Apache Tech LED Grow... 8x12...1900w

[mamakush]

Currently Apache is using 1w driven @100% and they have more output than most every 3w and 5w using units still.

Pardon my ignorance, but is it energetically possible to run a current-driven device @100% output?

 

[tags420]

Pardon my ignorance, but is it energetically possible to run a current-driven device @100% output?

I am not an engineer and that is just out of my league. This is what I know...They have 1w diodes and they are driven to max power(100%), thats what apaches says. They might be @ like 99% or something if they aren't exactly 100% . I will try to get more on this for you. Do you want to explain what you are thinking more?
The reason I'm pretty sure it is 100% is that they use 120 1w LED's. But the unit pulls 157w so that supports that the chips are being maxed out (1w each), plus fans and driver.
This is the opposite of most companies. Most 3w or 5w companies say they have 200 3w(should=600w)diode yet the unit only pulls 60% of that wattage..."we have 1500w led...only 750 true wattage." That doesn't mean they have 1500w of LED if they aren't driving them at that. It just means that they are missing out on potential.

 

[tags420]

Pardon my ignorance, but is it energetically possible to run a current-driven device @100% output?

Okay, I have a little more details now. You got me going and I learned some new things while reaserching and understanding this more, so thank you. You are pretty much right. Each chip is rated and that rating is not always(never) the optimal efficiency rating. For apache's chips...They are driven at their optimal mA current of 350mA...the max rated is 375mA...so 350/375=98%. At 350mA the diode is working at max efficiency...after this you are putting more in and not getting the same out proportionally. I know it as the point of diminishing return from school. Their cooling system helps them do it without over heating. The chips temp when being used in the AT120's is half of it's rated temp. So apache is getting the most out of every diode while keeping them under ideal conditions so they still maximizing the life too.

 

[djwimbo]

I am not an engineer and that is just out of my league. This is what I know...They have 1w diodes and they are driven to max power(100%), thats what apaches says. They might be @ like 99% or something if they aren't exactly 100% . I will try to get more on this for you. Do you want to explain what you are thinking more?
The reason I'm pretty sure it is 100% is that they use 120 1w LED's. But the unit pulls 157w so that supports that the chips are being maxed out (1w each), plus fans and driver.
This is the opposite of most companies. Most 3w or 5w companies say they have 200 3w(should=600w)diode yet the unit only pulls 60% of that wattage..."we have 1500w led...only 750 true wattage." That doesn't mean they have 1500w of LED if they aren't driving them at that. It just means that they are missing out on potential.

EDIT: I didn't read the last post ... so I'm dumb.



As long as heat is maintained at a safe level, running at "100%" shouldn't be an issue. The other companies are doing what they can to keep heat down, and balance the output of the LED's. At least that's my understanding. I'm curious why other companies have not taken the same approach. I think people(LED companies) are too afraid of heat, yet they are in the market of replacing HID's.

The power being pulled from the plug is pretty much the same as the infamous Blackstar240, and comparing them would be a joke.(although now I want to see the #'s)

 

[jubiare]

Mamakush

It's well possible to drive 1watters @100%, actually when knna was still around he experimented (spectroradiometer rtc) with driving them @110ish% and he said most chips can handle it nicely with a good compromise heat/efficiency (driven @ 400mA for es)

And to be frank you don't need no Apache technology or what to do so, they can just handle it nicely

With the so called 3w 5w chips the story changes

 

[jubiare]

djwimbo

Well the fact that other companies employ 3watters does answer your concerns in a way? Bear in mind that being"scared" of heat is a good thing for this tech and longevity/efficiency of the LEDs! They even go all over the place with nm's when not handled properly. Companies didn't care about that and drove LEDs harder faced problems, have you heard of stories about GLH swapping drivers for all the customers having issues with drivers @850ish?

And anyway ALL the companies dealing with such 1watters do drive them 100%ish (350mA)

 

[tags420]

It's well possible to drive 1watters @100%, actually when knna was still around he experimented (spectroradiometer rtc) with driving them @110ish% and he said most chips can handle it nicely with a good compromise heat/efficiency (driven @ 400mA for es)

And to be frank you don't need no Apache technology or what to do so, they can just handle it nicely

With the so called 3w 5w chips the story changes

No they "don't need no apache technology" but they 1w chips need a cooling system in the long run specially when applied like in most led grow light configurations. I never said it was revolutionary or gnarly...it's just a big finned aluminum heat sink with 2 fans creating passive movement, and plenty of room inside the unit supports airflow. It is top quality and efficient unlike others that need 5+fans and still don't get the most out of things.

