HLG550 vs Gavita? Anyone with experience with either/both?

[Cold$moke]

Lol

 

[WeedSexWeightsShakes]

Not in relationship to the hlg 550 but I added co2 to my grow tent and been trying to follow the vpd chart and plants are responding great to 85f 65rh. Lights off it was 75f 75rh earlier today. I do want to get the rh down more during lights off but overall it’s going well. I do have a lot of airflow tho.

 

[Ryante55]

Lol. I was talking about an LED setup for a 5x5 that would be superior to a DEHPS because a dehps, even cranked to 1150w isn't capable of getting a 5x5 to optimal intensity.

The LEDs have more output and a better spectrum, and the price, all things considered, is essentially the same as the dehps setup.

That is all. Never said dehps doesnt work, i just presented a better alternative for a 5x5 tent than it.

dude just shut up already i promise i have more experience with led than you. your comparing a damn strip build to a complete fixture a dehps will light up a 5x5 just fine. stop making led guys look bad. you take one kinda true thing and cling to it and exaggerate it. try growing some bud for once. or show me a ppfd reading with your par meter of your 5x5 strip build that crushes hps. or maybe your just spewing bullshit you have no experience with?

 

[wietefras]

The DEHPS spectra is just dominated by yellow wavelengths, no good. Therefore, all of the other wavelengths relative to it are quite low. Sure there's a decent amount of red, but the 3000k LED has way more red spectra, and especially notable is that it has 4 times the relative amount of 660nm far red, the most important wavelength. Overall, there's a significant amount more red on the 3000k cob than the 2100k DEHPS.

Oh, and green is nearly as photosynthetically active as the red in intense white light. And it penetrates leaves like butter. HPS has no green. Scientifically speaking, the LED has a more photosynhetically active spectra than the DEHPS.

That's all simply incorrect. There isn't that much difference between HPS and 3000K led in photosynthetic efficiency. Based on the McCree chart, HPS SPD is actually more efficient by about 6%.

I have normalized the SPD's of HPS and two 3000K SPDs to have the same surface area under the chart to make them comparable:


Clearly HPS is the one with more red and less blue. Yes HPS has less green, but the magical unicorn benefits of green light which you claim just do not exist to that degree. Sure when you add more green you can use a higher intensity, but we don't usually go there because it still lowers photosynthetic efficiency to go over 800 to 1000umol/s/m2 average. How is it then a benefit that you can use say 1700umol/s/m2 with leds when with HPS the max is at 1500umol/s/m2. Apart from that green light is still far less efficient than red.

And it still packs plenty of blue light which (along with UV) has been shown time and time to increase trichome production.

There has been no proof of this either. In fact all the lab tests I've seen showed little difference between HPS and led buds.

I agree with Ryante55, I'm also 100% led fan, but people making stuff up and posting it like it's fact is just not right.

 

[klx]

I grew with solely HPS lights for more than 20 years. These days I have a mix of HPS, cobs and strips. I can honestly say that new LED growers with their datasheets, 100W strip lights and ridiculous claims are some of the biggest plastics I have ever had the misfortune to come across.

 

[Humple]

I grew with solely HPS lights for more than 20 years. These days I have a mix of HPS, cobs and strips. I can honestly say that new LED growers with their datasheets, 100W strip lights and ridiculous claims are some of the biggest plastics I have ever had the misfortune to come across.

I'm with you on the ridiculous claims, and relying on datasheets over experience is certainly not the way to go, but what do you have against strip lights?

 

[klx]

I'm with you on the ridiculous claims, and relying on datasheets over experience is certainly not the way to go, but what do you have against strip lights?

Nothing. I use strips myself they are great.

 

[Colo MMJ]

Nothing. I use strips myself they are great.

I agree with you that HPS is still hard to beat. What about a six light room of two rows of 3 lights - all HPS.

Would you start with QB (4 board fixture)in the middle of a row of three?
So 2 (four board) QBs and 4 1000 watt SE HPS?

I was thinking of doing that and if QBs do the business then put the HPS in the middle and had 4 QB fixtures and 2 HPS. I am trying to reduce the energy and heat. Thanks.

