Area 51 XGS-190

Greengenes707 · Nov 19, 2013

MrFlux said:
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.

16% seems fine to me. It still leaves a lot for red. Do you happen to know how much % is coming from the red.

And more importantly that is not the official spectrum...this is

I have flowered out under all whites 6100k(quite a bit of blue) and had great results. So I have great faith in this new a51 spectrum. It's not like he went from monochrome to all white...they have tested and tried many different spectrums of whites and red/white mixes, and this new all white panel got the thumbs up for a reason.

guod · Nov 19, 2013

MrFlux said:
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.

Spectral characteristics of lamp types
http://cpl.usu.edu/files/publications/poster/pub__6740181.pdf

check the blue part of the sun

Spectral Effects of Three Types of White Light-emitting Diodes
on Plant Growth and Development:
Absolute versus Relative Amounts of Blue Light
http://cpl.usu.edu/files/publications/publication/pub__4124704.pdf

Differences in the Response of Wheat, Soybean and Lettuce to Reduced
Blue Radiation

http://cpl.usu.edu/files/publications/publication/pub__266323.pdf

GroenJoe · Nov 19, 2013

Anyone who is interested in buying a Area 51 light can use the discount code DISCOUNT50 to get 50 bucks off (usable for both the SGS and XGS)

bmw626 · Nov 19, 2013

I wonder how long that discount will be good for.

Would 2 of these lights be needed to properly cover a 4x4 footprint?

If so, what would the required height be for optimal umol over the entire footprint, for having one light, and for having two?

MrFlux · Nov 20, 2013

Greengenes707 said:
16% seems fine to me. It still leaves a lot for red. Do you happen to know how much % is coming from the red.

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 blue above some absolute minimum amount.

GrowinDad · Nov 20, 2013

You would want two to cover the area. I have one SGS in a 4x4 tent. Coverage seems okay for 3-4 plant fairly close together, not using all space in the tent.

shamrockceo · Nov 20, 2013

GrowinDad said:
You would want two to cover the area. I have one SGS in a 4x4 tent. Coverage seems okay for 3-4 plant fairly close together, not using all space in the tent.

How big are your plants? Would the 2 lights be good for a SOG of 12-16 plants in a 4x4 tent? Also, do you have pictures of your plants and current setup? I'd be curious to see.

GrowinDad · Nov 21, 2013

I am having some challenges with my girls right now. Here are some pics. If you go through my journal you can find much of the setup.

I am pushing limits a bit seeing how much I can keep under the light. I have three trained going into 12-12 today. Also are two clones from when I topped them. On the outskirts of the direct light I have some basil and it is holding up. What I don't get is whether technically the basil is stealing light/energy from the others or just grabbing what would have been wasted.

GrowinDad · Nov 21, 2013

Here's some pics of that give you a better idea of the whole tent (just took them)

cooklaw · Nov 21, 2013

Got my XGS-190 delivered today. It came w 2 pulleys but was surprised it didn't come w hangers to connect to the gold posts on top. I had to rig some wire between the posts to hang it. Light is super bright all white. 25% brighter than my 210w HTG light on the meter. Penetration seemed significantly better as well. Would be interested to see how others hung their light.

Eraserhead · Nov 22, 2013

There is more than 21% color inside of the 620-680nm range.

Do you own a spectroradiometer that will give you such info?

I own one.

MrFlux said:
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 blue above some absolute minimum amount.

guod · Nov 22, 2013

Eraserhead said:
There is more than 21% color inside of the 620-680nm range.

color, the talk was on Power...

would say this is the weakest Part...after the green gap

PetFlora · Nov 22, 2013

Just tried sending a PM, but your box is full

Eraserhead said:
There is more than 21% color inside of the 620-680nm range.

Do you own a spectroradiometer that will give you such info?

I own one.

Eraserhead · Nov 22, 2013

This is what the spectro says:

350-400 -1%
400-450 7%
450-500 9%
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%
650-700 15%
700-750 3%
750-800 -1%

PSUAGRO. · Nov 22, 2013

Eraserhead said:
This is what the spectro says:

350-400 -1%
400-450 7%
450-500 9%
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%
650-700 15%
700-750 3%
750-800 -1%

41% of the spectral distribution is in the 500-600nm......wow........dat green gap ;-)

Gonna be an interesting couple months around here.

guod · Nov 23, 2013

Eraserhead said:
This is what the spectro says:

350-400 -1%
400-450 7%
450-500 9%
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%
650-700 15%
700-750 3%
750-800 -1%

------------------
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %

19% at 500-550nm against 22% at 550-600nm range

must be way less than 19%
----------------------------------
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%

and for the 550-600nm against 600-650nm range
here the Triangles have the same size

the area for 600-650nm is less than that at 550-600nm
-----------------------------

Eraserhead · Nov 23, 2013

I'll check again. I posted the numbers yesterday just a minute after I got them, and got the number specifically just for that post, I didn't have them on hand prior. The spectrum chart I've had for about 2 months.

This time I'll leave the lamp on for at least an hour before getting figures for each color group. Also on Monday I'll call Stellarnet to make sure I did everything correctly, I've only had the spectro for about 4 months and am still learning all of its functions. So if there are errors in those numbers, I'll correct them. I'll post the results after I return from spending the weekend in Boston and can also call Stellarnet.

Y'all stay safe. :peace:

guod said:
------------------
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %

19% at 500-550nm against 22% at 550-600nm range
View attachment 2904234

must be way less than 19%
----------------------------------
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%

and for the 550-600nm against 600-650nm range
here the Triangles have the same size
View attachment 2904237

the area for 600-650nm is less than that at 550-600nm
-----------------------------

Eraserhead · Nov 23, 2013

^^ Appears there is a tiny crack in the sensor, that could very well cause inaccurate numbers. The crack wasn't there the last time I used it a couple months ago... So, on Monday I'll order a new sensor.

If Guod never pointed that out, I may have not discovered the crack until the 2015 lamps were in the making, which is when I would have probably used the spectro next.

So, thanks to Guod. bongsmilie

PetFlora · Nov 23, 2013

Hey, still waiting to hear from you. PM me if you like. You also have my personal email

Eraserhead said:
^^ Appears there is a tiny crack in the sensor, that could very well cause inaccurate numbers. The crack wasn't there the last time I used it a couple months ago... So, on Monday I'll order a new sensor.

If Guod never pointed that out, I may have not discovered the crack until the 2015 lamps were in the making, which is when I would have probably used the spectro next.

So, thanks to Guod.

MrFlux · Nov 23, 2013

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:

Area 51 XGS-190

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads