"High Lights" - high powered, CRI95 flowering boards made in Australia

Frank Cannon

Frank Cannon

Well-Known Member
Sooo someone else musta done the thinking for me.

In the 4 Highlight config along one side:

Edge of tent to edge of 1st HL = 4"

Vesuvius sink inside HL to inside of other HL = 5 1/2" (T5 between)

Between 2 Vesuvius sinks HL to HL = 5"

In the 2 Highlight config along the other side:

Edge of tent to edge of 1st HL = 6"

Between 2 Vesuvius sinks HL to HL = 9 1/2"

FC
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
Or_Gro said:
That’s pressed bud...

Talking near/full melt:

20% or more is considered good for bubble....next step up for you could be a tabletop washer...Take some of the work out...

Pressed bud, w good equipment and technique (depending on micron size of bags, temp, time, bag psi), is similar range.

I like press over all solvent-based methods, you get full terp and cannabinoid profile...aroma flavors are soooo good....unless you have a good concentrate vape, you look like a crackhead doin it...

Here’s a useful chart on yield vs bag pressure (bag pressure (psi) = force of press (lbs) divided by area of bag (sq in); eg
6-ton press 2”x5” bag: (6x2000)/(2x5) = 1200 psi):

View attachment 4328487
Click to expand...

What temp range you are using for best results? I've seen most use 110°F for full terpene profiles but others using up to 190°F.
I've btw. figured out how to build my own heating plattens pretty cheap. I've already ordered two 50w/120°C PTC heating elements(5$), a 120w 12v driver with 10A(13$) and a temperatur controller with k-type thermocouple(9$) for exact and fast measurings. Hysterese can be as small as 1°C which means I can hold the set temps within ±1°C. So I need only to make 2 nice and even alu blocks and its done for less than 50 bucks.

Frank Cannon said:
Sooo someone else musta done the thinking for me.

In the 4 Highlight config along one side:

Edge of tent to edge of 1st HL = 4"

Vesuvius sink inside HL to inside of other HL = 5 1/2" (T5 between)

Between 2 Vesuvius sinks HL to HL = 5"

In the 2 Highlight config along the other side:

Edge of tent to edge of 1st HL = 6"

Between 2 Vesuvius sinks HL to HL = 9 1/2"

FC
Click to expand...

Sounds good! If you have them hanging you can still move them a bit until you have found the best layout. With 8 boards its almost impossible to get no even distribution. In the end we talk over a few percent better uniformity maybe but the brightness level across the canopy will stay the same.
When you have different strains in your garden you will anyway use different hanging heights to reach the same 900-1000μMol/s/m². Do not overthink it... the plants don't complain if the uniformity is 2 or 3% better or not. As long as they get 800-1000μMol/s/m² uniformity is at least 80%. That's already pretty high and compared to 82, 83 or even 85% it really makes no difference.
You would indeed lose more light on the walls if you try to reach 90% or more uniformity. You are forced to move the boards more to the outside and that's counter productive from a certain moment. More energy would be needed to reach the desired 900-1000μMol/s and the whole light would be less efficient.
80% is already the optimal range and without additional optics it makes no sense to try to improve that. Maybe with 80° beam angle along the 4 walls and 120° for the inner boards but 80° midpower diodes are not available.

Be happy with the spread you have; its already within the optimal range! Play a bit with the distances between walls and fixtures if you see anywhere darker spots on you lux meter but I hardly believe you'll find any.
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
Randomblame said:
What temp range you are using for best results? I've seen most use 110°F for full terpene profiles but others using up to 190°F.
I've btw. figured out how to build my own heating plattens pretty cheap. I've already ordered two 50w/120°C PTC heating elements(5$), a 120w 12v driver with 10A(13$) and a temperatur controller with k-type thermocouple(9$) for exact and fast measurings. Hysterese can be as small as 1°C which means I can hold the set temps within ±1°C. So I need only to make 2 nice and even alu blocks and its done for less than 50 bucks.




