XR30 Blue's with Seneye

[ReefPig]

I have two XR30 G5 Blues over a 200L, whilst that sounds like a lot, I hate shadows and wanted that "blanket of light" feel that T5's give.

The thing is, the PAR reading I'm getting from my Seneye makes very little sense, particularly if I compare it to the results which BRS got when they tested out the same.

My lights are mounted 8.5" above the water, they are situated 6" apart from each other (picture at the bottom).

With all channels set to 100% (following AB+) and total intensity set to 35%, this gives me a PAR of 530 at 8" below the water.

BRS recommend 8" above the water, and at 8" below the water to achieve 350 PAR I would need to be pushing 60% total intensity.

One of two things is happening:

• My lights are closer together than would be normal with XR30's and this is overlapping the light significantly, essentially doubling the PAR
• My Seneye is not working correctly, maybe not working correctly with XR30 blues at all (as I have seen someone else reporting an issue with Seneye and blues)

Thoughts?
I guess my concern is that I might be under lighting my tank, some of my corals don't seem to be very colourful right now and I just feel like they could do with more light, 35% is pretty low.
However, if it is correct, and i'm already at 530 PAR, then I absolutely don't want to be turning it up anymore.

Thoughts?

 

[92Miata]

Could you clarify? Your post is a bit confusing.

Which are your actual readings (at what setting) and which are the BRS video readings?

 

[ReefPig]

Could you clarify? Your post is a bit confusing.

Which are your actual readings (at what setting) and which are the BRS video readings?

Forgive me for just copy/paste, but I can't see how I can be more clear.
If you could tell me what I'm not being clear about, I can clarify.

"My lights are mounted 8.5" above the water, they are situated 6" apart from each other (picture at the bottom).

With all channels set to 100% (following AB+) and total intensity set to 35%, this gives me a PAR of 530 at 8" below the water."

 

[92Miata]

You say you're getting 530 par at 30% and then immediately say you'd need to run at 60% to get 350.

 

[ReefPig]

You say you're getting 530 par at 30% and then immediately say you'd need to run at 60% to get 350.

"BRS recommend 8" above the water, and at 8" below the water to achieve 350 PAR I would need to be pushing 60% total intensity"

In the BRS video, they needed to push 60% to get 350 PAR, at the same height and same depth as me, but I'm only running at 35% and getting 530 PAR.

Hope that clarifies

 

[Darren in Tacoma]

Let me start by saying that I am no expert when it comes to lighting, but that looks like a lot. I have 2 XR15 that sit 12" apart, edge to edge, over a 47" long tank and I get good coverage. I don't have a lot of corals as our tank is still young, but I have an Acan that is near the sand bed, 24" under the lights and about 6 inches from center that is growing like gangbusters and has improved in color since adding to this tank. My lights are set with the LPS template and point intensity is 50%.

 

[BackToTheReef]

You say you're getting 530 par at 30% and then immediately say you'd need to run at 60% to get 350.

That's the way I read it too!

For the OP, out of curiosity what are your tank dimensions? It looks like a fairly small foot print and my guess is your are going to have a lot of overlap.

Didn't BRS test just one over the cube and then do multiples over the 120? Maybe you are looking apples to oranges with the numbers (why I asked about the tank dimensions).

 

[Darren in Tacoma]

Maybe you should turn off one light and see what the Seneye reads.

 

[ReefPig]

That's the way I read it too!

For the OP, out of curiosity what are your tank dimensions? It looks like a fairly small foot print and my guess is your are going to have a lot of overlap.

Didn't BRS test just one over the cube and then do multiples over the 120? Maybe you are looking apples to oranges with the numbers (why I asked about the tank dimensions).

800mm long x 500mm wide x 500mm high.

The two lights are 6" apart, so there will be overlap,

 

[ReefPig]

Maybe you should turn off one light and see what the Seneye reads.

Good call, I'll try that and report back.

 

[BackToTheReef]

800mm long x 500mm wide x 500mm high.

The two lights are 6" apart, so there will be overlap,

So 31"ish x 19"ish x 19"ish which is 589 square inches of surface area. The BRS test cube is 24" x 24" x 24" isn't it? That's 576 square inches of surface area. I don't think your seneye is wrong, you just have a TON of light over the tank.

A little late since you already have two but I bet you could get pretty close to the BRS numbers (if that is what you are trying to do) by centering one XR30 and turning it sideways.

 

[takitaj]

BackToTheReef has it right. You definitely only need one XR30 for that tank. Turn it 90 degrees and you still may also need to raise it some.

 

[ReefPig]

With only one unit turned on, at the same settings of 35% total intensity (all channels 100%), I get 296 PAR, measured in the exact same spot, 8" below the water.

This still is a long way off the BRS number and still doesn't make any sense.

Randy achieved between 250 and 350 at 60%, 8" above the water (same as me).

I get the same results but at nearly half the intensity.

Incredibly, just above the waters surface (with the same settings), I get nearly 1300 PAR.

Has any got an XR30 Blue and tested it with an apogee? (other than BRS).

 

[ReefPig]

BackToTheReef has it right. You definitely only need one XR30 for that tank. Turn it 90 degrees and you still may also need to raise it some.

Interestingly, I just had one XR30 turned on, in the exact configuration you mentioned. It looks horrid, shadows everywhere, significant parts of the tank not lit, lots of shading in the corals. Most were lit only from one side.

 

[Jon's Reef]

I also have wondered a little about this. I've tried both an XR15 pro and blue and found the intensity @6" right under the light via Seneye to be 1.5-2x the values in the video. (I am seeing ~300 PAR vs ~180 PAR)

That being said... those values are just a guide, the only way to know on your tank is to use a PAR meter and look how your corals are responding. Too little par... they just don't look happy. Too much PAR... they die. I would be careful with those 2 XR30 on that tank because it could be very easy to go too high.

 

[takitaj]

Raise the light higher and turn it up. Keep raising until you get the spread you want then turn up the power until you get the par you want. It's not going to be the same as BRS because you're using a different tank shape and each tank is going to be different. They used a 2ft cube with no rocks, brand new water, etc., etc.. The BRS video is just a guide/comparison of the lights capability. You have to find the right height and power setting for your tank. Since you have a par meter it's just a matter of experimentation. I have 2 XR30's over a 4ft, 2ft deep tank and I could vaporize the corals if I wanted to. I can't imagine 2 over a tank your size.

The par is going to be quite a bit higher in air. Water scatters and filters light exponentially more than air does. Hence the reason it gets darker and bluer the deeper you go down in the ocean.

Mount one light in the center of the tank, or just slightly forward of center, in the same orientation of the tank and experiment with it. These things are massively powerful and designed for very wide spread.

Did you get them from BRS? If so maybe you could return them for 2 XR15's instead? Good luck either way!

 

[adams901]

I'm running 4 over a 525 and am running a schedule intensity of 22%

This gives me a par if 380 1/3 of the way from the surface

 

[dadnjesse]

Did BRS use a Seneye for their test also or the Apogee MQ510?

 

[Sisterlimonpot]

Did BRS use a Seneye for their test also or the Apogee MQ510?

As I was reading this was exactly what was running through my head.. I'm pretty certain that BRS used the apogee MQ-510, which is specifically made for LEDs.

I'm no fan of seneye nor do I know their models, but I would wonder the difference could be the sensor used. Is seneye designed specifically for LEDs?

 

[Jon's Reef]

I just got my hands on a 510. The seneye definitely runs "hot" compared to the 510. Seneye is ~30-40% higher. Measurements taken back to back, ~6" under surface, direct center (both sensors pointing at the light).