LED Patents - Action Needed!

[sphelps]

I'm not being negative just realistic. The first picture provided has no SPS corals or high light corals that I can see. It also looks like a new setup so it doesn't show sustainability. It also has 400 LEDS!!! How many watts does one LED use, isn't it 3W? Cause that's 1200Ws! Sorry but that's just ridiculous. The second tank has obvious flaws, it clearly looks like a different light is used in the second pic and the tank looks a little shallow. A link to the source would be helpful.

LEDs obviously work but my point is they don't replace halides or T5s, they do work well as a replacement for lower light requirements.

I've read the article provided before, in fact it's where some of my problems with LEDs are from. The spread of the LED fixture is very small in comparison to the halide and you're already at 70% less output at the surface. The article clearly states the need to place high light corals directly below the light. Plus it provides no information about light levels at different water depths. Can it provide enough light for clams at 24" depths? Hard to tell when they only measured up to 9" and didn't actually provide the numbers. Realistically you'll need more LEDs than the manufacture provides and you can't fit enough LEDs over a tank to actually match halides. Then the LEDs don't have the power to to penetrate enough light to the bottom of deeper tanks.

I'm also not saying plasma is best either but the ballasts can be remote just like halides and the bulbs are small but in all fairness LEDs have been around a very long time, new to aquariums but old technology, plasma is quite new in lighting technology all around. The only plasma light available right now is pretty nasty which is why time is still needed just like LEDs. The difference is plasma has the intensity whiles LEDs just don't. You can make more than one color with plasma so time will develop better spectrum bulbs if the technology fits the requirements of the hobby.

I guess whether LEDs work or not is different subject and I apologize for taking away from this thread.

On the subject of patents though I really don't think the patent in question is going to prevent retrofits and other types of LED fixtures from entering the market if someone is brave enough to invest in the manufacturing of a product that costs 10x the price of the proven alternative. This all seems like a bunch of hype caused by what happened to PFO which in all fairness is a result of poor execution on their part.

[freezetyle]

http://www.rapidled.com/servlet/the-...its/Categories

found this scrolling through RC. didn't seem to bad

[banditpowdercoat]

Originally Posted by freezetyle

http://www.rapidled.com/servlet/the-...its/Categories

found this scrolling through RC. didn't seem to bad

48 LEDS for $525 and for a 5' tank I'll need what, 200??

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by sphelps

LEDS can't touch the intensity and penetration of halides, for clams and SPS halides win.

actualy they can and have less frop off through the water colume. people switching from MH to a good LED set up are finding they have to dim there lights to between 40 and 50% and slowly increase them over a couple weeks to prevent bleaching. quite a few get to about 75-85% and leave them there as they are getting better growth and color than they did with there old MH or T5s.

Originally Posted by sphelps

LEDs do burn for 10 years but halides will also burn for 5+ years but you still have to replace them every year. My guess is that LEDs will require replacing somewhere around 3-4 years and the cost will be ridiculous, likely cheaper and easier to buy a new fixture.

And who really cares about dimming?

MH have a drop off of 20-30% in intensity and they also have a color shift after 1 year aprox. thats why it is recomended to change them yearly.
LEDs are rated for 11.4 years at 12 hours a day and at that time they will have a 30% drop off in intensity and no color shift. so you can guess what you like but just shows you haven't read about them or bothered to look up the specs.

I don't know.. I always wished I could do a gradual ramp up in the morning over say 2 hours for my sun rise instead of the 2 stage sun (actinics then MH ) then the reverse for night time..

Steve

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

actualy they can and have less frop off through the water colume. people switching from MH to a good LED set up are finding they have to dim there lights to between 40 and 50% and slowly increase them over a couple weeks to prevent bleaching. quite a few get to about 75-85% and leave them there as they are getting better growth and color than they did with there old MH or T5s.

All talk my friend, I'd love to meet these people.

MH have a drop off of 20-30% in intensity and they also have a color shift after 1 year aprox. thats why it is recomended to change them yearly.
LEDs are rated for 11.4 years at 12 hours a day and at that time they will have a 30% drop off in intensity and no color shift. so you can guess what you like but just shows you haven't read about them or bothered to look up the specs.

Has anyone tested these claims, I've read them but I don't buy it. All LED lamps used in residential applications are rated for around 10 years, so how can they last as long in aquarium applications. If they did wouldn't they last longer in other applications? Part of the reason our aquarium lamps don't last as long is due to the conditions they are used in, was this considered?

[lastlight]

StirCrazy...weren't you pushing mh lighting HARD still only a few months ago? From what I gather you're now pushing LED even harder and haven't actually run a tank with them for any period of time? You have every right to your opinion I was just curious...

I'm certainly one to read till my eyes are sore...but so much about LEDs seems to be specualtion as I see it. If these bulbs last forever like the claims why did the Solaris have them burning out on people etc?

[Ron99]

Good discussion even though it diverts a bit from the main topic. So let's keep discussing but also post any prior art you can find along the way

Originally Posted by sphelps

All talk my friend, I'd love to meet these people.

Has anyone tested these claims, I've read them but I don't buy it. All LED lamps used in residential applications are rated for around 10 years, so how can they last as long in aquarium applications. If they did wouldn't they last longer in other applications? Part of the reason our aquarium lamps don't last as long is due to the conditions they are used in, was this considered?

Yes, user evilc66 at nano-reef.com is a bit of an LED lighting guru and has built and tested countless systems including testing PAR. He is the one that found that the drop off in intensity was greater with MH than LED. I don't have the exact link at the moment but you can see a lot of LED info at nano-reef if you try.

