I think Steve pretty much summed it up. Just to add to it, my PAR reading on the T5 were with the old bulbs so yes, the reading would have been higher with newer bulbs. Couldn't do that as I just recently borrowed a PAR meter for this testing and had no way to test when my bulbs were new. And I wasn't about to spend $250+ on new bulbs at this point :) I would love to see others posting PAR numbers from their fixtures so we can do comparisons.

And for the record, I wasn't making any claims as to comparisons with 250w or 400W MH as I haven't done any PAR readings from those but a guess as to where my light output would end up. If anybody else has let's see the numbers as it would be interesting to compare.

But what I do know is that with the LEDs lower down, at about 7 to 8 inches above the water I was seeing just over 500 PAR in the upper part of the tank and 300 just above the sand bed of the tank about 18 inches down. That's pretty good from my understanding. I didn't test with the fixture even closer to the water but if I lowered it to where I had the T5s then I suspect Steve is correct and PAR would be 600 to 700 in the upper part of the tank. Maybe I'll try it tomorrow and see. The reason I raised the fixture for now is that I would burn all my corals switching them from say 300 PAR to 500+ PAR. They need to be acclimated and I plan to slowly lower the fixture every few days to acclimate them to the higher light.

Give this article a read:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/2/aafeature2

It shows comparisons in air, not water but it's a start. Also you have to note that the LED fixtures used in the article are not the best. One is a PFO Solaris which used older LEDs that do not have the same output as the newer generations of emitters and the other is the Eco-Lamps one that under drives their LEDS at just over 1 watt instead of 3 watts. Even so they compared well to a high end T5 (about equal performance) and a 250W MH (a little less but not by much; about 15 to 16% less output). I guarantee you my fixture will outperform both the Solaris and the Eco-Lamps as I used very good Cree emitters driven at a full 3W and 1000mA for the whites and about 900mA for the blues.

Even so Dr. Joshi states that most Acropora and light loving corals will thrive at PAR levels of 300 to 400 which this fixture can provide throughout my tank if I wish. That's good enough for me. In a 30" deep tank for example you could keep high light SPS in the top 2/3 of the tank. I don't have a deeper tank to test on but I suspect PAR would still be close to 200 by 30" down. That's pretty good performance in my book.

For comparison purposes Eugene at Oceanic Corals tested their 400W MH fixture (in their LED spotlight thread) and says that PAR was 500 at 12" below the water. I had 400 PAR at about that depth with the fixture say 7.5 inches above the water. I'll try to test with the fixture closer to the water at 12" depth and see what I come up with.

But I think my 400PAR as tested so far shows pretty well against the MH.

Oh, and just to Spam my own thread a bit testing by the LED leaders at nano-reef.com shows that the drop off in PAR vs. depth is less with LEDs vs. MH. That makes sense as with the optics virtually all the output of the LEDS is focussed down into the tank. T5s and MH, even with good reflectors, probably have less cohesive light with more scatter from the reflectors as they emit in all directions and then rely on the reflectors to focus the light down if that makes sense.

Steve,

You'll have to read Ron's post after yours. The PAR measured with the low quality T5 fixture was on more than 1 year old T5 lamps and therefore a very poor comparator - forget about the height of the fixture comparison. Additionally, I'm less concerned about the comparison to T5s than I am to MH (the only reason I commented on T5s was because the comparison was hugely favorable to the LEDs based on the manner in which it was performed). Various qualities of LEDs make them favorable to T5s IMO. With that said, comparisons are being made all over the place to MH by retailers, manufacturers, and hobbyists. When you were standing on your soap box about MH a few months ago you pounded your chest about getting over 1000 PAR at the surface and 500 on the bottom of the tank. Clearly, the numbers being reported here don't fall in line with what you've purported constitutes adequate PAR for your SPS tanks.

And as far as the theory behind intensity drop in LEDs goes - it's just that: a nice theoretical expectation based on presumed qualities. Until there is some long term data for PAR the theoretical musings can carry on but with a healthy dose of skepticism.

First I think you are being overly critical of my light fixture. I would not call it low quality but about a middle of the road one. Sunlight Supply makes good fixtures and these were not much different then the first generation Tek fixtures in terms of lighting output. Slightly better reflectors and active cooling would improve it somewhat but how much do you think that would be? 10%? 20%? Secondly, while the bulbs were old, the only references I could fine say that T5s lose about 10% output over 2 years. The problem for reef tanks is the shift in colour which can lead to undesirable algae etc. But let's say that the degradation was 20% for the sake of argument. So my 300 PAR with the T5s could mean 375 PAR with new bulbs. Still much less than 500 PAR with the LEDs higher above the tank then the T5s were. Argue all you want but however you set up my test, new bulbs or not etc. my LEDs handily outperform my T5s. That's all I am claiming. I would love to test different lighting setups for comparison but I don't have easy access at the moment. Maybe we can do that and arrange to test various people's lights with the same meter which will give some idea. it's not as good as a side by side comparison under the same conditions in the same tank but it would be a start.

