A New Top LED Panel for Testing

runewulfsong said:
Smart@$$ :p lol... buy yeah, very much so far on my side
Click to expand...

Yes I like this panel a lot.

SmokeSara said:
nice weekend everyone. rainy, every weekend is heavy rainy,:( :( :(
Click to expand...

Bummer... but you could always "lay around the shanty, mama and put a good buzz on" :cheesygrinsmiley:

BigIrishDoode said:
Yeah the rpk only stretches 10-15% after flip so it will help the ww xbb to stay short, the GDP in Durple Winchell the lanky Bd side but both are heavy yeilders in fact all the genetics involved in both of those Crosses are big yeilders except white widow and is super frosty potent,! IM so pumped to see our results with these strains/Crosses (they aren't actually "strains"yet) gotta do the whole stabilizing thing but if they turn out to be worth it I will put in the work! Like I did with trailor trash #1 that took 5yrs ! But I could not do 99 plant grows so selecting was much slower & I pooped in my oatmeal on a couple runs and killed em accidentally ,so with my advancements in equip and tech I think I can do it in 18months-2yrs let's hope Durple & Wwbbrpk are keepers,,then again I can always just fast track em and do a truckload of feminized beans that will be like clones of mommy, but you breed those fem beans and you'll get all sorts of phenos so that sucks, you want your work to breed true, unless you just wanna sell beans for 20 a pop and force ppl to come back to you for more, not my style, IM about creating the uber genetics and making it accessible to EVERYBODY! My theory is sick&broken ppl (like me) can't afford that kind of thing over & over, so someday in the future when I have a collection IM gonna find a way to get it out there without stepping on toes, first thing is I gotta figure out if I have the skills & talent to be a real breeder.:thumb: wooo that sour diesel gets me chatting lol
Click to expand...

Holy chatty Cathy :cheesygrinsmiley: Good for me, I got some good "intel"!! Doode, you have the skills, you just need to be free.

Bumpin Spheda said:
Buck, not the camera flash, the LED's you're growing with. You grew those plants with White in the spectrum, correct? The shade of Green looks too light and "powder-coated" to be grown under strictly Red and Blue. R:B plants looks deep Green (almost like over nitrification without the tip curl) and have a "waxy" quality to the leaves. You plants don't resemble this stereotype, so I was just wondering if my hunch was correct.
Click to expand...

BS :cheesygrinsmiley:

I believe the panel is using soft (yellow) whites. I think the web page has the spectrum and quantity if not Sara can provide that info.
 
yes, we use some warm white in the light, 2500~3500K. but as to how many we used each spectrums, we will not to tell others. sorry about this, we want to test out the best spectrums ratio, and keep it as secret.
 
So... I am getting pretty crowded. Looks like this week I will need to go to 5 gallon pots. My veg room is all backed up because I have gone outdoors. With only two plants to run inside I am going to be chock full soon. I have been putting off taking cuttings from the outdoor girls but had to do it yesterday as they have gone into bloom. I wanted cuts because one of the plants is "I think" a haze x SI plant. This girl was awesome. I did not takes cuts of her till later on and then lost track of all my tags. I just grew out a plant that I think was a super snowdawg x SI real potent with a caramel flavor. I failed to clone it. I am too full anyway!! I will have to start more of those seeds when the flow is better. Soooo now under this one panel I have, clones (blueberry and outdoor girls),blue moons, wwbbrpks, durple dreams and one 2' blueberry!!!! My plan at this point is to set up a MH or HPS 400 watt or temporarily take a panel from "the room" to veg with when I move this panel to bloom. I will need the hoods and ballasts for their heat in the winter anyway. The wwbbrpk have a ways to go before I would think about blooming them but the durple dreams are getting lanky already and will get out of control quick. :hmmm: I am glad it is all in slow motion.
 
SmokeSara said:
yes, we use some warm white in the light, 2500~3500K. but as to how many we used each spectrums, we will not to tell others. sorry about this, we want to test out the best spectrums ratio, and keep it as secret.
Click to expand...

