Spectrum Analysis w/ Ocean Optics USB4000

[ccjung]

For those of you who know me, you know I'm a geek at heart. I've been pining for a Spectrometer since I started Nanocustoms, and haven't had the resources to get my hands on one.

 

We do ALOT of testing here at Nanocustoms, the numbers were impressive, but not to my satisfaction. After varied success with Quantum (Par) meters (geared more towards terrestrial photosynthesis), lux meters (human eye response), I had come to a realization that I had to bite the bullet and buy a 'scope.

 

I'll be posting plots of various systems here and on our product pages at nanocustoms/nanotuners. We will be including PAR as well as lux. One Weakness we found in our Apogee Instruments Par meter, was a response curve geared towards Yellow - Red, with heavy attenuation in the blue-violet range. That meant that only 40-50% of the the photons in the Blue-Violet Range were being counted.

 

In essence, although PAR readings from an Apogee meter is a generally accepted method of measuring bulbs, its not appropriate for Marine Applications involving Cool White PCs.

 

Some preliminary graphs. This is purely spectral. Until i get a part that was not sent in the order, I will not be able to give you an apples to apples comparison on Intensity.

 

JBJ 28G NANOCUBE - STOCK - 14000K 150w HQI

PAR - 128 micromoles @ 12"

NOTES - Note the Infrared Heat transmission. We will compare JBJs GLASS Splashguard with Nanocustoms Glass within Polycarbonate (we run WAAAY cooler at 150 than JBJ) to see infrared differences.

 

JBJ 28G NANOCUBE - Nanocustoms Modded - 14000K 150w HQI + 2 x 18w PC

PAR - 151 micromoles @ 12"

NOTES - Look at the FAAAATTTY Actinic Lighting provided by the 2 x 18w PCs. It really rounds out the spectrum of the tank and adds that critical 420-440 nm Blue LIght.

 

JBJ 24G NANOCUBE - NANOCUSTOMS MODDED - 14K USHIO - 2 x 18w Actinic PC

PAR - 185 micromoles

NOTES - Test coming soon

 

OCEANIC 29G BIOCUBE - NANOCUSTOMS MODDED - 4 x 36w PC

PAR - Test coming soon

NOTES - Test coming soon

[reefdan]

i don't have an AIO anymore but this will be interesting.

 

i don't suppose you want to gauge t5 bulbs for your former AIOers? you do have to test your new machinery out to the fullest don't you....

[SPerry]

What is a micromole? I assume that the higher the PAR the better for coral growth but what is the graph really showing us?

[ccjung]

micromoles per meter squared/second is the unit of PAR, which is Photosynthetically Available Radiation. it essentially includes all light from 400 to 700 Nm. Most PAR meters have a signal response (basically more sensitive to certain light), so that means in most cases, blue light is not measured for a standard PAR meter.

 

Essentially what im saying is, PAR (as measured by an apogee QM-SS) means NOTHING to us when measuring Pure PC flourescent systems. This came as a result of me testing a stock 12g Nanocube which got an 85. Versus a modded 24g with 132w that only read an 85. The numbers didnt make sense to me at the time, so I questioned it. Sure enough, 48w of Actinic Blue (420Nm) only gave me 35 PAR. This meant that only half of the Blue (the light REEFERS care about) was getting measured when considering PAR measurements with PC lighting.

 

So, a few lectures from the boss and a dent in my credit card later, I have a True Spectrometer in my hands. They forgot to send me the remote fiber optic cable, so i cannot measure "true" intensity right now, just the spectral break down of the light.

 

I'll be testing every model we make in the next coming days vs stock and other configurations., stay tuned Sperry. We have a 12g LED system thats pushing 200 PAR, I cant wait to see what its putting out on the scope.

 

Chris

 

ps - PAR is useful, just not for marine apps where PC lighting is being considered. Its a good guage of light output, but doesnt take account of the corals ability to use blue light, in fact, it punishes it. This would also explain why lower color temp = higher PAR, since there is more yellow, red in Lower Kelvin Bulbs.

[reefdan]

ps - PAR is useful, just not for marine apps. Its a good guage of light output, but doesnt take account of the corals ability to use blue light, in fact, it punishes it. This would also explain why lower color temp = higher PAR, since there is more yellow, red in Lower Kelvin Bulbs.

 

this makes logical sense to me because PAR is a measure of light and how wouldn't stuffing tons of blue bulbs in a hood raise PAR?

