churchhaze
Well-Known Member
NOOO!!! WHYYYYYYYY!!!!!!
But ... what if i underdrive my cxb2530 3000k u2 to 350mA... hehehehe....
DiY LED - Cree CXA3070
- Thread starter SupraSPL
- Start date
But ... what if i underdrive my cxb2530 3000k u2 to 350mA... hehehehe....
medicinehuman
Well-Known Member
I need LED rehab, I can't stop enjoying all this cob and efficient ect. stuff. I am addicted and my wife knows it. Jerry emailed me, $52 a piece for CXB3590 3000K. A week or two to get. That beets anyone else that I know of, I'm sure some of you big order guys did better
(JUST JOKING 
)
(JUST JOKING )
MrDavis
Well-Known Member
Supra man I hope you have time to answer this. I know a lot of questions get asked and it might of been answered.
How do you compare HPS to LED? In terms of horticultural performance.
I know lumens gets thrown around a lot and I do believe lumens can be a measurement of growth potential; however there are individuals who don't like the lumen hype lol.
I know you have $/par (could you elaborate on this?) but how do we compare wattage? PAR rating?
Is it the LEDs max wattage x the amount in the fixture?
So 4 CXA3590's would be equivalent to 600wHPS(150w max 3590. Using only 380 actual watts)
If so how is this fair to market something as an equivalent to HPS if it will never even be run @150w. At least not nothing on the market would; as it would definitely burn the cob.
I haven't got any cob's as of yet (still trying to piece together my build for 4cxa3590's) but I know the cobs, when properly fixtured, will out perform the HPS hands down.
However reiterating some you feel in your bones is a lot harder on paper when they are being marketed as something they might not be (or ever depending on how equivalence is determined when comparing and marketing HpS vs LEDs).
So what's the dealio? Is PAR comparisons possible?
How do you compare HPS to LED? In terms of horticultural performance.
I know lumens gets thrown around a lot and I do believe lumens can be a measurement of growth potential; however there are individuals who don't like the lumen hype lol.
I know you have $/par (could you elaborate on this?) but how do we compare wattage? PAR rating?
Is it the LEDs max wattage x the amount in the fixture?
So 4 CXA3590's would be equivalent to 600wHPS(150w max 3590. Using only 380 actual watts)
If so how is this fair to market something as an equivalent to HPS if it will never even be run @150w. At least not nothing on the market would; as it would definitely burn the cob.
I haven't got any cob's as of yet (still trying to piece together my build for 4cxa3590's) but I know the cobs, when properly fixtured, will out perform the HPS hands down.
However reiterating some you feel in your bones is a lot harder on paper when they are being marketed as something they might not be (or ever depending on how equivalence is determined when comparing and marketing HpS vs LEDs).
So what's the dealio? Is PAR comparisons possible?
alef
Active Member
well, it depends on what is the criteria to measure BS. yes, it will be more efficient but the cost of the solution per watt will be more. it is logical to use the optimal parameters and for vero 10 they are 350mA
. you can connect each COB with a 10W power supply. your efficiency may reach the sky but what about the proportion of cost/lm?
alef
Active Member
one more, let's call it an alternative view and not BS next time, ok?
SupraSPL
Well-Known Member
@MrDavis Only with an accurate spectroradiometer can you accurately measure PPFD in PAR W and umol/S to make a fair comparison between HPS and LED canopy intensity, although there are very significant differences in the spectrum and spread as well. Unfortunately, I do not have that $5000 tool on hand although I will consider acquiring one. So I start by looking at the lamp ppf (total photons emitted, 400-700nm). The way I see it ppf is the lamps responsibility and ppfd is our responsibility (ppfd = photons in the canopy, umol/s/sq meter). In other words if you are determined to get the most out of the lamp's ppf, you can run an HPS bulb vertical and bare to somewhat reduce reflector losses, scatter losses and glass losses. Using LED, you can run them bare at low current, so close to the canopy that there are almost no losses to reflectors/lenses or scatter.
So in order to estimate the ppf of a white light lamp, we can convert from lumens if we know the LER. The LER can be estimated from an SPD curve which several awesome growers have done. The Cree CXA 3000K spectrum is 325 LER, according to Cree, which closely agrees with the SPD curve in the PDF. So the next part, we have to figure out how many lumens the lamp is emitting at each current. I estimate that from the Cree PDF data. They provide a Vf curve and a temp/current droop curve. Now we know our approximate lumens/W, which we can convert into efficiency. We can also convert in umol/PAR W because Mr Flux provided the data when he calculated the LER. The CXA 3000K spectrum creates 4.88 umol/PAR W.
For 3000K LED, I recommend about 15 PAR W/ft² (15X10.76X4.88=788 ppfd) and would consider that very good intensity. With DIY LED you can get a much more even spread of light into the canopy (ppfd) than you can with HPS and that is very worthwhile effort. With lenses or reflectors you can get a more precise cutoff so less photons "miss" the canopy. You can scale it up as large as you need. You can increase intensity to 20 PAR W/ft² (20X10.76X4.88=1050 ppfd). Using COBs you can continue to increase intensity to the point that the plants turn white and die from light bleaching, but with perfect canopy temps LOL.
For HPS ppf, we can use the same method although there is some variance in our LER figures, 380-390. Large HPS lamps claim 130-150lm/W, which corresponds to 34-39% initial efficiency. So a 600W HPS put out about 225 PAR W. They experience about 20% reflector losses, 5-10% losses in the glass if there is a cover, maybe 5% to lateral scatter. So if the 600W HPS is covering a 3X3 canopy, you can expect about 18 PAR W/ft² (canopy average), which is very good intensity (initially.) You can get a decent spread of light, but the corners and edges will be a lot lower intensity than the center and the edges. See growers house test of the 1000W HPS in magnum XXXl hood
In summary, we are looking at canopy intensity first and efficiency second. It is possible to strongly outperform the efficiency and intensity of HPS using COBs and many of us are doing it every day
So in order to estimate the ppf of a white light lamp, we can convert from lumens if we know the LER. The LER can be estimated from an SPD curve which several awesome growers have done. The Cree CXA 3000K spectrum is 325 LER, according to Cree, which closely agrees with the SPD curve in the PDF. So the next part, we have to figure out how many lumens the lamp is emitting at each current. I estimate that from the Cree PDF data. They provide a Vf curve and a temp/current droop curve. Now we know our approximate lumens/W, which we can convert into efficiency. We can also convert in umol/PAR W because Mr Flux provided the data when he calculated the LER. The CXA 3000K spectrum creates 4.88 umol/PAR W.
For 3000K LED, I recommend about 15 PAR W/ft² (15X10.76X4.88=788 ppfd) and would consider that very good intensity. With DIY LED you can get a much more even spread of light into the canopy (ppfd) than you can with HPS and that is very worthwhile effort. With lenses or reflectors you can get a more precise cutoff so less photons "miss" the canopy. You can scale it up as large as you need. You can increase intensity to 20 PAR W/ft² (20X10.76X4.88=1050 ppfd). Using COBs you can continue to increase intensity to the point that the plants turn white and die from light bleaching, but with perfect canopy temps LOL.
For HPS ppf, we can use the same method although there is some variance in our LER figures, 380-390. Large HPS lamps claim 130-150lm/W, which corresponds to 34-39% initial efficiency. So a 600W HPS put out about 225 PAR W. They experience about 20% reflector losses, 5-10% losses in the glass if there is a cover, maybe 5% to lateral scatter. So if the 600W HPS is covering a 3X3 canopy, you can expect about 18 PAR W/ft² (canopy average), which is very good intensity (initially.) You can get a decent spread of light, but the corners and edges will be a lot lower intensity than the center and the edges. See growers house test of the 1000W HPS in magnum XXXl hood
In summary, we are looking at canopy intensity first and efficiency second. It is possible to strongly outperform the efficiency and intensity of HPS using COBs and many of us are doing it every day
medicinehuman
Well-Known Member
A lot of French Supra, but I can get the general idea and I like it. Good work sir.
