Register ICMag Forum Menu Features Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
You are viewing our:
in:
Forums > ICMag Vendor Forums > Hydro Grow LEDs > Penetrator Quantum - R&D For a New Era in Lighting

Thread Title Search
Post Reply
Penetrator Quantum - R&D For a New Era in Lighting Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-15-2019, 03:22 AM #11
HydroGrowLeds
Grow Light Guru

HydroGrowLeds's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 180
HydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Awesome to hear and thanks for the reply, interesting you are using 740nm specifically. I learned about its potential greater benefit on the Emerson effect when paired with 470nm recently, which your spectrum seems to have a peak at as well.
660nm when combined with 730-740nm can increase photosynthetic rates as much as 30%. I had learned about it in 2008 and played around with different ratios in my first couple prototypes. We do also have a 470nm, peak. 440nm, 470nm, 525nm, 640nm, 660nm, 740nm is our spectrum and has been since 2010. Prior to that the 525nm was different color temps of white.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
In the par data pdf under the buy now button when looking at your current lights the mention of 740nm specifically being utilized highly by plants, though no information about its benefits anywhere on the site that I could find seemed odd. The only spectrum chart I could find on the site I had to search for. Found it by clicking on the led grow lights button, then reading about midway down the page under the header "Full Spectrum HID Grow Lights Are Obsolete For Weed Growing". Since its only showing PAR 400nm-700nm and not labeled as such its misrepresentative.
I've been through several wordpress developers who just haven't been able to complete the site. There is a lot of missing information that is partially uploaded but not complete. PAR is between 400-700nm, so for that particular graph we cut off the 740nm as it's not technically in the PAR region.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
My understanding is infrared wavelengths begin at 700nm, minor miscommunication/perspective difference.
Infrared begins at 800nm. Far Red is between 710-850nm, so there is a cross with infrared, but the FR we use is not an IR wavelength.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Thanks, since you started posting here again I found your site for the first time. After scavenging through it reading Ive wanted to discuss with you and this thread was a good opportunity.
I'm an open book. Always have been. Have always published my research to the web to try and better the industry as a whole. Our X series was the most counterfeited LED in the world (and possibly still is). We've made a pretty big mark on the LED industry over the years, and now we're looking forward to developing a new chapter of lights.
HydroGrowLeds is offline Quote


2 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-15-2019, 07:07 PM #12
Ibechillin
Research Enthusiast

Ibechillin's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Tacoma, Washington 47n
Posts: 1,163
Ibechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant future
The best results people achieve with DIY led seems to comes from the ability to maintain consistent intensity across the whole growing space. COB lighting with 1 per sq ft and Samsung lm561c strip's abilities to be built in square and rectangular shapes that fit the grow space evenly work really well with as low as 500 PPFD to the edges. Due to the multiple overlapping light sources and angles hitting undersides of leaves as well.

The Fluence SpyderX Plus and Gavita 1650E are the only commercial fixtures I think currently that have applied that methodology towards a 4x4 growing footprint. Gavita claims top bin Osram and Samsung diodes are used but Both Fluence and Gavita utilize a much broader less efficient spectrum compared to yours. Fluence claims 2.3 Ámol/J and Gavita claims 2.6 Ámol/J.

Fluence spyderx plus spyder2p spectrum:



Here is the Gavita 1650e led spectrum:



Since you have access to the newest generation SMD to recreate your spectrum with you could create a more efficient/more powerful fixture. Legalization is creating a boom of 3x3 and 4x4 tent growers as well as commercial growers in 4x4 growing footprints.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The educational system is supposedly improving constantly, oddly though people seem to be declining in cognitive ability as time moves forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVOH View Post
open mind leaves room for growth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud Green View Post
For almost 50 years I've smoked weed to enhance reality, not to escape from it...
Playing around outdoors again (current grow 2019 starts on post #75):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352271

Science Of Lighting & Plant Reactions (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358147

Drying and Cure Process Explained In Depth (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358186

Pot Size, Root system and maximizing growth thread:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=344347

Silicon, The Misunderstood Element:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352413

Humic and Fulvic acid information:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352265

