bicit
Well-Known Member
The best HID bulbs are around 42% efficient IIRC. The CXB3590 series can be roughly 55-70% efficient. HID tech isn't advancing nearly as rapidly as solid state lighting.
Why do HID lights have better penetration?
- Thread starter tstick
- Start date
- Status
The best HID bulbs are around 42% efficient IIRC. The CXB3590 series can be roughly 55-70% efficient. HID tech isn't advancing nearly as rapidly as solid state lighting.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
SPLFreak808
Well-Known Member
This is an example why i dont think lumen to watts would be much of a good comparison between HID's and LED's. 1k hps=100,000-140,000 lumens 1k LED 20,500-35'000 lumens
I believe the HPS is using its 1000watts for a bandwidth of wavelengths some usable some not,
while LED's are only using targeted wavelengths asuming they are not RGB.
The real test would be to test individual wavelengths under an hps vs led to see which one has more output below the canopy. Of course a lumen reader will favor the hps.
I believe the HPS is using its 1000watts for a bandwidth of wavelengths some usable some not,
while LED's are only using targeted wavelengths asuming they are not RGB.
The real test would be to test individual wavelengths under an hps vs led to see which one has more output below the canopy. Of course a lumen reader will favor the hps.
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
1k watts of my DIY cxb build would be 160000 lumens, and each lumen comes from more radiant energy than the same lumen generated by hps (the SPD has lower LER than HPS)
I'm not sure where you got the 20-35k lumens from 1k dissipation unless you were refering to blurple.
I'm not sure where you got the 20-35k lumens from 1k dissipation unless you were refering to blurple.
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
Part of the problem with these "debates" is that blurple growers act like they're making the same argument as Rellow growers, and insist on showing up to these debates, showing pictures of their fucking mars grows... posting thread after thread about how mars is better than HPS. It destroys credibility in anything that has LED in the name of it, and makes it even harder to make the case to people looking to make sound investment decisions.. The people using Rellows are generally looking for results they saw from someone else, while the people looking to use blurples still have "the theory" that you save energy by only using red and blue. There's a reason I'm not designing my own DIY panels using blurple epishit crap. I am not a hypocrite. I practice what I preach.
It's actually kind of frustrating trying to convince seasoned HPS growers that our white DIY arrays are actually better than HPS when the fucking mars growers keep popping in and trying to blend in with the DIY folk. This makes it VERY HARD for HPS growers interested in the current state of "LED" to find the information they need. Please keep yourself separate in some way... to not confuse people looking for the results DIYers get at the price mars growers pay..
"LED" is not a technology, it's a category of device, like an HID. Different leds are made with different semiconductors on different substrates. If you're just going to call them "LED", you should call your HPS and MH as "HID" and stop being so specific. Most of the "rellow sect" does not vouch for the blurple mars sect. I find them to be very stubborn, and make a fool out of everyone else. You're better off getting an HPS lamp in that case. HPS is rellow.
It's actually kind of frustrating trying to convince seasoned HPS growers that our white DIY arrays are actually better than HPS when the fucking mars growers keep popping in and trying to blend in with the DIY folk. This makes it VERY HARD for HPS growers interested in the current state of "LED" to find the information they need. Please keep yourself separate in some way... to not confuse people looking for the results DIYers get at the price mars growers pay..
"LED" is not a technology, it's a category of device, like an HID. Different leds are made with different semiconductors on different substrates. If you're just going to call them "LED", you should call your HPS and MH as "HID" and stop being so specific. Most of the "rellow sect" does not vouch for the blurple mars sect. I find them to be very stubborn, and make a fool out of everyone else. You're better off getting an HPS lamp in that case. HPS is rellow.
Last edited:
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
Yes, that's what I think. I'd love to be proven otherwise, but I've never seen giant plants under R+B with good yields that actually finish on time. I have seen HPS like results from white, but with greater photon output per input watt.. I've drawn the conclusion that R+B lights have a fundamental problem with producing bud that's not a problem with technology, but with how the plant works.
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
I suspect the japanese engineers who designed this came up with the same conclusions.
Why not make it all one color? The red is likely for germinating and the white light for penetrating.
Why not make it all one color? The red is likely for germinating and the white light for penetrating.
SPLFreak808
Well-Known Member
Blue and red yes, i have never taken the time to build them new white led's. Are they full spectrum/narrow or single per diode? Actually i was talking kelvin power below the canopy for testing individual kelvin joules.
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
It's all about the Far Blellow now. Get with the times dude.
If you had an HPS bulb that was put into a reflector that has a very tight pattern, it will have good penetration.
If you had an LED lamp that had lenses that emitted in a tight pattern, you will have good penetration.
If you put 5° lenses on LEDs, it'd penetrate so well you'd think you were in a porno.
Penetration has to do with #1 total photon output and #2 beam angle. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you had an HPS bulb that was put into a reflector that has a very tight pattern, it will have good penetration.
If you had an LED lamp that had lenses that emitted in a tight pattern, you will have good penetration.
If you put 5° lenses on LEDs, it'd penetrate so well you'd think you were in a porno.
apoulin
Well-Known Member
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
If you put 5 degree lenses on vero 29 at 2.1A, you would have a weapon of US quarter sized destruction. If you want to call that penetration, go ahead.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Nah man, he just wants to mount his light array on the third floor of the atrium...
OneHitDone
Well-Known Member
So it is possible to set up a cob system with no fans given a large enough heat sink is used?
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
Yes, however it is more economical to design it for an optional fan. I try to design my heat sinks to be large enough so the leds don't become damaged if the fans stop working. In my opinion, it would cost way too much in aluminum to run passively at 35C with 0 forced air, but 50-70C with 0 forced air is very feasible (and what I aim for).
the dopest
Well-Known Member
Church, where are you measuring the 50-70C, just curious. I measured mine beside the chip, right at the edge of the heatsink and chip but heard that was an inaccurate place. I can't measure temps between fins on back of the heatsink, they are too close together.
Thanks
Thanks
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
You can measure right next to the chip, or you could use the area on the cob meant for probing case temperature. I like to use the rule of "thumb". Put your thumb on it. It can be warm, warmer, very warm, hot, hotter, or too hot to put your thumb on without getting blistered instantly. If it's blistering hot without a fan, it's too hot to take a fan failure.
REALSTYLES
Well-Known Member
Like church says I run big sinks as well 10"x24" and if the fan fails it will hold up.
REALSTYLES
Well-Known Member
you guys stop talking porno, I'm eating a bag of Cheetos right now lol All this Photon and penetration shit lol
- Status
Similar threads
