Jesus titty-fucking Christ, Bob. You didn't even read my post. I see why other people are annoyed by you in this thread, I posted all the information you would really have needed. I don't think I'm special for posting it, but you're talking about stuff we've covered already like it is breaking news. Sorry, I'm pissy today...
This is more up to speed in the community...Probably give you a smile even
You just don't explain stuff well enough, that's the problem. How exactly do the 3590s crush the 2590s? Is it lm/w efficacy-wise?
And here's the top of the line stuffs:This is more up to speed in the community...Probably give you a smile even
http://kingbriteled.en.alibaba.com/productgrouplist-801574224/Original_Cree_COB_leds.html
I would suggest the CXB25xx, similar to what churchaze built about 6 mos. ago? Right around 50% efficient running 700ma? something like that, Very nice....the new CXB lines.
You're probably right, I don't. It is all in the datasheets for the components on Cree's site, which I linked to first thing. I am not invested in doing a class on it for you, but I do want you to have the information. I won't do the legwork for you, maybe someone will.
I'm a slow learner, Michael, but I get it now. The CXBs are up to 33% more efficient than the CXAs. I just wasn't thinking straight before, that's all.
Stoner. Don't beat yourself up, or anything, haha. I really do want to help but I'm a fairly impatient asshole by nature.
Actually there doesn't seem to be much difference between the CXB high-bays and the XBD ones. They're both 100 lm/w. Just look at the listings for the lamps. The 240 watt CBXs put out 24,000 lm and the 400 watt XBDs put out 40,000. Where's the extra efficiency? It's just easier to wire the arrays than the single LEDs so they're better for DIY projects. If you buy the manufactured lamps there's really no difference. The XBD ones actually look like they have better reflectors.
OK, interesting. I thought CXB3590's were pushing 150lm/w at normal operating temps, but you may be right. I'm sleepy, anyone smart want to weigh in?
Yeah but 24W CXB3590 can put more than 200lm/W easily. There's the efficiency and the difference. Can't be done with XB-D. So yes, COBs are easier to work, higher efficiency can be achieved and they're also much cheaper.
That Cree high bay is using old cxb/affordable cobs to meet the price point for commercial adoption http://generationleds.com/products/CREE-CXB-A-XX-M-240-Watt-LED-High-Bay-Luminaire-Light-Fixture-16-400W-HID-Equivalent cxa family was the top dog at it's release....
Yeah, round grow spaces are dumb. Getting rid of dark corners, WTF?
I think round grow spaces are actually quite logical. What shape is an LED? It isn't square.
I see. So the trick is to use many low power arrays instead of a few high power ones. Weird how there would be a difference though. Aren't they driven at the same current? Though come to think of it, I don't believe you can get 200 lm/w from any current LED. The highest figure I've seen is 148. I just checked the data sheets and the CXBs are about 9% more efficient than the CXAs, 12,000 lm compared to 11,000 and 13,000 compared to 12,000 at the same currents and temps. So yeah, there is a slight advantage. What's the price difference though?
Well, you can. The trick is to use large COBs at really low current. You can get about 220lm/W from the top bin CXB3590 at 23W. And there's a few more 200lm/W options.
Oh I see, okay, that sounds plausible. They're cheap enough that it would be practical to use a lot of them at very low currents I guess. What kind of intensities can you get at those currents? You need at least 400 PPFD for normal growth in Cannabis. Below that it just drops right off like a cliff. I've seen the graph. There's actually no point in building a setup where there's less than that at any point.
Light decreases in intensity as the square of distance. That makes for round growing areas.