Your thoughts on Light Intensity vs Wattage

Discussion in 'Growing Marijuana Indoors' started by PfefferGeist, Dec 8, 2014.

  1. [​IMG][​IMG]16x 54w T5 HO @864w in the Veg Tent.
    ~300µmol average with a 363µmol peak @ the canopy (6"-8" distance)
     
     
     
    [​IMG][​IMG]
    600wHPS + 600wMH @ 1200w of HID Light in Cool Tube Reflectors in the Flowering Tent.
    ~545µmol average with a 580µmol peak @ the canopy (24" distance)
     
     
     

     
  2. Whats the question? :p
     
  3. What's the question then man?


    Chef.
    Haha you musta sent as I was typing, hey buddy :wave:


    Chef.
     
  4. Haha I read your mind all the way from across the pond, cheffy :)
     
  5. #5 PfefferGeist, Dec 8, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 8, 2014
    Are LEDs finally catching up? And, what is the most effective PPFD in µmols for "most efficient" growth?
     
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    3x SolarSPEC 150w HI-LEDs @ 450w of LED Light in a Flowering Tent.
    ~560 µmol average with a 573µmol peak @ the canopy (26" distance)
     
     
    I have always grown with HIDs and have always been in the camp where more light (and wattage) = more yield. But at what point does one hit diminishing returns. Regardless of the type of light one uses? My experience in experimentation is limited to HID tech till now. 
     
    The Sun measures just over 2000µmols on a clear bright day. It grows trees.
     
    Gavita double ended bulbs seem to do the trick. I have friends with huge harvests (and huge electric bills). They get hot.
     
    I am trying out LEDs (to cut cooling costs since my area got hit with an 18% increase in electricity costs) and waiting to harvest before I make a decision to purchase more panels. (IceMud, Weed Dude and DDP seem to be doing well with LED Technology)
     
    Is 500µmols too little. Is 1000µmols too much? If one yields X with 1000µmols, can one expect to yield 2X with 2000? The fact that there are many variables is understood.
     
    Your thoughts are most welcome,
    -PG
     
  6. I'm still trying to find out what micromols are.  (A term I'm unfamiliar with. How does it relate to lumens or other typical measurement of light?)
     
    Ah...   "Light for plants is measured in micro-moles shining on a square meter. For example, full-sun at noon on the equator is 1990 μmols-m2-s1. (1990 micro-moles per square meter per second). To measure the light-energy for a photoperiod, multiply the micro- moles by the total seconds in the photoperiod and divide by 1 million….1990x3600x12÷1,000,000 = 86 moles (DLI)
    …which is also referred to as the Daily Light Integral (DLI). To add some perspective, the highest DLI recordings in the USA are in the Californian desert at 45 DLI."
    I think spectrum comes into play too, but I honestly don't think you can have too much light, as long as you manage the heat.
     
  7. Found my answer here:
    http://forum.grasscity.com/lighting/489137-how-light-measured-lighting-spectrum-photosythesis.html/page-5
     
    I am in the process of reevaluating my light sources. LED technology has progressed to the point where I believe it is now a viable option in my grow-room. I am trying it out and what I am finding is that I have been wasting electricity with obsolete/ inefficient grow light technology.
     
    Icemud pretty much broke it down in a very informative post. The information on that page is helping me streamline my indoor operation and save me money on my electric bill at the same time.
     
    Thanks again Icemud! 
     
    -PG
     
  8. I always work in luminosity, lumens, and lux for my figures, because figuring and comparing total light energy is so damn inconsistent in anything but lab conditions or completely uniform conditions.

    But...sunlight provides about 128,000 lux in tropical areas (128,000 lumens per sq meter). A 1,000 watt HID provides 92,000 lumens AT THE BULB. 2 meters down, it's only 75% of that. Reflectors do help that, of course, but between reflector inefficiencies and the fact reflected light travels farther, it's just not *enough*.

    If you can control heat well enough to keep from burning the tops of the plants, while lighting open areas at the base of the plant/top of the pot, as close as you can get to 128,000 lumens. Period. If you can deliver all of that in reds and blues (useful light), all the better.
     
