DIY LEDs - The write-up

Status
Not open for further replies.
DRIVERS
There are two main type of drivers. I did not use either one so I did not pay a whole lot of attention to these. But before we get there, there has been discussion about running string that involved terms like series, parallel, matrix, and others (thanks CJO for reminding me about this fine kettle of fish :)). Generally it is agreed that each driver should drive one string as kcress says (I think this was all him):
You should only have one driver for each string. Period.

Any other scheme risks all the LEDs as soon as one fails shorted.

Two stings in parallel will toast them all. Why?

If you are running two stings in parallel and each string is, for example, 700mA, your driver would need to put out 1400mA. Now if one LED shorts the driver will continue to drive 1400mA into the two stings. But the string with the shorted LED will have a different voltage requirement than the good remaining string. This causes what is termed as "current hogging". The good sting will either go dim or OFF completely while the bad string may have 1200mA running thru it. The remaining LEDS will fail in seconds.

Once the entire string with a short in it has blown or one of the LEDs fails OPEN the driver will then focus on driving the 1400mA thru the remaining good string. Every LED in that string will also fail within seconds in a domino effect.

One driver per string!
OK, CJO was really interested in this and has a good reason, I don't recommend (and I think most will agree) this, but if you really want more information check the bottom for some notes CJO collected.

Meanwell
These are nice because the run off of 120 so no extra power supply is needed. There are several different type. The differences (I think) are how much power they can supply and how they are dimmed. This thread seems to answer a lot of questions: How to dim a Meanwell ELN-60-48D...
D Version
I have seen several question on wiring so since Stugray said it so clearly:
The AC wires that go into a plug don't matter which way.

The V+ goes to a + on the LED the - of that LED goes to the + of the next LED etc.

The - of the last LED in the string goes to the V- of the driver.

The two DIM signals go to your ALC dimming channel.

Set the dimming output of the ALC to max (+10V) then set the meanwell max current to what you want the LEDs to run at. DO NOT turn on the driver until you have turned the internal dim pot counter-clockwise all the way or you will blow the string when you turn it on the first time.

THEN adjust upwards. To measure the current properly you need a digital Multi Meter placed inline on the LED string to read the current.

Not everyone found that information, but this shows it all pretty clearly:
Meanwell and how to use it - for Idiots like me

Internal Current Adjustment
Some meanwells (like the D) have an internal adjustment to limit current. Der_wille_zur_amacht explains the different ways of limiting these very nicely:
To help clear it up. The driver you have has TWO ways to adjust the power that the LEDs are running at (actually three, but the third - voltage limiting - doesn't come into play when it's run as a constant current LED driver.)

First, there is the internal trimpot. Think of this as the max. limiter for current provided to the LEDs. The trimpot sets the max current (amps) your LEDs will run at. You adjust this internal pot simply by turning it with a screwdriver and reading the CURRENT (amps, not volts) on the output string, i.e. in series with the LEDs.

Second, there is the external dimming signal, connected to the external wires. This external circuit allows you to dim DOWN from the max current set by the internal pot. You control this function by providing a voltage signal to these wires, between zero and 10 volts. The LEDs aren't actually running at this voltage, it's merely a signal. The driver translates the signal into a percentage of the current set by the internal trimpot.

So, when your external signal source (ALC, whatever) is providing a 10v signal, your LEDs aren't running at 10v, they're running at 100% of the current limit set by the internal pot.

The internal pot is a set and forget kind of thing - you configure it when you install the system, and then you likely won't touch it again. Depending on your plans and which LEDs you're using, typical values might be between 700 and 1000mA.

The procedure Stu suggested above is 100% exactly what I would suggest. Turn the trimpot all the way down (counter clockwise). Wire everything up, with your external control signal set at 100% (i.e. 10v). Put a multimeter set to measure amps in series with the LEDs. (make sure it's well connected, you don't want loose connections!) Plug the whole thing in, and measure the current. Leaving your external signal set to 10v (100%), adjust the internal trimpot upwards until you get the current you want, which will be between 700 - 1000mA for most people. Then, unplug the driver, remove the multimeter from the circuit, close the circuit, and you're ready to go.

BuckPuck
These are nice because they are small, but a separate power supply is needed.

LENSES
I found a really good post by der_wille_zur_macht so I will just leave this with what he said.
Those rough guidelines are probably about right [referring to an earlier post]. It's hard to give really specific suggestions because of all the variables, and not every type of LED has every width of optic available (i.e. there really aren't any 60 degree optics for XP-G that I'm aware of). I might cut your ranges a little as follows, for "œaverage" depth tanks (say, 18").

