a mongo frog
Well-Known Member
That seems awful low to what i see some of the cob guys putting out. Looks like i bought a shitter..........
Yields at differant PPFD?
- Thread starter Trippyness
- Start date
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
I have no idea at that foot print, however a Phillips GreenPower 2100umol in a 5 x 5 hits 800ppfd according to gavita. Hight am not sure hut I assume 3 foot.
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
I should restate my wrong claim.
COBS are by far the best.
If your going with Diode based lights use Area 51.
If blurple, well that are all the same epistar chips.
I do however use a 550w blurple fixture to achieve 2 lbs.
Pled is just rebranded eshine.
Have learned alot since that post.
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
Has to do with reflector. Thats the main issue.
I have seen PAR numbers first hand under a Gavita and they are much higher.
Around 800ppfd in a 5 x 5 according to Gavita.
Ill be calling Gavita to get theyre take on PPFD and yields.
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
Ok so I just spoke to Gavita about PPFD and a bit off topic DE vs High efficiency COB LED.
So for every 1% of light increase you get a 1% yield increase for majority of all plants including Cannabis and other flowering plants.
DE specifically Gavita 1K DE at 36 inches puts out 800+ PPFD in a 5 x 5 space coming from Gavita themselves.
They however did say that reflector has alot to do with there numbers. Other commercial reflectors may vary in results.
I also spoke in regards to COBS and they put my commercial LED uses to shame.
Plants need to maintain a certain leaf temperature and with LED you will have to heat a large space with natural gas or other.
ROI with COB on electric alone can gross 8 years.. (also did this math as well)
Seems Gavita have tested LED in large spaces and energy savings are not there in large applications plus the costs, and honestly I agree.
Gavita thinks LED is the way of the future , but its just not there yet compared to DE.
Including penatration which is for sure true.
I agree with them for large applications.
Anyways, goes to show 600 vs 800 is a 25% increase in yield theoretically if conditions are ideal.
All coming from a very high standard light manufacturer.
Case closed.
Quote from Gavita as well
Roughly these are a few examples of recommendations for a high light recipe of around 700 µmol m-2 s-1. Calculations made with 10% reflector / wall losses:
400W a) - 1 x 1 m - 1 m2 at a ppfd of ~ 650 µmol m-2 s-1
600W b) - 1,2 x 1,2 m - 1,44 m2 at a ppfd of ~ 690 µmol m-2 s-1
1000W c) - 1,5 x 1,5 m - 2,25 m2 at a ppfd of ~800 µmol m-2 s-1
In practice levels can be lower with different reflectors (open reflectors will have more stray light), older reflectors and a lot of wall influences. Other lamps may result in different densities.
a) - Philips GreenPower 400W 230V - ppf 725 µmol
b) - Philips GreenPower 600W 230V - ppf 1100 µmol
c) - Philips GreenPower 1000W 400V Electronic - ppf 2000 µmol
Trippy
So for every 1% of light increase you get a 1% yield increase for majority of all plants including Cannabis and other flowering plants.
DE specifically Gavita 1K DE at 36 inches puts out 800+ PPFD in a 5 x 5 space coming from Gavita themselves.
They however did say that reflector has alot to do with there numbers. Other commercial reflectors may vary in results.
I also spoke in regards to COBS and they put my commercial LED uses to shame.
Plants need to maintain a certain leaf temperature and with LED you will have to heat a large space with natural gas or other.
ROI with COB on electric alone can gross 8 years.. (also did this math as well)
Seems Gavita have tested LED in large spaces and energy savings are not there in large applications plus the costs, and honestly I agree.
Gavita thinks LED is the way of the future , but its just not there yet compared to DE.
Including penatration which is for sure true.
I agree with them for large applications.
Anyways, goes to show 600 vs 800 is a 25% increase in yield theoretically if conditions are ideal.
All coming from a very high standard light manufacturer.
Case closed.
