PICO's DIY Thread - Advise, Ideas and Technology - NO PANEL REPS!

[Abiqua]

So due to atmospheric scattering, not even sunlight is an "ideal" light source, it's simply very close to one (of varying CCT depending on time of day, the date, and latitudinal degree). You are correct, human sensitivity is taken into account with CRI (UV and IR do not play very substantial roles), however, it has to be said that the closer a light source's SPD (human sensitivity not accounted for) follows that of a blackbody radiator (and not just at peaks, across the entire visible spectrum) of any CCT, the higher it will score in a CRI test. It's not a perfect system, but it gives you a good idea on what's going on.

Also, the sun's light quality has little to do with why we want high CRI/R9, though. If we were to compare it to anything we'd be attempting to recreate the light that a plant would see on a planet in a ~2700K star solar system, right? Regardless, R9 tells me how much Red I can expect for a given CCT. So two values (CCT and R9) together roughly tells me two things: its stand-alone flowering potential, and its inefficiency due to Red phosphor conversion.

If im not mistaken you are correct expect that it is only accounting for certain nm peaks, and then not even at what intensity? I agree though starting as baseline with all this crazyness, it could be acceptable. I still think every manufacturer just needs some kind of intensity rating at each nm of PAR, fuck it, you wan't my money, ante up, ha ha.....

 

[Abiqua]

Guys, I am even skeptical about just a pure PAR rating even if a rating standard can be agreed upon.

I am going to look now that I thought of it, but it will be interesting to see what components of light outside the visible spectrum are capable of being introduced.

AGain the Sun, but as something that has been a constant source of data for millenia, its hard not to try and use that data, but not to suit an opinion.
So, if we take into account what the SUN emits or what makes it thru the ozone, then PAR is less than half? of what EM spectrums are being radiated. Is it incorporable to these discussions?

 

[tags420]

The sun is the best source we know of. It has so much of everything...including what plants need/want(chlorophyll peaks and a good amount of the rest of the whole par spectrum). But it does not mean that plants use or want everything/all that is being emitted, even from the almighty sun. Pet has said it before, they take what they want and leave the rest.

Looking at it simplified, 99% of what drives and positively effects photosynthesis is within the PAR range. So why move on to the smallest and most complex of thing when the main part of the growing equation it still insufficient. There is a direct relationship between the amount of PAR photons received(DLI) and yield. I have yet to see anyone in the led world have too much light for their whole grow area yet.

 

[lax123]

Unlike the house cat, plants are not gluttons. They take what they need and leave the rest

Plenty of growers have proven you can grow excellent meds with only r/b. Why? Plants adapt to survive.

An interesting test would be to put plants where they could grow toward the light prefer. My $$$$ is on NW over R/B​

Those examples were not meant to be taken literally...and i didnt say something about just R/B...we know from different plant studies that different wavelengths/bands of light Trigger a vast amount of different plant respones (e.g. building of certain enzymes, stem Elongation, leaf surface area, thickness, shade avoidance, flowerinitiation, stomatal opening, root development..etc.) so why cant there be a light/ light schedule that produces more that what "humans" want instead of what "nature" has "planned".

 

[PetFlora]

IMHO: Never said you were referencing only R/B: it was an extreme example that is still being used (and sworn by) today.

I appreciate chasing the minutiae, but as it relates to plants (and mj specifically) plants will grow better when their basic needs are first met. Full spectrum does that. After that is covered, then adjusting specific aspects (up/down) will have an effect.

However, keep in mind, that nothing works in isolation- for every action, there is an an equal and OPPOSITE reaction.

Those examples were not meant to be taken literally...and i didnt say something about just R/B...we know from different plant studies that different wavelengths/bands of light Trigger a vast amount of different plant respones (e.g. building of certain enzymes, stem Elongation, leaf surface area, thickness, shade avoidance, flowerinitiation, stomatal opening, root development..etc.) so why cant there be a light/ light schedule that produces more that what "humans" want instead of what "nature" has "planned".

 

[bicit]

I sure do, its got a nice thick copper base, it looks relatively low flow, I would be careful about cooling a few in series but one or two would work quite well, the base looks just thick enough to drill the mounting holes, but its going to be tricky, you might be able to use a clamp system, saving you from possibly breaching the flow chamber.

Next question, would this power supply work? Could I get away with powering two emitters? Any suggestions?

http://www.newark.com/tenma/72-7295...pular Electrical And Electronic Test Products

 

[PICOGRAV]

Next question, would this power supply work? Could I get away with powering two emitters? Any suggestions?

http://www.newark.com/tenma/72-7295...pular Electrical And Electronic Test Products

Yes that power supply would work, but you could only get up to 2.5 amps through each array if you connected two, this is where I find eBay quite useful, you can pick up used, HP, LAMBDA and Sorensen power supplys very cheap,

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sorensen-DL...710?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43c11a81e6

That one listed would drive nearly 5 Vero 29s to almost fully power and it has the expensive Ethernet option, connect straight up to Labview or Labwindow, the drivers are already available, its switch mode so takes up less space and is more efficient.

