Why do some guys wats to still use mono led with cobs?

Add mono's to cobs?

  • Total voters
    116
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
Sounds awesome! Give them plants what they want. Don't hold back on anything if it's possible. That's why I say deffinetly run monos w/ COBs until there's better options. The fuller the spectrum the more is activated in your plant causing more growth functions. At least that's what I see using mine. I mean I see it, not just wishful thinking. They straight explode with the full spectrum.
Off topic maybe but I've flowered with my Hortrilux Blue & got great results, sick color & trichs. Pulled a pound w/ 600w of Hortri-Blue. There's plenty of red in it. Just thought id add that as that & CMH are the closest full spectrum bulbs to what many of us are trying to accomplish w/ LED. Almost forgot, the Owner of the grow store near me gets 1 plate off a 315 CMH Philips 3k. Full spectrum. Bye-Bye straight Burple!!![/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
BOBBY_G

BOBBY_G

Well-Known Member
im going for a "sharp shoulder" on the upper end.

the 3000k cobs prob have more punch than a 3500 but they also extend up well into 700-750 nm and will promote stretching

this will basically push the 3500k cob peak out from 630 to 660 and then drop it like a rock

3000K curve

https://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut2809

3500K curve

https://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut2810

now imagine the 3500 extending out and dropping down sharply

also the ability to throttle the reds and push em hard in weeks 3-8
 
Last edited:
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I use lenses, because I'm looking to keep my vertically oriented COB LED chips clean over time and ensure they don't get damaged by people leaning on them or accidental overspray.
Click to expand...
That sounds smart. Get worried about mine being bare. I'd like to have a lense on mine but don't wanna use the 90• big thick lenses it came with. Need the spread sometimes.
I'd like to see Hollow bubble lenses w/ thin glass. That would act as a primary lense right in the sense of utilizing more light?
All small diodes have primaries under the secondary. Why don't cobs? Not cuz they get to hot, cuz what would be the differance, using magnifying lenses.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
That sounds smart. Get worried about mine being bare. I'd like to have a lense on mine but don't wanna use the 90• big thick lenses it came with. Need the spread sometimes.
I'd like to see Hollow bubble lenses w/ thin glass. That would act as a primary lense right in the sense of utilizing more light?
All small diodes have primaries under the secondary. Why don't cobs? Not cuz they get to hot, cuz what would be the differance, using magnifying lenses.
Click to expand...
The thickness of a glass lens doesn't hurt its performance. They only cost a few percent, either in terms of additional cost to the project or in terms of performance penalty over bare and for the money I spent on the chips it's no brainer cheap insurance.

I have two modules in my veg area; they're identical except that one has lenses, the other is bare. Plants do better under the lenses.

No lenses on a COB. The entire surface is luminous.

Heat is removed from a COB through the back of the chip.
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
The thickness of a glass lens doesn't hurt its performance. They only cost a few percent, either in terms of additional cost to the project or in terms of performance penalty over bare and for the money I spent on the chips it's no brainer cheap insurance.

I have two modules in my veg area; they're identical except that one has lenses, the other is bare. Plants do better under the lenses.

No lenses on a COB. The entire surface is luminous.

Heat is removed from a COB through the back of the chip.
Click to expand...
Primary lens. Similiar to how a 3 or 5 watt diode on a grow light has a primary lense over the diode, after that the bigger one is the secondary. The primary captures the light to be used. Hard to explain. Can't right now. Know what I mean?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
Primary lens. Similiar to how a 3 or 5 watt diode on a grow light has a primary lense over the diode, after that the bigger one is the secondary. The primary captures the light to be used. Hard to explain. Can't right now. Know what I mean?
Click to expand...
Yes, and COB LED doesn't have them.
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I'm not a chip designer but from the little I know, I think it's because the entire surface of the chip is made to illuminate, obviating the need for small primary lenses outright.
Click to expand...
I think the same thing. But I'd like to know for a fact because it's practically detrimental to getting the most out of your diode in smaller diode use. Shouldn't the same apply? I took a close look at my HH lens & diode. Cobs only seam to use one lens for both purposes if at all. I ran mine bare w/ reflectors the first run. Great spread.
Just wondering is all.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Hybridway said:
I think the same thing. But I'd like to know for a fact because it's practically detrimental to getting the most out of your diode in smaller diode use. Shouldn't the same apply? I took a close look at my HH lens & diode. Cobs only seam to use one lens for both purposes if at all. I ran mine bare w/ reflectors the first run. Great spread.
Just wondering is all.
Click to expand...
We've reached the limits of my knowledge.

I'm an applications specialist.
 
febisfebi

febisfebi

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I've been thinking about how one implements a light source twice as bright as a DE, and honestly I'm having a little trouble. I'm currently using a very popular COB combination at just 50W apiece. I created an array with them that evenly distributes light across a large surface and the COBs are only 16" from the canopy.

