Lamp Luminous Flux(lm)?? The higher ther better or No?? Help if ya can

[RB1956]

Hey, I am looking on Cidly, Bsled and Aliexpress, Alibaba for a great deal on a light.. And I noticed with that the Lamp Luminous Flux is different in say the 600w.. 1 would be 9500 and the other would be 18000.. What does this mean.. Also it says something about OEM whats that?? Well please let me know that this is if you can..

 

[guod]

Organizacion Editorial Mexicana, also known as OEM, is the largest Mexican print media company and the largest newspaper company in Latin America. The company owns a large newswire service, it includes 70 Mexican daily newspapers, 24 radio stations, 1 TV channel and 44 websites.

An original equipment manufacturer, or OEM, manufactures product or components that are purchased by another company and retailed under that purchasing company's brand name.[SUP][1][/SUP] OEM refers to the company that originally manufactured the product.

nowadays i find my socks with google, especially the left one!

 

[stardustsailor]

nowadays i find my socks with google, especially the left one!

LOL!!!!!
Ok ...
Once again you made me pee my pants (ok some drops ,nothin' to worry about ...Still... ) from laughter !!!
Dam' you Guod ! Today morning I just wore them,fresh and clean ....

"Especially the left one ....."

FGS ....
MUA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA ...........
.......

 

[stardustsailor]

Once again : Lumens have nothing to do with art. lighting & growing plants .

A company or their staff , that advertise or promote their led product(s) and mentioning "Lumens " either they telling you lies ,
or they simply ,do not have the slightest idea about what they are talking about ....

It's usage -in REAL led growing panel world - it is only limited to express a level of how bright the fixture's light ,
will appear to you (or any other human being ..) .Nothing more .....

I suggest you ,never to take seriously ,someone who is talking about leds -and growing plants with them -and
at the same time uses terms like " footcandles" , "lumens " ,"photometric efficiency " ," lux " & "candelas ",to convince you
about a product' s efficiency ....

He-She , is just joking .
Both him/her-self and you ....

 

[chazbolin]

I've heard these terms used separately before but I believe in the context of plant lighting systems they are defined as a whole unit.

My understanding is that certain lighting manufacturers will extoll the virtues of their products based on superior lumens, footcandles, luminous flux 'photosynthetic' reference values, thus earning them the hardly sought after OEM title.

Oily (slick) Empty (lacking scientific foundation) Meanderings (slick sales speak that obfuscates little things like plant photobiological response when using their products)

I may be wrong though. If so I defer to post number 2.

 

[stardustsailor]

I'll give an example ,randomly found on web ......
......With Color coded after-notes ...

" How many lumens do the xxxxx put out?

The quick answer is about xxxx lm. However, this measure is highly misleading, as with ANY LED grow light. Somehow, much of the grow light industry incorrectly advertises luminous intensity as the determining factor for effectiveness of grow lights, including High Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting, like Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium lamps. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

For instance, blue LEDs, which are also the base frequency for most white LEDs, are not measured in lumens due to the high frequency and subsequently greater power..



They are measured in radiometric power (in Watts) and converting this power to luminous intensity is subjective.


A simple analogy that should illustrate the uselessness of comparing lumens to effectiveness: Tape 100 X 300-lumen flashlights together and use them the same way you would any grow light. Even though they put out 30,000 lumens, they won’t grow a plant! .... "






-No .White leds are manufactured for serving human vision applications .
Their efficiency is based on human vision .Photometric efficiency .
Monochromatic leds are used in "special applications " where human vision ,usually is not implicated .
Science & Industry need real radiometric efficiencies and output power figures ....
They do not give a sh..Oooops ,about the lumens of a blue or red led used for
curing paints or hatching chicken eggs or any other sh..Ooopss ...

-No .In that case no .Exact nm of emmision is known and to convert into lumens is relatively easy ,by using the photopic human response graph ...
The smaller the range of the led's wl emission ,the more accurate the conversion will be .Ideal emission is a single nm line " peak ".

-No comments .Very scientific .Goes beyond my poor knowledge ...


It seems to me that , "they" do not know sh..oopppsss ,about what they are talking .....

 

[RB1956]

Ok so it doesn't matter then?? So the 1 with the higher lumans flux isn't nes.. better?? Was just asking because someone asked about the lumans I think on like the hans panels or something on here someone had made and they were talking about 12000 lumans so I was sure.. Just checking folks and thanks.. LEFT SOCK LOL

 

[chazbolin]

You got it RB. Lumens is for humans

 

[RB1956]

lmao........

