LED Without LEDs -My First T5 Grow

A

asdmo

Active Member
been following this thread for a while, just wondering what you guys think the best veg setup is. im going to try to order within this week.
fiji purple, actinic, 75.25, 454, fiji, actinic, 75, 454
or
fiji, redsun, super actinic, 75.25, fiji, 454, redsun, fiji
or what else do you guys recommend??
 
L

Lucius Vorenus

Well-Known Member
Just from this whole t5 experience with 2 t5 grows just about done and using hid since the late 90's . From what ive seen first hand. Spectrum and par definitely triumph over lumens. I pull the same size buds under both lights. The t5 produces better quality.[/QUOTE]

Post pics!
 
P

pedro420

Active Member
hey everyone ive been looking at new quantum ballests and i got a few questions

my tent is 48/24/60
the 6 bulb is 46.25/18/3.5
the 8 bulb is 46.25/24/3.5

ive been trying to figure the best to put in my tent and was wondering if the 8 bulb would rub the sides sence they are both 24 inches wide or you all think it would be ok

also ive read a bunch of posts where people have mentiond there bad boy has multiple switches for diff bulbs the systems at quantumhort.com only have 2 switches where did you guys find them with multiple switches

thank you for help
pedro
 
PetFlora

PetFlora

Well-Known Member
I got my new Hanna pH meter. My reses were 2.9 - 3.0 OUCH. I am pretty sure the dying tip was a major reason (+ 1900ppms) for my BK-1 to decline so badly during flower. And for my new plants to be doing so poorly +new 4 seeds started on 1/1/12 not to get past crack stage. I changed the water they were soaking in this morning and I think they may begin to develop.

I emailed wavepoint and ccd Kelly at AS. Hopefully she will provide mouth watering potential

Pr0f: I would mos def buy 8 bulbs
 
P

pedro420

Active Member
im thinking about it but i dont kno if getting the 8 bulb would be a issue being that it is the same size as my tent in width

sucks to hear bout the ph inthe res
 
C

Calrt

Member
pedro420 said:
im thinking about it but i dont kno if getting the 8 bulb would be a issue being that it is the same size as my tent in width

sucks to hear bout the ph inthe res
Click to expand...
Some of the 8 bulb fixtures are as small as 18" wide. I can't remember which ones...
 
C

Calrt

Member
PetFlora said:
I got my new Hanna pH meter. My reses were 2.9 - 3.0 OUCH. I am pretty sure the dying tip was a major reason (+ 1900ppms) for my BK-1 to decline so badly during flower. And for my new plants to be doing so poorly + 4 seeds (1/1/12) not to get past crack stage

I emailed wavepoint and ccd Kelly at AS. Hopefully she ill provide mouth watering potential

I would mos def buy 8 bulbs
Click to expand...
I can't believe you didn't have a PH meter!
 
PetFlora

PetFlora

Well-Known Member
Calrt said:
I can't believe you didn't have a PH meter!
Click to expand...
I DID have a meter. The probe died- slowly. Most likely, the readings were inaccurate for well over 2 months, and got worse over time. I was adding more and more acid, not thinking the probe was dying.
 
A

aoyanagi

Member
Just got off the phone with the professor at my local school, he said if I had my fixtures and bulbs already I could bring them up today and he'd run home and get the special computer to run his meters and we'd have a spd for the Fiji and for what a PAR setup is actually outputting both in wavelength and radiant flux. W-2's hurry the heck up so I can order mah stuffs!
 
A

aoyanagi

Member
Psytranceorgy said:
wow that is awesome aoyangi! I love your spirit! =D
Click to expand...
Well, no one else is going to do it for us, right? And I decided when I applied for my state medical license that I was going to put my ass where my head and heart are. The only way to get rid of a taboo is to openly and unashamedly discuss the topic and keep your cool / keep your side of the debate "clean." If this somehow results in my getting some time, well then I'll just go full activist. Putting a mom in jail for trying not to be a pilled-out zombie or neurotic hypervigilant meanie all the time SHOULD embarrass the powers that be.
 
