*HELP* Radion Pro or Hydra 52

[maddhugan]

Originally Posted by 125mph

What is power factor mean? Is it the usefulness of the consumed power relative to the product?

Yeah you are right

please checkout this link for more info:

http://www.save-energy.org/power_factor_correction.htm

And please share your thoughts. I would like to know your opinion on this

[K2Reefer]

Im wondering the same thing i am thinking of trying the Hydra 52's over a 9' long tank!

[maddhugan]

Originally Posted by ihigh

back to your topic sandy...

I've had the pleasure of trying GHL mitras, radion pros (and gen2), and AI's sol hydra, vega, and will be trying the hydra 52 soon.

GHL Mitras are by far the best LED-only unit of the three, hands down. The color is spectacular, the par ratings and spread is the best, but it is the priciest. Mounting and setting it up is a breeze

Radion pros are also great, they're good penetration and spread. their color spectrum is 2nd to none, and they have great customer service. The issue I run into (is imo a major one) is that the fan at the bottom of the fixture is going to get salt creep. No and, if, or buts about it...it is going to happen one way or another. A fellow reefer on the local forums of mine has had a repeated issue with his fixture and salt creep for the past year, but ecotech has fixed it every single time. Great that they fix it, horrible for headaches and the time in between to get it fixed. He had to run his old t5s a few times because of this. The other big issue I personally dislike is that radion pros make the corals visually 'fake' in color. everything pops like its not...real, if you get what I mean? Fish such as fairy and flasher wrasse look extraordinary as well.

AI is the cheapest of the 3, but very simple clean, cheaper and easy to use. 1.5 hydra 52s = 1 radion pro in price. The director takes a bit to work with, but once it sets up it is good to go. the wireless controller works well also, so either way its good controls. The vegas were lacking the uv/violets, but the hydra fixes that. hydra/vega have good coverage (reported 24x24, but 2 over a dsa 105 would work perfectly - i'm running 2 over a 120 right now). The hydra 52 is stronger and has more spread due to more LEDs. This one compared to the radion has a more natural look.

It all comes to your preference. money saving + good coverage/par - hydra 52

you really like the colors popping a lot more and the 'fake' look (not in a negative sense) then radion pro

if you're ballin and can afford it (or find it cheap used) I'd get the GHL mitras every day.

Hello ihigh

thanks for your help and info and I find your info very useful. I already bought a Neptune Apex and wired them with aquabus by opening up several walls and sheetrock roofs and just finish closing and patching all the holes and at this point I can't switch it to profilux. I don't mind buying GHL Mitras and money is not an issue, but it won't be compatible with Apex. Don't want to buy profilux and we don't even have much info (such as what additional modules they have like the apex and so on) on profilux so I will stay away from that controller. For the US based Hobbyist it makes sense to have Neptune Apex controller. Do you agree on this? That's the only reason I'm inclined to buy the hydra 52. Have you looked at HYDRA 52 in flesh?

Also GHL MITRAS led needs a controller for utilizing all the controllabilities right?
CAN Apex be used on GHL MITRAS(I KNOW FOR SURE THIS IS DUMBEST QUESTION EVER) LOL.

[maddhugan]

Originally Posted by sandy7263

I am going to give myself an aneurysm over trying to decide what the best light would be.

I have a new DSA 105 which is 48x24x21 with 2 mp40's. I would like to keep sps to fish.

If this was your tank, would you get Radion pros, hydra 52's or something else?

I would love to buy GHL MITRAS and I know it is expensive but I think it is worth to invest on it; however, it is a pain since it is not Apex controller compatible. This is only reason I'm not going to buy MITRAS. So I decided to go with Hydra 52. I guess everyone is waiting for someone to buy Hydra 52 and leave reviews and post comments on forums(that includes me) . lol
Also, I'm very very interested to know the power factor on HYDRA 52, and I'm hoping that it would be 0.99. The regular Hydra has a power factor of 0.99, so one would anticipate and assume that hydra 52 also has the power factor of 0.99.

I will stay away from Radion Pro since it has a power factor of 0.54 and a number of hobbyists are unhappy with its Fan related design flaw. Initially I was drawn towards Radion Pro and as I got very closer, I was repelled by its design flaws and energy consumption due to LOW POWER FACTOR of 0.54.

