The LED "Arms race".....

Technology has come a long way since this morning.....
Every day nearly, another thread pops up "Which is the best?" That question is so entirely site specific, based on far too many variables, there cannot be a single definite answer.
I'm reminded of the mid 90's desktop CPU processor boom. My brother in law, is a highly educated electrical engineer, the consummate computer nerd. He always had the latest, and greatest CPUs. He spent lots of money to be on the cutting edge of the industry standards, it was AWESOME to have his expertise at my disposal. What was even more awesome, is I always got the leftovers.....When a new product would drop, the "obsolete" parts were of no use to him anymore. Not 6 weeks before, nothing could top what CPU he was running, and now he's giving it to me?????? Sure, maybe his system was top end, BAD ASS..... But so was mine, fractionally less BAD ASS, but still qualified as bad ass.
I don't really understand the insatiable desire to have the absolute best, when that title is temporary. The same idea applies to Golf equipment. I worked in the golf industry for nearly 2 decades, and the tech boom in that scene was just the same. Every so often there is a giant leap forward, but even then for a guy like me, Ill wait until a generation has passed, and score that gear at a fraction of the original cost, because its not "the best"....
When I started learning about LED grow lights, it lead me to this forum. Through the guidance of those in the know, I took on the task of learning WHY some LEDs are better for my specific situation. Its been fascinating to say the least, the knowledge so generously shared around here, is incredible.

Of course this debate will never end, and at times, opinions will clash, and as a result, intelligent debate will deteriorate into third grade level name calling.

If you are new to LED ideas in grow lights, the ideas shared in these forums can prove to be invaluable.

about a pound

3.7

Chip Green said:

Of course this debate will never end, and at times, opinions will clash, and as a result, intelligent debate will deteriorate into third grade level name calling.

Click to expand...

photons are photons. most people who have used quality LEDs for a minute know that they all perform relatively similar, there is no magic bullet light that is substantially superior. and we still have a lot to learn

if one led test is a few % less than the next big thing...and its a worry ...just move it one cm closer and feel happy.. u r there!

There are a couple differences between Game PCs and LED fixtures.

If there's a watt budget and the goal is to "grow as much as possible" then the highest efficiency will deliver the most PAR for whatever the watt budget is.

High efficiency lowers long term costs compared to similar PAR output with less efficiency. There's a financial consideration there that isn't the same as spending bucks on the newest processor and GFX card where the reward is subjective.

Consider the commercial grower, or rather, where commercial growing is headed. Just like every other industry, at the top level margins are razor thin. A couple of percent difference in yield or quality can have a huge impact on the profitability of a giant farm. It pays dividends for these types of business to have any advantage they can find over the competition.

Then there are those like your buddy, who simply won't run anything but the best.

The one with the most cobs and lowest power bill wins.

I absolutely understand the splitting of hairs on efficiency when it comes to large scale operations. A few % can save substantial amounts of dough on power usage. The conclusion I've reached, is that even the middle of the road efficiency models, of any sort of LED product, will produce acceptable results, IF a certain threshold of photon saturation is reached. That is really what the question should be. In my space, will this "lamp", produce said amount of light?
With the help of many of you fine gentleman, I have that answer. Using what I consider to be middle of the road equipment.
It makes perfect sense how many growers are reluctant to embrace these new methods.

The led light that is efficient and grows great herb today will do just the same thing 5 years from now as opposed to computer components which must interact with other always changing components, services and such.

I have older discreet Cree 5watt white and white/red panels that do as great a job as they did 4 years ago and use them when I need more space lighted. They still outdo HID light just like they always have. The COBs and boards are even more efficient and much more simple.

I hate blurple!

Photon Flinger said:

The one with the most cobs and lowest power bill wins.

Click to expand...

No they won't. I see people spending double the money on their fixture in order to save only a few percent on their energy bill. In fact they waste money because their fixture is overly expensive.

You need to calculate what your running cost will be over a certain period and then compare which option is cheapest. Going for maximum efficiency is only worthwhile if your kWh price is very high. Saving 10% on the energy bill gives a very different result if you pay 9 cents per kWh versus 36 cents per kWh. So naturally the desired efficiency and related fixture cost will be lower at the 9 cents end of the spectrum and much higher at 36 cents.