80 degree: anything up to a foot
60 degree: 18"
40 degree: 24"
20 degree: 36"
anything smaller: on the ceiling!

As noted above though, concentrating the light with optics has other inherent effects besides the obvious one of increasing intensity and reducing spread. The spacing between your LEDs becomes a little more important as your optics get narrower, both from a coverage perspective and a "œcolor separation" perspective. When you have wide optics or no optics, it doesn't matter that you are alternating blue and white LEDs every few inches (typically) because by the time the light hits the tank, it's "œmixed" together well. With really tight optics, you can get an effect where shadows look blue on one side, and yellow on the other side - this is because the different colors of light are so laminar that they don't "œmix" evenly.

And, of course, you can get the typically undesirable "œshafts of light" effect if you use tight optics and big spacing between your LEDs. So, typically, as your optics get narrower, you are forced into a closer LED spacing to compensate for these effects, which COMPOUNDS the typical issues of using tight optics (less light spread and more intensity directly under the LEDs.) Effectively, if you want or need to use tight optics on a larger tank, you are FORCING yourself into a very high output light fixture, because you'll have to increase your LED count (decrease spacing) to get good coverage. The alternative if you really want a lower-output fixture is to use lower drive currents along with the closer spacing and tighter optics.

One final thought on optics that isn't brought up often. As stated above, tighter optics result in more laminar light. As you change from wider to tighter optics, your light behaves less like an MH and more like a laser. As this happens, we start to get some effects that may be considered desirable, but it's very possible for them to become overwhelming with very tight optics. Namely, shimmer and "œcontrast" in the sense of shadows becoming very, very well defined.

Shimmer is pretty much a "œgood" thing to most reefers, and you can control/influence it easily by changing the amount of turbulence on the surface of your tank. So it's a non-issue.

Level of contrast in the shadows might be considered a good thing, up to a point. As your optics get tighter, there is less "œsideways" light in the tank, which means that corals/rock located in a shadow will get less and less light. Up to a point, IMHO, this can be very desirable - the sharply defined, dark shadows can look really cool. BUT, for people with lots of corals, it can be undesirable if taken TOO far, because lower branches on big colonies will be receiving very little light, which might cause growth problems or die-back for the coral. This can be somewhat avoided by letting your corals grow up in the LED-lit tank, and/or creative effects with LEDs.

Which brings me to my last thought for this post (I promise!). The above "œdark shadow" issue could be easily thwarted if a few LEDs were angled with respect to the tank, instead of all of them pointing straight down. To date, 99% of LED builds have been BORING! :lol: The typical approach is to get a big heatsink and spread X number of LEDs evenly across it, then hang it above the tank. This gives a final result very similar to what you'd get with T5 and MH. A perfectly even and vertical distribution of light from edge to edge across the tank. LEDs let us BREAK FREE from that mold if we so desire! You can't bend a T5 lamp to get "œangled" light at one end of the tank and vertical light at the other end. BUT that is easy to do with LEDs! Us reef folk seem happy to have actinic lights coming on before white lights as "œsunrise" simulation. Imagine a tank where the "œsunrise" actually involved a narrow shaft of light piercing the tank in a nearly horizontal fashion. The possibilities are endless! We can position individual LEDs, or small banks of LEDs, at different heights, angles, and positions to get some really cool effects. Time to think outside the box!

XP-G can be hard to get lenses for.
XP-G Optics: I ordered the 60 degree optics from etgtech.com for $1.25/pc plus shipping.

I don't believe they have them listed on the site so you will likely have to email anna@etgtech.com. !

I started quote everyone else, because they are much more wordy and descriptive than I am, oh and did I mention it is easier. Most of this quoted information was added in as the question came up after the original post so rather than paraphrasing and trying to remember they get full credit.
 
Paralleling LED Strings "“ Make Sure You Understand the Risks
Maybe I should write this really small so it gets ignored. I started thinking about this kind of late so did not try and remember what I read on parallel, but here is some basic information:

Since I started the summary I have been thinking more about the parallel configuration.

As a general rule we have been saying avoid parallel configurations. After thinking I wonder if the Meanwell's are meant to driven in parallel. The advice was to ignore the internal voltage setting potentiometer. But if we set the voltage to the measured voltage when running at the desired current then when a string is lost the Meanwell us unable to increase the voltage to get the additional current out. I don't think any additional safety precautions are needed.

I think this was mentioned before, but just did not sink in for me. So where is the problem if both internal adjustments are PROPERLY set with running parallel strings?
And kcress pointed out what I forgot:
The problem is shorts in a string.

With a short the required voltage of the string drops and the current increases, a vicious circle.

