Doer
Well-Known Member
I guess you know all about it, child.Must suck to suck
I guess you know all about it, child.Must suck to suck
you clearly bust me and my pumping garden of pure high efficiecy led's with all your proof and evidence of concepts. HahaSo, when Green and Scotch get this defense, it means I busted them.
Incandescents are not for horticulture. Everyone knows that.Lol then hang a shit ton of em and call it a day. Save yourself some money. O wait, they don't sell them anymore. I wonder what could've driven them to that....inefficient, safety (mercury)? Hm...
Loud and clear. Consider me Stan.
Are you moving past? The first sway guess was 25% effecint running at the recommended boost current.Lol no 25% efficient light source is for horticulture, or an industry. Obviously.
But hell they have close to 100 CRI so at this point I think that'd be a better option. I set my ego aside for a living, frankly it is nonexistent, if you gave a shit to respect anyone than your own ideas you'd probably realize that. Prime example is me trying to move past this, eh?
Go far away and never return. I am not having an argument.My problem is with you being a rude dick, trying to diminish anything I have to say just for the hell of it. Then after the outburst, you pick it up and continue to try and diminish me and my contribution. And if you were correct or I was off I would have no problems admitting it. But that isn't the case and if it was you would need to actually show how/why. If you said nothing that is fine, but you don't, you try and turn me into something negative. You have not shown anything to support your arguments. You have not countered anything I have presented with any valid info. When ever I get involved you resort to name calling and a small tantrum to deflect.
You don't remember this of course.Must suck to suck
LER of the sun in space is significantly lower because of the ionizing radiation (cosmic, gamma, xray, UVC, UVB), and the infrared region. (non-visible, but tremendous amounts of energy radiated. LER of the sun is more like 93lm/W according to wikipedia. Truncated LER might be 280lm/W.Yes sunlight has an LER. In space, it is about 5000K 100 CRi. So LER is about 280lm/W (my conjecture)
While you are extracting LER from an SPD curve, you will also come across another useful number, the umol/PAR W constant for that particular SPD curve. That allows us to convert from % efficiency into umol/W.
One that I am familiar with is the CXA 3000K, the figure is 4.88umol/W. So a 50% efficient CXA 3000K would create 2.44umol/ dissipation W.
Really?No one is attacking but you
Direct sunlight has a luminous efficacy of about 93 lumens per watt of radiant fluxTrue much of its radiation falls outside of the visible spectrum and for LER we just consider the visible. I wonder exactly how many lumens 1 pure W of that spectrum could produce? Maybe @alesh has an idea?
View attachment 3373427