AquaIllumination PAR Measurements

[Garage1217]

Hey Tom "sorry to call by first name but your screen name is a bit to write *LOL*" I would really like to see a surface area test if you get time or want to give it a shot.

This is how I setup mine, however I do not have a cool par meter like you have! Just a lux meter. I just want to see how tight the field is focused on the 40 degree lenses vs no optics on the maxspect. I used a black cloth to eliminate reflection "which may help the maxspect since the bottom is mirrored" & used little sticky circles from binder reinforcers to map out the area. Would love to see the measurements at 10" & then at 20" or something like that useing 1 AI unit vs the 1 maxspect unit.



If you do not have office 07 or a 3d graphing program, I would be happy to graph the data for you as I would like to get an idea of the actual emitting pattern between optics & non optics.

So far in my lux testing, the non optic maxspect emits light more similar to a t5 than a halide however not the same as t5, just similar as stated. Makes me wonder if the optics make it emit more similar to a halide than t5.

[stephane]

So Far If I take your number the Ai is maybe to much powerfull in a beam those 1400 PAR at 12 inch for me are to much for most coral but maybe this is inefficient to give enough spread so you need to use two dimmed fixture in a 24 inch area

Measuring middle of a fixture like AI with optical and a maxspect witout is not in favour of the maxspect for shure. Even more if we only look into PAR

The old guy over here will remember It make me feel like 10 years ago when there was a big debate about the new kids double ended 150 watt producing same PAR as a 400 watt mogul. Reflector was making all the difference. In the beam you have a hotspot with High PAR but 2 inch on the side you loose most where a mogul was spreading more equal. We all know now a 400 cannot compare to a 150

I dont have the fixture so I cannot compare my self but just want to be shure we look at the right direction and dont do the same mistake as those old 150 DE vs 400 flaming debate

thank you again

[builderguy]

so at first read I thought maxspect would be a waste...blown away by AI, but are we now to understand that AI might be too strong and Maxspect favorable?

[stephane]

here is an old photo I found there is tons of similar measure over here but this is the only one I could find

You could see PAR from a 400 watt MH under a lumen bright and lumenarc reflector. We all know as a fact for most use it is more than enought and as you could see we are far from the 1400 6 inch

For me the Maxspect number as I see it seem to be more usefull spread and more than enought PAR for any SPS 30 inch or less deep tank



Apogeee QMSS-E par meter. 5'X2'X2' tank using a pair of full size LBs. 400W 12K Reeflux at around 3 months old using Coralvue electronic ballast. Lamps are 10.5" above the waterline and the meter maxes out at the surface.

[stephane]

Here many other measure PAR photo I found here in the lumen bright monster post

Raised the lights to where the lamp is at 16" The dark areas in the middle got brighter and I like how it looks now. New par readings:



Here is a shot with a black background - it is under 400w however.

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by stephane

So Far If I take your number the Ai is maybe to much powerfull in a beam those 1400 PAR at 12 inch for me are to much for most coral but maybe this is inefficient to give enough spread so you need to use two dimmed fixture in a 24 inch area

Measuring middle of a fixture like AI with optical and a maxspect witout is not in favour of the maxspect for shure. Even more if we only look into PAR

The old guy over here will remember It make me feel like 10 years ago when there was a big debate about the new kids double ended 150 watt producing same PAR as a 400 watt mogul. Reflector was making all the difference. In the beam you have a hotspot with High PAR but 2 inch on the side you loose most where a mogul was spreading more equal. We all know now a 400 cannot compare to a 150

I dont have the fixture so I cannot compare my self but just want to be shure we look at the right direction and dont do the same mistake as those old 150 DE vs 400 flaming debate

thank you again

While not entirely accurate, it might be a good generalization to think of think of the light pattern of the IAs like that of a large metal Halide (as mentioned by Garage in an earlier post) - You likely would NOT place anything 6" directly below a 400W MH. Whereas the Maxspect are more like a poorly reflected T5, where the light is "spilled" over the entire surface area (as seen by the light on the walls surrounding the tank.) This works fine on shallower tanks and as long as the lights are mounted directly over the water, but when doing so - a single G2 unit did not provide adequate coverage on my 24 X 24 X 8 Frag tank (sides and corners were dark) as seen in these photos of the G2 mounted using it's rails atop the tank.