All the streetlights and signal lights run parallel with no protections and the strings all burn out eventually. I was just noting yesterday that about 1 signal light in 3 has failing LEDs showing. My town embraced LED signal lights the minute they came out. So what, 6 or 7 years? And now failures are starting to occur. If you are fine with retooling your fixture in that period it will probably work fine to parallel with no added protections.

So I think with a properly adjusted Meawell and some fuses you should be ok.

So for those interested here are notes CJO (who was interested in this as he read the threads) took:

Series or Parallel

Fairly simple actually. With the same power supply, in this case for 4 LEDs with a forward voltage of 3.3v, of 15v.

The series circuit, uses less current draw from the power supply, and a single resistor.

The parallel circuit, uses a higher current draw from the power supply, and larger multiple resistors.

Another way to look at it, you need a larger voltage, lower amperage, power supply for series circuits. A smaller voltage, higher amperage power supply for parallel circuits. Assuming the same number of LEDs.

With power supplies, having less than the total forward voltage of all the LEDs, it is necessary to use a series/parallel circuit. In this particular case, the power supply is easy to come by, and the closest standard size resistor 120 ohms, is the exact size needed. The other circuits use the next closest higher resistor. (results in dimmer LED output, because less current will flow.

So from a design point of view, you design for the type circuit that will give the best results, in this case, although the series circuit is close enough, the series/parallel circuit with a 9 volt supply, will perform the best. (LED output wise, power is a secondary concern-- except for dissipation, depending on the size of the array)

See circuits below. If there are math errors, it is the calculators fault (it is an old TI-36X)

The greatest difference is seen in the total power (wattage) for the circuit.

----see attached diagram----

(kcress)
You should only have one driver for each string. Period.

Any other scheme risks all the LEDs as soon as one fails shorted.

Two stings in parallel will toast them all. Why?

If you are running two stings in parallel and each string is, for example, 700mA, your driver would need to put out 1400mA. Now if one LED shorts the driver will continue to drive 1400mA into the two stings. But the string with the shorted LED will have a different voltage requirement than the good remaining string. This causes what is termed as "current hogging". The good sting will either go dim or OFF completely while the bad string may have 1200mA running thru it. The remaining LEDS will fail in seconds.

Once the entire string with a short in it has blown or one of the LEDs fails OPEN the driver will then focus on driving the 1400mA thru the remaining good string. Every LED in that string will also fail within seconds in a domino effect.

One driver per string!

Drivers cost money.. How do you deal with this?

Two ways: The first is to string far more LEDs in a string. Using a 36V or 48V driver or at least 24V. 12V borders on the ridiculous.

48V/2.2V = 21 LEDs
36V/2.2V = 16 LEDs
24V/2.2V = 10 LEDs

Alternatively you could run strings in parallel but you would need to put a fuse in series with each string. As soon as an LED fails shorted that string would hog current, exceeding the fuse rating, and the fuse would blow. Promptly the full current would try to run thru the adjacent parallel strings and those fuses would also promptly blow. It would take some careful fuse selection however.

How to test forward voltage of individual LED's:
Wire them to a driver (you can do lots at once if you want). Run them at your target current. Read voltage across each one with a multimeter, by probing right at that LED's solder pads.

Really, the only trick to it is not blinding yourself. It helps if you have optics or an optic holder that leaves the pads exposed, because then you can easily look at the LED from the side without getting blinded.

(der_wille_zur_macht)
Parallel strings are not ideal in these applications, for a few reasons. First of all, if there are any tiny differences in characteristics in your various LEDs, you'll have inconsistent performance. If you have one string that ends up requiring 10.3v to drive at 700mA, and another string that requires 10.5v to be driven to 700mA, then the driver will end up over driving one string and under driving the other. Since even a small variation in voltage can lead to huge variations in light ouput, this might mean poor performance from some LEDs. In practice, I've seen 3 - 4% variation in drive voltage to achieve a target drive current from LED to LED (even in the same bin) which is enough to make me worry about performance in parallel applications.


A: (der_will_zur_macht) Daniel, fusing the parallel strings would prevent failure, but it leads to some other (potential) issues:

1) If the LEDs in one string have a different total forward voltage at a given current than the LEDs in the other string, they won't balance out well. This would be especially true if you mixed different colors/types of LEDs on the same driver. I'd want to carefully "bin" the LEDs I was using (set up a test station where you could drive a single LED for a few seconds to record it's voltage at a given current) to avoid this.

