Rider's first foray into LED strip lighting: Samsung H Series GEN3

It's not an approximation. For a singular light source the inverse square law is always the same. Twice the distance = a quarter of light intensity.

Multiple light sources do counteract the inverse square law.

Example. 3 seperate lights in a row. Each a single point for a light source (not a board ). Spaced 2 ft apart.

The further below the light you get the more of that lights intensity is lost but assuming a dispersion of 120° at 3 ft below the light source the 2 lights furthest from one another have overlapped. Granted the light has to travel 5 ft to the point of intersection and light intensity is reduced it still counteracts light lost from the inverse square law. And this doesn't even account for the middle light which would reduce the effects even further than the far light
 
The problem with applying the Inverse Square Law to lights inside a tent is reflectivity and multiple light sources, as Fanleaf discovered. The law relates to the dispersion of a point source of energy through a 3-dimensional void. In practical applications in atmosphere it works well enough as long as the air is clear of dispersive particles.

Dr. Fish, it's all light talk among friends. :)
 
Dr Fish said:
Don't mean to be jacking your thread Rider....
Click to expand...

No worries Dr Fish. Riders thread is not only a DIY and test for the light itself but more a discussion of the entire spectrum of light/lights/lighting as it relates to growing. Fill your boots bud, this is all good.
 
Yo Rider, Minute of your time for a LUX reading at 12inch strips setup alone?

Thats alot of power for them strips, awesome man.
 
Mayne said:
Yo Rider, Minute of your time for a LUX reading at 12inch strips setup alone?

Thats alot of power for them strips, awesome man.
Click to expand...

420-magazine-mobile2065056079.jpg


420-magazine-mobile1390104717.jpg
 
Rider, Your Awesome Man, Thanks for your valuable time on these numbers, cant wait to see some fruits!!
 
Derbybud said:
So I would by now but went to hook it up and blew my driver. I have a new one coming tomorrow and will post on Wednesday. I'm thinking my Drok meter went bad as it made a sizzle sound then pop went the driver. I'm going to hook the new one up without the meter and see if that is it. Costly and I don't really know the problem yet. All wires were connected correctly but still a problem
Click to expand...

Drok meters. I learned something today! :reading420magazine:

Check out the Kill-A-Watt meters. Just plug and play. What model driver are you using?
 
Hey Rider, I read through Fanleaf's journal and saw that I had totally forgotten that you were there through all that :slide: - JesseJames and all. :cheesygrinsmiley:

:Namaste:

I'm kinda confused looking at your readings. The lumen and umol output you're measuring seems low. You're measuring under a 2x4 configuration and getting 60% of what I would expect. Have you done the same with all the lights on? 600 watts in a 4x4 should be reading over 100,000 lumens. 500 watts over 2x4 should be a lot higher than 98,000.

No? :hmmmm:
 
Graytail said:
Hey Rider, I read through Fanleaf's journal and saw that I had totally forgotten that you were there through all that :slide: - JesseJames and all. :cheesygrinsmiley:

:Namaste:

I'm kinda confused looking at your readings. The lumen and umol output you're measuring seems low. You're measuring under a 2x4 configuration and getting 60% of what I would expect. Have you done the same with all the lights on? 600 watts in a 4x4 should be reading over 100,000 lumens. 500 watts over 2x4 should be a lot higher than 98,000.

No? :hmmmm:
Click to expand...

I was stumped too, I was expecting 980ish on the 300w and 1550 on the 500w
 
I was curious as well but had to blast out to the salt mine. I'll look into it when I get home tonight. I need to test voltage and run the ammeter in-line right at the lights.
Sumpin' ain't right.
 
OK, guys, I need help checking my train of thought on determining expectations for luminous flux. We have to take an educated guess on efficacy but given what we know from the data sheet it should get us very close. Here goes:

Driving the strips at 500W, or about 75% of their max current puts us in the 185lm/W range.
500W x 185lm/W = 92,500lm

But I measured 98,000lm.
98,000lm / 500W = 196lm/W, which exceeds the max listed luminous efficacy of 190 lm/W at max current.

What the hell am I doing wrong?

To add to the confucsion, the spec sheet lists max luminous flux of 19555 for these 3500K strips. For four strips that would be 78,220lm total. :hmmmm::surrender:
 
Back
Top Bottom