 

what is really interesting is deciphering what kind effect higher measurements in the blue wavelength range have on coral growth/photosynthesis. does it really matter to have high light in the blue range when our corals aren't able to absorb the light for energy purposes?

[TJ_Burton]

ps - PAR is useful, just not for marine apps. Its a good guage of light output, but doesnt take account of the corals ability to use blue light, in fact, it punishes it. This would also explain why lower color temp = higher PAR, since there is more yellow, red in Lower Kelvin Bulbs.

 

Please expand on this. What form of measurement should be used if not PAR? I am aware that "blue" light travels further/deeper through water. Logically, it makes sense that some corals may have an ability to harness that spectrum of light more then others, but that does not explain why there are an abundant amount of SPS and other corals that grow just feet, even inches under the waters surface. Photo synthetically Available Radiation dissipates rapidly as depth of water increases, and even in our aquariums where there is maybe 3 feet of hight, corals like SPS and other light demanding corals placed near the surface where par is much higher, will do vastly better then the same species placed lower in the tank. That seems to have a direct relation with par since this is even true when using 20,000K bulbs, which are higher in the blue spectrum, and have less par then a 10,000K bulb. Even less light demanding corals will go through color shifts depending on their height in the aquarium. For instance, zoas placed at the bottom of an aquarium versus the top. Some will show far better coloration/growth when exposed to more PAR.

 

Now I am unaware of a way to measure the "blue" light and it's direct benefit to corals, however this may still be factored in. Technically, the blue light penetrates water better, and should keep the coral just as happy anywhere in the tank provided the light plays a decent role in the corals sustainment, however I have not yet seen this to be the case. The only thing that could possibly represent that relationship to blue spectrum, would be corals that require lower light environments, that bleach if left in higher lighting. These corals I can see having that potential relationship to blue spectrum. That being said, it would be too generalized to claim PAR is not an accurate reading for coral/marine applications. Rather it would make more sense to say it is not accurate for ALL corals.

 

Sorry I am just trying to grasp what you said. So if I am wrong or misunderstood please correct me!

Cheers.

[reefdan]

yeah i am confused too. AP chemistry and physics was waaayyy too long ago

[ccjung]

Im about to do some more runs.

 

Quick read: http://www.personal.psu.edu/sbj4/aquarium/...tosynthesis.htm

 

Basically he says that over billions of years, coral have photoadapted to process blue light more effectively than any other photosynthetic bands. Also in the reef aquarium environment, the lighting is around 1/10th the intensity as that found in the real world, but somehow corals have adapted to handle less light, as long as there is enough 420/460 actinic.

 

"The primary benefit of light to corals is the conversion of PAR into the energy required for photosythesis by the symbiotic zooxanthellae in the coral tissue to produce food. Photosynthetic pigments in the zooxanthellal cells carry out the collection of the light energy, such that they efficiently absorb light in the 400 to 700 nm range. The zooxanthellae contain various types of pigments: chlorophyll a, chlorophyll c and the carotenoids, such as Beta carotene, peridinnine and dinoxanthines. The pigments in the cells will absorb different wavelengths with different efficiencies. The absorption spectrum for zooxanthellae has been shown to have a broad peak in the 400 to 500 nm waveband (blue-green) and a narrow peak in the 650 to 700 (red) waveband."

 

Let me know if im wrong, because i read through stuff pretty quickly. I do know tho, that this article is one of the basis' for reef aquarium lighting.

 

Be back soon,

 

Chris

 

PS. I'll be reading over your posts in the meantime too. Also, let me amend my statement, PAR (400-700 nm Light) is useful, but modern PAR meters dont count blue light equally. Either the Par Meter has to change, or a simple PAR meter like device must be created for Reef Aquarium Lighting use. When I spoke with Apogee, they told me there was nothing I could do.

[TJ_Burton]

yeah i am confused too. AP chemistry and physics was waaayyy too long ago

 

Well what makes the least sense to me, is that PAR is in direct relationship to photosynthesis. Corals hosting zooanthellae are very much dependent on the zooanthellae's ability to produce food for them. So PAR in essence would seem to be much more important to these corals and their ability to survive.

 

Blue spectrum lighting from what I understand has more U.V. radiation, and corals produce their phosfluorescent colors to protect themselves from harmful U.V rays. So this would explain why Higher kelvin ratings would promote better coloration, but would have less effect on growth (which has been proven by many hobbyist's). That being said, saying PAR doesn't have a place in coral/marine applications still doesn't make sense to me.

