# [Wet Thumb Forum]-FL (standard T? tube) Vs PL (compact) flourescent light



## fc (Mar 19, 2004)

Since 2 years ago, many from the place I live have slowly converted from FL to PL. I was told that it can better penetrate deep tanks. However, its’ compactness is the feature that I need.

I am hesitated about it but finally gave in because I need to increase my light. PL seems to be the obvious choice as it fit in to the “urban” space up there.

However, I soon found that PL is not as efficient as FL in light reproduction. Visually, it is much less bright that FL, something like 30% poorer. FL is 865 and PL is 860 and both are Philips and 36 watts.

Dear experts, what is your view to this? If space is not a constraint, is PL a bad choice?


----------



## fc (Mar 19, 2004)

Since 2 years ago, many from the place I live have slowly converted from FL to PL. I was told that it can better penetrate deep tanks. However, its’ compactness is the feature that I need.

I am hesitated about it but finally gave in because I need to increase my light. PL seems to be the obvious choice as it fit in to the “urban” space up there.

However, I soon found that PL is not as efficient as FL in light reproduction. Visually, it is much less bright that FL, something like 30% poorer. FL is 865 and PL is 860 and both are Philips and 36 watts.

Dear experts, what is your view to this? If space is not a constraint, is PL a bad choice?


----------



## Rex Grigg (Jan 22, 2004)

Normally with compact florescent lights you get much more light in the same space. I can't see how you are using both bulbs in a 36 watt output. Do you have a picture of the bulbs?

Moderator










American by birth, Marine by the grace of God! This post spell checked with IESpell available at http://www.iespell.com

See my Profile for tank details.


----------



## fc (Mar 19, 2004)

Rex,

I do not have the picture at the moment but I can describe it. There are 2 PL lamps (the U shaped compact tube) fitted into a 4ft lamp housing which normally can house one 36 watt FL tube.

I compare this PL set with a FL lamp set which has 2 FL tubes in a bigger lamp housing meant for 2 FL tubes. Both use the same type of electonic ballast.

The light output difference is very significant, about 30%.

Thanks.


----------



## Rex Grigg (Jan 22, 2004)

OK, it sounds like you are under driving the lights. If you are using the same ballast that will drive one FL bulb to drive two PL bulbs you are under-driving the bulbs.

Moderator










American by birth, Marine by the grace of God! This post spell checked with IESpell available at http://www.iespell.com

See my Profile for tank details.


----------



## fc (Mar 19, 2004)

Rex,

Sorry, I did not explain well. I mean both PL and FL lamp sets are using electronic ballast with the same brand. Each lamp set has their own ballast that is designed to drive two 36 watts lamp.


----------



## fc (Mar 19, 2004)

I would appreciate to have the comments/opinions from anyone who has the experience in both PL and FL light. Which type is more efficient in light reproduction and better for the plant?


----------



## fc (Mar 19, 2004)

Can someone advise on this?

Thanks.


----------



## Rex Grigg (Jan 22, 2004)

Well you have me confused but I will try. If by FL tubes you mean the straight tubes with pins on each end and my PL you mean the bent tubes with all the pins at one end I might be able to help you.

You say both tubes are 36 watts. Well 36 watts is 36 watts. They should be around the same brightness. But I'm still confused. What size, length and diameter are your FL tubes? 36 watts is not a common size. If they are 4' long and 1.5" (t-12) in diameter then they could be anywhere between 32-40 watts. How long are your PL bulbs?

And I'm still not clear on the ballast situation. When you removed the FL bulbs you replaced the ballast with one that was supposed to drive two PL 36 watt bulbs, correct?

Moderator










American by birth, Marine by the grace of God! This post spell checked with IESpell available at http://www.iespell.com

See my Profile for tank details.


----------



## jpmtotoro (Feb 13, 2003)

i love power compact lighting, throwing away all my flourescent tubes as fast as i can. i don't know what type of lighting you have... but i use 55 watt PCs and a single 55 is MUCH brighter than 60 watts of normal tubes. look at ahsupply.com you can look at those lights vs your own... are they the same? the PC lighting is ungodly bright, plants grow great... so i'm wondering if you have really good NO lighting, or really bad PC lighting.

JP

PS where did you come up with "PL" ? just wondering. most people call the bulbs power compact, thus PC... are yours called something different?


----------



## Mortadelo (Mar 14, 2004)

They call compact fluorescents "PL" because that is the brand name of Philips compact fluorescents (Philips PL-L 860 for example). As everybody calling HQI and HQL to halide lamps and mercury vapor lamps in some countries. HQI and HQL were the names of a line of lamps form Osram.

Freddy, most compact fluorescents (what you call PL) have virtually the same brightness of triphospohor linear fluorescents becuase they use the same phosphors, you lose some brightness due to the shape of the CF, but just a little bit, not 30%.

Perhaps you are using one of the rare full spectrum compact fluorescents. Most compact fluorescents are triphosphor (very bright) but a few are multiphospohor (full spectrum) and, as we all know full spectrum fluorescents have lower lumens (around 20% less). In this case less lumens are not a bad thing, it is just the way full spectum bulbs are made.

¡Mi web!
http://www22.brinkster.com/aguaverde/


----------

