LED Patents - Action Needed!

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by naesco

I see a fantastic potential for LED lighting. Many reefers are tired of the static though beautiful SPS tanks and are looking to LPS coral which offer the opportunity to view florescense that LED deep blue lighting provides. The difference is colour is shocking.
The newer LED systems provide this opportunity. You can focus light beams, programme different lighting and dim which is not available on dated MH lighting.
I would encourage the lighting experts on this board to experiment with DIY and bought systems.
I am defineately not knowledgeable of the details of LED but IMO LED is the future.
Wayne

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.

[banditpowdercoat]

Ya, who's gona patent Plasma lighting for Aquarium use????!!!!!!!!!

[sphelps]

As far as the patent issue if concerned I'm pretty sure you could still build and market another LED fixture pretty easily. But in order to do so you'll have to have some obvious difference and fork out the money to patent your own fixture. The reason PFO lost so badly is they didn't have a patent and the other company just so happened to have one that described the solaris quite nicely. This is a risk you take if you're going to sell and market a new new idea without a patent, it's also why you see patent pending around more than actual patents. The trick is to fill out the initial paper work for a patent but never complete the process, that way if someone else comes into the market you can complete your patent and because your initial paper work was in first you'll win.

Really I don't think the patent is the issue stopping more competition. First off the patent applies only to the US and yet I don't see any large advances from other countries like Europe or even China. The problem is this lighting source is too expensive, too complicated, not as efficient as people think, and not as effective as people think. It's a gimmick product more than anything and it really can't compete with the leaders in the market, T5s and MHs.

[banditpowdercoat]

How the heck is Aqua Illumination able to make and sell LED fixtures? AND, they state assembled in the US
http://www.aquaillumination.com/?page_id=38

[lastlight]

I believe they pay orbitech a licensing fee.

[naesco]

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.

You may be right on the plasma.
The the point I was trying to make was that with LED is available now and Plasma technology is around the corner it would not be a good move to invest in expensive MH lighting at this time. It would be much better to invest in a cheap T-5 option.

MHs are expensive, have a huge demand for electricity, create tremendous heat which has to be dealt with chillers or noisy supplementary fan additions, require frequent bulb replacement, cannot be programmed to dim and require supplemental lighting.

Would anyone by an analog TV today? Would anyone buy an ordinary LCD TV today when the 3D technology is available for sale this summer?

[banditpowdercoat]

I sure wouldn't buy a 3d tv just yet!!!

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by naesco

Would anyone by an analog TV today? Would anyone buy an ordinary LCD TV today when the 3D technology is available for sale this summer?

ya, cuz I bought them 2 months befor the anouncment

Steve

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by naesco

You may be right on the plasma.
The the point I was trying to make was that with LED is available now and Plasma technology is around the corner it would not be a good move to invest in expensive MH lighting at this time. It would be much better to invest in a cheap T-5 option.

MHs are expensive, have a huge demand for electricity, create tremendous heat which has to be dealt with chillers or noisy supplementary fan additions, require frequent bulb replacement, cannot be programmed to dim and require supplemental lighting.

For the average size tank MH can be cheaper than T5s or about the same, they don't need supplemental if you use the right bulb and they don't require a chiller if done properly.
All I'm currently running is 500W of halide and the color is good. I only need a small fan on hot days (no ac in house) and replace the bulbs once a year which runs for about $140. If I had all T5 I would spend about the same or more on bulbs, still require a fan on hot days but I'd save a little in power but not enough to make much difference. T5 bulbs also burn out prematurely and take up more space which is why I'm now using halides.

LEDS can't touch the intensity and penetration of halides, for clams and SPS halides win. For a softy and LPS tank LEDs may work well but you'll never get your money back in energy savings and I'd still like to know how long the bulbs actually last. 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?

[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.