 

But I am no scientist! So really this is all just gathered knowledge from over the years being applied. I could be wrong.

 

(Just read over your post)

I still have a feeling that there is too much generalization involved when saying that 400-500nm light is more usefull to corals. Man, I wish I had my degree in marine biology... I would be out doing field testing on this right now!!! Stuff like this drives me nuts!

[ccjung]

My main gripe

 

 

A true PAR count or quantum is ANY photon with a wavelength of 400 to 700 nm. The Apogee Par meter has a response curve that only counts 40% of the light at the lowest end of the spectrum.

 

Sanjay says in his article that the absorbance of blue light was broadest in the coral, implying that the Coral use the Blue Light most since they are absorbing the photon and shooting out an electron and kicking off photosynthesis.

 

Therefore the meter I use and most people in the industry use, isnt giving enough weight to Blue and is contrary to the reef enthusiasts needs.

 

 

Chris

 

More From Sanjay

 

"As light passes through the water column, it is attenuated exponentially, and this attenuation is not uniform across all wavelengths. So the water acts as a “filter,” reducing the spectrum of light that penetrates it. As depth increases, the waveband of light that penetrates narrows. The shorter wavelengths (reds and yellows) are the first to be absorbed, and the blue light penetrates the deepest. At a depth of 1 meter, only 50 to 60 percent of the higher wavelength light (600 to 700 nm) penetrates the water, and at a depth of 10 meters less than 10 percent of the higher wavelength light penetrates. By comparison, 92 to 97 percent of the irradiance in the 400 to 575 nm range is transmitted at 1 meter in depth, and 40 to 50 percent of the available spectrum in the range of 400 to 550 nm penetrates to depths of 10 meters (Jerlov 1976). Most of the SPS corals are found in waters less than 15 meters deep, but our reef aquariums are usually 24 to 30 inches deep. So, we cannot rely on water to create the difference in spectral distribution in the tank and have to rely on the bulbs to provide a “correct” spectral distribution."

[ccjung]

SOme other good reading.

 

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/2/aafeature/view

[TJ_Burton]

My main gripe

 

 

A true PAR count or quantum is ANY photon with a wavelength of 400 to 700 nm. The Apogee Par meter has a response curve that only counts 40% of the light at the lowest end of the spectrum.

 

Sanjay says in his article that the absorbance of blue light was broadest in the coral, implying that the Coral use the Blue Light most since they are absorbing the photon and shooting out an electron and kicking off photosynthesis.

 

Therefore the meter I use and most people in the industry use, isnt giving enough weight to Blue and is contrary to the reef enthusiasts needs.

 

Chris

 

Even so, what I am asking is - do you think it makes a significant enough difference to outweigh the current readings from our current PAR measurements? Also, how would you explain the significant growth difference in corals placed under lower kelvin bulbs?

 

 

SOme other good reading.

 

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/2/aafeature/view

 

Thanks, I will take a look at this! It's always great to refuel with new info.

[ccjung]

Even so, what I am asking is - do you think it makes a significant enough difference to outweigh the current readings from our current PAR measurements? Also, how would you explain the significant growth difference in corals placed under lower kelvin bulbs?

 

I think a VERY important thing to consider with color temperature is what type of bulb you are running.

 

Metal Halide are Full Spectrum, and therefore emit in the lower spectrum as well. PCs and T5s have narrower bandwidths, and its usually hit or miss, Low end or High End.

 

My main gripe is that PC based systems can "trick" the apogee PAR meter because it gives more weight to White lIght. A 100% 10K daylight System would read with a higher PAR than the same system with a balance of Actinic and White Light, but most in the hobby would agree that the growth and coloration is better with the actinic light.

 

As far as increased growth with lower Kelvin MH, I am aware of that field of thought, but at this time am not able to support or refute it as a claim.

 

Lets keep this going. Its fun to talk shop.

 

Chris

[TJ_Burton]

I think a VERY important thing to consider with color temperature is what type of bulb you are running.

 

Metal Halide are Full Spectrum, and therefore emit in the lower spectrum as well. PCs and T5s have narrower bandwidths, and its usually hit or miss, Low end or High End.

 

My main gripe is that PC based systems can "trick" the apogee PAR meter because it gives more weight to White lIght. A 100% 10K daylight System would read with a higher PAR than the same system with a balance of Actinic and White Light, but most in the hobby would agree that the growth and coloration is better with the actinic light.

 

As far as increased growth with lower Kelvin MH, I am aware of that field of thought, but at this time am not able to support or refute it as a claim.

