DIY watercooled photosynthetic-research LED-Lamp completed build, tell me what u think

Shugglet said:

What exactly is the advantage then? People make passive setups that are as effective for cheaper... Its not like watercooling is actually benefiting you in this case over an aluminum heatsink and fan because thats essentially the same thing, but far cheaper.

Click to expand...

well it is benefiting at least a bit. i build this setup as my firt lamp ever. never did one before. i was not sure about the heat i get confronted when this runs for 18 hours. so i wanted to be sure. now i know it is enough and maybe a bit overpowered in terms of cooling but at the other point i dont think u get 40°C with passive heatsinks, so to actually get that same amount of cooling u need st least a fan on that aluminium sink. powerwise seen a pump takes 8 - 13V @ 350ma and the fan takes 12V @ 350ma so its like having two fans at low speed. i dont know how much 1 fan takes to cool a CXB3590 with 36V and 1400ma down to 40°C but i think at least 12V at 350ma? so i got maybe double consumption but steady 40°C. in a real room it may be 45°C cause the room is warmer. then i need less power for that 65% relative luminous flux i told about some posts before.

i get your point but i dont think its that much inefficient as u may think. i accept that i use more power to cool this setup via watercooling than it would need when cooled with alu and fan.

so at the end i got a bit more cooling for a bit more power needed.

some thing that is a negative point is the weight compared to alu and a fan. but thats another thing thats gonna be optimized with a better frame.

Shugglet said:

He did ask for comments and questions... I commented it appears he overspent by atleast a factor of 2 to cool his light. I asked him why.

Click to expand...

yeah thats right and i am thankful for any questions and critics or even tips.

i just want to do some conversation over anything thats said and maybe make some things clearer. so no offense.

Shugglet said:

Yeah, agreed. But Id also say its good to learn from mistakes, not double down defending them lol.

Click to expand...

well double down defending sounds for me as if i would defend a very obvious mistake i did and i dont want to accept it. but thats not the case.

Shugglet said:

Im still very curious to see someone with a cob/mono setup run a grow with monos and without to gauge the difference.

Partly what I said about what I liked about this particular light, but when you criticize any part, people just assume youre a hater, regardless of validity or not.

Click to expand...

thats what i want to test in some testruns and be sure, i will update this thread and tell what i found out, positive and negative things so that someone maybe can take a lesson from this or in worst case only me

l0wbob2016 said:

i dont think u get 40°C with passive heatsinks, so to actually get that same amount of cooling u need st least a fan on that aluminium sink

Click to expand...

Most likely at 50w a COB you are probably right. It probably would have to be active.

l0wbob2016 said:

so at the end i got a bit more cooling for a bit more power needed.

Click to expand...

But youre not getting more cooling, thats the thing. Those water blocks dont cool any better than aluminum heatsink and fan.


Im just trying to steer you in a better direction if you choose to build another light. I mean its fine if it works but why not save money in the future if your going to get just as good if not better performance??

sethimus said:

@Danielson999 first: answering in quotes is bad style, when someone tries to answer to that one needs to manually copy the quotes



i could follow that but: he's using a big cob with a fixed spectrum, adding just one of each wavelength per cob doesn't changes the spectrum that much



he's investing a lot of $$$ just to move the hot air a few inches away instead of directly out of the grow room if done properly and probably for less dough than buying cpu equipment. there are a few builds on here that done it right

Click to expand...

He's still testing & perfecting. This is obviously a prototype w/ changes to be determined.

l0wbob2016 said:

Sure i will keep u updated about the performance.

the only hard part about building it was to make all that monos dimmable haha

Click to expand...

Are they individually dimmable? That would help w/ your spectrum performance testing a bunch to determine how your final product will work for growing.
Awesome Job!

This is Amare & Chilled souled up. Nice!
Adding one of each mono to each cob seams like a great way to get close to the Suns spectrum.
IMO, every grow light should be vented out if possible, especially in a grow room full of them.
If I DIY any light, it would be wrapped in aluminum n vented out.
I'm very surprised I haven't seen this done. It's very simple. Basic Break work. Anyone who's wrapped trim on a house w/ metal could do it easily.
That's my biggest beef w/ led pre-manufactured right now.

Shugglet said:

Im still very curious to see someone with a cob/mono setup run a grow with monos and without to gauge the difference.

