churchhaze
Well-Known Member
That stuff's for pussies! lol
Why do HID lights have better penetration?
- Thread starter tstick
- Start date
- Status
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
Yeah, my gavitas are killing it. The only study on lights I've seen recently that included DE HPS had the DE as the most efficient (tied with the top of the line LEDs -) light source but for a lot less money. Now, they used commercially available models to compare. I am unsure if any of the LEDs they tested are truly the top of the line LED technology but there are some damn expensive fixtures from companies I've seen folks recommend listed so it's worth reading.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0099010
Of course these things bring other issues with them. Many safety related. You have to replace the bulbs every couple of years (not 6mos like older models, worth mentioning). Gotta have the ceiling for them, in part because they're so bright (actually from what I understand COBs can have this problem too, as well as some other LEDs, LEDs don't exactly love being dimmed either without some extra electronics).
I think if you're going to buy something premade the DE HPS setups are superior to anything available that is LED. I think if you're willing to build something the LED technology could win, but then I'd be worried again about ceiling heights still.
LEDs also have a very directed canopy which can be useful or harmful depending on the application. At least commercial LEDs, I think COBs have a broader reflector (although I'm sure you can change them out).
Last edited:
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
I've found the blurple, as you put it, style lights also cause weird fucked up feeding requirements. I'm not a fan. I am very interested in the COB LEDs but they're pretty inaccessible.
Rahz
Well-Known Member
One of the top 2 LEDs in that chart use Osram emitters which are only going to be 110-120 LPW which is a mostly valid way to compare one LED to another. My lamp is running at around 140 LPW and it's possible to get 150-160 LPW in the 3000K range and the DIY cost on those builds would still be less than the commercial fixtures at similar wattages. On the less efficient DIY end, for about $1000 you can rain down 900watts of LED at 130 LPW.
SupraSPL
Well-Known Member
Although that study does have some useful data, they should have included the very best commercial LED lamps of the time. Either way, current commercial LEDs are now up to 1.95umol/s/W and rising, some DiY LEDs are up to 2.93umol/s/W flowering and 3.25 umol/s/W vegging. If they had compared a 1.95umol/S LED vs a DE HPS, the LED would result in a much higher PPFD and ultimately gpw.
The study also failed to mention if the LEDs were fully warmed up. That would hugely affect the output especially for any LED using red or deep red emitters, but would not affect well built commercial COBs units using whites. It makes no sense that flat plane efficiency figures would be higher than integrating sphere efficiency figures for some of their lamps, calling the flat plane accuracy into question which is very important to the end results. They are including driver/ballast losses in their figures, which is fine as long as they are doing it consistently BUT are they accounting for power factor? All they said is that flat plane efficiency measurements were made with a current clamp meter. Finally, they did not mention how power and power factor was calculated for the Integrated Sphere measurements. Mabe it is in the notes somewhere but I guess it doesn't really matter since all the LED lamps tested are already off the radar for most buyers..
As far as canopy "penetration", @Eraserhead said it, it is all about output and beam angle. This shot is lit by a commercial LED, 53W Vero18 with about 70 degree beam angle. If you tighten up the beam by moving then lens further away from the COB, it will light up the distant parts of the woods like a spot light with an image of the COB surface (will get a pic of that tonight if I remember).
The study also failed to mention if the LEDs were fully warmed up. That would hugely affect the output especially for any LED using red or deep red emitters, but would not affect well built commercial COBs units using whites. It makes no sense that flat plane efficiency figures would be higher than integrating sphere efficiency figures for some of their lamps, calling the flat plane accuracy into question which is very important to the end results. They are including driver/ballast losses in their figures, which is fine as long as they are doing it consistently BUT are they accounting for power factor? All they said is that flat plane efficiency measurements were made with a current clamp meter. Finally, they did not mention how power and power factor was calculated for the Integrated Sphere measurements. Mabe it is in the notes somewhere but I guess it doesn't really matter since all the LED lamps tested are already off the radar for most buyers..
As far as canopy "penetration", @Eraserhead said it, it is all about output and beam angle. This shot is lit by a commercial LED, 53W Vero18 with about 70 degree beam angle. If you tighten up the beam by moving then lens further away from the COB, it will light up the distant parts of the woods like a spot light with an image of the COB surface (will get a pic of that tonight if I remember).