Sounds good! If you have them hanging you can still move them a bit until you have found the best layout. With 8 boards its almost impossible to get no even distribution. In the end we talk over a few percent better uniformity maybe but the brightness level across the canopy will stay the same.
When you have different strains in your garden you will anyway use different hanging heights to reach the same 900-1000μMol/s/m². Do not overthink it... the plants don't complain if the uniformity is 2 or 3% better or not. As long as they get 800-1000μMol/s/m² uniformity is at least 80%. That's already pretty high and compared to 82, 83 or even 85% it really makes no difference.
You would indeed lose more light on the walls if you try to reach 90% or more uniformity. You are forced to move the boards more to the outside and that's counter productive from a certain moment. More energy would be needed to reach the desired 900-1000μMol/s and the whole light would be less efficient.
80% is already the optimal range and without additional optics it makes no sense to try to improve that. Maybe with 80° beam angle along the 4 walls and 120° for the inner boards but 80° midpower diodes are not available.

Be happy with the spread you have; its already within the optimal range! Play a bit with the distances between walls and fixtures if you see anywhere darker spots on you lux meter but I hardly believe you'll find any.
Click to expand...
Because you can vary pressure, temp, time; you have a number options to match the strain and your personal preferences. Micron size of bags also affects this.

I typically press bud at 220f in 90 um bags; 1 min at minimum pressure (50-100psi bag pressure, basically, plates touching bag) to pre-heat, then about 3 mins at full pressure, repeating for 3 presses (changing parchment for each press). This is a “test” cycle that helps identify yield potential of the material (which varies between strains; at different material conditions, like rh%).

If you press at lower temp, say 160f, for a longer time, the resulting consistency is softer, more butter-like; terpenes are somewhat higher; and yield is generally lower.

As you go much higher than 250f, you lose the terps.

If you press kief/dry sift or bubble hash, all the parameters (pressure/temp/time) are lower.

Here are a couple links, but in the end, it comes down to personal preference, especially the tradeoff between terps vs yield.

https://gopurepressure.com/blogs/rosinpress-tips-tricks/top-5-flower-rosin-tips-tricks

https://www.dabpress.com/blogs/news/what-temperature-should-i-press-my-rosin-at?
 
Frank Cannon

Frank Cannon

Well-Known Member
Yeah I did think (there's that word again) that it would be pretty hard to fuck up spacings with this many panels in my tent.

Really happy I was cattle prodded by Prawn to run 8 boards at a lower wattage instead of running 6 panels on Prawns sinks in hindsight at a higher wattage. Cost effective option for you guys considering his boards when you need to consider price of sinks and freight.....
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
Frank Cannon said:
Yeah I did think (there's that word again) that it would be pretty hard to fuck up spacings with this many panels in my tent.

Really happy I was cattle prodded by Prawn to run 8 boards at a lower wattage instead of running 6 panels on Prawns sinks in hindsight at a higher wattage. Cost effective option for you guys considering his boards when you need to consider price of sinks and freight.....
Click to expand...
...and when you have to explain to Mrs. Cannon why you need a new set of lights for each run you do, and generously contributing a supernova to your penpal in oregon.....
 
Last edited:
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
Frank Cannon said:
Yeah I did think (there's that word again) that it would be pretty hard to fuck up spacings with this many panels in my tent.

Really happy I was cattle prodded by Prawn to run 8 boards at a lower wattage instead of running 6 panels on Prawns sinks in hindsight at a higher wattage. Cost effective option for you guys considering his boards when you need to consider price of sinks and freight.....
Click to expand...
Well I think I might owe your a beer or three, because after Or_Grow's PAR mapping, it seems you might have got away with six panels and no heatsinks. Especially with the T5s.

I guess I underestimated how much power you would need.:o

Having said that, your area is 25% bigger (4.5'x4.5'), and you should get almost uniform light spread across the entire canopy with eight boards. And those 2-colour boards are about 1% more efficient than the 3-colour boards, as the Sunlike UV LEDs are slightly lower efficiency than the Nichias.

Frank Cannon said:
She still thinks I'm building the 4 x Vesuvius panels for Prawn, doh!
Click to expand...
Oh, NOW I get it! :bigjoint:

Jeeze, I'm always being blamed for something . . . Can't I get the credit for something good for a change?
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
Well I think I might owe your a beer or three, because after Or_Grow's PAR mapping, it seems you might have got away with six panels and no heatsinks. Especially with the T5s.

I guess I underestimated how much power you would need.:o

Having said that, your area is 25% bigger (4.5'x4.5'), and you should get almost uniform light spread across the entire canopy with eight boards. And those 2-colour boards are about 1% more efficient than the 3-colour boards, as the Sunlike UV LEDs are slightly lower efficiency than the Nichias.


