90 gallon slow and steady build

4 hrs a day for the MH seems to be the consensus I got as a starting point. Then run your t5's 8-12 hours it seems like. This is what I'm going to start at next week. I think I'll run the t5's from like 8am-1pm then MH from 1pm-5pm then back to t5's from 5pm to 10pm. I'd like to slowly ramp up the MH to like 6hrs a day, so I'd either run everything at once, or cut the hours of the t5's accordingly.

I am far from an expert on MH/t5 lighting schedules....like far far far far far....far far far....and a little further from an expert. Saturday will be my first attempt at it in probably 5 to 6 years. Hopefully some more opinions will come in...help us both out!

I'll start out with four hours then. I was excited to learn that you are switching over to MH too. We can compare notes as we go.

I'm going to be going halide/t5 on my build off tank and my 180 whenever I can finally set it up. Are T5's typically run separately and not on when the halides are?

I was thinking of running them separately to help keep heat down, even if just a little. Plus it might extend the life of the t5's if you saved the hours (4,5,6,8,10 whatever the MH's are on for).

I don't know, random thought by Chris I guess!

I'm going to be going halide/t5 on my build off tank and my 180 whenever I can finally set it up. Are T5's typically run separately and not on when the halides are?

I would think you would want to run them together. Haven't really seen anyone do them always separated. To me it would kind of defeat the purpose of having the combo if you arent going to run them together at least for a short amount of time. I could see maybe only doing them separate if par levels were way to high with both running, but otherwise I would always do them together

Most definitely! If you want to get more eyes on the MH/t5 lighting schedule questions and options, maybe you are I should start a new thread? Although looking at some of the national forums last night I consistently saw 4,5,6 hours on MH and 8-12 on t5.

Quick update- replaced all the ceramic MH bulb sockets. Installed new bulbs and put the light up. It's been running since Sunday and the livestock seem to be responding well. Today I installed a fan to run with the lights. It's like the one you posted @kchristensen8064 . Made a mounting bracket out of acrylic to bolt it right to the light fixture. View attachment 14015 View attachment 14016 View attachment 14017 View attachment 14018 View attachment 14019 View attachment 14020 View attachment 14021

Quick update- replaced all the ceramic MH bulb sockets. Installed new bulbs and put the light up. It's been running since Sunday and the livestock seem to be responding well. Today I installed a fan to run with the lights. It's like the one you posted @kchristensen8064 . Made a mounting bracket out of acrylic to bolt it right to the light fixture. View attachment 14015 View attachment 14016 View attachment 14017 View attachment 14018 View attachment 14019 View attachment 14020 View attachment 14021

If this doesn't resolve your temp issues, I would suggest lowering or angling the fan so that the air flow hits the surface of the water. That provides much more cooling than just trying to blow hot air away from the bulbs. You can improve it even more by blowing air in an area like your sump that has a lower ambient air temp.

Sent from my SM-G965U using MASC mobile app

Great work! Do you think a second fan on the other side would help pull the air away from the tank (as opposed to blowing it back at the other fan)? Might help you not have to run the fan at full speed.


Sent from my iPhone using MASC - Marine Aquarium Society of Colorado

Great work! Do you think a second fan on the other side would help pull the air away from the tank (as opposed to blowing it back at the other fan)? Might help you not have to run the fan at full speed.


Sent from my iPhone using MASC - Marine Aquarium Society of Colorado

It does not unless you are adding fans to an enclosed canopy. The main source of cooling from fans is actually the evaporative cooling caused by having wind blowing across the water surface. A fan sucking has a very low wind speed across the surface and hence very low evaporative cooling.

In the event of an enclosed canopy, using the push pull method helps because it forces the air out in a more defined path and doesn't require a pressure increase to exchange the air inside with ambient.

Sent from my SM-G965U using MASC mobile app

Good point. That makes sense. So more effective use of a second fan would be on the sump. And because the water is passing through the sump at a faster rate than the main display, would that also increase the potential for evaporative cooling? Or is that determined by the surface area of the water regardless of the turnover rate?