A lot of led fixture question

[A. grandis]

Keep in mind that even though using LED is fairly new to most people in most cases, it is the oldest type of light in our hobby with the p-n junction being around since 1939. MH was not invented until the 1960s (I think). There are all kinds of rare-case diodes out there for specialty stuff. There are some for egg incubators, curing tooth filling cavity material, wart removal and all kinds of specialty stuff where the bandwidth needed to be kept narrow and the p-n junction was ideal. There are lots of diodes for lots of things - figuring out if/when they are applicable for us is the next step.

Fluorescent lighting is quite old too, but the "tube" iteration that we know is about fifty years old. That is right, LEDs are "old tech."

I think it really doesn't matter how old those type of light bulbs were invented and used. It's what they do with the best application you can have over the tank that matters at the end of the day, isn't it? Interesting facts though.
Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

That is a horribly broad brush and actually insulting...or should I say demonstrating Hubris...

You wouldn't even define the % of UV in your sphere..

Many "get it" MH's and to a lesser extent T5's ect. produce energy outside 400nm..(and outside 700nm..)
How much and what it actually means is more important..

Visible light is almost UNARGUABLY "the most" important part of the spectrum for most things..

Set up a tank w/ only UV or IR.. see how you like it..
UV "might" be fun..

advertising blurb for fun:


LED history for 10o Alex..
http://www.historyoflighting.net/light-bulb-history/history-of-led/


MH "started" in :
1912 Charles P. Steinmetz is the first to use halide salts in a mercury vapor lamp. He used the halides to correct color and was successful, but he could not get a consistent arc. The complex phenomena of plasma physics was still being explored. Steinmetz's arc would dance around allowing the temperature in the discharge tube to drop, the lower temperatures would stop the halide salts from burning and the color and intensity of the lamp would shift.

LED "started" in:
In 1907, British experimenter in Marconi labs Henry Joseph Round noticed for the first time that when a potential of 10volts is applied to carborundum (silicon carbide) crystal, it emits yellowish light.

I'm sorry oreo, but if you get the context he actually had a point and he is actually just saying the truth, without being aggressive:
"...The visible spectrum also would pop PAR meters and stuff to make their products look more powerful... people on this board cannot understand that LUX and PAR meters do not capture all of the usable output, so imagine what a time that AI or EcoTech would have telling people this. ..."
It's the whole idea that matters...
Would be great if others would come and discuss such subject. I also see that as the truth with some of the best and smartest friends here.

Grandis.

 

[Nanoreefwannabe]

I wouldnt say that they are not adequate enough... just the light is different... and way more focused then a mh.. though my is still considered s point source of light it radiates 360 from its source and through Tre use of a reflector that light is focused down to about 100-80° depending on the reflector... where as a led (assuming a COB style light) the light starts out at 120 degrees and is generally focused to about 60°...i think these leds pucks (COB) fixtures usually have about 15-25 chips on them so I would say in the vicinity of 50-75W of light therefore you would need about 3 pucks to make up the same amount of power used as the mh... for the most part the led is more focused which gives more par but less area... you would need more leds for coverage but your par in those areas will also be higher... that or you hang the led higher to get your coverage/ overlap at the sacrifice of some par...

 

[A. grandis]

I wouldnt say that they are not adequate enough... just the light is different... and way more focused then a mh.. though my is still considered s point source of light it radiates 360 from its source and through Tre use of a reflector that light is focused down to about 100-80° depending on the reflector... where as a led (assuming a COB style light) the light starts out at 120 degrees and is generally focused to about 60°...i think these leds pucks (COB) fixtures usually have about 15-25 chips on them so I would say in the vicinity of 50-75W of light therefore you would need about 3 pucks to make up the same amount of power used as the mh... for the most part the led is more focused which gives more par but less area... you would need more leds for coverage but your par in those areas will also be higher... that or you hang the led higher to get your coverage/ overlap at the sacrifice of some par...

Yes, exactly. Efficacy, as Mr. Tullio Del Aquila says.
Still laying the facts on the table and respecting whoever likes to use LEDs for whatever reason, of course.
Now, after this thread, also looking into the part of the spectrum halides offer and LEDs don't provide, but is also useful.
Grandis.

 

[Shooter6]

I wonder if to fix the narrow beam of light on leds, has anyone considered building a canopy with the lights pointed up, and having a rippled reflector to direct the light back down. I think the lights would have to be run around the parimeter of the tank inside the canopy at approximately 70 degrees angle. I am sure someone who has modded the chinese boxes could easily do it, as all the parts are avalible online from my understanding.