Ibechillin is offline Quote


5 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-15-2019, 07:43 PM #13
HydroGrowLeds
Grow Light Guru

HydroGrowLeds's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 180
HydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The best results people achieve with DIY led seems to comes from the ability to maintain consistent intensity across the whole growing space. COB lighting with 1 per sq ft and Samsung lm561c strip's abilities to be built in square and rectangular shapes that fit the grow space evenly work really well with as low as 500 PPFD to the edges. Due to the multiple overlapping light sources and angles hitting undersides of leaves as well.
An even spread of PPFD should be the goal of any light. Our lensed units have a difficult time maintaining an even spread, but when several are used in combination you can achieve a decently even spread. Our X-PRO bars are able to be spaced and angled to increase even spread/coverage, but are only available to the commercial industry for orders of 200 lights or more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The Fluence SpyderX Plus and Gavita 1650E are the only commercial fixtures I think currently that have applied that methodology towards a 4x4 growing footprint. Gavita claims top bin Osram and Samsung diodes are used but Both Fluence and Gavita utilize a much broader less efficient spectrum compared to yours. Fluence claims 2.3 Ámol/J and Gavita claims 2.6 Ámol/J.
Very familiar with Fluence. Our X-PRO were used against their Spyder models in a Canadian grow op. After 2 rounds where our lights were the clear winner (higher yield and faster growth with less watts), the facility is now filling in an additional 768 units. I haven't done umol/J testing on our lights, but with the new SMD panel I plan to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Since you have access to the newest generation SMD to recreate your spectrum with you could create a more efficient/more powerful fixture. Legalization is creating a boom of 3x3 and 4x4 tent growers as well as commercial growers in 4x4 growing footprints.
Osram is among the LEDs I am testing, as they do make a good 640/660 chip. The lights I design are mostly for square areas. We produced the first square LED grow lights in 2009 (205W & 345W Penetrator). We've always tried to design our lights around the actual application of gardens, but our 126X is also a big seller for 2x3 areas. 4x4 has always been standard and 4 of the new SMD lights will cover it very evenly.
HydroGrowLeds is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-15-2019, 09:02 PM #14
Ibechillin
Research Enthusiast

Ibechillin's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Tacoma, Washington 47n
Posts: 1,163
Ibechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant future
1000w HPS is estimated to be 2lbs/1 gram per watt typical yield. With the CXB3590 cob at 28.5 watts per sq ft claims of 2 grams per watt and 2+ ounce per sq ft have been made. Which means only 456 watts of broad spectrum CXB3590 over a 4x4 area is needed to match the typical 2lb yields of 1000 watt HPS.

CXB3590 spectrums:



Quote:
Originally Posted by HydroGrowLeds View Post
Very familiar with Fluence. Our X-PRO were used against their Spyder models in a Canadian grow op. After 2 rounds where our lights were the clear winner (higher yield and faster growth with less watts), the facility is now filling in an additional 768 units.
Spyder x plus is advertised at 660w draw and for a 4x4 footprint, what was the footprint used in the comparison?
How many watts were your X-pro lights using over the footprint?
Typical yield from both fixtures? Gram per watt or yield per sq ft averages?

Some thinking Ive been doing today:

For smaller 2x2 spaces 20 inch by 20 inch fixture ~114 watts (28.5 watts per sq ft) or more could work well for even coverage. Two fixtures could be used in line for 2x4 spaces then four fixtures in block configuration for 4x4 spaces.

For 3x3 spaces a 32 inch by 32 inch fixture could work well ~256.5 watts (28.5 watts per sq ft) or more. In 5x5 space a 56 inch by 56 inch fixture could work well ~712.5 watts (28.5 watts per sq ft) or more.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The educational system is supposedly improving constantly, oddly though people seem to be declining in cognitive ability as time moves forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVOH View Post
open mind leaves room for growth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud Green View Post
For almost 50 years I've smoked weed to enhance reality, not to escape from it...
Playing around outdoors again (current grow 2019 starts on post #75):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352271

Science Of Lighting & Plant Reactions (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358147

Drying and Cure Process Explained In Depth (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358186

Pot Size, Root system and maximizing growth thread:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=344347

Silicon, The Misunderstood Element:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352413

