Wait I'm confused I was looking at the wrong light I don't see yours, if its running at 2150mA that's really pushed hard, look at this chart
Not hot at all. It has a fan and a fin heavy duty heat sink, but I can pretty much damn near touch the diode, albeit blinding. Like I said, the emitter is driven at 2150 but is rated for like, 3600, so it should still last alright. And he guarantees workmanship for two years? I think?
Those extra fans are only used when you push your diodes too hard.
I suppose it's included to ameliorate that, yeah, but I swear, it runs pretty cool. And, again, the chip is rated for 3600. 2150's about the median amperage it can take, so it should last fine.
Yeah but when you are making your own you can build for quality, and use the best heat sinks available and push diodes less and use more to get the max out of leds, to me that's how they were always intended to be run, slightly underdriven to achieve maximum performance. Standard operating procedure for prefabs is to overdrive them using low quality heat sinks and cool those with low quality cpu fans. Been like this since the start of LEDs, if you dissect old leds(and most new ones too) you will see how cheap the heat sink and fans are.
I must admit, I'm not electrically inclined, so I went with Tasty. In any case, I do know he uses quality parts, at the very least. I will certainly keep you updated if anything fails, though, but I think despite it being driven hard--and obviously that leads to a drop-off in efficiency for the slightly extra power--I think it'll last a while. I'll keep you posted.
I have been following this thread for a minute and as far as I can tell you yourself have not grown with LEDs correct? Now to be fair nether have I but I don't knock LEDs . I have done quite a lot of research on this and in all comparison they will yield bout the same. I do tend to live by the statement don't knock it till you try it. So why are you so dead set against them? Why come to a thread to just argue? Especially if you yourself have not used them?600watt digi switchable hps, clearly it gives higher yeilds and i have no idea why i would change to leds. Seriously in comparison the top hps growers are pissing all over the top led growers. Now they can tout whatever they want but it just dosent compare when the big hps yeilds rock up. A picture is worth a thousond words, this thread proves it and thanks for the few hps guys who posted them as i now want a bigger hps not some rip off led hype that obviously hasnt changed much.
As to the argumentative types, carry on as i got my answer clear as day
Im not knocking leds, thats the point, but i am knocking their claims. Theres a difference and purely based on the equation that yeild is king for a lot of us i think we have a pretty good answer here.
I know they produce heat, but hardly anything compared to hid lighting. Like I said, I can run 6 set ups in a small apartment if I use led. I could not run 6 hid set up's.
I may be wrong and would be really curious to see an actual btu versus btu output, but I would think watt for watt they would be comparable re heat produced.
Perhaps, cobs are a bit more work to setup properly on a commercial scale, I understand having so much stuff hanging could be a pain on a large scale but at this point I'd be curious to see what would yield the best, 1000w DE or 20 x 50w COBs evenly spread over a 5 x 5. We need someone to do a 5 x 5. When I did my first round with COBS, I was a little disappointed because I thought they were not that bright.
For every watt pushed to a bulb there are 2 results, light and heat. This is why LED users constantly talk about efficiency. They are trying to get the most lumens/watt. How much of the wattage is turned to heat vs light varies from HID to HID, LED to LED. Average HID's convert roughly 1/3 of their wattage to useable light. Quality LEDs driven softer can reach 2/3 of the wattage being converted to useable light.I came across a pretty good thread here by SupraSPL that discusses this. There is also the obvious conversation to be had about light degradation. An HID will continually lose efficiency as it is used (creating less light and more heat), while LEDs will continue to run at nearly 100% of their initial efficacy. I've used HID in the past, am getting back into growing (why I joined this forum), and am currently in the market for a COB setup just to see what they can do before I scale. I'd love for LED to work out for me for numerous reasons, but will it? Yet to be seen.
I get the feeling that a lot of folks just want to defend the way they grow. Those who have grown with both HID and COB are the most credible. I like em all and can't wait to try COB. Christmas is around the corner...
The fallacy in your thinking is clear. Heat is not the byproduct of wattage usage, it is a product of wattage usage. The energy used in HID is wasted on excess heat simply due to the nature of incandescent lighting, whereas with a solid state COB emitter, most/much more of the energy is successfully converted to photons because it isn't super-heating gasses or metal to create that light. It's simply the result of electricity arcing through the phosphor emitter, not deliberately heating it up as incandescent bulbs do. Anything incandescent like HID is bound to get hot because it uses heat to create light. SSD lighting is more efficient, converting more energy into photons because it isn't a traditional incandescent and doesn't use heat to create light; it uses electroluminescence.