 

[FranJan]

So let's say if, (all numbers are made up BS all you Analogy Nazis you );
Company A makes a fictional XML panel that produces 10,000 lumens using 250 watts and Company B uses XML LEDs to make a panel that produces 10,000 lumens using 200 watts. Which panel is better, efficacy wise, (lumens per watts)? And shouldn't efficacy be a concern for most LED growers? Lumens alone tells you nothing about a panels ability to grow really, but can indicate your panels ability to produce light efficiently, which might be a concern to you. It is a way to compare two companies similar LED offerings and can indicate the quality of the diodes used on your panel, so not withstanding what SDS posted, don't ignore lumens RB. IMO comparing lumens is a tool in your arsenal to help make a more informed choice. So care about both Photo and Radio-metric measurements. Or at least some of them till the industry can come up with some better ways of measuring a panels ability to grow. Or better ways of lying to us .

 

[stardustsailor]

So let's say if, (all numbers are made up BS all you Analogy Nazis you );
Company A makes a fictional XML panel that produces 10,000 lumens using 250 watts and Company B uses XML LEDs to make a panel that produces 10,000 lumens using 200 watts. Which panel is better, efficacy wise, (lumens per watts)? And shouldn't efficacy be a concern for most LED growers? Lumens alone tells you nothing about a panels ability to grow really, but can indicate your panels ability to produce light efficiently, which might be a concern to you. It is a way to compare two companies similar LED offerings and can indicate the quality of the diodes used on your panel, so not withstanding what SDS posted, don't ignore lumens RB. IMO comparing lumens is a tool in your arsenal to help make a more informed choice. So care about both Photo and Radio-metric measurements. Or at least some of them till the industry can come up with some better ways of measuring a panels ability to grow. Or better ways of lying to us .

Ok ...

I'll take once more further ,but try to remain "simple " .....
photopic graph .
1=683 lm / watt of light (green 555 nm )


Company A makes a fictional led lamp of pure green leds .10 of them .
Each led has an electrical power of 1 Watt ,but it outputs only 250mW of light .Rest is heat .

Lamp specs :
Peak wl : 555 nm
Power at plug (fictional 100% efficient driving ) : 10 Watts
Radiometric Output Power : 2.5 Watts
Photometric flux : 2.5 x 683 =1707.5 Lumens .
Photometric efficiency : 1707.5 lm / 10 watts = 170.7 lm / watt
Radiometric efficiency : 2.5 / 10 = 0.25 (25% )


Company B makes a fictional led lamp of pure blue leds .10 of them .
Each led has an electrical power of 1 Watt ,but it outputs 600mW of light .Rest is heat .

Lamp specs :
Peak wl : 440 nm
Power at plug (fictional 100% efficient driving ) : 10 Watts
Radiometric Output Power : 6 Watts
Photometric flux ( from photopic graph ~ ) 6 x 683 x 0.025 =102.45 Lumens .
Photometric efficiency : 102.45 lm / 10 watts = 10.2 lm / watt
Radiometric efficiency : 2.5 / 10 = 0.6 (60% )

Company C makes a fictional led lamp of pure red leds .10 of them .
Each led has an electrical power of 1 Watt ,but it outputs 400mW of light .Rest is heat .

Lamp specs :
Peak wl : 625 nm
Power at plug (fictional 100% efficient driving ) : 10 Watts
Radiometric Output Power : 4 Watts
Photometric flux ( from photopic graph ~ ) 4 x 683 x 0.4 =1092.8 Lumens .
Photometric efficiency : 1092.8 lm / 10 watts = 109.2 lm / watt
Radiometric efficiency : 4 / 10 = 0.4 (40% )



Lumens and all the photometric units are existing only as (relative ) "reference" ,
of how bright a light is sensed by humans ....
For humans:High Photometric efficiency is the brighter light to humans ,the less electricity power needed .

Radiometric units are not relative to any living organism's vision sense .
They are ABSOLUTE UNITS .
Radiometric efficiency : how much of the electric power ,converted to light power and how much is "lost " to heat ...


Hatching eggs ,growing plants ,curing glues & paints ,IR signaling ,etc do not have anything to do with
photometry .Simply light there -at such cases -is not used for human vision .