 

Lets keep this going. Its fun to talk shop.

 

Chris

 

You have a good point. I am arguing mostly in the playing field of halides alone. I deal with MH bulbs and have seen countless instances where 6500K and 10,000K bulbs produce dramatically better growth then their higher kelvin counterparts. If this has been proven in practice, that these bulbs lacking the blue end of the spectrum tend to produce noticeably better growth, how could the theory about "blue" light be true?

 

I am baffled because in theory your claim makes sense. In practice it does not (from my findings). I can't seem to make the two meet at all.

 

This may relate to PC bulbs more then MH bulbs, however I am still quite confused by the contradiction in practice and theory.

[ccjung]

Long story short, I should have gotten a Licor to measure PAR instead of the Cheaper Apogee, and got my dream toy out of it.

 

I think your experience with 6500K vs 10000K really all boils down to mother nature.

 

I think that since the middle photosynthetic band (green-yellow) is AVAILABLE for photosynthesis, and the lower Kelvin bulbs have more Green - Yellow, the Coral have ADAPTED to handle this new source of light.

 

Did you see the part in Dana Riddles article about Blue Light accelerating photosynthesis? Also, the coral being tested was a shroom. Im sure those things could live without light for weeks.

 

 

Chris

[TJ_Burton]

Long story short, I should have gotten a Licor to measure PAR instead of the Cheaper Apogee, and got my dream toy out of it.

 

I think your experience with 6500K vs 10000K really all boils down to mother nature.

 

I think that since the middle photosynthetic band (green-yellow) is AVAILABLE for photosynthesis, and the lower Kelvin bulbs have more Green - Yellow, the Coral have ADAPTED to handle this new source of light.

 

Did you see the part in Dana Riddles article about Blue Light accelerating photosynthesis? Also, the coral being tested was a shroom. Im sure those things could live without light for weeks.

 

 

Chris

 

Very true. I do not mean to belittle your efforts or anything like that. I am just the type of person who likes to test theories to the fullest. This is mostly just for my own understanding and not necessarily because I don't believe them.

 

Here I go with another possible theory.

Maybe corals benefit primarily from light within the PAR range, and of higher kelvin, but have accelerated photosynthetic capabilities when accompanied by supplemental light in the lower kelvin/nm ratings (like actinics, or 20,000K bulbs for example). This would be one explanation that would incorporate both theories. This would also explain my great success with coral coloration and growth when mixing halide kelvin ratings (using 20,000K and 10,000K in tandem) and supplementing with actinics on top of that.

 

I must do more research! I need a lab, I swear I would be in there all day!

 

*edit*

I haven't had a chance to finish reading the article yet - I am currently at work!

[ccjung]

I agree. If you look at this chart:

 

 

If you were to integrate that chart, you would see that a large portion exists below 6. With spikes in the Blue and Red

[TJ_Burton]

I agree. If you look at this chart:

 

 

If I am reading that right, it would seem a mix of 430nm-440nm in conjunction with 660nm would prove to be most beneficial.

 

Right on,

 

So if I am getting this correctly, both are probably quite important and corals would fair the best if supplemented with both types of light as they are probably designed to do.

 

And your "gripe" is that currently we do not take the lower end into consideration enough, if at all, when clearly it does play enough of a role, that if considered accurately, we may have better success keeping corals in home aquariums. And in your case, specifically under PC's.

 

Am I following you now?

[ccjung]

Yep Yep.

 

How could i live with myself if a Stock JBJ 12g DX has a PAR of 85 (on the Apogee) while a modded version with nearly 3 times the light reads the same number. The only difference was the amount of actinic in the systems.

 

This was profound. If the PAR meter was true and my customers were wrong (Modded PC systems) when they tell me they see increased growth with the addition of actinic PC lighting.

 

This means that my entire business, the mouths it feeds & boards, is a sham.

 

I did this because I understand that my customers demand results. Every custom built system will come with a "birth certificate" with a spectral plot & other performance data.

 

The Spectrometer reassured me that the quality of light from our modded systems really make significant differences in what the customer is ultimately seeking... Growth & overall coral health.

 

Chris

[SPerry]

This is going to be interesting. I confess I don't understand all the graphs and such but I have always heard that for growth go with 10000K and for color go with 20000K which is why most people get a 14000K bulb. Trying to hit a happy medium between the two.

[ccjung]

Is my business a sham Sperry? I hear your name in our order queues at least once a month.

 

Chris

[SPerry]

Is my business a sham Sperry?

Chris

 

No way, I didnt mean that at all. I love you guys stuff. Currently have several of your hoods and am looking at another. I just mean that it will be interesting to see the analysis of the different lights. It sounds like your findings may go against the generally accepted belief. That isnt a bad thing, just interesting. I am looking forward to learning some new things from this. I would also be interested in a comparasion that I have often seen questioned here. Between a 4.24 hood 2 10000K 2 actinic and a 1.70 + 2.18 hood 10000K + 2 actinics. I have seen several threads asking if 70W HQI is a better light for corals than 96W PC.

[masterbuilder]

Between a 4.24 hood 2 10000K 2 actinic and a 1.70 + 2.18 hood 10000K + 2 actinics. I have seen several threads asking if 70W HQI is a better light for corals than 96W PC.

 

 

Ditto...I have had both on my nanocube. Plusses and minuses to each system.

 

I THINK that my corals have better color under the 1.70+2.18. The growth is interesting, some of my softies really took off with the 1.70 others did not like it so much.

 

About to upgrade into the next size (24-30G) AIO and trying to decide what type lighting system to go with.

 

Looking forward to the plots.

 

Mark

 

p.s. LED in a 24G Nanocube......mmmmmmmmmmmmm.......hint...hint

[ma_sha1]

Great work Chris,

 

We need more data like this, speak louder than opinions.

 

Could you do some spectrum analysis on 70W MH? Sanjay didn't have data on 70W,

too bad so many nano/pico guys are using 70W MH, we need more data on 70W than the old 150/250W,

where the spectrums are all over the place.

 

keep up the good work!

 

Is my business a sham Sperry? I hear your name in our order queues at least once a month.

 

Chris

[dja1980]

Chris, this is some great reading!

 

You are definitely correct about the Apogee meter, and this is not the first time I've read about the Apogee meter being "off" in terms of measuring the blue end of the spectrum. After reading the monster Lumenbrite thread over on RC, I saw this reference several times…

 

Originally posted by bubbletip2

I am sure the numbers will be higher and not to get into it now but there is a bit of an error to be compensated for on the Apogee as it surely underrates bulbs that contain spikes in the blue spectrum. So none the less these numbers we are showing are lower than they actually should be. The multiplier to be compensated will vary on the basis of spectral quality of the bulb and without a spectroradiometer I would be unable to give a concrete multiplier that would be of any use. To save the expense of a $2-3000 spectroradiometer, I am fine with just knowing the numbers should be a bit higher as the 12K Reeflux certainly have a blue spike.

 

However, I still think this might be a useful tool in determining bulb life and coral placement in the tank (when dealing with MH... I'm actually considering picking one up). I also learned that this is useful in "tuning" your ballast for those running dimmable electronic ballasts…

 

Originally posted by bubbletip2

It is a beautiful thing to be able to tune the ballast to an optimal setting. It was easy to do with Jeremy tuning the ballasts as I read the PAR readings go up and down. You get to a point where the PAR peaks at a number and levels off for a couple turns on the knob. Then the PAR begins to drop. We set it back a turn to be in the middle of the peak level.

 

I have heard for many years people talk about electronic ballasts burning out bulbs to quick. Every ballast comes out of the factory different. To be able to tweak each ballast to the threshold, you prevent overdriving the bulb and prolong the life of it as well. Where people claim 4-6 months on a bulb running on electric ballasts because of overdriving them, I claim 7-9 months when not overdriving an electronic.

 

So basically you are spending less on electric by not overdriving it and spending even less than a magnetic just due to the efficiency of an electronic ballast.

 

Have you read Dana Riddle's article comparing the Li-Cor with the Apogee? It's pretty interesting…

 

www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/7/review

Every custom built system will come with a "birth certificate" with a spectral plot & other performance data.

 

So Chris, once you get a chance to play with your new toy, is there any chance you will be able to provide your current Nanocustoms customers with one of these "birth certificates"? As you obviously know, I have your 24g 2.70 + 2.18 system with Ushio 10K & Actinic bulbs. I would love to be able to compare this data with that of the 1.150 + 2.18 system. I've noticed that the SPS mounted in the lower half of my tank live, but definitely don't thrive and "pop" with color like those mounted in the upper half. Even though I REALLY like the dawn/dusk effect by having a dual MH system, I suspect that the 70w bulbs lack the capability of the downward "punch" you would get out of a single 150w. Do you have any thoughts on this?