They are working on a bar light similar to Illumitex kind of light that won't require moving fans...just a the heat sink is enough.

 

[jubiare]

tags420
I know you are not saying that, it's rather Apache claiming it
in reality with enough heatsink area massive heatsink one won't even need actively cooling! Anyway good luck with your giant Apache grow!

 

[chazbolin]

Don't want to jack the thread but since you all are speaking of passively cooled LED housing design, this may be the largest heat sink I've ever seen. Click on the Union Jack flag and you'll get this in English. No idea as to cost but I bet it gets expensive real fast. The shape of things to come? Philips thinks so.

http://www.netled.fi/hortishine

 

[tags420]

^^^Im trying to keep it about what I am doing and using in my grow; but ya that thing huge, it's 6 feet long.
I just don't know why all the interest in bar lights. How is it going to cover a square like everyone actually uses. Unless it is a vertical lettuce farm they don't seem practical or intense enough to do anything that usually requires a hps.

 

[Scotch089]

Idk...

I've really been waiting for a larger name to release some solid 2' led bar lights.. could be killer vertical side lighting.. (imagines a stand up tanning bed for cannabis..)

From micro growers to larger SOG style..

Thank you all for the education on running 1w emitters at 100%

I actually feel kind of dumb for not thinking "350mA is full capacity.. full capacity is 100..."

...duh..

+rep ... for who it will let me....

 

[PurpleBuz]

Idk...

I've really been waiting for a larger name to release some solid 2' led bar lights.. could be killer vertical side lighting.. (imagines a stand up tanning bed for cannabis..)

QUOTE]


Thinking of 4' x 6" led bars, passive cooling, with some real punch at least 1 watt chips and a mix of tight focus and wide angles that I can hang like 2 bulb T5s.

The wide 4' width as opposed to a spot source allows for a more even coverage. Put a few up in parallel and you have very even coverage over a plant row.

 

[djwimbo]

djwimbo

Well the fact that other companies employ 3watters does answer your concerns in a way? Bear in mind that being"scared" of heat is a good thing for this tech and longevity/efficiency of the LEDs! They even go all over the place with nm's when not handled properly. Companies didn't care about that and drove LEDs harder faced problems, have you heard of stories about GLH swapping drivers for all the customers having issues with drivers @850ish?

And anyway ALL the companies dealing with such 1watters do drive them 100%ish (350mA)

If I were to spend my money on LED's today/next30 days, it would be on an Area51 or CLW. Not sure of that helps, just the balance of need/performance/budget.

My point towards the heat was that HID's put off immense amounts of heat, while stealth can be the goal or very advantageous, growers are used to dealing with heat. Why not have a stealth line, and a "medical" line? Like the idea of the steel housing Apache. I don't know or recall any of the details, but it's mentioned in this thread. Keep the high dollar line for the artisans, investors and stealth stuff, and have a heavy framed line for the "I need a Jetta diesel" group. I'll pay for quality and decent customer service.
As long as longevity doesn't suffer, drive 'em as hard as you can.

Link to GLH issues? I'll read it

I haven't done much research into 1W LEDs at all, maybe I'm trendy, but my eyes tell me 3 or 5 watters out perform (watt for watt) ... but now I'm here, and keeping my mind open.

 

[tags420]

Idk...

I've really been waiting for a larger name to release some solid 2' led bar lights.. could be killer vertical side lighting.. (imagines a stand up tanning bed for cannabis..)
From micro growers to larger SOG style..

Thank you all for the education on running 1w emitters at 100%

I actually feel kind of dumb for not thinking "350mA is full capacity.. full capacity is 100..."

...duh..

+rep ... for who it will let me....

Thinking of 4' x 6" led bars, passive cooling, with some real punch at least 1 watt chips and a mix of tight focus and wide angles that I can hang like 2 bulb T5s.
The wide 4' width as opposed to a spot source allows for a more even coverage. Put a few up in parallel and you have very even coverage over a plant row.

Well then you will like that apache is making a bar unit. And they already have T8 LED bulbs that have better output and growth than T5's. Great for cloning and side/supplemental lighting.