2) As you get more LEDs on a driver, you start to lose control resolution. Maybe this isn't an issue on a very large tank, but on a smaller tank, if you had drivers doing 12, or 24 LEDs each (for example) you quickly lose resolution to the point that it would be hard to implement the sort of control people are starting to show interest in. For an extreme example, I have a nano rig with 16 LEDs run at very low current. This is two of my DIY drivers, 8 LEDs each. A driver capable of doing all 16 wouldn't even let me dim blue and white separately.

From the sounds of your posts, neither of these would be huge stumbling blocks for you, but I wanted to point them out in case others were following along.

Binning LED's, adding Fuses (Kress)



You could theoretically run 4 strings of 48/3.5 = 13 LEDs.

Or 52 total.

You would be limited to 1.3A / 4 = 325mA per string.

To do it right though you'd need to do some additional work.

It would consist of some detailed meter work.

You would set up a string on a Mean Well and set the string current to 325mA using an ammeter.

Turn it on and wait until the string is warmed up. As you wait, use a Sharpie to number every one of them. Once warm measure the voltage across each one and write it down in a numerical table.

Do this for all 52.

Now take this table and mix and match the values to end up with the same total voltage in each string. You could do this many different ways. Use, say, the highest 5 with the lowest 6 if that works. Or just match across one low one in each string then the next higher one in the next string, etc, etc.

Once you have them grouped build your 4 strings.

You need to build the strings normally BUT you need to add fuses in each string.

Something like a 375mA fuse. Digikey F1504-ND in a holder F1467-ND.

Now when a LED opens or one shorts the fuse will open protecting the rest of the string.

Note that if any fuse opens they will all open, so keep spares.

If you can't pull this off as described, don't run parallel strings.

(der_will_zur_macht)
Skeptic, it's an easy problem to solve. Set up a "test station" with a constant current driver that can power a few LEDs at a time at some reasonable current, while allowing you to probe each individual LED with a multimeter. Turn the test array on, test the voltage drop across each LED, and write them all down. Then, arrange your LEDs into groups such that the total voltage drop for all groups is as close as possible. That's what I meant about "binning" your own LEDs. It should take an hour or two max, and it's cheap insurance if you're running parallel strings.

.2v CAN be quite significant (like 100mA!!!), but I'm not sure you'd see variation that high unless you randomly stacked things up in the worst possible way.
GEORGEDOPE; If you want to use that driver with parallel strings, go ahead. Add a 5 Ohm 10Watt resistor in each string. This resistor will help balance the string currents due to the inevitable mismatched string voltages.


Next turn down the voltage limit on the driver until you just detect some dimming. Then turn it back up a wee bit.

Now when one of the three 700mA strings opens the remaining two will theoretically have 1050mA sent thru them. But to have this happen the voltage must rise significantly, except, you just limited that voltage rise with the adjustment. The limitation will keep the current below 1050mA by a significant amount.

The only thing you aren't fully protected from is a shorted LED in one of the strings. The math shows that with those resistors you would probably see one string increase about 50mA and the other two drop by 25mA. Someday I will check that on a build. For piece of mind you can add a 3/4A fast blow fuse to each string.

Partial Summary
First, I don't think there is any difference between the cool white and royal blue (XR-E). Both are 3W, have a forward voltage of ~3.6v, and take a max current of 1000mA. However, I've read that the royal blue (and white to a lesser extent) are best run at a slightly lower current. Say 700mA. This extends the life of both types of LED with only a slight decrease in light output. This means that both colors could be on the same driver. But, most people don't so they can dimm them by color and turn them on at different times to simulate sunrise/sunset. I'll try and get confirmation on this.

The Meanwell, specifically that in the group buy ELN-60-48P, is a line voltage constant current source. It provides a constant 1.3A (-25%,+3%) to the LED load on it. It can handle up to 48V max on the load. And the P means it is externally dimmable with an analog signal. The line voltage part means it just plugs into the wall (90 - 240v), no additional power supply is needed. The max constant current is changeable by an internal potentiometer -25% or +3%. This means it can output from 1A to 1.4A or so.

LEDs have a current requirement and a forward voltage. For the Cree XR-E that is ~1A and 3.6v (on average). In series, voltage adds and current is the same. Thus, the Meanwell can power up to 13 XR-E in series at 1A (with the max current at -25%).

It can also run two parallel strings of 13 LEDs at 700mA per string with the max current set to +3%. Current divides in parallel so a total of 1.4A is being provided but each string gets 700mA.

A word of caution with parallel strings of LEDs. This is a recipe for disaster. If you aren't comfortable building this next item, don't run LED strings in parallel. What happens is if one LED in one string dies, then that string shorts and all of the current is sent through the other string. This either kills part or all of the LEDs in the other string or it severely limits the life of the LEDs in the second string. The higher current will work but it will also heat up the LEDs a lot. That is how they die.

