[LEDGirl]

As some of you have heard recently, we've been working hard to create a light that a lot of people have been asking for. A light that works extremely well for those square rooms or grow tents that all you gardeners seem to love! This by no means came cheap to us as a company, but we are in business to serve the requests of the consumer, so here's what you asked for!

The Penetrator 205W, is the newest member to our LED Grow Light line-up. It is a square design, measuring approximately 19" x 19" x 3.5", and supplying a maximum footprint of 3' x 3' (30" x 30" recommended). The light features our latest version of light engine, with an output of 85% red, 10% blue, and 5% white. This light is proprietary to Hydro Grow LED, and can be found from no other manufacturer (we own the mould). It features 196W of spectrally targeted light, and 9W of white. The price is $700.00 shipped, making this our most cost-effective unit. As with all of our other models, it comes with a standard 60 degree lens, and optional 30 degree. Contact us via sales@hydro-grow-led.com to place an order.

[blynx]

Very nice footprint! Need a tester?

[indifferent]

Looks good, a square form factor is a good idea.

Couple of questions:

1. 85% are red, but what wavelengths are these? A mix of 625nm and 660nm?

2. Only 9 whites isn't many, are they warm whites or cool whites?

3. Where is the 730-740nm far red coming from? With such a high ratio of red, but no far red (unless the whites have some far red output) won't this effect overall flowering time?

Looks like a really nice product.

[one Q]

getting one!!!! March or so. All i need to see is how all these LEDs are adding up numbers wise. This pannel is the KEY to success for many footprints IMO!!

Thanks LEDGirl!!

greener way to grow

[one Q]

one question, does that on/off button light up, that could be a problem.

also can we see one lit up

[LEDGirl]

Originally Posted by indifferent

Looks good, a square form factor is a good idea.

Couple of questions:

1. 85% are red, but what wavelengths are these? A mix of 625nm and 660nm?

2. Only 9 whites isn't many, are they warm whites or cool whites?

3. Where is the 730-740nm far red coming from? With such a high ratio of red, but no far red (unless the whites have some far red output) won't this effect overall flowering time?

Looks like a really nice product.

Our output in nm's is unchanged, meaning we still use 440nm 470nm, 640nm, 660nm, and 740nm. We simply went from 70% red (including IR) to 85% red. The white is a "filler" making up any spectral output the plant doesn't receive from it's "targeted" LED's, and also supplying enough light to aid with the human element (allowing you to see the health of your plants). If anything, flowering will be stronger with our updated design, with the extra red for flower.

[indifferent]

Cool, thanks for the answers. Interesting to see if the increase from 70 to 85 will improve flowering.

[sx646522]

Originally Posted by LEDGirl

Our output in nm's is unchanged, meaning we still use 440nm 470nm, 640nm, 660nm, and 740nm. We simply went from 70% red (including IR) to 85% red. The white is a "filler" making up any spectral output the plant doesn't receive from it's "targeted" LED's, and also supplying enough light to aid with the human element (allowing you to see the health of your plants). If anything, flowering will be stronger with our updated design, with the extra red for flower.

Sweet! Nice to see you're working continuously to keep improving on an already effective design. R&D really does pay off in the end. How long until the new 85%/10%/5% ratio gets updated on the production end of the 63, 126, and 318W units you are currently selling, Cammie? I notice it's not on the website yet...

Now all that's left is to release those LED strip lights you've been working on, and you'll have the most complete LED product line available!

Originally Posted by indifferent

Cool, thanks for the answers. Interesting to see if the increase from 70 to 85 will improve flowering.

Very interesting! While the absorption peaks for photosynthesis are well known these days (contributing to both primary and secondary growth), at this point in time, the exact factors (including those due to differences in spectrum) responsible for certain associated regulatory mechanisms (outside of dark period response and some research into both IR and UV) are, in truth, not that well understood.

The assumption by many growers is that white light (whether warm, neutral, cool, or 'daylight') is the missing X factor in these LED panels outside of the blue and red nm ones. This has probably been implied by looking at the LEDs from some models - it has become the 'catch-all' light for all other spectrums, as mentioned.

But of how much, and of what type, is best? Are *any* crucial processes really affected outside of what's already known, requiring any white at all? Or are they really most useful for giving a higher CRI (i.e. they're easier on the eyes), while also providing some red to assist in flowering? I think we still have to answer that question - which subsequent grows with the new lights will help provide us with.

If you look at the white LEDs themselves, you'll note that they are simply blue LEDs coated with a phosphor which determines the character of their spectrum, much like a fluorescent light uses. Any time you change spectrum using a phosphor, you are going to lose a certain amount of efficiency in the conversion process. This means less radiant energy from those LEDs anytime you're not using the original blue (source).

The conventional wisdom has been to use 'warm' white LEDs, as this produces a largely red-shifted spectrum (and a smattering of others in all other colors), just like warm white CFLs.

The thing is - if you don't really NEED to hit those other spectrums, why waste any radiant energy outside of your targeted ones by converting a more efficient blue into a less efficient white (which is simply a combination of many colors)?

Better to start with (more) red LED in the first place - which is what the new lights will do - if we want to improve flowering.

To me, that makes a lot of sense.

------------------------------

That also (once again) raises the question of why other lights, such as the UFO and Procyon, haven't seemed to be very good at flowering - and why their owners have had better results at supplementing them with white CFLs on subsequent grows. Was it due to:

1) A lack of white light?;
2) Wrong targeted spectrum(s)? (i.e. using cheaper 630 nm reds without adding 660 nm, etc.);
3) The much reduced intensity from using 120 degree lenses instead of 30/60?;
4) Simply not enough wattage?; or
5) The fact that many (early) growers had their lights up too high, ran colder grow rooms, and/or just didn't know how best to use LEDs in general?

It's probably some mix of all the above, depending on the individual in question - but if I had to put money on it, I'd lean towards 2) and 3) as being the primary culprits in an absolute sense - which HGL seems to have largely solved now.

So: more red, of the right spectrums, at the right viewing angles, should =

MORE BUD!

Cheers,

-SX

[LEDGirl]

Originally Posted by sx646522

Sweet! Nice to see you're working continuously to keep improving on an already effective design. R&D really does pay off in the end. How long until the new 85%/10%/5% ratio gets updated on the production end of the 63, 126, and 318W units you are currently selling, Cammie? I notice it's not on the website yet...

Now all that's left is to release those LED strip lights you've been working on, and you'll have the most complete LED product line available!

We are always doing testing behind the scenes to make our products better. Unlike some companies who think they have it all figured out (some of which you mentioned), it would be very ignorant for us to think that further progress could not be had, if more time and energy were invested in our products. Our latest light is the best of 3-4 potential design changes that we built and tested. The newest models featuring our latest output, are currently available. I will be going over the website tomorrow to make the necessary changes. We will also be adding the 205W to the site tomorrow.

As far as the light strip goes, it is still not cost-effective of we'd be offering it. Our cost per watt on them is higher than what we retail our lights at to our customers. Instead of going that route and waiting for someone to come up with a better, or cheaper strip, we've resorted to designing our own product line. We've been fielding requests for months, and HAVE listened to what a lot of customers have been asking for, and now we are developing products to suit their needs. The 205W is the first, and another major light is under development right now to fill a completely different niche in growing.

You mentioned white, so I felt it appropriately to announce that we will never remove the white from our product. It has been reduced to it's lowest point, which still allows for good visibility within your garden. Even if it is not as efficient as using a targeted source, several gardeners (including Irish) have expressed the need to be able to see their plants, so that they can fix problems like nutrient deficiencies or spider mites. Lights without white make it very difficult for our eyes to view plants beneficially. The gardener does account for at least 50% of the overall success of the garden, and we feel it is very important for them to be able to see their plants without having to turn off their lights.

As always SX, it was a pleasure to read your post.