Thanks for taking the time to post your results. There is no way any light will accomidate for a tank with poor parameters. The question that I want to know isn't can LED's grow SPS, but what are the optimal optics (45, 60, 90, 120 degrees), and is there a tank depth that is "too deep" for adequate pentration.
For SPS dominated tanks, the normal height of the tank is around 20-24", with 17-21" of water, that way using either 60 or 90 degrees optics you'll be able to provide sufficient PAR for the entire tank.
I think it depends on LEDs and I would measure PAR before trying any optics or would adjust power accordingly.
It's difficult with LEDs to get advice because it's relatively new and keeps evolving, where with MH you usually get advice quickly.
It's not really that difficult, more and more people are using LEDs these days and I think it's in fact easier than MH, with MH there're only two options, 250w or 400w, whereas in LED there's a very wide ranges of different wattage to choose from (and with different spread of optics).
For the "too deep", look here:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1985714
it's a side by side comparison of LEDs and T5. That is on 6 feet deep tank.
For deeper tanks like the 6' tank you've shown in your thread, although you'll still get very visiable light at the bottom of the tank (visible to human eyes), but in terms of PAR (
photosynthetically active radiation), there's just not enough light for photosynthesis to carry out.
It might be bright enough for a FOTWL but really not enough for a RT.
Am I reading this correctly? You are using 2 of these led fixtures plus T5 actinics over a 55 gallon tank.
I'm using
ONLY LED, no T5 at all. It's a 65g tank (including water from sump)
The reference to T5 is that I want to mix the color of LED bulbs on my fixtures to make it gives the T5 appearance.
Very much possible. Some fixtures drawing less than 200wats are being compared to 250MH and some suggested should be compared with 400MH. Seen maany threads about people getting LEDs, underestimating them leading to bleaching and dies off.
PAR meter helps, ability to dim helps too.
With the PAR I've recorded, it's comparable to using 2x 400w MH on my tank.
I could have use just one single 230w model instead of 2x 160w, the reason is, I already own a 160w from my older 20g nano-tank, and I've two options when I upgraded my tank.
Either get a 230w and get rid of the 160w, or get another 160w so I could have a total of 320w. I opted for the latter because I could always reduce the photoperiod using the 320w to get the optimal results, but I cannot push the 230w beyond its capacity in the future.
If you do the math he has 336 watts of LEDs over a 55 gallon tank. Wouldnt of been much easier and cheaper to just use 2 150 watt metal halides. This LED build is very good, Im not trying to take away from that. One of the arguements for LEDs are the power savings. In this build the power savings has been thrown out the window. Also the cost of this fixture probably been equal to 3 or 4 years of replacement lamps.
That being said it is a very nice build and looks very good.
150w MH would NEVER be able to produce the amount of PAR I need on my tank, perhaps 2x 250w, but like I said, the PAR I've been getting is comparable to 2x 400w now.
Read my previous comment and see why I've opted for 2x 160w LED fixtures instead of 1x 230w. :twitch:
Also I'm not using all 320w of LED for the entire photoperiod. With LED I can choose to turn on groups of LED at different time, so on average I'm only running approx. 200w-250w of LED.
Here's my photoperiod:
Blue only: 13 hours (12:00 noon - 1:00am) approx. 96w
Blue + white (3ws): 9 hours (2:00pm - 11:00pm) approx. 216w
All on: 5 hours (4:00pm - 9:00pm) approx. 336w