OneHitDone
Well-Known Member
This Philips T5 Direct wire LED tube is doing pretty well for veg in 3500K
LUXX CLONE LEDs SUCK B4LLZ
- Thread starter calvin.m16
- Start date
welight
Well-Known Member
The point being that it is spectrum and given we understand what 6500 is in T5, no doubt it can be replicated in LED.
Yes we are actually running some 2200k strips at present and can certainly build 2200k Skins with 730nm and 400nm uva
Cheers
HippieDudeRon
Well-Known Member
2+2+4+2=10...aka 6500k
3+1+4+1+1=10....aka 6500k
What if the key is to have "1" for certain value.... not to all add up to 10?...then situation number 1 does nothing for you...yet you were searching for 6500k and it fit the build. You probably were not looking for 6500K, but a "x%" in the blue range. Chasing the wrong tail here.
Correlation is not causation.
Cause= SPD average make up
Effect= CCT reading
or
Cause= SPD individual contributions(each nm or range of nm) and ratios
Effect= plant growth and morphology
3+1+4+1+1=10....aka 6500k
What if the key is to have "1" for certain value.... not to all add up to 10?...then situation number 1 does nothing for you...yet you were searching for 6500k and it fit the build. You probably were not looking for 6500K, but a "x%" in the blue range. Chasing the wrong tail here.
Correlation is not causation.
Cause= SPD average make up
Effect= CCT reading
or
Cause= SPD individual contributions(each nm or range of nm) and ratios
Effect= plant growth and morphology
grotbags
Well-Known Member
to be fair to the horticultural led industry they really dont have a lot of choice, its not like they picked 450nm because that would be closest to the absorbtion peaks its literally all they could pick without crashing efficiency.
nearly all white diodes are based on some form of gallium nitride (GaN) which means a blue 450nm pump, they then convert this into white light via a phosphor coating. different mixes of phosphor give you your different kelvin colour temps and cri's.
when you look at the spectrum of a typical 3500k led the blue peak at 450nm is the underlying colour of the diode (these blue photons managed to make there way through the phosphor without conversion) the rest of the curve is made up from the 450nm light that gets converted by the phospor into green/yellow/red ect.
the problem is the phosphor conversion isnt free so you have to put in more photons than you get out so the more you want to drown out that 450nm peak and "broaden the spectrum" the more/different phosphor you have to use so less photons out , less efficiency...
generally the lower the kelvin (more yellow) and the higher the cri (how evenly each individual block of colours is represented in the spectrum(100 cri would look like a straight line accross the spectrum graph)), the more phosphor is needed and the worse efficiency.
there are a few white diodes based on different blue/violet nm pumps, nichia's optisolis, bridgelux thrive's, seoul sunlikes ect but all these are geared towards good colour reproduction/high cri, they aint cheap and the efficiency isnt great at around 120 - 140 lm/watt compared to samsungs top bin 301 b&h's at around 220lm/watt you can see why led growlight manufactures are not going to use them.
samsungs new 301h evo use a 435nm pump and manages around 235lm/watt which is about efficient as it gets for now but with the 435nm pump and the phospor they are using the whole spectrum is pulled/shifted more blue which isnt great for a flower spectrum if they are used without supplemention, luckily when you add a load of 660nm monos this fills out the red spectrum an ups the efficiency even more (its more efficient to produce red 660nm with monos then converting blue 450nm ect to red with phosphor).
but you still end up with the more or less standard led spectrum, its no broader or fuller than 99% of every other grow light spectrum its just now even more efficient...
i think we will soon be approaching growlights with a board efficiency of around 3.5 umol/joule (standard narrow spectrum). to get a true broad/full flower spectrum you are lucky to aproach 2.7 umol/joule and it will cost more to make than the narrow spectrum...
hence why more or less all led growlights spectrum look the same...
p.s @Kassiopeija i am not suggesting you dont know all this, you seem very knowledgeable it was just me on a ramble...
p.p.s i think 4000k brigelux thrives would be about perfect for cuttings and veg, im gona try some soon...
Last edited:
grotbags
Well-Known Member
i recon their flower spectrum will veg plants better than their veg spectrum...Looks like Chilledgrowlights is doing the old monkey see monkey do also. Can't wait to see all of the reviews from the happy customers with that veg spectrum
View attachment 5079053
grotbags
Well-Known Member
yep i agree 6500k flourescent is still better for cuttings and early veg than any standard 80/90cri 3000k,3500k,4000k,5000k led spectrum i have tried, i dont use 6500k flourescents any more though i just use 4000k led, it gets the job done and still get great growth it just lacks a certain something...
i think 4000k bridgelux thrive might give 6500k flourescents a run for the money.
Last edited:
grotbags
Well-Known Member
honestly for me its not, i can equal or better growth in veg v's a cmh with 3700-4000k 80cri standard led and i get way better results in flower with led vs sodium/sodium+cmh.
hid is dead...
OneHitDone
Well-Known Member
I ran 5K Thrive. They did well, still lacked as you say that "certain something". The 3500K 80cri Philips led T% tubes I would say are delivering comparable results. I am going to try a blend of Fluorescent and LED and see how that plays out.