 

[PICOGRAV]

To be clear: I was referencing the fact that PAR meters base their measurements off an ideal light source, usually a "copy" of the sun, additionally, I thought that was how CRI was calculated and I was dead wrong.

"Is the Sun the perfect candidate to emulate for an artifical light model" would be a separate argument. And I am not trying to make that argument.


R9 is certainly the linear progression of the CRI, but why not tabulate all R values? CRI2 put out by the CIE is another method, but it is criticized too, lol.

If it would just be based strictly on the ability of the the source to create that "nth" nanometer at such intensity, seems like it would work wonders, of course, I am putting my hand in the chainsaw and not accounting for something probably.

EDIT: CRI or whatever future derivative is agreed upon in the future has great potential to be a fair indicator of what kind of light source your are getting. Kind of a symbolic gap between, the "don't give a shit" layman, just wants to grow and the techie, who want's to run a micrometer and FLuke over every sq. inch of the muthafucka.

Maybe it has potential similar to PC chip ratings. Ratings were far incomplete when rated by clock speed [GHz] but when you started to add in your bus speeds plus multiple cache's, you started to develop a better overall idea of what the cpu was capable of. But clock speed was enough to satisfy the first glance of everyone from noob to pro, for the most part and then people who cared, followed up.

Is that a fair comparison? I guess something would have to be combined with CRI in that comparision to make sense, however there are many.

The standard is CCT + CRI

 

[PICOGRAV]

I FIGURED IT OUT!

The plants little green secret!

Oh boy...

 

[PICOGRAV]

I want to test the use of lamp-black coating round plants, instead of the reflective or white paint we all use, possibly this could help the plant interact with only the true light waves from are LEDs...

 

[lax123]

doesnt make any sense to me, could you explain?

 

[PICOGRAV]

So I have an idea on one of my bleached out buds, this one grew up fast and was under the 2700K LED Array, about 4-5 inches away for about 1.5 days;



The really cool thing you can see in the flower is that, not only the yellow rashes on the leaves but the streaks of purple through the top Calyx's and then directly top you get almost pure white coming through.

Now I talked a little about DNA inside chloroplasts and what the plant uses this for, making complex proteins for growth among other things and I mentioned my idea is that chloroplasts have green pigments to protect and regulate light waves bouncing in and around themselves, apparently DNA is very light absorbent and the funny thing is the chloroplasts is surrounded by specific green pigments...

Now another thing to look at is unique genes that develop in plants, chloroplasts transfer these unique genes into the carrier Cells Nucleus's, basically making a record of all the past chloroplasts DNA and RNA that has developed of generation after generation.

Next, there are some interesting things that happen to damaged DNA;
- an irreversible state of dormancy, known as senescence
- cell suicide, also known as apoptosis or programmed cell death - unregulated cell division, which can lead to the formation of a tumor that is cancerous
The first two are worth a look at, when the chloroplasts DNA become damaged from say too much sunlight, they would either become dormant or actually self destruct! This is super cool, its like a self regulating system.

So this relates back to my bleached bud and that fact that these chloroplasts are so close to where the seeds are pollinated and produced and I would just have to prove it over time but I imagine you could control the ancestry of the DNA by the quality and quantity of light you give a bud, this leads me to think, some how these purple streaks in my bleached bud are just some very old genes pushing through, and because most of the chloroplasts became damaged, they went dormant, allowing a new mix if DNA and RNA. Now then the white tips, is this a total lack of chloroplasts DNA, and what happens here? Maybe this DNA would be more pure and you could start almost brand new stains?

Light, DNA and Chloroplasts...

There is more to come with how I think plants direct them self's to the light, but I will talk about that later.

 

[tags420]

I hope you are dumb enough to pollinate your tent now. You think you know all this stuff and think it is super important...yet you are talking about making beans/pollinating late in flower. Learn something useful.

 

[PICOGRAV]

I hope you are dumb enough to pollinate your tent now. You think you know all this stuff and think it is super important...yet you are talking about making beans/pollinating late in flower. Learn something useful.

I had always planed to pollinate some of my buds, even before flower? Tags, I have flowers in my chamber in most stages of development. The shaded stems on the edges of the chamber are at least 2-3 weeks behind the main flowers, I could use them.

You want to come over and measure the light bulb in my oven with your par meter, I'm sure there would be someone interested in that, dammit I dont know the PAR ratings for the Concoction, Tisane, Elixir's I'm cooking tonight, oh well

 

[tags420]

I had always planed to pollinate some of my buds, even before flower? Tags, I have flowers in my chamber in most stages of development. The shaded stems on the edges of the chamber are at least 2-3 weeks behind the main flowers, I could use them.

You want to come over and measure the light bulb in my oven with your par meter, I'm sure there would be someone interested in that, dammit I dont know the PAR ratings for the Concoction, Tisane, Elixir's I'm cooking tonight, oh well

The shade branches are not behind in a real sense...if they started flowering at the same time(as in they are on the same plant) they are at the same point...they may seem behind but it is because they are just not as good because of the conditions(light mostly). There can be a slight difference in theory but it is only a few days in actuality...when the plant starts flowering it is all starting. And if anything the lowers would be flowering first due to their more often darker space they occupy(under all the top foliage).