A monster COB by itself is certainly no improvement. I'm still interested in the design, spectrum, etc.
Click to expand...
This monster COB you speak of is certainly interesting. Is the issue coming up with a cost effective DC power supply that big, or are you saying that it would be too much concentrated light from one source, which would likely do better spread out in a bunch of smaller chips like you described. Sounds like more of a replacement for what they are using for streetlights, or the CREE high bay luminary in factories where a bunch of smaller COB's are crammed together to create the effect of one big lamp.
Twice as bright as DE though, it would certainly be interesting to see if there was a way to efficiently harness that energy, but I would tend to agree that spreading them out would be better for our purposes.
Maybe for warehouse type setups that are 9 ft off the ground like DE are designed to be, where everything is overlapping from all angles.
In a small room, we benefit from having the light spread out exactly where we want it, but in a warehouse setup it may be more cost effective to use the brighter light source to do the same thing on a much larger scale.
As if we could take a regular room/lighting/ distributed small COB chip setup and enlarge the entire thing 5000%.

I am glad to hear your COB setup is working well! I wish I could afford it right now, because the cost of electricity would be so much less than DE+ supplemental, but the tech keeps changing so quickly, we really don't know what they are going to come up with in the next few years. Especially now that the industry can legitimately work on Horticultural COB's we could see a lot of improvements tailored just for us, hopefully getting rid of the need for adding mono's.

@Hybridway why not use a combination of 3k and 4k, or some similar combination to achieve the spectrum your thinking? Just a thought

Looks like they are doing some interesting work at MIT
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12093545/Return-of-incandescent-light-bulbs-as-MIT-makes-them-more-efficient-than-LEDs.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12093545/Return-of-incandescent-light-bulbs-as-MIT-makes-them-more-efficient-than-LEDs.html
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
febisfebi said:
This monster COB you speak of is certainly interesting. Is the issue coming up with a cost effective DC power supply that big, or are you saying that it would be too much concentrated light from one source, which would likely do better spread out in a bunch of smaller chips like you described. Sounds like more of a replacement for what they are using for streetlights, or the CREE high bay luminary in factories where a bunch of smaller COB's are crammed together to create the effect of one big lamp.
Twice as bright as DE though, it would certainly be interesting to see if there was a way to efficiently harness that energy, but I would tend to agree that spreading them out would be better for our purposes.
Maybe for warehouse type setups that are 9 ft off the ground like DE are designed to be, where everything is overlapping from all angles.
In a small room, we benefit from having the light spread out exactly where we want it, but in a warehouse setup it may be more cost effective to use the brighter light source to do the same thing on a much larger scale.
As if we could take a regular room/lighting/ distributed small COB chip setup and enlarge the entire thing 5000%.

I am glad to hear your COB setup is working well! I wish I could afford it right now, because the cost of electricity would be so much less than DE+ supplemental, but the tech keeps changing so quickly, we really don't know what they are going to come up with in the next few years. Especially now that the industry can legitimately work on Horticultural COB's we could see a lot of improvements tailored just for us, hopefully getting rid of the need for adding mono's.

@Hybridway why not use a combination of 3k and 4k, or some similar combination to achieve the spectrum your thinking? Just a thought

Looks like they are doing some interesting work at MIT
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12093545/Return-of-incandescent-light-bulbs-as-MIT-makes-them-more-efficient-than-LEDs.html
Click to expand...
The spectrum I like cannot be achieved by mixing Kelvin temp. For Veg & for flower. But I'd grow w/ white all day over Burple now that I've tried it (Burple).
I've been thinking about getting a commercial street light or high-bay LED.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
febisfebi said:
Looks like they are doing some interesting work at MIT
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12093545/Return-of-incandescent-light-bulbs-as-MIT-makes-them-more-efficient-than-LEDs.html
Click to expand...

They actually said that LED lighting is just 14% efficient, and then they want to make us believe this horseshit by telling us they're MIT?!

First, my fucking standard production Cree chips currently operate in excess of 55% efficiency and there are literally thousands of test results backing this figure up. So that's a lie.

Second, even if these chuckle heads ARE getting 40% efficiency from an incandescent lamp, that's still only 70% as good as my setup, and THIRD, they haven't addressed durability at all.

I smell a big, stinking pile of bullshit.
 
Stephenj37826

Stephenj37826

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
They actually said that LED lighting is just 14% efficient, and then they want to make us believe this horseshit by telling us they're MIT?!

First, my fucking standard production Cree chips currently operate in excess of 55% efficiency and there are literally thousands of test results backing this figure up. So that's a lie.

Second, even if these chuckle heads ARE getting 40% efficiency from an incandescent lamp, that's still only 70% as good as my setup, and THIRD, they haven't addressed durability at all.

I smell a big, stinking pile of bullshit.
Click to expand...

Even if it isn't the spectrum is still not ideal and in fact worse than hps.
 
BOBBY_G

BOBBY_G

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
They actually said that LED lighting is just 14% efficient, and then they want to make us believe this horseshit by telling us they're MIT?!

First, my fucking standard production Cree chips currently operate in excess of 55% efficiency and there are literally thousands of test results backing this figure up. So that's a lie.

Second, even if these chuckle heads ARE getting 40% efficiency from an incandescent lamp, that's still only 70% as good as my setup, and THIRD, they haven't addressed durability at all.

I smell a big, stinking pile of bullshit.
Click to expand...
depends on the yardstick

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top