Arcadia T5HO 12% uvb output -solarmeter-

[Hoj]

so i thought i would do a thread showing the output these things got. i am amazed at how much UVB these thing generate.

so here are a few pics, the fixture was laying on the floor with the meter at a 90 degree angle also place on the floor. no screen

at 12"

at 24"

now some numbers for you freerangers
at 4 ft

and a whopping 5ft still showing an acceptable ammount of uvb.

now for my cage i put the uvb right on top and as such the number would be way to high, as a result i used 3 layers of screen to bring it down to an acceptable level. ( at basking site about 12" away from top)

as the bulbs wear out and the uvb drops i will remove layers of screen, thus extending my bulb life. for the few memebers who knew i was going to be trying acrylic to lower the uvb, i have found the acrylic even at 1/16" blocks almost all output. i will be trying other materials but fore now the screen does the job.

and one last shot just to show exactly what these bulbs are capable of

the solarmeter acctually maxs out at 2000 and the bulb was doing it, this is the highest i could get without maxing out the meter

so far both the chams using the new lights are spending more time soaking up the great UV rays and loving it.

i will do one more thread in the next few days to try and show how they look on the cages with the jungle dawn L.E.D's which really make for a nice looking cage.
thx
hoj

 

[blackhawk007]

Awesome Hoj, were you able to get a reading with just one layer of screen, at say 18"? I'm just curious what you would come up with.

 

[Olimpia]

Why would you "dumb" down the UV output with so much screen? It seems like if the sun is putting out a reading of thousands and thousands, even a reading of 200 wouldn't be too much UVB. That's not even what you get in complete shade outside, no?

Call me crazy, but I think we're waaaay too conservative with how much UVB we provide our chameleons.

None the less, THANK YOU for showing these readings. I was just looking at this bulb yesterday and needed exactly this kind of info.

 

[Todnedo]

I think 200- 300 would be fine for panthers as long as the spectrum is correct.

 

[clarkrw3]

In the old AZ where we have some pretty impressive UVB my meter says 275-315ish. And at that the chams even on a pretty cool day 68 deg will spend much time under a few leaves out of the direct UVB. Also why does everyone say to stay away from 10.0 uvb bulbs if more is better?

 

[EvilLost]

Why would you "dumb" down the UV output with so much screen? It seems like if the sun is putting out a reading of thousands and thousands, even a reading of 200 wouldn't be too much UVB. That's not even what you get in complete shade outside, no?

Call me crazy, but I think we're waaaay too conservative with how much UVB we provide our chameleons.

None the less, THANK YOU for showing these readings. I was just looking at this bulb yesterday and needed exactly this kind of info.

I would have to agree with Hoj's approach here in "matching" the current status-quo outputs. My reasoning in this approach is the following:

-Having too little UVB can lead to problems, we all know this; however, we know that the current bulb outputs are sufficient to meet the "floor" requirements. Therefore, as long as we have this much, we are good.
-Having too much UVB can also lead to problems. To the best of my knowledge, there are no studies that have measured just how much is too much or general thresholds of risk activity (if I am wrong, please direct me).
Since we do not know how much UVB is too much, I feel it safer to give "enough" plus a little more, but I do not feel safe making immediate jumps to 3, 5, or 10x the UVB output.


I'm not sure why you said the sun is putting out "thousands and thousands", but this is not true. Perhaps you are thinking of lumens?

UVGuide.co.uk (a rather trusted source of lighting info in the community) shows a MAX reading of around 450mW/cm2. This number is a good way to know our absolute "ceiling" but it is important to remember that this is a max and fluctuates (to lower values) throughout the day, so we do not want to be giving this amount consistently to our animals.
See here: http://www.uvguide.co.uk/uvinnature.htm

Even taking the highest amount of UVB put out the by the sun, this assumes chameleons are sitting out in the open basking them in, which is generally not the case. Chameleons do not live in the upper canopy but rather in the understory, which results in further filtration of light. I do agree with you that we can up our uvb output somewhat, but I do not feel comfortable saying that a 200mW/cm2 output given 12hrs a day consistently would necessarily be safe. I do think the amount of foliage in the setup would be a factor in the safety analysis though.

