A New Top LED Panel for Testing

Hosebomber, I may have posted the wrong NASA study. :scratchinghead: I remember the Green supplementation increasing dry leaf mass. I didn't really read that article, you're right, I just assumed it was what I thought it was. If I find the article I was thinking of I'll be sure to post it.

That being said, I can't help but feel you and I said very similar things, no? High light levels + Green light = good for deep leaf pigments (where I said it has an increased effect when Green is shown on the underside of leaves, thus closer to deeper pigments). I realize the use of that "NASA" study got you heated up. <<< My bad.

Oh, and I found the study I spoke of that was a corroboration between Texas A&M and Illumitex. Nothing you haven't heard before, I'm sure:
Patent US20120218750 - Plant growth lighting device and method - Google Patents
A peak in the green region may assist in regulating aspects of plant physiology and assist accessory pigments in producing biochemical products. In the specific example shown in FIG. 4, the green light is about 8%, the blue light-about 12% of the total photon flux, with the balance in the red/far red spectral region, with a negligible amount of far red (less than 2%). Generally, though not necessarily, the amount of blue light is increased as height elongation is to be decreased. Preferably, in this example, the amount of green light is in the 5-10% range and the amount of blue light is within the 5% to 30% range.
...
Spectral distributions containing between 10% and 20% green light have been found to be particularly good for the growth of lettuce and tobacco. In them, the preferable amount of blue light is between 5% and 30%.
Click to expand...

Pretty basic, yes. Rather ambiguous, I agree. But I feel it's important since it states in simple terms that they found Green light to benefit the growth of both tobacco and lettuce which later led to the development of a spectrum used by Texas A&M in (what was at the time) the largest vertical greenhouse in the world, afaik.

The bottom line, for me, is that LED manufacturers have performed rather in depth lab tests showing that Green light is beneficial for some species of plants, and that finding happens to agree with my own point of view. I don't remember saying "everyone is wrong," I said the leaves of plants grown under narrowband R+B spectrums have a deeper shade of Green and a waxy texture. Other people I've spoken to have concurred, and I find it interesting that Area-51 chooses to incorporate Green in their TOL LED grow panels.
 
The statement wasn't completely directed at you as much as it was an over statement. Every 3-6 months someone new to the forums pops up with the same 2 studies (the one you linked is the only NASA study dealing with green light supplementation) and claiming that it is a must to have monochrome green diodes in all LED panels. If you use a mixture of cool and warm white diodes (@ between 7 and 25% of the total ratio) to hit accessory pigments you get more than enough green photons to perform all of the vital functions that green photo-receptors do.

As for Area 51, they are not TOL and have nearly the exact same panel as a group of forum members came up with on the forum that their owner frequents. I'm not saying he copied them, but they are very similar. I believe that forum group has now started their own company as well. Likewise, all of their newer panels are solely red and white LEDs and they no longer use any green monochrome LEDs at all.

When you view peer-reviewed articles in the plant physiology, biology or lighting industry, you have to see what plants they used. Lettuce and other green leafy vegetative growth plants are very poor measures of how a light will work with higher plant forms. As a matter of fact, using 20% blue 75% red and 5% white will give you the greatest growth rates with lettuce and basil and the white keeps the color pigments adjusted, while doing little else for the growth rate (ie you can remove the whites, not add any extra red or blue diodes and get the same growth with a slightly off color leaf). Yes, red and blue only diode panels will create a darker green leaf with a waxy texture. This is due to the highly increased rate of photosynthesis. However, higher plants require more than just the conversion of photons to starches for healthy growth and the production of flowers and or fruits. That is where adding the accessory pigments come into play. Green light has much less to do those accessory pigments than anyone thinks. It is simply very hard to hit all of those without using whites or making a panel that disrupts the ratios while removing the green light Phycoerthrin is the only photo receptor in cannabis (to the best of my knowledge and all data currently available) that has a peak in the green range, it also has peaks in yellow and high blue.

I meant no disrespect toward you personally. It seems to me I have to dig out all of these old papers repeatedly so I don't misquote them. I have attempted to address most of these common misconceptions, misunderstandings, and lack of general knowledge in one or two post but they seem to get lost over time. That is what lead to the link in my signature to the very basic information. FYI your link to the patent document is just that. It gives not factual data and is surprisingly vague for patient submission. I'm confident that they would not be able to maintain their patient if their were to challenge another manufacturer. Their statements about the growth of plants are quotes from another study which they did not site references (not required on patient applications). If you would like I can search my records for that study but I believe it was done by a Japanese student at the University of Kentucky, Department of Agriculture.
 
I'm confident that they would not be able to maintain their patient if their were to challenge another manufacturer.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge the patent has more to do with their primary die optics packaging than anything else. There is a Chinese manufacturer making excruciatingly similar LED arrays, and another LED manufacturer by the name of Envirolux which has obvious "rebrands," yet the two (Illumitex and Envirolux) are in competition. I'm not sure what's going on with the situation/patent, but it seems fishy.

Their statements about the growth of plants are quotes from another study... If you would like I can search my records for that study but I believe it was done by a Japanese student at the University of Kentucky, Department of Agriculture.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't mind taking a look at it if it's not too much. My hasty Google search is too broad.
 