I would also take manufacturers claims with a grain of salt as they are in the business of marketing their products and most likely set up tests to skew results in favour of their products. However, independent test are being done like Sanjay Joshi's comparison I linked in my last post. That clearly showed the "lower quality" LED fixtures performing as well at or slightly better then a high end T5 fixture and only 15 to 16% lower output then a good 250W MH setup. Dr. Joshi is an engineer and has been testing all sorts of lights, especially MH, for a long time so I would consider him a good independent reviewer. Here's also a more recent review of a top of the line LED fixture, the AquaIllumination:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007...searchterm=PAR

This one clearly shoes the AI unit outperforming a 250W MH unit. Granted, the MH ballast used may not be top of the line but is probably typical of one used by many people.

With respect to who has the biggest PAR; really, who cares. Stoney corals appear to photosaturate between 400 and 500 PAR so having 700 or 1000 PAR is probably pointless other than for bragging rights. I doubt it will do the corals much good.

As for longevity and degradation of LEDS, that is fairly well established. While high powered LEDs are fairly new to our hobby they have been around for a decade and are well tested. Low power LEDs have been around far longer then that so the degradation of LEDs is well understood.

You have done a great job, look amazing! Still debating myself whether i should buy myself at 4 foot MH fixture or be adventorous and build an LED setup myself.

Thanks. I say go LEDs. You won't regret it. Lots of people are having great success with DIY LED setups.

And just to throw more fuel on the fire I should add that that last review I linked to was a test of the first generation AI fixture. The second generation should perform even better as it uses the latest Cree XP-G LEDs that have higher output than the SSC ones used in the first gen fixtures.

Played around lowering the fixture and found that the colour blending and overlap of the emitters wasn't great in the upper portions of the tank with the lights 3 inches above the water. PAR was between 550 and 600 in the upper part but stayed at 500 in the middle of the tank and was close to 400 at the bottom. I think that to get optimal blending of the light from the emitters and good overlap 6 to 7 inches above the tank is about as low as I will want to run them.

What are you planning for livestock? SPS, LPS, clams, zoa, softs... etc?

yup, I did, and I have no doubt that if Ron put 40 degree optics on his fixture, at 3" he would blow away my MH. and just to add to it my MH were unusaualy high output which was a combanation of the right ballast, my own design for the reflector and good bulbs. in the 25 MH setups I tested the only one that came close was a 400 watt sona agro ballast running iwasaki 6500K bulbs and it was still only slightly over 800.

so I can safly say that a good LED set up such as Ron's will blow any T5 out of the watter, most 150 watt setups, and some of the 250 watt setups. if he would have gone a little tighter spacing which allowed for 40 degree optics with out spotlighting I can say you would be hard to find a MH system that would be a higher output, and it would be pointless to try as at that output level would it realy matter?

Is this because you spent to much on your T5 set up and are haveing buyers regrets Andrew? :mrgreen: don't worry I spent close to 10K on lighting in 2 years befor I found something I was happy with myself. now I did recover some of that selling reflectors and reflector material, but still spent way to much on lighting.. thats why the new tank is going to have LED lighting, as it will give me the ability to change color K value on a whim, and also talyor the intensity to what I have in the tank at the moment. if I get a bunch of new frags, I can dial it down and have it increase slowly over a week or two to prevent bleaching. I can have a gradualy sunrise/sunset instead of a two stage on/off. plus the most fun is building the stuff now keeping the tank going.. maybe I should just build systems for people who want a tank but dont want to build it :mrgreen: then I could just keep on doing the fun stuff .

Steve

All of the above:biggrin: I currently have a mixed bag in the tank with SPS, LPS, softies, and zoas. I hope to be able to keep all of them with careful positioning. But I already found the T5s were to much for some of the LPS and had to tuck them under overhangs etc. I would like to add a small clam if space permits but we'll see.

Also, this latest news as of today is interesting. LEDs are only going to get better while MH and T5s etc. are pretty much as good as they are going to get now:

Cree, Inc. (Nasdaq: CREE), a market leader in LED lighting, announces a breakthrough new lighting-class LED platform, the XLamp® XM LED. This new single chip LED delivers record-breaking efficacy of 160 lumens per watt at 350 mA. The LED also delivers 750 lumens at 2 A, which is equivalent to the light output of a 60 W incandescent light bulb at less than 7 watts.

