Mau5Capades: builds & grow journal

[Greengenes707]

Thanks for the great compliment @IlovePlants its only day 43 on 63 day strain. I feel like things are going pretty well from a health perspective, but bud size could be much better. Don't get me wrong , there are some chongers in there (like GG would say) but there are some really puny buds as well, esp the Sin Mint.

We shall see, this is the first time I dropped the House and Garden: Top booster & Top Shooter(aka liquid shooting powder). This combo has been my late stage booster for the past couple years. This time around, im using Rock Resinator. But ill keep you guys posted, like I said in my first episode of this series: no BS, no ego, no numbers fudging, just the straight dope....

I knew that was cookies or a cross as soon as it popped up. Super cookie dom looking. Hate to say it, probably won't get much bigger. But the rest of the garden is large and in charge. The mid to late 40days are the best, still so healthy, but have the size and girth.
Very nice brother.

 

[Growmau5]

I knew that was cookies or a cross as soon as it popped up. Super cookie dom looking. Hate to say it, probably won't get much bigger. But the rest of the garden is large and in charge. The mid to late 40days are the best, still so healthy, but have the size and girth.
Very nice brother.

Thanks GG, that means a lot coming from you! Ill save the cookies for the private reserve, scrap the clones, and make way for the new gear. Bitches be addicted to buying shoes, growers be addicted to collecting seeds, lol I just popped some Exotic Genetix:: Cherry Cream Pie then I saw seedsherenow has a pre-order on their next drop. So I got Grease Monkey and Pink v2. I have been wanting something with Starfighter genetics in it for a while now.

 

[sethimus]

Doing a little camera work tonight. I have a tripod on the way, but I couldn't resist. I'm pretty happy with this run so far, and its development for day 43 of flowering.

you are using unlicensed music in your vid, gets blocked in germany

 

[Growmau5]

you are using unlicensed music in your vid, gets blocked in germany

yup. thats the price I had to pay. sorry germany.

 

[Getgrowingson]

You wouldn't actually be getting improved efficiency with the PWM dimming then. The LEDs just won't be emitting light steadily but when they in the on state they will be the same efficiency as they were when powered steadily. There will be no increase in lumens per watt. I guess you need to adjust the internal "I" adjuster, "I" meaning current. PWM won't alter the current. Less total power will be consumed but that's because the LEDs are off some of the time.

It's using the pwm to switch the firing of scrs to decrease output current. It isn't flashing on and off

 

[CanadianONE]

It's using the pwm to switch the firing of scrs to decrease output current. It isn't flashing on and off

In a PWM driver the current is is switched at a high frequency between 0 (off) and rated output current. This means the LED load is either off or or running at its rated current. Example 1000ma driver using PWM to run at 25% (250ma approximate equivalent) the signal would be @ rated current 25% of the time and off the other 75%. The ration of on time vs off time is what determines the LED brightness. That's always been my take on PWM as far as the electronic theory behind it. If Meanwell is using some other proprietary method or something please point me to the link or documents to support this so I can learn something new

 

[Getgrowingson]

In a PWM driver the current is is switched at a high frequency between 0 (off) and rated output current. This means the LED load is either off or or running at its rated current. Example 1000ma driver using PWM to run at 25% (250ma approximate equivalent) the sigwould be @ rated current 25% of the time and off the other 75%. The ration of on time vs off time is what determines the LED brightness. That's always been my take on PWM as far as the electronic theory behind it. If Meanwell is using some other proprietary method or something please point me to the link or documents to support this so I can learn something new

You are correct. I was thinking of CCR. Constant current reduction. Here is a little write up I found to explain what I was thinking. But meanwwell does use pwm to dim so it's not really applicable but some info none the less lol. >

LEDs, as well as conventional sources, can also be dimmed through constant current reduction (CCR), or analog dimming. CCR maintains a continuous current to the source, but it reduces its amplitude to achieve dimming. “The light output is proportional to the amount of current flowing through the device.

 

[Getgrowingson]

So based off what you are saying and what I'm reading if indeed they are on at full current then off for a certain time the efficiency tables were all using are moot. Correct? If we're not actually running at a certain current like we think but at full current a percentage of time then the led is not running at said efficiency? I'm no technologist just an electrician so bare with me. But from what I've read ccr dimming is much more efficient the pwm dimming. So can anyone prove to me or show me where my thoughts are wrong? Sorry to plug your thread growmou5

 

[WwW1962]

i could use some advice , since you asked if i need help.. here's what i got hooked up

You could use the$30 Mean Well HLN-40H-54A , dimmable from 450-750mA or the HLN-40H-54B dimmable from 75mA-750mA[/QUOTE]

fired up the HLN-40H-54B to 20 xlm 10w with no pot..i think im gonna need a more powerful one, it's pulling 60w @kilawatt meter and looks weak,
since im such a newb and old and lazy LOL
what is the next powerhouse option that i can dim down..if there's any thank you here's a pic to show
WwW SINCERELY

 

[Growmau5]

i could use some advice , since you asked if i need help.. here's what i got hooked up

You could use the$30 Mean Well HLN-40H-54A , dimmable from 450-750mA or the HLN-40H-54B dimmable from 75mA-750mA

fired up the HLN-40H-54B to 20 xlm 10w with no pot..i think im gonna need a more powerful one, it's pulling 60w @kilawatt meter and looks weak,
since im such a newb and old and lazy LOL
what is the next powerhouse option that i can dim down..if there's any thank you here's a pic to show
WwW SINCERELY[/QUOTE]


hmm, 20 xml2's. well the hlg120-c1400b would run 28-30. you could use that and leave some headroom for later on. There is also the ELG 150-c1750, which can run 23.