The advantage of the AI is that with the controller and optics - with the turn of a knob, you can adjust the power output to whatever PAR desired and still deliver tons of light to depth. The optics allow you to control both PAR and coverage area by simply adjusting the height the lights sit above the tank.

Because my tank is so shallow (DSB at 15") and my aquascaping places much of my SPS near the very top of the tank, I likely will never use the the full-power capabilities of the AIs'. At max (mid-day sun) I presently only reach 75% white output, and then - only for a few hours. Those with a traditional 20+" deep tank would be better able to take advantage of the performance of the AIs. Those with larger tanks can also raise the lights further and provide additional coverage area.

I suspect there may be quite a few AI users that do not run the lights at maximum power. This provides a richer blue color, less electricity usage and seemingly even longer LED life.

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by builderguy

so at first read I thought maxspect would be a waste...blown away by AI, but are we now to understand that AI might be too strong and Maxspect favorable?

The AquaIlluminations can't be "too strong" as the controller allows you to adjust it to your tank's exact PAR needs and your color preferences. I would however warn anyone switching to ANY fixture using Cree LEDS to be careful in acclimation. They generate MUCH more PAR than any comparable "looking" MH or T5 (I learned that the hard way prior to acquiring a PAR meter.)

Comparing these two types of lights is difficult as they are very different and likely target different types of tanks and users. Both of these lights work very well and IMO provide huge advantages over MH/T5s.

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by stephane

For me the Maxspect number as I see it seem to be more usefull spread and more than enought PAR for any SPS 30 inch or less deep tank

While the G2 measured 840 PAR at 6", it dropped to 350 PAR at 12" (a 58% loss tested in air directly below the light.) While the lack of optics provides greater coverage - it does so at the expense of PAR at depth.

I'll know more when I have a chance to take more measurements underwater, although I'm limited due to the depth of my tank.

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by Garage1217

I would really like to see a surface area test if you get time or want to give it a shot.

A while back, AquaIllumination did a PAR study that provided a nice coverage map. They used data points mapped every .25" comparing a 250W Phoenix MH to a single AI unit at 19" (the AI out-performed the MH) - I'll see if I can find it. Once I've completed taking the actual tank measurements, I'll see if I can provide similar data on the G2.

I still need to get my DSLR back from my Son so I can transpose the PAR numbers onto decent photos of the tanks.

[fernandokng]

Great measurements. I think costs/value need to be somehow considered into this.

It seems has AI does have better PAR and depth penetration, but it is also costing atleast 2x as much. If I am paying that much, I kinda expect it to be better, much better.

One point to note is that corals may not necessarily need all that much PAR anyway, and I wonder whether spending more $ on the AI to get that par is worth it.

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by fernandokng

Great measurements. I think costs/value need to be somehow considered into this.

It seems has AI does have better PAR and depth penetration, but it is also costing atleast 2x as much. If I am paying that much, I kinda expect it to be better, much better.

One point to note is that corals may not necessarily need all that much PAR anyway, and I wonder whether spending more $ on the AI to get that par is worth it.

I agree, if you're lighting a shallow tank, or one with lesser light needs, from just a PAR perspective the AI's at full power would massive overkill. That said, the AI's controller is a HUGE advantage - the ability to customize PAR and color, create custom sun rise/sunset, gradual mid-day increases and the lunar schedule with varying intensity are (to me) an invaluable option.

Another thing I'd like to try is turning one AI unit sideways (like the G2) and comparing them. I *think* you could raise the AI high enough to create a coverage area greater than the G2 and still have far more PAR and the great controller at a comparable cost - Perhaps the best of both worlds.

[Garage1217]

To your points, and NO offense is intended as this is a constructive open discussion & a good one that you started!
- Your use of the maxspect on such a shallow tank is a corner case, not the norm for most all users. Light is spilling over as the fixture is designed to be mounted very close to the water as you & I have pointed out before. When mounted this way, reflection is minimized, the mirrored surface on the bottom helps re-direct any light back into the tank "in theory" & the tank is illuminated very well with good spread.

- On lux only, I graphed the output of the g2160w. It did not perform like a poor t5, it actually performed very well! This particular test was at 13" The maxspect did a lot better than I thought considering the test surface area of 24" x 16" I can rotate the 3d model if anyone wants to view it from multiple angles.

