DiY LED - Cree CXA3070

Hi,
@ uzerneims, in europe there are digikey and newarks and mouser. 30euros for the Cxa3070 Z2 3000K.

bicit said:

Have you checked the availability of Bridgelux vero chips? The 29 is comparable to the 3070.

Click to expand...

Yep by my measure, the CXA3070 3000K Z2 @ 1.4A is 36.6% efficient and the Vero 29 3000K @ 1.4A is 35.8%.

The Vero 29 4000K might actually be a good choice for flowering because it has 13% blue. The Vero 3000K has 8% blue and the CXA 3000K has 10% blue.

Those have even less blue ...

stardustsailor said:

Those have even less blue ...

View attachment 3173381

Click to expand...

I would love to test out those 95CRI cxa3070 3000k (6907 flux (lm) @ 25 °c 1925mA). I know they may not be as efficient as the 80CRI bottom Y4 bin (7422 flux (lm) @ 25 °c 1925mA) but I believe they are more efficient then the 80cri CXA3050 27k w2 bin (5477 flux (lm) @ 25 °c 1400mA) that bbspills is using with great success with a fuller spectrum. I think they might even better then the top bin 3050-27k-X2 (6299 flux (lm) @ 25 °c 1400mA) but really still learning to read the spec sheets so I could be wrong.

too bad im not that good with crunching numbers like others around here are.

maybe Supra (your awesome by the way, thanks for all the info) can put them in his spreadsheet for comparison for people like me who dont understand the math all that well

stardustsailor said:

Those have even less blue ...

View attachment 3173381

Click to expand...

I really like the 95 3000k! how can we order those? What bin code?

Hello EF! As far as efficiency goes here are some of the numbers for the bins currently available from Digikey:
CXA3050 2700K mid bin W2 @ 1.4A = 31%
CXA3050 3000K mid bin W4 @ 1.4A = 33%
CXA3070 3000K mid bin Z2 @ 1.4A = 36.6%

I am not aware of any of the high CRI bins being available in CXA3050 or CXA3070, but to compare the one you mentioned:
CXA3070 3000K 93/95cri top bin Y2 @ 1.4A = 37.5%

So once we have the electrical efficiency, we then have to consider the photosynthetic efficiency. The 2700K should be slightly better than the 3000K and the high-cri should be higher than the 2700K.

Then we have to consider the photomorphogenesis, in other words, does it have enough blue to be used on its own and still get decent node length and frosty trichs.

CannaBare said:

I really like the 95 3000k! how can we order those? What bin code?

Click to expand...

the high cri were added to the spec sheet when they added the 3000k AB bin and probably wont be available for a while

for the high cri 3000k the 2 bin codes listed are

bottom - CXA3070-0000-000N0YX430F /H
top - CXA3070-0000-000N0YY230F /H

yeah true that,
maybe if i cooled the led with the rez water
then sprayed n' bubbled it back into the rez

also maybe blow the raditated air into the foggers for free cooling?(and no heat signature)

we got digikey here can get 18's in 2700k and 29's in 3000k might give those a try =]

The last thing you want to do is use your lights to heat up the water your roots are bathed in.

but doesn't 4 micron fog particals cool warm air and sterilize the roots?

also the radiator redirects some of the heat into the rez air.

(you could also control rez heat and room heat and humidity with fans and radiators)

What is the LER on a high CRI 3070. I have wondered about LER and higher CRI graphs for a while now.

According to Mr Flux data, the CXA 3000K 93 CRI is 276 LER and is 12% blue. For those who don't know what LER is, it is the maximum possible lumens/W for that particular spectrum. Because high CRI LEDs are designed for the human eye to be able to distinguish each color equally well, it has less green than most LEDs and therefore suffers in terms of the maximum possible lumens/W. So a low LER is not necessarily a bad thing in terms of growing lights.

BUT, if we compare the high CRI top bin to the 80 CRi top bin, a signficant difference in efficiency shows up:
CXA3070 3000K 93/95cri top bin Y2 @ 1.4A = 37.5%
CXA3070 3000K 80 cri top bin AB @ 1.4A = 42.1%

The high CRI top bin is very impressive, but it still holds true that it is really just a low cri with a "filter" over it, blocking photons. The 80 cri is creating 12% more photons/W.