 

[jda]

The form of a larger black box would make this hard since it would block a lot of light reflecting back down. A Kessil would be OK since they are small. The kinda need to spread 360, or close to it, to fully take advantage of all of the reflector, and also to just get light going straight down - maybe two black boxes on top of each other, one pointing up and one pointing down? Form factor is one of the main reasons why LEDs are so popular, along with controllability.

The current LEDs don't have a lot of output once you spread them. Adding on to the conversation above where the higher end Manufacturers really need to pop a PAR meter to sell units, as seen in the past with vivid clarity, spreading the output over a wider area would lower the numbers even more with current power levels. They could easily add more diodes and power, but that take the appeal away from all of those but the ones who know that they are looking at many units per 2x2 area. It would also raise the cost.

Basically, the "value proposition" of LEDs in reflectors is no better than MH in reflectors, IMO (not very scientific). They would still have spectrum gaps. ...so this is not a market I expect anybody to be in soon.... except for maybe China which can probably put 400-500W of diodes in a sphere with a reflector for relatively pretty cheap like they do everything else.

 

[A. grandis]

No sense to spend more money on LEDs to try to simulate the results that we already have with the halides, right?
Might as well just spend money and time improving halides, T5s and their fixtures, if that would be the case.
What would be the benefits, if any, getting that sphere of LEDs with reflectors, if they would still have spectrum gaps?

Grandis.

 

[oreo54]

What gaps??

https://www.yujiintl.com/custom-led-spectrum

https://orphek.com/led/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Orphek-Atlantik-V4-Kanaldaten-1233x1060.jpg

 

[Roy 9121]

Sure, ha!


http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/04/autos/ford-f-150-truck-40-years/index.html

Ok, believe what you want. But general motors sells more trucks then ford does.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

Yes, exactly. Efficacy, as Mr. Tullio Del Aquila says.
Still laying the facts on the table and respecting whoever likes to use LEDs for whatever reason, of course.
Now, after this thread, also looking into the part of the spectrum halides offer and LEDs don't provide, but is also useful.
Grandis.

Plasma.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

What gaps??

https://www.yujiintl.com/custom-led-spectrum

https://orphek.com/led/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Orphek-Atlantik-V4-Kanaldaten-1233x1060.jpg

Ok, believe what you want. But general motors sells more trucks then ford does.

Easy on the facts things please.

Imperical evidence is not well liked.

 

[oreo54]

Plasma.

Ohhh. Sulfur plasma and induction lamps.. now you are talking..

For fun..
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/PAR_Metal_Halide_Spectral_Comparison.png

 

[Daltrey]

Ok, believe what you want. But general motors sells more trucks then ford does.

A fact is a fact. You can’t change it. FACT: FORD F-SERIES IS THE BEST SELLING TRUCK. HA

 

[A. grandis]

What gaps??

I believe we are referring strictly to the beginning and the end of the chart you published above. Before and after the purple vertical lines, where the LEDs aren't present.
Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

Easy on the facts things please.

Imperical evidence is not well liked.

I like empirial evidences, specially when it is applicable to the practice and we can understand why things work one way or the other.
I appreciate the graphics!

Grandis.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

I believe we are referring strictly to the beginning and the end of the chart you published above. Before and after the purple vertical lines, where the LEDs aren't present.
Grandis.

To the right of that spectrum is heat.
Tonthe left are the UV that so far science has said corals don’t use, as they haven’t needed to because that frequency isn’t presesnt at depth.

 

[oreo54]

I believe we are referring strictly to the beginning and the end of the chart you published above. Before and after the purple vertical lines, where the LEDs aren't present.
Grandis.

Lines are at 400nm and 700nm.. There are plenty of diodes beyond those lines on both sides.. Even 400nm (410nm) will "bleed" beyond the 400nm cutoff line.
How much and which ones and particularly their meaning
is a manuf/science choice not a technological one.

W/ enough effort one can emulate almost any type of lighting available..but which bands are "critical" which are neutral, and which are detrimental and in what ratios is still open to debate.


Again critical is mostly in the vis. spectrum.. Rest is gravy for the most part..( the arguable point..)
From the success of "simple" RB/White fixtures (yes, not "perfect") for MOST things that is evident.
IMPROVEMENT in a base system is human nature and is proceeding along this path.
The failures of the past is not indicative of the future..only a learning experience.

Actually using 400nm violet and RGB phosphor is exactly like a t5 and MH w/ the exception of small energies in the UV and for MH that HUGE spike past 800nm..
Both easily added though..
Consider this the tip of the hat to "old" tech...but the point is it is not the emitting source (si gaps, electric arc, microwaves, hot tungsten, ect) but the massaging of said source..
Isolating bandwidths (channels) IS a complication and a blessing..
Being able to tailor radiometric output on a band by band basis is.. err.. IDEAL....for some
A nightmare for others....

