The 'Shimmer' Experiment

I am brainstorming some ideas on how to increase efficiency of LED light by using the 'shimmer effect' that is found in nature/ocean. Before the invention of high output LEDs, duplicating nature to do this effect was simply cosmetic and didn't provide the same benefits of nature (MH, while a 'point source' of light, was still too broad). After several years of studying this effect on aquariums and showing the effect does happen with high output LEDs similar to nature, I am now trying to see if I can use that effect for terrestrial plants and if it is beneficial.

Basic premise is, in the ocean as the surface motion creates waves, peaks and valleys at the surface of the water, it creates a magnification effect. Basically it provides short high intensity pulses of light followed by low intensity as the light is de-focused. When the light it focused, it creates a bright shimmer line. Here is an animated video showing what I am talking about. All those white lines are the shimmer, and they can be up to 3x the intensity of the light at the surface of the water due to the magnification effect. I have tested this effect on an aquarium setting with LEDs and 40 degree optics and I was able to achieve an increase in PAR that was actually more than nature, I was able to get 5x the intensity @ 2" underwater for brief periods of time (split seconds) compared to the intensity at the surface.

[video=youtube;PwjQk7dJOFQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwjQk7dJOFQ[/video]

Another positive aspect of this phenomenon is it is able to focus light at angles, basically doing what a light rail does, putting focused light to parts of the plant that would normally be shaded by static lighting.

I have no idea if this idea will work or not (if it will provide any benefit for growing plants), but I want to try it to find out. I have come up with 2 basic ideas to try, but neither are what I feel are ideal. First method, build a very thin 'box' out of glass, only about an 1/8th inch gap between the top and bottom pane of glass, and put water inside (so it would be a sealed box). I think that idea will help me with a 'proof of concept' to know if it actually works or not, but it far from ideal as a commercial product and has obvious size limitations. The larger you make it, the thicker the glass needs to be, which means more light is blocked by the glass. At some point any benefit of the shimmer is negated by the loss of intensity by the glass. The idea for my test is this. My light swings a little just from the fans. By hanging the glass under the light/attached to the light, it will create more movement which will then slosh the thin layer of water around to create the agitation needed to create the shimmer. The more you agitate the water, the more shimmer effect is created. When the aquarium hobby first started making LED lights and had improper distance between leds (to far apart and multiple colors of LEDs) this created a very bad 'disco effect' we call it. Almost seizure inducing. This taught us how to group LEDs better as well as getting the ideal surface agitation (too much and you got very spastic spiderweb looking lines all over the tank, too little and no shimmer).

The second method, which I don't know if it will function at all, is to simply use a sheet of saran wrap stretched under the light with a fan blowing on it to create a 'horizontal flag flapping in the wind' type of effect. That method seems much more commercially viable, but completely unknown right now if it will create the desired effect or of saran wrap will allow proper light transmittance. That is my dilemma right now, how to create the effect with minimal loss of intensity from the idea.

So I plan on experimenting this weekend just to see if it works. For now, just looking to hear from others on what they think. Good idea, terrible idea, alternate methods I am not thinking of? Fire away.

That's a lot of work.

I have an idea if you were using multichip arrays, but it'd be a specialty type of item that would have to be made. No idea how you'd do it yourself.

Why are we trying to do this? The "defocused" areas are areas that at the surface were of high reflection? Aren't you going to lose like a ton of light by doing this? What keeps the water clean?

I'm having a hard time trying to figure what you think this might help. I honestly see no purpose at all for this.
I think it's great that you think alternatively, but I'm quite sure you will just waste your time.

If, however, you still want to try it, then just mount your LEDs on a heatsink and spin it. You can transfer power through for example a mini-jack plug (it will allow it to spin and still transfer power).
The optics for your LEDs already focuses the light sufficiently, so you might as well try that.

If you still want to go with the water, make the assembly for the water and attach a vibrator - a small motor that's out of balance.