SupraSPL said:

The high CRI top bin is very impressive, but it still holds true that it is really just a low cri with a "filter" over it, blocking photons. The 80 cri is creating 12% more photons/W.

Click to expand...

I understand the filter concept but when I look at the curve provided by MrFlux's thread (Thanks MF)

I cant help to notice that the purple line seams to have close to the same amount of "blue", about the same amount of 640nm and more of everything above 650nm.

It might be 12% less but the photons in the high cri could possibly be more beneficial... I don't know.

If I could...($$$)...I would do a 50/50 mix of the 3k 80cri and 93cri. Why choose sides, they could only help each other out.

I am of the belief that every step closer to the suns spectrum is going to help the crop, if not we could just stick with R/B panels for they are the highest efficiency. At 37.5% the CXA3070-0000-000N0YY230F is better then HPS by far when you take spectrum into consideration... But that's just my opinion and could be far from factual

Totally agree on that too, epicfail...
37% is already the efficiency of an HPS, but the spectrum is better, the repartition is also better and penetration can be manage by using lenses...
But why not adding 10w of oslon SSL hyperred on your 3000K 80cri => you catch up with the 650nm+ of the 93cri plus you will be more efficient.

speedyganga said:

Totally agree on that too, epicfail...
37% is already the efficiency of an HPS, but the spectrum is better, the repartition is also better and penetration can be manage by using lenses...
But why not adding 10w of oslon SSL hyperred on your 3000K 80cri => you catch up with the 650nm+ of the 93cri plus you will be more efficient.

Click to expand...

The Oslons are not a bad idea speedyg if they could be put on the same sting as a 3070, I guess that would depend on the driver and current but then there would still be some "disco" effect happening.

I imagine one could always just use a 2.7k Z4 80cri and 3k AB 80cri mix to create a similar spectrum to the 3k Y2 93cri but the canopy would still have two "colors" of white instead a even white distributed light source.

oh the future will be bright!

yes, you could make a very efficient light by putting oslon and cxa on the same 1050mA driver (HGL 85 1050mA, and 190V). It would make 10W of oslon for 38W of cxa (rated at 127lumen/W )
But I would rather have cxa on a string with a dimmer and oslon on another with a dimmer too. So that I can activate the red only for flowering and adjust the amount of red for each cross I grow
Btw do you think adding blue to a mix of 8W oslon and 52W cxa 3000K would be necessary ?
I mean would it be better to veg with cxa + some blue, and flower with cxa + some red?

Otherwise just need to wait 2-3month and the oslon 3590 will be available in BB 3000 93cri and that would be a definitive killer.

SupraSPL said:

Yep by my measure, the CXA3070 3000K Z2 @ 1.4A is 36.6% efficient and the Vero 29 3000K @ 1.4A is 35.8%.

The Vero 29 4000K might actually be a good choice for flowering because it has 13% blue. The Vero 3000K has 8% blue and the CXA 3000K has 10% blue.

Click to expand...

is vero 29 4000k is better for flowering than for vegetative state?

speedyganga said:

Btw do you think adding blue to a mix of 8W oslon and 52W cxa 3000K would be necessary ?
I mean would it be better to veg with cxa + some blue, and flower with cxa + some red?

Click to expand...

I personally will only use white in anything i made at this point, if I was to supplement the 3000k I would think about what SDS suggested in his first post here.

5000K instead of blue and 2700k instead of red, but even he ultimately decided to just go with 3000's all around

epicfail said:

I cant help to notice that the purple line seams to have close to the same amount of "blue", about the same amount of 640nm and more of everything above 650nm.

Click to expand...

It's true that the high CRI has more far red, on the other hand most of this >700nm light is (imo) wasted energy.

akaki said:

is vero 29 4000k is better for flowering than for vegetative state?

Click to expand...

The Vero 4000K vegs very well when the intensity is high enough. For lower intensity the 5000K is a better choice. For flowering the Vero 3500K and 4000K both are superb.

Btw I'm curious why no one has ever tried the CXA 3500K for flowering.

MrFlux said:

It's true that the high CRI has more far red, on the other hand most of this >700nm light is (imo) wasted energy.

The Vero 4000K vegs very well when the intensity is high enough. For lower intensity the 5000K is a better choice. For flowering the Vero 3500K and 4000K both are superb.

Btw I'm curious why no one has ever tried the CXA 3500K for flowering.

Click to expand...

How well do you think the 2700k vero's would work?