Humic and Fulvic acid information:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352265

Ibechillin is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-15-2019, 11:13 PM #15
HydroGrowLeds
Grow Light Guru

HydroGrowLeds's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 180
HydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
1000w HPS is estimated to be 2lbs/1 gram per watt typical yield. With the CXB3590 cob at 28.5 watts per sq ft claims of 2 grams per watt and 2+ ounce per sq ft have been made. Which means only 456 watts of broad spectrum CXB3590 over a 4x4 area is needed to match the typical 2lb yields of 1000 watt HPS.
Yeah, 1g/w is a mythical unicorn with HID for 90% or more of growers. Every single person who ever claimed they could achieve these figures, that we provided lights to for testing, came in significantly lower (most around 0.4-0.6 gpw). That's not to say that some commercial PRO growers out there aren't hitting 1gpw, but the vast majority of people growing with HID are nowhere near it.

Likewise most people growing with LED (especially generic white spectra) are not hitting anywhere close to 2GPW. This doesn't mean a PRO grower with the right strain, CO2 enrichment, nutes, etc... can't hit the number, but it's certainly not an average.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Spyder x plus is advertised at 660w draw and for a 4x4 footprint, what was the footprint used in the comparison?
How many watts were your X-pro lights using over the footprint?
Typical yield from both fixtures? Gram per watt or yield per sq ft averages?
They were running 4x12 test beds. We supplied 9pcs 168X-PRO for the test area at 300W each. I believe they were running 4 of the Fluence fixtures you mentioned, so the wattage draw was pretty even (2640W Fluence, 2700W HGL) over the same sized test area. They never provided me the direct yield numbers, they simply ran the test twice, told me our lights were the clear winner in both tests, and as a result our product was chosen for the build-out. I encouraged the client to do a side-by-side as they were on the fence about which lights to choose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Some thinking Ive been doing today:

For smaller 2x2 spaces 20 inch by 20 inch fixture ~114 watts (28.5 watts per sq ft) or more could work well for even coverage. Two fixtures could be used in line for 2x4 spaces then four fixtures in block configuration for 4x4 spaces.

For 3x3 spaces a 32 inch by 32 inch fixture could work well ~256.5 watts (28.5 watts per sq ft) or more. In 5x5 space a 56 inch by 56 inch fixture could work well ~712.5 watts (28.5 watts per sq ft) or more.
Yes, ideally for any space if you could have a panel almost the same size as your area, you're at a huge advantage. But most people aren't running lights that way, at least not yet. The 100W example I showed previously would adequately light up a 2x2 with pretty even intensity considering the light itself is a 1x1 loaded with LEDs. A 2x2 is only a 6" lateral spread from the edges of the fixture. But it also comes down to economics. Larger and larger heat sinks are more costly to produce and then ship. The goal is to make something repeatable where people can later build their own arrays using 1020 or 2020 aluminum profiles.
HydroGrowLeds is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-16-2019, 12:25 AM #16
Ibechillin
Research Enthusiast

Ibechillin's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Tacoma, Washington 47n
Posts: 1,163
Ibechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant future
"Faster growth with less watts" but 2700 watts is more than 2640 watts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydroGrowLeds View Post
Very familiar with Fluence. Our X-PRO were used against their Spyder models in a Canadian grow op. After 2 rounds where our lights were the clear winner (higher yield and faster growth with less watts)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HydroGrowLeds View Post
They were running 4x12 test beds. We supplied 9pcs 168X-PRO for the test area at 300W each. I believe they were running 4 of the Fluence fixtures you mentioned, so the wattage draw was pretty even (2640W Fluence, 2700W HGL) over the same sized test area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydroGrowLeds View Post
Yes, ideally for any space if you could have a panel almost the same size as your area, you're at a huge advantage. But most people aren't running lights that way, at least not yet. The 100W example I showed previously would adequately light up a 2x2 with pretty even intensity considering the light itself is a 1x1 loaded with LEDs. A 2x2 is only a 6" lateral spread from the edges of the fixture. But it also comes down to economics. Larger and larger heat sinks are more costly to produce and then ship. The goal is to make something repeatable where people can later build their own arrays using 1020 or 2020 aluminum profiles.
I didnt mean to assemble huge panels just examples of frame sizes and estimated watts per sq ft I feel would work well for most common grow configurations, how the lights fit inside those constraints to cover an area are up to you. Assembling the panels in 5.5" by 12" could cause fitment issues in restricted spaces so I thought about shaving some off the dimensions for clearance to 5" by 10". That would make the smallest light 10" by 10" which fits right in line with your modular strategy.