The defocused areas would be akin to LEDs without optics. It is more 'spreading the light' vs reflecting the light, but reflection is a big concern of mine. Think of it like placing a prism in front of the light and alternating the prism so it either focuses or spreads out the light. The hope is the focused areas provide some type of positive benefit/increased photosynthesis that exceeds static light and is greater than the defocused light. As an example, and I am just pulling #'s out of thin air so don't take these as meaningful... say a light is 100 PAR and is static. The hope is the focused light is able to give pulses of 500 PAR while the defocused side would be 50 PAR. In the ocean, corals that are to deep to get proper light intensities are still able to grow at those depths by utilizing the shimmer. For plants, and I am pulling this out of my ass, is the hope that the shimmer will provide 'cycles' of photosynthesis throughout the entire plant. Break it down to the leaf level.. different parts of a leaf will have different photosynthesis rates and the shimmer moves around the leaf, but the outcome is greater photosynthesis overall.

I can draw a graph that would explain my thought process much easier. The left side is what I hope to accomplish by using a thin layer of water sandwiched between 2 pieces of glass with a tiny bit of air in order to create the 'waves'. Since the water layer is so thin I am hoping the negative side of the wave just flattens out on the glass, in turn creating greater peaks than valleys. The right side is how light would behave in deep water where there is nothing to stop the valley from forming equal and opposite to the peak. This may be the case with a thin layer of water as well though, which is where the 'experiment' comes into play.



As for the water, I would use RO/DI water in a thin sealed box. No evaporation or contamination possible.

I have an idea...

So it is slightly different then yours but it is related to a few things you mentioned;

Goal - Higher efficiency from diodes we have available today.

Effects of the "simmer"
-Light increasing intensity for short bursts
-Up to three times the intensity
-Wave like patterns

So lets take some thing a little different then are normal LED's, Lasers. Laser light can be very powerful but if you shine a laser at our plants, bad idea? Lasers use optical amplification and can produce very stable visible light. Lets say we could leave the laser light on a plant leaf for a tiny short amount of time and still be ok, if we moved it across the plant in a pattern, like the shimmer back and forth really quick, maybe we could peak out the photo cells in the leaves and let them recover then peak them out with the next wave.

Remember these?



Set up one of these each side of the plant then program the wave patters you want. I don't know how much power or about the efficiency of these or even if the light would be suitable but a start...

Anyway, my thoughts, I am super duper high right now as well, lololol

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/147656-worlds-first-digital-laser-shapes-its-own-beam-heralds-new-age-of-trippy-concert-lighting

interesting read...

Thanks for the ideas! That is exactly the type of alternate thinking I was looking for!

If I could get lasers like that article mentions that would definitely be much better than my ideas, but today there are 2 problems with that, 1. They (digital pattern changing lasers) are still very experimental and 2. Lasers are still very expensive for high output types. We obviously wouldn't need ones that can cut a leaf in 1/2 just by moving across it, but we need something more powerful than a typical laser pointer. Just thinking about how to get a proper intensity laser to do what we are talking about makes my head hurt. With shimmer, you simply adjust the agitation of the water to adjust how much shimmer is created (I know, simple in theory but more difficult to do in practice for this type of experiment).

Please keep on throwing out ideas though. I know my idea is far from ideal/easy to implement (if it even works), but some crazy thought that may enter your head (like the lasers) and escape mine could be the perfect solution to what I am trying to accomplish. As you may have guessed by now, I am a thinker and experimenter.. I am always doing odd things like this in all aspects of my life. Being single and an introvert gives me a lot of time for that stuff. Like most inventors, 99 out of 100 ideas are flops, but to me that is 99 learning experiences regardless if they didn't work, because even in failure I gain knowledge that will stay with me for years to come.

https://www.rollitup.org/led-other-lighting/508848-laser-grow-light.html

CaliJoe, they have nothing on your idea

After some more brainstorming I have come up with this idea...