I will take some risks and order 6 hydra 52 soon

[jefnalyssa]

Tagging along

[simonh]

Originally Posted by maddhugan

Also, I'm very very interested to know the power factor on HYDRA 52, and I'm hoping that it would be 0.99. The regular Hydra has a power factor of 0.99, so one would anticipate and assume that hydra 52 also has the power factor of 0.99.

I will stay away from Radion Pro since it has a power factor of 0.54 and a number of hobbyists are unhappy with its Fan related design flaw. Initially I was drawn towards Radion Pro and as I got very closer, I was repelled by its design flaws and energy consumption due to LOW POWER FACTOR of 0.54.

Other than the fact that with a low power factor their is more current flowing through the circuit so cables and other components need to be bigger what's the big deal?

My understanding was that electricity companies charged commerical and industries for this wasted energy in the distrubition system whereas residential customers aren't?

[alton]

Power factor can mean many things for example when buying a fluorescent ballast you can buy .8, .9, 1.0, and 1,1. What that means is if you use a 32 watt lamp and use a .8 PF ballast the lamp will only be powered to 80%, as where the 1.1 will be overdriven at 110%. Which is very important when dealing with energy codes and making the 1 watt per square foot work. Maybe the .54 means the leds will be driven at 54% even if you have them adjusted at 100% making the LEDs last longer?

[raybyrne67]

I found this article reviewing the three LED lights in question very interesting. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2013/8/review

[zachts]

...buildmyleds.com is going to soon be a contender when they release thier 3 channel version if you're using apex or 0-10v controll. Even with the one channle strips they have now you could use 3 of them for the price of a single radion........

Radions are nice but if your considering your own controller then there is now reason at all to spend that much on them IMHO.

@ the OP I'd take the hydra52 overa radion for better coverage and blending for what it's worth.

[jbraslins]

i jsut got 4 hydra 52s to replace my vegas. i also had sol superblues and regular hydras.

Hydra 52 is the way to go. Leds are small and packed together in each puck. blends color very well. i dont notice any disco ball effect anymore, def did with vegas. has near uv, violet, red, green, def fuller spectrum.

Tons of par everywhere, frosted lenses help diffuse/blend light further. measured par with apoge meter, got 450 mid-tank with 9" AWL. 200 at bottom. 700+ on top of my rocks.

no experience with other brands. few of my buddies have radion pros. they seem happy with them too.

[psykobowler]

Got mine last week. 2 down, 6 more to go. They go in between the 400watt radiums on lumenmax elite reflectors

[psykobowler]

I run 2 displays plumbed together. I am using both 400watt radiums and hydra 52s. My photoperiod is from 10am through midnight.

[mguimaraesm]

Buy unafraid to Hydra, mesu colleagues here in Brazil are replacing their Ecotech radion by such as all, as said before, to address problems of defective cooling system, and as we can see in the photo above, the cooling system of the hydra 52 is even better.

[maddhugan]

Originally Posted by simonh

Other than the fact that with a low power factor their is more current flowing through the circuit so cables and other components need to be bigger what's the big deal?

My understanding was that electricity companies charged commerical and industries for this wasted energy in the distrubition system whereas residential customers aren't?

Yeah but still you waste energy, and If the power factor is low and if someone is ok with that then it's no big deal I guess

http://www.save-energy.org/power_factor_correction.htm

[maddhugan]

Originally Posted by alton

Power factor can mean many things for example when buying a fluorescent ballast you can buy .8, .9, 1.0, and 1,1. What that means is if you use a 32 watt lamp and use a .8 PF ballast the lamp will only be powered to 80%, as where the 1.1 will be overdriven at 110%. Which is very important when dealing with energy codes and making the 1 watt per square foot work. Maybe the .54 means the leds will be driven at 54% even if you have them adjusted at 100% making the LEDs last longer?