:shhh:
 
COB light do not have white. yes, blue and red, I am asking if there has orange.
jon705 said:
is there any warm white in my light Sara? it looks to be just blue and red.
Click to expand...
 
When I say plants grown under "White" light have healthier leaf color and texture I mainly mean R:B with Green supplementation. You don't need that much Green within the spectrum, anywhere between 5-20% of radiometric power will be good for overall pigment health. Area51 has two "Outdoor" White LEDs for every 630nm LED and their panels are considered TOL by many.

SGS-160

Blue, Green, Yellow and Orange are all about 30%.

I'm using Warm White LED's in my grow and they do perform, but at some point you have to ask yourself if the efficiency losses due to phosphor conversion is worth it going from Blue all the way over to Red. It's a fine line between Blue chip+phosphor efficiency versus Red chip efficiency, and all that plays into total panel cost and desired plant response. If you're just looking for some Green output to round out the spectrum coverage Cool White or Neutral White is easily enough and can also be your main source of Blue light if you want. Some companies stick with Red/Blue and supplement with Neutral White LED's for Green coverage. It's very easy to supplement a Red/Blue LED panel with a few CFL's.

I like the idea of Blue + Red chips on a "COB"/multichip and either selectively coating the Blue chips with phosphor, or simply coating all chips with phosphor (Red doesn't excite the phosphor, losses should be minimal). Illumitex also looks very interesting with 50 degree primary optics.
 
Thanks for the welcome, jon.

A51 panels look very nice, it's their price that throws me off. No idea how much it would cost to build the same panel myself, I haven't looked into XP-G prices. There's a discount for the 24" T-slotted heat sinks at HeatsinkUSA at the moment, though, so if you're interested it might be the right time.

VanQ will also be releasing a new multichip panel rather soon, you might wanna hold off on buying anything to see the specs of their new lineup if you end up really liking the sample COB panel you've got.

And Green light does "penetrate" the canopy better (this was stated in a research article by NASA where they were growing lettuce and radishes, iirc, and there was also an experiment done by Texas A&M where they were growing tobacco for vaccines that concurred), but in my mind if you want to grow tall cannabis plants with LED you need a lot of space to hit the plant with light from multiple angles, very small beam angles, or a lot of side lighting. I'm in a 2'x2' tent and currently have 100W overhead and ~90W as mostly side lighting. I'm thinking the amount of time it takes to veg isn't worth it and will probably move to a SoG next season. I believe training plants to achieve as even a canopy as possible is a natural progression for LED's. Creating a homogenous light zone (even intensity and spectral mixing) over an even canopy with as little stray light lost as possible (at the edges of the canopy, losses from wall reflection, and/or losses from secondary optics) would be the pinnacle of LED growing, imo. Illumitex is releasing a new line-up of panels ?this October? that should be rather interesting and play to these strengths.
 
Bumpin Spheda said:
When I say plants grown under "White" light have healthier leaf color and texture I mainly mean R:B with Green supplementation. You don't need that much Green within the spectrum, anywhere between 5-20% of radiometric power will be good for overall pigment health. Area51 has two "Outdoor" White LEDs for every 630nm LED and their panels are considered TOL by many.
optics.
Click to expand...

Interesting you should key in on green. Green has been shown to actually have a negative impact on plant growth...

Here is an example of studies done. Green light: a signal to slow down or stop
 
A lot of that info is old (1960's), and their experiments mention "low fluence rate" yet fail to show spectral analysis graphs or supply details on the radiometric power output of specific wavebands. I have no idea what the quality of light that they're using is. I also remember reading that at low fluence rate green supplementation is counter productive, yet at high light intensities (what we'd be growing under) Green light has positive effects and increase photon uptake (especially Green light shown on the undersides of leaves). Still, that doesn't exactly coincide with the study you just supplied us with. It says Green light is bad pretty much no matter what. I just don't agree, and many horticulture LED panel manufacturers feel the same.

Here's the study by NASA I mentioned:
Ashspublications.org

I can't find the Texas A&M study, atm. They were using a spectrum developed by Surexi that had mostly Red and Blue, yet through the use of Neutral White (~5700k) there was anywhere from 5%-20% of radiometric power in the Green band depending on species and stage of growth.

I've also read that Green light helps increase Oxygen production and nutrient/sugar storage in orchids.

These studies were all performed with narrowband LED's and/or phosphor coated LED's. NASA used CFL's to supplement Red/Blue LED's and there have been other studies that used light filters in green house settings.

If you're interested I'd recommend either reading up, or simply comparing plants that you've grown yourself. Plants grown under White light just look healthier, imho, and much closer to plants grown outdoors
 
We have covered this in depth many times on this and other sites already. The study Bumpin linked is one of the older studies. (performed in 1992) Because It was performed and NASA research centers and has the words green light in it, it has to mean NASA says using green light is better. Please read that research paper. The reasoning for adding green is solely to enhance the appearance of the lettuce. The paper that Buckshot linked (from 2007) is one of about 200 that states it requires a complete over saturation of white light for green light to penetrate deeper into the cell tissue. Just like this one, and this one and many others.

Don't get me wrong, I am a firm believer in the full spectra approach. I simply hate seeing some misinformed person that read one of 2 or 3 reseller websites stroll through here and say that everyone is wrong because they don't have green and then link to the same disproven, unread, noncomprehending "NASA" article time and again. If you are going to link to that article, at least read it and see what it states. "The addition of green light would make the leave appear green and normal similar to a natural setting under white light and may also offer a psychological benefit to the crew." Read through the study and the results and see that they had almost not increase in gains when adding green light. Likewise, everyone forgets to mention the fact that the CWF (cool white light) that they used in the study provided the worst results, proving that they should not use white light in their panel and also that the white had the highest concentration of green photons.

There are a very large number of factors that the "NASA" study does not take into effect and if it were to be performed again at the current knowledge and tech levels of today, the results would look completely different. We know that there are a lot more photo-receptors over a much larger range of wavelengths than we thought in the '90's. We breakdown the test wavelengths better, and we record more accurate results now than we did 20 years ago.
 
The only other paper that attributes any positive results to green light is THIS STUDY.

To read all of the negative shade avoidance responses (read stretching of your plant) that green light causes, try these 31500 scholarly articles from a google search.

I keep a word file with links to a number of sites, articles, and resources that I run across that are note worthy. Roughly 20 of those are college course files or text books on sites. If there is a particular subject that you are looking for more information on I'd be glad to help.

The following 3 links contain nearly all the basic information and every relevant research study over the past 10 years.
Home Page for Ross Koning
Oxford Journals | Life Sciences | Plant and Cell Physiology
Plant Physiology


Have fun!
 
Harley001 said:
Buck how many different LEDs' have you grown with??:peace:
Click to expand...

I was gonna be a smart ass and add up all the LEDs :cheesygrinsmiley:

I have 6 different panels.
 
Buckshot said:
I was gonna be a smart ass and add up all the LEDs :cheesygrinsmiley:

I have 6 different panels.
Click to expand...

I figured you might so I added different LEDs. Of the 6 panels you have do all of them grow hemp well?? Are there any significant differences in yield? I don't really care about the manufacture it's more about different panels with different light spectrums and how they work in real life use. You Sir are most certainly a person who has a wealth of knowledge about real world applications I'm just trying to catch up I do appreciate your help.:peace::high-five::bravo::circle-of-love:
 
Harley001 said:
I figured you might so I added different LEDs. Of the 6 panels you have do all of them grow hemp well?? Are there any significant differences in yield? I don't really care about the manufacture it's more about different panels with different light spectrums and how they work in real life use. You Sir are most certainly a person who has a wealth of knowledge about real world applications I'm just trying to catch up I do appreciate your help.:peace::high-five::bravo::circle-of-love:
Click to expand...

Harley

I will mull this over. Problem is some I can't talk about, some are discontinued and plus I am lazy and that sounds like work :cheesygrinsmiley:
 
Back
Top Bottom