Tuning a Rapid Led Corona

[Biologic]

So I have a topless JBJ 28 gal Nano cube (cue the whistles and cat calls)

I’ve been out of the hobby and had plans getting back in 2015, just got back in as of 2020 August. Built a great mostly SPS tank. Using the Rapid LED Corona, I have used the basic prebuilt geographic sun cycles. Tell you the truth, I wish I had a different light like a G4 or anything else. It’s hard to tune lights that you don’t have access to a knowledge base. Plenty of examples of lighting schedules online.

So you can pick a geolocation and it will imitate the light in that area. Or schedule out what you want in the sun cycle mode. I’ve seen other posts that say the par values are as much as a G4.

My biggest problem I have no idea how to tune these lights exactly. I am open to you guy’s advice. Just want what everyone else wants, healthy colorful corals. They (corals) are doing OK now. Want to make sure I get all that can be obtain from this light. Here’s the specs—


6 Independently controllable LED channels as follows:

16 CREE XT-E royal blue LEDs
10 CREE XP-G3 cool whtie LEDs
4 SemiLEDs Violet UV LEDs + 4 SemiLEDs Hyper Violet LEDs
2 CREE XP-E Photo Red LEDs
2 CREE XP-E2 Green LEDs
2 royal blue moonlights

Rapid LED Corona

The next generation of lighting from Rapid LED has arrived! Introducing the Corona, our wifi controlled full spectrum LED fixture. Each fixture has 38 LEDs, 5 channels of independent control plus moonlights (2), and a wifi enabled controller built into each fixture meaningn no more dimming...

oceanreefsmarine.com.au

 

[Biologic]

Also I forgot you can make sun cycles like this. So I can do pretty much anyone else can do. I don’t want to leave any growth or color or health on the table.

 

[Nano sapiens]

Having built (and still using) a DIY LED array, you can imagine that I had the same dilemma. A spectometer would have been the ultimate, but cost was a deterrent.

Here's an alternative that I have used with success:

http://spectra.1023world.net/

There are different ways to approach building a light's spectral output with this program. One way is to know the specs and use the provided list of emitters that are closest to what you have...

Another way I've been experimenting with is to set your array's individual channels as close as possible to what you believe is a proper spectrum for coral. Then I take PAR readings of each individual channel (if a channel has more than one LED type, I take an overall reading and then temporarily mask off one...subtraction gives the other). With my older style Apogee sensor, I apply appropriate correction factors for underwater readings and spectrum correction factors. Once all the PAR readings are complete, then I use the program by selecting the proper emitter wavelengths and adjust the parameters to get to the PAR reading taken earlier (you'll need to got to SETUP first and check mark the 'Beam Angle Compulsive Calculation' so that you can adjust 'Beam' and 'Length' settings as a way to get to your specific PAR readings, in addition to selecting the number of emitters for a specific wavelength). Once all wavelengths are entered, the program will show you the overall PAR, a graphic representation of the spectrum and any deficiencies in chlorophyll, chromoproteins, etc.

Once any deficiencies in PAR and/or spectral output are identified, you can adjust to correct.

Here's my latest spectum (eyeballed to get close, before any adjustment):

Score of '73' in this case gives a subtle blue tinge to the aquarium. If I tweak it to '100', it's brighter/whiter (closer to the Radion G4) and would theoretically grow coral faster:

What the '73%' spectrum looks like:

Anyway, something you might want to explore...

 

[Biologic]

Here's an alternative that I have used with success:

http://spectra.1023world.net/

There are different ways to approach building a light's spectral output with this program. One way is to know the specs and use the provided list of emitters that are closest to what you have...

Thank you so much for your reply. You are a saint! Your light in your tank is absolutely lovely. I am so doing this!

Here are my specs- two pucks, so each puck has half the number listed below. So 8 CREE XT-E’s royal blue LED’s on one puck.