Partly what I said about what I liked about this particular light, but when you criticize any part, people just assume youre a hater, regardless of validity or not.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of already done with mono's and cob's. Most lights prior t diy were mono's with full spectrum 3w or 5w led's. Many folks were quite happy with that until the cree cob's came out. This build is similar to growmau5 build with mono's and cob's, the difference is if this was a growmau5 thread they would all gush period, like fan boys. Folks lack the ability to be non-critical and open to different. Change comes from that ability to be different. I think most folks smoke too much and listen to little for effectiveness. Growmau5 has done this and his current rig is quantum boards, cob's and mono's but no one is going to criticize his rig.

Shugglet said:

But youre not getting more cooling, thats the thing. Those water blocks dont cool any better than aluminum heatsink and fan.


Im just trying to steer you in a better direction if you choose to build another light. I mean its fine if it works but why not save money in the future if your going to get just as good if not better performance??

Click to expand...

well maybe it is just me, but i dont agree on this.

since water needs a lot more energy than air to be heated up to the same temp, the water would need a lot more time to heat up if the powersource is the same.

lets say we dont mention the way the heat needs to go from the COB through the thermal paste to the actual heatsink cause thats basically the same in both methods.
just think about the heat goes into the actual heatsink and out of the heatsink into a cooler medium.

my AiO-watercooler got copper as heatsink material to transfer it into cirulated water. water heats up slow. copper got a thermal conductivity of 401.
you method got aluminium as heatsink material to transfer it into circulated air. air heats up faster than water. aluminium got a thermal conductivity of 236.

another thing is the thermal conductivity of air and water. first transfer between water and copper goes pretty fast then transfered very fast ( 1,5liter per AiO solution working at 35liter a minute ) later the same water to radiator. compared to aluminium into air thats flowing i dont know how fast ( for both cases )

lets assume the amount of air that the fan pushed thorugh itself is the same in both methods.
so the only difference is the amount of surface that can transfer heat from the heatsink into the pushed through air and the different thermal conductivity of the heatsinks.

a radiator is extra build to have a higher amount of transfer surface than a normal aluminium heatsink.

thats why i think a normal aluminium heatsink & fan you dont get the cooling of a watercoolling solution made out of copper and a higher surface than a normal aluminium heatsink.

if i got anything wrong please tell me!

and again, i dont want to save money or be cheap in this setup.

Hybridway said:

He's still testing & perfecting. This is obviously a prototype w/ changes to be determined.

Click to expand...

thats for sure

Hybridway said:

Are they individually dimmable? That would help w/ your spectrum performance testing a bunch to determine how your final product will work for growing.
Awesome Job!

Click to expand...

yes they are all individually dimmable. so every wavelegth can be dimmed for its own in 256 steps from 0 to 100% power output. thats why i got 12 dimmers in total

Hybridway said:

This is Amare & Chilled souled up. Nice!
IMO, every grow light should be vented out if possible, especially in a grow room full of them.
If I DIY any light, it would be wrapped in aluminum n vented out.

Click to expand...

well IMO the normal ventilation of a grow for changing old and fresh air will handle this cause the heat isnt very high. in a room the air cirulates and the 5 fans add some more circulation.

since this lamp couldnt be tested up to now under real conditions i will keep that in mind and check from time to time if there are any unusual hotspots or to warm air in the room at all.

VegasWinner said:

There are plenty of already done with mono's and cob's. Most lights prior t diy were mono's with full spectrum 3w or 5w led's. Many folks were quite happy with that until the cree cob's came out. This build is similar to growmau5 build with mono's and cob's, the difference is if this was a growmau5 thread they would all gush period, like fan boys. Folks lack the ability to be non-critical and open to different. Change comes from that ability to be different. I think most folks smoke too much and listen to little for effectiveness. Growmau5 has done this and his current rig is quantum boards, cob's and mono's but no one is going to criticize his rig.

Click to expand...

i get what u r saying but i am ok with ppl asking questions or telling me things to improve.

i am here to present, share and learn. i want to say my points on any given answer and if i am wrong maybe someone can tell me the truth. thats all but thanks for the flowers

l0wbob2016 said:

since water needs a lot more energy than air to be heated up to the same temp

Click to expand...