The frustrating part for me is that led technology is clearly capable of living up to the task yet we have not seen any of these led companies do proper engineering or spectral research. They just keep spoon feeding the same crap incomplete spectrum to the market.
The few that are working in the right direction are just too expensive for consideration by most growers.
HID is definitely not dead. I ran full led in flower for a year or so, long enough to know what I am looking for in an led spectrum before I go down that path again......
OneHitDone
Well-Known Member
I think a lot of people are also still not being honest about what to expect under led. If trimming lots of small hard flowers is your game, maybe led is made just for you.
The led provided higher average ppfd across the canopy as well.
This is the exact same strain grown under HPS and LED. Both fantastic finished quality but the nod went to the HPS flower by multiple patients who have been toking for longer than most on this forum have been growing.
Only a fool would go against randomized feedback from multiple people in their circle.
LED:
HPS:
Kassiopeija
Well-Known Member
Grotbags, thank you for this highly informative writeup. It rang a bell on many thing I read from GLA & Co at another forum at another time yes.
I can understand the ulterior motives and it seems like the "umol chase" is customer-driven as well - this is what they are looking at. But for me it is just 1 piece of the puzzle so to speak. Not all spectra cause the same net return in plant mass/growth - but this is depending on a number of factors, and scientists in study usually only unveil these things from 1 side.
For example, the literature states that the blue light promotes rooth growth - so this why they used such a spectrum. But at the same time - too much blue will cause loss in overall growth and can have some other negative consequences. So it stands to reason to only include blue as minimal as is needed to activate the various photoreceptor natural responses.
There is evidence that a monochromatic light from blue, yellow & red is a better photosynthetic recipe than the typical diode white light, and since these colors are mostly absorbed quickly it would fit an 'early veg' rack.
Later when plants are taller an adapted light recipe could be used, I firmly believe that the darkred color can do alot of good things here in the depth/middle of the plant structure. But it would stand to reason that manufacturers like to target a broad range of species and not many plants grow that tall or bushy than Cannabis. So they may wanna not include colors that would rather shine through, or be deflected to generate a higher ambient light, or drive photosynthesis at very luminosity.
But for commercial indoor hemp this would all make sense, esp. when the canopy is covered in multiple layers of leaves.
That said, maybe the recipe can even be more efficient in output in the future. Because, I wonder why 660nm is so in focus but not 700nm - this light holds less energy per particle. I just don't know how good their pumps are, but these monos do exist already.
That color wouldn't place such a heavy burden on topleaves (at high irradiance), shine halfway through, and help photosystem 1 which in nature is done by the 690-780nm sunlight. And it would be neutral to the phytochrome response....
Yeah this problem with blue, well what they need is another pump somewhere in the 360 or 380 nm and then convert this to blue & green light, and then mix these diodes with the common white light to arrive at a basic spectrum that resembles somewhere a high CRI CMH and then this still can be pimped up by red & farred monos.
HydroKid239
Well-Known Member
Have you tested the lux reading? Those should be ok. Even at 4” away. I sit mine on the floor of the tent under the shade of other plants unless I am trying to push gender out.. then they go directly in 12/12 from the snip.
Horselover fat
Well-Known Member
Yes, small hard nugs for me please. And I'm not foolish enough to ask other people what I like best
calvin.m16
Well-Known Member
I don't know what the Lux is but I know the PPFD is 120-150 @ 6" away from strips. Spectrum is showing 7500k when they are claiming to be 9000k.. I run my VEG & Clone room 18/6 I never have liked running 24 hours of light nor have my plants. Hopefully they're getting enough DLI.
I've placed the lights further away on my second rack and I'm going to see what happens with a bit more distance.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't wanna bother selling them I'd rather just run the clone rack with them and hopefully it works out..
Leds....................................................
calvin.m16
Well-Known Member
So far I have a small 3x3" pot with a plant in it.. Were my first 2 cycles with these just a flook? Will they show the same malformities on this plant? Time will tell!
Kassiopeija
Well-Known Member
It's looking light-depraved and rootbound. You can keep it like this like treating a "genetic backup" plant - slow veg growth - but if you'd wish to achieve good growth there needs to be more soil & light. And I don't think the blue & red diodes mix well into the general spec at that distance, they could have done 1 blue + 1 red each 4th row
Kassiopeija
Well-Known Member
so even when they say "diode beam angle 120°" most of the radiation will still just emanate straight out ....?
OneHitDone
Well-Known Member
Maybe just a fluke in reflection off the wall in a photo?
If I am understanding correctly, @calvin.m16 is saying that he normally would have a T5 in place of each of those Luxx clone strips and the growth and health is just fine?
calvin.m16
Well-Known Member
I've ran 4 per rack with plants in center, in this case I'm trying to run them without being directly overtop plants perhaps that will assist in accuracy. PPFD is reading steadily at 150 across the whole shelf. Perhaps the lights were too intense vs too dim so we'll see. Spectrum is showing 7500 not 9000 so who fuckin knows. These are the most questionable thing I've tested to date..
calvin.m16
Well-Known Member
Good guess because this plant is actually just sitting on the sidelines this run. I'll be planting it into a 2 gallon in the next couple days.