Other reason to go for really maximum efficiency is when you are limited to the power you can use. Which is rarely an issue, but I've seen people limited to a few thousand watts. Obviously squeezing 10% extra light out of those watts (ie 10% more yield) will make you a lot more money than saving 10% on your energy bill.

Another thing to keep in mind is the current development pace of led solutions. The prices are dropping so rapidly and the efficiency and quality of new leds is going up so fast that it doesn't really warrant spending top dollar for leds now. In two years time there will be much cheaper and much better leds available.

wietefras said:

No they won't. I see people spending double the money on their fixture in order to save only a few percent on their energy bill. In fact they waste money because their fixture is overly expensive.

You need to calculate what your running cost will be over a certain period and then compare which option is cheapest. Going for maximum efficiency is only worthwhile if your kWh price is very high. Saving 10% on the energy bill gives a very different result if you pay 9 cents per kWh versus 36 cents per kWh. So naturally the desired efficiency and related fixture cost will be lower at the 9 cents end of the spectrum and much higher at 36 cents.

Other reason to go for really maximum efficiency is when you are limited to the power you can use. Which is rarely an issue, but I've seen people limited to a few thousand watts. Obviously squeezing 10% extra light out of those watts (ie 10% more yield) will make you a lot more money than saving 10% on your energy bill.

Another thing to keep in mind is the current development pace of led solutions. The prices are dropping so rapidly and the efficiency and quality of new leds is going up so fast that it doesn't really warrant spending top dollar for leds now. In two years time there will be much cheaper and much better leds available.

Click to expand...

Blah, blah, blah, you don't understand math as you have shown time and time again.

The simple fact is that I get the same amount of light from 214w that people get using the common cob setups running 400w.

Photon Flinger said:

The simple fact is that I get the same amount of light from 214w that people get using the common cob setups running 400w.

Click to expand...

can you breakdown how you came to this conclusion?

the average cob setup is running 45-55% efficiency at the system level. your claim that 214W generates the same amount of light as 400W of typical cobs would require an impossible 90%+ system efficiency

CobKits said:

can you breakdown how you came to this conclusion?

the average cob setup is running 45-55% efficiency at the system level. your claim that 214W generates the same amount of light as 400W of typical cobs would require an impossible 90%+ system efficiency

Click to expand...

Duh just grow outdoors..... Hahaha

chakup said:

Duh just grow outdoors..... Hahaha

Click to expand...

you may be onto something. my cobs crush when run in full sunlight. pushing 6 gpw right now

wietefras said:

No they won't. I see people spending double the money on their fixture in order to save only a few percent on their energy.....

Another thing to keep in mind is the current development pace of led solutions. The prices are dropping so rapidly and the efficiency and quality of new leds is going up so fast that it doesn't really warrant spending top dollar for leds now. In two years time there will be much cheaper and much better leds available.

Click to expand...

For ME, these are two key points in the formulas in my DIY design. Building from the middle ground, finding that area of value....
Again, I'm not trying to light up a large area by any means, so saving a few KWH per month is negligible.

CobKits said:

can you breakdown how you came to this conclusion?

the average cob setup is running 45-55% efficiency at the system level. your claim that 214W generates the same amount of light as 400W of typical cobs would require an impossible 90%+ system efficiency

Click to expand...

40 Vero 29C run at 85ma (5.3w each) for 212w versus 8 Vero 29c run at 700ma (46w each) for 400w.

Photon Flinger said:

40 Vero 29C run at 85ma (5.3w each) for 212w versus 8 Vero 29c run at 700ma (46w each) for 400w.

Click to expand...

Wow.

That's a lot of COBs, I actually purchased the Vero29Cs for the headroom so I wouldn't have to buy a whole bunch of 'em, then find a heat sink, drill, tap, so on and so forth.

How much did that cost to build?

What is the efficacy of the Vero29C under-driven @ 85 mA?

Photon Flinger said:

40 Vero 29C run at 85ma (5.3w each) for 212w versus 8 Vero 29c run at 700ma (46w each) for 400w.

Click to expand...

sure lets see your measurements indicating these systems put out the same amount of light. (without using broken bridgelux simulator that returns impossible 100%+ efficiency at low currents). In other words, actual field measurements are ideal

Enigma said:

What is the efficacy of the Vero29C under-driven @ 85 mA?

Click to expand...

approaches 200 lm/W