BlueB

BlueB

Active Member
There are a few things I need cleared up. Do I have this right? Lumen refers to only the visible spectrum? I thought lumen referred to the brightness of all light. So, how do you refer to the light intensity of the non-visible spectrum? Also, don't plants mainly use light within the visible spectrum? I thought the visible spectrum was between 380nm and 760nm. It makes sense to me that the brightness of a light source would determine the amount of energy or photons given off by that particular light source. I know it would take some precise measuring, but if a 6500K light produces let say 15,000 lumens and a PAR specific light produced only 1,000 lumens, I would think it would be safe to assume that the 6500K light would grow plants better due to the higher lumen factor.
Plants mainly use light within the visible spectrum as far as I can tell.
Wiki:
Electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength between 380 nm and 760 nm (790–400 terahertz) is detected by the human eye and perceived as visible light. Other wavelengths, especially near infrared (longer than 760 nm) and ultraviolet (shorter than 380 nm) are also sometimes referred to as light, especially when the visibility to humans is not relevant.

P.S.
Wouldn't it be possible for a 6500K light bulb to have more PAR than another 6500K bulb? I thought the Kelvin representation was just an average of color temperature. So wouldn't it be possible for a 6500K bulb to have more blue and red light than let say green or yellow and it just happens to average out at the 6500K zone? For example, when I was at the aquatics store the other day I checked out some lights they had glowing in a few different aquariums. In one aquarium they had the Coralife Nutrigrow lights and in another they had the Zoomed Ultrasun lights. The Nutrigrows had far more pink and the Ultrasuns had far more blue. This was detectable by looking at them. The color difference was obvious, yet they are both listed as 6500K!!
 
mipainpatient

mipainpatient

Active Member
BlueB said:
There are a few things I need cleared up. Do I have this right? Lumen refers to only the visible spectrum? I thought lumen referred to the brightness of all light. So, how do you refer to the light intensity of the non-visible spectrum? Also, don't plants mainly use light within the visible spectrum? I thought the visible spectrum was between 380nm and 760nm. It makes sense to me that the brightness of a light source would determine the amount of energy or photons given off by that particular light source. I know it would take some precise measuring, but if a 6500K light produces let say 15,000 lumens and a PAR specific light produced only 1,000 lumens, I would think it would be safe to assume that the 6500K light would grow plants better due to the higher lumen factor.
Plants mainly use light within the visible spectrum as far as I can tell.
Wiki:
Electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength between 380 nm and 760 nm (790–400 terahertz) is detected by the human eye and perceived as visible light. Other wavelengths, especially near infrared (longer than 760 nm) and ultraviolet (shorter than 380 nm) are also sometimes referred to as light, especially when the visibility to humans is not relevant.

P.S.
Wouldn't it be possible for a 6500K light bulb to have more PAR than another 6500K bulb? I thought the Kelvin representation was just an average of color temperature. So wouldn't it be possible for a 6500K bulb to have more blue and red light than let say green or yellow and it just happens to average out at the 6500K zone? For example, when I was at the aquatics store the other day I checked out some lights they had glowing in a few different aquariums. In one aquarium they had the Coralife Nutrigrow lights and in another they had the Zoomed Ultrasun lights. The Nutrigrows had far more pink and the Ultrasuns had far more blue. This was detectable by looking at them. The color difference was obvious, yet they are both listed as 6500K!!
Click to expand...
Ill start with the 6500K Yes, especially as bulbs can be referred to as 6500K and differ from even the average by admitting a CRI lower than 100 (highest I've heard of was 95 CRI on a CFL and 90 CRI on a t5) Lumens are visible light yes, but measured the way our eyes see. And if you look at the graph of EMrad that we can see, we disproportionately see/sense yellow/green more than the other bands of the spectrum. Meaning that a light that puts out 100 lumens could be putting out more PAR than another light that puts out 100 lumens, depending on the banding of the wavelengths. If the first (higher PAR) light is still putting out 100 lumens, you could safely come to the conjecture that it is actually putting out more total radiation in the visible light spectrum, just exceeding the output of the second bulb. Also, regarding UV, UVb that you want to target is actually in the 315nm range, but you only need a teeny tiny amount, in fact a UV diode or bulb that targets UVa will probably get you enough UVb to see results.
Also just because a wavelength falls in the "visible" range doesn't mean you can see it very well. The fact that we can see the colors of the t5 bulbs means (to me) that they must be putting out A LOT of it.
Hope some of this helps blueb,
MPP