You got it wrong. Power factor doesn't mean to what percent you drive the lamp, it means how efficiently you utilize the energy. Actually Radion Pro drive their leds to the max and that's one of the reason they have a low power factor.

check this: http://www.save-energy.org/power_factor_correction.htm

[alton]

Your right I messed up I was thinking BF or ballast factor. I am still lost though if you use a watt meter and it shows 171 watts that's what you are paying for in electricity usage. Anyway I am going by one of fish stores today to take a reading with my Fluke Meter

[richiero]

eco tech is P I S S Y!

[richiero]

build you own to the spectrum you desire....

[jorda9095]

pretty easy decision. 52 high watt cree LEDs or 42 for the radion pro, 32 for the radion. the price per LED is better for the AI fixture

[maddhugan]

Originally Posted by alton

Your right I messed up I was thinking BF or ballast factor. I am still lost though if you use a watt meter and it shows 171 watts that's what you are paying for in electricity usage. Anyway I am going by one of fish stores today to take a reading with my Fluke Meter

Radion Pro has a power factor of 0.54 and What a low power factor is saying is that some energy is wasted. If it draws 171 watts then most of it is not converted to lumens(light energy). most likely more than 55 watts in that 171 watts is not converted to light energy but most likely heat energy. I guess this should explain.

On the other hand Hydra 52 has a power factor of 0.99 and most likely 2 to 3 watts in that 135 watts may be wasted and not utilized which is not bad. The remaining 132 watts will be converted to lumens which is awesome.
hope this explains

[jbraslins]

If i understand this correctly, driving LEDs up to their efficiency sweet spot instead of max, should dramatically increase fixture efficiency. So it's plausible.

But 0.99? That seems too good to be true. I know my Hydra 52s get pretty hot. Does it mean that they get this hot from 0.01% of wasted energy? Seems too good to be true.

[psykobowler]

IMO, as long as the fixture serves your purpose it is a good purchase. I decided on the hydra 52 since the radion pro is still overpriced at $750 with fewer LEDs and run higher wattage at 170. Plus a defective cooling system. At under $600 I get more bang for the buck. Keep in mind I have no plans of getting rid of the 400Watt radiums. I can tweak the hydra to run like a vho actinic on certain periods and full spectrum at other times. I plan run less halides in the summer and plenty of halides in the cold months.

[simonh]

Originally Posted by jbraslins

If i understand this correctly, driving LEDs up to their efficiency sweet spot instead of max, should dramatically increase fixture efficiency. So it's plausible.

But 0.99? That seems too good to be true. I know my Hydra 52s get pretty hot. Does it mean that they get this hot from 0.01% of wasted energy? Seems too good to be true.

No. Power Factor (PF) is to do with the phase angle of the current compared to the voltage. If the current lags the voltage then the power factor will be less than 1. This is typically of inductive devices such as motors or transformers. In the Advanced Aquarist article the watts is the real power used by the device. The apparent power used by the devices is the volts multiplied by amps (VA). Power factor can then be computed from the W real power / VA apparent power figures.

I'd suspect the low power factor is something to do with the transformer rather than anything else. AFAIK it is only in industrial applications where the electricity supplier would charge a levy if a company were driving equipments such as big motors with low power factor ratings. To overcome this there are devices that can improve the power factor, although these make no different to the real watts used by the device.

[alton]

Okay with a Fluke 381 the reading with everything on 100% - 2.2 amps and 121.9 volts or 268 volt amps

[simonh]

Originally Posted by maddhugan

Radion Pro has a power factor of 0.54 and What a low power factor is saying is that some energy is wasted. If it draws 171 watts then most of it is not converted to lumens(light energy). most likely more than 55 watts in that 171 watts is not converted to light energy but most likely heat energy. I guess this should explain.

On the other hand Hydra 52 has a power factor of 0.99 and most likely 2 to 3 watts in that 135 watts may be wasted and not utilized which is not bad. The remaining 132 watts will be converted to lumens which is awesome.
hope this explains

Power factor has NOTHING to do with how much of the real watts used by the device is converted into lumens.

It is all to do with the phase of the current to the voltage in the supply. A purely resistive device has a power factor near 1, an inductive device such as a motor or transformer will have a power factor less than 1. Nowadays, cleverly designed switched mode transformers can avoid most of the issues of low power factors.