Led + cfl cheaper than hps

BobCajun

BobCajun

Well-Known Member
WeedBulbs said:
Every time you turn on a CFL of any brand, you are seeing the magic of a mix of blue, green and red phosphors to make white... the common term is tri-phosphor.
A 2700K is primarily green phosphor with the balance of blue/red to be more red. A 6400K is primarily green phosphor with the balance of blue/red to be more blue.
It makes no difference if this mix of light is done internally or externally.

We are currently making a yellow bug light, but there is no yellow phosphor in it... just a mix of green and red light producing phosphors.
Want Cyan? mix blue and green light in just the right portions.
Magic.

One of the most useful tricks in a grow room is to put a PowerGREEN in a drop light and then shine it on your plants that are receiving purple or lavender light. You will magically see white light.
Click to expand...
Personally I would buy your bulbs, if they were in stores locally. It's just not an item I would go to the trouble of ordering by mail, since regular white ones work well enough and are readily available. My advise to you would be to supply some to hydro stores on consignment, maybe with a nice display rack. If people see them, with the spectrum graph shown, I'm sure they'd sell.

You're right about more than 24% green actually suppressing growth, rather than helping it. I use a light filter myself to reduce the green, but it's obviously more efficient not to generate the excess green in the first place. Me using a 1/2 minus green filter made CXBs about the same efficiency as CFLs, because 29% of the light is absorbed and it was only 100 lm/w to start with. It's a lot nicer shade of white now though, kind of pinkish.

 
Last edited:
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
per the quote from NASA

RM3 said:
more electrically efficient to make white light from monochromatic RGB LEDs than to
use white ones.

from here,
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20150009399
Click to expand...
This is no longer 100% true. The most efficient white phosphor cobs are hitting efficiency (50 to 60%) levels making them more efficient than most monos (~40%+). There are only a few ways to make an led more efficient. Lower temp, smaller diodes, and the chemistry of the diodes.

In theory, a cob without the phosphors will be more efficient than a cob with a white phosphor blend, BUT nobody that I know of makes a royal blue cob sans phosphor.
 
BobCajun

BobCajun

Well-Known Member
PurpleBuz said:
bullshit
Click to expand...
I guess you better tell these scientists then. Also these ones, who wrote the following.

"The supplementation of blue + red LEDs could also be complemented with green LEDs. Illumination with more than 50% of green LED light causes a reduction in plant growth, whereas treatments containing up to 24% green light enhanced growth for some species [17]. "
 
Last edited:
Evil-Mobo

Evil-Mobo

Well-Known Member
PurpleBuz said:
per the quote from NASA



This is no longer 100% true. The most efficient white phosphor cobs are hitting efficiency (50 to 60%) levels making them more efficient than most monos (~40%+). There are only a few ways to make an led more efficient. Lower temp, smaller diodes, and the chemistry of the diodes.

In theory, a cob without the phosphors will be more efficient than a cob with a white phosphor blend, BUT nobody that I know of makes a royal blue cob sans phosphor.
Click to expand...

You have yet to post (1) picture of any plant you have grown MMJ or not using any of the theories/methods/etc you drive so hard upon anyone else...........

For someone so passionate about the heated conversations you always find yourself in there sure is A LOT of LACK of proof on your end of anything.
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
BobCajun said:
I guess you better tell these scientists then.
Click to expand...
the data that you are trying to quote is working under low light level conditions. similar to what you will find underneath a full canopy ... hence "shade response studies". For goodness sakes they are talking about 100 to 200 umoles of total light. absolutely irrelevant for production light systems.

from the paper that you cited:
"The white light sources emitted 1000 and 500 footcandles (approximately 200 and 100 lmol m2 s1, respectively)"
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
Evil-Mobo said:
You have yet to post (1) picture of any plant you have grown MMJ or not using any of the theories/methods/etc you drive so hard upon anyone else...........

For someone so passionate about the heated conversations you always find yourself in there sure is A LOT of LACK of proof on your end of anything.
Click to expand...
how about a data sheet ?
http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/LED-Components-and-Modules/XLamp/Data-and-Binning/ds-CXB3590.pdf
is that enough proof for you ?

run the numbers yourself if you are in doubt, before spouting out about pics of plants.
 
Evil-Mobo

Evil-Mobo

Well-Known Member
PurpleBuz said:
how about a data sheet ?
http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/LED-Components-and-Modules/XLamp/Data-and-Binning/ds-CXB3590.pdf
is that enough proof for you ?

run the numbers yourself if you are in doubt, before spouting out about pics of plants.
Click to expand...

you're extremely rude to people for no reason, there were many other ways to respond besides saying "bullshit" to someone, and all you can do is provide links to data sheets. You have no clue on hands on because you're just regurgitating things you have "read".

So you stick to your internet BS and I will stick to my plants and the real world lol.

I will spout out about whatever I please when I please you're nobody to tell me different! :bigjoint:
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
Evil-Mobo said:
In case you want to get cute and backtrack on being an asshole by editing now it's quoted.
Click to expand...
BobCajun has been talking about the green shade response findings ad infinitum in multiple threads despite my friendly requests to understand what the research papers are really saying and under what conditions the results are applicable.

thats why mr Cajun gets a simple "bullshit"

only assholes speak out without checking the facts first.

Have you ever run the numbers on monos versus the latest warm white cobs ?
 
