ChilLED grow light

BobCajun said:

Touche. Not a big weed growing zone though.

Click to expand...

lol - that's true. lil bit of ruderalis maybe....

coreywebster said:

Which is what makes me believe there is a difference in heat from one light emitting device to another, even though it would be very negligible.

Photosynthetic Efficiency.

100% sunlight → non-bioavailable photons waste is 47%, leaving
53% (in the 400–700 nm range) → 30% of photons are lost due to incomplete absorption, leaving
37% (absorbed photon energy) → 24% is lost due to wavelength-mismatch degradation to 700 nm energy, leaving
28.2% (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyl) → 32% efficient conversion of ATP and NADPH to d-glucose, leaving
9% (collected as sugar) → 35–40% of sugar is recycled/consumed by the leaf in dark and photo-respiration, leaving
5.4% net leaf efficiency

Forgetting about the sun. HPS would have more light outside the 400-700nm range so the percentage of non bioavailable photons. LED would have a higher percentage within that range. So the net leaf efficiency would be higher under LED. The 5.4% listed above is for the sun, both the HPS and LED would be higher than this.

I know its still negligible, but no matter how small, there's a difference.

Would you agree?

Click to expand...

That's not a difference in the heat from the device - remove the plant from the system and there is no difference.

maybe one post instead of 150 in a row nfhiggs?? Thanks for mucking up this thread asshole!

JJFOURTWENTY said:

maybe one post instead of 150 in a row nfhiggs?? Thanks for mucking up this thread asshole!

Click to expand...

He is on many, many board member's ignore list.

so back to the subject at hand

when can we expect photometric tests on the assembled fixtures so we can make apples to apples comparisons vs other manufacturers?

CobKits said:

so back to the subject at hand

when can we expect photometric tests on the assembled fixtures so we can make apples to apples comparisons vs other manufacturers?

Click to expand...

Are you expecting 400- 700nm range from them? Won't be apples to apples unless so. #s won't fare well against competition with uva, fr monos on the board

sure why not

they did that for the competitors with uva and fr in their design (Kind XL1000)



as well as for their pre-production 1200W S5 bin light

(https://chilledgrowlights.com/independent-lab-reports/gen-2-pre-production-s5-bin-grow-light-1200-watts-goniometer-lab-report)



with S6 being an average of 6% above S5 (mid-bin to mid-bin), without knowing the voltage bin they are using we can probably assume 4-5% flux bump so about 2.16 umol/J 400-700 and 2.23 350-750.

i know that @Growmau5 has mentioned the 400W Chillled is "the most efficient light available" but as far as i know the boards are being driven at the same current as the 1200W version here. Which if my assumptions are correct would put it about 10% below the HLG550 in umol/J (even considering the wider range of measurement)

CobKits said:

sure why not

they did that for the competitors with uva and fr in their design (Kind XL1000)

View attachment 4012654

as well as for their pre-production 1200W S5 bin light

(https://chilledgrowlights.com/independent-lab-reports/gen-2-pre-production-s5-bin-grow-light-1200-watts-goniometer-lab-report)

View attachment 4012655

with S6 being an average of 6% above S5 (mid-bin to mid-bin), without knowing the voltage bin they are using we can probably assume 4-5% flux bump so about 2.16 umol/J 400-700 and 2.23 350-750.

i know that @Growmau5 has mentioned the 400W Chillled is "the most efficient light available" but as far as i know the boards are being driven at the same current as the 1200W version here. Which if my assumptions are correct would put it about 10% below the HLG550 in umol/J (even considering the wider range of measurement)

Click to expand...

No shit, right on their website too ..... thanks for the info, I should do a little research before opening my fat mouth.

'sall good bro. who has time to keep up with all this stuff anyway? would leave us no time to grow

JJFOURTWENTY said:

maybe one post instead of 150 in a row nfhiggs?? Thanks for mucking up this thread asshole!

Click to expand...

Well, fuck you very much.

Enigma said:

He is on many, many board member's ignore list.

Click to expand...

LOL.... and you would know that how, exactly? I've only pissed off one jackass here (that has made it known).

CobKits said:

'sall good bro. who has time to keep up with all this stuff anyway? would leave us no time to grow

Click to expand...

We are making some tweaks and have been in and out of the sphere lab all month. The availability of better voltage bin reds, blues and samsungs are looking very promising. Coupled with the AR coated optics, we believe that we can reproduce and prove the most efficient system level numbers in the world (period). The only thing that I believe is close is that 2.7 µmol PL lighting led, but its full on blurple, mostly reds actually. and limited to 320w strips.

