Thoughts on the Zeus 308 board?

Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
Stephenj37826 said:
Yes we do actuality . Samsung is launching a 660nm red which we have the first 100 pcs to ship out and we will debut them. Last year they asked us what led we would like to see next and we told them 660nm. They developed it No we don't have exclusive on it nor would we want that We are just helping each other. Samsung has been awesome to work with.
Click to expand...
Nice! Hopefully we see strips with those 660's. Interesting! I know, I should not ask, but is it a mid power smd?
 
Airwalker16

Airwalker16

Well-Known Member
Randomblame said:
Nope, 2pcs of 2ft. EBgen2 at 1050mA.
I would use at least 24 Vesta's at 1050mA(525mA per channel) or 16-18 at 1400mA(700mA per channel). Above that I would use c-channels to keep them cool to touch.
Click to expand...
What c channel thickness? 1/16 or 1/8? People could get interested in this it'd be a VERY cost effective build.
You could also use 320-2100 for each 8-9 boards in series too? The 320-24's would be parralel though right?
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
But not the same effiency! F-strips are far more efficient, means less watt for the same brightness and Vesta wring is even more complicated unless you don't want two seperate channels and wire them in series.
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
Current CRI90 COB's are ~150lm/w these strips are 135lm/w. You need to drive them low to get the same effiency.
If effiency doesn't matters, take the Vesta, they have a nice CRI90 spectrum.
But if effiency matters, take EBgen2 or F-Series, they are CRI80 but 175lm/w.
Q-series and H-inFlux are also better and more efficient.

Higher upfront cost doesn't matter much because you get your bet back quickly. Seen at 2, 3 or more years, you make more profit with better efficiency.
Do you save on the upfront costs and you only save one time, with better efficiency you save every time (on your electricity bill) as long as you use the light!
 
N

Nutria

Well-Known Member
We should look at PPF readings instead of lumens/watt.

Didi someone mention a thread on ledgarnder forum?
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
Nutria said:
We should look at PPF readings instead of lumens/watt.

Didi someone mention a thread on ledgarnder forum?
Click to expand...

I've seen that chart. 46,5% effiency with Vesta's and 52% or so with F-strips means the same.
Vesta's are nice and have a good spectrum but that's aside they are not as efficient as their competitors.
More effiency means more yield per watt and for that reason the F-strips win.
I really like the Vesta's but to get comparable effiency you need to run the Vesta's low. If they would be around 150lm/w that would be comparable to 175lm/w in CRI80. But therefor you need to drive them at half current or 500mA(250mA per channel). That means only 12w per strip and you need twice as much strips. Cost savings adé!
If you want CRI90 get a few CXM22 or CLU1818, both are above 150lm/w at nom. current. With the usually used 50w per COB it would be 160-165lm/w. Lumen per watt is just a effiency term same like μmol/J. Divide lm/w numbers by the conversion factor of a known spectrum and you get μmol/J. For 3000°k/CRI90 the factor is probably somewhere near 66, that means 160lm/w would be 2,42μmol/J. With 130lm/w it would be only 1,967μmol/J.
 
Airwalker16

Airwalker16

Well-Known Member
Randomblame said:
I've seen that chart. 46,5% effiency with Vesta's and 52% or so with F-strips means the same.
Vesta's are nice and have a good spectrum but that's aside they are not as efficient as their competitors.
More effiency means more yield per watt and for that reason the F-strips win.
I really like the Vesta's but to get comparable effiency you need to run the Vesta's low. If they would be around 150lm/w that would be comparable to 175lm/w in CRI80. But therefor you need to drive them at half current or 500mA(250mA per channel). That means only 12w per strip and you need twice as much strips. Cost savings adé!
If you want CRI90 get a few CXM22 or CLU1818, both are above 150lm/w at nom. current. With the usually used 50w per COB it would be 160-165lm/w. Lumen per watt is just a effiency term same like μmol/J. Divide lm/w numbers by the conversion factor of a known spectrum and you get μmol/J. For 3000°k/CRI90 the factor is probably somewhere near 66, that means 160lm/w would be 2,42μmol/J. With 130lm/w it would be only 1,967μmol/J.
Click to expand...
Lol so now your dawgin on the very ztrips you brought up!! Haha
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
EBgen2, F-series, Q-series, H-influx series they all are more efficient. Even the old M-series should be better effiency wise. The nice thing with the Vesta's is the tuneable spectrum and their high lumen/$ rating. But like mentioned above, effiency matters more than upfront costs.
A light with 5% better effiency will yield 5% more bud every few weeks! These 5% will pay the higher upfront cost probably within the first run.
As you see, in the end it always depends on effiency!
 
Airwalker16

Airwalker16

Well-Known Member
Randomblame said:
EBgen2, F-series, Q-series, H-influx series they all are more efficient. Even the old M-series should be better effiency wise. The nice thing with the Vesta's is the tuneable spectrum and their high lumen/$ rating. But like mentioned above, effiency matters more than upfront costs.
A light with 5% better effiency will yield 5% more bud every few weeks! These 5% will pay the higher upfront cost probably within the first run.
As you see, in the end it always depends on effiency!
Click to expand...
But you'd just have to buy sooo many EB/F strips to get the same amount of light as you would from the Vesta's. Like I said, 40 or so. That sucks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top