Evil-Mobo

Evil-Mobo

Well-Known Member
PurpleBuz said:
BobCajun has been talking about the green shade response findings ad infinitum in multiple threads despite my friendly requests to understand what the research papers are really saying and under what conditions the results are applicable.

thats why mr Cajun gets a simple "bullshit"

only assholes speak out without checking the facts first.

Have you ever run the numbers on monos versus the latest warm white cobs ?
Click to expand...
Going to continue with the insults, wow my feelings are soooo hurt.

I don't grow with a calculator and data sheets asshole, I use real plants and lights and water lol. When you do the same come back and show us. I'm not the first one to call you out. But you still have shown us nothing but how good you are at acting like a dickhead and using a calculator lol.......:bigjoint:


There are no facts for me to check because I have my shit up and running, you can keep trying to turn this around, but it won't work. I called you out on being a dick who shows no proof of anything in the real world and that is still where I stand. I never said anyone's numbers were right or wrong, because I could care less, my lights are already hung and growing plants. But you seem not to grasp that, which makes sense because you're full of shit and only read data sheets :dunce:
 
pookat

pookat

Well-Known Member
PurpleBuz said:
understand what the research papers are really saying
Click to expand...
Research......thats what the papers say, when you do the experiment you have empirical evidence, and a shit load of fukt up plants,......if you believe everything you read why experiment? thats what bob's doing, trying to better what is already proven by trail & error. Green is needed but only a bit, it gets used several times whilst in the leaf,
But whats that to do withLed-Cfl-cheaper than Hps
.....one of my mercury vapor lamp's blew last night...any one got a spare??
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
I didn't insult you, perhaps you insulted yourself. I simply stated people that post without checking their facts first are assholes. I never called you anything.

If you have a dispute about my comment on the NASA quote about monos being more efficient than white phosphor cobs, then please show me where I am wrong. That's why I posted the link to the datasheet. It tells the whole story.
A pic of a plant isn't going to substantiate that the efficiencies that white phosphor small diode cobs are surpassing large diode (e.g. 5 watt diodes) in terms of efficiency.

Evil-Mobo said:
Going to continue with the insults, wow my feelings are soooo hurt.

I don't grow with a calculator and data sheets asshole, I use real plants and lights and water lol. When you do the same come back and show us. I'm not the first one to call you out. But you still have shown us nothing but how good you are at acting like a dickhead and using a calculator lol.......:bigjoint:


There are no facts for me to check because I have my shit up and running, you can keep trying to turn this around, but it won't work. I called you out on being a dick who shows no proof of anything in the real world and that is still where I stand. I never said anyone's numbers were right or wrong, because I could care less, my lights are already hung and growing plants. But you seem not to grasp that, which makes sense because you're full of shit and only read data sheets :dunce:
Click to expand...
Evil-Mobo said:
Going to continue with the insults, wow my feelings are soooo hurt.

I don't grow with a calculator and data sheets asshole, I use real plants and lights and water lol. When you do the same come back and show us. I'm not the first one to call you out. But you still have shown us nothing but how good you are at acting like a dickhead and using a calculator lol.......:bigjoint:


There are no facts for me to check because I have my shit up and running, you can keep trying to turn this around, but it won't work. I called you out on being a dick who shows no proof of anything in the real world and that is still where I stand. I never said anyone's numbers were right or wrong, because I could care less, my lights are already hung and growing plants. But you seem not to grasp that, which makes sense because you're full of shit and only read data sheets :dunce:
Click to expand...
 
Evil-Mobo

Evil-Mobo

Well-Known Member
PurpleBuz said:
I didn't insult you, perhaps you insulted yourself. I simply stated people that post without checking their facts first are assholes. I never called you anything.

If you have a dispute about my comment on the NASA quote about monos being more efficient than white phosphor cobs, then please show me where I am wrong. That's why I posted the link to the datasheet. It tells the whole story.
A pic of a plant isn't going to substantiate that the efficiencies that white phosphor small diode cobs are surpassing large diode (e.g. 5 watt diodes) in terms of efficiency.
Click to expand...

You have a way to dodge responsibility for your actions. You most certainly did insult me and I quoted you doing so. And of course you will give this type of answer because then you get out of providing us any real world example you have done to back anything up. Aside from the fact this that you're arguing has nothing to do with the title of the thread.

Have a good one :bigjoint:
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
pookat said:
Research......thats what the papers say, when you do the experiment you have empirical evidence, and a shit load of fukt up plants,......if you believe everything you read why experiment? thats what bob's doing, trying to better what is already proven by trail & error. Green is needed but only a bit, it gets used several times whilst in the leaf,
But whats that to do withLed-Cfl-cheaper than Hps
.....one of my mercury vapor lamp's blew last night...any one got a spare??
Click to expand...
nothing wrong with experimenting. I do it all the time. but an out of context research paper shouldn't be quoted as the gospel until one can substantiate the hypothesis under relevant growing conditions.
 
P

PurpleBuz

Well-Known Member
Evil-Mobo said:
You have a way to dodge responsibility for your actions. You most certainly did insult me and I quoted you doing so. And of course you will give this type of answer because then you get out of providing us any real world example you have done to back anything up. Aside from the fact this that you're arguing has nothing to do with the title of the thread.

Have a good one :bigjoint:
Click to expand...
why what did I say to insult you ? do you actually disagree with my comment on the NASA quote ?
 
pookat

pookat

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top