But, you can do parallel strings as long as you build in a current mirror. Evil66 found and posted this in the Meanwell thread on nano-reef. Basically it forces the same current in both strands. If one strand shorts then it shorts the other strand too. The Meanwell thread:circumventing the filters is generally frowned upon
 
I'm currently planning on a led build for a new 63x24x26wh tank.

I've already read through this whole thread and some other build treads only i've got some questions about led color.
Most people use a 60% XRE/XPE RB and 40% XPG CW or 50% XRE/XPE RB and 50% XPE CW ratio. Only in some treads it's stated that this ratio does produce crappy colors.

To create some better color i'm thinkin of a ratio like this:
40% XPG CW (0D0 bin)
10% Cree 3XL cyan (505-510nm)
10/15% XPE Blue (470-480 nm)
35/40% XPE RB

I'm mixing in the blue and cyan to fill the gap from the CW's in the 450-500nm region.

Has someone done this before and does it improve the visual color's? and does adding some white/warm white xpe/xpg's improve colors?

I'm currently thinkin of 100 leds with 10 Recom RCD-24 drivers and a 320 watt 36 volt meanwell ps.
 
I don't think anyone has done this. I think the only thing I have read is using some warm white rather than cool white. Since the CW have a lot of blue I am not sure that your mix will help with the coloring. To get non 'crappy' colors you may need greens and reds which I don't think your mix will do. I am not a color expert, so I would get a few of each and try it over your tank and see what you like.
 
The (very small number of) complaints about color seem to be mostly focused on missing red spectrum, not missing blue spectrum. Hence, if you're going to experiment with non-standard LED colors and ratios, I'd suggest playing with neutral or warm whites in place of some of the cool whites, rather than additional blue colors.

FWIW I have built several test rigs including plain blue and cyan LEDs, and wasn't really impressed with the result. The plain blue and cyan produce a nice "sky blue" or "baby blue" tint, but don't really seem to "pop" any coral or fish colors, so you end up with a rather washed out look in the tank. On the other hand, royal blue does great at both "pop," AND at providing blue light to give a "deep sea" look, hence it's popularity. Also keep in mind that the standard ratios you're quoting are "standard" because they've worked well for a very large percentage of the people who have tried them!

All that said, experiment away. Regardless of if the light is coming from LEDs or MH or T5, that's the BEST policy. Personal preferences for lighting vary from individual to individual, and different tanks/corals will respond differently to different rigs. Though, I wouldn't plan on any non-standard configuration without trying it longterm over livestock, as many of the single-color LEDs produce extremely intense light in an extremely narrow wavelength, and hence there's some risk if the livestock doesn't "like" that color.
 
My tank isn't up yet but from what I can see just looking at the light using 8 warm whites in a mix of 84 LED's is going to be plenty of red. I like a little warmer look than most and also have a whole lot of blues so I suspect 6 would have been enough in a more 14K looking configuration. For folks using optics (I dont) the neutrals might be a better choice but I haven't seen them yet so I couldn't even guess what mix to use.
 
Thanks for the feedback. I'm wondering if some people would be happier with a warmer bin of cool white. Once you get into the ratios you're describing (8 out of 84 LEDs) you're going to get some color separation, probably severe if you have optics.
 
Thanks for the feedback. I'm wondering if some people would be happier with a warmer bin of cool white. Once you get into the ratios you're describing (8 out of 84 LEDs) you're going to get some color separation, probably severe if you have optics.

Yeah, I am not sure the warm whites would work if you had optics unless you have them mounted a couple feet above the tank so the light will mix before it hits the water. I need to grab a Neutral and take a look. I have a cheesey spectrometer on the way where I hope to be able to get pictures of the actual light distributions. If that works out I am going to need to get ahold of a bunch of different LED's.

I haven't even set my tank up yet and have the jones to build another fixture LOL
 
Hey all... I love this thread and have been reading through the majority of it and appreciate everyone's input and help they provide. I'm currently in the process of setting up a 120g reef, and have been researching like mad. The dimensions of my tank are 4'x2'x2' and DIY LED lighting is definitely the route I'm leaning towards. I'm looking at purchasing two 48 kits from rapidled. The only issue I have is my soldering ability, I'm capable but would rather prefer not to solder every led. I've done some searching online and found this product for folks like me who aren't really confident with their soldering. Anyone ever use this type of STARboard holder?? This particular one centers and fits the XR-E/C.

47_313_5101_80.png



http://www-1.bjb.com/index.php?productid=243685

I think this could simplify this DIY for many... What are your opinions?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top