All can happily coexist..and it is a personal choice..
One is not better than another except to each individual........... no more, no less..
Like any tool.. it depends on the carpenter..
MH works, t5's work, LED's work as does any combination of the 3.. Pick one or many..
Again though, this concentrates on "quality" not delivery. Another complication..

 

[A. grandis]

To the right of that spectrum is heat.
Tonthe left are the UV that so far science has said corals don’t use, as they haven’t needed to because that frequency isn’t presesnt at depth.

So you are saying that "scientifically speaking" there is absolutely nothing missing in the spectrum of the Eco Tech compared to the 250W radium bulb.
What about of the differences of intensity when comparing halides and LEDs, taking that example, meaning the quantity of the UV offered by halides compared to the Eco Tech?
Also, do you think the IR from MH would make any positive influence?
Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

Lines are at 400nm and 700nm.. There are plenty of diodes beyond those lines on both sides.. Even 400nm (410nm) will "bleed" beyond the 400nm cutoff line.
How much and which ones and particularly their meaning
is a manuf/science choice not a technological one.

W/ enough effort one can emulate almost any type of lighting available..but which bands are "critical" which are neutral, and which are detrimental and in what ratios is still open to debate.


Again critical is mostly in the vis. spectrum.. Rest is gravy for the most part..( the arguable point..)
From the success of "simple" RB/White fixtures (yes, not "perfect") for MOST things that is evident.
IMPROVEMENT in a base system is human nature and is proceeding along this path.
The failures of the past is not indicative of the future..only a learning experience.

Actually using 400nm violet and RGB phosphor is exactly like a t5 and MH w/ the exception of small energies in the UV and for MH that HUGE spike past 800nm..
Both easily added though..
Consider this the tip of the hat to "old" tech...but the point is it is not the emitting source (si gaps, electric arc, microwaves, hot tungsten, ect) but the massaging of said source..
Isolating bandwidths (channels) IS a complication and a blessing..
Being able to tailor radiometric output on a band by band basis is.. err.. IDEAL....for some
A nightmare for others....

All can happily coexist..and it is a personal choice..
One is not better than another except to each individual........... no more, no less..
Like any tool.. it depends on the carpenter..
MH works, t5's work, LED's work as does any combination of the 3.. Pick one or many..
Again though, this concentrates on "quality" not delivery. Another complication..

So how can we explain the report of so many people who see huge differences in color/ growth, specially with SPS corals, namely Acropora spp., after changing their LED back to halides? Do you think that would have to do only with wattage? That happens also when the change from LEDs to T5s, but let's keep the topic with the halides.
I know there must be something else to explain all that, then. I think the extra UV from halides would be the main reason, even though the scientists don't think so, I guess...
Plus, Mr. Tullio Del Aquilla said in that video that "...halides can produce a lot of UV that LEDs cannot!"
What is that about?
We clearly see and know there is a difference between using halides and LEDs under table Acopora spp., for example. They tend to have dead spots under the colony due to shading. That happens more often than any other shading problems with LEDs. I believe that is a combination of factors, like intensity, spectrum and reflection (uniformity). The best aquarists in the world have seen that happening more often with LEDs than Halides. Some say they can actually correct the problem when they go back to halides.
What do you think?
Grandis.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

So you are saying that "scientifically speaking" there is absolutely nothing missing in the spectrum of the Eco Tech compared to the 250W radium bulb.
What about of the differences of intensity when comparing halides and LEDs, taking that example, meaning the quantity of the UV offered by halides compared to the Eco Tech?
Also, do you think the IR from MH would make any positive influence?
Grandis.

I’d have to look personally at the Ecotech with a spectrometer , and the bloody settings all the kids are using. (The failure point imo)
As far as I’ve read , Uva uvb etc because of the shorter wavelength doesn’t penetrate well, and I’ve not read any conclusive scientific paper that there’s a benitift. I’d love to read more naturally.
But from what I do know , a Light can be mixed to deliver the entire visible spectrum.

As far as it, I’ve though about that before yea , I honesty don’t know.
Heat can be transferred in a multitude of ways, so logically , I’d say no. But it’s a reason I’m about to dig head first into clams.

As far as specific intensity, I think we’ve all seen poorly made Lights regardless of the type.
From what I’ve seen , honestly , the biggest failure in led is the knobs and the misunderstanding of how it works. Put a Kessil on it don’t go over 60% Uh ok. Is a 200 gal 30indeep tank.
Most t5 mh for the uninitiated generally give too much light , and corals don’t mind that for the most part. W led, it’s too little.