Not a very convincing argument and who is Floyd??
Hello
Point is it probably matters little that one uses blue based diodes w/ a broad spectrum red (NOT Blue plus red diodes) and I suspect you will not see any difference and possibly
a benefit. did Floyd TRY "full spectrum" LEd's??
Never really got around to it, but Deep Red + Hyper Violet works so well for me, why bother.
Floyds recommendations
Here is my recommendation for LED lighting of a waterfall algae scrubber screen:
This is for a double-sided screen using Philips Luxeon ES 3W Deep Red 660nm LEDs without lenses (120-140 degree) running at 700mA at 2-3" from the screen to LED
Minimum coverage: One LED on each side of every 8 sq in of screen
Maximum coverage: One LED on each side of every 4 sq in of screen
Even Floyd is a bit wishy washy on this.. From post 6884 in the sticky..
pg276...
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1977420&page=276
How am I being wishy washy?
Here is a link directly to the post (page numbers are relative to the user and how many posts/page they have set)
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1977420&page=138
*** This is current as of 2015-05-15! ***
----------------
Here is my recommendation for LED lighting of a waterfall algae scrubber screen:
This is for a double-sided screen using Philips Luxeon ES 3W Deep Red 660nm LEDs without lenses (120-140 degree) running at 700mA at 2-3" from the screen to LED
Minimum coverage: One LED on each side of every 8 sq in of screen
Maximum coverage: One LED on each side of every 4 sq in of screen
Simple as that. For new screens (bare) if using the "Maximum" level, run at 350mA until mature, or use a diffuser. Might have to do this with the Minimum level also actually, but not typically. The minimum could probably be stretched to a larger area but screen will cure slower and generally have less capacity.
So for a 6x6 screen, which is 36 sq in, /8 = 4.5 per side. Make it 5.
So for a 6x6 screen, which is 36 sq in, /4 = 9 per side.
Supplementing with blue/violet: Always run blues at 350mA, violets can be run higher but should follow the same rule for the maturing stage (350 at first, then increase after maturing). Use one to two at this current level for every 5-6 reds, roughly. Lots of flexibility here, a little blue/violet goes a long way. I've used 440-445nm Royal Blue Luxeon ESs for this, but I know of at least one other that used to use RBs and switched to Deep Violets and almost doubled growth. Steve's LEDs now carries a good Hyper Violet made by SemiLED.
Regarding non DIY-LEDs in general, this is what I have roughed out to help with this.
The issue is that my DIY LED guideline is based on coverage. You can't say "I need 5 3W LEDs which is 15W, so a 15 W fixture is what I need". It doesn't work that way.
That's because a 3W LED does not necessarily consume 3W, and a purchased LED may rate it's intensity based on actual wattage used, or it may add up the LEDs and give a wattage but the actual watt draw is less. You have to watch for this.
A 3W Philips Luxeon ES 660nm LED will typically drop 2.2v across the LED at 700mA. Power = Amps * Volts so 2.2 V * 0.700 A = 1.54W. What? I thought it was a 3W. It is. That is something called MARKETING. LEDs have become more efficient over time as they have been redesigned, so a lower Vdrop and Idrive results in the same output, but instead of calling it a 1.5W and confusing everyone, they call it a 3W still.
So now on to your fixture you are looking at.
Converting the "LED per unit area guideline" to a "wattage" guideline is as simple as doing the math.
Figure out what you need per the "unit area" guideline. In the above example, 6x6 screen, minimum level (low intensity), 5x 3W per side. Each is actually drawing 1.5W, so 5x1.5 = 7.5W. Your light fixture should actually consume, at the wall, a minimum of 7.5W. The electronics built into the fixture will draw power also, meaning that you might want to add a little cushion to the number. So a 10W fixture on a 6x6 screen would be about right for a comparable replacement to an array of 5x 3W LEDs.
Now let's add that factor in and parallel it to screen size. A 6x6 screen = 36 sq in. Make it 40. you need a 10W actual-draw LED fixture on each side of this. So you could say that the rule of thumb for a pre-built LED fixture is that you need 0.25W per square inch of screen. That would get you into the Minimum light arena - or "Minimum Intensity", and you need one of these on each side of the screen.
Doubling that would put you on the higher end. 0.5W per square inch - actual wattage draw of fixture.
What you have to watch for is when they use a multi-chip that has 9 1W LEDs on it and they call that 10W. Not necessarily true. But 1W LEDs are actually more efficient than 3W LEDs when you are talking radiant flux output per unit of energy input into the LED, so it's not horrible, just shoot for the higher light level and you'll be OK usually. At best, you will actually be at the minimum level. At worst, you'll be on the low side but still OK.
I actually thought that was prety clear. Gives you a range to work with, instead of being strict A + B = C, because it's rare that it works out that way. Anyone else see this ^^ as wishy washy? If it was just wishy, or just washy, I might be OK. But if it's both, then man, I overlooked something huge.
I read the complete thread. No offense to Floyd, but his name does not equate to scientific peer reviewed papers. In a macro algae refugium, I used a hydroponic fixture with 1:1 ratio of red to blue. I was very happy with it. Does that make it better than a 3:1 ratio of red to blue? Not necessarily, but it was my experience.
