is LED losing the battle ....?

[420empire]

Hey ICmaggers!

Hope you are well, and in good spirit. Currently I have some experience with some of Hans LED panels from Holland, very nice ! But recently i stumble upon this little article from trehugger. Please comment on it, and share your thoughts with the rest of this community. I think it seems pretty nice, I mean 70 lumens pr. watt in one LED diode, contra luxim which is 140 lumens pr. watt ! The guy in the video talks about the bulbchamber will get a temp. at 6000 kelvin, just like the surface of the sun, and at at the same time the bubl will deliever the same spektrum as the sun when the rays are reaching the earths surface.

Linke; http://www.treehugger.com/interior-design/luxim-plasma-light-bulb-kicks-some-serious-led-butt.html

Cheers

 

[Phychotron]

We don't use LUX rating for plants. We use PAR. Lumens is the rating of what the human eye processes as bright.

 

[tebos]

The article was already outdated when it was written.

Not that Lumens matter for plants but there are 200lm/W emitters already available.

 

[WeedIsGod]

http://www.luxim.com/technology/features/quality-of-light

If you could get 140lm/W of that SPD (at around, say, $3/Watt for the actual grow light cost) you wouldn't? Lumen rating alone doesn't tell us much of anything, but we know that LEP is both a relatively high CRI and comprehensive (very even coverage of the entire visible spectrum) White light source. Look at all the Near UV, the Deep Blue, the Deep Red, IR... These are all pretty low on the lumen scale, yet the lamp still rates impeccably. 140lm/W definitely says something here, imo.

LED's in our grow room could already realistically be ~100lm/W for Neutral White CCT's (I'm guessing the Luxim is ~5000K). As phosphor conversion becomes more efficient (hopefully within the next few years we'll see some larger developments) I believe LED's will single handedly be able to compete with LEP on a lumens basis. Blue chips can already be made @ ~50% radiometric efficiency. I'm sure the lumen per Watt value could be calculated for an LED with 100% phosphor efficiency. Then maybe compare that to 50% phosphor efficiency. Then compare that with actual phosphor efficiency. I think we'd all be surprised what current-day LED's could do with tomorrow's phosphor techniques. And yet, using lumens actually helps LED's, in this instance, because a ~5000K LED emits very little to no UV, near UV, Deep Red, and IR. Most of this light would be accounted for if we were measuring in PAR. Then again, if strides in phosphor/chip efficiency are made we might start seeing more Violet pump LED's which means better Blue band coverage for LED (Blue phosphor has much broader emission than single wavelength Blue chips, and Violet chips emit near UV).

As of right now, I don't think you have a chance in hell making a 140lm/W LED with comparable SPD to the Luxim.

But, of course, that's all being said before we discuss the cost of LEP systems/bulbs. I'd go CFL, LED and/or CMH before I went LEP, and that's based on cost alone.

 

[alesh]

Actual phosphor efficiency is about 90%. The blue pumps in the top LEDs such XM-L2 are already more than 60% efficient at low currents. Theoretically speaking, a 100% efficient cool white LED (SPD similar to current Cree's) with 100% efficient phosphor would perform at about 350lm/w (about 335 for warm white).

I totally agree about what you said about that plasma light.

a.

 

[satyr]

Neither lumens nor PAR is a good measure of how efficient or well suited LED or LEP are at growing big amounts of cannabis.

You can have the most perfect PAR and your yield will still pale compared with HPS.

You need to know the amount of Photons and luminous flux.

Intensitiy of the light is paramount even if most of it, theoretically, is the wrong kind of light as is the case with HPS.

If quantity is what you are after HPS can't be beat. If its quality you are after, you might want to add some more blue light. Mh, LEP or even LED, but no bumper harvest without HPS

 

[villain420247]

If quantity is what you are after HPS can't be beat. If its quality you are after, you might want to add some more blue light. Mh, LEP or even LED, but no bumper harvest without HPS

Beat may be relative...but properly dialed - I have seen some folks pulling similar yields off HPS vs. LED (when dealing with similar wattage and space and such anyway)...have you seen that conclusively the other way?

 

[habeeb]

The article was already outdated when it was written.

Not that Lumens matter for plants but there are 200lm/W emitters already available.

can you tell me what brand / model. highest performing I know of is the Phillips TX.

Neither lumens nor PAR is a good measure of how efficient or well suited LED or LEP are at growing big amounts of cannabis.

You can have the most perfect PAR and your yield will still pale compared with HPS.

You need to know the amount of Photons and luminous flux.

Intensitiy of the light is paramount even if most of it, theoretically, is the wrong kind of light as is the case with HPS.

If quantity is what you are after HPS can't be beat. If its quality you are after, you might want to add some more blue light. Mh, LEP or even LED, but no bumper harvest without HPS

not true, it's spectrum. which as I will agree with you PAR won't even tell you that. I have a PAR meter, and it's only to check even coverage or what number I get bleach.. it will not tell me how good a plant will grow..

want a green led light that's 20 times brighter then the sun? see, it's about the spectrum.. I also find intensity is not good, as I wouldn't want a high blue spectrum for flower even if it had red, I wouldn't take it, as too much blue in flower would be SHIT even if I nuked the plant at 5000 watts to get the red up to a good level, you would mess up the plant giving it too much blue....

