Acronyms
- Thread starter daizeUK
- Start date
The December FOTM Contest Poll is open!
🏆 Click to vote! 🏆
Is it used often?
No - hence I'd never heard of it! 
There was one post recently where lighting was being discussed and somebody said something like "WPG isn't so relevent these days, more people are using PAR". So that perked my curiosity.
Actually, come to think of it, WPG might be another good candidate!
There was one post recently where lighting was being discussed and somebody said something like "WPG isn't so relevent these days, more people are using PAR". So that perked my curiosity.
Actually, come to think of it, WPG might be another good candidate!
Par is regularly used now and should be used more that the wpg rule...
TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
What about CRI which, for fw, I consider the most important measure.
I hate mouse over pop-ups
The worst CRI bulbs are the actinics for sw.
I hate mouse over pop-ups
ian said:
While I agree with the thought process behind that, is it easily calculable by the average aquarist, or is it so complicated that only the true "aquarist gardening" enthusiasts would be able to determine it? I saw something about it a few years ago, but honestly, the cost of the meter to determine it for a hobby tank put it out of my mind. I could see professionals needing it, but for the home hobbyist, is it easily attainable?
Specialist forums are now using par on LEDs/bulbs, as a guide, it won't be long til it becomes the norm to use it. As chad states, it's been used for a while in the marine side of things.eaglesaquarium said:
I don't deny that, just curious if one can easily determine it without a meter? More specifically thinking about the fishkeeper who comes in blind and sees others with planted tanks and wants a few nice looking plants in their own tank, but isn't looking to break the bank, or spend weeks researching.
The WPG "rule of thumb" is a decent starting place for those individuals, I believe and is very easily calculated without any special equipment searches or formulas. Its certainly not perfect, and I would prefer it were measured as lumens per gallon, as wattage (energy consumption) and light production are not inseparably linked. Fluorescent bulbs, incandescent, halogen, LEDs all can produce the same amount of light (lumens) as each other but at far different wattages. And then there is the issue of the ER spectrum and the frequency of the light produced compared to what the plants can use best, and what is absorbed by the water versus is able to transmit through the water.
There are a lot of variables, and a meter makes the most sense, but can a novice calculate it (or measure it) without great expenditures of time and/or money?
The WPG "rule of thumb" is a decent starting place for those individuals, I believe and is very easily calculated without any special equipment searches or formulas. Its certainly not perfect, and I would prefer it were measured as lumens per gallon, as wattage (energy consumption) and light production are not inseparably linked. Fluorescent bulbs, incandescent, halogen, LEDs all can produce the same amount of light (lumens) as each other but at far different wattages. And then there is the issue of the ER spectrum and the frequency of the light produced compared to what the plants can use best, and what is absorbed by the water versus is able to transmit through the water.
There are a lot of variables, and a meter makes the most sense, but can a novice calculate it (or measure it) without great expenditures of time and/or money?
It is not included in our acronyms. Thanks for the suggestion!
you cannot determine PAR without a PAR meter but many manufacturers provide that information for their lights.
For example here are the specs on my lights http
/aquaillumination.com/sol/performance.html
you cannot determine PAR without a PAR meter but many manufacturers provide that information for their lights.
For example here are the specs on my lights http
/aquaillumination.com/sol/performance.html
Yes, that's what I meant, many plant enthusiasts are testing certain LEDs and bulbs in correlation to depth of tank. Then using this as a guide, as the wpg was originally done on t12's. It just isn't viable to use the wpg rule at all.tcamos said:It is not included in our acronyms. Thanks for the suggestion!
you cannot determine PAR without a PAR meter but many manufacturers provide that information for their lights.
For example here are the specs on my lights http
Right...for my lights as an example they are 75 watts per module and compare to a 270 watt MH light. So if we only look at watts per gallon then it looks like my lights aren't sufficient. Watts per gallon is sub-PAR...see what I did there?
I see Drs Foster and Smith have PAR ratings for many of the LEDs, but I can't find any ratings for their fluorescent lights...
I believe they only include it if the manufacturer gives it to them. With many fluorescents the PAR isn't so good until you get into T5HO and T5VHO lights. Even then their ability to maintain PAR at depth is limited. I had some great T5HO lights that I had to replace when I got my 210 gallon tank because it is 30" deep and that's just too deep for the T5's at depth. My sand-based corals like fungia, brains, etc. would not be able to grow.
This Old Spouse
TOTM Winner May 2013
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
385 -
206 -
203 -
191 -
186 -
180 -
157 -
152 -
143 -
109 -
98 -
97 -
85 -
82 -
78