 

[Hoj]

Awesome Hoj, were you able to get a reading with just one layer of screen, at say 18"? I'm just curious what you would come up with.

i did not but i can do that, give me day or two.

and to the others the reason i am lowering the uvb is for many reasons that evil pointed. he is correct that the sun put out in the 300-400 range on a clear very sunny day.
in the wild a chameleon has many options for shade and level of the tree where they are. as such would make the adjustments themselves.
also since we are using a basking site which attracts the cham to the top to gain heat thus exposing them to more uvb, in the wild they would not always need to use direct sunlight for heat absorbson as the abient temps are higher for the most part.
also there are spots in the cage where my guys can get closer to the uvb without getting closer to the heatlight and they cn use these areas to gain more uvb exposure if needed.( around the 80 mark )
i feel that if we are going to retrict the enviornment that we keep our chams we must also restrict some of the elements we provide.

 

[mcleodschams]

great post hoj i have been waiting for you to do this post .

 

[Olimpia]

Oh, I was told by another member that in the shade their solarmeter reads 800-900, so it stood to reason that full sun would be in the thousands. I do not own one so cannot say what readings are what.

Still, if 400 is the max, and if we put chameleons in an outdoor enclosure with a few plants and think they're not just ok but thriving outside, why be afraid of an indoor UV reading of at least 100? Why do the minimum we know works if nature does a lot more? This is an interesting area of discussion, hope you don't think I'm calling you out negatively Hoj! I do thank you for posting this, since it's the exact bulb I was looking at buying.

 

[EvilLost]

Oh, I was told by another member that in the shade their solarmeter reads 800-900, so it stood to reason that full sun would be in the thousands. I do not own one so cannot say what readings are what.

Still, if 400 is the max, and if we put chameleons in an outdoor enclosure with a few plants and think they're not just ok but thriving outside, why be afraid of an indoor UV reading of at least 100? Why do the minimum we know works if nature does a lot more? This is an interesting area of discussion, hope you don't think I'm calling you out negatively Hoj! I do thank you for posting this, since it's the exact bulb I was looking at buying.

The meters must be calibrated to properly work. Also, only the solarmeter 6.2 reads UVB, the other versions read various other UV and light indices....perhaps they had a different model or improper calibration?


I agree with you that we can do more, and I think those members with solarmeters (which will generally be advanced keepers anyway) SHOULD do slightly more and monitor the results.

I just want to clarify that the 300-400 numbers are on a clear day out in the open directly measuring the sky. When we put a cage outside, unless your cage is sitting in the middle of your yard with nothing blocking it, your numbers will be lower. For example, the direction greatly matters (north facing windows/walls will get much less exposure than southern facing ones). And, these numbers are considering "peak day" exposure; the sun is not giving out that much for a continuous 12 hours straight like we do with our lights on inside.


In answering your question a little more directly: The sun may be putting out 400+ mW/cm2 at peak transmissions, but this is not the max value that chameleons receive in the wild (it is in actuality lower than that) and the majority of the time they are receiving some value even lower. My concern lies with the fact that we don't actually know how much chameleons receive in the wild, and what kind of a gradient they have in receiving it (in other words, just how much more can they get if they go to the very top of a tree vs the very bottom, etc.) These are all factors that the chameleon can only mildly, at best, control in the confines of a 2'x2'x4' enclosure with generally limited foliage.
All these factors combined makes me apprehensive to do anything but very small incremental increases in their UVB exposure.



EDIT: One last point here....I am not educated deeply on D3 synthesis so perhaps someone else can clarify/confirm this, but in my understanding this is a limiting reaction. That is, we only need "enough" UVB to synthesize the appropriate vitamins and once the body has enough of these vitamins it does not need any additional UVB (since it does not need to synthesize more vits).

 

[Hoj]

Oh, I was told by another member that in the shade their solarmeter reads 800-900, so it stood to reason that full sun would be in the thousands. I do not own one so cannot say what readings are what.

Still, if 400 is the max, and if we put chameleons in an outdoor enclosure with a few plants and think they're not just ok but thriving outside, why be afraid of an indoor UV reading of at least 100? Why do the minimum we know works if nature does a lot more? This is an interesting area of discussion, hope you don't think I'm calling you out negatively Hoj! I do thank you for posting this, since it's the exact bulb I was looking at buying.

i think one of the big reasons for me to keep the uvb at much lower levels than the sun is the fact of supplementation, i supplelement my chams with calcium plus almost everyday and with it containing D3 ( chams kept out doors would not recive such ) i would have to wonder at what point the D3 levels would need to be adjusted to account for all the extra UVB.
i think this question may become more previlant as these lights keep getting stronger and stronger,
one day we may not really need to supplement with D3 as the lights will be able to provide the nessecary amount ot UVB for chameleons to produce the D3 on their own.
oh and by no way do i feel like you are calling me out i like a good discussion. i can always learn more

 

[Venutus1]

Part I.
Thank you Hoj for taking the time to help educate folks and taking such detailed pics.