Lumens is by no means a tool in a led grower's arsenal ..
FAR-FAR-FAR from truth and true knowledge of "things " ...


Except ,if you really care about how bright ,your growing leds will appear to you -and only ....
Your plants have photo-pigments different than those humans have and are used for different purposes ...

Other than that ,photometry is useless in almost all applications ,where light has nothing to do with human vision ....


Believing or trusting otherwise is either pure ignorance ,which in that case a light physics book/guide might help ,
or
is pure stupidity ..

....At that case nothing can be done ,I'm afraid .....

 

[jubiare]

So let's say if, (all numbers are made up BS all you Analogy Nazis you );
Company A makes a fictional XML panel that produces 10,000 lumens using 250 watts and Company B uses XML LEDs to make a panel that produces 10,000 lumens using 200 watts. Which panel is better, efficacy wise, (lumens per watts)? And shouldn't efficacy be a concern for most LED growers? Lumens alone tells you nothing about a panels ability to grow really, but can indicate your panels ability to produce light efficiently, which might be a concern to you. It is a way to compare two companies similar LED offerings and can indicate the quality of the diodes used on your panel, so not withstanding what SDS posted, don't ignore lumens RB. IMO comparing lumens is a tool in your arsenal to help make a more informed choice. So care about both Photo and Radio-metric measurements. Or at least some of them till the industry can come up with some better ways of measuring a panels ability to grow. Or better ways of lying to us .

^^^^^^^^^word

 

[jubiare]

Ok ...

I'll take once more further ,but try to remain "simple " .....
photopic graph .
1=683 lm / watt of light (green 555 nm )
View attachment 2657675View attachment 2657677

Company A makes a fictional led lamp of pure green leds .10 of them .
Each led has an electrical power of 1 Watt ,but it outputs only 250mW of light .Rest is heat .

Lamp specs :
Peak wl : 555 nm
Power at plug (fictional 100% efficient driving ) : 10 Watts
Radiometric Output Power : 2.5 Watts
Photometric flux : 2.5 x 683 =1707.5 Lumens .
Photometric efficiency : 1707.5 lm / 10 watts = 170.7 lm / watt
Radiometric efficiency : 2.5 / 10 = 0.25 (25% )


Company B makes a fictional led lamp of pure blue leds .10 of them .
Each led has an electrical power of 1 Watt ,but it outputs 600mW of light .Rest is heat .

Lamp specs :
Peak wl : 440 nm
Power at plug (fictional 100% efficient driving ) : 10 Watts
Radiometric Output Power : 6 Watts
Photometric flux ( from photopic graph ~ ) 6 x 683 x 0.025 =102.45 Lumens .
Photometric efficiency : 102.45 lm / 10 watts = 10.2 lm / watt
Radiometric efficiency : 2.5 / 10 = 0.6 (60% )

Company C makes a fictional led lamp of pure red leds .10 of them .
Each led has an electrical power of 1 Watt ,but it outputs 400mW of light .Rest is heat .

Lamp specs :
Peak wl : 625 nm
Power at plug (fictional 100% efficient driving ) : 10 Watts
Radiometric Output Power : 4 Watts
Photometric flux ( from photopic graph ~ ) 4 x 683 x 0.4 =1092.8 Lumens .
Photometric efficiency : 1092.8 lm / 10 watts = 109.2 lm / watt
Radiometric efficiency : 4 / 10 = 0.4 (40% )



Lumens and all the photometric units are existing only as (relative ) "reference" ,
of how bright a light is sensed by humans ....
For humans:High Photometric efficiency is the brighter light to humans ,the less electricity power needed .

Radiometric units are not relative to any living organism's vision sense .
They are ABSOLUTE UNITS .
Radiometric efficiency : how much of the electric power ,converted to light power and how much is "lost " to heat ...


Hatching eggs ,growing plants ,curing glues & paints ,IR signaling ,etc do not have anything to do with
photometry .Simply light there -at such cases -is not used for human vision .


Lumens is by no means a tool in a led grower's arsenal ..
FAR-FAR-FAR from truth and true knowledge of "things " ...


Except ,if you really care about how bright ,your growing leds will appear to you -and only ....
Your plants have photo-pigments different than those humans have and are used for different purposes ...

Other than that ,photometry is useless in almost all applications ,where light has nothing to do with human vision ....


Believing or trusting otherwise is either pure ignorance ,which in that case a light physics book/guide might help ,
or
is pure stupidity ..

....At that case nothing can be done ,I'm afraid .....

^^^^^^^^^Simplicity is no simple thing (Charlie Chaplin)

 

[stardustsailor]

In order to VERY ROUGHLY "compare " two leds (or led units of any kind ) using photometry ,one needs
a lot more from that part of light Physics ....

Kelvin temperature can used along with CRI figures ,to "reveal " the light's "inclination "
to certain wls .....

A low temp light with high CRI R9 & R13 , denotes a (white ) light that has lots of it's power in red/amber range ...

example : ....


As long ,as such estimation is established ,then the lumens can be used ..
But still it's going to be a REALLLLYYYYY ROUGH estimation .....


Or expensive hardware & software can be used ,to actually calculate ,
the radiometric figures of a led ,through it's photometric measurements .....

..

 

[stardustsailor]

^^^^^^^^^Simplicity is no simple thing (Charlie Chaplin)

I agree ....At least ,I've tried ....

 

[stardustsailor]

" Tool in my Arsenal "......
Or " Tool my @$$ " ?

HPS 400 Watt ...60.000 Lumens .....
Radiometric efficiency : ~30% Photometric : 150 lm / Watt
Mostly yellow and green light (that's why the high photometric efficiency ! )
Poor CRI ,really low Kelvin Temp ( ~2200 K )

Leds 300 Watts 30.000 Lumens ........
Mixed whites with reds ....
Average Radiometric efficiency : ~40% Photometric : 100 lm / Watt
Mostly red and deep red wls there .More blue wls than the HPS ....
less power at green ,but more "smooth" and "full " power distribution ...
High CRI , low Kelvin Temp ( ~2700 K )


Tell me what to choose ....
"Tool " says ,go with the HPS ....

 

[jubiare]

Yes sure, but when comparing LEDs diodes (whites) I am afraid that even I it's not the best measure.. One would want to go with the higher lm in most if not all cases..

 

[stardustsailor]

Yeah ...Probably ...
But look...
Take a look at human vision response graph ....
The further wls move away from peak of 555 nm ( 100%=1Watt of light-not at plug-is 683 lm ) ,the bigger the decrease rate in lumens / Watt ....

So two leds :

Led A :

5000 K ,at @ 130 lm / Watt photometric efficiency ....
CRI RA : 75
CRI R12(blue) : 50
CRI R14 (green ) : 90
CRI R9 (red ): 20


Led B :

5000 K ,at @ 100 lm / Watt photometric efficiency ....
CRI RA : 90
CRI R12(blue) : 98
CRI R14 (green ) : 85
CRI R9 (red ): 95



1)Which one is most probably the most (trully )efficient ?
2) Why ?
3) Which one of those two Neutral Whites is best for led growing purposes ?

No spectral graphs needed,really,in order to answer to those questions ...



The $3.000.000 questions .....

 

[stardustsailor]

Spoiler :

1 ) Most probably ~99% ,more efficient led is Led B .

2 ) Since Led A has a CRI R14 at greens of 90 ,means that green colors are rendered quite accurate .
That means that led A has full green range of wls and most probably quite a lot of power at that range ,since it renders poorly blue and red ..
(R 12 & R 9 ) ..Since a lot of power is in green part ,this NW led ,probably has elevated figures,regarding photometric units....
.....From the other hand ,led B has still a good rendering in green colors ,meaning that also has plenty of green light ...
But now ,rendering of blue and red colors are also accurate .Meaning that this led emits quite a lot of it's light power at blue and red range .....
And since we can not sense these ranges of light as "bright " ,as the green one and already the led has 100 lm / Watt .....
Then this led's radiometric output ,most probably is by far superior than the one Led A has ......

30 lm difference ,from Led A that is rich in green light power to Led B that has enhanced blue & red regions ,probably means
quite a lot of mWatts output difference ...
I.e
If Led A outputs ~ 300mW ,then led B outputs at least 500mW ,in order to remain(only ) 30 lumens "behind " ...

3) ...O k ....By now ,I think ,it is already answered .....

 

[Kite High]

yeah yeah leds produce great numbers but small plants..period..when the insane pricing practices and some good penetration develops then will look again...until then glorified xmas lights for way more $ than they are worth

now if one has accurate spd info for the comparison of units then ftc can be used in determining efficiency of the source...if you understand the spd info that is