  9. I have read a few posts of this guy today and he's obviously something to do with "solarspec". Works for them or sponsored or something. But these back door advertisements should be banned. These are not fair comparisons and he knows it 
     
  10. Nope, just use that particular model because I've been studying it lately, trying to decide if I'm going to jump LED this summer, and "tune it up" myself, or wait until they actually have 20-25 channel units on the market.

    Currently, I use LED to augment my HID setup, a Solar Flare and a couple LED spots. Previously, I've grown under the Solar Flare alone (and make all the claims you want about "not growing as fast" under LED...even in a 4 by 4 under the SF 220, I was fighting to keep plants under 30 inches in 3 months of veg, as I screwed around with the plants themselves...like having to over-top AND LST, and STILL having plant matter so thick the side buds were choked off from light).

    I know the tech end. Hell, I'm BUILDING one based off laser strength LEDs, frequency modifying crystals, splitters, and mirrors, just to see if I can manage to get rid of the normal penetration issues, expand the coverage of the proper spectra, and pan the resulting light slow enough to do any good, yet fast enough to avoid damage. If it doesn't work, a bit of programming, and I have LASER Zepplin in my back yard, this summer. If it does, I have one hell of an expensive gimmick that may or may not be worth the trouble and money, but I had fun making it.The LED systems are going to be the ONLY smart choice, soon enough. The question is "when do I want to make the leap?"
     
  11. I recently re-discovered that lux and lumens means shit to a plant. What matters is PAR(photosynthetic Active Radiation) 
    This is basically the spectrum of light from the source that is usable to the plant. You can think of Lux and Lumen as how bright the bulb actually is, while PAR is how much of that total light is useful to the plant. Lux and lumens really only matter to people. 
     
    Here is an excellent read on the subject
     
    https://www.thcfarmer.com/community/threads/lumens-are-for-people-par-is-for-plants-and-a-lot-of-other-lighting-spectrum-info.37783/
     
  12. Nugg...Lux and Lumens do have impact, in combination with PAR (which is bandwidth comparisons)

    Lux and lumens don't care about color...they're a measurement of intensity. 1 Lux (1 lumen per sq meter) restricted to 720nm wavelength is just as intense as 1 lux white light. But ALL the 720nm wavelength is used by the plant (it's in a PAR wavelength) ...to the best of our knowledge, right now, about 75% of "white light" is "waste light".

    If you have a PERFECTLY provided PAR rating that delivers an intensity of 2 lux at 2 meters in the PAR frequencies, but have a 10 lux at 2 meters white light, the intensity of the PAR--the energy provided in those wavelengths--is higher under the white light.

    Therefor Lux/lumens DO matter, just as much, in comparing light sources.
     
  13. I see what you're saying but it matters very little when par is not even part of the conversation. You could have a light source that outputs 1 lux with 100% of the colors outside of the par range and in that case lux would mean nothing. I'm not sure if such light sources exists that contain 0nm in the par range though, just a hypothetical. 
     
  14. That's true...and no grow light system I know of is THAT bad...or we wouldn't use it, because nothing would grow <grin>

    But yes, it IS the PAR bands that are most important (though as we go along, we're learning the PAR bands span more than we thought)...but intensity IN those bands is what defines how much energy the plant gets from the emitter.
     
  15. so do you feel higher intensity with a narrow range is more beneficial than weaker intensity with a full PAR range?
     
  16. Actually, no, I feel that whatever delivers the most intensity across the largest part of the PAR ranges is what's ideal....right now, I'm using an HID based system with LED support...with the way LED is going, I'll be shifted to full LED within the next 2 years, possibly as soon as summer.

    My hesitance so far with LED has been twofold...gaps in PAR bands reducing the actual effect compared to full spectrum (not saying they weren't delivering superior light where they did deliver light, but that they DIDN'T deliver light to too many frequencies in PAR bands), and the fact that multiple smaller emitters means you experience intensity fall-off faster than with a single larger, more powerful emitter.


