PARwise
- Thread starter Mark Goode
- Start date
- Tagged users None
telegraham
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2017
- Messages
- 590
- Reaction score
- 795
I offer some alternative data. Under an open-air Gen 5 XR30 Blue, I get 200 umol/m²/s with an SQ-500 (no immersion effect multiplier, so appropriate for open air). Using the Hopoocolor, I get 235 umol/m²/s. With the PARwise set to open air, I read 179 umol/m²/s. However, if I tilt the light over the PARwise by about a 45°, I read 240 umol/m²/s. Placement is important.
The average of the three is 205. I trust my trusty MQ-500 enough, but interestingly, under a Mitras 7206, both the MQ and PARwise read within 10 umol/m²/s. Again, placement is important.
If reading underwater, there are other factors at play that should be considered when comparing the Apogee to the PARwise, meaning I wouldn't compare the two underwater. Same for open-air. Maybe the comparison approach should be to find someone with the same light and you both test with two different PARwise devices. That will give you some reassurance that your numbers are good enough.
Jim
Hopoocolor
PARwise
The average of the three is 205. I trust my trusty MQ-500 enough, but interestingly, under a Mitras 7206, both the MQ and PARwise read within 10 umol/m²/s. Again, placement is important.
If reading underwater, there are other factors at play that should be considered when comparing the Apogee to the PARwise, meaning I wouldn't compare the two underwater. Same for open-air. Maybe the comparison approach should be to find someone with the same light and you both test with two different PARwise devices. That will give you some reassurance that your numbers are good enough.
Jim
Hopoocolor
PARwise
Hurricane Aquatics
Valuable Member
I offer some alternative data. Under an open-air Gen 5 XR30 Blue, I get 200 umol/m²/s with an SQ-500 (no immersion effect multiplier, so appropriate for open air). Using the Hopoocolor, I get 235 umol/m²/s. With the PARwise set to open air, I read 179 umol/m²/s. However, if I tilt the light over the PARwise by about a 45°, I read 240 umol/m²/s. Placement is important.
The average of the three is 205. I trust my trusty MQ-500 enough, but interestingly, under a Mitras 7206, both the MQ and PARwise read within 10 umol/m²/s. Again, placement is important.
If reading underwater, there are other factors at play that should be considered when comparing the Apogee to the PARwise, meaning I wouldn't compare the two underwater. Same for open-air. Maybe the comparison approach should be to find someone with the same light and you both test with two different PARwise devices. That will give you some reassurance that your numbers are good enough.
Jim
Hopoocolor
PARwise
n2585722
2500 Club Member
I just got a Parwise today and turn up the channels to the max settings I have the set for and this is the spectrum at the waters surface for a DIY LED light system. This was just above the water. The light is 10" above the surface. I will need to play around with it some more this weekend.
n2585722
2500 Club Member
I got some readings from outside with both clouds and sun. The readings were bouncing around too much between my Apogee and the Parwise to compare other than they seem to be close when there was clouds. When there was direct sun the Apogee would just display a 1 so my guess it was too much light for it. The first screenshot is with full sun, the second is with clouds. The CCT numbers appear correct on these. Today I get unknown for that checking the tank. In the tank the Apogee and the Parwise was within 5 of each other with the pumps off so no surface agitation. With the pumps running they keep changing quickly so there is no way to tell. On the sand they both read 79. At coral depth the read 200-205.
Hurricane Aquatics
Valuable Member
I got some readings from outside with both clouds and sun. The readings were bouncing around too much between my Apogee and the Parwise to compare other than they seem to be close when there was clouds. When there was direct sun the Apogee would just display a 1 so my guess it was too much light for it. The first screenshot is with full sun, the second is with clouds. The CCT numbers appear correct on these. Today I get unknown for that checking the tank. In the tank the Apogee and the Parwise was within 5 of each other with the pumps off so no surface agitation. With the pumps running they keep changing quickly so there is no way to tell. On the sand they both read 79. At coral depth the read 200-205.
LOL! Well, I don't see any lights replicating that spectrum! Nice work.
ReefEco
Well-Known Member
I wish Apogee would make an attachment or cable for their 510 meter that would help read spectrum too - maybe an app with some extra software to translate the data from the sensor, if that is possible. Unless the sensor can't read spectrum...
n2585722
2500 Club Member
It was more for a reference than anything and does look similar to some of the spectral graphs I have seen of the sun. The ones for white LED's I have seen look like my white LED's if I turn the others off.
Hurricane Aquatics
Valuable Member
Haha, yeah I know. I was just commenting on what a wide spectrum that is. I haven't done that with mine yet. Always good to see different situations.
anyone with one of these have access to those DIY/3D printed light diffuser kits? We know they affect PAR, but i'm wondering if they also negatively impact spectrum spread.
I know walls affect WIFI 2.5Ghz less than 5.0Ghz, and even less than 6Ghz (which basically can't penetrate walls). I wonder if certain light spectrums would have the same issues penetrating a light diffuser.
I know walls affect WIFI 2.5Ghz less than 5.0Ghz, and even less than 6Ghz (which basically can't penetrate walls). I wonder if certain light spectrums would have the same issues penetrating a light diffuser.
n2585722
2500 Club Member
I don't have a diffuser but I do have a clear acrylic barrier between the LED's and the area above the water surface. To keep them from getting splashed or wet from humidity. My spectrums are posted earlier in this thread.
Hurricane Aquatics
Valuable Member
I have lexan/plexiglass covers that I've tested the spectrum and PAR with and without the covers, it made no difference.
Thanks. That sounds promising. Although I'd imagine your tank's lid is meant to be as transparent as possible? Would be interesting to see how a medium that's meant to interfere with the light actually behaves, and if it affects every spectrum evenly as well.
Nonya
Valuable Member
Have you done a direct comparison of the XHO on other spectrometers vs the PARwise? Can you provide a pic of the spectrum on the higher-end spectrometer you used? I have a PARwise and could use a good reference for comparison
I'm curious as to the accuracy of the PARwise measuring single-wavelength LEDs instead of multiple wavelengths. That would be of use to somebody building their own LED fixtures, knowing that Chinese-made LEDs rarely match the advertised wavelengths.
