HLG-185H-C1050B i got too many
- Thread starter stock
- Start date
Doer
Well-Known Member
How about if I was able to get 16 COBs and 4 Drivers per rail.
1600w Would that be worth it?
alesh
Well-Known Member
Don't get me wrong. It's an awesome setup. I just think you could build a more convenient one with less effort using usual HS (either passive or active). Doesn't make your solution wrong.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Oh, I know for sure, you are not saying that. You and I are very straightforward and I like plain talk.
What I am asking, is at what level can I exceed a more conventional design and to do that I have to use water.
So that is why I asked you. You have the knowledge in detail. So, I asked would 1600w in that footprint justify water plumbing in your mind?
alesh
Well-Known Member
TBH, I believe that you'd run into problems with too high light density before the problems with cooling (I'm talking about CXB3590). If we can agree that an average of 1500 umol/s/m^2 is the goal, there will never be a need for you to remove more than about 320W/m^2 (3590 @50% efficiency) -- an amount well manageable with conventional HS.
My idea of perfect design is close to what SDS does or what most most commercial LED lights - an enclosed, plug&play, maintenance-free unit. Kind of the opposite of what you're making. Therefore my answer would be no. This answer might be a little biased, though.
--
This argument will go away, eventually. LEDs are improving - hitting 70% efficiency now - and soon they'll produce almost no heat. Ie if today's 70% LEDs are improved to 80%, the output will improve by 14% while the heat will be reduced by 33%.
AquariusPanta
Well-Known Member
Could you please explain to me what you mean when you say "output will improve by 14% while heat will be reduced by 33%"? I don't fully understand where those numbers come from, because 80-70 is 10%, so I must be missing something.
alesh
Well-Known Member
It might seem so but it's not true.Could you please explain to me what you mean when you say "output will improve by 14% while heat will be reduced by 33%"? I don't fully understand where those numbers come from, because 80-70 is 10%, so I must be missing something.
Let's say that we're talking about a LED with 1W input power. @70% it produces .7W of light and .3W of heat. FF @80% it produces .8W of light and .2W of heat.
light .8 W/.7 W = ~1.14 -> 14% improvement
heat .2 W/.3 W = ~.66 -> 33% less heat
Hi, Do you still have?
Similar threads