edit:
this is totally crude, but maybe it explains my words in picture form:
http://ledgrowlightsreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/par-chart-compared-to-humans.png
 
BlueB

BlueB

Active Member
mipainpatient said:
Ill start with the 6500K Yes, especially as bulbs can be referred to as 6500K and differ from even the average by admitting a CRI lower than 100 (highest I've heard of was 95 CRI on a CFL and 90 CRI on a t5) Lumens are visible light yes, but measured the way our eyes see. And if you look at the graph of EMrad that we can see, we disproportionately see/sense yellow/green more than the other bands of the spectrum. Meaning that a light that puts out 100 lumens could be putting out more PAR than another light that puts out 100 lumens, depending on the banding of the wavelengths. If the first (higher PAR) light is still putting out 100 lumens, you could safely come to the conjecture that it is actually putting out more total radiation in the visible light spectrum, just exceeding the output of the second bulb. Also, regarding UV, UVb that you want to target is actually in the 315nm range, but you only need a teeny tiny amount, in fact a UV diode or bulb that targets UVa will probably get you enough UVb to see results.
Also just because a wavelength falls in the "visible" range doesn't mean you can see it very well. The fact that we can see the colors of the t5 bulbs means (to me) that they must be putting out A LOT of it.
Hope some of this helps blueb,
MPP

edit:
this is totally crude, but maybe it explains my words in picture form:
http://ledgrowlightsreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/par-chart-compared-to-humans.png
Click to expand...
I know what you are saying, the 6500K lights that came with my fixture look really green. And after a year they start to appear even greener. They are crappy chinese made lights. I think I'm going to switch to the Zoomed bulbs because of how blue they appear. Then I will add a bulb with more red in it. Any suggestions? Since the Zoomeds already seem to have a lot of blue, I don't think I will need any additional blue lights. It makes me think that an array of the Zoomed lights and some 660 LeD would be real nice.
 
BlueB

BlueB

Active Member
As you can see, the Nutri grow lights have far more red and less blue in them compared to the Zoomed lights. Nice to know I am not imagining things! Maybe a combination of these 2 lights would be good for vegging? hmmmm
View attachment 1986346View attachment 1986347
P.S.
I just noticed that the Zoomeds even have a nice spike in the UVb region. That solves that problem!
P.S.S
The Zoomed Ultrasun lights have a CRI rating of 98!
 
A

aoyanagi

Member
VHO = Very High Output. HO = High Output. HO fixtures are designed to run HO bulbs and get 5k lumens per bulb. VHO fixtures are designed to run VHO bulbs and get 7800 lumens per bulb by supplying more electricity to each bulb, sacrificing some effiency for more light output. You cannot put an HO bulb into a VHO fixture and have it run ok, it will get too much juice and burn out. You can put a VHO bulb into an HO fixture and it will run just fine and have about twice the bulb life as an HO would have. Individual unscrupulous manufacturers notwithstanding, why would a VHO bulb output less lumens in an HO fixture than the HO bulb would? Does not compute. ALL T5 bulbs useable in a T5 HO fixture should put out roughly 5k lumens, or am I completely wrong here?