“This new platform continues Cree’s well-established record of turning R&D innovations into products,” said Chuck Swoboda, Cree chairman and CEO. “We continue to set the pace for LED performance, establishing new benchmarks that make you wonder why anyone would consider last-century’s energy-wasting technology.”

A cool white XM LED driven at 350 mA can produce 160 lumens at 160 lumens per watt. The new platform has a larger footprint than Cree’s XP family and also offers the unique combination of very high efficacy at very high drive currents. At 2 A, an XM LED produces 750 lumens at 110 lumens per watt. The thermal resistance of the XM platform is 2 degrees C per watt— an industry-leading technology breakthrough and a 350 percent improvement over Cree’s flagship XLamp XP-E LED.

Samples of the XLamp XM LEDs are available for order with standard lead times and commercial availability is targeted for Fall 2010.

I so need to build my own light when i decide what my next tank is.. it looks like a fun project. and when things go wrong.. there is only one person to blame.. yourself.

Where did you find most of your reading and research?

I apologize in advance for the odd timing of these posts. I had intended to post after work but got caught up with the realtor and was running around all night until going to bed. Now I'm awake in the middle of the night so I thought I'd do something "productive" :)

Nope. It's low end. For comparison here is a picture with PAR values for a higher quality T5 fixture. Keep in mind the setup here is still far from ideal given that the fixture doesn't extend the length of tank so keep your eye on the PAR values in the middle of the tank. In this picture you're seeing similar PAR values to your LED fixture with newer lamps and better quality fixture.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...TS7-3-09-1.jpg

Here are PAR values on that same tank one month after the above. This hobbyist measured 20-30% PAR drop WITH ACTIVE COOLING over the course of 6 months. After driving up the fan voltage he was able to cool the fixture enough to keep the drop to 10% over 6 months. So again, old lamps on a low quality fixture (without active cooling) will show 30% + PAR drop over the course of 15 months.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...1-09-002-1.jpg


No arguing. Just trying to ensure there's a reasonable comparison without making hugely inaccurate leaps in assumptions. As shown above, your PAR values are hardly representative of a good T5 setup. And while you claim the comparison is only to your T5s you're trying to report the values as if they're some how representative of T5s by commenting on the relative quality of your fixture and expected drop in PAR of T5 lamps.

I'm well aware of the article. It is quite dated. And again, the comparison is to a 250W 20,000K bulb on a crappy Coralife ballast with an uknown "polished aluminum parabolic reflector". At least you're recognizing that the parameters of the comparison aren't exactly even here.

FWIW, I agree. This was only commented on because Steve got involved in the conversation and has, in the past, made a big deal about the high PAR values he got with his DIY MH setups on his SPS tanks when comparisons to T5s were made. Now that LED PAR values in a typical setup (such as yours) seem to be similar to those of "good" quality T5 setups (see pictures above) he seems to be suggesting those PAR values are now acceptable.

With respect to PAR? Please show me the data.

Please see the picture above of a typical good T5 setup. Would you seriously contend it blows any T5 out of the water? The numbers for the less-than-optimal T5 setup above (I only quickly grabbed those pics because I knew they existed and didn't have to spend a great deal of time searching) are not far off those that Ron is reporting with his fixture.

Part of the fun of DIY LED I suppose - trying to optimize spacing with optic angle with height above the water without getting unattractive spotlighting. Even the better manufactured LED fixtures such as AI produce some really ugly spotlighting when suspended at suboptimal heights.

As I've stated several times I actually want to run LEDs and have for well over a year. I'm not anti LED revolution. I'm anti hype based on fuzzy numbers and marketing. I replaced my Giesemann fixture with the ATI I have now and will likely replace the ATI with a couple AI modules in the future. No buyer's remorse. I just want the best of both worlds: efficiency and PAR (not to mention "controlability") in an attractive mass produced product. But I want to make the change based on objective data and not marketing hype.

And this isn't an issue of T5s versus the world. I generally comment on comparison threads when garage "scientists" take it upon themselves to make comparisons as if they're conducting controlled experiments (not that Ron did this or is a "garage scientist" but I didn't want others to try to make comparisons as if the two fixtures were representative examples). The comparison to T5 lighting in this thread is not representative. Had Ron compared his DIY LED fixture to a Coralife MH fixture with a one year old 20,000K MH bulb I would have made similar comments about unfair comparisons. Likewise, I think Sanjay's comparison of the older model AI module to a crappy MH setup with 20,000K lamp is hardly a fair and representative comparison.