If I were to spend my money on LED's today/next30 days, it would be on an Area51 or CLW. Not sure of that helps, just the balance of need/performance/budget.

My point towards the heat was that HID's put off immense amounts of heat, while stealth can be the goal or very advantageous, growers are used to dealing with heat. Why not have a stealth line, and a "medical" line? Like the idea of the steel housing Apache. I don't know or recall any of the details, but it's mentioned in this thread. Keep the high dollar line for the artisans, investors and stealth stuff, and have a heavy framed line for the "I need a Jetta diesel" group. I'll pay for quality and decent customer service.
As long as longevity doesn't suffer, drive 'em as hard as you can.

Link to GLH issues? I'll read it

I haven't done much research into 1W LEDs at all, maybe I'm trendy, but my eyes tell me 3 or 5 watters out perform (watt for watt) ... but now I'm here, and keeping my mind open.

The steel will be the less expensive version... the current aluminum is the expensive and very durable version. They would both be "stealth" and low heat...the housing isn't part of the heat sink/cooling directly. It's mostly just for looks and durability.

As for watt for watt, I would take on any light(led or hps) with these apaches...(4) Apache AT120's vs. (1) A51 A600, not even a fair fight. That's is one of the reasons I stand behind them...on a watts to output basis, apache has the best light. Other lights that are on the same level of output are 2X the power consumption of an AT120.
Keep checking in and you will see why I like these lights so much.

 

[chazbolin]

As for watt for watt, I would take on any light(led or hps) with these apaches...(4) Apache AT120's vs. (1) A51 A600, not even a fair fight. That's is one of the reasons I stand behind them...on a watts to output basis, apache has the best light. Other lights that are on the same level of output are 2X the power consumption of an AT120.
Keep checking in and you will see why I like these lights so much.

Hiya Tags! I've had the opportunity to see the Apache Tech lights up close and they are quality made products. No question in my mind. Watching grows like this will help people get a better understanding of where the latest generation LED designs have made vast improvements over previous generations LED's. I'm all about quality, yield, repeatability, initial cost and operating efficiency. To that end I, and many of us here, sincerely appreciate your doing the journal and Apache Tech for continuing to push the boundaries to help meet these goals.

I've always wanted to do a run with these so I've got some extra $$ to play with and I was wondering if I was to do a side by side where I have a 4 x 8 area split in 1/2 with a 420/Pontoon combination, consuming roughly 460 watts would you recommend 3 @ 470 watts or should I push it to 4 @ 628 watts of the AT120's? I also want to go from veg thru flower on the same light so would you recommend the WR or RB series? Or do you think I should wait for the next generation light that AT is currently working on which I know your not at liberty to discuss but would include benefits that we don't see in the current models?

I really want to do this for my own personal experience since I've long been curious how in a controlled environment, with all things being equal save the lighting, the technologies stand up. I know it's going to be expensive but you pay for quality. Perhaps with your connections you can help me get me some kind of deal and in consideration of that courtesy I'll post up a running journal for all to see. PM me or post here to let me know your thoughts. Thanks

 

[djwimbo]

Well then you will like that apache is making a bar unit. And they already have T8 LED bulbs that have better output and growth than T5's. Great for cloning and side/supplemental lighting.


The steel will be the less expensive version... the current aluminum is the expensive and very durable version. They would both be "stealth" and low heat...the housing isn't part of the heat sink/cooling directly. It's mostly just for looks and durability.

As for watt for watt, I would take on any light(led or hps) with these apaches...(4) Apache AT120's vs. (1) A51 A600, not even a fair fight. That's is one of the reasons I stand behind them...on a watts to output basis, apache has the best light. Other lights that are on the same level of output are 2X the power consumption of an AT120.
Keep checking in and you will see why I like these lights so much.

I've seen the T5/T8 LED replacement bars(current market options), they interest me, but I'd like to see them being used. Also, they require a different driver/special housing, because they're half the watts of a flouro-bulb. So you can't just buy a bar and put it in your own fixture. I want a direct replacement, so I can use ANY T5/T8 fixture, and install an LED bar.

I wouldn't doubt that 4x AT120's would out perform an Area51 A600, but right now that's $4k vs $1K ...

 

[PurpleBuz]

Well then you will like that apache is making a bar unit. And they already have T8 LED bulbs that have better output and growth than T5's. Great for cloning and side/supplemental lighting.

