How many 288 qbs for a 4x4 space?

Z

zomgKIDD

Active Member
If running 9 288's in a 4x4, why not consider running a 185h-48a x3. Put one on each run of 3 boards. Should be able to bump the current up to almost 1.4 per board. You still get close to 600w but it's easier to manage one driver per module. Also you would be above 35 w/sqft.
 
Z

zomgKIDD

Active Member
I realize this makes the upfront costs quite high, but if you want to see 2.0 gpw production you need to drive these boards at a low current while still shooting for 35ish w/sqft in my honest opinion. At least running these below 70 watts saves some $ on the heatsinks.
 
splakow

splakow

Well-Known Member
zomgKIDD said:
I realize this makes the upfront costs quite high, but if you want to see 2.0 gpw production you need to drive these boards at a low current while still shooting for 35ish w/sqft in my honest opinion. At least running these below 70 watts saves some $ on the heatsinks.
Click to expand...
Would I be able to pull 2gpw with the 120 boards or should I go with the 288s if I wanna achieve those numbers?
 
splakow

splakow

Well-Known Member
zomgKIDD said:
I realize this makes the upfront costs quite high, but if you want to see 2.0 gpw production you need to drive these boards at a low current while still shooting for 35ish w/sqft in my honest opinion. At least running these below 70 watts saves some $ on the heatsinks.
Click to expand...
So if I run the 288s at only 35w heatsinks aren't needed?
 
Last edited:
Z

zomgKIDD

Active Member
I was referring to 9x 288.2 boards. You would be running them just under 70w per board. 9x $60=$540. 3x $53 for drivers=$160. +$50 in miscellaneous. You are looking at $750. But the intensity and overlap, you should be seeing 1.75 or better on the regular
 
Z

zomgKIDD

Active Member
You can run 9x120 boards, but you are aiming for a big pull. Consider this: folks can pull 2lbs in a 4x4 with 1k hps. Folks can pull 4lbs in an 8x4 with 3x 600hps. Less watts but what else changed? Better overlap and a slight efficiency boost. you need 2.5 lbs in a 4x4 with 555 watts of light (what I suggested). Thats 4.5 elbows on every plant if using 9. Scrog or maybe 8 top manifolds can achieve this.
 
Rocket Soul

Rocket Soul

Well-Known Member
zomgKIDD said:
I realize this makes the upfront costs quite high, but if you want to see 2.0 gpw production you need to drive these boards at a low current while still shooting for 35ish w/sqft in my honest opinion. At least running these below 70 watts saves some $ on the heatsinks.
Click to expand...
Running more boards soft, almost covering the cannopy with board is a winner move. I also like running boards without heatsink as it generally means you have to run them soft, at nominal or less. But from my own tests ( w china boards though) i feel 70w per qb is a bit much, i dunno if atreum has better thermals.
I feel much happier running boards around 35-40w w no heatsink.
 
splakow

splakow

Well-Known Member
Rocket Soul said:
Running more boards soft, almost covering the cannopy with board is a winner move. I also like running boards without heatsink as it generally means you have to run them soft, at nominal or less. But from my own tests ( w china boards though) i feel 70w per qb is a bit much, i dunno if atreum has better thermals.
I feel much happier running boards around 35-40w w no heatsink.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't yield be increased by running the boards higher than 40w
 
Rocket Soul

Rocket Soul

Well-Known Member
splakow said:
Wouldn't yield be increased by running the boards higher than 40w
Click to expand...
It depends on how many boards youre running. You can get to 35w/sq foot using more soft driven boards or just a few running harder. I prefer soft and more boards, better electrical efficiency and i hate shipping heatsinks internationally.
 
splakow

splakow

Well-Known Member
Rocket Soul said:
It depends on how many boards youre running. You can get to 35w/sq foot using more soft driven boards or just a few running harder. I prefer soft and more boards, better electrical efficiency and i hate shipping heatsinks internationally.
Click to expand...
I plan on running 9 288s in a 4x4
 
Z

zomgKIDD

Active Member
I honestly don't know for certain if atreum boards recommend to run their boards without a heatsink at 70w. HLG states 288v2 boards as needing a heatsink at over 75w so you would be good in this application. I emailed Atreum and will update when they get back to me
 
Z

zomgKIDD

Active Member
Atreum got back with me, <70w without a heatsink should be fine with adequate air movement. An oscillating fan or a couple small stationary would probably suffice. It's always a good idea to have a infrared thermometer to verify surface temps. Both companies spec their boards at 50C.
 
Getgrowingson

Getgrowingson

Well-Known Member
zomgKIDD said:
You can run 9x120 boards, but you are aiming for a big pull. Consider this: folks can pull 2lbs in a 4x4 with 1k hps. Folks can pull 4lbs in an 8x4 with 3x 600hps. Less watts but what else changed? Better overlap and a slight efficiency boost. you need 2.5 lbs in a 4x4 with 555 watts of light (what I suggested). Thats 4.5 elbows on every plant if using 9. Scrog or maybe 8 top manifolds can achieve this.
Click to expand...
Elbows? Where I’m from that’s lbs haha had me thinking wtf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top