Scotch089
Well-Known Member
OG im lost to your height concerns when it comes LEDs, the restrictions are no different for LED panels like the SGS/XGS/RW/etc from A51 (because they use lenses) compared to a 600w HPS, no different with an AT200 using the stock (very narrow) lenses than you would a 800somewatt CMH or 1k HPS (at least me personally- 24-28") and with the wider optional lenses you can treat the AT200 similar to the 600w HPS or A51s.
As for the new tech COBs, as long as youre not stupid about it, theres no reason why you couldn't get within 6" without heat issues (maybe photon OD ie. bleaching) but if youre running them that hard then its common sense not to do that. Just like sticking a 1k 6" away. If you run them at <700mA you can get away with anything. sure 1.4-2.1A youre going to want to think about things. but nothing insanely dramatic, and still probably less than what you would with the equivalent HPS.
for the study, its outdated, we all looked at it and appreciated the testing, but it IS old news, it doesn't have the newer Apache model included, doesn't have A51 (yes EH, you deserve to be in on those), doesn't have the OpticVeros, etc. so of course LEDs are going to lack in comparison, look at how far LEDs come within a couple months time. Let alone years.
Supra that's a kickass picture, I have 7-8 of the same model of flashlights that run a neutral white CREE chip with an adjustable lens and switch for brightness and like you said, narrow it enough and you can see the surface of the chip. Cool shit.
As for the new tech COBs, as long as youre not stupid about it, theres no reason why you couldn't get within 6" without heat issues (maybe photon OD ie. bleaching) but if youre running them that hard then its common sense not to do that. Just like sticking a 1k 6" away. If you run them at <700mA you can get away with anything. sure 1.4-2.1A youre going to want to think about things. but nothing insanely dramatic, and still probably less than what you would with the equivalent HPS.
for the study, its outdated, we all looked at it and appreciated the testing, but it IS old news, it doesn't have the newer Apache model included, doesn't have A51 (yes EH, you deserve to be in on those), doesn't have the OpticVeros, etc. so of course LEDs are going to lack in comparison, look at how far LEDs come within a couple months time. Let alone years.
Supra that's a kickass picture, I have 7-8 of the same model of flashlights that run a neutral white CREE chip with an adjustable lens and switch for brightness and like you said, narrow it enough and you can see the surface of the chip. Cool shit.
TheChemist77
Well-Known Member
diy led,,,sorry cant build my own!! the ones i can buy,, are going to be better in a year or 2...that is the truth.. so why spend money on a led that will be out dated in a year?? maybe u can build leds to compete w hid but the ones fr sale are expensive and will be improved on....so do it urselfers may be worth it, but to the technically declined its a waste of cash...ill just wait.. or maybe someone can build me one,,,ill pay for it,, and do a side by side test in a 4x4 area..nothing different but the lights,,must be same wattage,,to prove or disprove led can yield same as or better....anyone want to build one for me?? ill pin it against a 600 watt hps in a 4x4 ebb n flow... most studies i see are putting an led against a 1k in a 4x4 area,,that 1 k should be covering a 5x5 or better so wile the 1k is wasting light the led is maxing out its coverage.. not a very good comparison in my eyes,,, to do a true compare the 1k and led should be in a 5x5 area or bigger and no led would cover that space exept diys and maybe even a diy cant cover that space?
TheChemist77
Well-Known Member
please,,, anyone want to make some cash? build me a led to cover a 4x4 area just for flowering, ill buy it..but if it does not produce at least the same as the 600 hps...ill send it back for my money back...ill take picks and cover the compare... ANY TAKERS? IF NOT ILL REST MY CASE ON LED...Iill take it as a can NOT do....
Doer
Well-Known Member
I know I can do it and I am doing it. But, I would not sell it to you. 
I thought the same way, but just in the last few years there has been an major breakthrough.
Now I can get a $50 dollar device that runs at 50% efficiency and produces 50w.
I am building an 800w set up now and will double on the same water cooled heat sink.
The problem with HID is that they will only fire at 250c or ~445f HOT.
With LED we get higher savings on electricity and I will exhaust 100% of the heat using flowing water.
The difference of course is the photon density. I can run the LEDs much closer to the canopy and get 15 watts PAR per square foot. When I double it it will be 30 watts.
