timmylucas Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Here is an article I came across. pretty cool light fixture http://reefbuilders.com/2014/05/30/unibody-lani-led-triton-reef/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClark Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Very interesting, thanks! Simple spectrum to leverage for DIY designs. 80 LEDs including 16 UV LEDs with an emission peak of 405nm, and the remaining 64 diodes evenly spread across cool white Cree XTE and blue XPE.Also interesting they are only driving the leds at 1 watt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClark Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Another noteworthy item, no lenses on the LEDs. So we have no lenses, and LEDs running at 1 watt. Interesting approach, seems different than many of the fixtures out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombertech Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Interesting to note: You're looking at a 16% increase in efficacy running the Cree's at 1W which is a pretty big deal. With 3, 1W XT-E's you get the same lumenous output as a single XT-E overdriven at say 5W's. Now technically, the XT-E was designed to run at 1W and 3W's is called overdrive... So, it really depends on the LED, and couldn't be a blanket statement "running leds at 1W is more efficient", however, the lion's share of LED's designed in the 2012-2013 timeframe were deisgned around 1W having the highest efficacy (which is the efficiency of an LED taking lumens or mW over input wattage, crossing below 470nm blue we use mW versus lumens). However, payback on the initial cost doesn't justify doing this on most diodes when you consider technological advances year over year. But, it makes sense with the design aspects of this fixture (100% passive cooling, uniform light spread). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombertech Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 oh, one other thing to consider... Acrylic optics result in a 10% loss of light. Lower wavelengths violet/UV result in much higher losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClark Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Good stuff, is there a number on the wavelength loss for glass? Thanks Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombertech Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Not that I have seen, as long as you don't have build up on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitrillion Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Interesting to note: You're looking at a 16% increase in efficacy running the Cree's at 1W which is a pretty big deal. With 3, 1W XT-E's you get the same lumenous output as a single XT-E overdriven at say 5W's. Now technically, the XT-E was designed to run at 1W and 3W's is called overdrive... So, it really depends on the LED, and couldn't be a blanket statement "running leds at 1W is more efficient", however, the lion's share of LED's designed in the 2012-2013 timeframe were deisgned around 1W having the highest efficacy (which is the efficiency of an LED taking lumens or mW over input wattage, crossing below 470nm blue we use mW versus lumens). However, payback on the initial cost doesn't justify doing this on most diodes when you consider technological advances year over year. But, it makes sense with the design aspects of this fixture (100% passive cooling, uniform light spread). I only understanded 1/4 of what u said lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.