Instead of trying to slosh water around to creates waves, which would be a lot of weight over a 4'x2' area (size of the light I made), even 1/8" deep. All I really need to do is section off the glass and simply put a few drops of water in each section. Even a few drops worth of water will create the curvature needed to bend and focus light around the edges. I believe the ideal pattern for chambers would be a honeycomb pattern. By doing that type of pattern and having water in each chamber it should provide an excellent shimmer pattern, only question now is how many chambers is ideal. Too many chambers and it will be spastic and less focused light overall, too few and your not maxing out the potential, if there is any.

Another idea I was thinking of, instead of just water in each chamber, it would be nice to be able to use 2 different liquids, one that is hydrophobic but similar in clarity, that way you can have 2 droplets per chamber to double the effect.

First test will be small scale just to see how it works, creates a positive shimmer effect (added PAR), etc. I can test that all myself at home. To make it work, I am thinking of using silicone to make the honeycomb pattern. I would mask off the glass, leaving very thin lines for the silicone (1/32") to minimize light reduction. I would then apply a good layer of silicone over the pattern, smooth and level it off, wait at least 30 minutes to allow it to harden a little, and then carefully peel back the masking tape exposing the boarders for the honeycomb. Silicone takes at least 24 hours to dry so it may take a few hours before it is hardened enough to pull the masking tape off without damaging the pattern. I would then put a drop of water and a hydrophobic liquid in each chamber and then very carefully place the top pane of glass on top, sandwiching the drops in the glass and sealing them in their silicone chambers. Silicone all around the edges of the glass and let dry. A very gentle rocking motion (by hanging from the lights/fans blowing on it) should be enough to move the drops around the chamber and create the desired effect.

Edit: The end of this video (skip to :39 seconds) shows the type of effect I am going for. As the water drop (mine won't be that big) moves and changes shape it will create the shimmer from the curvature of the droplets.

[video=youtube;AqQ3IyyObsk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AqQ3IyyObsk#t=39[/video]

PICOGRAV said:

I have an idea...

So it is slightly different then yours but it is related to a few things you mentioned;

Goal - Higher efficiency from diodes we have available today.

Effects of the "simmer"
-Light increasing intensity for short bursts
-Up to three times the intensity
-Wave like patterns

So lets take some thing a little different then are normal LED's, Lasers. Laser light can be very powerful but if you shine a laser at our plants, bad idea? Lasers use optical amplification and can produce very stable visible light. Lets say we could leave the laser light on a plant leaf for a tiny short amount of time and still be ok, if we moved it across the plant in a pattern, like the shimmer back and forth really quick, maybe we could peak out the photo cells in the leaves and let them recover then peak them out with the next wave.

Remember these?

View attachment 2798603

Set up one of these each side of the plant then program the wave patters you want. I don't know how much power or about the efficiency of these or even if the light would be suitable but a start...

Anyway, my thoughts, I am super duper high right now as well, lololol

Click to expand...

Output vs. price is horrible. A large powerful laser projector is 1W - that won't get you far. On top of that, how long do you think the lamp will last if you run it for 18 hours every day for several months? Look at how they work.

CaliJoe said:

After some more brainstorming I have come up with this idea...

Instead of trying to slosh water around to creates waves, which would be a lot of weight over a 4'x2' area (size of the light I made), even 1/8" deep. All I really need to do is section off the glass and simply put a few drops of water in each section. Even a few drops worth of water will create the curvature needed to bend and focus light around the edges. I believe the ideal pattern for chambers would be a honeycomb pattern. By doing that type of pattern and having water in each chamber it should provide an excellent shimmer pattern, only question now is how many chambers is ideal. Too many chambers and it will be spastic and less focused light overall, too few and your not maxing out the potential, if there is any.

Another idea I was thinking of, instead of just water in each chamber, it would be nice to be able to use 2 different liquids, one that is hydrophobic but similar in clarity, that way you can have 2 droplets per chamber to double the effect.

