Introducing CobKits.com - specializing in DIY and Citizen COBs

CobKits said:
except those are completely pulled out of the air and its closer to 2-5% at 1400 mA
Click to expand...
and also a real 45% vs a real 56%, that would be a relative difference of almost 25%
kaivorth said:
I got my numbers from some charts on this post here:

https://www.rollitup.org/t/cheap-and-cheerful-diy-using-citizen-cobs.909460/page-13

Post 250
Click to expand...
that fine for the citi, the cree number is not very realistic it seems. put a real temperature into PCT and its much more in line with real world results

3000K:
upload_2016-10-12_23-20-59.png

upload_2016-10-12_23-22-26.png
 
Last edited:
CobKits said:
i'll try to make the driver page more explicit.

trying to be polite here, but its kind of not up for debate. Youre the only person who advises 400, every other person on this site would say 600-1200. and there is plenty of science to back that up. But there are other threads for that. im all for 400+ on the bottoms but top canopy really should have 600+
Click to expand...


Being polite is why I said it was up for debate.

I totally agree that plants will accept more light but that it doesn't mean they will use it. That gives lots of room before ill effects of too much light start to appear. As long as you are within that range then increases in light from a singular top source provides a benefit by bringing lower regions of the plant will into the optimal range.

Producing as efficiently as possible also means making sure that as much of the light produced by the light source as possible is used by the plant. If photosynthesis maxes out at 400 umols then we know that should be our target for all areas of the plant where photosynthesis occurs. You can get there by pounding the plant from the top with excessive amounts resulting in >600 umols at the canopy or by dispersing discrete light sources around the plant.

With the latter approach you can get higher yields using the same amount of light. That really is the point. I don't think anyone disagrees that using multiple light sources is much better than a single one for most indoor growing.
 
point taken but can you start another thread about it if you want to discuss it, thanks

its kinda outside of the scope of this thread

gracias
 
bleak said:
Thats perfect, thanks a lot! Apart from the driver and light engine, do I need anything else to get up and running? Cables etc? I'm a newbie, so please assume I know nothing :)

Heres my shopping list so far:

- CLU048-1818 light engine
- Meanwell HLG-120H-48A driver

https://cobkits.com/product/clu048-1818-active-light-engine-single/
https://cobkits.com/product/meanwell-hlg-120h-48a/
Click to expand...
really the only thing you need is to throw an AC cord end on the driver, can you do that? it will be the hardest part of the project. driver to cob is a quick job for two 2-slot wagos
 
CobKits said:
really the only thing you need is to throw an AC cord end on the driver, can you do that? it will be the hardest part of the project. driver to cob is a quick job for two 2-slot wagos
Click to expand...

I should be able to handle the AC cord. Good suggestion on the Wago connector. So I would add a '2 pole' Wago to my shopping list.

Could that HLG-120H-48A driver also handle the CLU058-1825 engine? https://cobkits.com/product/clu058-1825-light-engine-single/
 
CobKits said:
here are my best guesses at real world efficiency relative to cree data

View attachment 3781736
Click to expand...
The 1825's are interesting now. Jeez now I see the 3618 too.

4x 1825's @ 1400ma
2x 3618 @ 1400ma

Now I'm looking at your light engines too.

What one would be better for me you think? I was thinking the 1825s for more spread, but idk now. 3618s are almost more cost effective due to needing less heatsinks.
 
depends how hard youre running it. id use em this way
10-50W - 1212
40-100W - 1818
60-150W - 1825
150W+ -3618

in other words a 3618 is in fact more efficient than a 1212 at 40W, but not 3-4 times more efficient so imo youre wasting your money to run it that soft
 
CobKits said:
cmon man. i dont know many rednecks who run more than 4-6 deep on heater cores in their front yard, what you gonna do when you run out?
Click to expand...

Hey now. My ancestors were Scots in Tennessee coal country, wearing red scarves around their necks so they could be told apart from the Pinkertons the mine owners brought in to 'restore order'.

And yes, I have a few radiators in my yard.
20151112_155305.jpg
 
CobKits said:
depends how hard youre running it. id use em this way
10-50W - 1212
40-100W - 1818
60-150W - 1825
150W+ -3618

in other words a 3618 is in fact more efficient than a 1212 at 40W, but not 3-4 times more efficient so imo youre wasting your money to run it that soft
Click to expand...
I meant to say:

2x 3618 at 150w
Or
4x 1825 at 70w

Shooting for about 300w in an 8sqft area. Would either of these solutions be worth pursuing or am I going to need more? Which is more preferable?
 
Peltier will kill your efficiency. 4-5 watts to runs a fan, 75 watts or more for a Peltier. Water cooling is better for extreme cooling, though not by much, unless passive.

HolyGhost23 said:
if you look at the lm/w the 1825 is the best at that amperage. so if you get me a 185-54 ill buy your 1825 light "engine".. i might swap out the fan for a Peltier cooler to it .. to experiment.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top