2018 light efficiency ultimate battle

[PurpleGunRack]

I know there are a lot of ways to grow but this is focused more in SOG and SCROG because those are the most efficient ways to grow.

Huge difference between ScroG and SoG, ScroG only makes sense if you're limited to a certain number of plants by law.
You can grow at least twice as much weed in the same time in SoG

One thing you mentioned, do you believe LED's finish plants later than HID's?

No, it's the opposite, but it's based on subjective experience, not just my own though
This does not go for blurples, only high power white light LED!

Since some companies have HID's for horticulture are you aware of LED research being carried out?

Nope, not a lot of research is being done at all, we as growers are pretty much it...

The "q" series is more efficient right than this ones right?

Yes, but the diode density is very low on the Q-series, and the price per diode is higher than H inFlux + H inFlux are much better designed strips with nice coated aluminium, H, F and Q series are bendy plastic PCBs.
And the H inFlux has higher temperature ratings than the older series.

 

[aerorev]

EDIT: Added light efficacy

Huge difference between ScroG and SoG, ScroG only makes sense if you're limited to a certain number of plants by law.
You can grow at least twice as much weed in the same time in SoG




No, it's the opposite, but it's based on subjective experience, not just my own though
This does not go for blurples, only high power white light LED!



Nope, not a lot of research is being done at all, we as growers are pretty much it...




Yes, but the diode density is very low on the Q-series, and the price per diode is higher than H inFlux + H inFlux are much better designed strips with nice coated aluminium, H, F and Q series are bendy plastic PCBs.
And the H inFlux has higher temperature ratings than the older series.

Yeah from my research and experience I found out SOG kills all other growing methods in terms of efficiency. Maybe some vertical grows also but I don't really like vertical growing so I will not comment.

I was reading on another place that maybe they finish early because of the spectrum and something related to them being able to "rest" properly.

What colour temperature would you advise for a SOG room for flowering only? 3500K or 4000k? Most people seem to prefer 3500k but I talked to some people who are using 4000k and find that the plants are healthier. I don't want to go into mixing because that would lead to a no end discussion.

I really can't decide between the Q and H in flux. If you disregard price all entirely and decide to go with 3500k. Let's compare the 56cm strips:

H in flux
Part number: SL-B8U2N80LAWW
L04
CCT: 3500K
Luminous flux: 4060 lm
efficacy:182 lm/W
size: 560x24 mm
Power consumption: 22.3 W
Temperature Case (Tc) ℃ 55
light efficacy:1.76μmol/J (1.38A, 46.9V)

H in flux
Part number: SL-B8U4N90LAWW
L09
CCT: 3500K
Luminous flux: 8130 lm
efficacy:182 lm/W
size: 561x41 mm
Power consumption: 44.6 W
Temperature Case (Tc) ℃ 55
light efficacy:1.76μmol/J (1.38A, 46.9V)

Q Series
Part number: SI-B8U101560US
LT-Q562A
CCT: 3500K
Luminous flux: 1950 lm
efficacy:198 lm/W
size: 560x18 mm
Power consumption: 9.9 W
Temperature Case (Tc) ℃ 40
light efficacy: 2.43μmol/J (0.45A, 21.9V)

efficacy: Q series produces 16 lumens more per watt, so they are a clear winner.
light efficacy: 2.43μmol/J (0.45A, 21.9V) VS 1.76μmol/J (1.38A, 46.9V)
Temperature: The Q strips run 15 degrees cooler so they win this category also.
Build quality: As you stated and I was not aware the H in Flux are better built so they win this category.
Power consumption: The H in Flux power consumption is higher since they are bigger and carry more diodes. I believe it's much better to have more strips since you would spread the light much better above the canopy. Off course that would also mean a lot more trouble building the light module. I keep imagining for an area of 80cm x 80cm I could build a 60cm x 60cm heatsink and cover it with LT-Q562A. The lights would have an optimum spread and if you could run them for example a 75% of your needs the temperature would be very good also. With low temperature and high spread you could push the module very close to the canopy.

Let me know if my logic is flawed or if there are things I'm not seeing right. Off course this is disregarding price since I've done the math and the Q series comes at prohibited prices. Let's not think about that for now.

 

[PurpleGunRack]

Firstly, you have to *know* what these specs mean and at what circumstances they're measured, it's always at the nominal load, we like to step it up a notch (or at the very least be able to)
When I talk about temprature rating I mean how much heat the strip can take and the H inFLux L06 has a Tc max of 90° C, a lifetime Tc of 70° C and a nominal/perfomance Tc of 50° C.

What colour temperature would you advise for a SOG room for flowering only? 3500K or 4000k? Most people seem to prefer 3500k but I talked to some people who are using 4000k and find that the plants are healthier. I don't want to go into mixing because that would lead to a no end discussion.

3000K all the way, ''the redder the better'' I would recommend 2700K 90CRI if that was a possibility, but 3000K 80 CRI is reddest Samsung strip you can get and it's very good for flowering (and veg).
You can add some photo red 660nm and far red 730nm later on if you want a little more flower power.

I really can't decide between the Q and H in flux. If you disregard price all entirely and decide to go with 3500k. Let's compare the 56cm strips:

The reason why Q-series strip is more efficient is because it runs cooler and it runs cooler because it has less diodes.

560mm strips:

L06 = 88 diodes
L04 = 64 diodes
LT-Q562A = 40 diodes


L09 requires active cooling or low current and you're better off with single row strips in terms of coverage and cooling, so scratch that.

The diode density on the Q-series means you need a lot of strips close to each other to get enough light saturation and penetration power for a power flower room.

I have build lamps with F and Q series and H inFlux, and the Q-series only makes sense (to me) when using the 280mm strips in micro grows like PC cabinets and such.
H inFlux is a clear winner, and F-series is the runner up, i like Q-series but wouldn't bother building a flowering light with it.

A proper flowering lamp with Q-series is gonna be much more expensive than H inFlux and insanely more expensive than F-series.
And though the F-series use the ''obsolete'' LM561c diode it's a super good light and the price is very good.

The footprint is the actual size of the lamp + maybe 5-10cm more to each side in an open area and a little more in a tent or other small room with reflective walls.

What area do you want to cover, and what is the budget?

 

[bluter]

One thing you mentioned, do you believe LED's finish plants later than HID's?

No, it's the opposite, but it's based on subjective experience, not just my own though
This does not go for blurples, only high power white light LED!

i'm gonna throw a little mud in the water here...

worked with an experienced grower for the past couple years trying to figure lighting and other stuff out. a bit over 100 plants a run it was a pretty decent grow, and we experimented with everything. both of us have a working background in LED and COB, but with no formal training. we used MH, HPS, T8, T5, LED, and COB.

multiple strains grown in soil and every plant strain got the same nutes. none of our approach could be called scientific. i feel we learnt a lot, even if only anecdotal.

for clones / seedlings we couldn't beat the t5 / t8 's. we tested against MH, LED, and COB for this stage. MH simply proved too hot and too much for both the space and plants. and we literally light fried the poor things with both the LED and COB rigs. never saw anything like it.

as a result we pretty much went straight to t8's for this stage. we used regular home fixtures we got grow bulbs for as it was by far the cheapest method. really high efficiency too, almost as economical as the LED and COB rigs to run.

now that i'm on my own i have to figger how to get my cob rig to work for the clone / seedling stage in a much smaller grow. i will probably just get a t5 light to be safe, still debating.

in veg we got near identical results from both the MH and COB rigs. we had access to 400 and 600 watt MH. the COB kept up with either. the COB rig was citizen based, a 5 light engine rig with a mix of 3500K and 3000K, it was biased to 3000k. the COB worked so well in veg we thought we had a veg only rig on our hands.

the 600 watt MH proved inefficient and too hot for the space we were using and did not net us anything above either the COB or 400 watt in veg. the burple LEDs did do decent but the plants were averaging 20% smaller than either MH or COB. while maybe not so concerning at this point, the lack of development continued to follow those plants through flower.

the LED rig we had did not do much better in veg than a T8 rig we swapped in from the clone room. one positive for the LED is it used like nothing compared to the others in energy. COB rig was close but the LEDs were ultimately cheaper to run by a few pennies per day. i would not discount either the LED rig or T8's we used for veg as the results were comparatively decent, depending on home grower expectations.

overall i'd call it a tie between the MH and COB in veg with the LED a decently close third. the COB was the clear winner when cost to run was factored tho.


in flower we used to run 3 64 sq ft pods ( similar to a tent). we tested 2 400 watt hps, 2 600 watt hps, 1 1000 watt hps, 4 400 watt force cooled COB rigs at 3200K ( these are not available to home growers ), 1 250 watt COB rig ( identical in build to timber grow rigs ) at a mixed 3000k and 3500k with bias to 3000K, and 1 300 watt LED based burple.

we did a pile of different configurations using combinations of different lights. again, not so scientific but we weren't concerned.

we used the full pods to test the 4 400 watt force cooled COB rigs, against a combined 2 600 watt hps, and a single 1000 watt hps.