First test will be small scale just to see how it works, creates a positive shimmer effect (added PAR), etc. I can test that all myself at home. To make it work, I am thinking of using silicone to make the honeycomb pattern. I would mask off the glass, leaving very thin lines for the silicone (1/32") to minimize light reduction. I would then apply a good layer of silicone over the pattern, smooth and level it off, wait at least 30 minutes to allow it to harden a little, and then carefully peel back the masking tape exposing the boarders for the honeycomb. Silicone takes at least 24 hours to dry so it may take a few hours before it is hardened enough to pull the masking tape off without damaging the pattern. I would then put a drop of water and a hydrophobic liquid in each chamber and then very carefully place the top pane of glass on top, sandwiching the drops in the glass and sealing them in their silicone chambers. Silicone all around the edges of the glass and let dry. A very gentle rocking motion (by hanging from the lights/fans blowing on it) should be enough to move the drops around the chamber and create the desired effect.

Edit: The end of this video (skip to :39 seconds) shows the type of effect I am going for. As the water drop (mine won't be that big) moves and changes shape it will create the shimmer from the curvature of the droplets.

Click to expand...

Why not just a glass tray at an angle, and then let water run down it. It's easy to fix with a pump and you will have low weight because of very little water flowing.

But you're still going with the "how", you are still missing to explain the "why". I still see absolutely no use of this. Care to explain?

JMD said:

But you're still going with the "how", you are still missing to explain the "why". I still see absolutely no use of this. Care to explain?

Click to expand...

He's trying to get a new High Score!

and to see if he can use those high points to kickstart Photo, this is like... The third exp. Get it?

JMD said:

Why not just a glass tray at an angle, and then let water run down it. It's easy to fix with a pump and you will have low weight because of very little water flowing.

But you're still going with the "how", you are still missing to explain the "why". I still see absolutely no use of this. Care to explain?

Click to expand...

Excellent idea! I will have to try that one out.

As for the 'why', it is the same answer to why someone would use a light mover.
http://www.lightrail3.com/maximizing-your-grow-lights-potential/

Idk, but wont plants adjust their leaf angles and positions according to the light they get and adapt?

ah yes, the shimmer effect. My LPS corals love it

A light mover does it for me. I use a light with 60 degree lenses. In the beginning, I had problems with too much intensity causing light bleaching with the light stationary. With addition of the mover my yield increased dramatically and the bleaching was resolved. What I see now is that the blast of intense light hits every part of the plants every minute or two which is not exactly the same as the shimmer that happens when light is momentarily focused and de-focused when passed through irregular water surface but the end result is similar. And, adding some wind keeps the plants moving which exposes more of the photosynthesizing cells to that intense light.

[video=youtube;NpEevfOU4Z8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpEevfOU4Z8[/video]

I like the "water film" idea, use 1/8-1/4" of water in a fixture immediately below the LED panel. Use a continuously variable frequency generator, so the pulses/shimmers do not create a constant wave, but a dynamic sequence within a set range. You would have to use higher frequency with a small pane of water.

For that size of a water basin, you would only need like 1-3w speaker, you can use acrylic or glass, but whatever the recommended height of your fixture is, I would cut that down by a 1/3.I would anticipate losing some coverage, but that's my guess ... I don't really know if that part is true.

Also, I like the water dripping idea too, but I'd do some testing before putting plants under any of these ideas.

CaliJoe said:

Excellent idea! I will have to try that one out.

As for the 'why', it is the same answer to why someone would use a light mover.
http://www.lightrail3.com/maximizing-your-grow-lights-potential/

Click to expand...

Light mover psychically moves the light, which means your light will no longer only have a single point of origin. This results in reaching leaves that would otherwise be in shade.

With your idea of shimmer, you point of origin for the light is still the same time. The only effect you will achieve is dynamic light - which I don't see the benefit of.


