Why has there been no major advances in HPS bulbs?

pokergod · Jan 15, 2011

The hortilux eye 1000 watt is arguably the best hps bulb out there, and there have been no changes to that bulb in years. Have they maxed out the technology on hps bulbs? Or is it that they are making money hands over fist that they don't give a shit about new research and development. I think that the development of hps bulbs are lagging way behind other advances in farming. Whats your $0.02 ?

Azeotrope · Jan 16, 2011

I think there isn't much of a real demand in quantity outside of growing. If you notice, MH is the choice for sports venue lighting and they run 1000w - 1500w bulbs. They need the full spectrum (mostly more blue). Street and parking lot lights are usually 150 - 400w as 1000w is way overkill. Those are mostly PSMH or CMH these days. Retail lighting or indoor lighting is either LED or small wattage CMH 39w to 150w. Or even Flouros. HPS just wont produce the full selection of colors and 1000w is primarily used for horticulture. For the manufacturers to invest what would probably be millions to re-invent the HPS would be silly when the vast majority of lighting sales are requiring more spectrum and that can allready be had by more efficient options.

IMHO - Why the heck anyone uses HPS for growing is beyond me. I mean as an exclusive source of light for the plants, even the Eye Horti bulbs are pretty lame. If I went big again, I'd be using multiple CMH bulbs mixed between the 3k and 4k and maybe throw in a larger HPS.....maybe???? Multiple points of light emination are better anyway.

softyellowlight · Jan 16, 2011

Azeotrope said:
IMHO - Why the heck anyone uses HPS for growing is beyond me.

I can grow in my half-open closet and work in it with the light on without giving myself skin cancer, so I'm happy with HPS.

asde² · Jan 17, 2011

why hps isnt evolving? the point is reached where it cannot become more effective.. at least on a high(everything over 3% efficiency of todays market is) scale.. there are limits to each technology and hps light technology been almost at it technical limit already 20 years ago - also cmh wont go much further than today while im already amazed by philips labor results; guess they are closest to the limit of this technology; but still, led's are already better comparing labor results maximum efficiency!!

actually every month there is a new super nice hps bulb on the market which is 20% better than other hps on the market.
explaination: its 20% better because the people who sell it make 20% more money with it because they changed their marketing strategy. that and nothing more

softyellowlight said:
I can grow in my half-open closet and work in it with the light on without giving myself skin cancer, so I'm happy with HPS.

you can do the same under mh/cmh even with a 5x bigger wattage.
fucking hilarious how people think that a TINY BIT OF UV-A and a even more TINY BIT OF UV-B and an almost NON EXISTANT TINY BIT OF UV-C can hurt HUMANS.. its not like you gonna have 10k watts of cmh at 1meter distance directly over you for 2 weeks.. fuck man you wont get skin cancer at all from those lights.. the sun emitts 100381231902 more uv light

Azeotrope said:
IMHO - Why the heck anyone uses HPS for growing is beyond me.

because hps offers yet the best photon flux per $ invested.

softyellowlight · Jan 17, 2011

You say that as if the Sun is a safe standard for "you can be exposed to this radiation all the time and be fine." It's not like the Earth has the ozone layer it used to. People can do as they prefer, and I'm going to stick with light that can't sunburn and will limit the bleaching of the non-garden items that it illuminates, and continue to consider those reasons perfectly valid.

PeteWeedSeed · Jan 17, 2011

I agree it's all about profits.. It would cost millions of dollars to do research for more powerful bulb, millions to build the factories to make them, millions to spend on advertising.. all extremely risky for a minimal return on investment.

All top of all that, millions is being spent on researching LED technology.. so by the time they make a more powerful HPS bulb... LEDs will be more powerful with fuller spectrum and fractional power consumption. So it would be like researching an obsolete technology.

Azeotrope · Jan 17, 2011

photon flux per $ is missleading. Every bit of the spectrum aids in photosynthesis. Even green..... As a matter of fact green is WAY more critical than most people understand. Red to far red an blue to red/far red ratios are more critical than most understand. NOt all photons are equal. HPS is sooooo lacking (like LED ) in this respect that, yes you can grow plants under them, but what qualities or characteristics are underfed with them?

LED's have a very long way to go still and I don't personally think that they will ever really get there. I have been heavily involved in their introduction & use for retail lighting and even after many years of research and development - They leave a lot on the table in regards to spectrum, color mixing, diffusion and spread. Not to mention diode life, quality and serviceability.

Andyo · Jan 25, 2011

osram 600w Nav-t 4Y super hps is the latest advance

osram 600w Nav-t 4Y super hps is the latest advance

longer life better lumen maintainence highest output per watt.
still 90% at 18 mnths

Azeotrope · Jan 28, 2011

Yeah - Still just an HPS though. Current tech allows them to manipulate the arc tube charge a little and sell some additional snake oil lights, but still very lacking in the spectral coverage. Still pushing the worst word in plant lighting - LUMENS

budlover123 · Jan 28, 2011

If the problem with HPS technology is the color spectrum, as in Lumens being a misleading term because the color spectrum is limited while outputting a lot of lumens, than why not use modern technology like those crazy bright new florescent lights somebody on here is talking about or LEDs to make a more complete spectrum. Check out the link in my signature, I wish someone with resources would try that with maybe 80watts of drivers but adding a ton of green and cyan light to the mix perhaps, use that with an hps, if you used about as many leds as I did for the blue and added about as much cyan and green, a 250 watt hps would probably be crazy white balanced, if not still a little on the warm side from the hps, than youd get a pretty complete spectrum and you'd get full hps output, although for 600-watts and up you'd likely need more LEDs than I used, it's hard to say.

