![]() |
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() Quote:
Also, I would be happy if you can point me to the results of Vertex's test in the paper? I see two plots of areas measuring roughly 4 inches by 4 inches (100mm x 100mm). In those plots the PAR drops 30% from the center to the front and back when moving a mere 2 inches. So what would the PAR be 6 inches front and back or a full 9 inches at the front and back of an 18" wide tank? How about in a 24" wide tank? I still question vertex's design choice and that's why I am wanting to see some real world numbers over an end user's setup. IMO Vertex's paper is a bit disingenuous. They are trying to make a case against optics and saying that the light is concentrated in a small area so that's not good. They fail to take into account (or just don't bother pointing out) that all these narrow cones overlap to give an even spread of reasonable PAR over the whole tank. I strongly suspect that the Vertex fixture will produce decent PAR in a narrow strip down the center of the tank and then will have rapid fall off as you move front or back. That's why I would like to see some independent end user tests. I'm sure most others would to. |