Radion diffusers, I think I have cracked it.

[atoll]

I completely agree. When I said 30%+ i was referring to the decrease that would be seen in the tank. That is what matters to many. For me, the color blending is most important. For other's they are not willing to sacrifice the output for the more diffused look.

I do however question the OP (@atoll), what percentage decrease in output is unacceptable to achieve this color blending? Is it 25%, 30%, 40%, ect???

My assumptions are based on 2 things with regards to PAR loss.
1/The manufacturers supplied spec which states there is 89% PAR retention.
2/ How bright the tank looked before and after fitted.
There is no way there had been 30% plus in reduction in PAR looking at the tank. I did, however, try various other diffusers some of which had a PAR reduction of over 50% born out by my eyes. I will say again I can see no significant reduction in PAR when I fitted these diffusers and trust the manufacturers supplied spec to be correct. However, I also agree what is most important is the mix of the colours but a large decrease in PAR would have and was unacceptable with other diffusers I tried. I guess you can simply say the truth of the pudding and so far the pudding is proving rather good.

 

[gcarroll]

a large decrease in PAR would have and was unacceptable

But what is that decrease that is unacceptable to you? I know from a previous thread, 25% was unacceptable. Just wondering if you will hold these diffusers to that same standard?

 

[atoll]

But what is that decrease that is unacceptable to you? I know from a previous thread, 25% was unacceptable. Just wondering if you will hold these diffusers to that same standard?

I didn't have a specific % reduction in PAR but I guess around 15% would have been my limit. However, I let my eyes be the judge esp as I don't own a PAR meter as yet nor have I been able to find anybody local that does. My LFS had one a while ago but it went missing they told me.

 

[jda]

If you want to post a link to the material used, I can use my PAR meter if I can find some that does not cost an arm and a leg. I have MH, but it still should be a close guesstimate.

 

[atoll]

If you want to post a link to the material used, I can use my PAR meter if I can find some that does not cost an arm and a leg. I have MH, but it still should be a close guesstimate.

All I know is that they just call it prismatic polycarbonate sheet. I posted the spec further up the thread.

 

[Scooter.B]

Lexan Prismatic Lighting / found it here at HD

https://www.homedepot.com/p/LEXAN-2...ting-Panel-5-Pack-LP2448LCPRLEXAN-5/205980258

 

[JUNICHI YAMASAKI]

• 2018/03/21 17:17

Radon light diffusers

https://lineblog.me/minimini/archives/1062432958.html



Features Include:

Advanced color mixing

Reduced light spillage

25% or less reduction in PAR

Easy to install

East to remove and clean

Compatible with all generations of XR15 and XR30 Radions.

http://aquanerd.com/2017/12/meet-the-new-ecotech-marine-xr15-light-diffuser.html





t is the same filter.
I made 30% loss.
The coral is in good condition.
There is a good effect in the filter.
A polyp blooms.

• PAR is stable.
  Because I am burnt, the lens needs scattered light.
  Cheap.

B50%　w50%



光合成有効放射量（PAR）は688μmolS-1m-2



L.635μmolS-1m-2



S.612μmolS-1m-2。



R.589μmolS-1m-2。








600～40034％DWN。3ＷＬＥＤHydraの2W、
R.404μmolS-1m-2。



S.438μmolS-1m-2。（w50％、B100）



。



500μmolS-1m-2



310μmolS-1m-2


https://lineblog.me/minimini/archives/1062437025.html

 

[JUNICHI YAMASAKI]

• It is 10% down by a diamond cut.
  The diamond cut is not good.

 

[iTzJu]

• It is 10% down by a diamond cut.
  The diamond cut is not good.

I am confused, so the diamond cut only showed a 10% par loss but the frosted panel showed a 30% par loss?

In terms of retaining PAR values, the diamond cut would be the better panel to diffuse the LEDs

Was your goal to retain as much PAR or to simply diffuse and possible lower PAR to eliminate hot spots all together?

I'm just confused. lol

 

[Sleepydoc]

The loss is actually zero, if you measured in an integrating sphere or other mechanism that does not care about direction as much, including direct reflection back up into the fixture. They could totally measure at 11% for general room lighting where scattering is not so bad and 30% for downward focus onto the reef... it is not like there is less light, it just gets spread out more.

In any case, who cares? Only the people running already at 100% that cannot turn them up more.

A couple other concerns - even if you are running your LEDs at something less than 100% and have ‘room’ to turn them up, that will increase the power consumption and increase the heat generated which *may* shorten their lifespan. That is very dependent on the design of the fixture, but it is a potential concern.

As far as the spec sheet, 89% light transmission does not necessarily translate into 11% PAR reduction. I agree with @gcarroll that you need to check with a PAR meter to see. Your eye is a very insensitive tool for measuring/comparing light levels, so visual impressions aren’t worth a whole lot, unfortunately.

I still have to wonder with all of these if simply buffing a sheet of Lexan with steel wool would have the same effect.

