Search results

Instead of light you can also think about shadows. Just make sure there are no shadows. Photographers call this "filling in the shadows" and they use multiple lights and reflecting surfaces to do this. If there are no shadows it means there is light everywhere.

Yeah the vero family scales linear with size, so per Watt it stays the same. A normal heatsink would be a bit of overkill so I'm going for aluminium T-profile from the hardware store. It's basically a heatsink with one fin.

Andy it was a pleasure. If you are ordering from Digikey you will find the 4000K on backorder. Hope you enjoy your build and would love to see some pictures here!

It's for the Vero 10. The graph shows the umol output per Watt. For example the vero uses 9.35W, so its output is then divided by 9.35. This allows a Watt-to-Watt comparison.

XP-E2 Blue Power in : 1.09 W Luminous flux : 45.7 lumen Efficacy : 42 lumen/W LER : 91 lumen/W Radiometric eff.: 45.9% Radiant flux : 0.50 W Photon flux : 1.96 umol/s Blue : 84% power, 84% flux Red : 0% power, 0% flux Preaching to the...

19% blue matches exactly with the spectrum, if by blue you mean the power between 400-500nm. There are 15% of photons inside the 400-500nm range so perhaps that is what you were looking at back then. It helps to state the wavelength ranges and also to state the percentage of what exactly, it can...

Andy here is the relevant KNNA thread. He recommends an absolute minimum 40 umol/s/m^2 of blue light, where blue light for KNNA is between 431-480nm (everyone has his own definition of what is 'blue' so this makes comparisons a bit difficult). According to him some more blue is better to help...

From the numbers it looks like the peaks are clipped: The integration time of the spectrometer is set too high. That, and not taking a dark reading first (for subtracting ambient light) are classic rookie mistakes of new spectrometer owners :smile:

You can use any layout you want. I'll be using 1m alu profile with 4 vero's spaced evenly. A bunch of these profiles hanging parallel and some 12cm PC fans blowing air alongside. I settled on 4000K based on the old KNNA recommendation for the amount of blue. 3500K would be fine too. 3000K would...

Sure here you go

If you add extra red to the already reddish combo of 3000K+3500K it would probably need some extra royal blue as well, otherwise, to put it in Picographs words, the plants won't know where the light is :smile:

I have a bunch of these. They are pretty cheap and about 92% efficient. It's typical Chinese quality though.

Okay I would be genuinely interested to know what percentage you have and how you arrived at it. I'm not claiming the greatest accuracy but it can't be that far off. I'm a strict DIY-er. I know the emitter it uses and at what drive current it runs, the rest follows.

While you can run those vero's at 700mA it will be a lot less efficient. Since the vero's are so cheap it would pay itself back to get the double amount and run at 350mA. Slapping together the vero's would then give you >35% efficiency, compared to 30% for the new a51 panel, at a fraction of the...

With a XP-E red it looks like this Since the royal blue is more efficient it will 'win' here from the red. This is not the whole story though... When looking at the number of photons produced per Watt it is the red that wins: XP-E red must be about the best producer of photons (per Watt)...

The blue spike tends to look more imposing than it is. What counts is the area under the blue peak in relation to the total area under the spectrum. Compared to a royal blue XTE the peaks of the white emitters are completely dwarfed:

I agree vero's are the way to go, just placed the order for them myself. That depends on how the vero's are distributed. One extreme is to place them all on a smallish heatsink with fan to create one superbright mini-sun. The other extreme is to space out the vero's evenly over a large area...

That's already pretty close. Here is the list of every emitter that I have on file so that you can compare: blue = 430-480nm, red = 620-680nm XML2 2600K Power in : 2.0 W Luminous flux : 250 lumen Efficacy : 125 lumen/W LER : 355 lumen/W Radiometric eff.: 35.2%...

There is 21% of power inside the red 620-680nm range. If you are curious about the efficiency, it looks like the emitters are driven at 750mA which would put them on being 30% radiometrically efficient. Guod thanks for the links. For the crops they discuss there is no benefit for having extra...

Is it beneficial for flowering to have so much blue? The XT-E 3700K has about 16% of its power in the blue range of 430-480nm.