will the chiller still be needed? They seem to emit less IR the way I tested them.

Paul

About 20% Well the only "source" I found.

ZEISS Microscopy Online Campus | Metal Halide Lamps

Metal halide illumination sources are rapidly emerging as a serious challenger to the application of mercury and xenon arc lamps for investigations in fluorescence microscopy.

zeiss-campus.magnet.fsu.edu

https://www.icnirp.org/en/frequencies/infrared/index.html

Wavelength range and sources


Infrared radiation (IR), also known as thermal radiation, is that band in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum with wavelengths above red visible light between 780 nm and 1 mm. IR is categorized as IR-A (780 nm-1.4 µm), IR-B (1.4-3 µm) and IR-C, also known as far-IR (3 µm-1 mm).

 

[Reefering1]

Metal Halides

So I gave in and I’m giving up my Metal Halides for LEDs. I’m keeping the T5’s for now. But I did just replace the 2 - 250W bulbs in the MH. Anybody looking for metal halides get in touch. The real big deal is… wish me luck on figuring out these LEDs!

www.reef2reef.com

 

[Minifoot77]

Ended up getting 2 of the agrostar mh/hps ballast... im gonna have to open them up to put a normal connection on them and then we will see the difference with the blue icecap ballast and these guys

 

[Reefering1]

Ended up getting 2 of the agrostar mh/hps ballast... im gonna have to open them up to put a normal connection on them and then we will see the difference with the blue icecap ballast and these guys

When you open them, note the ansi number/ take a picture of label on the transformer inside