Reflective material

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
That's the problem with white paint. The light is scattered in every direction.

This creates extra-soft shadows. If you notice the sun does not do this. The sun creates well-defined shadows at direct angles.

All I care about is light hitting the plants directly. Bare metal is highly specular and does this better than any other material.

If you look at metal and you're not viewing from an angle that light would reflect from... this is good. It means the light is being directed. Consider a laser beam, shine it on a mirror and it'll reflect onto another surface. The beam will still be more or less the same intensity. If you use white plant you will not see the beam being reflected onto another surface intensely. You'll likely see a diffused glow of the laser color.
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
That's the problem with white paint. The light is scattered in every direction.

This creates extra-soft shadows. If you notice the sun does not do this. The sun creates well-defined shadows at direct angles.

All I care about is light hitting the plants directly. Bare metal is highly specular and does this better than any other material.

If you look at metal and you're not viewing from an angle that light would reflect from... this is good. It means the light is being directed. Consider a laser beam, shine it on a mirror and it'll reflect onto another surface. The beam will still be more or less the same intensity. If you use white plant you will not see the beam being reflected onto another surface intensely. You'll likely see a diffused glow of the laser color.

you are the best. :blsmoke:
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
I have one with my soil moisture meter...my 600 is reading off the scale..

oh yeah, and i bit your design fdd..thanks
very cool. wait until you see the new one. :mrgreen::blsmoke:



Anything reflective will help. use what you can get or afford. if it's wrapping paper, paint, panda film or mirrors, anything is better than nothing. i say let's all just grow some pot now. bongsmiliebongsmilie




i'm using yellow walls for reflective material on this grow. :mrgreen: IMG_1674.jpg
 

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
I used to aspire to being a CG artist. Learning about materials was critical to creating realistic images.

Light also decays rapidly(inverse square). I really don't see the importance of side-reflectors(unless you have HID and they're near the HID source). Just have a good main reflector, IMO. A good main reflector will trump any side-light-reflectance you could create.

I do not have a light meter, but manually setting my camera and taking pictures of a light versus aluminum(foil, cans, sheet, Mylar®, tin, etc.), the specular reflections are the same exact color as the bulb itself. There seems to be little, if any, difference between smooth shiny aluminum surfaces I've imaged. The shape is the crucial factor.
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
I used to aspire to being a CG artist. Learning about materials was critical to creating realistic images.

Light also decays rapidly(inverse square). I really don't see the importance of side-reflectors(unless you have HID and they're near the HID source). Just have a good main reflector, IMO. A good main reflector will trump any side-light-reflectance you could create.

I do not have a light meter, but manually setting my camera and taking pictures of a light versus aluminum(foil, cans, sheet, Mylar®, tin, etc.), the specular reflections are the same exact color as the bulb itself. There seems to be little, if any, difference between smooth shiny aluminum surfaces I've imaged. The shape is the crucial factor.

i think shape is highly overlooked. it reflects back in the opposite direction that it is hit, the surface that is. this could make a huge difference in the end. not a whole lot of good if you are just bouncing your light into the ceiling. lol :mrgreen:


i really, really, really love the pot. :hump::joint::joint::joint:
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
My wife is a science teacher. Would you like for me to have her to chime in?
Please, let her respond, I'd love to have a little science chat with her about reflectivity. Let her read the following post and correct any errors she finds.

The following will be necessarily a bit long. Although I cannot compete with FDD's vast experience, I also think he has some common misconceptions, but quite understandable considering this is an extremely technical and complicated subject (TTO, you also seem to be applying some good common sense, but unfortunately in this case it will lead you astray).

The issue with trying to define how much "reflective" a surface is, is that you have to specifically define the wavelength of light or electromagnetic radiation (EMR). Even visible light has a wavelength span of 400-800 nanometers or so. Each wavelength responds differently when passing through into a different medium. Quartz will actually separate out all of the individual wavelengths and create a rainbow. You know this as the prism effect. Your skin might reflect a bit of visible light, but X-rays go right through your skin, where bone has a bit higher reflectance rate for that wavelength--hence why X-rays can help doctors. Then you can take some of the huge satellite dishes that can reflect radio waves. The wavelength of radio waves can be so long that you do not even have to have a solid surface to efficiently reflect the wave. Most very large satellite dishes are made of a mesh of metal instead of a smooth solid surface.

If you draw a straight line on a sheet of paper that represents the transition between two media (in our case the wall surface), then you can draw the approach of an incoming light wave. Once it hits the medium (the first line you drew) it will change angles. There will be a defined angle between the ray of light in the first medium and the ray in the second medium. These are called the angle of incidence/angle of reflectance and math can be used to solve them. The angle the light strikes the surface plays a role as to how "reflective" a material is. In case of non-metals (coatings including paint pigments, plastics) the amount of reflected light increases with the increase of the illumination angle. The remaining illuminated light penetrates the material and is absorbed or diffusely scattered dependent on the color.
This is why that flat surfaces are better reflectors than most randomly non-flat surfaces since it keeps the angle of incidence high (some non-random surfaces like dimpled 'spectral' aluminum, is quite efficient at reflecting visible light.)

To make things further complicated, opaque surfaces like walls, metals etc do not transmit most EMR all the way through the medium. In these cases there is surface reflectance and absorption. Absorption at specific wavelength and reflectance at others is what gives color to the object that we look at. A red object reflects red light and absorbs most/all other visible light. Here again, though, you need to specify what wavelength of light you are dealing with to come up with a "most reflective" surface. Flat white paint appears white to us because it reflects all colors equally well, but since color, including white is a purely human perception, there will be a peak in the overall green light transmission/absorption (since our eyes are most sensitive in the green wavelengths). A magenta paint will absorb green light and reflect a lot of blue and red light.

Mirrors and other silvered surfaces, including tin foil, are very good at reflecting visible light without separating out the color, however, people sometimes forget that sunlight, as well as our horticulture lamps, do not only produce visible light, they also produce some UV and also infrared. I think some people also misconstrue the term 'hot spot' as equivalant to 'bright spots'. They are different since they are different wavelenghts of EMR.

Since infrared is heat, then we would like a material that reflects the smaller wavelengths of visible light, but not a lot of the longer heat/IR wavelenths. Mylar will reflect IR, but not nearly as much as some materials (the polyester material it is made from does not trap IR like a metalic material will). As with the radio telescope example earlier, there are some materials that efficiently reflect the longer wavelengths of infrared better than others. Most metals, including tin/aluminum foil are quite efficient reflectors of IR, which is why we use it in the kitchen to retain heat within the wrapped product. This is why tin foil leads to 'hot spots'.

The bottom line is, yes, tin foil reflects visible light well, but infrared too well to be useful for our purposes. Add that to the fact that it is very difficult to keep it smooth, you lose a lot of it's ability to even reflect the wanted visible light very well (you lose much of the light to scatter rather than direct reflectance). Ideally, we want a material that can reflect visible (and up to UVB) EMR but absorb or allow transmission of IR. Mylar does these things superbly, tin foil, eh, not so much.
 

SWIMoryou

Active Member
Yes but I am talking paper with a shiny coat like mylar on it. not tin foil heck (see profile) I used that bubble wrap reflective insulation one time (see pics on profile) and got acceptable results. IM not trying to grow crop to sell just enough to never have to see a dealer again. (NO deispensiaries in my area. but leagally allowed to grow 6 plants. Well 6 mature plants 12 sprouts and posess 8 OZ without fear of arrest so much weight off shoulders.
 

Tronica

Well-Known Member
The bottom line is, yes, tin foil reflects visible light well, but infrared too well to be useful for our purposes. Add that to the fact that it is very difficult to keep it smooth, you lose a lot of it's ability to even reflect the wanted visible light very well (you lose much of the light to scatter rather than direct reflectance). Ideally, we want a material that can reflect visible (and up to UVB) EMR but absorb or allow transmission of IR. Mylar does these things superbly, tin foil, eh, not so much.