What we aren't seeing from other companies are: actual integrating sphere reports. Like, what lab, whos the lab manager, how can anyone confirm or reproduce the data. Are these luminous efficacy extrapolations? or are we actually reporting sphere numbers?
-thermal management?? at what operating temperature are we publishing numbers to a website.

I'm not trying to blow up anybodys spot, specifically. But, I go to the lab personally and sit there while the technician is running the lights. The data im seeing (in person on a 60" labsphere) on the samsungs by themselves is not consistent with what I am seeing published.
FYI: we don't flash test, never have. all tests are performed at full operating temperature, just like in a grow room.

Growmau5 said:

The data im seeing (in person on a 60" labsphere) on the samsungs by themselves is not consistent with what I am seeing published.

Click to expand...

In what way? Are these the LM561C? What about LM301B's - have you had a chance to examine and test those yet??

nfhiggs said:

In what way? Are these the LM561C? What about LM301B's - have you had a chance to examine and test those yet??

Click to expand...

we test the samsungs alone at 40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110,120 milliamps per chip. To achieve the numbers that some people are reporting, a company would have to run each chip at 80ma. but some companies are reporting the efficacy that is achievable at 80ma, but actually running their chips at 116ma.

Growmau5 said:

we test the samsungs alone at 40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110,120 milliamps per chip. To achieve the numbers that some people are reporting, a company would have to run each chip at 80ma. but some companies are reporting the efficacy that is achievable at 80ma, but actually running their chips at 116ma.

Click to expand...

OK, I see. I thought you were referring to inconsistencies in the Samsung data.

Growmau5 said:

we test the samsungs alone at 40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110,120 milliamps per chip. To achieve the numbers that some people are reporting, a company would have to run each chip at 80ma. but some companies are reporting the efficacy that is achievable at 80ma, but actually running their chips at 116ma.

Click to expand...

how relevant is the implementation to the efficacy (heatsink area, diode spacing, quality and thickness of board, etc etc)

CobKits said:

how relevant is the implementation to the efficacy (heatsink area, diode spacing, quality and thickness of board, etc etc)

Click to expand...

I'm not a pcb design wizard, but I'm learning a lot about the copper weight used on boards, trace width for thermal & electrical performance etc. let's put it this way, there are ways to cut costs in metal core pcb manufacturing & there are ways to eek out some performance gains. I guess it depends on the led company's goals.

Growmau5 said:

I'm not a pcb design wizard, but I'm learning a lot about the copper weight used on boards, trace width for thermal & electrical performance etc. let's put it this way, there are ways to cut costs in metal core pcb manufacturing & there are ways to eek out some performance gains. I guess it depends on the led company's goals.

Click to expand...

I use wide traces for heat dissipation, and circuit design to establish my desired drive current.

Growmau5 said:

I'm not a pcb design wizard, but I'm learning a lot about the copper weight used on boards, trace width for thermal & electrical performance etc. let's put it this way, there are ways to cut costs in metal core pcb manufacturing & there are ways to eek out some performance gains. I guess it depends on the led company's goals.

Click to expand...

well then consider this

the largest (controllable) limit to efficiency of a diode is heat dissipation

cob companies are bending over backwards to deliver chips the size of a quarter that can effectively dissipate 100s of watts of heat and still assure spec on efficacy, lumen maintenance, and longevity. thermal performance goes up with every gen. cost comes down with every gen

i believe that unless someone comes along in the board world who has the manufacturing volume and large R&D budget of a large led manufacturer, the discrete diodes will never be as cost effective as mass produced cobs for producing light at a given efficacy.

the one thing boards have is footprint for dissipation. its really hard to justify all that real estate when cobs deliver the exact same light, for cheaper in an off-the-shelf design.Sure they are thermally limited but offset thgat with straight diode count. fundamentally they are the same, there is no level of efficacy that a single phosphor chip can reach that a cob cant

that said, board mfrs who are using monos are in a different territory. efficient red monos can outperform phosphir whites on a umol/J basis (particualrly when weighted for absorption). but i think we have a ways to go on determining the ideal recipe. lotsa grows and metrics have to happen between now and then.

Just ordered during the sale. Got the 2x 400w Strip package with controller - keen to start sharing light recipes with you guys after a few runs