My Finnex Planted+ PAR values
Planted Tank Forums
Your Tanks Image Hosting *Tank Tracker * Plant Profiles Fish Profiles Planted Tank Guide Photo Gallery Articles

Go Back   The Planted Tank Forum > Sponsors > Finnex / Schuber Wright


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-04-2013, 11:30 PM   #1
hedge_fund
Planted Tank Guru
 
hedge_fund's Avatar
 
PTrader: (94/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 3,371
Default

My Finnex Planted+ PAR values


I used Hoppy's par meter on an empty 40 gallon breeder. The light used was the 36 inch planted+. Light was just laid on top of the tank. By the looks of this, you would need two of these lights for a 40 gallon.

Here are my unscientific quick results which aren't all that bright.

aquarium size (length x widith x height)
36.2" x 18.3" x 17"


Par sensor directly in the middle of the tank (light was directly in the middle as well)



Par sensor all the way to the right of the tank and directly under light


Par sensor at the forefront of tank (I've angled the sensor to face the light which is in the middle)


Par sensor in the front corner while light was in the center
hedge_fund is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-04-2013, 11:31 PM   #2
hedge_fund
Planted Tank Guru
 
hedge_fund's Avatar
 
PTrader: (94/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 3,371
Default

To add:

Keep in mind that there is no water in this tank. Also, there is no gravel which would make the par higher since the sensor would be closer to light source obviously.

I purchased 3 of these lights for my 3 foot by 3 foot mostly crypt cube.
hedge_fund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 11:55 PM   #3
Sake
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
Sake's Avatar
 
PTrader: (6/100%)
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st louis missouri
Posts: 861
Default

Thank you for this Hedge!
__________________
You shouldn't take life to seriously. You'll never get out alive.
Sake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 01:12 AM   #4
Lowe
Finnex
 
Lowe's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 622
Default

Awesome, thanks for posting.

Does Hoppy's PAR meter measure the 660nm Reds correctly? We used true 660nm REDS instead of cheap off colored red LEDS in the Planted+, which our APOGEE does not pick up. Hence, us not being able to release official PAR data as we lost a certain someone working for the agricultural department in a local university whom use to get us precise numbers =(

__________________

Lowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 01:16 AM   #5
hedge_fund
Planted Tank Guru
 
hedge_fund's Avatar
 
PTrader: (94/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 3,371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowe View Post
Awesome, thanks for posting.

Does Hoppy's PAR meter measure the 660nm Reds correctly? We used true 660nm REDS instead of cheap off colored red LEDS in the Planted+, which our APOGEE does not pick up.
Honestly, I have no idea which is why this test is more of a back of a napkin type of calculation.
hedge_fund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 01:29 AM   #6
Hoppy
Planted Tank Guru
 
Hoppy's Avatar
 
PTrader: (74/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 18,638
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowe View Post
Awesome, thanks for posting.

Does Hoppy's PAR meter measure the 660nm Reds correctly? We used true 660nm REDS instead of cheap off colored red LEDS in the Planted+, which our APOGEE does not pick up. Hence, us not being able to release official PAR data as we lost a certain someone working for the agricultural department in a local university whom use to get us precise numbers =(

I have made several versions of my PAR meter, and not all use the same filters. The one used here is one of the older ones. It is probably no better than the Apogee Quantum PAR meter, if as good. But, it is adjusted to read the same as the Apogee meter with a 10000K PC bulb lighting it. I doubt that the 660 nm red light has any effect on the PAR reading - it is omitted from the PAR reading, so would give a lower reading. I have no idea how much of the PAR for that light comes from the 660nm LEDS, so the error this introduces is unknown to me.

Without knowing how the PAR was measured by that agricultural department I have no idea how good the numbers are, but I suspect they are better than the Apogee PAR meter gives. If they use a LiCor PAR meter, their numbers are indisputably much better than those with an Apogee meter.
__________________
Hoppy
Hoppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 01:49 AM   #7
Lowe
Finnex
 
Lowe's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoppy View Post
I have made several versions of my PAR meter, and not all use the same filters. The one used here is one of the older ones. It is probably no better than the Apogee Quantum PAR meter, if as good. But, it is adjusted to read the same as the Apogee meter with a 10000K PC bulb lighting it. I doubt that the 660 nm red light has any effect on the PAR reading - it is omitted from the PAR reading, so would give a lower reading. I have no idea how much of the PAR for that light comes from the 660nm LEDS, so the error this introduces is unknown to me.

Without knowing how the PAR was measured by that agricultural department I have no idea how good the numbers are, but I suspect they are better than the Apogee PAR meter gives. If they use a LiCor PAR meter, their numbers are indisputably much better than those with an Apogee meter.
Yes, our contact here and our other helping hand overseas were indeed using equipment from LiCor for the RAY2 and FugeRAY readings. Sadly, both are no longer available to assist us with the Planted+

And Hoppy, I wish I knew you produced meters before hand. Would have rather bought and supported a supporter of this forum instead of buying this Apogee.
__________________

Lowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 02:31 PM   #8
hedge_fund
Planted Tank Guru
 
hedge_fund's Avatar
 
PTrader: (94/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 3,371
Default

Cool. So my par values are invalid since it's not reading the red. I wonder how much stronger it would be due to the 660nm REDS.
hedge_fund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 03:10 PM   #9
Lowe
Finnex
 
Lowe's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hedge_fund View Post
Cool. So my par values are invalid since it's not reading the red. I wonder how much stronger it would be due to the 660nm REDS.
It's not a knock on Hoppy's meter. Hoppy's meter is probably just as good as any $300 meter out there.