When people let lower buds go longer it is so that they can get more light to them and allow them to photosynthesis more and thus grow better in the short time they are left. It actually doesn't effect yield all that much, mostly because 4-7days is not enough to change the 7-8weeks they have already spent in getting to that state. But what it will do is by getting more direct light to those lower bud the trichomes react and it pushes their development toward the finish a little faster. This trichome development is what takes their whole crop to dank level 9...not just the tops.

You also pick a big ass male...not the goal for a male. The drug traits of cannabis is recessive and most big dominating males are more likely to pass on hemp traits(low thc and lanky low yields). Did you freeze the pollen...or has it jet been sitting in a bag for 4weeks?

The goal of pollinating is to have female flowers at between 19-26days into flower.
And to have the male flowering about 5-7days before the females so it(the male) is in the 30+ days when the two get the nasty on.
It takes 32-36 days for a bean to mature. A little longer is better.

Are you trying to put down on PAR readings...keep talking about all those lumens. The fact that I gave some good and real info about a product(cree globes) that many peopleare using and want to know about...and also have already proved their value as a grow option.The par numbers are just showing why they are so good. So I really don't know what you are trying to say...I only use them for clones and my house. Keeping hating on true facts...as much as you think you know about electronics, and you do to a good extent...but when it comes to plants, light, and how it all works together you are so far from what is really important. You use a CFL at the base of your plants...you will probably never get a globe just because I support them...You will be losing out on 3X more light for 1/3 the wattage.
I hope you never do upgrade and keep using a lower grade and performing equipment in your little tent/cab(also talking about the vero...not just the CFL).

P.S. My Star is burning pretty bright these days.

 

[PetFlora]

Dank Level 9- I like it

That aside, you seem pretty short with Pico. IME, that approach does not make for converts

Lead by example, which you do with your fine grows. They speak for themselves

 

[lax123]

pico, I have a bit of a biological background and genetics and stuff (but not so much about mj)...id say thats all realllly far fetched, as in I cant get any sense into that theory at all.
Maybe you could explain it a bit better?

But i have something to ask, yesterday one of my XML-U2 cree burned out.
I was asking the ebay seller for help. He refunded me, very nice, no Problem.
I sent him Pictures of the Panel and the led. He said that my led prolly got damaged because im driving it in series with other leds of different Forward voltages.
XMLU2 has 12 Vf, while im using it in combination with 3,3Vf CW and 3,4Vf blue etc.
I explained to him, that that would be no Problem and anyways every led Vf is a bit different and so on and that im driving it at 650mA instead of 1000mA, so that it actually should last longer etc...
Using a Driver with 36V-76V and 650mA. Combined Vf about 50V.

Am i wrong? That would would be a really hard hit for me lol.

 

[PICOGRAV]

pico, I have a bit of a biological background and genetics and stuff (but not so much about mj)...id say thats all realllly far fetched, as in I cant get any sense into that theory at all.
Maybe you could explain it a bit better?

But i have something to ask, yesterday one of my XML-U2 cree burned out.
I was asking the ebay seller for help. He refunded me, very nice, no Problem.
I sent him Pictures of the Panel and the led. He said that my led prolly got damaged because im driving it in series with other leds of different Forward voltages.
XMLU2 has 12 Vf, while im using it in combination with 3,3Vf CW and 3,4Vf blue etc.
I explained to him, that that would be no Problem and anyways every led Vf is a bit different and so on and that im driving it at 650mA instead of 1000mA, so that it actually should last longer etc...
Using a Driver with 36V-76V and 650mA.

Am i wrong?

Have a look:

http://www.saps.org.uk/attachments/article/544/SAPS Green Genes Article.pdf

"Moving a gene from chloroplasts to the nucleus
would take several steps. The first might be the
accidental destruction of a chloroplast. This would
release chloroplast DNA into the cell, allowing a
chloroplast gene to enter DNA inside the nucleus."

Its a fragmented idea right now, I know.

Your idea on driving all of these LEDs is quite complex with the different Vf its a little hard to understand what you have connected here, is it one, 12 Vf in series with a 3.3 Vf and a 3.4Vf, or one 12Vf with three 3Vf and four 4Vf?

Normally you could calculate the resistance of the load and then work from that but I dont think that information is available and it changes depending on heat and voltage as well. You might want to add a parallel resistor in line with the the 12 Vf and then separate ones on with the smaller LEDs to maintain an even voltage drop across each LED.

 

[lax123]

Thank you for your answer. Its 9 leds in series, 2x 12Vf and like 7x 4Vf. Oh is there really something about calculating the resistances? I just thought 2x 12Vf + 7x4Vf = 52V thats within specs of my 650mA constant current Driver, so everything is ok, at least I thought :-/ I thought the XLMu2 Looks like 4 smaller Emitters in one, so its basically like 4 -3vf leds or something like that. Even if not, I dont understand the Problem. Do you or some one else maybe have a link explaining why you cant drive different leds in series without extra circuitry? Im really confused now

 

[guod]

@Lax
your calculation and thinking is right.