Bleaching with LED's watch your Height your PAR choose wisely

[Mudbeaver]

Ok this is a warning about asking the wrong questions for your lighting. Its not the power Its about the height of your tank and the PAR of your lights. Before planning my system my first thought was about reducing the cost of the most single item in are set ups. The lighting system. So I red and compared lots of them and how they worked. One of the biggest mistake is going after the fancy stuff and the powerful stuff. Oh i'll need that later on for my SPS and so on and so forth.

One example a friend of mine has a very expensive on but has to run it at 38 % of its power because he bleach everything in his tank if he goes full power. So much for his needs.....But the price tag remains huge and unused. When I did my planning I looked around and decided on a brand had my tank design to fit the parameters height especially for that need included and saved on it. The custom made tank cost more but I saved $ 1 800 on the lights alone.

So the most important thing in buying your lights is the height of you tank. And then knowing how much PAR the lights your buying will give at your lowest depth and your highest as well because if you bleach everything at the surface of your tank because you have 3W LED while you should only use 1W your wasting your money.

[ReachTheSky]

Light acclimation is a very, very important thing that is underutilized. As long as you ramp the intensity up slowly, corals can handle upward near 1000 PAR.

Of course the major issue here is that people don't do it slowly. Most immediately blast their corals with high intensity LEDs or place them a foot away from a 400w metal halide and some ramp it up way too quickly, then blame the lights once their corals bleach.

[malady]

unrelated topic

but love your avatar reach the sky i love starcraft but especially bw

[Reeftown]

How do you tell the PAR of a lighting system? I just bought this setup.

My tank is 20 inches deep, and the lights will sit about 6 inches about the water surface. As of right now it is just a FOWLR tank, but eventually I plan on getting into corals. The lights need replacing, but I'm not worried about replacing them until I make the jump to corals. But I'd like to know how to figure out the PAR of this system so I don't make the mistake of bleaching everything right off the bat.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by ReachTheSky

Light acclimation is a very, very important thing that is underutilized. As long as you ramp the intensity up slowly, corals can handle upward near 1000 PAR.

Of course the major issue here is that people don't do it slowly. Most immediately blast their corals with high intensity LEDs or place them a foot away from a 400w metal halide and some ramp it up way too quickly, then blame the lights once their corals bleach.

Well from what I know being to his place a few time its been 6 months at 38% . Every time he raises the output of his lights bleaching occurs to what ever is high enough in the tank. It also one of the thing to consider; your rock work. If you design it for a certain Par and change your set of lights , make sure you get it right. Especially if they give you all that fancy control over your output. But if you only need like I said earlier 38% for your tank.....you paid and wasted 62 % and its sleeping on the job. That's my main point .

[wildman926]

I just obtained a trachy that my LFS had, and it is bleached out due to having his AI Vegas at 90%. I got it 3 days ago, and today I am already seeing a difference in coloration and tentacles out wanting to be fed.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by wildman926

I just obtained a trachy that my LFS had, and it is bleached out due to having his AI Vegas at 90%. I got it 3 days ago, and today I am already seeing a difference in coloration and tentacles out wanting to be fed.

Yes one other point; did you know that when you have your lights let say at 50%intensity, they still use 100% of their Wattage , YES, they do. So don't think for a moment that your saving by reducing the intensity, your just diverting the power into a resistance box. Just so you know.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by Reeftown

How do you tell the PAR of a lighting system? I just bought this setup.

My tank is 20 inches deep, and the lights will sit about 6 inches about the water surface. As of right now it is just a FOWLR tank, but eventually I plan on getting into corals. The lights need replacing, but I'm not worried about replacing them until I make the jump to corals. But I'd like to know how to figure out the PAR of this system so I don't make the mistake of bleaching everything right off the bat.

Usually on LEDs they give a detail report on the PAR since its a very new technology somewhat unproven to many or misunderstood, plus LEDs are more powerful than most T5 the reason they are smaller too, like I said also its use is misunderstood as well. Its more complex and people need convincing to spend thousands on it. Your set up has been around for a while. And your lamp as well so the outcome is well known to merchants and most aquarist. Your ok i'm pretty sure. But if your concern this is what i'm referring too for those of us who have to differentiate between brands and the ongoing mark ups of the new technology' A PAR meter.

http://www.apogeeinstruments.co.uk/aquarium-par-meters/




PAR

Photosynthetically Active Radiation

400nm-700nm

This a very good article on PAR and its simple and SHORT

http://orphekled.blogspot.ca/2011/09...radiation.html

[zachts]

Originally Posted by Mudbeaver

Yes one other point; did you know that when you have your lights let say at 50%intensity, they still use 100% of their Wattage , YES, they do. So don't think for a moment that your saving by reducing the intensity, your just diverting the power into a resistance box. Just so you know.