I'm in no way an expert and I'm not saying you're wrong, but I fail to see the benefit of shimmer.

I just got done staring at leaves in a box for the last couple hours... even with strong wind, which does provide its own shimmer, doesn't get high intensities of light to certain parts of the leaf. If the shimmer idea works, it would put pulses of high intensity light to parts that would otherwise never receive it, in turn providing a higher rate of photosynthesis. Or you could be right and it does absolutely nothing..

I got the silicone drying now on some glass, once it is dry I will run a few tests and post videos, one with just a test LED light/par readings at various points, one with LED light and thin layer of glass (to see how much it reduces the light), and one with water dripping down the glass at a slight angle to find out if PAR values at various test points exceed the LED light alone. If it does, at least it tells me the shimmer idea works, but still unknown if would help. I am going to coat the glass with Rain-X in order to get the water drops to 'bead up' more and give more curvature to the drops and play with drip rates to try and get the most shimmer.

See if this makes any sense.. stoner ascii art. lol. Left side, normal light, equal light down in a cone, right side is 'shimmered light', light is focused into a tighter beam and that beam can be reflected sideways.

...*..*.....
......~~~.
.../\...\\...
../..\...\\..
./....\...\\.

CaliJoe said:

I just got done staring at leaves in a box for the last couple hours... even with strong wind, which does provide its own shimmer, doesn't get high intensities of light to certain parts of the leaf. If the shimmer idea works, it would put pulses of high intensity light to parts that would otherwise never receive it, in turn providing a higher rate of photosynthesis. Or you could be right and it does absolutely nothing..

I got the silicone drying now on some glass, once it is dry I will run a few tests and post videos, one with just a test LED light/par readings at various points, one with LED light and thin layer of glass (to see how much it reduces the light), and one with water dripping down the glass at a slight angle to find out if PAR values at various test points exceed the LED light alone. If it does, at least it tells me the shimmer idea works, but still unknown if would help. I am going to coat the glass with Rain-X in order to get the water drops to 'bead up' more and give more curvature to the drops and play with drip rates to try and get the most shimmer.

See if this makes any sense.. stoner ascii art. lol. Left side, normal light, equal light down in a cone, right side is 'shimmered light', light is focused into a tighter beam and that beam can be reflected sideways.

...*..*.....
......~~~.
.../\...\\...
../..\...\\..
./....\...\\.

Click to expand...

Problem is that you don't just want a short burst of light to those leaves in shade - you want a lot of light for longer periods of time.

I strongly believe that it will have absolutely not effect, but I encourage you to continue your tests, who knows.. I might be horribly wrong!

And even if it turns out not to work, we have still learned a lot. So continue, please

The shimmer effect is real which is cool and it does originate from a point source, but the endpoint [for lack of tech. vocab] isn't always the same. Which could be hurtful as well if light is just scattered randomly. However, I think it can be harnessed in some way I haven't devised, but maybe Joe is on to something.

However, I know certain chemical compositions that are immersed in water will produce different shimmering [aka wavelenghths], I know this from measuring water clarity quality in different water bodies with Secchi disks. Crater Lake is one. There was always crazy parameters to deal with, measuring conductivity and sampling at certain times to minimize the sun etc. etc. etc.

Could harmonizing your source with a specific chemical input be a possibility, I mean hell you don't even technically have to use H20 as the source for the shimmer.

Short bursts of light might be a problem, but what if the shimmer is able to multiply that light by lets say 5x, then it might not be an issue. Light movers provide short bursts of light too, if I am not mistaken and they get the job done.

I ran across this Liquid cooled LED Bulb.

I have been reading about liquid/alternative cooling LED's. It would be interesting to have a shimmer and a cooling source as one unit. Cheers.

[Edit] However the bulb does use liquid Silicone [?] for cooling, which probably isn't all that light transmissible, but it is an idea......


Any credence to the idea that swimming or being wet in the direct sun will increase a sunburn? or old wive's tale?