16 CREE XT-E royal blue LEDs
10 CREE XP-G3 cool whtie LEDs
4 SemiLEDs Violet UV LEDs + 4 SemiLEDs Hyper Violet LEDs
2 CREE XP-E Photo Red LEDs
2 CREE XP-E2 Green LEDs

So next essentially I need to rent a par meter from Bulkreefsupply.com and input the values channel by channel for the entire set up. Sounds easy enough

Yes, I’d like an the G4 AB+ Coral Labs spectrum or something to that effect. Any testing jig suggestions? Obviously off the tank and measuring par in the dry with the sensor. From what I am told, it’s a very powerful light, just needs tuning.

 

[Nano sapiens]

So next essentially I need to rent a par meter from Bulkreefsupply.com and input the values channel by channel for the entire set up. Sounds easy enough

Yes, I’d like an the G4 AB+ Coral Labs spectrum or something to that effect. Any testing jig suggestions? Obviously off the tank and measuring par in the dry with the sensor. From what I am told, it’s a very powerful light, just needs tuning.

I'm not sure which PAR meter that they rent out, but hopefully it's the most recent 'full spectrum' from Apogee (much better at measuring the wavelengths at both extreme ends of the visible light spectrum than the older quantum sensors, especially violet).

If you would like more accuracy than just 'per channel', think of measuring each individual emitter wavelength that's in a particular channel. For example, if your 'V/HV' channel has 405 nm and 430 nm emitters, run a loose loop of electric tape over all the 405nm diodes (best not to touch the diode with the tape, just want to block most of the light output) which will allow you to get a PAR reading for just the 430 nm emitters. Then tape over the 430 nm to get just the 405 nm PAR output. Looks like the rest of your channels are made up of just a single type of emitter, so those just need a simple PAR reading.

I take the middle (horizontally and vertically) of my aquarium as my main measuring/reference point. Since I do have some SPS at this level and above, I try to get somewhere around 150 - 170 PAR at this midpoint, which means the top of the rock structure gets around 200 - 220 PAR. I can do this because I have 31 emitters in my array which provides a relatively even distribution of light (think similar to the CoralCare concept, just a lot earlier). If I had multiple pucks, I'd take multiple readings staying at the mid level plane to see how even the light spread is.

You mentioned the G4 AB+ as your goal which has been proven to work well. In case you are interested in a deep dive into understanding all the different facets of reef lighting, I've included here what I consider the most informative article on the subject:

https://reefs.com/magazine/light-in-the-reef-aquaria/

 

[Biologic]

I'm not sure which PAR meter that they rent out, but hopefully it's the most recent 'full spectrum' from Apogee (much better at measuring the wavelengths at both extreme ends of the visible light spectrum than the older quantum sensors, especially violet).

If you would like more accuracy than just 'per channel', think of measuring each individual emitter wavelength that's in a particular channel. For example, if your 'V/HV' channel has 405 nm and 430 nm emitters, run a loose loop of electric tape over all the 405nm diodes (best not to touch the diode with the tape, just want to block most of the light output) which will allow you to get a PAR reading for just the 430 nm emitters. Then tape over the 430 nm to get just the 405 nm PAR output. Looks like the rest of your channels are made up of just a single type of emitter, so those just need a simple PAR reading.

I take the middle (horizontally and vertically) of my aquarium as my main measuring/reference point. Since I do have some SPS at this level and above, I try to get somewhere around 150 - 170 PAR at this midpoint, which means the top of the rock structure gets around 200 - 220 PAR. I can do this because I have 31 emitters in my array which provides a relatively even distribution of light (think similar to the CoralCare concept, just a lot earlier). If I had multiple pucks, I'd take multiple readings staying at the mid level plane to see how even the light spread is.

You mentioned the G4 AB+ as your goal which has been proven to work well. In case you are interested in a deep dive into understanding all the different facets of reef lighting, I've included here what I consider the most informative article on the subject:

https://reefs.com/magazine/light-in-the-reef-aquaria/

This all makes perfect sense. I can do it. My next question is “intensity” that people refer to when referring to their spectrum mixtures. For example, an AB+ at 50% intensity.

