Apache Tech LED Grow... 8x12...1900w

I am considering which LED light to go with now. My research has shown that the best results for LED usage is with the 5wat bulbs in them. I've benn watching different videos on many grows and that seems to be the way to go. I will be watching your result also for comparison. Thanks for your inputs on the cost effectiveness of LED'S. Keep growing and I will keep watching. Any inputs you have on the bulbs and quality, will be appreciated.

5w are sketchy to me, but I don't research all of them too gnarly so. 3watt chips are the most efficient from what I can tell but not too many companies are using the 3w to their fullest yet IMO. I think of 3w vs 5w the same way I think of (2)600hps vs (1)1000hps.
Currently Apache is using 1w driven @100% and they have more output than most every 3w and 5w using units still. I think eventually they will more up to a 3watt like chip but I doubt 5w or higher till technology seriously changes.

Some say driving LED's at full power is bad and limits the life of the bulbs, the higher the wattage this seems to be somewhat true. But I am not 100% sold that they shouldn't be driven @100% if they could be technically speaking. 50,000hrs is ten years of 12/12 so even half that would suffice if it performed like a champ. In the end I really only care about "what is the par output of the unit." If a 5w has the higher umole output, I would go with it I just haven't seen any yet. I have seen 80w chips now so who knows what will end up being the best. But for now it is still new territory.

Here is how I look at LED's in order of importance.
1) What is the par output in umol's (most companies don't give one on their website and that just pisses me off)...minimum 700umols@12" is the lowest end of my attention radar. 1000hps's puts out 1800umol@24" so that is my real goal. Yellow(lumens) light that is not all absorbed(wasted) is still in the par spectum, so 1800umols LED PAR(wavelength specific) output would be more to the plants than 1800umols PAR(the whole mess) from hps.
2) Wattage to achieve output. (first total unit draw, then diode wattage and brand)
3) Coverage size and umol dispersion over the area (only strong in center or is it spread out)
4) Spectrum/wavelengths
5) Price
6) BS advertising/company image/knock offs on the market. (maybe they are the knock offs?)

Just the ways I personally judge all of them.

You my friend, are on it

+rep

Update time
[video=youtube_share;OJTUBH9T1-8]http://youtu.be/OJTUBH9T1-8[/video]

Looking real nice! Very lush growth. Keep up the good work. Can't wait to see 8 AT's going all at once.

I have a bunch of situations going on in my head. I think I might run 10 AT120's in stead of 8 in the 4x12. Or maybe even 12 and do a watt per watt kind of thing. It would be 1884w(total power draw) led vs 2100w(3 600w hps with ballast). But if thinking of only light sources, technically it would only be 1440w (actual LED wattage, since only 120w of the 157 total is from the LED's) vs. 1800w(bulb wattage)

EDIT:I wouldn't/won't be running any hps...just what I would have run in that space

I have the lights so I'm thinking of a few things. Since my original plan is way off, I might just rethink the whole thing. No matter what happens it will be 100% apache led with the same plants I've been vegging the whole time. Just think what is the best way to go about this given my plants, space, and lighting.

Since you have the lights already how about setting them up and take some PAR readings and use as many lights as it takes to get to the same readings for the hps lights you have used in the past?

I'd love to see measured par readings at the top of the canopy for your flowering setup (ie I can't afford a par meter yet).

Interstex in these lights for sure, everything looks dank so far, cool that they were able to get rid of the blues so it looks a lil normal in there lol. just kinda sucks all my panels are technically obsolete with the ratio of blue to red I have...

PurpleBuz said:

Since you have the lights already how about setting them up and take some PAR readings and use as many lights as it takes to get to the same readings for the hps lights you have used in the past?
I'd love to see measured par readings at the top of the canopy for your flowering setup (ie I can't afford a par meter yet).

Click to expand...

I don't have a PAR meter as they are like $350 but I will have one in here eventually I just need to borrow it again.
I know that 3 AT120's put in a square like configuration(2 long,1 horizontal) will do 2100umols @18"...we tested this last time we had the par meter. The best 1000w bulbs do 1900umols@24". So 4 sets of the 3 AT120's(12 AT's total) should have a slightly higher par reading than 3 1000w ups...But I usually run only 600w's so it would really be a big increase in par for the plants. 8 would be enough comparable par to the 600's but if I use more more lights I can drop them lower and get even better readings than 1000w.
The problem with running all the lights is it will not be saving me any electricity...not the biggest issue if it up my yields that much though.
It is all still an experiment to me at this scale.

From what ive seen the best 1000w hps claim that high but at 12 inches away the highest par is just under 950 umoles my digilux is considered # 2 highest par, tied with ushio for 855 umoles at 12 inches away. The sun at best produces 2000 umoles at mid day. I highly doubt any light out produces the sun. Sunlight is the basis for par....


Girls look good .

Isnt it possible to get a 2000 u/mol reading with just blue light? Dont have a meter so i do not know myself just what I have heard. want a par meter bad but need more lights before I can drop money on testing their output....

hyroot said:

From what ive seen the best 1000w hps claim that high but at 12 inches away the highest par is just under 950 umoles my digilux is considered # 2 highest par, tied with ushio for 855 umoles at 12 inches away. The sun at best produces 2000 umoles at mid day. I highly doubt any light out produces the sun. Sunlight is the basis for par....
Girls look good .

Click to expand...

Here is where I got the hps par data... http://growershouse.com/blog/hid-bulb-test-comparison-review-hortilux-ushio-digilux-baddass-solistek-lumatek-maxlume-growlite-ultra-sun/ Interesting that there is such a big discrepancy.
As for the sun...it has so much of everything not just par...doesn't mean we can't make more par more efficiently without the heat and other negative effects. The nice thing about the sun is that since it is so far away(remember the inverse square law)...your plant could be 20 feet tall and the difference in par would be nothing between top and bottom. The difference between top and bottom from hps is night and day...literally. But at the canopy level they can/could be equal or greater.

Edit: Thanks, the ladies are loving life

Agreed, just because the sun is the best light source available to us now does not mean we should not aim to surpass the level of growth achievable with sunlight, although the sun will win every time since it will always be free unless mr. burns is out there for real lol....

A big change today...
[video=youtube;xuVV68s-K7Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuVV68s-K7Q&feature=youtu.be[/video]

It's only going to get bigger and better from here!

Looking good all topped and in their new homes. Are you/will you be hand watering them all? Looks like it might be tough all the way in the back. Glad you are having fun with it, always a pleasure to take a peek at your ladies. Keep up the good work!

^^^Unfortunately I'm hand watering for now but that will have to be rethought in a few weeks. I can skirt around the side if I push them over for now. I have a wand & hose connected to a submersible pump that I will probably have to use. The wand is pvc and I can make it longer to get all the way back there.

i feel your frustration trying feed. I use a watering can with a long spout. my whole room is 8x8. the girls take up 6x5 for now but usually at 6x8. I have to move them around just to reach the back ones and rotating them too.

natro.hydro said:

Isnt it possible to get a 2000 u/mol reading with just blue light? Dont have a meter so i do not know myself just what I have heard. want a par meter bad but need more lights before I can drop money on testing their output....

Click to expand...

sure its possible, but why would anyone want to produce such an unbalanced spectra ? That would actually be worse than unbalanced hps lighting.

I was just simply pointing out that without the spectral distribution graph par numbers become pretty pointless without knowing what wavelenghth the light is emitting in. Get where I am going? I sure hope no companies go strictly blue just for the par reading.... prob would not sell very many units before going under lol.

yes agree, thats why color temperature, Kelvin and CRI are such bad specifications.