All of the leds in bar format or T8 tube replacements that I have seen are either priced too high or have insufficient wattage or both.
The commercial LED T8 replacements that I know of are like only around 22 watts, just not enough basic wattage for the area that it needs impact. (minimum 4' x 1.5' spread).


I'd love to see a prototype of the apache bar unit!

 

[tags420]

I've seen the T5/T8 LED replacement bars(current market options), they interest me, but I'd like to see them being used. Also, they require a different driver/special housing, because they're half the watts of a flouro-bulb. So you can't just buy a bar and put it in your own fixture. I want a direct replacement, so I can use ANY T5/T8 fixture, and install an LED bar.

I wouldn't doubt that 4x AT120's would out perform an Area51 A600, but right now that's $4k vs $1K ...

All of the leds in bar format or T8 tube replacements that I have seen are either priced too high or have insufficient wattage or both.
The commercial LED T8 replacements that I know of are like only around 22 watts, just not enough basic wattage for the area that it needs impact. (minimum 4' x 1.5' spread).

I'd love to see a prototype of the apache bar unit!

That's the problem with the T8 led's, they can't be used in standard fixtures. What you need to do is disconnect the internal ballast and connect the bulb directly to the wall line basically(very unsafe to tell just anyone todo). It is like a CFL but needs the Tube fixtures...kinda dumb but they work really good once you do it, but then they aren't UL anymore so that is why I think they keep them kinda hidden. It would only cost them $4 to all the parts of a regular T8 fixture, minus the ballast, and make it for the LED bulbs...sell it as one package(Bulbs+housing) and people would buy it I'm sure.

You said watt for watt 3w/5w would out perform...I said no they wouldn't. If the only rule was watt for watt...no confined space, I could spread mine so much more that it literally is not fair. If we are talking fair and practical I would say that 2 AT120's(314w) in a confined 4x4 would be a good match for any top quality light. After that point your major limiting factor is the size.

 

[tags420]

Hiya Tags! I've had the opportunity to see the Apache Tech lights up close and they are quality made products. No question in my mind. Watching grows like this will help people get a better understanding of where the latest generation LED designs have made vast improvements over previous generations LED's. I'm all about quality, yield, repeatability, initial cost and operating efficiency. To that end I, and many of us here, sincerely appreciate your doing the journal and Apache Tech for continuing to push the boundaries to help meet these goals.
I've always wanted to do a run with these so I've got some extra $$ to play with and I was wondering if I was to do a side by side where I have a 4 x 8 area split in 1/2 with a 420/Pontoon combination, consuming roughly 460 watts would you recommend 3 @ 470 watts or should I push it to 4 @ 628 watts of the AT120's? I also want to go from veg thru flower on the same light so would you recommend the WR or RB series? Or do you think I should wait for the next generation light that AT is currently working on which I know your not at liberty to discuss but would include benefits that we don't see in the current models?
I really want to do this for my own personal experience since I've long been curious how in a controlled environment, with all things being equal save the lighting, the technologies stand up. I know it's going to be expensive but you pay for quality. Perhaps with your connections you can help me get me some kind of deal and in consideration of that courtesy I'll post up a running journal for all to see. PM me or post here to let me know your thoughts. Thanks

The WR all the way...R2's. The BR should be/is obsolete in my book. Yet I still have 2 BR's.
An indagro side by side sounds interesting. But for your space, kinda like my last post, I would wait for the bigger unit for what you are trying todo. It would be one unit vs one unit and the wattages would be almost perfect(+/- 20w). They should be price comparable too. 2 AT120's is usually plenty for a 4x4. Any more than 2 and the space limit is holding them back too much. But if you're feeling spendy and can't wait I would love to see that many AT's in such a small area. 3 together are better than the sun, but it's just not practical and probably wouldn't be a good test for that space. The big unit will be perfect for you.

 

[djwimbo]

You said watt for watt 3w/5w would out perform...I said no they wouldn't. If the only rule was watt for watt...no confined space, I could spread mine so much more that it literally is not fair. If we are talking fair and practical I would say that 2 AT120's(314w) in a confined 4x4 would be a good match for any top quality light. After that point your major limiting factor is the size.

Exactly why I figured the comparison was moot. There are a lot of factors in why running multiple panels can be beneficial. Why doesn't Apache make anything bigger?