This is the bottom line and it's pretty easy to get this one your own by just using common sense.

Tin foil isn't reflecting "hot spots". It is reflecting more IR than mylar, or white paint, or metal, or other reflectors.

If you do not have issues with heat in your grow room, you can actually get away with using tin foil. But that's not the case for most growers. It's harder to deal with than mylar as well since it's a pain in the ass to keep it clean and flat.
 

xogenic

Well-Known Member
This guy just repeats the same bullshit in different threads.

Only his numbers change! LOL!

Mylar is aluminum metalized to fiberglass. (I said that already! :oops:)

Hot spots don't exist from aluminum foil. You've never had one. You just regurgitate what you're read from other fools.... Not good, man. Not good at all.

Think for yourself.

------

not trying to be an ass just adding my piece

... the tinfoil for me has given me hot spots but that might be cause it is "tin" foil and not aluminum

the best reflection will either be flat white paint or Mylar that's why they are used in hydroponics and sold by the truck load every year

so my advice would be to savesv if you need to and get some Mylar and some flat white Matt paint as in the long run its all about getting the most you can out of your crop


also has any one realized that the diamond pressed Mylar has the exact same reflection percentage as the normal Mylar on all the websites and yet it costs like an extra 2 quid a meter lol
 

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
Mylar® as in aluminum metalized PET fiber.

The process by which mylar is made makes the aluminum surface about 3-5% better on average than bare aluminum in the PAR spectrum. It also smooths and heightens the IR dip that normal aluminum foil has(by about 10-15%). As such it decreases absorption of heat. Mylar is a superior IR reflector compared to bare aluminum. This is the biggest difference between them, when comparing their meaningful spectral reflectance. Bare aluminum is 90% reflective in the PAR spectrum. It dips to 80% up around 800nm(IR), and also dips into the lower UV to around 80%. UV enhanced aluminum, coated with magnesium fluoride, can perk this up to around 90-95%, typically the rest of the spectrum suffers slightly. There are also enhanced aluminum coatings, multilayer dielectric films, that can average 95% reflectance across the visible spectrum and into IR and UV. These would be those high-end aluminum reflectors you see claiming between 93-95%



UV is on the lower(smaller wavelengths) end of the EM spectrum compared to visible light, mindphuk.

Heat can only be transferred so many ways. This is governed by the laws of thermodynamics. The second law deals with entropy. That warmer objects tend to become cooler objects, giving off their energy and forming a diffuse background(like a hard musical beat echoing and fading into silence, or light decay, radiators, and so on) tending to a maximal value, to be briefly technical.

Lets start with conduction. That's the direct contact between two objects, energy is transferred from the warmer object to the cooler object in an effort to create equilibrium between the two objects.

Convection is the movement of heat through a liquid, air, but not empty space, that's saved for radiation, our favorite form!

Radiation is light we see. It's also a form of heat transfer. Heat and light are both electromagnetic.

If you'd ever seen one of those compass like children's toys.... I'll describe it, it has white and black faced fins, 4 of these fins, all at 90 degree angles to each other. If it spins one way you would only see one color coming or going. If you shine a light on the black side, it will spin towards the light. If you shine a light on the white side it will spin away from the light. This is a display of the kinetic power of photons. You can repeat this experiment yourself with two magnets to vertically suspend a steel nail and taping on paper, foil, mylar, paint, etc. See which one makes it spin the fastest(most times over a given period, like a minute).

Then you do not have to take anyone's word for it. You will have proven it to yourself!

As you say, it's metal's ability to directly divert light that makes it the superior reflective material. The angle of reflectance is equal to the incident angle. Any surface will increasingly randomize the reflectance angle as the the surface becomes rougher. Also much light is never lost, it gets trapped helping the even illumination of the surface. Surfaces that are have even reflectance are said to be Lambertian, after the mathematician/physicist Johann Lambert, whose formulas describe said phenomenon. This is contrasted with specular reflectivity.