I love that you guys are helping develop LED fixtures and ideas for those of us who don't want to go the DIY route. You'll help push manufacturers to make better hobbyist fixtures. And I love that you guys are so enthusiastic about what you're doing. What my concern is, is that some people are getting caught up in the enthusiasm (and blatant marketing hype) and losing site of objectivity. Historically, the same thing happens with new lighting technology coming to the hobby. Reports about T5 longevity and PAR were completely off base for several years until real hard data started to be compiled. The same thing is happening with LEDs to some extent right now. Fortunately, LED lighting is still in it infancy (especially for use in our hobby) and is bound to improve and at the same time some controlled quasi-experimental data will start to emerge.

Andrew, PAR is a function of spectrum and intensity, if you spectrum shifts and your intensity stays the same the PAR changes, if the intensity changes and the spectrum stays the same the PAR changes. with the LED the spectrum is the same through out the life, but like said befor at 50000 hours they will have a 15% decrease in intensity, so the PAR will drop about 15%. With the bulbs we are using now there is a intensity drop and a spectrum cange so the PAR drop can be compounded. I'll see if I can find the article I was reading about it. It comes from the glrow light side of the industry but same concerns, PAR, spectrum, intensity. this industry has had LEDs for over 10 years already, they just didn't have enough punch for coral, but they grew tomatos pretty good aparently.

Steve

Oh Andrew, I never said they are aceptible or not aceptable, if you go back and look at 99% of my posts on the T5/MH issues it was when people were claiming T5's were more powerfull then MH, and you were one. and if you read carfullyI said many a time that you could grow SPS under a NO bulb as it was done before buy a guy on this board.

your Hi quality T5 set up you showed there, is there any distance referances? and whats the point of taking readings int he air 1/2 way between the reflector and the water? so just under the surface it looks like he has a 575 average in the well lit area. at the bottom about 280ish. the hot spot is a little higher than the numbers but the other areas are lower. (I never realized the hot spot on T5s would be that pronounced) at any rate His number were very comparable with your high end T5 with new bulbs. although we would need measurments of all the reading positions to be sure. so what happens if he adds more LEDs.. nothing, bt if he adds more LEDs to reduce his spacing then adds 40 degree optics his numbers should jump by about 50% from what I have been seeing. if he adds more and then goes 20% optics.. problem is the spacing is so tight on 20% or lower optics it would only be a reasonable cost on a 20 gal tank or less, but man would you pack some punch. I know there are some people trying the the newer bulbs that have about 3 times the output as the ones Ron is using but they don't make that strength in a Royal blue yet so it is only good for the white and they are finding it is to powerfull for any other lighting they try to give it a blue look as it just washes it out. now if you like the icewhite look to your tank, which I tend to.... they might be a awsome bulb to try. I am actualy going to buy a handfull of LEDs and build a tiny cylinder that is about 24" tall but small enough aroundI can lighting it with 2 or 3 LEDs so I can try some different combos on my Ardunio and see what kind of color blending, lenses and PAR values I can get a different depths. just have to clean my shop out first.. which at the way I am goiong should be another 6 months :redface:

Steve

And you're assuming that with whatever installation method you choose for heatsinks and whatever you choose to drive the emitter at there will be negligible thermal damage. Again, and again I say this: theory is great when you don't have real data. We can assume there will be little intensity drop but until we see long term data, especially for the blue emitters that are more prevalent in our hobby, it's just an assumption.

False. Steve, I never once said that T5 was more powerful than MH. That is patently false. I expect you to go back and provide a quote in context to substantiate that I ever said it was more powerful. All I ever maintained was that T5 was not inferior to MH when you made broad-based statements about inferiority and superiority one way or the other.

The tank pictured above is 5' with a 4' fixture over it. The tank is 60 x 30 x 24. The fixture is roughly 6-7" above the water's surface. The edges of the tank are dim because the fixture does not extend to the edge and because the first 3" or more of a T5 lamp produce significantly less light. Within the 3.5" feet centered below the fixture the PAR is pretty consistent (biased on one side because that's where the fans are).

And Ron, I apologize for derailing your build thread.

I have a 48" 10 bulb ATI Powermodule on my home tank, the 48" Aqua Illumination module I have seen is brighter than my Powermodule. This of course is just my observation.

On a second note, Ron, you are more than welcome to come over and pull some numbers off my tank. Also, it would be nice to see all of this back and forth discussion on the comparatives between LED and conventional lighting moved to a new thread for this purpose. I was actually just enjoying Ron's build thread as it was.