As for whether they produce enough intensity or not, just look at the numbers. A really efficient MH can put out up to 115 lumens/watt. Good LEDs are now well over 130 lumens/watt and Cree just announced that their prototype emitters have hit 200 lumens/watt. So which one has more intensity? For longevity, LEDs are affected more by heat than anything else. Run them to warm and they will degrade faster. Cool them properly with a good heatsink and a couple of fans and they will last the rated time which is approximately 50,000 hours. We would have to see how the 10 year household rating is calculated. Also, most household LED replacement bulbs or fixtures that I have seen have minimal thermal management. So they probably run at higher temps and degrade faster.

Originally Posted by lastlight

I'm certainly one to read till my eyes are sore...but so much about LEDs seems to be specualtion as I see it. If these bulbs last forever like the claims why did the Solaris have them burning out on people etc?

Goes back to thermal management. The one Solaris unit I saw dismantled had only aluminum I beams for heatsinks and I don't remember them having good airflow over those. This was probably woefully inadequate and led to overheating of the emitters and burn outs. They also had problems with the power supplies they were using (modified PC power supplies) so I suspect a good portion of the problems were actually burned out power supplies rather thean burned out emitters.

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by sphelps

Yes I've seen some nice thanks that use LEDs as supplemental to halides and/or T5s. LEDs can create the spotlight effect which is very nice. I agree and see potential as supplemental but not so much on their own. I see more potential in the plasma light than LED, the plasma is 1000x smaller and more efficient. The other problem is LEDs is limited spectrum.

ya and the plasma is a ugly color, not adjustable, expensive as heck, and has been comming soon for 6 years.. and it isn't realy smaller, it is big and bulky due to the magnet design, housing, ect.. looks ugly over a tank. I was all excited about the plasma 6 years ago when it was first showen for fishtanks, but since then it has been all talk.

LEDs may be overall a larger surface area but you can do them 1.5" thick if you want. so it is hardly noticable over a tank.

man are you ever negitive to some things. somepeople grow SPS under T5's LEDs blow them out of the water, you said there are not a lot of high light corals in the tanks, but I see a tone of SPS in them.. as for spotting, if you space them right there is no spotting, even if you have the fixture 1" above the water and for colors, you can make them any color you want.. you like 10K, maby 14, maybe 20, heck you want 12.3K the color is adjustable to anything between the color of the white wich is usaly abut 8K to the color of the royal blue which is abut 24K. you get the shimmer effect of the MH, with the total coverage of the T5, and can be dimmed anywhere from 0 to 100% instead of a couple steps like lights we are using now. here is a write up/review. now he is talking about a LED board that replaces MH lights, the differance between what he is talking about and what we are is that we will get that same intensity over the whole tank instead of a just a footprint simular to a mh pendant. to do these we use more led and yes it costas a bit more, but like I said.. I can build a setup that will replace two MH bulbs for about the same money as it costs to go buy two MH pendant setups.

"Aquarium LED lighting must be differentiated in two different categories:
1. Very low power aquarium LED light
2. High power aquarium LED light
1. Very low power LED lighting
These lighting systems have become very popular now and are easily obtained. The major benefits are that they only use very little power so the electricity cost is close to zero and they increase the visible attractiveness of your reef.
With the low power Aquarium LED light it is easy to prolong the light step down process by switching them on just before the main lights turn off. This light is very weak and therefore doesn t disturb the fish or corals, and many aquarists also use them to add the moonlight effect on the corals which enhances coral spawning.
When the main lights are switched off, the aquarium LED light gives a flickering moonlight effect to the reef tank. It does look lovely when the beams of weak LED light dive through the water and ripple over the rock and coral formations.
2. High power aquarium LED light
I have changed my aquarium light around 2 years ago and have found out that there are some great benefits and advantages compared to my previous metal halides. I will try in this post not to become too technical so that also novice aquarists will understand the benefits of this fish tank light system.
High power aquarium LED light systems come in 250 Watt and 400 Watt arrangements, which are the most popular for reef aquariums. The set up is similar to the metal halides in a rectangular box above the aquarium.
Producing only about half the heat of the common metal halides, they can be installed much closer to the water surface and don t require a chiller anymore, which reduced my electricity bill.
Due to a combination of white and blue LED s, the lighting color is very similar to that of the fluorescent tubes, with a Kelvin rating of about 20.000 so that they equal metal halides in color output.
The by far biggest benefit of the LED s is their endurance. They will produce the same light quality for around 50.000 hours which equals 11 years if the LED s run for12 hours a day. That is more than 5 times the life span of metal halides bulbs and 11 times of the fluorescent tubes.
Aquarium LED light can be dimmed from maximum output to zero output making them better adjustable for any aquarium needs, while hardly any UV radiation comes from them.
The aquarium light offered by LED s produces the same attractive glitter lines that make your reef appear more natural than that produced by the metal halides.
Concerning the aquarium light there is in my personal opinion not a single disadvantage using aquarium LED light over the common lighting methods like metal halide bulbs or fluorescent light tubes.
However, the LED technique is still new and therefore the initial cost of a complete aquarium LED light system is higher. But in the long run you will save money on buying a chiller and paying this chillers power usage. Please also don t forget that common lighting systems have to be replaced every year or two which calculated over a 11 year period also accumulates to a significant cost. This means that you will have less maintenance work on your fish tank light compared to continuous bulb changing.
The final big plus is that with the aquarium LED light you can easier adjust the simulation of a natural reef which will significantly increase the success rate in growing corals yourself."


Steve

[StirCrazy]

here is a review of the solaris, keep in mine the systems Ron and myself and other are building will generaly have more coverage as were making bigger systems and we are using newer LEDs at a higher amprage which put out a lot more light than the ones used in the solaris.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/8/review2

Steve