SmokeSara said:
I am reading, long English, headache.
Click to expand...
If you're interested in Illumitex's technology I recommend contacting Henglight.
The 14th Hortiflorexpo China_LED Grow Light_??????????
50 degree beam angle without the use of secondary optics. Extremely homogeneous spectral mixing and umol/s ratings over the entire foot print of the light and very sharp cutoffs. This equates to less wasted light (losses in secondary optics, losses in wall reflection, losses in stray light at edge of canopy, etc). If you could distribute their product in the US it'd be a very interesting development, imo.
 
we have this light for project.
Imagen_164.jpg
2541437564737448089.jpg
 
No, that is a normal bar light. Look here:

That's a square beam angle where all the light within the beam angle has a perfectly mixed spectrum of Red, Blue and White (spectrum designed for horticultural use).

See how a square beam with SHARP cutoff can increase light onto your plant canopy?
 
The man closest to the camera is holding a flashlight with an LED array built with his patented technology, and he's shining it onto a billboard nearby. The lit area above the bald man's head is demonstrating the square beam angle and sharp cutoff of said technology.

This technology aims to direct 100% of produced light directly at location. It is meant to be kept at approximately a one foot distance from the canopy, and this is enough for nearly 100% spectral mixing. I've heard that canopy penetration is above average which should be expected for such a small beam angle. Light spectrums were developed by a company named Surexi, notably the F3 and X5 spectrums for general cannabis growth/flowering.

I suggest you contact Henglight if you'd enjoy more information. I have been in contact with them for approximately one week and there is a rather large language barrier. If you can speak Mandarin you will most likely be able to communicate much more rapidly.

Hopefully Hosebomber can give us his/her opinion (when he/she wakes up?) because I'd like to know what they think. The NeoSol panels by Illumitex look great for flowering cannabis and Henglight has yet to provide me a price quote for 24" LED light bars. I don't have the funds to purchase new lights right now, but the idea behind the technology is quite alluring, at least for me.
 
Man, I'm glad there are smart people on here to know this stuff because I'm lost :( while I understand most of this I'm still confused. Thanks for the info though, gives me something to read up on.
 
Hey Buck, I think I scrapped the 144x3w panel idea. I am going with a 3x3x6"8' tent instead and am thinking of getting the same panel you have. I noticed on their site they have a 140x5w panel, do you feel that the 5w leds are more beneficial?
 
BlazinThat said:
Man, I'm glad there are smart people on here to know this stuff because I'm lost :( while I understand most of this I'm still confused. Thanks for the info though, gives me something to read up on.
Click to expand...
Im with you bro lol...I have been looking at those lightbars though, Im picturing them under the plants shining up, Buck,Hosebomber, Bumpin Speda, what do you guys think of that idea?
 
The Illumitex light bars? I would like to think of them as primary lighting. I spoke to someone who owns the NeoSol 300W panel with F3 spectrum and he said that lower "popcorn buds" were surprisingly well developed. Side lighting might not be as necessary as you think. Btw, each LED array is about 10W. I'm not sure what they're foot print is at a given distance, but I can't imagine they'd be very far from the plants underneath/shining up. That's a lot of light. Also, afaik, photosynthesis rates are higher on the adaxial side of the leaf.

I really like the idea of a scrog grow with these. Creating a perfectly even plant canopy would allow you to keep the lights at their recommended 1 foot distance everywhere. This isn't a scrog, but it's the general idea:
 
Hey Folks

I have to read back... looks interesting
 
First, their COB blending is nothing new or revolutionary, Kessel has been doing it for years and have a nice package. They are just a little expensive. We had a discussion in another thread about Illumitex and the lack of information they give about their product. I later received a PM with a quote from the owner of the company in which they were speaking to a member here about setting up a grow room. Their cost was so high that I personally offered to fly to the member, build 100% custom panels, help install the rest of the grow room, and get everything started for them and still save them over $10,000 while I took leave from work (which was made up in the price). If I recall correctly, they had a max coverage of 16 watts per square foot. As for their footprint, it's not new tech or something special, you can build the exact same housing in 20 mins using TracePro. (Good program for creating panels and running photon release patterns).
 
Agreed, Kessil does look nice.

I don't know what Illumitex is/was trying to pull, but after talking with Henglight 16W per square foot is not a design limitation. We discussed 160W covering a 2'x2' and there was enough space for two more 60cm panels (another 80W). I have not gotten a price quote yet so I cannot say if the tech is horridly overpriced from them.

It might not be new tech, but I haven't seen anything like it, per se, apart from Kessil, which doesn't seem much, if any, cheaper than building panels yourself using old stock Illumitex arrays. Kessil spot lights also have circular beam angles. The DiCon chips they're using only addresses half of the equation for me, and there's no option for White in the H350's designed for land plants, afaik.
 
Hey folks,

I know it has been a while. I am actually stunting the growth of these plants by not transplanting them quickly enough. Tonight I will do two one of each and try to get some pics. It has been a little hectic around here.
 
Back
Top Bottom