Ian

I have created a thread specifically for this type of conversation, if everyone is interested maybe the MODS can move the latter half of this vs conversation to the thread I have linked below.

I feel this is detracting from this excellent build thread......

http://www.canreef.com/vbulletin/sho...374#post510374

Thanks Ian. Good Idea. Let's move the debate over there.

No Worries, it's good to discuss it and try to develop real information. I agree that there is lots of manufacturer hype and BS. One reason I built my own array, aside from costs, is that most of the commercial LED lights make compromises of some sort unless you spend big dollars on the high end fixtures.

In any case, let's continue in the other thread.

nano-reef.com seems to have the most active LED community but more is showing up on reef central now too.

Hey Ron great thread I've been following since day 1 but I want to know now that you have your new led fixture up for a few days running, how are all the SPS corals doing? Also do you find that your LEDs miss some light in some areas as your LEDs are spreaded out and LED light rays are directed in a straight focused downward "UFO" path and doesn't light its surrounding area like MH or even T5s. As you may have probably already noticed, the solaris's or any professionally made LED fixtures are all built with its LEDs side by side tightly snug. I honestly prefer to spread them out as you did as it covers more area but wasn't sure if it was ideal.

Y'know....sometimes, sometimes it's just fun to build your own stuff. You get to make it suit your personal needs exactly and there is a great deal of satisfaction to be had from the design and build process.

After all, this is a DIY forum, is it not ?

Totally agrees..........GREATER satisfaction from it plus you the educational aspect.

Probably built better as well. :lol:

This should shed some light on the subject. (pun intended :) )
http://www.cree.com/products/pdf/XLa...aintenance.pdf

Pretty much what we have been discussing on the other thread. Keep the LEDs cool and they will last for a long time.

Time for a quick update. Haven't really had time to work on the controller very much but hopefully soon. But after about 1 month I thought I would post a couple of pictures of the corals.

Here's a shot taken on April 23rd:

http://hotimg23.fotki.com/a/70_70/254_23/Coral11.jpg

And one from May 19th:

http://hotimg23.fotki.com/a/70_70/254_23/Coral12.jpg

It has great colour and some noticeable growth in the last month.

Here's one that was pretty much brown except for the tip:

http://hotimg23.fotki.com/a/70_70/254_23/Coral21.jpg

Now it has a bit of growth but is colouring up all over:

http://hotimg23.fotki.com/a/70_70/254_23/Coral22.jpg

Looks great!

What was your lighting setup before the LEDS?

curious as to what optics to use?
http://www.ledil.fi/datasheets/DataSheet_LC1-TAPE.pdf or http://www.ledil.fi/datasheets/DataSheet_CRS.pdf
they have real spot or smooth spot versions too.as for drivers i was going to go with LM3464 from national semiconductor.
( i got data sheets from Walter Shawlee 2, President - Sphere Research Corporation
3394 Sunnyside Road, Kelowna, B.C., CANADA V1Z 2V4
URL: http://www.sphere.bc.ca E-Mail: walter2@sphere.bc.ca )

I don't think any of those optics will be best as they seem to be very narrow (3 degrees to 21 degrees). Depending on what you want to do you should be looking at 40 degree or 60 degree optics. Something like the ones nanotuners sells. I don't know the brand off hand but they are the type that most DIY folks are using.

As for the drivers, they seem a bit complicated to implement. I would look at the Meanwell drivers as they are far simpler. They run off AC power directly and you can get the dimmable versions. So the only small added complication is circuitry for dimming input but that can be fairly simple too if you just want a knob to dim them.

I have personally seen Fishytime's lighting, and it looks fine with 2, put together.

in my email i got from him he said they had 54 and 62 degree optics.but there are diff kinds of lens ,real spot, oval,rectangular ect ill have to see if he can get the meanwells in.prob cant thats why he sent me the other info im guessing.what prices were you able to get your stuff for?

Sorry for taking a while to answer, been a bit busy lately. I bought most of my parts through a group buy at nano-reef so the prices were good. Star mounted LEDs were $5.75 each and optics were another $1 IIRC. Nanotuners has a good sale on now on LEDs, optics and drivers.

Great build I feel like I'm late to the dance on this one. I think a real big point that everyone is missing is the electrical consumption used to power leds vs T5 or MH. Anyways any updated photo's or info on the controller.

thanks

Ditto on that Twinn and less heat too..Just wanted to add excelllent job on the light and the post Ron..hats off to you

SORRY TO HEAR THAT YOU ARE SELLING YOUR LIGHTING, AND OF COURSE THE SITUATION AT HOME. :cry: