V series "Tetras"

C

CellarDweller

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
And some quick notes & observations ,
regarding the spectrum of emitted light from Vero 29 versus CXA 3070,
both @ 3000K 80Ra .

.................................................................

1) The PPF percent distribution of the two COBs,for the range 380-780 nm is as follows
( BL 380-499 nm - GR 500-599 nm - R 600-699 nm -FR 700-780 nm ) :

Vero 29 3K80Ra : 10.67% - 40.73% - 44.04% - 4.57% LER: 320-322 ( typ:321 )
CXA3070 3K80Ra :10.62% - 41.37% - 43.71% - 4.3% LER: 324-326 ( typ:325 )

And their PPF spectral distribution graph in comparison (Both @ 2200 mA & Tc=50C ).
View attachment 3374197

The differences seem rather minuscule..Ain't so ?

Well ...
Those of you that have both of these COBs try a small test ...
Illuminate firstly a mj plant with one of the two COBs.
Try to record in your mind ,the actual green shade of the leaves reaching your eyes ...
Then illuminate the same plant with the other COB ..
What do you see ?
The difference of the green hue from the leaves is not minuscule,but rather great ,this time ....

(Under the CXA3070 the photosynthesizing leaf tissue has a yellowish-lime green hue,
while under the Vero 29 the same photosynthesizing leaf tissue has a dark green -purplish hue ! )

What assumptions we can make out of that ?

Well ...For starters ,the photosynthesizing leaf tissue is NOT GREEN ,actually ...
It's just the fact that our vision that " translates" the reflected light into "green " ....
Human vision ,in well lit situations ,is most sensitive to green 555 nm light (Photopic )

But human vision can not perceive as "light" E/M radiation over ~780 nm ..
(Although some people are able to see up to ~800 nm )

But what wls plants do reflect actually ?
Well ..Let's see our beloved plant...
View attachment 3374212
(Vegetative Growth phase )


View attachment 3374209
(checkout the green curve :Leaf Lamina Absorptance - of alive tissue and not some kind of diluted Chlorophyll )



15 % reflection of green ....Actually peaking close to..555 nm !!!
Still over 50% reflection is taking place over ~740 nm ...
So ,actually photosynthesizing leaf tissue ,would had a rather brownish /reddish hue,
if only ,we humans could perceive the NIR /FR E/M radiation as light being able to see the " whole picture".
But we can't ...
So ,due to limited range of E/M radiation perceived as light by human vision and
due to it's high sensitivity to green light ,plants seem to be green ..

Well..They are not green .

So next time one will say to you that green light is reflected and not absorbed ,
just laugh . It's a good ol' joke !


2) Both of these COBs can be used for vegging with great results .

Just do not place them near the plant tops,'cause your plant(s) will stay extremely compact (short ) ...
And that will have a negative impact on yield ..(Trust me,on that one ) .
Later in flowering ,COBs and plant(s) can have a smaller distance between them .
No need for extra monochromatic LEDs .Just give raw power (more COBs ) if you want bigger yields.
Nothing more is needed .

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
I just wish more people in the world had the time to actually understand the truth of things like this......kind of "grounding" to see how things really work. Thanks.
 
C

CellarDweller

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
I've already tested it against a similar sized heatsink (exact same to be precise ) from
Fischer Electronik ,the SK85 at 100 mm length.
For comparison I've used a 100mm option of the heatsink I use ( ST10 from Normabox ) .

The SK85 has a thermal resistance of 0,85 C/W,when black anodised and a retail price of ~22 euros.
The ST10 has a thermal resistance of 0,6 C/W,when black anodised and a retail price of ~10 euros.
The actual temperature difference was about 1,5 C for the same ~25 W of Q load.(
PASSIVE ,fins perpendicular to ground)

Then again I've tested the ST20 (the one I'm using of 200 mm length ) with the-again exact same sized and shaped- ABL 159AB .
http://nl.rs-online.com/web/p/heatsinks/2342463/

The 159AB has a thermal resistance of 0,55 C/W,when black anodised and a retail price of ~34 euros.
The ST20 has a thermal resistance of 0,3 C/W,when black anodised and a retail price of ~25 euros.

The actual temperature difference was about 4 C for the same ~25 W of Q load.
(PASSIVE ,fins perpendicular to ground).

SketchUP2015 actual size model inside .zip folder.

http://www.normabox.gr/website/product_info.php?cust_id=10303&template_id=&lang=gr&cPath=9&cust_id=10303&template_id=&lang=gr&cPath=9&products_id=22&lang=en
Click to expand...
So the Fischer stuff is interesting to me (based in Germania) and I was looking at this one: SK 162 600 SA
 
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
CellarDweller said:
So the Fischer stuff is interesting to me (based in Germania) and I was looking at this one: SK 162 600 SA
Click to expand...
Fischer Elektronik ,except a wide range of top-quality heat sinks ( including also LED dedicated heat sinks),
it offers a wide range of top-quality cases and boxes as also some great TIM .
I really like the products of that company .Their standards are the highest in EU,probably.
The design is more than great and "Fischer Elektronik " brand is by itself a guarantee of highest quality.
If only their prices were a tad lower.
But hey,I should not complain...
You get what you pay for ..

Cheers.
:peace:
 
C

CellarDweller

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
Fischer Elektronik ,except a wide range of top-quality heat sinks ( including also LED dedicated heat sinks),
it offers a wide range of top-quality cases and boxes as also some great TIM .
I really like the products of that company .Their standards are the highest in EU,probably.
The design is more than great and "Fischer Elektronik " brand is by itself a guarantee of highest quality.
If only their prices were a tad lower.
But hey,I should not complain...
You get what you pay for ..

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
TIM? Sorry don't get that one
 
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
And these pics show what will happen if one vegs with the 3000°K 80Ra COBs being too close
to the seedlings-young plants ....

Leaf tissue is narrow bladed ( narrow laminae ),waxy-glossy and thick =high levels PAR adapted .
Plant(s) stay extremely short ....

This particular plant vegged for 30 days under 2x Vero 29 ,with an average distance less than a foot.
The first 4 weeks of flowering was also done under the 2x Vero29 ....

( I was just "burning -in " the COBs from a V series fixture ,that later was sold...:P )

From the 5th week up till now (towards the end of 6th week ) ,it flowers under 2x CXA3070 3000°K 80Ra Z4 @ 1650 mA ...And it will finish under them ,also ...

The specimen is just 16" high ...
NO kind of training is done ,no defoliation,not topping or anything else...
Just like if it was wild ,field grown in the arms of Big-moma-Nature ....

This partricular hybrid has an average height of 3 m ( ~9' ) when grown outdoors under the burning
mediterranean sun ,while indoors under a Phillips 400 W GreenPower HPS ,the average height is 1.2 m
( 3' 8" ) .

I know this hybrid like the inside of my pocket ,as I 've been growing it constantly for over a decade now ..
You see it's my favourite herb and an ideal hybrid for experiments ( IBL ,very hardy plant ,very productive ,always very "hungry" for CO2 and nutes ,exceptional resistance to pests and fungi ,high rates of growth -except a small Chlorophyll biosynthesis "lag " at the very first stages,no matter the light source ..)

The results of a very stocky plant are just disappointing ,in case of "single plant grow" ..

P3192516.JPG

P3192519.JPG

P3192518.JPG

Cheers.
:peace:

Edit:
Forgot to mention that ....
This same hybrid when is vegged under 3000°K 80Ra COBs (No matter if Veros or CXAs )
having a distance over a foot ( @ 1400 -2200 mA ) ,then its blades are broad with thin, velvety lamina ..
The average height then is about 80 cm -1 m ( 2' 7" - 3' ) ..
And the results are most often great to superb !
 
Last edited:
AquariusPanta

AquariusPanta

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
And these pics show what will happen if one vegs with the 3000°K 80Ra COBs being too close
to the seedlings-young plants ....

Leaf tissue is narrow bladed ( narrow laminae ),waxy-glossy and thick =high levels PAR adapted .
Plant(s) stay extremely short ....

This paticular plant vegged for 30 days under 2x Vero 29 ,with an average distance less than a foot.
The first 4 weeks of flowering was also done under the 2x Vero29 ....

( I was just "burning -in " the COBs from a V series fixture ,that later was sold...:P )

From the 5th week up till now (towards the end of 6th week ) ,it flowers under 2x CXA3070 3000°K 80Ra Z4 @ 1650 mA ...And it will finish under them ,also ...

The specimen is just 16" high ...
NO kind of training is done ,no defoliation,not topping or anything else...
Just like if it was wild ,field grown in the arms of Big-moma-Nature ....

This partricular hybrid has an average height of 3 m ( ~9' ) when grown outdoors under the burning
mediterranean sun ,while indoors under a Phillips 400 W GreenPower HPS ,the average height is 1.2 m
( 3' 8" ) .

I know this hybrid like the inside of my pocket ,as I 've been growing it constantly for over a decade now ..
You see it's my favourite herb and an ideal hybrid for experiments ( IBL ,very hardy plant ,very productive ,always very "hungry" for CO2 and nutes ,exceptional resistance to pests and fungi ,high rates of growth -except a small Chlorophyll biosynthesis "lag " at the very first stages,no matter the light source ..)

The results of a very stocky plant are just disappointing ,in case of "single plant grow" ..

View attachment 3375556

View attachment 3375557

View attachment 3375558

Cheers.
:peace:

Edit:
Forgot to mention that ....
This same hybrid when is vegged under 3000°K 80Ra COBs (No matter if Veros or CXAs )
having a distance over a foot ( @ 1400 -2200 mA ) ,then its blades are broad with thin, velvety lamina ..
The average height then is about 80 cm -1 m ( 2' 7" - 3' ) ..
And the results are most often great to superb !
Click to expand...
Do these pictures demonstrate what you're after in your specimen or the opposite, as in it's short and stocky, attributes you would rather not have? I'm a little confused with your words, maybe I should drink some Earl Grey ;).
 
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
AquariusPanta said:
Do these pictures demonstrate what you're after in your specimen or the opposite, as in it's short and stocky, attributes you would rather not have? I'm a little confused with your words, maybe I should drink some Earl Grey ;).
Click to expand...
The term "efficiency" is very complicated ...And not "One-Way" ...
These pics show an example of a plant that does not use efficiently the available light (energy ) .
The artificial light source itself it might well be quite efficient.
This particular plant ain't efficient though ,relative to it's energy source ...

1) It should have been taller in order,for more canopy/foliage to make use of available energy in the "y" axis ,
having those "high PAR adapted" leaves ....Additional height means also more "bud-sites/spots".
The combined result is higher yield.

Or ....

2) It should had wider and thinner leaves ,velvety (not glossy reflecting some light ) ,if the specimen remainedsuper stocky as is ...That kind of "Low/Moderate PAR levels" adapted foliage would capture more efficiently the available energy ,due to larger photosynthesizing canopy area and thinner leaves ( transimission of light is the term and not "penetration" .Penetration is a term used in ballistics and elsewhere ..) ,transmitting more energy to lower/deeper canopy.
That will have led to massive flowering buds ,thus once more better yield .

Depending on the artificial light source and it's power , spectrum and coverage both in horizontal and vertical axis ,the plant(s) should have an "ideal" height as also an ideal leaf adaptation .

It seems rather complicated ?
Well it ain't so ....
The grower should take under consideration the light source and it's specs as also the available room/space.
Having on mind those two and their ideal set -up & combination during flowering ,then he/she should proceed with caution selecting the power and the distance of the light source during vegging .

A plant that was grown to face "extreme s" regarding energy availability ,will fail to efficiently use the available energy
later in flowering when the source of light is not exactly "Extreme PAR levels " emitting .
(in place of "extreme" you can place "high" ,if you like ,too )

Same way ,a plant that was "raised" as a "light-hunter" due to low PAR levels during vegetative growth ,will face serious trouble when later in flowering is nuked with high PAR levels ...

In both cases light capture mechanisms are wrong from the very start ,as they do not "comply" with the energy levels
available,later at the reproductive stage .

Now..That was just for the leaf adaptation ....
Try to think of the rest regarding internode spacing ,stem height and number of bud-sites ...

I hope I was more of "enlightening" than of "further confusing" ...