So in my case, I’d develop a spectrum ratio at brightness max of whatever that may be. For example, 100% blue, 90% V/HV, 40% green, 30% white, 10% red, which equals the highest par value for the correct spectrum that I can possibly produce with my given equipment. Let’s say 700 par out of water at 10 inches.

If I needed less par, but at the right spectrum...So 50% brightness of the spectrum (50% of each channel) I created would be, half of the values in my previous example would be 350 par? Theoretically?

BRS rents for $69.99 for a 7 Day Rental - MQ-510 Full Spectrum Underwater LED PAR Meter

The next thing I’d want to do, it get the data into an Excel spreadsheet and do linear regression and test the output at given intensities see if it fits the model, and then I maybe able to know a given depth and intensity I will have a par range.

 

[Nano sapiens]

This all makes perfect sense. I can do it. My next question is “intensity” that people refer to when referring to their spectrum mixtures. For example, an AB+ at 50% intensity.

So in my case, I’d develop a spectrum ratio at brightness max of whatever that may be. For example, 100% blue, 90% V/HV, 40% green, 30% white, 10% red, which equals the highest par value for the correct spectrum that I can possibly produce with my given equipment. Let’s say 700 par out of water at 10 inches.

If I needed less par, but at the right spectrum...So 50% brightness of the spectrum (50% of each channel) I created would be, half of the values in my previous example would be 350 par? Theoretically?

BRS rents for $69.99 for a 7 Day Rental - MQ-510 Full Spectrum Underwater LED PAR Meter

The next thing I’d want to do, it get the data into an Excel spreadsheet and do linear regression and test the output at given intensities see if it fits the model, and then I maybe able to know a given depth and intensity I will have a par range.

I suspect that a 50% reduction in all channel settings might not result in exactly a 50% decrease in PAR as there would be some variance depending on whether the emitter is more efficient at one power setting vs. another. Anyway, that's where the trusty PAR meter comes in and you can test out your theory for your array first-hand.

Good, the MQ-510 should make for more precise readings and will make your task easier.

The PAR intensity that you shoot for depends greatly on the type of coral that you plan to keep. There are a number of videos from BRS, WWC and others that propose optimal PAR levels for softie, LPS or SPS dominated systems. Mixed reef systems are the most challenging to light properly since there are many different corals in them with often varying lighting intensity needs. I opted for a more 'LPS' LED lighting model (~150 PAR mid depth), then adjusted where the corals were placed so that they could receive the correct lighting for their particular types.

 

[Biologic]

Also for your reference, here is my graph. Not that I was expecting. Was hoping I’d get a higher score.

I did find some other reefers here that already measured par. Attached is a screen shot from that thread.

 

[oreo54]

If I needed less par, but at the right spectrum...So 50% brightness of the spectrum (50% of each channel) I created would be, half of the values in my previous example would be 350 par? Theoretically?

Generally it's going to be pretty close.. LED's get more efficient at lower currents but PWM dimming isn't actually changing the instantaneous current only average.
Efficiency also increases w/ cooler diodes.
As a practical example I'm testing some FW arrays atm and since I'm plugged in will give an example..
at 100% PAR is 35. At 50% PAR is 19. At 1/4 power 9 PAR


Obviously real world measurements are the best.
will be curious what you come up with though.

Huh, you posted real data while I was writing this..
Not exactly support of my findings.. LOL
Somewhat at the sand bed if in an open space.
Close to the light or close to reflective surfaces yes clear glass is reflective) not so err predictable. is another.
Mine were at 24"
Thanks.

 

[Nano sapiens]

Also for your reference, here is my graph. Not that I was expecting. Was hoping I’d get a higher score.

I did find some other reefers here that already measured par. Attached is a screen shot from that thread.

