I don't have figures for the 90 degree optics I use, but thanks to robincnn I have figures for lens free and 80 degree optics along with the 90 degree reflector. The center point will be a bit brighter because the overall output will go up. This may mean the lights need to be raised an inch or two higher above the current minimum but I will need to do some testing. I've put off buying a meter and am waiting on the SQ-500. While I won't be able to offer lenses or reflectors in stock I could still do custom jobs with lenses. And while it won't interest the space confined I might be offering a choice between 90 and 65 degree viewing angles since those reflectors would be interchangeable.Do you have measured output with the planned reflectors as opposed to present model. What do reflectors do to footprint and distance to canopy? Optional with lenses or total change?
Go on...There's also a small boost in output.
me too. def adds some weight on there though thinking of trying one with reflectors so if there is much of a diffI went with lenses for long term protection... maybe it's overkill.
For overhead use I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm running mine vertically, so I'm more concerned with rubbing issues. They're cleanable and since I believe the biggest threat to their longevity is physical abuse, they seem like good insurance.The lenses are advertised as 97% efficient. Whether this is entirely true or not I can't say but when factoring in the fact that most of the light doesn't touch the reflector and they are 93% efficient then the total output should be around 99%.
I've been running cobs optic free for 2 years now, not a spot of dust. They seem to repel particles. This may have something to do with the photon output but I suspect there is a bit of laminar flow produced by the temperature differential. My experience has been with passive heatsinks and vertical air movement so the flow pattern will change, but I still think the LES will stay fairly dust free over the long term, especially with reflectors in place.
There are a couple reasons for several series, but the biggest reason for me was intensity in particular spaces. Someone with a 3x3 tent might not be comfortable having almost 1300 PPFD, but is okay with 1100 PPFD or 900 PPFD... or 850 or 700 or 600. A single current can't provide that many options despite having several lamp models. I almost decided on just doing 1750 since it will hit just over 800 in a 2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 4x4, and 5x5. That was the reason I started out focused on 1750 but there has been demand for all three currents.Why 1750 over 2100 at same virtual cost? Is it purely efficiency boost of 3%. Or do I need to think like 50% equals the whole number and 53% is really a 6% increase? How long are lenses available? New case?
I kinda liked just being Rahz.The RIU Advertiser banner looks good on you, Rahz.