 

[a mongo frog]

I agree with you that HPS is still hard to beat. What about a six light room of two rows of 3 lights - all HPS.

Would you start with QB (4 board fixture)in the middle of a row of three?
So 2 (four board) QBs and 4 1000 watt SE HPS?

I was thinking of doing that and if QBs do the business then put the HPS in the middle and had 4 QB fixtures and 2 HPS. I am trying to reduce the energy and heat. Thanks.

Just go for it. I think i need to learn more about this efficiency thing and get some tools to read these LED's. Room is running a bit warmer then i thought LED's run. Totally happy though, plants responded super well. I replace 3 1000 watt single ended with this set up in the pic.

 

[skoomd]

That's all simply incorrect. There isn't that much difference between HPS and 3000K led in photosynthetic efficiency. Based on the McCree chart, HPS SPD is actually more efficient by about 6%.

I have normalized the SPD's of HPS and two 3000K SPDs to have the same surface area under the chart to make them comparable:
View attachment 4117517

Clearly HPS is the one with more red and less blue. Yes HPS has less green, but the magical unicorn benefits of green light which you claim just do not exist to that degree. Sure when you add more green you can use a higher intensity, but we don't usually go there because it still lowers photosynthetic efficiency to go over 800 to 1000umol/s/m2 average. How is it then a benefit that you can use say 1700umol/s/m2 with leds when with HPS the max is at 1500umol/s/m2. Apart from that green light is still far less efficient than red.

There has been no proof of this either. In fact all the lab tests I've seen showed little difference between HPS and led buds.

I agree with Ryante55, I'm also 100% led fan, but people making stuff up and posting it like it's fact is just not right.

Thanks for the info. I will retract that statement then. Sorry for causing a fuss. I don't mean to be a data sheet whore so I will stop doing that. I just find it interesting to see how the data translates for changes to our plants to get a better grasp of what works and what doesnt. I think that's important for an industry with little scientific research.

I do still believe more blues and uvs can increase trichome production (read below) though (whether or not that always translates to THC is debatable), hence why growers get better quality with CMH and have finished their crops using MH bulbs for years. A small difference between 1% and 1.3% of a terpene is a 30% increase, so it may not seem significant but it is. Or 26% thc-a vs 24% thc-a being an 8% increase.

I noticed under my more blue heavy LEDs they were more frosted every single time than the more red heavy ones. And noticeably more aromatic. I never ran 2 clones side by side to say that's something I can 100% stand behind that, just an obersevation. Here's just an example of a plant I did under a blue heavy led panel.

This test found there's only a small change in cannabinoid content when using only blue+white light to finish their crops, but found significant increases in 15 different trials for 8 terpenes and 1 significant decrease for 1 terpene. 15 instances with 4 different strains is a solid dataset. Also important to note is that all occured in 3 days time.

I will put this up just because I found it interesting in regards to absorption peaks for the different photoreceptors. Not to disregard the mcree curve or anything, just thought it might be helpful.

Anyways, im out. Whatever works best for you guys is what you should keep using. Just sharing some info. Peace.

 

[klx]

I agree with you that HPS is still hard to beat. What about a six light room of two rows of 3 lights - all HPS.

Would you start with QB (4 board fixture)in the middle of a row of three?
So 2 (four board) QBs and 4 1000 watt SE HPS?

I was thinking of doing that and if QBs do the business then put the HPS in the middle and had 4 QB fixtures and 2 HPS. I am trying to reduce the energy and heat. Thanks.

Summer heat is the reason I switched out my thouie so yeah if heat is an issue, boards, strips, cobs they all work awesome. But when people say you can replace a thouie with 550 watts take it with a very large grain of salt.

 

[Cold$moke]

I wanted to combine the two

Have my de light up in the middle and a satellite f strip leds set up closer to the plants

1 gavita and 8 double row f strips to start cause i use the heat in the winter

Then i wanted to be able to add another 8 strips
To run in summer without the de.

Ill be doing my strip build soon kinda waiting to see if new strips will come out or the f strips get cheaper

 

[klx]

I wanted to combine the two

Have my de light up in the middle and a satellite f strip leds set up closer to the plants

1 gavita and 8 double row f strips to start cause i use the heat in the winter

Then i wanted to be able to add another 8 strips
To run in summer without the de.

Ill be doing my strip build soon kinda waiting to see if new strips will come out or the f strips get cheaper

Sounds like a plan!

 

[Cold$moke]

Anyplace to buy cheaper f strips then digikey?
Also heat sink is spendy to have shipped here any links on that?

I know the real heatsinks arent "needed" but i like to do stuff as good as i can

 

[skoomd]

Anyplace to buy cheaper f strips then digikey?
Also heat sink is spendy to have shipped here any links on that?

I know the real heatsinks arent "needed" but i like to do stuff as good as i can

I found this site (link) selling the LT-FB24B (double row 44" strip) for $13 each, but I doubt they're real. Or you have to buy an entire pallet of them.

Where are you at? I got my heatsinks from heatsinkusa and even shipped to me in colorado it was like 20-30$ for shipping.

I do like the heatsinks though. If you're an overkill kind of dude, they are really nice. Keeps my strips at 75% current at 50c dead center, versus the U frame I used on another build which at 50% current are about 60-65c. Heatsink itself never goes over 30c.

 

[Cold$moke]

Yea shipping enough heatsink to do my 8 light build is i think 120 from heatsink usa

Im way up north

And being a guy thats installed hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of aluminum
I can't swallow the shipping price haha

So i was going to hobo 2 u channels stacked inside each other

 

[BuddyColas]

I found this site (link) selling the LT-FB24B (double row 44" strip) for $13 each, but I doubt they're real. Or you have to buy an entire pallet of them.

Where are you at? I got my heatsinks from heatsinkusa and even shipped to me in colorado it was like 20-30$ for shipping.

I do like the heatsinks though. If you're an overkill kind of dude, they are really nice. Keeps my strips at 75% current at 50c dead center, versus the U frame I used on another build which at 50% current are about 60-65c. Heatsink itself never goes over 30c.

Is that the 2.079" heatsink you are speaking of?

 

[skoomd]

Is that the 2.079" heatsink you are speaking of?

Nah, the heatsink build is using 1" and the U frame is using 2". But i have single rows on the heatsinks, double row on the U frame.

You only need the 1.813" heatsink for the double row strips. The strips are 1.5"

 

[Cold$moke]

Is that the 2.079" heatsink you are speaking of?

Yes i forgot to add its 2 inch

 

[OneHitDone]

Thanks for the info. I will retract that statement then. Sorry for causing a fuss. I don't mean to be a data sheet whore so I will stop doing that. I just find it interesting to see how the data translates for changes to our plants to get a better grasp of what works and what doesnt. I think that's important for an industry with little scientific research.

I do still believe more blues and uvs can increase trichome production (read below) though (whether or not that always translates to THC is debatable), hence why growers get better quality with CMH and have finished their crops using MH bulbs for years. A small difference between 1% and 1.3% of a terpene is a 30% increase, so it may not seem significant but it is. Or 26% thc-a vs 24% thc-a being an 8% increase.

I noticed under my more blue heavy LEDs they were more frosted every single time than the more red heavy ones. And noticeably more aromatic. I never ran 2 clones side by side to say that's something I can 100% stand behind that, just an obersevation. Here's just an example of a plant I did under a blue heavy led panel.

This test found there's only a small change in cannabinoid content when using only blue+white light to finish their crops, but found significant increases in 15 different trials for 8 terpenes and 1 significant decrease for 1 terpene. 15 instances with 4 different strains is a solid dataset. Also important to note is that all occured in 3 days time.

I will put this up just because I found it interesting in regards to absorption peaks for the different photoreceptors. Not to disregard the mcree curve or anything, just thought it might be helpful.

Anyways, im out. Whatever works best for you guys is what you should keep using. Just sharing some info. Peace.

Hey @skoomd , maybe you can help the entire growing community out with that big brain of yours and participate in my other thread and see if you can solve the lettuce equation with some test grows of your own?

https://www.rollitup.org/t/all-cob-users-lettuce-grow-challenge.905662/