Part II.
I believe this is one area where "The Party Line" of stating that chams should have UV in the 35 - say... 50 or so range should be stressed.

I try and always consider what the common Chameleon enclosure is set up like when talking in general terms about applying UV light.

Not to mention the very WIDE range of skill and understanding that the cross section of chameleon owners have.

It is NOT advisable for anyone to try and duplicate the UV levels in Nature inside on their herp....
Unless they are at "EXPERT ++ LEVEL" and would know all the nuances needed to go with creating such an environment.

I always worry that some individuals with very bare cages and not a lot of experience may get the idea / be influenced / that more is better.... and shoot for a UV level of 200 or some such thing.

You know... since they heard that a Solarmeter reads 250 outside at noon.

Remember... UV LEVELS CHANGE throughout the day in Nature.

Also...Think for a moment... the sun passes across the sky..(!!)... possibly only lighting a wild chams territory directly for only a few hours a day before it passes over the trees.

Thus: A Wild cham in a large tree is not being forced to sit 12 -14 hours a day under static UV levels that are that high in Nature.

Plus...the heat being radiated from direct sunlight is VERY DIFFERENT than a a flo. bulb.
The animal's system of biological "Q's, as far as heat, light intensity, etc. IS constantly being compromised by mis-information in an artificial set up.
So their ability to regulate themselves is going to be difficult for them. Especially if wild caught I would imagine.

I could go on (and on.... and on... ) .. but I hope everyone gets the general idea of what I am saying.

Keep the UV on the conservative side.

Example: A baby veiled in an exo with no foliage being radiated 14 hours a day with a 10 or 12.0 T5 bulb "to get more natural "outdoor' levels of UV" could result in a cruel disaster.
All because the owner read somewhere on a Forum that UV levels reached 300(at noon) in the tropics.
That is what must be guarded against by proper education.

Plus: by all means, folks should try and borrow, if they cannot afford one, a Solarmeter to check out UV levels in their set-ups.

Ok, time to get down off my soap box.

Cheers!
Todd

PS.
If anyone would like the data for UV output from Arcadia T5s at different distances & between the 6% and 12% bulbs... please e-mail me. It is in a word document with nice pics.

 

[blackhawk007]

I'm not sure if this will help, but I thought it was worth a try.

 

[Venutus1]

i think one of the big reasons for me to keep the uvb at much lower levels than the sun is the fact of supplementation, i supplelement my chams with calcium plus almost everyday and with it containing D3 ( chams kept out doors would not recive such ) i would have to wonder at what point the D3 levels would need to be adjusted to account for all the extra UVB.
i think this question may become more previlant as these lights keep getting stronger and stronger,
one day we may not really need to supplement with D3 as the lights will be able to provide the nessecary amount ot UVB for chameleons to produce the D3 on their own.
oh and by no way do i feel like you are calling me out i like a good discussion. i can always learn more

good point!!

 

[Olimpia]

I'm not sure if this will help, but I thought it was worth a try.

So looking at this chart, specifically at the orange Sarasota lines because that's exactly the longitude where I am except on the opposite side of Florida, UVB only reads under 50 an hour during the entire day - do we not think that this is too little as well? If we're getting <50 from our UV bulbs during ALL the 12 hours of the day, we don't think this is taking it way too conservative? I don't think that aiming for a UVB of ~80-100 would be excessive.

 

[Todnedo]

Part I.
Thank you Hoj for taking the time to help educate folks and taking such detailed pics.


Part II.
I believe this is one area where "The Party Line" of stating that chams should have UV in the 35 - say... 50 or so range should be stressed.

I try and always consider what the common Chameleon enclosure is set up like when talking in general terms about applying UV light.

Not to mention the very WIDE range of skill and understanding that the cross section of chameleon owners have.

It is NOT advisable for anyone to try and duplicate the UV levels in Nature inside on their herp....
Unless they are at "EXPERT ++ LEVEL" and would know all the nuances needed to go with creating such an environment.

I always worry that some individuals with very bare cages and not a lot of experience may get the idea / be influenced / that more is better.... and shoot for a UV level of 200 or some such thing.

You know... since they heard that a Solarmeter reads 250 outside at noon.

Remember... UV LEVELS CHANGE throughout the day in Nature.

Also...Think for a moment... the sun passes across the sky..(!!)... possibly only lighting a wild chams territory directly for only a few hours a day before it passes over the trees.

Thus: A Wild cham in a large tree is not being forced to sit 12 -14 hours a day under static UV levels that are that high in Nature.

