True dat
Thanks, that's helpful. I looked for arcadia lighting sight where I might find all their uv bulbs and associated info and spectrums etc. I couldn't find it (not for their UV). When I check this reptile bulb store online, they don't give UV index. I'm guessing most UV bulbs don't, they probably just tell you the percent of B vs A, right? Eg: https://www.reptilesrus.ca/arcadia-24w-t5-d3-12-uvb-22/ (thanks for the link @daveybc.)
If your "pure UV's" are similar to the Agromax, then that's too much UVB and you'll fry your plants. Idk if they are similar or not but just saw that and figured I'd give a shout. Otherwise it seems like a good spread, 4× 4ft tubes per 4×4 sounds legit. Folks only use 1 Agromax for ~15min, 3× a day if I'm not mistaken, but you'd want to double check that assumption with an Agromax user.
For me in a 5 x 5 2 x Agromax 4', run at 3 minutes intervals every hour during the light ON cycle from the start of week 7 until harvest really does an awesome job pumping up the trichome production. I have compared that schedule with running Arcadia 14% always on during the ON light cycle and I also ran 4 x CLW0053(s) and the results from both the Arcadia setup and the CLW setup, couldn't produce the results that the Agromax kicks-out. I also run 4 X ATI coral+ 4' lamps all through flowering, starting them right at the flip. my main lights are 15 x 288(s), 3 rows of 5 x 288(s), that are arranged like so...
Did you mean 30 minute intervals? Or is 3 minutes really enough with those bulbs? My CLW recommends 4 hours during the last 2-3 weeks....so I’m working up to that level with 30 minutes per day.
Sounds like a nice set-up for sure! 3min/hr seems about what I'd expect, the equivalent of 3×15min per day would mean a little over 4min/hr (if running for 12hrs), but that's definitely one way to run the Agromaxes that I don't give enough credit to. It requires a bit of a specialized timer but if you have the capability to do it then I think it'd be a fine solution and good to know you've had success!
I thought the flourescents degraded faster with loads of on and off switching? This why i would rec leds.... Especially since prawns results with uva which are generally easier to do.
I prefer LED and think it has the edge for the reasons you state, but also the ease of integration, size, and operating efficiency (UVA). A fluoro tube will emit in all directions and require a reflector to keep emissions off of LEDs. They take up more real estate and I just think LEDs are a better way of getting UV to the plants (like you), but if you have fluoros already, or don't have the money to switch your whole grow over to LED, then I think fluoros are still a viable option, just not the most advanced or efficient.
no pm, but after a few years the agromax pure uv made the reflective liner fall apart in the tent, bronzed the pins on a heat sink i think, weakened the plastic shrouds on the fans, while making great bud though.
Makes perfect sense. I lived at 6000+ ft above sea level (~2000m) and the extra UV would destroy (almost) everything you left outside.
There's no uv in what you're using, you're not getting any uv from either as far as I understand.
Uh, the 315 lamps even have a UV warning on the box. Please refrain from giving outright false advice, it shows you have zero clue but are willing to give opinions in place of relaying facts. Google takes two seconds to look up a spectrograph.
Yea I went and looked up the graph after he posted this. He got that quote directly from hortilux's website which obviously seems like a nasty marketing tactic.