If the 10" by 10" lights were powered at ~37.5 watts for max coverage they could be placed centered on every sq ft of canopy space leaving 1 inch on all sides (frame space), would be same watts per sq ft as your 126x 225w over a 2x3 area like you mentioned above.

Otherwise something like:
2x2 area 3 panels spread evenly total 112.5w/28.125w per sq ft.
2x4 area 6 panels spread evenly total 225w/28.125w per sq ft.
3x3 area 7 panels spread evenly total 262.5w/29.16 watts per sq ft
4x4 space 12 panels spread evenly total 450w/28.125w per sq ft.
5x5 space 19 panels spread evenly total 712.5w/28.5w per sq ft.
Ibechillin is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-16-2019, 04:53 PM #17
HydroGrowLeds
Grow Light Guru

HydroGrowLeds's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 180
HydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
"Faster growth with less watts" but 2700 watts is more than 2640 watts?
[/b]
Yes, I mis-spoke. I was meaning to relay a higher yield per watt. If a product yields higher per watt, it means you can use less watts to keep a similar (or in many cases even higher) yield.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
I didnt mean to assemble huge panels just examples of frame sizes and estimated watts per sq ft I feel would work well for most common grow configurations, how the lights fit inside those constraints to cover an area are up to you. Assembling the panels in 5.5" by 12" could cause fitment issues in restricted spaces so I thought about shaving some off the dimensions for clearance to 5" by 10". That would make the smallest light 10" by 10" which fits right in line with your modular strategy.
The PCBs being 5.5" x 12" would be loaded 2 to a 13" x 13" light, or 3 to a 13" x 19-20" light. I have no intentions of creating a light with a single PCB, as it wouldn't be cost-effective. The design is likewise not finalized. Based on my first renderings, I will be reducing the size of the PCB a bit to accommodate a deeper reflector. Right now as designed it will only create a 120 degree pattern for about 1/3 of the LEDs. I'll do some math after PAR testing to determine the optimal reflector angle and number of LEDs per PCB. Most competitors right now are loading way too many LEDs, resulting in hanging their lights almost 3' away to achieve reasonable PAR numbers. To me this is just poor engineering and development. Why produce a light that pumps out way more umols than plants can use? Smarter to instead divide the LEDs up over more area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
If the 10" by 10" lights were powered at ~37.5 watts for max coverage they could be placed centered on every sq ft of canopy space leaving 1 inch on all sides (frame space), would be same watts per sq ft as your 126x 225w over a 2x3 area like you mentioned above.
Otherwise something like:
2x2 area 3 panels spread evenly total 112.5w/28.125w per sq ft.
2x4 area 6 panels spread evenly total 225w/28.125w per sq ft.
3x3 area 7 panels spread evenly total 262.5w/29.16 watts per sq ft
4x4 space 12 panels spread evenly total 450w/28.125w per sq ft.
5x5 space 19 panels spread evenly total 712.5w/28.5w per sq ft.[/quote]

I see what you're saying and not a bad suggestion. I'll have to do some numbers on putting together sheet arrays with 2020 profiles to look at final dimensions on the entirety of the product.
HydroGrowLeds is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-16-2019, 07:01 PM #18
Ibechillin
Research Enthusiast

Ibechillin's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Tacoma, Washington 47n
Posts: 1,163
Ibechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydroGrowLeds View Post
Right now as designed it will only create a 120 degree pattern for about 1/3 of the LEDs. I'll do some math after PAR testing to determine the optimal reflector angle and number of LEDs per PCB. Most competitors right now are loading way too many LEDs, resulting in hanging their lights almost 3' away to achieve reasonable PAR numbers. To me this is just poor engineering and development. Why produce a light that pumps out way more umols than plants can use? Smarter to instead divide the LEDs up over more area.
Glad to hear your working to accommodate consistent light spread by experimenting with different beam angles and LED arrangements. 99% of lights currently are designed to create a 1x1 hotspot of max intensity directly below and exponentially decreases as you travel in any direction, I feel this is the worst flaw in lighting tech. The lights are creating a footprint similar to HID: where you need to manipulate your canopy/plants in a bowl or upside down pyramid arrangement, with lowest growth directly below and tallest growth towards outside edges for optimal coverage.