Plus...the heat being radiated from direct sunlight is VERY DIFFERENT than a a flo. bulb.
The animal's system of biological "Q's, as far as heat, light intensity, etc. IS constantly being compromised by mis-information in an artificial set up.
So their ability to regulate themselves is going to be difficult for them. Especially if wild caught I would imagine.

I could go on (and on.... and on... ) .. but I hope everyone gets the general idea of what I am saying.

Keep the UV on the conservative side.

Example: A baby veiled in an exo with no foliage being radiated 14 hours a day with a 10 or 12.0 T5 bulb "to get more natural "outdoor' levels of UV" could result in a cruel disaster.
All because the owner read somewhere on a Forum that UV levels reached 300(at noon) in the tropics.
That is what must be guarded against by proper education.

Plus: by all means, folks should try and borrow, if they cannot afford one, a Solarmeter to check out UV levels in their set-ups.

Ok, time to get down off my soap box.

Cheers!
Todd

PS.
If anyone would like the data for UV output from Arcadia T5s at different distances & between the 6% and 12% bulbs... please e-mail me. It is in a word document with nice pics.

This is not a bulb to be set directly on top of the screen on a small cage!
But for large enclosures it has the output some keepers have been looking for. The uv output drops off nicely in 4 feet so in a large well plant enclosure one could create a uv gradient.
The output is strong enough to only burn this bulb in peak times say 11am to 3pm.
I agree with Todd, this is not a bulb for beginners without a meter.

 

[Chameleopatrick]

So looking at this chart, specifically at the orange Sarasota lines because that's exactly the longitude where I am except on the opposite side of Florida, UVB only reads under 50 an hour during the entire day - do we not think that this is too little as well? If we're getting <50 from our UV bulbs during ALL the 12 hours of the day, we don't think this is taking it way too conservative? I don't think that aiming for a UVB of ~80-100 would be excessive.

This chart speaks volumes why more UVB is a good thing not a bad thing in husbandry provided there are ample areas in the habitat to escape. 50mw is like Seattle in march at noon on a cloudy day and we don't have any reptiles out around here that time year. Higher UVB and well planted enclosures seem to had very positive effects on my chameleons. New chameleon populations seem to be thriving in Florida and as Olympia stated, there is only one hour in the daytime that isn't above 50mw.

 

[Hoj]

so by this train of though on more UVB at waht point do you stop giving D3 then. all these numbers say 150 and up in outdoor senarios would no longer requier D3 supplementaion, i feel this fact is being ignored.
if a new owner reads this and goes with a high uvb setup they will no longer be able to follow the typical supplelemting advise givein.

 

[bradley]

It's great to see more people with chameleons using these bulbs. I always recoomend for people to use the 12% outside of screen and a 6% bulb if no screen will be in the way. I use the 12% above screen for my veileds and panthers n 4 feet setups. I have the uv at the front 1/3 of the cage. My animals seem to self regulate very well wether they want to be in the uv or not. They will travel up and down the cage to get what they need.

 

[blackhawk007]

I find it very interesting to see everyone's individual point of view. There are some very good points here. One that makes the most sense to me personally is the mixing of UV and D3 supplements and how this can be good and bad. Newer owners often look hard for information. And in my short time one here I have seen many collect bits and pieces of information and put it all together with their best efforts. Sometimes they get all the information the need and all goes well. I consider myself one of those lucky few, thanks in large part to all of you. Then on the other side, how many times does a "HELP" thread pop up? Only to find out that that person tried their best but was missing a few crucial bits of information that could have helped to prevent the ailment.

What this thread shows me is that there is a black line, a white line, and a very large grey middle. What I mean is that, we all know too little UV is bad, and way to much is also bad. But depending on your techniques, husbandry, and level of pure knowledge this will determine where you stand in these three areas. The problem being that there is just not enough data out there to know exactly where the white and black lines of too little and too much start. But I completely agree that it can turn real bad if newer owners hear that a person is pushing 300 UV 14 hours a day and it works for them. But that same new owner continues giving D3 every day like the pet store said they must do, not knowing any better. When you put those together it will result is the disasters that turn up in the Health thread.

Just like in the salt water reef community, there are things that just work all the time. Then there are some extreme routes that people take and get great extreme results because they researched everything before they made the plunge. But those same extreme practices are not for most people and should only be tried by the most experienced.

Its almost like there should be an advanced husbandry section for the more experienced users to discuss risky practices. That would still allow everyone to share this valuable information but with the disclaimer to deter the newer less experienced owners from trying those practices out, until they acquire the much needed experience.

Again these are just my personal thoughts. Being new to the site I hope I have not stepped on any toes. Keep the excellent information flowing.