Cheers.
:peace:
 
Last edited:
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
In the case of HPS ,taller plants than ideal ,
will produce leaves that later will face issues regarding light capturing ,as the plant has gained height and the artificial light
source is then much higher than before .These leaves will die.
Plant has put a great effort making PHOTOSYNTHESIZING BIOMASS only for that-valuable- tissue to die because it can not capture the aproppriate amounts of energy needed to sustain it's metabolic procedures,it's own life ..
The plant is making tissue that dies ,without that tissue having the chance to contribute to reproduction (Flowering-fruiting )
That's a fail ,regarding plant efficiency ,also.
 
Last edited:
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
DEFOLIATING is pure myth and a pile of BS.

1)"Entry spots" for various pests and fungi are being made ..

2) Excessive stress is applied to the plant..

3) WHO would like to loose a finger or two? Afterall ,each of us has ten ...
Cannabis is having cystolith trichomes on it's leaves just for the fun of it ?
OR the poor plant it's trying to defend itself ,regarding every single leaf ?
LIfe is not producing something in "excess"..Specially ,regarding an artificial environment.
Nothin should be " lost " or "sacrificed " ,for any reason,ideally ...
Except those,that the organism "decides" to do so with ...
(for example cotyledons )

Ideally ,not a single leaf should be damaged until it's natural abscission or senescence time has come ...

Otherwise ,that's an ENERGY loss (light was captured to make that leaf ,electricity was used for the light source ) .

Cheers.
:peace:

P.S.
Most of these are my assumptions and personal experience ,coming from an over a decade period ,with experimenting and knowledge acquiring ,regarding Cannabis Sativa L. species.

Another example that depicts some negative effects of human interference with plant physiology and biology ,is the pruning of branches done on fruiting trees ,all over here where I live ,at least.
Every year or so fruiting trees ,are being pruned,having in mind to keep the trees at an aproppriate height and shape ,so the fruit picking -harvesting will be done with the least effort.

Pruned fruiting trees are being productive for only about 10-15 years and oftenly their lifetime
is also 10-15 years.(With few exceptions like olive trees -Olea europaea ).
Unpruned trees ,that are left unaltered by any means ,oftenly live longer than 30-40 years ,
while they still produce fruits ,almost till the end of their life .
 
Last edited:
bicit

bicit

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
DEFOLIATING is pure myth and a pile of BS.

1)"Entry spots" for various pests and fungi are being made ..

2) Excessive stress is applied to the plant..

3) WHO would like to loose a finger or two? Afterall ,each of us has ten ...
Cannabis is having cystolith trichomes on it's leaves just for the fun of it ?
OR the poor plant it's trying to defend itself ,regarding every single leaf ?
LIfe is not producing something in "excess"..Specially ,regarding an artificial environment.
Nothin should be " lost " or "sacrificed " ,for any reason,ideally ...
Except those,that the organism "decides" to do so with ...
(for example cotyledons )

Ideally ,not a single leaf should be damaged until it's natural abscission or senescence time has come ...

Otherwise ,that's an ENERGY loss (light was captured to make that leaf ,electricity was used for the light source ) .

Cheers.
:peace:

P.S.
Most of these are my assumptions and personal experience ,coming from an over a decade period ,with experimenting and knowledge acquiring ,regarding Cannabis Sativa L. species.

Another example that depicts some negative effects of human interference with plant physiology and biology ,is the pruning of branches done on fruiting trees ,all over here where I live ,at least.
Every year or so fruiting trees ,are being pruned,having in mind to keep the trees at an aproppriate height and shape ,so the fruit picking -harvesting will be done with the least effort.

Pruned fruiting trees are being productive for only about 10-15 years and oftenly their lifetime
is also 10-15 years.(With few exceptions like olive trees -Olea europaea ).
Unpruned trees ,that are left unaltered by any means ,oftenly live longer than 30-40 years ,
while they still produce fruits ,almost till the end of their life .
Click to expand...
I've actually had better results typically with trained plants over untrained plants. Purely anecdotal but the 'mainlining' method works great. Especially with lights in an overhead grid like this.Ideally training would be done from the start, minimizing energy losses.

To each their own :P
 
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
bicit said:
I've actually had better results typically with trained plants over untrained plants. Purely anecdotal but the 'mainlining' method works great. Especially with lights in an overhead grid like this.Ideally training would be done from the start, minimizing energy losses.

To each their own :P
Click to expand...
Agreed.
It's another thing the Low Stress Training and another the high stressing alterations like defoliating or lollipopping ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top