220w CFL 4'x4' floor plan, superior to 400w HPS

[TeaTreeOil]

So you want to grow around 16 plants, and have around 40"x40"xZ".

4 x 55 watt bulbs should do!

If you're REALLY crazy, add 5 more 55 watt bulbs(in a cross). Totaling 9x55W = 495W. Double the lumens for each middle outside 2 (7.2k lm). And quadruple the 4 center plants(14.4k lm)... which is like having a 150W HPS over those 4. A 75W HPS over EACH of the outer, middle 8. And the outside 4 will still be getting more light than a 400W HPS would provide at those distances from center(or 150W HPS, 37.5W*4)!

That's uh... 150W*4(600w) + 75W*8 (600w) + 150W = 1350W!!!! You only pay for 495W(plus ballasts).



And I didn't even make it to explaining PAR in this post! So go here, https://www.rollitup.org/2081469-post16.html , so I don't have to repeat myself!

 

[TeaTreeOil]

So I've been modeling this room in 3DSMAX6 with Photometric lights & Mental Ray GI(global illumination, it simulates radiance caused by actual photons bouncing around the room!).

So far the four 6500K 55 watt CFLs produce *10% more* blue spectrum than HPS, but only 81-82% as much red & 85-87% as much green as the HPS (HPS temp of 3600K, a grow light, not a 2100k, or whatever, street light!). It's doing this at 50k HPS lumens compared to 14k CFL lumens. 400w vs 220w!

I'm waiting on the 2700k CFL render. And a true test of wits(er.. light) 440w(8x55w) 2700K CFLs versus HPS!

Set-up: mylar(or 100% reflective) walls/ceiling/floor. HPS bulb is 1 foot away w/reflector. CFLS's are 'in' the canopy(1 foot closer, no reflectors, just the walls).

I based the room exactly off the prior image attachment. It's 4'x4'x10'.

The following table shows the limits of RGB light, the ranges include RAW(lumens) & PAR-filtered light. Two PAR filters are used, one that favors red(80%r/60%b), and one that favors blue(80%b/60&r), neither favor green(26%), which is why green has the widest range. Multiple test points are used(far and near, but not the light itself).

RGB per watt:
HPS:
R: .57 to .6
G: .23 to .54
B: .35 to .42

CFL:
R: .84 to .85
G: .33 to .85
B: .67 to .84

HPS is clearly out-classed in PAR spectrum output.

I've also attached a CFL bulb/lumen comparison guide for your convenience. Here's a similar HPS chart: https://www.rollitup.org/marijuana-pics/index.php?n=14126&page=1

 

[beginningbotanist420]

I like that chart you posted. People always use lumens as a reference without understanding what that word means. Money says that you're going to have to explain the term foot-candles to someone. I never thought about it that you actually get more foot-candles than the bulb is rated for if you're inside of a foot, but it makes sense according to the formula L=P/D^2. I always saw it as meaning what you lost by going over a foot away, but never to mean what you could gain but going under a foot. If you look at the HPS chart, you can see that you don't get the full number of "lumens" unless your under about 6.5" away, but you get several times what the bulb is rated for if you're under that distance.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Right, usually there's a ~45 degree cone of usable light per bulb. Reflectors are only capable of reflecting back ~30-40%(and still hitting foliage with enough intensity, and that's with a high reflectance, distance is a bitch) out of the ~50% cast upon it. Removing the reflectors, and focusing on DIRECT light with 90 degree cones in 4 directions(360 degrees) utilizes the maximum amount possible per plant.

8 lights takes WAAAAY longer than 1 or 4 for GI to calculate....

 

[beginningbotanist420]

i'm not gonna lie though. when I read the title, I thought this was going to be such a noob post. I am actualy very impressed by the level and validity of information that is presented here, although you should have made the title "495w CFL 4'x4' floor plan, superior to 400w HPS". You just earned youself a repping

 

[weedaweedaweed]

Sounds good, where can i follow the grow journal?

 

[Tronica]

Great info, pls keep us posted on your findings here.

 

[UserFriendly]

ugh......

 

[TeaTreeOil]

No grow journal. This is just a simulation.

See attachment, it's the various renders and them split into their RGB channels. They are then ranked by two factors: one with the most intense color, and by the amount(spread).

Spoiler: HPS only out-shines in the GREEN spectrum!

Conclusion:

HPS bulbs emit a lot of green-yellow light. This is light best seen by humans. Green light is, of course, reflected off green objects. Lots of green light would make plants appear even brighter to human eyes.

HPS bulbs place 3rd for red after *unreflected* 2700k CFLs @ 440w total. And last in blue, against even 4 6500K lights @ 220w total(noted in earlier post). Even 8x2700k CFLs @ 440w would be better to veg in.

NOTES: the 4 bulb set-up has flat-white walls! The rest have 100% reflective walls, ceiling, and floor.

No reflectors were simulated for 6500k bulbs. Although the 8 bulb set-up would be superior to, but similar to 4 bulbs with proper reflectors. Only HPS & indicated 2700k setup have light reflectors.

Lastly, only the 4 bulb set-up has bulbs 1 foot closer to plants. In all 8 bulb set-ups all bulbs are 1 foot(identical as the HPS) above the canopy. Meaning it's a 'level' playing field... you ought to put them ~12 inches closer as they are designed. Even when not used properly though... they do a damn good job.

 

[weedaweedaweed]

Sounds good, now you just have to prove it

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Sounds good, now you just have to prove it

The simulation is physically accurate within 10% or so.

I don't really have to prove anything. I've done the research. I wouldn't waste my money on HID. So a real life test case isn't going to come from me. I also see it as pointless.... the margins are so wide with the test cases.

I think the yields of the dozens upon dozens of grow journals speak louder than any single study I could come up with. When CFL growers are pulling nearly a gram/watt, and HID growers think .5/watt is doing great....

That's what I consider truly superior. The most dry weight, while maintaining quality, for the least amount invested(set-up & kWh).

If anything my next test will be T5 vs CFL.

Greenhouses use HPS to supplement MH. Or they just use MH.

Again, this is an 'FAIR test', those 8 bulbs totaling 440W are the SAME distance above the plants(1 foot). No CFL light should be used this way(especially 55 watt 3600 lumen lights). But even if you did as the experiment demonstrates, they beat HPS in every spectrum except green-yellow.

Learn more about the mental ray render platform: http://www.mentalimages.com/products/mental-ray.html

Quote: "mental ray is the first rendering software which combines the physically correct simulation of the behavior of light with full programmability for the creation of any imaginable visual phenomena."

Note: all renderings were ray traced with mental ray using photometric lights and a (mostly, the plants aren't hemp) physically accurate scene. All test points were from the walls & floor(beyond foliage). That's good enough for me.

 

[homegrwn]

Great info... how bored are you truely...There is still and always will be the stigmata that HPS is the best choice if money and space is not at a premium... MIT grad probly but have you grown using either CFl or HPS.

T5 V.S. CFL I feel would be totally T5 winning.. That said put your computer programs to work and prove me wrong or right.

Unfortunatly from experience I can tell you that all elements being equal ive produced more dry weight per plant flowering with HPS then with CFL.. My last grow was my experiment vegging and flowering the same strain, the same amount of light hours with the CFL grow being half the total yield dry!

 

[ejf1676]

tto great info that's right what do you work for nasa aor something anyway i agree cfl's are great and i use them but the hps is hard to beat but time will tell cheap and easy is superior
thanx for the research

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Well, if you rely on the grow FAQ:

https://www.rollitup.org/view.php?pg=faq&cmd=article&id=54

500 Watt halogen lighting produces about 0.08 Watt/s/nm in the green-yellow spectral region which is about the same as 80 watts of cfl's.

500w halogen / 80w CFL = CFL 6.25 times as efficient

Philips Advantage Fluorescent, 5000K: 1.44 PAReff

Philips High Pressure Sodium deluxe: 1.38 PAReff

Philips Dense-Line Emitter Metal Halide, 4100K: 1.38 PAReff

Philips Spot Halogen Masterline, 2950K: 0.263 PAReff

They even state plainly fluorescent is efficiency champ.

Lets do some more math! 6.25 * .263 PAReff = 1.64 CFL PAReff

We have a new champion, ladies and gentlemen. By 20%!

 

[l3ored]

I'm going to do 3 42w for 6 small plants, putting them in the canopy, between the tops. I'll keep it trimmed so each plant has buds of a controlled size and height, equally close to the bulbs. Only real question I have is whats the best color ratio with cfls? Would be worth it to stick some smaller 6500k bulbs into the lower parts of the plant?

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Try M-wing reflectors. They can widen light by quite a bit. 5000k would be the best single bulb choice. Daylight GE bulbs seem like good all-around bulbs. Trying a grow start to flower with them(104 watts at the moment). Probably one of the best bulbs that mimics the actual sun precisely. Thinking of around 50-75 watts per four plants. Going for peak grams/kWh.

Plan on supplementing 6500k bulbs(GE Daylight) with 2700k(have not yet purchased) 2:1. Hanging them vertically in the center of 4 plants in a square(5 gal containers). Very little wasted light.

 

[ejf1676]

so this is one i made louan bent and screwed to ribs pro mod bath exhaust in top 400 w mh silver paint interior (white is bettter or metal) this works really well and is very cool!

 

[l3ored]

good god thats impressive

 

[ejf1676]

thanx it works quite well although i just bought a 400 hps/mh sunleaves mini for increased flower power i will still run this for veg as it produces great results

 

[l3ored]

I hear you that CFLS when used right beat out MH. Does this configuration, with 2700k bulbs beat out a 400w hps?