Sorry, but I'm going to by the guy who calls BS here.

How on earth do you justify your statements?

Please, do more research before posting false statements like this, which (and please take this as a constructive criticism) sound purely ignorant to anyone who knows anything about current LED lighting technology.

Modern LED lighting, either commercial setups or the DIY builds that are common on Reef Central DO NOT use resistors to drive the LEDs. They use current limiting drivers, which dim based on two principals depending on the particular driver.
1. PWM (pulse width modulation) where the driver turns the LED on and off at full power very rapidly creating the effect of dimming light.
2. Current Reduction. the driver reduces the current (mA) being allowed to flow to the LED.

in either case as you dim your LEDs to 50% they will use less watts of power.

in case 1: they probably use slightly more than 50% watts due to overhead of the powersupply and that they are turning on and off at full current and full forward voltage. they would however only be ON for 50% of the time.

in case 2: the LEDs are dimmed by lowering current which at 50% intensity will more than likely cause you to be using LESS than 50% of the power when the LEDs are on at 100%. this is due to the fact that as you reduce drive current the LED needs less forward voltage, also at lower drive currents the LEDs are more efficient and produce more light output watt for watt than they due at higher drive currents. Ohm's Law, volts x amps = watts.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by zachts

Sorry, but I'm going to by the guy who calls BS here.

How on earth do you justify your statements?

Please, do more research before posting false statements like this, which (and please take this as a constructive criticism) sound purely ignorant to anyone who knows anything about current LED lighting technology.

Modern LED lighting, either commercial setups or the DIY builds that are common on Reef Central DO NOT use resistors to drive the LEDs. They use current limiting drivers, which dim based on two principals depending on the particular driver.
1. PWM (pulse width modulation) where the driver turns the LED on and off at full power very rapidly creating the effect of dimming light.
2. Current Reduction. the driver reduces the current (mA) being allowed to flow to the LED.

in either case as you dim your LEDs to 50% they will use less watts of power.

in case 1: they probably use slightly more than 50% watts due to overhead of the powersupply and that they are turning on and off at full current and full forward voltage. they would however only be ON for 50% of the time.

in case 2: the LEDs are dimmed by lowering current which at 50% intensity will more than likely cause you to be using LESS than 50% of the power when the LEDs are on at 100%. this is due to the fact that as you reduce drive current the LED needs less forward voltage, also at lower drive currents the LEDs are more efficient and produce more light output watt for watt than they due at higher drive currents. Ohm's Law, volts x amps = watts.

First; I don't care, it was an example.

Second; the guy who build's them told me himself and showed me.

Third ; keep on paying extra, extra power extra stuff extra light that you may or may not need I don't care.

[zachts]

got a link to that light the "guy" builds? now I'm curious what reef light would intentionally waste all the power not used when the lights were dimmed. if it's not making light it can only go one place, heat!

[ReachTheSky]

Dimming reduces either the amperage or voltage going to the diode. Assuming the driver still pulls the same amount of wattage at, all that unused energy will need to go somewhere otherwise it will turn into heat. I'm not talking about ambient heat either. 100w of energy being wasted by something as small as an LED driver can create the type of heat that can make water boil. Maybe I don't understand how it works well enough but it sounds like a serious fire hazard from how it's being described and I know that's not the case.

Another thing to consider is that sometimes getting 100% out of something doesn't mean you're getting your money's worth. Let's assume you're correct that wattage is the same across the board. You're still not factoring in intense strain on the equipment. Your friends LEDs are under driven which means they're running very cool and efficient which ensures longevity while still providing adequate lighting for his needs. Something running at 100% all the time is prone to breaking down a lot sooner.

[wildman926]

You lower current by increasing resistance within a circuit, i.e. a resistor.

[kajung2k]

So... I plugged my AI VEGA into a kill a watt meter. I had all channels at 100 percent and the kill a watt meter 92 watts, I then ran them at 50 percent at the kill a watt read 48 watts.

Again. Please don't post up false information. Your posts are very misleading.