 

[Ryanbrs]

I will share I have tested a variety of these and I would be shocked if you found anything that was only a 10% reduction and performed the desired function. The best performing of the bunch we tested was a 25-30% reduction in par when measured in a grid that attempts to measure overall par distribution. The material scatters a lot of the light and reflects it back up at the light. That said, IMHO the performance improvements are totally worth increased energy consumption. The spectrums are blended better which is good for the corals and visually looks a ton better. There is also an improvement in the distribution of par.

A decent place to start a DIY project is looking for materials designed for this specific purpose and cheap. Lighting gels might be a good option.

Cinegel #3000: R3000 Tough Rolux
Description
A dense diffuser that creates an even field of soft, "shadowless" light. Excellent for combining multiple lighting fixtures into a single, large area source. Tough, heat resistant base.

Page 44 of this link http://us.rosco.com/en/products/catalog/filters-diffusions

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/43754-REG/Rosco_RS11111_111_Filter_Tough.html

 

[gcarroll]

I am confused, so the diamond cut only showed a 10% par loss but the frosted panel showed a 30% par loss?

In terms of retaining PAR values, the diamond cut would be the better panel to diffuse the LEDs

Was your goal to retain as much PAR or to simply diffuse and possible lower PAR to eliminate hot spots all together?

I'm just confused. lol

No, I think he meant that the diamond cut showed a 10% loss compared to the frosted panels.

A couple other concerns - even if you are running your LEDs at something less than 100% and have ‘room’ to turn them up, that will increase the power consumption and increase the heat generated which *may* shorten their lifespan. That is very dependent on the design of the fixture, but it is a potential concern.

As far as the spec sheet, 89% light transmission does not necessarily translate into 11% PAR reduction. I agree with @gcarroll that you need to check with a PAR meter to see. Your eye is a very insensitive tool for measuring/comparing light levels, so visual impressions aren’t worth a whole lot, unfortunately.

I still have to wonder with all of these if simply buffing a sheet of Lexan with steel wool would have the same effect.

I have to admit, to my eyes, my radions with the diffusers look brighter than without. But I know better as in reality, it is not possible.

 

[KenO]

I will share I have tested a variety of these and I would be shocked if you found anything that was only a 10% reduction and performed the desired function. The best performing of the bunch we tested was a 25-30% reduction in par when measured in a grid that attempts to measure overall par distribution. The material scatters a lot of the light and reflects it back up at the light. That said, IMHO the performance improvements are totally worth increased energy consumption. The spectrums are blended better which is good for the corals and visually looks a ton better. There is also an improvement in the distribution of par.

A decent place to start a DIY project is looking for materials designed for this specific purpose and cheap. Lighting gels might be a good option.

Cinegel #3000: R3000 Tough Rolux
Description
A dense diffuser that creates an even field of soft, "shadowless" light. Excellent for combining multiple lighting fixtures into a single, large area source. Tough, heat resistant base.

Page 44 of this link http://us.rosco.com/en/products/catalog/filters-diffusions

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/43754-REG/Rosco_RS11111_111_Filter_Tough.html

Can these filters be cut? If so, how?

 

[Ryanbrs]

Can these filters be cut? If so, how?

It’s a thin sheet so I think a scissors will do

 

[KenO]

It’s a thin sheet so I think a scissors will do

Yes from what I read all you need are sissors. I ordered a couple of the 20"x 24" sheets of the Cinegel 3000. I build my own leds so it will be interesting to try these. I do have my own PAR meter so I can see the drop off. I would think if I sandwhich the Cinegel sheet between two clear rigid plastic sheets that would keep it flat. Plus the rigid plastic would protect it from salt spray. I also have a couple of Gen 3 Radions so I can hold the sheet in front of them to see what it looks like.

 

[Michael Benz]

I believe the material original poster is using is Polystyrene .I would be concerned about UV yellowing material over time. Now it could be cheap enough that you can replace every year.

 

[atoll]

I believe the material original poster is using is Polystyrene .I would be concerned about UV yellowing material over time. Now it could be cheap enough that you can replace every year.

Polycarbonate and so far no signs of discolouring not on mine nor with any of the many I have made for people. The manufacturers do stay ir does not discolour as per the spec I posted. Maybe it will in time who knows.

 

[Michael Benz]

OK, I didn't see material mention in earlier post. I work in the LED industry so am very familiar with PC and PS. One thing I do not know is whether the intensity of UV versus what would typically be experienced when using these panels. PC can be resistant to UV but it is not 100%. Again coming from someone you just purchased 5 of the EcoTech diffusers I hope it is a good solution since the price ET is selling these for is crazy. I just installed my diffusers and although I miss the look of pure LED I think it will reduce the burning of my corals.

 

[TexasTodd]

atoll, did you ever get a PAR or LUX meter to test?

 

[atoll]

atoll, did you ever get a PAR or LUX meter to test?

Nope I have asked mates and neither has one. I am not overly concerned with numbers and am happy to reply on my eyes as to what I see with regards to how my coral react an how bright it looks both with and without the lenses fitted. An LFS of mine had a PAR meter but had it stolen when I asked him if I could loan it,
On different note I have recently broke my tank down as I am moving house after Christmas, date to be confirmed and have now sold my Radion's.