 

[WwW1962]

fired up the HLN-40H-54B to 20 xlm 10w with no pot..i think im gonna need a more powerful one, it's pulling 60w @kilawatt meter and looks weak,
since im such a newb and old and lazy LOL
what is the next powerhouse option that i can dim down..if there's any thank you here's a pic to show
WwW SINCERELY

hmm, 20 xml2's. well the hlg120-c1400b would run 28-30. you could use that and leave some headroom for later on. There is also the ELG 150-c1750, which can run 23.[/QUOTE]
mucho graisa's amigo i couldnt find the first one on mouser, headroom for later would be the bomb..make into a full blown on vegging light, like u once said before, i hope im not clogging up your thread with this stuff thank you again GrowMau5

 

[WwW1962]

hmm, 20 xml2's. well the hlg120-c1400b would run 28-30. you could use that and leave some headroom for later on. There is also the ELG 150-c1750, which can run 23.

mucho graisa's amigo i couldnt find the first one on mouser, headroom for later would be the bomb..make into a full blown on vegging light, like u once said before, i hope im not clogging up your thread with this stuff thank you again GrowMau5 [/QUOTE]
i got it now HLG 120H-c1400b.. and ordered 10 more stars for a total of 30..go GrowMau5 , this is gonna be blinding

 

[nevergoodenuf]

It looks like 10 xmls is only 30 volts. If you add 5 more, then it will be within the HLN-40s voltage range. It should not be pulling 60 watts unless you also have a fan.

 

[WwW1962]

It looks like 10 xmls is only 30 volts. If you add 5 more, then it will be within the HLN-40s voltage range. It should not be pulling 60 watts unless you also have a fan.

i have 20 in series. going to add 10 more .i was thinking 3w a piece..you guys know all about this stuff

well i just tested it again, never your right, it's only pulling 9.3 watts and running at 60 hz
120 v i told ya i was blind .. thanks for making me retest, i disconnected 1 lamp and it's twice
as bright now pulling 38 watts..

 

[nevergoodenuf]

Sorry that was aimed at Gromau's light.

 

[Growmau5]

i have 20 in series. going to add 10 more .i was thinking 3w a piece..you guys know all about this stuff

well i just tested it again, never your right, it's only pulling 9.3 watts and running at 60 hz
120 v i told ya i was blind .. thanks for making me retest, i disconnected 1 lamp and it's twice
as bright now pulling 38 watts..

keep in mind, as you run your xmls at a higher current, their forward voltage will increase from 3.0v to around 3.7v
I tried building a (30) xml2 light (fasttech chips) running on hlg120-1400b for a local friend of mine. only 29 would fire. We did all the appropriate testing, swapped out the chip that wouldnt fire, etc. still only 29 would light up. Sometimes math & calculations don't quite work out in real life.

 

[WwW1962]

keep in mind, as you run your xmls at a higher current, their forward voltage will increase from 3.0v to around 3.7v
I tried building a (30) xml2 light (fasttech chips) running on hlg120-1400b for a local friend of mine. only 29 would fire. We did all the appropriate testing, swapped out the chip that wouldnt fire, etc. still only 29 would light up. Sometimes math & calculations don't quite work out in real life.

i'll keep one as a spare thank you GM

 

[PurpleBuz]

keep in mind, as you run your xmls at a higher current, their forward voltage will increase from 3.0v to around 3.7v
I tried building a (30) xml2 light (fasttech chips) running on hlg120-1400b for a local friend of mine. only 29 would fire. We did all the appropriate testing, swapped out the chip that wouldnt fire, etc. still only 29 would light up. Sometimes math & calculations don't quite work out in real life.

must be sumthin about the xml specs, cause I built a light with xml 2s and even after using the data sheet for a normal max Vf to spec out the driver, I ended up having to disable a couple of the chips or the driver would go into limp mode.

 

[alesh]

So based off what you are saying and what I'm reading if indeed they are on at full current then off for a certain time the efficiency tables were all using are moot. Correct? If we're not actually running at a certain current like we think but at full current a percentage of time then the led is not running at said efficiency? I'm no technologist just an electrician so bare with me. But from what I've read ccr dimming is much more efficient the pwm dimming. So can anyone prove to me or show me where my thoughts are wrong? Sorry to plug your thread growmou5

MW drivers use PWM only as a mean of transportation of the signal. Actual dimming is done by reducing the current. It means that the efficiency is the same no matter whether done via resistance, PWM or 1-10VDC.

 

[bizfactory]

MW drivers use PWM only as a mean of transportation of the signal. Actual dimming is done by reducing the current. It means that the efficiency is the same no matter whether done via resistance, PWM or 1-10VDC.

That's what I suspected but I'm glad to hear someone else say it