Which is more effective between fluorescent UVB lamps and LED UVB lamps?

Why UVB?

We have been working hard to find a way to increase the THC content of plants. In our previous products that contain UVA spectrum, we have not received positive feedback that UVA can increase the THC content. Now UVB is our only option.

We found some fluorescent UVB and LED UVB lamps on the market, but there is no data to support these lamps, their efficiency and their intensity. So we decided to do some research.

We made three 20W UVB lamps,Input 20W.

1: 20W GeekBeast UVB 310（fluorescent UVB，Custom spectra）.


2: 20W Led UVB lamps ( Seoul Deep UV LED -310nm UV CA3535 series (CUD1GF1B).


3: 20W A fluorescent UVB (Another fluorescent UVB lamp we customized).


Two measurement methods:

1.UV Light Meter Test
Test Equipment：UV LIGHT METER (UV detector spectrum from 290nm-390nm).

Test Data：


2.OPTICAL RADIATION TEST
Test Equipment：EVERFINE OST-300 OPTICAL RADIATION SAFETY SYSTEM.


Test Data：



This is indeed an interesting test:

In the UV LIGHT METER TEST data, we found that the best performance is the A fluorescent tube.

This is indeed an interesting result. After our exploration, we found that the test intensity of the UV LIGHT METER is equal to the comprehensive performance of the UVA+UVB data in the A fluorescent tube, but what we need is the UVB data performance.

In the OPTICAL RADIATION TEST data, we found that the best UVB data is GeekBeast UVB 310.

We also found the same power input, GeekBeast UVB 310 (UVB data)=18.5 set Seoul UVB（20PCS Seoul UVB chips）.

By the way, the cost of 1 Seoul Deep UV LED -310nm UV CA3535 series (CUD1GF1B) is about 10 dollars，So the cost of our LED UVB lamps is more than 200 US dollars.

But its performance really surprised us.



1*GeekBeast UVB 310 = 1.8*A UVB =18.5* Seoul Deep UV LED

We hope to do some data discussion, what is your opinion on this？

Some points:
- most around here would probably go for 285nm or so instead of 310; seems like this where the actionspectrum peaks and should give a lot more effect per radiant watt than 310nm.
- some say there seems to be a synergistic process between UVA and UVB; without any uva the plant has a hard time with uvb and tends to get stressed and hurt, it's like the uva prepares the plant and strengthens the plant to be ready to take the uvb without dying a bit. I've seen 3:1 uva to uvb levels quoted. And I would definitely recommend a solution with uva and UVB on separate channels.
- uva and the near to uva section between 400 and 430nm has tested out as boosting THC and cannabinoids, maybe you need to test this in house rather than with your testers.
- I'd expect the most active part of the uva spectrum to be 365ish as it is already a peak in the stomata aperture actionspectrum.

Nice suggestions
The ratio of the fluorescent tube we use is 75%UVB+25%UVA

GeekBeast said:

Nice suggestions
The ratio of the fluorescent tube we use is 75%UVB+25%UVA

Click to expand...

You want that turned over the other way, 75% uva, 25% uvb

Rocket Soul said:

some say there seems to be a synergistic process between UVA and UVB; without any uva the plant has a hard time with uvb and tends to get stressed and hurt, it's like the uva prepares the plant and strengthens the plant to be ready to take the uvb without dying a bit. I've seen 3:1 uva to uvb levels quoted.

Click to expand...

This has also been my experience. I burnt plants when using UVB only and was able to apply even more UVB on subsequent cycles without a hint of burning after I added UVA. I'm guessing it's the same reason gardeners harden plants before moving them outside. I'm not sure my exact ratios but using 4x10k+UVA 4ft'ers and 1xAgroMax PureUV 4ft in a 5x5. I've also noticed stronger/healthier plants utilizing UVA from seedling stage. I plan on running UVA blasted seedlings with only UVB in late flower and see if any of the effects carry over.

Another issue is the genetic pool: for decades weed has been grown under HPS (no uvb) and selected by growers for best results. If this has been the natural selection it is reasonable to suspect current lines may not have the genetics for this that you'll get more effect from uvb the longer we grow and breed under uvb.

The answer to your question is on the internet. I was told the solution by someone else. But your goal is to complete the Suns spectrum relative to plant growth. We need true full spectrum lights if we want to breed indoors. But that means uva, uvb, and higher IRs.





So the percentage of each should be based on the natural intensity of the sun.