Overall these fixtures are designed in two different realms of thought.
-The AI being mounted higher up to get decent spread with minimal energy usage "minimal energy is a large bonus" but at an outstanding upfront cost.

-The other unit being maxspect is designed for maximum reasonable coverage with wide angle stock led lenses / very close to the waters surface at a mega budget price.



Both units will definitely grow coral & sps, no question on that. Deeper tanks 30"+ would benefit from the AI's optics. Tanks considered more normal depth wise which are 24" or less would work great with the maxspect.

Originally Posted by CalmSeasQuest

While not entirely accurate, it might be a good generalization to think of think of the light pattern of the IAs like that of a large metal Halide (as mentioned by Garage in an earlier post) - You likely would NOT place anything 6" directly below a 400W MH. Whereas the Maxspect are more like a poorly reflected T5, where the light is "spilled" over the entire surface area (as seen by the light on the walls surrounding the tank.) This works fine on shallower tanks and as long as the lights are mounted directly over the water, but when doing so - a single G2 unit did not provide adequate coverage on my 24 X 24 X 8 Frag tank (sides and corners were dark) as seen in these photos of the G2 mounted using it's rails atop the tank.

The advantage of the AI is that with the controller and optics - with the turn of a knob, you can adjust the power output to whatever PAR desired and still deliver tons of light to depth. The optics allow you to control both PAR and coverage area by simply adjusting the height the lights sit above the tank.

Because my tank is so shallow (DSB at 15") and my aquascaping places much of my SPS near the very top of the tank, I likely will never use the the full-power capabilities of the AIs'. At max (mid-day sun) I presently only reach 75% white output, and then - only for a few hours. Those with a traditional 20+" deep tank would be better able to take advantage of the performance of the AIs. Those with larger tanks can also raise the lights further and provide additional coverage area.

I suspect there may be quite a few AI users that do not run the lights at maximum power. This provides a richer blue color, less electricity usage and seemingly even longer LED life.

[stephane]

Originally Posted by fernandokng

Great measurements. I think costs/value need to be somehow considered into this.

It seems has AI does have better PAR and depth penetration, but it is also costing atleast 2x as much. If I am paying that much, I kinda expect it to be better, much better.

One point to note is that corals may not necessarily need all that much PAR anyway, and I wonder whether spending more $ on the AI to get that par is worth it.

Im on the same exact boat and from my experience with coral they dont really mind about sunrise sunset controller, rain simulation, lightning and cloudy day it is maybe fun gadjet for the end user and a great option to play and impress the Neighbor but for my own personal taste no thanks. My experience is every time I play with intensity (change bulb color or new bulb) coral need adaptation and don't like it so I think they adapt but prefers stability. Great example is indoor vegetable culture alway faster and nicer because of this stability

[stephane]

Originally Posted by CalmSeasQuest

maybe it is illusion but In this picture it seem the mounting rack blocking some of the spread on the side of the tank. I did not see it but maybe the fixture will gain benefit to be fix between the two bar and not over it

[jcolletteiii]

Originally Posted by stephane

Im on the same exact boat and from my experience with coral they dont really mind about sunrise sunset controller, rain simulation, lightning and cloudy day it is maybe fun gadjet for the end user and a great option to play and impress the Neighbor but for my own personal taste no thanks.

The AI controller does not do thunderstorms, cloudy days or any of that other BS - just sunrise/sunset. The benefit of the new firmware cannot be overstated. You can create up to 8, 3 hour custom ramp up/down periods for a natural PAR simulation. I have seen par measurements somewhere (Still looking for these) that were measured on a natural reef in Hawaii. It might be interesting to match the lighting schedule and intensities with these natural values. I like being able to ramp up the AI units during mid-day, when I'm not home to higher levels for only a few hours, then reduce output to levels that are 'pretty' while I'm home. This has the added benefit of keeping the emitters fairly cool for most of the day, which will also extend the lifetime of the LEDs.

[Garage1217]

Originally Posted by stephane

maybe it is illusion but In this picture it seem the mounting rack blocking some of the spread on the side of the tank. I did not see it but maybe the fixture will gain benefit to be fix between the two bar and not over it

Get rid of the mounting rails and the dark corners will not be as bad. They block a lot of the light. In most tanks, corals are not 6" below the light, more like starting around 12" below the light and lower. Or put your fixture over your tank that currently has AI units on it. The darker corners would not matter then as all the light would be focused on the usable area in your setup.