Andyo · Jan 28, 2011

2 x new 1000 hps phillips and osram

2 x new 1000 hps phillips and osram

So phillips have put there new 1000 agrolite xt hps with extra blue
And osram have the new 1000w plantastar hps 1000 with extra blue.
I noticed whilst searching info that osram are made in germany while phillips are made in china lol think i may try the osram .A

sm0k4 · Jan 28, 2011

Azeotrope said:
Still pushing the worst word in plant lighting - LUMENS

lumens give lux. Why is the term lumen bad? I think it is the end user's responsibility to know how to interpret the data given.

spectral efficiency might be a better term for HPS and why their lumens aren't weighed as high as a light tailored to the optimal spectra for growing.

pokergod · Jan 29, 2011

I wish Phillips would come out with a 1000 watt Ceramic Halide Bulb, it would have a wicked light spectrum. I wonder why they can't produce one bigger then 400 watts?

Azeotrope · Jan 29, 2011

I don't think that they can't. Just a demand issue. While it is be nice to think that growers would provide enough demand, I just don't think we would......... IDK..... It is odd too me that Philips and GE haven't pushed the CMH for horticulture. I guess if you look at horticultural lighting, neither is one of the bigger players. Seems that Eye, Osram/Sylvania, Venture and a few others have really focussed on our craft.

smOk4 - I am just a diehard believer in spectrum first, output second. Meaning I find the spectral coverage and then calculate how much I need to add in terms of fixtures that produce that coverage. I also find that you need a lot less "lux" or "lumens" when you cover the spectrum or get the B:R:FR just right. Just how I do it.

ZAPOT · Jan 29, 2011

HPS is at it´s point that it needs to be to produce resinous / big buds. What more do you want?

Let me explain something... I hope i´m not getting over my head with this but let´s see about that.

I´ve never used HPS. I´ve just done some reseach about HPS because i´ve been curious about it.

I´ve never seen a proper answer for why does HPS produce resinous / big buds in the first place.

Now i can tell that i know why. At least i´m pretty sure about it. What do you guys really propose?

Why does HPS produce resinous / big buds? Why is it difficult to get HPS produce those better?

On the other hand, about your "original" question: Manufacturers haven´t used http://www.amolf.nl/news/detailpage...gative-index-of-refraction//chash/6ce6fbf61f/ / http://scienceray.com/physics/created-three-dimensional-met-material-bends-light-opposite/ within the bulb itself that can be quite helpful. Forget reflectors in some case?

Frankly, the design of a bulb generally is pretty poor for even light distribution. They could do something about that too! Cheap asses!

Then there is the real problem of the heat in arcs etc. Bulbs would need special cooling to be able to handle more watts. Safely for all.

Unless you live in a bunker... be safe!

pokergod · Jan 29, 2011

Master Blaster 1500 watt hps bulb has been out for almost two years, for use with Master Blaster 1500 watt digital ballast. Biggest hps combo outhere, 206,000 lumens, must put out massive heat. Would be cool to see some of these in a vertical, bare bulb setup.

bobjoe 69 · Jan 29, 2011

crazy bright new florescent lights

crazy bright new florescent lights

[why not use modern technology like those crazy bright new florescent lights somebody on here is talking about or LEDs to make a more complete spectrum.

Well I started using Gecko grow lighting units flowering unit at 300 watt (2700k) and veg 200 watt unit at (5000k) I mix’s the lighting to get a better spectrum and I have use hps and mh in the past with good results but I have always felt that the costs should be reduced I have a homebox xxl 8x8x 4 and would normally use a 600 watt hsp and 400 watt mixed spectrum as my flowering room I they can be halved my electric costs now
And have start flowering a number of strains to see what results I get
You can check my journal at
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=4140776#post4140776
Peace bros

pokergod · Jan 29, 2011

Hps is still king of the ring, plasma, leds, floros, don't match up in the bigger grows. Plasma does not have the spectrum for flowering, leds & floros don't have the penetration. Using anything else other than hps (even mh) for flowering, is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. Outclassed.

Azeotrope · Jan 29, 2011

pokergod - I would say that your last post about HPS still being King is only true where yield/weight is the most important goal. They leave a lot of potential on the table where fragrance, internode spacing, trich density and potency are concerned. For personal use growers, I see too many other much more nutritious light sources available today to waste time on HPS.

Doc420 · Jan 31, 2011

I think the new step in hps is the "Philips Greenpower EL 1000w 400v"
This double ended lamp has a spectrum that is designed for plants.
No wire running aside the arctube.
Gavita Holland made a special ballast that run's on 230v and burns a horticultural 400v lamp.
This Gavita-Pro electronic ballast is made as a remote and as a full fixture.
The full fixture has no rf interference.
In Holland they use over 20.000 electronic ballast in proffesional greenhouses and still there is no problem with radio or television.

Why has there been no major advances in HPS bulbs?

Member

Well-known member

Active member

Member

Active member

Member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Member

Active member

sm0k4

Member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Member