Since you are limited by what the manufacturer put in the array, having a 'perfect score' may be difficult. But honestly, I wouldn't worry about it since this 'perfect spectrum' is just a theoretical guide and corals are highly light adaptable. I'd suggest just to get as close as you can while still keeping a pleasing look to the tank (happy corals, happy coral keeper).

Interesting, I do see a 420 nm peak, but I'm wondering what happened to most of the hyper-violet 430 nm? (430 is a most important peak for photosynthesis). is this a used array? If so, I'd check the Hyper-Violet emitters lenses to see if they are discolored (aka 'browned-out').

Cyan is also underrepresented, but both Cyan and especially Lime are primarily used to brighten the look of the aquarium (although Cyan around 495 nm is somewhat used for photosynthesis). Another thing I see is that you only have 'Cool White' which is high in Royal blue, but relatively low in the warmer colors compared to Neutral White or Warm White, especially.

 

[oreo54]

Also for your reference, here is my graph. Not that I was expecting. Was hoping I’d get a higher score.

I did find some other reefers here that already measured par. Attached is a screen shot from that thread.

Yea that's a bit tricky.. See if you lower your blue output your score will improve. See it's all relative.
Also for some reason it uses chl a and b where zoo uses a and c

Some improvement suggestions on the "score"
you need a bit more cyan and amber..and if you favor a over c Cree photo red (660nm)
OK your one graph uses "regular" red thus missing the 660 part.

BTW an amber "peak" (600-ish) is present in most Mercury emission based lights.
Usually enhanced w/ warm whites in led land.

What you want it to look like is really the more important thing in my mind.
As long as that looks doesn't impact your PAR goal.. go for it regardless of charts.
They are only a guide.

Photosynthetic organisms adapt..

 

[oreo54]

You can't really get a "good" AB+ with those diodes really..

You are shifted left vs the t5..
you would need cyan and "regular" blue added.
Radion adds 8 regular blue to fill in to the right.
That's not bad just an "is"

 

[Nano sapiens]

Also for some reason it uses chl a and b where zoo uses a and c

Yeah, not sure why Chlorophyll B is indicated as it's not used by coral (Dana Riddle caught that too in a different post). My guess is that it was a typo and the creator really meant 'Chlorophyll C'

 

[Nano sapiens]

Interesting, I do see a 420 nm peak, but I'm wondering what happened to most of the hyper-violet 430 nm? (430 is a most important peak for photosynthesis). is this a used array? If so, I'd check the Hyper-Violet emitters lenses to see if they are discolored (aka 'browned-out').

Looking further at the SemiLed Hyper-Violet spectrum peak, I can see they list peak at 420-420 nm (the ones I use from LGB peak at 430 nm). Hyper-Violet can be considered 420nm as well as 430 nm (or anything in between), so your spectrum output makes sense and you can ignore my paragraph above.

 

[oreo54]

Yeah, not sure why Chlorophyll B is indicated as it's not used by coral (Dana Riddle caught that too in a different post). My guess is that it was a typo and the creator really meant 'Chlorophyll C'

Chl b & c are fairly close on the blue side..
Keep in mind that the solvent used can shift peaks so just an approx of "real world" absorption.
SPECTRA is used for freshwater lighting as well and ab covers most plants from green algae on up.

One the red side the "triangles" go from 630-670 w/ 660 "peak"
On the blue side goes from 400-470

Doesn't change if you shift chart from freshwater to reef.

 

[Nano sapiens]

Chl b & c are fairly close on the blue side..
Keep in mind that the solvent used can shift peaks so just an approx of "real world" absorption.
SPECTRA is used for freshwater lighting as well and ab covers most plants from green algae on up.

One the red side the "triangles" go from 630-670 w/ 660 "peak"
On the blue side goes from 400-470

Doesn't change if you shift chart from freshwater to reef.

