Search results

BS really? I think I have more faith in Bridgelux testing than what some random internet person thinks. More importantly though is the measurements in operation, which I am glad to say Bridgelux meets and more than often exceeds the performance expectations. Tell us more about your ideas on...

Makes more sense and is more relevant to the discussion than what he posted. It is nice to want things. You are not worthy of pictures anyhow. Other than a few old timers left, most knowledgeable people have moved on from this site. I just keep coming back from time to time to check in to see...

Wrong again. Vero 29 C 3000k 80 CRI clock in at 228lm/w, 3.3 ppf/J at just under 26w each. It is publicly available information that you can verify yourself. This isn't trolling. Just because you are wrong and getting embarrassed on an internet forum by some random person on the internet...

No skoomd applied the context wrong. He is trying to use something not relevant to the topic to justify his position. Classic deflection used by the ignorant when debating. My preference is that he rights himself and gets on the better path to enlightenment. You mean intensity? Oh really? I...

Yeah it is inefficient by today's standards. I haven't run anything in flower less than 3 ppf/J for more than 2 years now. Plus I have the proper tools to verify which makes all the difference in the world. As for crying about the upfront cost, boo hoo. You don't need bulky heat sinks when...

Wrong. Let us know when you get a PAR meter and then we will let you sit at the adult table. In the meantime, ask yourself what a cob actually is and see if you can figure out how it is multiple light sources. Maybe you can ask your dad for some help.

Just go SIP and be done with it. Get off the expensive nutrient bandwagon too, all you need is simple salts that are very cheap.

Bingo. skoomd must be part of the new crop of forum newbies. It will take a while for the koolaid to wear off. It is actually funny when he talks about his dad being a teacher at MIT as if it would hold some weight. First off there is no way to verify and second, MIT is an engineering school...

Not really. His light source is only about 800-850 ppf which for 330w is fairly inefficient these days. It can be easily doubled with 12-15 Vero 29s using the same amount of power.

Future electronics is your best bet up here. Bridgelux Vero 29 SE (get version C) have poke in connectors so you don't have to do any solder. For drivers your can go meanwell or whatever and use wagos to connect the wires. Very simple wiring. Don't bother with heat sinks, just use aluminum...

Uh, unless you are using lasers to pierce through plant matter then you aren't doing any penetration. More diodes in the same space means higher density of the LES. That is why CoBs are superior to QBs for large scale growing. Or any growing for that matter if you were to completely cover the...

Just ignore his blathering, he doesn't have a clue.

Well you have proven over the years to be stupid. End.

You mean subpar as in an Apogee meter? Even with the old sensors it would still be better that trying to convert from lux. I have both the hydrofarm and licor meters, there is nothing wrong with the hydrofarm. It is used far more than the licor. Plus you can use it to log data over USB and is...

Does it matter?

Yeah but you also have plants and other objects in the space. For a comparison perspective it is fine though.

With prices dropping and under driving the LEDs for better efficiency, passive cooling in an open space with good air flow is probably more attractive. Just run the math for yourself. 25-35w/ft2 delivered by 1 cob/ft2 is feasible when you are looking at 350-400/ft2 capital cost for a facility...

Well I tried. You are just stupid. Fixing stupid is a pointless task. Over the years on this forum you have proven time and time again that you have basically no clue. After that long you would think a person would learn something, but no, you have proven that to be wrong. Instead you mock...

Yeah they are significantly off. The problem is that lux is a measure of light energy with a bias towards the 550nm green range. PAR is a simple photon count. Totally different things. Too many variables involved that introduce margins of error putting it way out. For example, under driving will...

I was making it as a general statement for all not just yourself. There is so much nit picking back and forth that almost all threads eventually devolve into a troll fest. Probably because people are bored now that LED has proven its place in replacing HPS. I will say this, we don't know all of...