This HLG550 v2 PPFD chart demonstrates this well at 22" hanging height over a 4x4 space. 1152 lm301b diodes on a 26" by 20" panel and all the intensity is in a 1x1 area.



Since LED release their heat through conduction to the mounting surface using more diodes ran at less power means better heat dissipation, longer life expectancy, increased efficiency (total light generated per watt of power) and light spread from overlapping light sources. There are multiple benefits to utilizing many diodes, an equilibrium needs to be determined between performance and worth. I recommend people the Samusng lm561c strips over the lm301b for DIY because of the above reasons. lm561c single row 2 ft strip 72 diodes, lm301b less than 10% increase in light output and only 40 diodes per 2 ft strip. These lights are designed for industrial/warehouse lighting though and have merely been adopted by horticulturalists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HydroGrowLeds View Post
I see what you're saying and not a bad suggestion. I'll have to do some numbers on putting together sheet arrays with 2020 profiles to look at final dimensions on the entirety of the product.
Sorry if im throwing a wrench in your gears haha, hope some of it can be of use.

Another question I had:

Have you done any controlled testing with daily light integral to find what the max PPFD is under your lights and spectrum that the plants can use at atmospheric ~400ppm co2? Majority of the research and publications Ive found focus on using the sun or broad spectrum led.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The educational system is supposedly improving constantly, oddly though people seem to be declining in cognitive ability as time moves forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVOH View Post
open mind leaves room for growth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud Green View Post
For almost 50 years I've smoked weed to enhance reality, not to escape from it...
Playing around outdoors again (current grow 2019 starts on post #75):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352271

Science Of Lighting & Plant Reactions (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358147

Drying and Cure Process Explained In Depth (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358186

Pot Size, Root system and maximizing growth thread:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=344347

Silicon, The Misunderstood Element:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352413

Humic and Fulvic acid information:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352265

Ibechillin is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-16-2019, 07:29 PM #19
HydroGrowLeds
Grow Light Guru

HydroGrowLeds's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 180
HydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the roughHydroGrowLeds is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Glad to hear your working to accommodate consistent light spread by experimenting with different beam angles and LED arrangements. 99% of lights currently are designed to create a 1x1 hotspot of max intensity directly below and exponentially decreases as you travel in any direction, I feel this is the worst flaw in lighting tech. The lights are creating a footprint similar to HID: where you need to manipulate your canopy/plants in a bowl or upside down pyramid arrangement, with lowest growth directly below and tallest growth towards outside edges for optimal coverage.


One of the reasons we recommend using multiple smaller fixtures, is to alleviate the occurrence you referenced. The above graphs represent 4pcs 84X spaced 6" edge to edge (18" CTC) hung over a 4x4 test grid with readings taken every 6". By using multiple fixtures to distribute light more evenly, we can create larger coverage areas of high intensity light. Our new lights will follow this same concept, but with a wider dispersion angle that will make the intensity a lot more uniform. Notice that even at 12" hanging height our lights are calibrated to deliver only 1300 umol? Other fixtures at this height are delivering well above 2000. We design the output of our fixtures around practical application/use of the product so it can be used at a reasonable height while delivering ample intensity for all plant types.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Since LED release their heat through conduction to the mounting surface using more diodes ran at less power means better heat dissipation, longer life expectancy, increased efficiency (total light generated per watt of power) and light spread from overlapping light sources. There are multiple benefits to utilizing many diodes, an equilibrium needs to be determined between performance and worth. I recommend people the Samusng lm561c strips over the lm301b for DIY because of the above reasons. lm561c single row 2 ft strip 72 diodes, lm301b less than 10% increase in light output and only 40 diodes per 2 ft strip. These lights are designed for industrial/warehouse lighting though and have merely been adopted by horticulturalists.
Yes, more diodes at a lower drive current with more spacing between diodes will certainly result in lower operating temps; however that in no way means "optimal" operating temps. Products like HLG don't even use a heat sink... They rely on passive cooling from the PCB and then affix it to a thin metal plate to build a large array. Generic Chinese boards loaded with the same LEDs and a heat sink, are operating at 65C (149F) at the heat sink and 80-85C (176-185F) at the solder junction of the LED. This is way above the optimal range which is 125F and below. For colored LEDs best to stay under 100F if you can, since reds decay faster than other colors. Hence why our model will not only have a heat sink, but one that is designed with purpose.