 

[tebos]

XM-L2 at very low current for example.

 

[habeeb]

XM-L2 at very low current for example.

can't agree



second, run at lowest voltage, that's ridiculous to even build a light worthy of growing.. also the expense of that light even if you did build a light..

 

[tebos]

You might want to try a top bin (U2 running at 100mA), and yes, it's not practical but it already exists.

 

[habeeb]

You might want to try a top bin (U2 running at 100mA), and yes, it's not practical but it already exists.

top bin or not.. running at 100ma, no one would even do. you can say you would do it if you show us a lamp running it. there's doing, and then there's DOING

second, these are seconds flashed on, not even run at normal temps, so the numbers already don't even represent real world numbers.

third. why this discussion. you know there is no 200 lumens per watt chip out, or everyone would be using them. myself included

fourth. no one's going to run a U2 bin, as guess what color that is. pointless when talking about plants ( flowering ) which is all someone is really talking about. once again I like to see you running 6500k at 100ma in flower..

fifth. before you go on any further. I want to see a chart with the U2 running 100ma, at real world temps. do you have one you can show us?



I like your in the LED section man, there's not enough people, but please stop already.

 

[tebos]

I just said that it's available in the context that lumens don't even matter. Of course nobody would use that, myself included.
Take a look at http://ledcalc.fonarevka.ru/cgi-bin/LCalc.cgi?led=XML2, too bad you can't enter anything below 150mA, which is already running at 190/lmW with 25degree environment temperature. It's not hard to guess that it's not far away from said 200lm/W.
By the way, Cree advertised their MK-R emitter with 200lm/W too (also at very low, unusable current).

 

[devilgoob]

We get carried away with lumens, and even have whole grow charts with height the bulb is from the tops. PAR has a negative stigma. It's because some don't like LEDs and think photosynthetically active radiation is a poor term, but then you go with flux per given area per time - I guess both PAR and flux can be combined somehow, but then we take away the Edison effect somewhat because LEDs aren't coherent. Lumens are a good baseline, because we've adjusted to it's terms.

Lumens are measured from 1 foot. If an LED covers 125 degree and the HPS covers 360 if you do vertical, then the lumen area intensity can be matched, yet the HPS would cover more area.

That lumen per watt is the absolute lowest industry standard on bigger emitter chips.

It's actually twice that. Then you get into the higher bins....

Higher bins are LEDs that were sprayed right, phosphored right, and outperform others.

For LEDs, they get expensive, but not if you use a little below the high bins, and make proper use of that light.

Either way, properly cooled LEDs have a much higher and longer lumen maintenance.

Right now, I would say they surpass flourescent and a lot of HPS bulbs, but their usage and who is using them can limit them. People who grow LED are starting out mostly, but when you have a grower with 28watts of LED that has grow a lot, they're going to max it.

There are accomplished growers using LEDs, but still the way and direction they shine could be modified, instead of all the light on top. Plus plant placement is key sometimes.

The one with the 70w panels and the white and red populations of LEDs in circles. If you grew under it, you'd want a plant under each light or atleast a budsite.

Those 70w with the red and white nodes like 5 of them probably at 15 or 12watts....they not only covered their little spotlights because their lens focus more in the spot, they are also RAISED which gets some penetration going....along with spottlighting or increasing the light flux to a more intense zone in a given area...where the buds are usually located or the OMCC. One main central cola.

 

[SupraSPL]

I use XML2 4500K T5 bin at 350mA for cloning box and for small seedlings/rooted clones. It runs at about 165 lumens/watt at operating temperature and is about 47% efficient. There is an XML2 U3 bin now but as HB pointed out it is very cool white.

I never understood why the MKR claimed 200lm/watt. I poured through the spec sheet and came up with nothing. I think there is an MKR2 coming out bit I still suspect the XML2 is king for our purposes.

Regarding the LEP, I suspect that well balanced white light is not ideal for flowering medical cannabis. A red weighted spectrum seems to give better results. I always have to remind myself, vegging and flowering are two very different things. I much prefer HPS nugs over outdoor nugs in terms of leaf ratio. And I much prefer red weighted LED nugs over HPS nugs in terms of yield, ratio and frosting/terpenes.

 

[Mr Orange]

Can't really talk about technical aspects simply because i'm dumb as f**k but i urge you all to read this: __Walking in the garden__

Right now it's all about HPS in my garden but i bet you a billion that tomorrow LED will be it.

Sorry about the lack of information in this post. I bet you all know more about the matter than i do but that topic seriously spoke to me. No bullshit there.

 

[zero244]

LED lighting is getting better and more effective, but not getting really much cheaper. A couple of months ago I bought two kessil 150h and four Hydro Grow 21x lights. I got the kessil's for 95.00 each and 3 or 4 21x pros for a hundred dollars off each and I still spent 900 dollars for lights that work about the same as one 400 watt hid.
Now all of these combined only use about 200 watts, don't generate heat and will grow very nicely a 2x2 ft area. I am using them for autoflower seed run.
I bought them mainly as a experiment and I grow more as a hobby than anything.
So to answer your question, I think LED's are gradually gaining ground, mainly for people with deep pockets or who are growing in small areas.

 

[willyweed]

there was a battle ! when, where? most people i know, now have a spare disco light that will send your eyes funny ! ww