SupraSPL
Well-Known Member
If you were "efficiency eccentric" and ran the very best COBs (CXB3590 3K CB) at 700mA (23W) ea, to compare 180W of LED, 275W of LED and 600W of HPS:
1 600W HPS in a 3X3, mentioned above, gets us 18PAR W/ft² and 378W of heat. Good intensity but a lot of heat, 825nm infrared beam, less than ideal spread, less than ideal spectrum.
12 CXB3590s at 22.9W ea, 58.7% efficient, 275 dissipation W, 161.3 PAR W. In a 3X3 that is 18 PAR W/ft² and 114W of heat. This will strongly outyield the 600 HPS with 1/3 the heat.
8 CXB3590s at 22.9W ea, 58.7% efficient, 183 dissipation W, 107.5 PAR W. In a 3X3 that is 12 PAR W/ft² and 76W of heat. This will yield the same or slightly less than 600 HPS with 1/5 the heat.
Last edited:
SupraSPL
Well-Known Member
I was actually saying get 5 drivers for 5 leds (Sorry if it was unclear) They put out 10w each at around 300mA, just wanted to know if it was possible to hook up 1 Led at 10 watts or if its restricted to 6-10 x 1w leds (Should work with 1 x 10w led I think)well, it depends on what is the criteria to measure BS. yes, it will be more efficient but the cost of the solution per watt will be more. it is logical to use the optimal parameters and for vero 10 they are 350mA
Plus looking at only 50w extra, more spread out, as I already have about 70w of veg lightswell, it depends on what is the criteria to measure BS. yes, it will be more efficient but the cost of the solution per watt will be more. it is logical to use the optimal parameters and for vero 10 they are 350mA
MrDavis
Well-Known Member
Safe to say I am now, addicted.@MrDavis Only with an accurate spectroradiometer can you accurately measure PPFD in PAR W and umol/S to make a fair comparison between HPS and LED canopy intensity, although there are very significant differences in the spectrum and spread as well. Unfortunately, I do not have that $5000 tool on hand although I will consider acquiring one. So I start by looking at the lamp ppf (total photons emitted, 400-700nm). The way I see it ppf is the lamps responsibility and ppfd is our responsibility (ppfd = photons in the canopy, umol/s/sq meter). In other words if you are determined to get the most out of the lamp's ppf, you can run an HPS bulb vertical and bare to somewhat reduce reflector losses, scatter losses and glass losses. Using LED, you can run them bare at low current, so close to the canopy that there are almost no losses to reflectors/lenses or scatter.
So in order to estimate the ppf of a white light lamp, we can convert from lumens if we know the LER. The LER can be estimated from an SPD curve which several awesome growers have done. The Cree CXA 3000K spectrum is 325 LER, according to Cree, which closely agrees with the SPD curve in the PDF. So the next part, we have to figure out how many lumens the lamp is emitting at each current. I estimate that from the Cree PDF data. They provide a Vf curve and a temp/current droop curve. Now we know our approximate lumens/W, which we can convert into efficiency. We can also convert in umol/PAR W because Mr Flux provided the data when he calculated the LER. The CXA 3000K spectrum creates 4.88 umol/PAR W.
For 3000K LED, I recommend about 15 PAR W/ft² (15X10.76X4.88=788 ppfd) and would consider that very good intensity. With DIY LED you can get a much more even spread of light into the canopy (ppfd) than you can with HPS and that is very worthwhile effort. With lenses or reflectors you can get a more precise cutoff so less photons "miss" the canopy. You can scale it up as large as you need. You can increase intensity to 20 PAR W/ft² (20X10.76X4.88=1050 ppfd). Using COBs you can continue to increase intensity to the point that the plants turn white and die from light bleaching, but with perfect canopy temps LOL.
For HPS ppf, we can use the same method although there is some variance in our LER figures, 380-390. Large HPS lamps claim 130-150lm/W, which corresponds to 34-39% initial efficiency. So a 600W HPS put out about 225 PAR W. They experience about 20% reflector losses, 5-10% losses in the glass if there is a cover, maybe 5% to lateral scatter. So if the 600W HPS is covering a 3X3 canopy, you can expect about 18 PAR W/ft² (canopy average), which is very good intensity (initially.) You can get a decent spread of light, but the corners and edges will be a lot lower intensity than the center and the edges. See growers house test of the 1000W HPS in magnum XXXl hood
In summary, we are looking at canopy intensity first and efficiency second. It is possible to strongly outperform the efficiency and intensity of HPS using COBs and many of us are doing it every day
MrDavis
Well-Known Member
Supra what increases the PAR/w (intensity) Is it the voltage?