Given that, I'd expect the foil or mylar to spin the fastest. As it would have more directed force(radiation) given the proper angle.

I don't know who actually even has "tin foil" it makes food pick up a tinny taste(very unpopular). It was replaced by aluminum foil decades ago.

ESR is a mirror film created by 3M. As you can see it beats mylar in the visible and PAR spectrums.
http://products3.3m.com/catalog/us/en001/electronics_mfg/vikuiti/node_7358GD8CMRbe/root_GST1T4S9TCgv/vroot_S6Q2FD9X0Jge/gvel_B6D4SWL5QCgl/theme_us_vikuiti_3_0/command_AbcPageHandler/output_html
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
UV is on the lower(smaller wavelengths) end of the EM spectrum compared to visible light, mindphuk.
Depends on how you orient the EMR spectrum. The terms lower and higher depend on whether you are referring to wavelength, frequency or photon energy. When I used the term lower to higher, I am referring to the lower energy, long wavelength radio and microwaves, moving up the scale to the higher energy/frequency IR, then visible and UV light. X-rays and gamma rays are the most energetic, so they are at the highest end of the spectrum. Since wavelength and energy are inversely proportional, you could probably use either terminology as long as you are consistent and clear as to what you are referring to.

Any other comments about the post? I spent a bit of time writing it, I was hoping for more discussion about it.
 

Jtoth3ustin

Well-Known Member
flat white paint.... and if you dont want a mess...... panda film. maylar is good but it is to fragile, and gettig all the wrinkles out is a bitch...
The foil you bought should be fine. but dont use the outer side. use the side that would be on the inside of the present if you were using it for its intended purpose. that is the more reflective side...
but get some white nd black polly..... Pe@ce
 

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
Depends on how you orient the EMR spectrum. The terms lower and higher depend on whether you are referring to wavelength, frequency or photon energy. When I used the term lower to higher, I am referring to the lower energy, long wavelength radio and microwaves, moving up the scale to the higher energy/frequency IR, then visible and UV light. X-rays and gamma rays are the most energetic, so they are at the highest end of the spectrum. Since wavelength and energy are inversely proportional, you could probably use either terminology as long as you are consistent and clear as to what you are referring to.

Any other comments about the post? I spent a bit of time writing it, I was hoping for more discussion about it.
Yes, of course, Gamma rays are the most energetic.

What exactly would you like to discuss further?

She laughed at the hot spots notion. Asked about the context of your post. I said for reflecting light, and she remarked aluminum would be better than white paint, and would not create hot spots unless you purposely make a lens or other concentrator.

I then showed her some of my research and we both concluded that a commercial aluminum reflector coated with whatever enhancement is just going to be that much better than normal aluminum(foil). UV, visible, or IR. The gains are minimal. Bare aluminum pretty much instantly forms an oxide coating that protects it pretty much indefinitely from further oxidation and reflectance loss unless you spill an alkali on the surface, which will cause corrosion.

Here's a site that seems intended for k-12: http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/GBSSCI/PHYS/CLASS/refln/u13l1d.html
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Yes, of course, Gamma rays are the most energetic.

What exactly would you like to discuss further?

She laughed at the hot spots notion. Asked about the context of your post. I said for reflecting light, and she remarked aluminum would be better than white paint, and would not create hot spots unless you purposely make a lens or other concentrator.

Here's a site that seems intended for k-12: http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/GBSSCI/PHYS/CLASS/refln/u13l1d.html
Maybe both of you missed the point of the post. Aluminum certain has good reflective properties. The issue is heat. What people refer to as hot spots, is basically foil's ability to reflect IR wavelengths as efficiently, or more so, than it does light. Don't think of it as focusing light like a magnifier. That's the impression that people get when they hear about hot spots. Other materials allow heat to transmit through them much better than foil. This is why FLIR can pick up IR from the other side of a wall, it hasn't reflected the IR, but it allowed a significant percentage to pass through. I don't care how reflective a substance is to visible light, if it reflects IR wavelengths too efficiently, it will create hot areas.

