Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board - New Lighting Technology?...

Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board (http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/index.php)

- Product Review and Equipment Forum (http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=23)

- - New Lighting Technology?... (http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=52347)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron99 (Post 417211)

High Power LEDs will last the 50,000 hours as long as you keep them cool enough. I think failures were due to poor thermal management. LEDs do not like excessive heat. The Solaris units had pitiful excuses for heat sinks so that was likely responsible for most of those failures. I am going a bit with overkill on mine. But as long as you have adequate heat sinks and run a fan or two to move air over the heatsink the LEDs will last the 50K hours.

Penetration is poor because the output is something like 120 or more degrees wide so it is quite spread out. Adding even 80 degree optics will bump up performance quite a bit. 60 degree optics should give performance equal to or better than 150 Watt MH. 40 degree optics will equal or exceed 250 watt MH and 20 degree optics should reach 400 watt MH PAR levels. For any tank deeper than say 10 inches you need some optics to get better penetration and PAR at depth.

I have seen the PAR numbers for the new LEDs at the bottom of a tank with water in it and to tell you the truth I wasn't impressed, it was no where near what I have measured on a 150 watt HQI MH, but I don't know if this was the way the guy measure it or what. it was weird as everyone tells me that with this set up you get the same output as (insert whatever) so I think what I am going to do is order a couple LEDs and do some direct comparasons from exact same distances as I am suspecting there is some distance fudging going on :mrgreen:

Steve

Hello,

It'd be interesting to see how the new plasma stuff pans out. It looks dangerous though.

Titus

Hmm, most of the data I've seen on LEDs was using 45 degree optics, which will make the penetration (and par numbers) much better. I think that LEDs are perfect for smaller tanks anyhow... why bother with a bunch of little lights over a big tank when a few large MHs would do the job better (and just as efficiently)?

I took note of this new plasma technology when it was first announced, and I think it shows some promise as a replacement (or alternative) to MH. I'll be watching this closely... thanks for posting!

Quote:

Originally Posted by StirCrazy (Post 417367)

Sounds like a good plan. I'll be curious to see what PAR numbers you get. Try to use some of the better LEDs like the Cree XR-E. Don't bother with the MC-E as it is not an optimal option for aquarium lighting. Also, try to run an array of something like 4 x 4 or 4 x5 LEDs with 50% cool white and 50% royal blue. You'll want more than 1 LED as in real world applications you will get overlapping output from the LEDs.

Or if you make it out to the Lower Mainland you could bring your PAR meter by once I've built my array and make some measurements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueAbyss (Post 417408)

Actually, the LEDs should be more efficient. They convert more energy into light than heat compared to MH. They will use less power than a comparable MH set up and transfer little to no heat to the tank so you're less likely to need a chiller. Also, as long as you manage the heat around the LEDs themselves, they will last for 50,000+ hours so that's a big cost savings in bulb changes too.

Also, you can control the blue and white LEDs separately to fine tune your colour temperature to exactly what you want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron99 (Post 417411)

come july, I will be going to Kamloops on weekends, so I could always stop by on a friday or sunday.

Steve