The data we use to get were drawn from equipment costing thousands of dollars. A pretty penny not everyone has. We went with the more costly 660nm which sadly is not picked up to its fullest by the Apogee.

Ideal readings:



What our Apogee reads:

__________________

Lowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 03:24 PM   #10
Bryk
Planted Member
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 224
Default

At substrate in my 46G, what I believe to be a sp of rotala macandra red is growing green directly under the fixture. (36+planted), however it is only 3-4 inches tall. It will be interesting to see if it turns red when it gets taller. I have 2 planted+s on this tank, one towards the back, and one on the front directly above this plant.

I dry fert this tank as well as liquid CO2.

I've only had it in there for 1 1/2 weeks I think.

I do also have some floaters which I will be removing this weekend so I plan to update it.

So far the PAR seems to be pretty much what I expected, in between fugeray and ray2, with the red being more pronounced near the surface as it diminishes near substrate it is close to the fugeray intensity.

I imagine these lights with moderate PAR with the added reds will do really well on shorter tanks. I wish I had a camera, I would keep a journal of each of my tanks that have the finnex fixtures for documentation purposes.
__________________

Last edited by Bryk; 12-05-2013 at 03:36 PM.. Reason: Liquid CO2
Bryk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 03:53 PM   #11
DarkCobra
Planted Tank Guru
 
DarkCobra's Avatar
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 3,349
Default

I'm sure you could get some rough idea of how well Hoppy's PAR meter responds to 660nm. Use a piece of cardboard with a hole punched in it, just big enough to let light from one LED through when pressed against the fixture. At short range, test PAR from one white, then one red LED.

It may be better than expected. A bare photosensor has good response at 660nm. And best response in infrared, which is undesirable, so an IR filter is added. But most filters don't have nearly as sharp a cutoff as the Apogee.
DarkCobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2013, 06:40 PM   #12
Hoppy
Planted Tank Guru
 
Hoppy's Avatar
 
PTrader: (74/100%)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 18,638
Default

The photodiode I use has a spectral response that looks like:


I add filters, including, on some of the PAR meters I made, an IR blocking filter to further reduce the IR transmitted to the diode. The latest version modifies the photodiode response so it looks like:


This is a calculated response curve, as I suspect the one for the photodiode also is, and as I'm fairly sure the one for the Apogee Quantum PAR meter is. Note that I, at least theoretically, get a little better red response than the Apogee meter. But, the problem with theoretical things is that they are often not that accurate.

Several months ago one member of our local aquatic plant club brought a Finnex light to one of our meetings, and I used our club's Apogee meter to measure the PAR from it. When I got home I checked my reading against the data charts in this forum, for that light, and my reading was very close to what the chart showed. Based on that I trust those charts to be correct. Of course basing everything on one single data point isn't the best form of engineering! But, I do trust those charts anyway.
__________________
Hoppy
Hoppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2013, 01:28 PM   #13
Veritas
Planted Member
 
PTrader: (5/100%)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 297
Default

wow, I'm glad I decided to hold back on the purchase of this. Those values are not nearly strong enough for the setup I had planned.

seems that for large, deeper tanks - the Ray 2 is still the way to go?
Veritas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2013, 02:16 PM   #14
hedge_fund
Planted Tank Guru
 
hedge_fund's Avatar
 
PTrader: (94/100%)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Greenwich, CT
Posts: 3,371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veritas View Post
wow, I'm glad I decided to hold back on the purchase of this. Those values are not nearly strong enough for the setup I had planned.

seems that for large, deeper tanks - the Ray 2 is still the way to go?
Take my readings with a grain of salt though. Please read the whole thread
hedge_fund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2013, 03:10 PM   #15
Saltydog33
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: South Florida
Posts: 75
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veritas View Post
wow, I'm glad I decided to hold back on the purchase of this. Those values are not nearly strong enough for the setup I had planned.

seems that for large, deeper tanks - the Ray 2 is still the way to go?
Yea i actually have the light im very disappointed if i knew it was just going to be an ordinary low par light i would have went with the current satellite + at least it has cool features. I was under the impression this was going to be a medium par light from what i can understand the meter doesnt pick up the red spectrum or something or other im not a scientist all i know is i seen a thread where lowe said the par readings were 45 at 15" depth people even told me i could grow dhg with this light from what im seeing and reading that doesnt seem possible. I wonder where lowe got the 45 reading from for this light seeing as he just said both his connections that had accurate testing were lost oh well not the first dumb decision i ever made.
Saltydog33 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Planted Tank LLC 2012