Yeah, but youre not comparing the water to air, youre comparing it to an aluminum heatsink.

l0wbob2016 said:

lets assume the amount of air that the fan pushed thorugh itself is the same in both methods.
so the only difference is the amount of surface that can transfer heat from the heatsink into the pushed through air and the different thermal conductivity of the heatsinks.

Click to expand...

Yes this is pretty much what it boils down to. The thing is aluminum conducts heat far better than water. They would probably perform fairly similar but the heatsink would be way cheaper and less electric usage.

The thing is watercooling could be set up to be far better. But youre not really taking advantage of the perks it has to offer. Namely water is cheap and a large rez of water can hold tons of heat for very little cost. Also you can dump heat from the lights outside the grow environment, cutting down on overall cooling costs as well. These are a couple of the biggest perks to watercooling IMO.

How about just copper heat sinks, big enough for passive but ran active as a consideration for the future if the water cooling thing turns into more hassle (time + $) then it's worth?
Still think ducting out on passive sized sinks is the least cost & effective way though. That way your keeping the cobs cool enough w/ large enough sinks & pulling the heat out.

Cool Stuff Man Super Clean!

Shugglet said:

Yeah, but youre not comparing the water to air, youre comparing it to an aluminum heatsink.

Click to expand...

what i compare there is [cooling medium] vs [cooling medium].

when i got a powersouce and use it one time to heat water and one time to heat air then the water will always be cooler because i can take a lot more energy before getting hot than air.
so the actual heat-energy is inside the cooling medium. now this warmed up cooling medium needs to get moved away so that new chilled cooling medium gets to the heatsource.

in the case an aluminium heatsink is used with a fan the fan moves the cold air into the heatsink and pushes it while warming up away from the heatsource.
in the other case where a AiO-watercooler is used the water gets moved by a pump into the radiator where it gets cooled.

so again, since water needs more energy to be heaten up than air and the amount of energy is always the same, the result is that the water doesnt get that warm like the air but contains the same amount of heat-energy.
so the temp of the cooling medium getting to the point where the heat needs to be moved away when used water is lower than when used air. after this the radiator works like the aluminium heat sink but is made out of copper and got a bigger surface. the air can heat up faster and transport the energy away from the water.

in this special case here it is like having a copper heatsink with a fan compared to an aluminium heatsink with a fan but with another point for the watercooling is that the actual temp the COB has while turned on is lower all the time.

so at the end:
1) aluminium heatsink + fan ( cheap, works fine, low electric cost)
2) copper watercooler + radiator + fan ( expensive, works a lot better than the aluminium heatsink, uses more energy )

Shugglet said:

Yes this is pretty much what it boils down to. The thing is aluminum conducts heat far better than water. They would probably perform fairly similar but the heatsink would be way cheaper and less electric usage.

Click to expand...

you compare here the water to aluminium but the things that have to be compared should always be the same like heatsink vs heatsink or cooling medium vs cooling medium.

thermal conductivities:
Air : 0,0263 best case only O2
Water : 0,5562
Aluminium : 236
Copper : 401

l0wbob2016 said:

when i got a powersouce and use it one time to heat water and one time to heat air then the water will always be cooler because i can take a lot more energy before getting hot than air.

Click to expand...

You make the assumption that the volumes are the same in this case. Consider this, 1 gal of water has roughly the same heat capacity as 100cu ft of air... And in your case, there is very little water in the system compared to volume of air in any grow. Also ignores the fact that most typically have a constant ventilation of fresh cooler air coming in. Open system vs closed system...

l0wbob2016 said:

so again, since water needs more energy to be heaten up than air and the amount of energy is always the same, the result is that the water doesnt get that warm like the air but contains the same amount of heat-energy.

Click to expand...

This is true but again ignores the previous point of ventilation. The heat you create has to go somewhere. And if the energy input is the same the heat input is as well.

l0wbob2016 said:

watercooling is that the actual temp the COB has while turned on is lower all the time.

Click to expand...

