I am almost ready to harvest 9 plants in square 5 gal pots placed in a 4.5ft x 4.5ft grow tent with a 320 watt full spectrum led....I soon realized that 1 light would not be enough to cover the jungle that 9 plants turned into. I added side lighting in the corners and now this is more than likely overkill another 320 watt led for a total of 860 watts on the killawatt meter.....let me say that it's producing very very wellwhat the topic saysi'm looking to get into LED. hate how hot HID is.
.Which make LED panel are you using Montana Robert?
^^^Watt for watt? Not true. HID's advantages over LED are many but that ain't one of 'em.HID will put out more par light then leds per watt.
- Jiji
a fucken lot lol a shit load i would rather buy a inline for 60 bucks to pull the heat from a 1000w bulb then wast 800 bucks on a bucket of shit hope that answers ya qustionwhat the topic saysi'm looking to get into LED. hate how hot HID is.
For a more accurate comparison I would like to see the data from leds compared to interpolated data from gavita 1000 watt de hps^^^Watt for watt? Not true. HID's advantages over LED are many but that ain't one of 'em.
http://growershouse.com/images/ALTEST_infographic_1.pdf
And poorly designed budget LED panels made with inferior diodes will always make more heat than light.
i found a wikked graph on people that grow with leds it proves right here how good they areFor a more accurate comparison I would like to see the data from leds compared to interpolated data from gavita 1000 watt de hps
- Jiji
as u can see 1= people that grow with hps mh and t5 10=the people that grow with leds and cfli found a wikked graph on people that grow with leds it proves right here how good they are
Also Just trying to set the record straight here.^^^Watt for watt? Not true. HID's advantages over LED are many but that ain't one of 'em.
http://growershouse.com/images/ALTEST_infographic_1.pdf
And poorly designed budget LED panels made with inferior diodes will always make more heat than light.
Not trying to win an argument or set the record straight actually. I agree the data I used is a bit shaky and those LED panels are shite actually. I just wanted to show that blanket statements about LEDs are usually incorrect more than anything. Data from say an ApacheTech 600 or an Illumitex DS that produce astonishingly consistent output throughout their coverage areas or data from Purdue's recent studies would of been more germaine to "winning", whatever though, I hate debating and arguing in this format and I totally see what you're saying. May I make a suggestion? You should check these threads out and talk to this grower who more closely speaks your languageAlso Just trying to set the record straight here.
If your going by their par/watts ratio the data it is garbage. I'll explain why. I'm actually surprised they published it like that, but then again who are they?
If you notice the data points on the led light panels such as the kind, in the very center is a very high par reading. What seems to be leds strong point in par. Then as you get towards the 4x4 footprint it rapidly diminishes.
Then if you look at the HPS that they compared, it doesn't diminish at nearly the same rate.
Now take into consideration that they took 33 equivalent weighted readings (8 for every ft), and 1 for the center
To get their par/watts ratio they just added up the 33 readings then divided by watts.
To get a real comparison, you would have to figure out avg of par over a set area, such as 4x4 foot print. This does not account for that.
Using their math the 8 data points at 1x1 are weighted the same as the 8 data points of a 4x4, when there is a much more area in between the 4x4 data points.
If the rate of loss is linear I suppose you could interpolate data, and it would be easy to figure out, I dunno I'm tired.
- Jiji