Sunshine at sea level on the equator is 45 watts PAR.
I thought the same way, but just in the last few years there has been an major breakthrough.
Now I can get a $50 dollar device that runs at 50% efficiency and produces 50w.
I am building an 800w set up now and will double on the same water cooled heat sink.
The problem with HID is that they will only fire at 250c or ~445f HOT.
With LED we get higher savings on electricity and I will exhaust 100% of the heat using flowing water.
The difference of course is the photon density. I can run the LEDs much closer to the canopy and get 15 watts PAR per square foot. When I double it it will be 30 watts.
Sunshine at sea level on the equator is 45 watts PAR.
TheChemist77
Well-Known Member
rest my case!!! wont sell it, cant prove it....if not than make some cash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!I know I can do it and I am doing it. But, I would not sell it to you.
I thought the same way, but just in the last few years there has been an major breakthrough.
Now I can get a $50 dollar device that runs at 50% efficiency and produces 50w.
I am building an 800w set up now and will double on the same water cooled heat sink.
The problem with HID is that they will only fire at 250c or ~445f HOT.
With LED we get higher savings on electricity and I will exhaust 100% of the heat using flowing water.
The difference of course is the photon density. I can run the LEDs much closer to the canopy and get 15 watts PAR per square foot. When I double it it will be 30 watts.
Sunshine at sea level on the equator is 45 watts PAR.
TheChemist77
Well-Known Member
also if this is possible, why are led makers not selling these leds that are so great?? apearently you diy ers are better than the led companies??I know I can do it and I am doing it. But, I would not sell it to you.
I thought the same way, but just in the last few years there has been an major breakthrough.
Now I can get a $50 dollar device that runs at 50% efficiency and produces 50w.
I am building an 800w set up now and will double on the same water cooled heat sink.
The problem with HID is that they will only fire at 250c or ~445f HOT.
With LED we get higher savings on electricity and I will exhaust 100% of the heat using flowing water.
The difference of course is the photon density. I can run the LEDs much closer to the canopy and get 15 watts PAR per square foot. When I double it it will be 30 watts.
Sunshine at sea level on the equator is 45 watts PAR.
bicit
Well-Known Member
Not buying an led because it will become 'outdated' is silly logic... you'll be waiting for years before the reach their peak and even then, something new could be out by then.
Its like perpetually waiting to buy a computer because the next genchip is 'just around the corner'
Its like perpetually waiting to buy a computer because the next genchip is 'just around the corner'
Nc87
Active Member
Yes diy LEDs can be better. They can be as good as we make them to be.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Rollitup mobile app
Rahz
Well-Known Member
I will build a lamp/s for you. I'm currently prototyping 200 and 300 watt fan cooled enclosures. If you do a side by side and mention where they came from I will sell them to you for cost plus shipping. It would be 2 300 watt units, total input of 645 watts. Cost to me is about $500 each, CXB3070s @ 1.4A though I could do V29s @ 2.1A for close to $350 each. I haven't parted the V29 out so don't quote me but it would be close.
Here's my first 200w unit, sold already.
Edit: With ballast the 600 -vs- 600 would be an almost exact watt for watt grow off. A lot of people would like to see that happen.
Attachments
Last edited:
Positivity
Well-Known Member
Ummmm...to put it simply. Fuck yea
Commercial leds always sucked. Just took people good at building things to make it right.
Commercial leds want to use the cheapest products .
Growers want to use the best.
ever open a led light up and look inside? If you did you would know anyone including a grade schooler could put one together..
Rahz
Well-Known Member
To be a bit more specific, the lamps I would send you are designed for a 2x4' area so 2 of them would fit a 4x4 perfectly... almost as if I had designed them that way. The one you see in the pic was made of steel but I would do aluminum for your lamps should you choose to purchase and do a side by side. The only thing unfinished about the lamp in the pic is no grommets in the wire holes, but that was because the buyer said he didn't care and didn't want to wait. Yours would have grommets and basically be UL certifiable. Unit is grounded, has on/off switch, power inlet and outlet. Outlet bypasses the power switch so is live as long as the unit is plugged in. If you have any questions feel free to ask.
bicit
Well-Known Member
Sure ill throw one in on the pile. I'll whip up a parts list later in the evening. Cxb3590's or 2530's based.
- Status