Originally Posted by Mudbeaver

Well from what I know being to his place a few time its been 6 months at 38% . Every time he raises the output of his lights bleaching occurs to what ever is high enough in the tank. It also one of the thing to consider; your rock work. If you design it for a certain Par and change your set of lights , make sure you get it right. Especially if they give you all that fancy control over your output. But if you only need like I said earlier 38% for your tank.....you paid and wasted 62 % and its sleeping on the job. That's my main point .

[Mudbeaver]

Oh by the way for those who bought a very expensive set of lights and can't use it at full strength, one trick is to use it for very short period of times. Like some only have to use their system for 3 hours a day and they can avoid bleaching of their corals. Keep searching for answers, you'll find them. Also raising them higher than normal helps too.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by kajung2k

So... I plugged my AI VEGA into a kill a watt meter. I had all channels at 100 percent and the kill a watt meter 92 watts, I then ran them at 50 percent at the kill a watt read 48 watts.

Again. Please don't post up false information. Your posts are very misleading.

I got that from 2 guys from the floor of a light show convention, selling and building that stuff, End of story But hey they could of lied to me....Back to topic. Choose wisely according to your needs and measurements

[ReachTheSky]

I'm not sure if they would lie - it makes no sense for them to torpedo their own business. Perhaps you misunderstood?

Once again, pulling that kind of power and not utilizing it is more than just wasteful, it's a fire hazard.

[Mudbeaver]

When I spoke to my dealer I asked if I could change the 8000k for 10 000k and he said yes. Because in my other tank i'll be growing some macro-Algae and the 10 000k are more appropriate for algae than the 8000k who are for planted fresh water tanks. If the dealer is not willing to do this ; change company its your dime, this simple service not rendered at the beginning of your business transaction doesn't look good for the future problem you could face later on with servicing. When your talking to a Rep of a co. always take the opportunity to ask for written detailed of the performance and PAR of their product, its a good way to take them at their word about what they profess and if the product doesn't deliver you have his flyer , his assurances that it would . Makes it easier to return and get your money back. Were talking thousands of dollars here, so take your time before committing. Ask if they have a 420 nm chip in the make up, its a catchy phrase that lots of sellers seem to ignore or think the buyer is unaware. That's the exact spectral peak that corals really like.

For your colors, the differences between 8000k- 10 000k and 16 000k;

The sun is about 5500k or kelvin degrees, a few meters under water and you have an 8 000k light in shallow waters where plants usually grow, so for planted tanks its perfect its also yellower.

The 10 000k is deeper and perfect for soft corals and mid corals like acropora , and a macro-algae mixed tank a bit blueish too.

The 16 000k is really blue because of the light penetration differences at those depth, large polyps your SPS will feel at home there. With 10 000k you could have a mixed tank with Macro-Algae but not with the 16 000k . Its too blue.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by ReachTheSky

I'm not sure if they would lie - it makes no sense for them to torpedo their own business. Perhaps you misunderstood?

Once again, pulling that kind of power and not utilizing it is more than just wasteful, it's a fire hazard.

I have no idea what would be the motivation that comes from two different stand. In any case I've already bought my system according to my specs and what i'm learning everyday point to a lot of car sales tactics and people with agendas. So I decided to start this thread to get the people to think or ask each other about their shopping experience with regards to LED, a relatively new concept with a lot of info and high prices out there ready for the born everyday shopper.

My friends who bought a $ 4000 system and who's frying everything under it
while I got away with a $ 1000 for the same size tank I tell him he bough a smart microwave while I bought a set of lights. Its ridiculous. He went for the fancy clouds and storm programs and tablets and USB key and ++++ can't use half of it because he misunderstood the product and his needs. That's what this thread is about, not the two guys I talked to or a dimer.....

[ca1ore]

Originally Posted by Mudbeaver

Oh by the way for those who bought a very expensive set of lights and can't use it at full strength, one trick is to use it for very short period of times. Like some only have to use their system for 3 hours a day and they can avoid bleaching of their corals. Keep searching for answers, you'll find them. Also raising them higher than normal helps too.

I think this is a case of 'trying to be precise' when it is debatable as to whether we are even accurate. It is my opinion that there is not nearly enough evidence as to whether LED lights will prove to be a long-term lighting solution. There are enough reports from respected reef keepers (using full spectrum LED) to at least cast some doubt on long-term viability.

My point is that if one buys LED lights, but then only uses them at, say 50%, what's the big deal. Perhaps over time those levels get ramped up, who knows! There simply is no reliable information about LED/gallon or LED wattage/gallon. It's all trial and error as far as I can see.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by ca1ore

I think this is a case of 'trying to be precise' when it is debatable as to whether we are even accurate. It is my opinion that there is not nearly enough evidence as to whether LED lights will prove to be a long-term lighting solution. There are enough reports from respected reef keepers (using full spectrum LED) to at least cast some doubt on long-term viability.