Quote from Gavita as well
Roughly these are a few examples of recommendations for a high light recipe of around 700 µmol m-2 s-1. Calculations made with 10% reflector / wall losses:
400W a) - 1 x 1 m - 1 m2 at a ppfd of ~ 650 µmol m-2 s-1
600W b) - 1,2 x 1,2 m - 1,44 m2 at a ppfd of ~ 690 µmol m-2 s-1
1000W c) - 1,5 x 1,5 m - 2,25 m2 at a ppfd of ~800 µmol m-2 s-1
In practice levels can be lower with different reflectors (open reflectors will have more stray light), older reflectors and a lot of wall influences. Other lamps may result in different densities.
a) - Philips GreenPower 400W 230V - ppf 725 µmol
b) - Philips GreenPower 600W 230V - ppf 1100 µmol
c) - Philips GreenPower 1000W 400V Electronic - ppf 2000 µmol
Trippy
Last edited:
testiclees
Well-Known Member
So the conclusion is that de are more effective in horticultural applications because they are more effective heaters? That pile of bullshit has been shoveled here a few times.
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
DE is not more effective. Just as effective as cobs and better penetration.
However in a commercial application meaning large warehouse heat is just as needed as ac plus the cost of lights.
Anyways, this isnt about that just had to add that in as I agree.I have run the numbers myself. A very long ROI. Again not about de here just had to add that in when I called.
Do the math yourself.
Anyways 800ppfd is 25% more than 600 in terms of yield if conditions are optimal.
testiclees
Well-Known Member
"Better penetration" no.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/top-bin-cob-comparison.891010/page-30#post-12271142
https://www.rollitup.org/t/top-bin-cob-comparison.891010/page-30#post-12271142
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
When I say penatraion I am not talking a few foot plants. 6+foot tress cobs cant compare. I am a LED guy, but its just not there yet.
Anyways, this is just a ppfd debate concluded. Facts are there and numbers are there to do yourself.
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
What do you expect Gavita to say,we're the second best light tech. From reading this page of posts it seems like your saying spectrum trumps photon count and efficency with HPS vs LED,at least that's my take from your posts.
Trippyness
Well-Known Member
Again, I am not here to Debate about DE vs LED. They both have their place in the grow room.
What I am saying is that 600 vs 800ppfd there is a 25% increase in yield if conditions are right.
As for DE vs COB.
They both have theyre place. ROI of COB takes much longer and electric isnt as much as once thought at high PPFD.
Like I said I love LED but I already get very low temps in my room. I can imagine needing heat in a large grow enviornment.
Ill call up my a commercial LP here in Canada and see what they say.
PPFD is PPFD. DE and COB both put out high numbers. Cooling for de and heating for COB. All comes down to your grow area and style.
Would love to see a Commercial grow with COB, have yet to see a single one in a warehouse enviornment.
If we want to debate COB vs DE more scientifically lets start a thread.
No BS just a simple debate with real science and testing.
I just dont see the ROI on COB rather than DE.
Stephenj37826
Well-Known Member
The same volume of light per given. Sq ft has the same "Penetration". Anyone that tells you different is an idiot. There is a gain to be made with diffused light but still the old adage is pure bull. Also Gavita would be very biased wouldn't they. As you increase light the yield does not increase proportionally. If that was the case then everyone could hit the number Heath Robinson was hitting with the new more efficient DE. His flip flop plan proves that more yield can be obtained per watt at lower light levels all other factors being the same. If Gavitas statement was true then I can cram 2000 Watts in a 4x4 with killer AC and all the bells and wistles and pull at least 4+ correct?????
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
Not trying to start a argument,just giving you my take away from your posts. Cold climate areas may be better off with HPS but if you need cooling LED has the advantage for operating costs in my opinion. Not sure large plants should be a concern in a commercial setting with cannabis,seems like smaller plants with a faster turn over would be the model,there are disadvantages with large plants.
Stephenj37826
Well-Known Member
BTW my offer still stands
Just hit me up.
BuddyColas
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
Rahz
Well-Known Member
Well, near linear perhaps. But there is what appears to be valid data (YOR and Potter) that suggests a strong curve, so while Gavita's opinion (no reference data sited) is noteworthy it's not the only source of information. To be clear, my results have been fairly linear as well but I have to take it all into consideration.
a mongo frog
Well-Known Member
I'll tell you what, I just started a DE fixture and that motherfucker heats up. I underestimated how hot they'd get. I should be fine I do have a decent size a/c but fuck the fixture runs hot when you put your hand close to the bulb. Like 10 inches away even. Love the foot print but the extra heat I could do away with.
Stephenj37826
Well-Known Member
No doubt lol. Most don't grasp that there is in fact a big difference between IR radiant heat and cascading conductive heat.