As for foil reflecting visible light better than white paint, it is certainly something that seems to make common sense but experimental evidence proves her wrong.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
This is only excerpt of the full article, but I think it supports my claims:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6248433/description.html


The amount of radiation emitted is a function of the emissivity factor of the source's surface. Emissivity is the rate at which radiation (emission) is given off. Absorption of radiation by an object is proportional to the absorptivity factor of its surface which is the reciprocal of its emissivity.

Although two objects may be identical, if the surface of one were covered with a material of 90% emissivity, and the surface of the other with a material of 5% emissivity, there would result a drastic difference in the rate of radiation flow from these two objects. The lower the emissivity, the lower the radiation. This is demonstrated by comparison of four identical, equally heated iron radiators covered with different materials. Paint one with aluminum paint and another with ordinary enamel. Cover the third with asbestos and the fourth with aluminum foil. Although all have the same temperature, the one covered with aluminum foil would radiate the least (lowest, e.g. 5%, emissivity). The radiators covered with ordinary paint or asbestos would radiate most because they have the highest emissivity (even higher than the original iron). Painting over the aluminum paint or foil with ordinary paint changes the surface to 90% emissivity and thus increases the radiatiors's radiant heating capacity.
[ed] this supports my contention that most other materials has higher emissivity than aluminum allowing heat to 'pass through'

Materials whose surfaces do not appreciably reflect infrared rays, for example paper, asphalt, wood, glass and rock, have absorption and emissivity rates ranging from 80% to 93%. Most materials used in building construction (brick, stone, wood, paper, etc.) regardless of their color, absorb infrared radiation at about 90%.

The surface of aluminum has the ability not to absorb, but to reflect, 95% of the infrared rays which strike it. Since aluminum foil has such a low mass to air ratio, very little conduction can take place, particularly when only 5% of the rays are absorbed.

In order to retard heat flow by conduction, walls and roofs are built with internal air spaces. Conduction and convection through these air spaces combined represent only 20% to 35% of the heat which pass through them. In both winter and summer, 65% to 80% of the heat that passes from a warm wall to a colder wall or through a ventilated attic does so by radiation.

The value of air spaces as thermal insulation must include the character of the enclosing surfaces. The surfaces greatly affect the amount of energy transferred by radiation, depending on the material's absorptivity and emissivity, and are the only way of modifying the total heat transferred across a given space. The importance of radiation cannot be overlooked in problems involving ordinary room temperatures.

Reflection and emissivity by surfaces can only occur in space. The ideal space is any dimensioned 3/4" or more. Smaller spaces are also effective, but decreasingly so. Where there is no air space, we have conduction through solids. When a reflective surface of a material is attached to a ceiling, floor or wall, the at particular surface ceases to have radiant insulation value at the points in contact. Therefore, care must be exercised, when installing foil insulation, that it be stretched sufficiently to insure that any inner air spaces are properly opened up and that metal does not touch metal. Otherwise, conduction through solids will result at the point of contact.

Heat control with aluminum foil is made possible by taking advantage of its low thermal emissivity and the low thermal conductivity of air. It is possible with layered foil and air to practically eliminate heat transfer by radiation and convection.

There is no such thing as a "dead" air space as far as heat transfer is concerned, even in the case of a perfectly air-tight compartment such as a thermos bottle. Convection currents are inevitable with differences in temperature between surfaces, if air or some other gas is present inside. Since air has some density, there will be some heat transfer by conduction if any surface of a so-called "dead" air space is heated. Finally, radiation, which accounts for 50% to 80% of all heat transfer, will pass through air (or a vacuum) with ease, just as radiation travels the many million miles that separate the earth from the sun.

