CRI test and Mcree weighted results

sixstring2112

sixstring2112

Well-Known Member
not sure if i missed the info or what,but were these clones of the same plant or seed plants?and is there any way to totally separate these boxes from each other for the next test because you talked about shading from box to box which in my mind would make this test kinda shady lol.also one more thing,2700k 80cri...this chip has performed awesome in my garden clone to clone.can it be used in this next round ?
 
DrBlaze

DrBlaze

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Science moves more slowly than most people are comfortable with
Click to expand...
And stoner science moves slowest of all :( I really thought that the areas were more segregated. Oh well, maybe we'll have some good news in the spring. Thanks for the effort Rahz, its difficult to control something like this long distance.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
Mn
Rahz said:
The yield results for 3000/90 and 2700/90 are in.

3000/90 - 367 grams.
2700/90 - 344 grams.

I've not been getting pictures since I told him I was sure the test needed to be redone, and I haven't pushed it because he wasn't real happy about doing a second run using the same gear. It wasn't part of the deal but the test failure was his fault, so I'm pretty sure we will get a second run. I regret not being able to do the test myself.

The rest of the yields will be in over the next 4-5 days but the info here and the 3500/80 result is probably going to be the only relevant info from the test. The tester is indicating that the 3000/90 is very likely the best of the bunch. These two samples are relevant and directly comparable because they were the tallest plants and had no interference from other plants. The 3500K 80CRI will also be valid because it was beside the 3000/70 sample and wasn't being shaded. The 3000/70 sample was being shaded by the 2700/90, and the 3000/80 was shaded by both the 2700/90 and 3000/90 so I suspect the 3000/80 will do the worst, but the results aren't going to speak to the efficacy of those two spectrums. What we're really getting is 3000/90 vs 3500/80 vs 2700/90. Hopefully in about 3 months we'll have relevant results for all 5 spectrums.
Click to expand...
Interested highly in the 70CRI results regardless of how in accurate they are due to the shading, as I'm running 4000k 70cri currently
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
DrBlaze said:
And stoner science moves slowest of all :( I really thought that the areas were more segregated. Oh well, maybe we'll have some good news in the spring. Thanks for the effort Rahz, its difficult to control something like this long distance.
Click to expand...
I strongly disagree, and this very forum is proof; when one of us discovers a better method, strain, technique or peeve of equipment, we disseminate that information amongst us and the improvements can be immediately accessed by others.

You're just impatient! :P
 
Rahz

Rahz

Well-Known Member
The grow areas are enclosed on the sides and the lamps were meant to sit at the top. The plan was a 1 week veg then 12/12 but the veg period was extended to somewhere around a month, I think because a room light was left on. So the lamps has to be suspended above the enclosures and were no longer limited to shining in their respective boxes. At that point the front and back of the enclosures were removed for better airflow.

I think despite being shadowed by the 2700/90 the 3000/70 will perform better than the 3500/80. I'm expecting it to perform well because it's output was so much higher than the other samples.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Silver or lead said:
That is so close I would consider it within any margin of error, especially considering the circumstances.

Hopefully he can maintain better control next time.
Click to expand...
Honestly I'd be surprised if there were very big differences in yield.

I think this experiment is valuable for what it can tell us about general trends.
 
Rahz

Rahz

Well-Known Member
sixstring2112 said:
not sure if i missed the info or what,but were these clones of the same plant or seed plants?and is there any way to totally separate these boxes from each other for the next test because you talked about shading from box to box which in my mind would make this test kinda shady lol.also one more thing,2700k 80cri...this chip has performed awesome in my garden clone to clone.can it be used in this next round ?
Click to expand...
Yes all the clones were from the same plant.

I may bump out a lamp for 4000/90. I'll consider bumping one out for 2700/80 as well.
 
Rahz

Rahz

Well-Known Member
PAR measurements from 18" were taken, listed in the first post of the thread. That value is what some manufacturers call PPFD.

PPF (and PPFD) would require spectral analysis of each spectrum which I haven't done.
 
P

Plant Lobbyist

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
PAR measurements from 18" were taken, listed in the first post of the thread. That value is what some manufacturers call PPFD.

PPF (and PPFD) would require spectral analysis of each spectrum which I haven't done.
Click to expand...
Ah thanks.

It does look like the higher CRIs produce better on a per PAR basis.
 
sixstring2112

sixstring2112

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
Final numbers.

2700/90 344g
3000/90 395g
3000/80 227g
3000/70 343g
3500/80 216g

3000/70 did do well. And with 1000w during flower the GPW is 1.525
Click to expand...
but unless im missing something here none of those hit 1 gram per watt based on 1000w you would need 448g to hit the mark,best i see is .88gpw
 
P

Plant Lobbyist

Well-Known Member
sixstring2112 said:
come on bro,give those damn 2700/90 some credit lol.no but really i would guess the 2700/80 will do even better
Click to expand...

Or 70. I think the 2700k doesn't get as much of a red region increase in comparison to higher CRI 3000k.

the 3000/80 had some issues it looked like. Excluding its result, there does appear to be a significant difference between the 70 and 90.

As was discussed somewhere in a thread, the higher CRI in 3000k requires more of the spd wavelengths in the greater than 630nm region. Maybe that's providing the bump.

sixstring2112 said:
but unless im missing something here none of those hit 1 gram per watt based on 1000w you would need 448g to hit the mark,best i see is .88gpw
Click to expand...
Probably referring to total watts used for all 5 grows (200w per) compared in the cycle.

No doubt that 3000/80 skewed the numbers. The 3500/80 didn't do so well either. Take out those two and its 1.8gpw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top