bicit
Well-Known Member
Awfully presumptuous of you.Not you. Peace.
CXA3590 Build Plan
- Thread starter Doer
- Start date
Positivity
Well-Known Member
You havent even started and you've already failed. Drive them at the right current and you wont need a cool tube.
Toot your own horn often?
Doer
Well-Known Member
Dear new friend, please go back and see. I have answered every question.
But, the questions I have asked are ignored. Go back and look, if you can't remember.
Ask away, with any new questions. Now, why do you assume I am asking for your help? It is a build thread, not a help thread. Just curious?
Have you ever heard of red-lining? It is when you give a document to someone, to review the content and fix typos etc., but they essential re-write the thing.
I have said, if you have alternate designs that harness forced air you have not proposed any.
So, how do you want to help, really?
Doer
Well-Known Member
You are a malfunction. Have you driven these 3590s at 100 w?
Doer
Well-Known Member
Oh, now it's Miss Manners?
Let's do lunch.
bicit
Well-Known Member
Answer this question. How much space are you trying to use to grow? All of my suggestions stem from that basic question.
bicit
Well-Known Member
Went back and 're read the thread. Other than a footprint of the light @3' my question wasn't answered. I can do trig, I can't see or messure your space.
I am here to learn, differing perspective s are a good thing I think.
Last edited:
Doer
Well-Known Member
By showing fear? Or by banging the thread to provoke? You are being worthless.
bicit
Well-Known Member
How big Is the bedroom and how much of it are you wanting to use to grow. Really read five posts up!
Doer
Well-Known Member
But, I said. This is not a design to cover a certain sized grow. I said all this and you comment on the monstrosity, but now you act like I am trying to cram into a little closet grow.
I said I think this light bar will cover 3-4 plant in a row. I calculated the foot print at 36" for the lower leaves.
So, go read it again? I'd like some math for the suggestions.
Doer
Well-Known Member
I am going to presume this is not a ventrui calculation which is about pressure/vs speed.
I am tending to think this: If the same amount of cubic volume of air must past through 1/2 the cross section it must move 2x as fast. Eh? Good enough to make the first hypothesis to test.
I need to get one of those cheepo wind speed handhelds.
Last edited:
bicit
Well-Known Member
I insinuated nothing of the sort. Usually when people are building a light they have at least some vague idea of how much space they want to utilize, plant size, pot size, some sort of dimensional analysis. 3-4 plants you say? Perpetual? Pot size? How much floor space do your plants occupy?
Like I said, I can do trig too. I can calculate the light foot print of a cob. Your numbers do nothing for me, are you plants less than 3' tall? Do you intend to keep the light 3' from the bottom of the plant at all times?
I don't know why you have this idea that we're all out to get you and trash your idea.It's frustrating since I think there is merit in concept.
Doer
Well-Known Member
And you know what? You have all been Teamed! That's right. We call that the Storming Phase. Next we NORMLize. No kidding.
So, the MVP during Storming was a real toss up, it was such a good contribution phase, but in end it goes to @churchhaze for the early idea of "just put a piece of sheet metal across the top of a heat sink" Oh yeah. That what I will do, with a few mods of course.
New look follows function, and form.
So, the MVP during Storming was a real toss up, it was such a good contribution phase, but in end it goes to @churchhaze for the early idea of "just put a piece of sheet metal across the top of a heat sink" Oh yeah. That what I will do, with a few mods of course.
New look follows function, and form.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Well, let us enter normalization. I think there may be merit also. And that is a point of agreement. Cool. We need that.
My grow is a monthly throughput type, in buckets, in inert media, fully drained. I did 4 at a time before, in pairs a month apart. This 16-18 week approach means they get about 4-5 feet high, after stretch.
So, again. I have no grow. I had one. I am buying a house. It has a 16 x 16 bedroom I will use.
I am interested in bettering the performance of 1000w HPS, without the hassle.
I am into extraction, and that consumes a lot of dry bud mass, so I need to step this up, from 2 ounces a month.
I am looking to create a high watt module that can easily be duplicated.