    The more I study CURRENT LED (as opposed to 2 year ago models), the more likely it becomes that I'm going to shift LED early...probably through one of the companies that will build custom spectrum assemblies...do it half in "full spectrum" white, the remaining half in 13 channel standard red-orange-blue PAR bands, at a 1200-1600 watt rating per, and run 2 per 5 by 10 tent.
     
  17. tell me about it. Everytime I see a post he's talking about his damn LEDS
     
  18. #18 PfefferGeist, Dec 17, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 17, 2014
     
    GoldGrower,
     
    You are absolutely right. The measurements in the photos above were arbitrary samples taken from the canopy. What I was measuring at the time was the amount of light that was actually reaching my plants. And, at the time of this thread, I was in search for an answer pertaining to the title of this post. Shortly after posting, I found the answer in Icemud's thread found here:
    http://forum.grassci...sis.html/page-5
    A great read explaining a great deal about the qualities of light. The subject of DLI or the Daily Light Integral was the answer I was looking for BTW.
     
    I do no wish to bore you with the details of why I am performing these tests or why PPFD, DLI and PAR are important to me other than that I am currently in the process of streamlining my operation in order to reduce my monthly expenses and improve my bottom line. And to grow healthier plants.  :)
     
    Here is a more precise measurement of my lights using a yardstick from Lowes (a hardware store here in the USA), measuring PPFD light output at a 24" distance from the light source. I can guarantee that these results are repeatable and can be duplicated in any grow space where the same lighting and test equipment in question are being used.
     
     What you are about to see may be disturbing, and may even make you uncomfortable.
     
    AGAIN... Viewer's Discretion is Advised.
    [​IMG]
    3x SolarSPEC 150w HI-LED panels measured from the center of the three @24" from the lens in a 5x5 area.
     
    [​IMG]
    1x 600w HPS EYE Hortilux measured from directly under the center of the bulb @24" distance from the surface of the bulb in a 5x5 area.
     
    [​IMG]
    3x SolarSPEC 150w HI-LED panels measured offset from the center of the canopy directly below the first panel in view @24" from the lens in a 5x5 area.
     
    [​IMG]
    1x 600w HPS EYE Hortilux measured offset from the center of the bulb @24" distance from the surface of the bulb in a 5x5 area.
     
    [​IMG]
    1200w of HID light (600w MH and 600wHPS) measured @24 from the height of the surface of both bulbs.
    \n600w HPS @24" from center yielded 337µmols
    \nA combined wattage of 450w from 3x High Intensity 150w LED panels @24"  from center yielded 532µmols
    \nA combined wattage of 1200w from a 600w MH and a 600w HPS@24" yielded 449µmols
    \n[​IMG]
    The Dual Spectra HID Garden
     
    I have only posted these results on threads where my integrity and the nature of my testing methods was in question. 
     
    I do not see how I could have been more fair with my testing. 
    I welcome any constructive criticism that will help or improve my methods to collect the most accurate data possible.
     
    The reason you hear me "banging on" about SolarSPEC LEDs is because my experience with LEDs in general is limited to this specific brand. As you can see in the photographs above, I have been using the same equipment most people have used in the past to grow quality meds. These subjects on HID lighting, HPS and MH have been discussed already so is it really news worth spreading? 
    \nHI-LED or High intensity LED technology is probably something not too many people have heard of. If I can return the favor by sharing this new technology and help a fellow grower out, the way Weed Dude and DDP did in their journals, I would have done my part.
    \nWhat does it feel like when some one accuses you of lying? Not good, right? So spread the love, and the knowledge. :wave: 
    -PG
     
  19. This thread is just going round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round in circles........boring isn't it?!


    Chef.
     
  20.  
    I couldn't agree with you more. I hate having to repost the same thing over, and over and over and over and over...
     
    If your integrity was challenged, and somebody called you a liar, wouldn't it interest you to make an effort to vindicate your self?
     
    GoldGrower, you seemed to have caused me to make some members in this forum dizzy. Please remember in the future, before you go and say things that you really do not mean, that it may start a chain of events that may cause people some discomfort and even boredom.
     
    “Boredom is the price one pays for not enjoying everything.”  :wave: 
    -PG
     

Share This Page