in a full pod the cooled 4 3200K COB rigs destroyed all others while using less energy than either the paired 600 watt hps or single 1000 watt hps. we decided this test was biased as neither hps rig was large enough for a single pod, while the combined 3200 K rigs were easily powerful enough for the space. while yield was higher overall under the COBs, individual bud development was heavier and better with the hps - so we got more bud weight per plant with the hps, but fewer sites developed, leaving us with less weight overall. kind of a weird outcome.

we subdivided the flower pods to test further.

in the smaller spaces we tested a single 400 watt hps, a single 600 watt hps, one 1000 watt hps, one 400 watt force cooled 3200K COB, and one 250 watt passive cooled mixed 3000k / 3500K COB.. we did roughly 16 sq ft under each light or a 4 x 4 area.


the 1000 hps did the best overall but wasn't much better than the 600 watt hps. they developed similar, we got some plant burnt under the 1000 watt that we did not get with the 600. we concluded the 600 watt was probably best for the amount of space we were testing as everything else was so close. if we tested a slightly a bigger space the 1000 watter would have likely been better. the 400 nearly did as well but we did get more weight with the 600.


the 400 watt COB and 250 watt COB did identical. zero difference between the two, a bit better than the 400 watt hps, and almost the same to a 600 watt hps in a 4 x 4 space. there did appear to be some damage with the 400 watt COB compared to none for the 250 watt COB.

for the space we concluded the 250 watt COB produced the same as the 400 watt HPS, and maybe close to the 600 watt HPS, but the 600 watt hps probably was the best.

the burple LED was dismal when compared to any HPS or COB in flower. our worst results were using burple through the whole grow. we attributed it to the lack of development from earlier stages. indeed plants that developed under other lighting earlier did better in LED burple flower than ones under burple throughout. we had burple buds that were better than some COBS or HPS so long as they vegged under MH or COB. again for us it was a weird outcome and left more questions than answers.

for our purposes we decided that the 250 watt COB for flower was the most efficient, but only in a smaller 4 x 4 space, based on yield and quality over all, and only if energy consumption was factored in as well. the HPS combos started winning as soon as the grow space size got bigger.

the grower i was working with has since moved on. we are no longer trying anything so big and do not grow together. the experiment did change his perspective however, and we both feel a COB, or now maybe a QB based light ( we did not test ) is really the future of home production, while older HID tech is still probably relevant to larger grows or commercial production.

since that time i have built two more COB based rigs for his use and he is now growing only personal under COBs.


none of this is scientific so please read with a grain of salt and learning in mind. your mileage may vary...

 

[Mayne]

great read bro, thanks,

 

[GrizzWald]

Good post mate... Im seeing something similar with cobs, Om happy to read some verification, not
matter science behind it Has got me thinking, break flowering up with different stage lighting.. one strech, one set, flower development, trichs production, final swell...

 

[bluter]

Good post mate... Im seeing something similar with cobs, Om happy to read some verification, not
matter science behind it Has got me thinking, break flowering up with different stage lighting.. one strech, one set, flower development, trichs production, final swell...

i still believe MH and HPS have a place in production. the years of development that went in to them have ensured they will make high quality light dialed in to the needs of our plants. LED, COB, and QB tech are eventually gonna supplant HID completely in home production tho, based almost entirely on cost to run. the new tech is already decent, and can only get better as research and development continue.

i'm moving forward with COB tech as its what i have on hand. i hope to try a QB build at some point as well. i'm really struggling to figger how to get my COB rig to work in the seedling / clone stage. we never got that dialed, and i never saw anything like the damage it did to those poor seedlings. it has to work tho, cause i see dozens of grow journals where people use them for that stage with little or no trouble. really don't know what we did wrong.

 

[Mayne]

man, keep a fan on them, as heat will destroy them before light does. I have some seedling i just put in cocoloco, so should be up in a 2 days or so. Using 4 COBS ( luminus),

Using a lux meter to dail in my light for 10,000 lux for first set of preleafs, 15,000 lux till 2nd set of true node, 20,000 lux till 4th node, ( top ) day 18,

I 12/12 from seed till sex, ( 21 days ) then 18-6 for 2-3 weeks, then 12/12 again.

 

[bluter]

no cash for a lux meter at the moment, but that does sound like a great idea. appreciate the lesson, great idea.

 

[Mayne]

no problem bluter. WIthout one, its really hard to dail in distance. So get one as soon as u can. Cobs are stronger then then eye tells ya.

 

[Mayne]

Im actually going to start these at 15,000 lux.. Im 21 inches from my rig, using 75watts of 4000k.

I use 2 different K values, 2pc 3500K90cri and 2pc 4000k80cri and each on dimmers so i can adjust each K independently. So i turn the 3500K all the way down, and adjust 4000k to hit my Lux goal.