My favorite color is blue and I am an Aquarius. Just kidding. We are friends, right?
Last edited:
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Obviously - or I guess not for some - with a modular system the room size or height is initially not the determining factor. Unless you're thinking micro grow...
Each module eventually has a certain amount of light output, call it lumen, par watts, pff, the unit is by itself - in this context - nor even relevant. Each plant species has a ideal range of the amount of of light it should receive. Efficiency wise low intensity is better. The second 500ppf gives only 30% more net photosynthesis than the first 500ppf. The third 500ppf (running 1500) only result in 10% more. Running above 1000pff is obviously inefficient (and running low intensity led gives relatively higher gpw...). So for cannabis, 700-1000 is a considering a good range to be able to fill a space bud-to-bud, with compact/dense nuggets.
When you know the output per module and the requirement of the plant species you know how many modules you need to use for a given space. Whether that space is 16x16 or 8x16 is initially irrelevant. And here's the kicker, how high the ceiling is or how high the leds will hang is not as important as people like to believe. As long at the light spreads out uniformly on the plants, it's actually better to raise them as high as possible (without creating a footprint larger than the growspace...), overlapping with as many others as possible. For example, instead of using 4 cobs to cover 1sqft each on a 2x2, in an ideal scenario, for the best spread (with light from multiple sources and angles, which helps crop penetration without removing leaves, which has proven, in professional experiments, to increase dry weight significantly) each of those 4 cobs would cover the 2x2 area and their footprints with the other 3.
I know that probably sounds controversial to people... keep it up, and maybe I'll fire up my $6K software and post pretty pictures too.
Each module eventually has a certain amount of light output, call it lumen, par watts, pff, the unit is by itself - in this context - nor even relevant. Each plant species has a ideal range of the amount of of light it should receive. Efficiency wise low intensity is better. The second 500ppf gives only 30% more net photosynthesis than the first 500ppf. The third 500ppf (running 1500) only result in 10% more. Running above 1000pff is obviously inefficient (and running low intensity led gives relatively higher gpw...). So for cannabis, 700-1000 is a considering a good range to be able to fill a space bud-to-bud, with compact/dense nuggets.
When you know the output per module and the requirement of the plant species you know how many modules you need to use for a given space. Whether that space is 16x16 or 8x16 is initially irrelevant. And here's the kicker, how high the ceiling is or how high the leds will hang is not as important as people like to believe. As long at the light spreads out uniformly on the plants, it's actually better to raise them as high as possible (without creating a footprint larger than the growspace...), overlapping with as many others as possible. For example, instead of using 4 cobs to cover 1sqft each on a 2x2, in an ideal scenario, for the best spread (with light from multiple sources and angles, which helps crop penetration without removing leaves, which has proven, in professional experiments, to increase dry weight significantly) each of those 4 cobs would cover the 2x2 area and their footprints with the other 3.
I know that probably sounds controversial to people... keep it up, and maybe I'll fire up my $6K software and post pretty pictures too.
bicit
Well-Known Member
Sounds about what I was thinking. I don't think its controversial at all.
Eta: I'd love to see what this software is and what its capable of regardless though. New things are always fun.
Eta: since a know tone isn't communicated properly through text I just want to clarify. This is genuine interest. Im not trying to be snarky.
Last edited:
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
This is a simulation of a 6' long 4" profile, 1.3" tall with 20mph wind across one long even 360W heat source (60% of 600W). The view doesn't fit the whole 6' bar, but it shows what I mean about temperature distribution.
Honestly, if that's the temperature of the red part, it shouldn't be too much of an issue, although it is something to keep in consideration.
This is all I was trying to say. Sorry for trying to help. It's not like I haven't thought about designing exactly what you're thinking of.
Honestly, if that's the temperature of the red part, it shouldn't be too much of an issue, although it is something to keep in consideration.
This is all I was trying to say. Sorry for trying to help. It's not like I haven't thought about designing exactly what you're thinking of.
Last edited:
Abiqua
Well-Known Member
anemometer