My point is that if one buys LED lights, but then only uses them at, say 50%, what's the big deal. Perhaps over time those levels get ramped up, who knows! There simply is no reliable information about LED/gallon or LED wattage/gallon. It's all trial and error as far as I can see.

+1 most definitely about trial and errors, that's why I waited so long before committing to LEDs and I went middle ground with spending to see if the result would be there. My friend went for the new and over the top, and now i'm helping him redo his rock work. We're bringing it down a bit , not so close to the surface to be able to put stuff on the top rocks, other wise it looks funny, desert like. By the way the manufacturer is no way at fault here; my buddy his! The lights are doing what they're suppose to do, but my friend didn't look what he was buying or read or understood any of the PAR graphics, THATS why he's in this position , that's why the title says choose wisely that's the issue here.

[gone fishin]

Choose wisely should go for everything in this hobby, whether it be power heads, skimmers, return pumps or livestock. People must due proper research.

But, I must disagree height of tank is the most important factor. Tank dimensions are certainly a good starting point in choosing lights. What one wishes to keep, heat input, and the intended aquascape all play an equally important role in deciding on what fixture to purchase.

[Mudbeaver]

Originally Posted by gone fishin

Choose wisely should go for everything in this hobby, whether it be power heads, skimmers, return pumps or livestock. People must due proper research.

But, I must disagree height of tank is the most important factor. Tank dimensions are certainly a good starting point in choosing lights. What one wishes to keep, heat input, and the intended aquascape all play an equally important role in deciding on what fixture to purchase.

I was quoting MY most important for me , but if your choosing lights its a factor because certain brand are good just past a certain height after that they loose effectiveness and don't provide the necessary PAR needed by your corals. That why knowing the intensity of the brands your contemplating is so important. Mine are perfect for a 19 inch high tank, but not powerful enough for a 24 " tank. That was the goal of my custom tank. I didn't need to buy a powerful LED to provide for my tank so even by paying my tank $ 200 more I saved $ 1800 worth of lighting. That is what my research did for me. Knowing my PAR, the product potential, and limits, and planning my tank size. That's a search a lot of people don't do and are dealing after the set up is done and wonder why the corals are dying or bleaching, or doing nothing at all. And the lights are the most expensive piece in the set up usually, but for me this time it was the tank. Something I wont change in 6 or 10 years. And loosing and replacing 5-6-10 corals at $ 60 a piece because of a bad choice ; you can buy almost a new light for that price . Like you said this hobby is expensive enough why rush to buy the thing that will determine the faith of everything under it for years to come. Most other stuff we can see if they work or not, you can see a malfunctioning pump, skimmer, heater etc, but the lights are eyes are not tune to see wave length or measure 420 nm or 10 000k you realise that much later, too late sometimes.

[Khemul]

Originally Posted by Mudbeaver

The 16 000k is really blue because of the light penetration differences at those depth, large polyps your SPS will feel at home there. With 10 000k you could have a mixed tank with Macro-Algae but not with the 16 000k . Its too blue.

Macro Algae isn't all that picky. Blue is perfectly fine for macro algae, especially if it can grow corals (corals like more light, so essentially anything that can grow corals can grow macro).

8000k vs 10000k, the macro probably won't notice much of a difference. They'll happily grow under 6300-6700k bulbs (soft corals too). They'll even grow (although less so) under 2700k bulbs. That's the thing about algae that makes them hated by a lot of reefkeepers, they adapt to whatever lighting is available. Even ambient room lighting is sometimes enough to keep them going.

[slief]

Originally Posted by Mudbeaver

Well from what I know being to his place a few time its been 6 months at 38% . Every time he raises the output of his lights bleaching occurs to what ever is high enough in the tank. It also one of the thing to consider; your rock work. If you design it for a certain Par and change your set of lights , make sure you get it right. Especially if they give you all that fancy control over your output. But if you only need like I said earlier 38% for your tank.....you paid and wasted 62 % and its sleeping on the job. That's my main point .

Bleaching is not always just a result of PAR but can also be related to color spectrum. As others have said, acclimation is a very important factor in adjusting corals to new new light be it with LED's or even metal halides. Not just because of intensity but also because of the color spectrum which is also very important when it comes to good coloration and coral health.