Its a marginal difference at best. Remember, the water isnt removing any heat and all the talk about how much heat it can store is pointless because the system your using has very little volume (heat capacity) to begin with and thus will reach radiating and equilibrium temps rather quickly. Then its a matter of which system gets that heat to the air faster. So its not the watercooling benefiting as much as the copper radiator being more efficient than aluminum. So in other words, if you had a copper heatsink vs copper radiator with same thermal properties, they would perform roughly the same (heatsink probably better actually as it has the most efficient heat properties of all mediums involved(you cut out water which is far less efficient)).

l0wbob2016 said:

you compare here the water to aluminium but the things that have to be compared should always be the same like heatsink vs heatsink or cooling medium vs cooling medium.

thermal conductivities:
Air : 0,0263 best case only O2
Water : 0,5562
Aluminium : 236
Copper : 401

Click to expand...

Air is the cooling medium in each case because its ultimately where the heat ends up in both systems as described.

Water is just another facet of the "heatsink", air is the actual cooling medium.

All your points have merit, but the system design is flawed as is, which is what my original point was.

Water as you noted isnt very thermally conductive, but where it does shine is its heat capacity, which you also noted, but again heat capacity is a moot point in your system IMO because it reaches its radiating point with the ambient environment so quickly because there is so little volume.

The last thing I want to do is dissuade or discourage you from using watercooling, I just want you to take much more advantage of it.

Shugglet said:

You make the assumption that the volumes are the same in this case. Consider this, 1 gal of water has roughly the same heat capacity as 100cu ft of air... And in your case, there is very little water in the system compared to volume of air in any grow. Also ignores the fact that most typically have a constant ventilation of fresh cooler air coming in. Open system vs closed system...



This is true but again ignores the previous point of ventilation. The heat you create has to go somewhere. And if the energy input is the same the heat input is as well.



Its a marginal difference at best. Remember, the water isnt removing any heat and all the talk about how much heat it can store is pointless because the system your using has very little volume (heat capacity) to begin with and thus will reach radiating and equilibrium temps rather quickly. Then its a matter of which system gets that heat to the air faster. So its not the watercooling benefiting as much as the copper radiator being more efficient than aluminum. So in other words, if you had a copper heatsink vs copper radiator with same thermal properties, they would perform roughly the same (heatsink probably better actually as it has the most efficient heat properties of all mediums involved(you cut out water which is far less efficient)).





Air is the cooling medium in each case because its ultimately where the heat ends up in both systems as described.

Water is just another facet of the "heatsink", air is the actual cooling medium.

All your points have merit, but the system design is flawed as is, which is what my original point was.

Water as you noted isnt very thermally conductive, but where it does shine is its heat capacity, which you also noted, but again heat capacity is a moot point in your system IMO because it reaches its radiating point with the ambient environment so quickly because there is so little volume.

Click to expand...

ok i get u now. so lets assume the room gets good ventilated with fresh air. in both cases this air gets used as a "heatdump". the only thing i want to mention is that i get the heat better into that air and i keep the COB's cooler than the aluminium heatsink.

Shugglet said:

The last thing I want to do is dissuade or discourage you from using watercooling, I just want you to take much more advantage of it.

Click to expand...

everything is fine, i love to talk about this and hear some good critics. IMO the only thing that i could improve in this case would be to transfer the heat from the radiators straight out of the room.
this would reduce the influence on the room climate by a lot.

the mono LED's get hotter as now with this setup but thats ok i think because the room is ventilated and cirulating air that would cool them.

l0wbob2016 said:

ok i get u now. so lets assume the room gets good ventilated with fresh air. in both cases this air gets used as a "heatdump". the only thing i want to mention is that i get the heat better into that air and i keep the COB's cooler than the aluminium heatsink.



everything is fine, i love to talk about this and hear some good critics. IMO the only thing that i could improve in this case would be to transfer the heat from the radiators straight out of the room.
this would reduce the influence on the room climate by a lot.

the mono LED's get hotter as now with this setup but thats ok i think because the room is ventilated and cirulating air that would cool them.

Click to expand...

Can this pull 2 lb a light?

also absorption / dissapation ....CU can adsorb more heat of a similar volume of Al....but will not dissipate as much of the heat as the aluminum....thats why copper isnt used alot times especially in passive....

Abiqua said:

also absorption / dissapation ....CU can adsorb more heat of a similar volume of Al....but will not dissipate as much of the heat as the aluminum....thats why copper isnt used alot times especially in passive....

Click to expand...

thats why copper works better with watercooling than aluminium right?