We also won't be using a single Samsung diode in our light or a single phosphor coated white. I don't believe in using inefficient technologies with poor spectral outputs/ratios, where a large majority of light created is never absorbed by the plant (aka wasted energy). We will either use a 2835, 3030 or 5730 package for our LEDs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
Sorry if im throwing a wrench in your gears haha, hope some of it can be of use.

Another question I had:

Have you done any controlled testing with daily light integral to find what the max PPFD is under your lights and spectrum that the plants can use at atmospheric ~400ppm co2? Majority of the research and publications Ive found focus on using the sun or broad spectrum led.
The simple answer is no. The scientific community as a whole is very disappointing to me. Most researchers and their students study the arabidopsis plant rather than developing customized spectral ratios and outputs for commercially grown plant varieties like tomatoes, cucumbers, lettuce, basil, etc... Most of these researchers use whatever generic panels are being donated to their University, rather than building their own panels or partnering with an OEM like us to build them on their behalf. There is so little being done in terms of spectral testing or adjusting DLI, it's almost sickening to me.

For example cannabis has a LSP around 1500 umol. The optimal DLI is about 65 moles. And yet with our LED it seems that about 1200 umol is the LSP. I'd love to run tons of tests on a wide variety of plants to determine optimal spectral outputs, ratios and then LSP and DLI values of those spectra, but the time and cost involved, plus the people is too big a burden for one company to take on.

I am working with one grower at the moment where we are trying to answer some of these questions with lettuce. After a few more rounds we may have some good answers, but the testing only began about two weeks ago and we have much to compare.
HydroGrowLeds is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-16-2019, 07:51 PM #20
Ibechillin
Research Enthusiast

Ibechillin's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Tacoma, Washington 47n
Posts: 1,163
Ibechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant futureIbechillin has a brilliant future
Here is the High PPFD Cultivation Guide pdf from Fluence:
(good baseline to go from since they are broad spectrum, Cannabis specific info also)

https://fluence.science/wp-content/u...de-9.27.16.pdf

Light intensity (umol/m2/s = PPFD) and C02 level required for max photosynthesis:



Temperature effect on photosynthesis:



Temperature and CO2 effect on photosynthesis:



Like I said earlier, 500 PPFD broad spectrum is all thats needed. 1300 umols is way overkill unless heavily supplementing co2...I think they could be much more efficient.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The best results people achieve with DIY led seems to comes from the ability to maintain consistent intensity across the whole growing space. COB lighting with 1 per sq ft and Samsung lm561c strip's abilities to be built in square and rectangular shapes that fit the grow space evenly work really well with as low as 500 PPFD to the edges.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibechillin View Post
The educational system is supposedly improving constantly, oddly though people seem to be declining in cognitive ability as time moves forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVOH View Post
open mind leaves room for growth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud Green View Post
For almost 50 years I've smoked weed to enhance reality, not to escape from it...
Playing around outdoors again (current grow 2019 starts on post #75):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352271

Science Of Lighting & Plant Reactions (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358147

Drying and Cure Process Explained In Depth (Sticky Thread):

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=358186

Pot Size, Root system and maximizing growth thread:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=344347

Silicon, The Misunderstood Element:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352413

Humic and Fulvic acid information:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=352265

Ibechillin is offline Quote


Post Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:36 AM.




This site is for educational and entertainment purposes only.
You must be of legal age to view ICmag and participate here.
All postings are the responsibility of their authors.
Powered by: vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.