Oh, NOW I get it! :bigjoint:

Jeeze, I'm always being blamed for something . . . Can't I get the credit for something good for a change?
Click to expand...
Good pack job on my bds & sinks...
 
Frank Cannon

Frank Cannon

Well-Known Member
All right I'll smoke ya pole too....





Nah in all seriousness I am stoked with my 4 x individual Vesuvius sinks gives alot of flexibility and only running 350w for veg and 700w for bloom is slaying my 6 x Qb96s (wattage wise) and me ole 600Hps is dead and buried under a pile of lava. No f@#king contest! (Caveat emptor - assuming they grow)

Now where's those X Files results tube squeezer?
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
Frank Cannon said:
All right I'll smoke ya pole too....





Nah in all seriousness I am stoked with my 4 x individual Vesuvius sinks gives alot of flexibility and only running 350w for veg and 700w for bloom is slaying my 6 x Qb96s (wattage wise) and me ole 600Hps is dead and buried under a pile of lava. No f@#king contest! (Caveat emptor - assuming they grow)

Now where's those X Files results tube squeezer?
Click to expand...
Buyer beware...assuming they grow?
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
Woohoo! First efficiency test and I'm really happy with the results: 2.46 umol/j at 1.5A (1/3 current) for a CRI95 white phosphor board isn't too shabby at all.

In fact, considering most of the LEDs on the board are CRI90 2700K, 2.46 umol/j is pretty decent.

Both the two-colour (below) and three-colour boards had similar figures. I will post another thread up later once I have all the pdfs, but the preliminary figures are:

3C (three-LED UV board)
CRI: 94.1-94.3
1.5A = 2.46
2.5A = 2.34 (118W at the board - which is what you would typically run them without heatsinks)
3.5A = 2.17
4A = 2.13

2C (two-LED, no UV)
CRI: 94.5-95.1
1.5A = 2.46
2.5A = 2.31
3.5A = 2.19

2C board (no UV)
Screen Shot 2019-05-07 at 14.37.24.png


TEKNIK also tested the HLG QB324 V1 board. In all fairness, I'm not going to post the actual figures as the supplied QB324 V1 had been used for a couple of grows, and so was not in factory fresh condition. The figures were about 20+% below the High Lights at similar wattages, but obviously that is not a true reflection of what they can do when new. The QB324 V1 are a mix of CRI80 and 90 LEDs.

EDIT: just fixed the figures
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
TEKNIK said:
I only have Monday or Thursday free at the moment so hopefully it will happen on Monday, if something comes up and I can't do it then it maybe delayed until next weekend when I am definitely free. Do not expect this to be ultra high in efficacy as it does have spectrums that fill in the gaps and that always comes at a cost in overall efficiency, Prawn has done a very good job at the first attempt at building his own boards, he did not cheap out on anything and that's a good sign for the future. Good shit costs and that's something that people miss understand at times.
Click to expand...
Well I wish you were still around, mate, because these certainly went beyond that 2.1-2.3 you were expecting, and even beyond the 2.4 I was hoping for :P
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
Woohoo! First efficiency test and I'm really happy with the results: 2.46 umol/j at 1.5A (1/3 current) for a CRI95 white phosphor board isn't too shabby at all.

In fact, considering most of the LEDs on the board are CRI90 2700K, 2.46 umol/j is pretty decent.

Both the two-colour (below) and three-colour boards had similar figures. I will post another thread up later once I have all the pdfs, but the preliminary figures are:

3C (three-LED UV board)
CRI: 94.1-94.3
1.5A = 2.46
2.5A = 2.34 (118W at the board - which is what you would typically run them without heatsinks)
3.5A = 2.17
4A = 2.13

2C (two-LED, no UV)
CRI: 94.5-95.1
1.5A = 2.46
2.5A = 2.31
3.5A = 2.19

2C board (no UV)
View attachment 4329289


TEKNIK also tested the HLG QB324 V1 board. In all fairness, I'm not going to post the actual figures as the supplied QB324 V1 had been used for a couple of grows, and so was not in factory fresh condition. The figures were about 20+% below the High Lights at similar wattages, but obviously that is not a true reflection of what they can do when new. The QB324 V1 are a mix of CRI80 and 90 LEDs.

EDIT: just fixed the figures
Click to expand...
Thanks @TEKNIK!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top