Per the cost factor guys. I used my aquarium cost calculator I made, slightly modified to compare NEW vs NEW equipment cost wise "if you were to choose one over the other at current NEW prices. This may help some of you if you are choosing based on energy consumption which is why most of us go to led in the first place.

My maxspect g2 covers 24" of tank very well as I have two over a 48" wide tank. From AI's own recommendation you would need two of their units to cover 24" of tank so I factored the price of 2 into the calculation. Also to toss it in, a 250w halide vs these two led fixtures as a single 250 also covers 24" very well with most reflectors in use today.

This will give you guys an educated guess on what fixture will save you what electrically & also calculates the years it will take a fixture to pay for itself vs the comparing unit. All based off of a $0.10 cents per KWH which is what I pay locally so cost will vary depending on your location.

I do feel this is valid since so much of this post seems to be about fixture vs fixture & so forth.


EDIT: DOH! Botched the last column title somehow. It represents the years it will take for payoff vs the comparing item.

[stephane]

The AI controller does not do thunderstorms, cloudy days or any of that other BS - just sunrise/sunset.

oups then sorry for this I was shure it was but as stating I dont own any of those fixture

The benefit of the new firmware cannot be overstated. You can create up to 8, 3 hour custom ramp up/down periods for a natural PAR simulation. I have seen par measurements somewhere (Still looking for these) that were measured on a natural reef in Hawaii. It might be interesting to match the lighting schedule and intensities with these natural values.

on this one I dont realy agree maybe it is fun for the user but coral as any photosyntetis organism for example vegetable or three will grow faster and nicer with stable flooded and photoperiod.

[ksc]

You forgot, "Time to grow 1" sps frag to 4" mini colony"
Maxspect 8 years
AI 4.5 years
250 MH 1 year

Saving money is great but the idea of a reef tank is to grow things.....

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by stephane

Im on the same exact boat and from my experience with coral they dont really mind about sunrise sunset controller, rain simulation, lightning and cloudy day it is maybe fun gadjet for the end user and a great option to play and impress the Neighbor but for my own personal taste no thanks. My experience is every time I play with intensity (change bulb color or new bulb) coral need adaptation and don't like it so I think they adapt but prefers stability. Great example is indoor vegetable culture alway faster and nicer because of this stability

One of my goals (or challenges) has always been to attempt to duplicate the conditions found on the reef (as much as possible within the limitations of an aquarium.) I like the ability to create sunrise/sunsets and mid day intensity increases because it more closely duplicates the natural zenith changes of the sun (as opposed to lights just switching on.)

An added benefit (albeit a personal one) is I enjoy watching the sunrise/sunset over the tank each day. I grab a cup of coffee and start my day while watching the sunrise and the animals going about their morning routines.

While I agree the clouds and lightening storms are more for the enjoyment of the viewer (assuming like that sort of thing) I do find value in the ramping abilities of the AI controller.

[ksc]

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009...s%20sun%20reef

[Garage1217]

Originally Posted by ksc

You forgot, "Time to grow 1" sps frag to 4" mini colony"
Maxspect 8 years
AI 4.5 years
250 MH 1 year

Saving money is great but the idea of a reef tank is to grow things.....

Absolutely BS. Troll another forum.

[ksc]

You know I don't troll Garage, I'm a live bait guy. Stay tuned for the LED vs MH growoff post coming soon. I do know for a fact that LED's have been an abysmal failure in the plant, cash crop world.....

[Garage1217]

Would love to see that, and tell me why then are my SPS growing equally and in some cases BETTER than under my halides? To quote BS made up numbers to get attention is not the goal of this post or welcome in this post, even if I am not the OP.

Sure we have a TON to learn still, especially how UV affects coral growth vs a severe lack of it with led, however we are to a point without question that LED's can and will grow coral / sps with ease & result in great color as well.

And as for the plant world, they are not focusing light into a small box of water, they are trying to cover large areas with light. In that case, of course a large reflector & mh would make sense. Our aquarium world vs growing plants are worlds apart.