Aluminum foil, with its reflective surfaces can block the flow of radiation. Some foils have higher absorption and emissivity qualities than others. The variations run from 2% to 72%, a differential of 2000%.

Most aluminum insulation has only 5% absorption and emissivity ratio, is impervious to water vapor and convection currents, and reflects 95% of all radiant energy which strikes its air-bounded surfaces. The performance of most aluminum insulation is unsurpassed for upward winter heat and it has an added efficiency for downward summer heat because of the absence of convection currents. Aluminum prevents the heat rays from penetrating the surface covered therewith while reflecting the heat back, for instance, into the building.
 

Tronica

Well-Known Member
Maybe both of you missed the point of the post. Aluminum certain has good reflective properties. The issue is heat. What people refer to as hot spots, is basically foil's ability to reflect IR wavelengths as efficiently, or more so, than it does light. Don't think of it as focusing light like a magnifier. That's the impression that people get when they hear about hot spots. Other materials allow heat to transmit through them much better than foil. This is why FLIR can pick up IR from the other side of a wall, it hasn't reflected the IR, but it allowed a significant percentage to pass through. I don't care how reflective a substance is to visible light, if it reflects IR wavelengths too efficiently, it will create hot areas.
That's the facts about foil that he's been avoiding ever since he called everyone "stupid" for believing them.

Foil reflects much more IR than other surfaces and is the main reason it's not reccomended in gardens.

It's nice that you spend as much time on here as you do, teatree. 900 posts in a month and mostly you do a good job of copy/pasting your sources for the rest of the forum to follow along with, but you're not always right, and you perusing google for specific info on your topics and then only believing that is the same shit you jumped down Bricks neck for.

And called me "stupid" for believing. Arrogance, when all you're doing is using someone elses information, is pretty retarded.
 

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
Aluminum only reflects medium and far IR, near IR light(700nm to about 1000nm) is the worst part of the spectrum that bare aluminum reflects(near IR is from about 750nm to 1400nm). Commercial reflectors with dielectric coatings are superior to bare aluminum at near IR reflectivity. You'd need IR being produced into the micrometers to be reflected well by bare aluminum. Fluorescents don't really do this. HPS and MH do. But regardless, the best reflectors you can buy(for lights/plants, and HID) are doing an even better job at this. Any any way, even removing a piece of adhesive tape will create radio waves(you can verify this with a hand-held radio). And short-wave IR, up to 3 micrometers is used in long-distance communicates. I don't think is is going to be very harmful to plants. The real heat is in the mid and long wave IR, after that you get microwaves, then radio waves.

My remote control uses infrared light. You think shining it on my plants will hurt them? I doubt it. Most objects in a room emit EMR from 8 to 12 micrometers.

Which is why the argument doesn't make any sense! I honestly think your issues are from mainly convection, not solely radiation.

You seen to have experimented incorrectly. If you tested angles at which the light will not specularly reflect from Al.... white paint will win every time. This is the comparing apples to rotten oranges analogy. Lets take your worst case and compare it against our best case, that'll show you!

The problem is with the word 'create'(in reference to heat). Aluminum doesn't create heat. Energy is neither created or destroyed. It's being transferred. As I mentioned a couple posts back.

So here's an idea: heat up a piece of aluminum foil, an aluminum sheet pan, a piece of glass, a cast iron pan, and water.

I'd bet money the one that cools(and conversely heats) the fastest is the foil!
 

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
That's the facts about foil that he's been avoiding ever since he called everyone "stupid" for believing them.

Foil reflects much more IR than other surfaces and is the main reason it's not reccomended in gardens.

It's nice that you spend as much time on here as you do, teatree. 900 posts in a month and mostly you do a good job of copy/pasting your sources for the rest of the forum to follow along with, but you're not always right, and you perusing google for specific info on your topics and then only believing that is the same shit you jumped down Bricks neck for.

And called me "stupid" for believing. Arrogance, when all you're doing is using someone elses information, is pretty retarded.
I have two college level physics books sitting on my desk. :spew:
 
Top