How about a screenshot? It looks like I am now at 13k. I dialed down the higher wavelengths today to reduce heatsink temps.
Switching from MH to GHL Mitras
- Thread starter KJoFan
- Start date
- Tagged users None
How about a screenshot? It looks like I am now at 13k. I dialed down the higher wavelengths today to reduce heatsink temps.
OP
OP
KJoFan
Valuable Member
I do. I want to get some par readings first just so I have an idea of what kind of layout I've got and par in various locations. But...I've been lazy about getting those readings, so on the rack they sit.
Plus, I'm always so indecisive placing my frags, it's so hard!
OP
OP
KJoFan
Valuable Member
Took some par readings with an Apogee MQ-200....I find the high sand readings (in red) high in comparison to what I see others maps posted. Otherwise, I think the uniformity of the rockwork makes sense as there aren't huge differences in the height. But..not sure my LPS and softies enjoy the high par on the sand?
OP
OP
KJoFan
Valuable Member
I still thought par readings would be higher given that my blue channels run at such a high percentage and/or max out a some point. If I wanted to get sps into the 300+ range for par I wouldn't have the power to do so with these fixtures, which seems opposite of everything I've read about them. Not to mention many frags in the past few days have bleached and they are as close to the bottom of the tank as I can get them still on the frag racks. Just doesn't seem to all add up to me. Am I wrong?
I don't think the PAR numbers you reported are all that bad. I think you would be fine keeping SPS with those numbers. The numbers you are getting on the sand are actually quite good! I'm curious who or what gave you the impression that they would be brighter?
I still thought par readings would be higher given that my blue channels run at such a high percentage and/or max out a some point. If I wanted to get sps into the 300+ range for par I wouldn't have the power to do so with these fixtures, which seems opposite of everything I've read about them. Not to mention many frags in the past few days have bleached and they are as close to the bottom of the tank as I can get them still on the frag racks. Just doesn't seem to all add up to me. Am I wrong?
OP
OP
KJoFan
Valuable Member
Oh, I don't think they're bad either, I guess I just anticipated them being higher based on percentages of intensity I'm running. As for why I thought they'd be higher, just based on others' impressions/comments that these lights are powerful and mine are only mounted about 7" or so from the water I thought all in all they'd end up as higher readings. I don't mean to come across as disappointed with the lights, more that I was worried I was wielding the par meter incorrectly.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2014
- Messages
- 720
- Reaction score
- 579
I still thought par readings would be higher given that my blue channels run at such a high percentage and/or max out a some point. If I wanted to get sps into the 300+ range for par I wouldn't have the power to do so with these fixtures, which seems opposite of everything I've read about them. Not to mention many frags in the past few days have bleached and they are as close to the bottom of the tank as I can get them still on the frag racks. Just doesn't seem to all add up to me. Am I wrong?
Those numbers are more than high enough. Most SPS will be happy from 200-400. I’d say it looks great. In fact it will be too high for new frags transferred from lower light tanks.
I still thought par readings would be higher given that my blue channels run at such a high percentage and/or max out a some point. If I wanted to get sps into the 300+ range for par I wouldn't have the power to do so with these fixtures, which seems opposite of everything I've read about them. Not to mention many frags in the past few days have bleached and they are as close to the bottom of the tank as I can get them still on the frag racks. Just doesn't seem to all add up to me. Am I wrong?
My tank is similar to yours at 72"X24"X24" with 3 LX7s (now 4) about 5" off surface and with the 3 units, I get around 400 Par halfway down at 12" deep. Similar to you. The Acros. higher up and under the center of lights get about 600-650 PAR. Likely too much and leading to photo-inhibition. I will be dropping all the corals down 3-4 " when I get time.
I do have glass tops which rob me of some PAR. FYI- I'm running UVs, hyper-violets at 100%, RBs at 95% and all else at about 67%
My PAR meter is an MQ-200. Note that the 200 and 120 use the original sensor, which likely misses all the UV, a chunk of the hyperviolet and some of the red LEDs on the LX7s. My guess is that you have higher PAR than you are measuring. See links for UW correction factor: https://apogeeinstruments.com/underwater-par-measurements/ and spectral response: https://apogeeinstruments.com/original-quantum-sensor/
Hope that helps, Bob
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2014
- Messages
- 720
- Reaction score
- 579
A little bigger so it's readable..
I will say I'm a little surprised that the numbers you posted aren't higher. I'll try to map my par numbers out similar to yours. I actually just raised my lights a little last week to keep numbers down a bit and reduce shading even more, but I do envision getting more fixtures in a year when things grow in.
Oh, I don't think they're bad either, I guess I just anticipated them being higher based on percentages of intensity I'm running. As for why I thought they'd be higher, just based on others' impressions/comments that these lights are powerful and mine are only mounted about 7" or so from the water I thought all in all they'd end up as higher readings. I don't mean to come across as disappointed with the lights, more that I was worried I was wielding the par meter incorrectly.
Here is another good link regarding correcting for different light sources: https://apogeeinstruments.com/how-to-correct-for-spectral-errors-of-popular-light-sources/
I think your par numbers look good and your stack work isn't that high either. I wonder what my numbers look like, but I have never used a PAR meter even when I had MH's. I just go by how the corals look.
You still have your MH's so you should be able to compare if that is what you desire. You can also use your GHL controller to measure power consumption too, so you can get a good comparison.
You still have your MH's so you should be able to compare if that is what you desire. You can also use your GHL controller to measure power consumption too, so you can get a good comparison.
Yeah your rock work is pretty low. Hitting 350+ in the middle of the tank doesn't seem bad. Can you post the light composer screen to see your led values? I will say my experience with Mitras is that they spread a ton and are not nearly as focused (lack of hot spots) as other LEDs. I've never bleached any acro at all, only LPS.
BRS hasn't tested the LX7206 but I remember seeing the previous gen with similar led clusters and they didnt have as high a par in the center as Radions but more consistent ranges further out from center. Some people may not like that.
BRS hasn't tested the LX7206 but I remember seeing the previous gen with similar led clusters and they didnt have as high a par in the center as Radions but more consistent ranges further out from center. Some people may not like that.
OP
OP
KJoFan
Valuable Member
I think the consensus is my numbers look fine. So I’m not going to worry about it.
I corrected/increased my readings off the meter by 15% to compensate for the meter’s lack of ability to read the blue. I was told increase by 10-15%. I did 15 but even at 10 they’re in a fine range.
I kept my rock work low for growing space for sps and also to have the ability to add to it if I need to get something higher or just for more room.
I’m not at my computer to post my project numbers, but when I get back to it I’ll see if I can screenshot it.
However, it is the reefrockerlive project that’s available on the ghl website.
I corrected/increased my readings off the meter by 15% to compensate for the meter’s lack of ability to read the blue. I was told increase by 10-15%. I did 15 but even at 10 they’re in a fine range.
I kept my rock work low for growing space for sps and also to have the ability to add to it if I need to get something higher or just for more room.
I’m not at my computer to post my project numbers, but when I get back to it I’ll see if I can screenshot it.
However, it is the reefrockerlive project that’s available on the ghl website.
OP
OP
KJoFan
Valuable Member
So despite not having super high par values...most all sps have bleached to the point you wouldn't know they are alive if not for some PE..some are extremely white.
Should I reduce intensity of the lights and/or length of the schedule or just ride it out and hope they adjust?
Or could something else be causing the bleaching? Alk is stable around 7.5. Nutrients are non-existent.
Should I reduce intensity of the lights and/or length of the schedule or just ride it out and hope they adjust?
Or could something else be causing the bleaching? Alk is stable around 7.5. Nutrients are non-existent.
Similar threads