*Assuming a 4 ft fixture, numbers taken from industry standard for 4 ft fixture/bulb*

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blue B, disregarding the lumen/lux etc this is how all T5 fluoros work: Low pressure mercury gas fills a glass tube coated with some blend of phosphors. This gas is excited by electricity, causing one of it's electrons to jump up to a higher energy orbit, when it falls back down that energy is released in the form of a photon of UV light. This UV light strikes the phosphor coating, where it's energy is absorbed, again stepping up an electron to a higher energy orbit. When this electron falls back down, it will produce a specific wavelength of light depending on what phosphor it is. Therefore unless it's just a shoddy bulb to begin with ALL T5 bulbs in a HO fixture will produce the same number of total photons per watt, it's the electricity being fed in not what wavelengths the bulb emits. VHO, HO, actinic or grow labeled this is how they ALL work and why they should ALL produce the same number of photons per square ft UNLESS you have a bad/old bulb or ballast because they ALL feed the same energy in electricity into that mercury gas. The ONLY difference is the phosphor blend and what wavelengths are being emitted.

If you really want to know more try looking up quantum flux, photosynthetic photon flux, and yield photon flux.
 
BlueB

BlueB

Active Member
aoyanagi said:
VHO = Very High Output. HO = High Output. HO fixtures are designed to run HO bulbs and get 5k lumens per bulb. VHO fixtures are designed to run VHO bulbs and get 7800 lumens per bulb by supplying more electricity to each bulb, sacrificing some effiency for more light output. You cannot put an HO bulb into a VHO fixture and have it run ok, it will get too much juice and burn out. You can put a VHO bulb into an HO fixture and it will run just fine and have about twice the bulb life as an HO would have. Individual unscrupulous manufacturers notwithstanding, why would a VHO bulb output less lumens in an HO fixture than the HO bulb would? Does not compute. ALL T5 bulbs useable in a T5 HO fixture should put out roughly 5k lumens, or am I completely wrong here?

*Assuming a 4 ft fixture, numbers taken from industry standard for 4 ft fixture/bulb*

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blue B, disregarding the lumen/lux etc this is how all T5 fluoros work: Low pressure mercury gas fills a glass tube coated with some blend of phosphors. This gas is excited by electricity, causing one of it's electrons to jump up to a higher energy orbit, when it falls back down that energy is released in the form of a photon of UV light. This UV light strikes the phosphor coating, where it's energy is absorbed, again stepping up an electron to a higher energy orbit. When this electron falls back down, it will produce a specific wavelength of light depending on what phosphor it is. Therefore unless it's just a shoddy bulb to begin with ALL T5 bulbs in a HO fixture will produce the same number of total photons per watt, it's the electricity being fed in not what wavelengths the bulb emits. VHO, HO, actinic or grow labeled this is how they ALL work and why they should ALL produce the same number of photons per square ft UNLESS you have a bad/old bulb or ballast because they ALL feed the same energy in electricity into that mercury gas. The ONLY difference is the phosphor blend and what wavelengths are being emitted.

If you really want to know more try looking up quantum flux, photosynthetic photon flux, and yield photon flux.
Click to expand...
Oh sure, that makes sense, they are all the same wattage so they all produce the same amount of energy. Thank you for clearing that up.
 
BlueB

BlueB

Active Member
BlueB said:
As you can see, the Nutri grow lights have far more red and less blue in them compared to the Zoomed lights. Nice to know I am not imagining things! Maybe a combination of these 2 lights would be good for vegging? hmmmm
View attachment 1986346View attachment 1986347
P.S.
I just noticed that the Zoomeds even have a nice spike in the UVb region. That solves that problem!
P.S.S
The Zoomed Ultrasun lights have a CRI rating of 98!
Click to expand...
I just want to re-post this so that everyone sees. I am really feeling this zoomed light. YeaYuhh!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top