What would 4 3590's at 95w(@1.2a each) a piece put out in terms of par/w?
What's the math in terms of getting the par/w number?
Last edited:
SupraSPL
Well-Known Member
Because they are on constant current circuits, boosting the current is how we boost the output of the COB. The Vf of the COB will rise a bit as the current is increased. Here is the data I am going by:
So at 1.2A, 87.55W dissipation for each COB X 4 = 350 dissipation W.
350 * .4248 = 149 PAR W
149/ 9sq ft = 16.52 PAR W/sq ft.
So at 1.2A, 87.55W dissipation for each COB X 4 = 350 dissipation W.
350 * .4248 = 149 PAR W
149/ 9sq ft = 16.52 PAR W/sq ft.
alesh
Well-Known Member
well, it depends on what is the criteria to measure BS. yes, it will be more efficient but the cost of the solution per watt will be more. it is logical to use the optimal parameters and for vero 10 they are 350mA
Please read again what you wrote. This thread (amongst others) is full of such half-truths and if we don't call them out they will continue to deceive unexperienced users.
Abiqua
Well-Known Member
@SupraSPL
Getting to the 11th hour on my Cree / Vero fixture...finally.....
But I wanted your opinion on grounding....
I bought a Meanwell HLG120-C1050A to power 2x 3k ABs and 1x V29 3K @ 1050mA....
[....I know took me forever, considering I started asking you questions nearly a year ago!!! damn....]
I also have an EMI filter to throw into the mix...and I am going to essentially remote mount the driver outside of my little cabinet....
[light inside, location of Driver is remote mount......]
So I have a ground on the EMI and I would also like to ground my aluminum frame for the COBS....ANY suggestions on how to mate the three ground wire [EMI, Driver, Frame Ground] into one area, without causing a fuss?
How unclear is that?
Maybe a simple diagram would help explain:
I am putting all the mains and Driver to main, inside of a junction box, could I use a terminal strip to mount all 3 grounds to a common source?
THANK YOU!
Getting to the 11th hour on my Cree / Vero fixture...finally
.....But I wanted your opinion on grounding....
I bought a Meanwell HLG120-C1050A to power 2x 3k ABs and 1x V29 3K @ 1050mA....
[....I know took me forever, considering I started asking you questions nearly a year ago!!! damn....]
I also have an EMI filter to throw into the mix...and I am going to essentially remote mount the driver outside of my little cabinet....
[light inside, location of Driver is remote mount......]
So I have a ground on the EMI and I would also like to ground my aluminum frame for the COBS....ANY suggestions on how to mate the three ground wire [EMI, Driver, Frame Ground] into one area, without causing a fuss?
How unclear is that?
Maybe a simple diagram would help explain:
I am putting all the mains and Driver to main, inside of a junction box, could I use a terminal strip to mount all 3 grounds to a common source?
THANK YOU!
Last edited:
Abiqua
Well-Known Member
or could I just ground the Driver Neutral and EMI neutral to a frame themselves....in one location? Then 2 wires instead of a 3rd?
Thanks again Supra
Tool!, been a fan since like 92 before I was a freshman even,,...they have been in Oregon, once or twice, lol......it all makes sense now...
Thanks again Supra
Tool!, been a fan since like 92 before I was a freshman even,,...they have been in Oregon, once or twice, lol......it all makes sense now...
MrDavis
Well-Known Member
So supra maybe I'm not doing the math right.
For your above HPS comparison
275w (12 cobs 22.9w) x .4248 (what is this number?) = 117.24 PAR w
117.24/9sqft= 13PAR/w Sqft?
I know that is a little different than the 18 you posted (could be my math, I stuck at it).
Just want to know if I am doing that right?
I think with the heat difference alone 5par/w isn't an issue lol.. As you said bleaching is really easy to do without burning haha.