I don't use an ATS. For me, the discussion is academic.
I never said it was scientific. My real name is Warren Carlson, does that make me sound more scientific? I also have a Professional Engineering license, so I even have cool letters after my name. Of course that doesn't mean jack to anyone outside of the design & construction industry, but, meh. This is just a bit of humor here I take no offense and am not trying to be a smarty pants. I wear dummy pants most of the time, no suit and tie for this guy.
The application is not academic though, more below
Anectodally, it seems that 3:1 to 5:1 (red:blue) ratio provides the most success. But all of this hasn't been scientifically verified.
If you look at chlorophyll a and b peaks, it makes most sense to me to use 4 LEDs (420, 450, 625 and 660). 420/660 for chlorophyll a and 450/625 for chlorophyll b. I have some BML strips that are great at growing algae, but I have not done any control experiments. Here is one strip that I have:
http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details?partNo=PS1290S201TSTKGTSTLATSTKG
The trouble with knowing what is optimal is that people report everything from low watt CFLs to HPS as being the "best" without any real experimentation going on... me included.
Anyways on a serious note, we don't grow plants. When you go to any sciency papers, you have to remember this. True we grow algae, and a lot of these papers are based on algae, but not the same kind. Truth is, there is not much that is specifically applicable. So you have to learn.
Here is what I have learned.
hydroponic fixtures made for growing plants are awesome to gleam info from. But again, plants. Plants love lots of intensity at certain times. I was told my someone whom I have faith in based on their experience and credentials that 630nm beats out 660nm about 3:1 in terms of growth per unit of power used (wattage of fixture). BUT. This does not equate to algae, because of intensity.
660 is actually the better spectrum for leafy plant growth (in certain stages) but it is so far red that the intensity drops off. So you need 3x the chips vs 630 and thus 3x the power. This is why you see a lot of 630 grow lights - because they are for plants. Not algae.
Why not algae? Intensity. If you put a Royal blue at 700mA 2" from an algae screen, then surround it with 660s in a 4" x 2" pattern with the reds on 2" centers, you will have a bare spot in the middle of the screen that maynever fill in. Trust me. I have a LOT of experience with this. Similarly, same array but 2 blues running at 350ma in the center of the 2 squares formed by the reds, not as bad but guess what - you will still have a bare area that will fill in slower. Switch to Hyper-violets, and that screen fills in nice and even. That small change in intensity by shiftin the spectrum toward the edge of visible makes all the difference.
Now, take your 660s and shift them to 630s, now your whole screen is photosaturated (at that same distance and current). The flipside of this argument is "just move the fixture back and drive it harder, then you don't need as many LEDs" and I would say, go for it! I haven't seen this tried but the issue might come down to getting the coverage right, use of proper lenses, maybe dimming, etc...
Anyways, what I have learned is that going the other direction is actually better taking the 660s, and putting them close, then dimming them. At first. As you get growth started, you can increase the photoperiod, then the intensity and flow, until you reach the happy zone for your tank. "Happy Zone" is a highly technical and registered and copyrighted term but I'll let everyone else use it.
What's the most ideal ratio of Red/White/Blue LEDS?
and floyds response
Skip the WW and
go all red. If anything mix 50/50 660nm and 630nm and maybe 1 455 or 425 blue per 6-8 reds,
if any blues at all. Nothing is 'proven' yet but there have been a few getting good growth with only 660 and only 630 so mix 'em and that way you're covered.
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19438012&postcount=82
That's a really old post (2011). There has been a huge amount of experimentation since then. I think you'll find more up to date information on the more recent algae scrubber basic and advanced threads here, or look at Turbo's Aquatics site and see what ratios they use on their current scrubbers.
In general, people seem to do better when they match the spectrum of chlorophyll A, which is stronger in algae, rather than B (i.e. 420nm and 660nm), and I think that is what the latest Turbo's Aquatics scrubbers use.
I had to go to the post, that was old! That was before I had even tried LED scrubbers. But the point is the same as at the top of this post, 630s are too intense. Know what else is intense? Camping. Say it out loud.
Red 625-660nm Which are actually Floyds
I use only 660nm Philips Deep Red, nothing else, never have.
The only thing I've change is from one full power (700mA) blue : 6 full power reds to 6 reds (@700mA) : 2 blues (in parallel @350mA) and then 6 reds : 2 violets. Violets I have found can be run in the same series (700mA) as reds and the screen will still fill in well, about the same as when you are running 2 blues in parallel, maybe a little better (not much data on that). But when you run the violets at 50% of the reds, that's when it fills in quick.
When you keep the violets at 50% of the reds and dim the whole thing and run long hours, that's when you get quick maturing screens. When you use the mortar screen (sacrificial mortar coating on canvas) then it really matures fast.
But then again...who am I anyways. Oh yeah, I'm Floyd b%$#hes :lolspin::blown::uzi::frog::ape:
*Note: This message has contained heavy sarcasm and humor. Do not interpret the tone of this message using the voice in your head. You must use the voice in my head to properly interpret tone. Even then, use caution. Sometimes, I even **** myself off.