[CalmSeasQuest]

Originally Posted by Garage1217

To your points, and NO offense is intended as this is a constructive open discussion & a good one that you started!
- Your use of the maxspect on such a shallow tank is a corner case, not the norm for most all users. Light is spilling over as the fixture is designed to be mounted very close to the water as you & I have pointed out before. When mounted this way, reflection is minimized, the mirrored surface on the bottom helps re-direct any light back into the tank "in theory" & the tank is illuminated very well with good spread.

- On lux only, I graphed the output of the g2160w. It did not perform like a poor t5, it actually performed very well!

Overall these fixtures are designed in two different realms of thought.

No offense taken Garage I agree my tanks are not typical. My T5 comparison was not meant to disparage T5s or the G2 (obviously I like the G2 as I purchased it after considerable research. ) It was a generalization of the way it casts light (a reference you originally made by the way) AI's with the optics are more representative of the focused light from a MH, whereas the Maxspect (or any LED without optics) is less focused, perhaps more like a VHO than a T5 - again - referring only to the direction in which light is thrown.

Regarding the LUX measurements, I don't put much if any faith in LUX measurements for reef use. I learned the hard way you cannot judge PAR based on the "appearance" or perceived brightness of the light - My attempt to do so resulted in a lot of bleached corals.

Originally Posted by jcolletteiii

The benefit of the new firmware cannot be overstated. You can create up to 8, 3 hour custom ramp up/down periods for a natural PAR simulation. I have seen par measurements somewhere (Still looking for these) that were measured on a natural reef in Hawaii. It might be interesting to match the lighting schedule and intensities with these natural values. I like being able to ramp up the AI units during mid-day, when I'm not home to higher levels for only a few hours, then reduce output to levels that are 'pretty' while I'm home. This has the added benefit of keeping the emitters fairly cool for most of the day, which will also extend the lifetime of the LEDs.

+1 - Well said - I do the same.

Originally Posted by Garage1217

Get rid of the mounting rails and the dark corners will not be as bad. They block a lot of the light. In most tanks, corals are not 6" below the light, more like starting around 12" below the light and lower. Or put your fixture over your tank that currently has AI units on it. The darker corners would not matter then as all the light would be focused on the usable area in your setup.

I agree the Maxspect rails are a poor design. I won't be putting the G2 over my DT as I prefer my AIs , but I agree (as I have stated) the shadows are less of a concern on a deeper tank.

Originally Posted by ksc

You forgot, "Time to grow 1" sps frag to 4" mini colony"
Maxspect 8 years
AI 4.5 years
250 MH 1 year

Saving money is great but the idea of a reef tank is to grow things.....

Interesting data ksc - Can you provide the source? I've only been running LEDS since December, so I have little data as to growth rates. I did a short term (3 month) comparison on my tanks using the AI's and 150W 14K MH/T5s, but it wasn't enough time to deliver real results - Especially since I was intially BLASTING everything with far too much PAR. I'd love to see longer term data on growth, no doubt we have lots to learn.

[Garage1217]

Agreed. I do not have access to a par meter, however lux does show the general spread of light & where the focus points are. I doubt the cone & coverage will change much if at all when testing par, but the values will obviously change a lot.

Agreed x 20. I have had several people ask if they should mount using the rails maxspect provides. They are a poor afterthought at BEST. Horrible design.

Originally Posted by CalmSeasQuest

No offense taken Garage I agree my tanks are not typical. My T5 comparison was not meant to disparage T5s or the G2 (obviously I like the G2 as I purchased it after considerable research. ) It was a generalization of the way it casts light (a reference you originally made by the way) AI's with the optics are more representative of the focused light from a MH, whereas the Maxspect (or any LED without optics) is less focused, perhaps more like a VHO than a T5 - again - referring only to the direction in which light is thrown.

Regarding the LUX measurements, I don't put much if any faith in LUX measurements for reef use. I learned the hard way you cannot judge PAR based on the "appearance" or perceived brightness of the light - My attempt to do so resulted in a lot of bleached corals.



+1 - Well said - I do the same.



I agree the Maxspect rails are a poor design. I won't be putting the G2 over my DT as I prefer my AIs , but I agree (as I have stated) the shadows are less of a concern on a deeper tank.

Interesting data ksc - Can you provide the source? I've only been running LEDS since December, so I have little data as to growth rates. I'd love to see longer term growth, no doubt we have lots to learn.