Correct, Chl C has a major spike on the blue side, but I was thinking that they might have mislabeled the lesser Chl C2 spike around 635 nm on the red side as 'Chl B':

Didn't know that SPECTRA is used for freshwater, too, so that now makes sense that they would reference Chl B.

 

[oreo54]

Correct, Chl C has a major spike on the blue side, but I was thinking that they might have mislabeled the lesser Chl C2 spike around 635 nm on the red side as 'Chl B':



Didn't know that SPECTRA is used for freshwater, too, so that now makes sense that they would reference Chl B.

Setup:Graph: Spectrum graph (FRESH).
Also changes background curve from "at depth" to "daylight"

You can also change standards to calculate CRI.

Setup:Advanced

 

[Biologic]

Since you are limited by what the manufacturer put in the array, having a 'perfect score' may be difficult. But honestly, I wouldn't worry about it since this 'perfect spectrum' is just a theoretical guide and corals are highly light adaptable. I'd suggest just to get as close as you can while still keeping a pleasing look to the tank (happy corals, happy coral keeper).

Interesting, I do see a 420 nm peak, but I'm wondering what happened to most of the hyper-violet 430 nm? (430 is a most important peak for photosynthesis). is this a used array? If so, I'd check the Hyper-Violet emitters lenses to see if they are discolored (aka 'browned-out').

Cyan is also underrepresented, but both Cyan and especially Lime are primarily used to brighten the look of the aquarium (although Cyan around 495 nm is somewhat used for photosynthesis). Another thing I see is that you only have 'Cool White' which is high in Royal blue, but relatively low in the warmer colors compared to Neutral White or Warm White, especially.

Hey, maybe I misunderstood. I thought I was just entering all of my LED’s into the synthetic spectrum analyzer and I’d make some educated guesses from there. I didn’t measure par yet.

 

[Nano sapiens]

Hey, maybe I misunderstood. I thought I was just entering all of my LED’s into the synthetic spectrum analyzer and I’d make some educated guesses from there. I didn’t measure par yet.

I did something similar to that when I first started using the SPECTRA tool, but it requires some calculating as to how much power each of the emitters is using at a particular power setting. The tool shows '1 W' emitters (350mA), so if running a particular emitter (say Royal Blue/450 nm) at 1 W (350mA), then you could simply put in the number of those emitters in the array and be done with it. As you can imagine, it gets a bit more complicated if you are using 3 W emitters operating at 60%, or 5 W emitters at 30%, etc.

So I thought there must be an easier way. Why not use the PAR measurement from a specific wavelength of emitters and then adjust the SPECTRA tool to match? So, for example, if I measure 90 PAR with just the 450 nm emitters, then I'd select the 'Royal Blue (450 nm)' in the tool sidebar menu and with some tweaking of the number of LEDs, beam angle and height settings ('Length'), get as close to the measured PAR level as possible (basically, I'm 'fooling' the tool to get to the measured PAR level). When all done with all the different channels/emitters, you should end up with a cumulative PPFD reading at the top of the spectrum page that should be close to your combined real world PAR reading from the array.

Here I've tweaked the tool to match my measurement of 1.6 PAR for my Red (660 nm) channel that has (2) emitters by selecting only (1) 'Red (660 nm) and an adjustment of the 'Beam' angle from it's true 120 degrees to 125 degrees:

But before working any of this, you need to add a check mark for the 'Beam Angle Compulsive Calculation' under the Settings tab to allow for tweaking the beam angle (angle of an emitter's lens):

There may be other ways to do this, but this works for me

Does that clear things up a bit?

 

[Biologic]

I want to share this with you. What do you think about something like this? This guy made a very simple DIY spectrometer. All it took was a CD, a webcam, freeware software, and some wood. Even was able to calibrate it with fluorescent bulbs based on their spectral peaks. Pretty amazing.

I know this is also assuming that the LED’s are blended well enough together, but I think this is something that can be cheap solution to a commercial spectrometer. The cheapest ones are $700. This is like $10!