# Using uv light to increase resin production



## theo212 (Dec 16, 2012)

I've read that dope produced resin, THC crystals etc. as a sort of anti UV burn sunblock; some believe that adding UV lights in the flowering stage can serve as be a kind of good stress, the plant picks up on the increased UV and responds by increasing its resin production, sounds great, except that UV light also degrades the resin and THC crystals...bad. So there's two schools of thought, UV good, UV bad, i've been thinking that maybe 4 hrs or so of UV might be good, just to kick in the plants natural defense responses without degrading any bud. Maybe turn the UV bulb off for the last two weeks of flower? who knows. Anyway i'd appreciate any input on the topic. i'm thinking about adding a week uv bulb or two to my tent, waddya think? 


https://www.rollitup.org/blogs/blog25517-grow-2-kushmans-strawberry-cough.html <-----] Strawberry Cough x Tahoe OG#Soilless: SCROG: week4: Soul Synthetics Nutes: Top V Fim Side By Side:My Current Grow<------------------]


"What comes around is all around"


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

I ran a sunpulse 10k kelvin last cycle and really didn't notice much difference myself. although I'll run it again this cycle, last cycle I left the glass on the hood, this time I'll remove it.
The 10k one is made for like the last 10 days or so.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

any HID bulbs uvb is going to be significantly reduced by the outer envelope to the point there is very little UVB coming thru regardless. you need a bulb specifically designed to emit UVB, the 10000k is not that bulb. i use a mercury vapor for reptiles. reptile bulbs are about the only bulbs you can purchase that emit UVB


----------



## gagekko (Dec 16, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> any HID bulbs uvb is going to be significantly reduced by the outer envelope to the point there is very little UVB coming thru regardless. you need a bulb specifically designed to emit UVB, the 10000k is not that bulb. i use a mercury vapor for reptiles. reptile bulbs are about the only bulbs you can purchase that emit UVB


Haha, I use an old school tanning bulb, 300 watts


----------



## whodatnation (Dec 16, 2012)

I bought a uvb light from the pet store and had it on for a few hours a day throughout flowering,,, I think it may have worked but honestly i cant remember.


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> any HID bulbs uvb is going to be significantly reduced by the outer envelope to the point there is very little UVB coming thru regardless. you need a bulb specifically designed to emit UVB, the 10000k is not that bulb. i use a mercury vapor for reptiles. reptile bulbs are about the only bulbs you can purchase that emit UVB


The sunpulse 10k produces uva, uvb and uvc and is only used the last week.
http://sunpulselamps.com/Lamp_Selection.html


----------



## theo212 (Dec 16, 2012)

thank, yea that reptile bulb sounds like a good idea, i remember i used to keep a bearded dragon. anyway what wattage do you think would be appropriate? what are your suggestions on timing and whether its really effective?


----------



## theo212 (Dec 16, 2012)

the sunpulse 10k probably outta my price range


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

hmmm i see that, well if that is the case they mnust be using the porper glass i will look into it and email them. if so look like polys getting a new bulb

but honestly i think they are lying simply in design, using the proper glass that would allow uvb to pass, to envelope the arc tube is not safe especially anything over 250w.


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

theo212 said:


> the sunpulse 10k probably outta my price range


76 bux online for the 1kw..


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> hmmm i see that, well if that is the case they mnust be using the porper glass i will look into it and email them. if so look like polys getting a new bulb
> 
> but honestly i think they are lying simply in design, using the proper glass that would allow uvb to pass, to envelope the arc tube is not safe especially anything over 250w.


they used to run a buck fidy or so. pricier than hortilux.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

theo212 said:


> thank, yea that reptile bulb sounds like a good idea, i remember i used to keep a bearded dragon. anyway what wattage do you think would be appropriate? what are your suggestions on timing and whether its really effective?


i use a 160w mercury vapor for a 2x4 area, or a 23w cfl per plant. i would run it the whole time with you lights. (honestly a 100w would probably be enough for each area of 2x4)


----------



## colonuggs (Dec 16, 2012)

suppopse to add 100 watt uv2 per 1000 watt... helps to increase resin production... not raise/increace THC % content

[video=youtube;aQPC6oAMK4k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQPC6oAMK4k[/video]


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

err, that's not for the 1kw. they're still pricey.


----------



## theo212 (Dec 16, 2012)

d'you recommend it? have you noticed increase in resin, stickiness, smell etc


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

you might want to see if your ballast is listed at this page.... http://sunpulselamps.com/Certified_Ballasts.html


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

theo212 said:


> d'you recommend it? have you noticed increase in resin, stickiness, smell etc


if you mean me, I've only run the bulb one cycle and really couldn't tell but I did leave the glass on the hood which probably made running the thing redundant.this time the glass comes out.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

theo212 said:


> d'you recommend it? have you noticed increase in resin, stickiness, smell etc


yes to all.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

well at least its certified i got a lumatek, they giving it a bad rep though...:/ ive never heard nothing but good things about lumatek. hell i bought some old as 240v 1000w at one time and they worked like champs so much so, i pawned em off to the next guy for all my money back.


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> well at least its certified i got a lumatek, they giving it a bad rep though...:/ ive never heard nothing but good things about lumatek. hell i bought some old as 240v 1000w at one time and they worked like champs so much so, i pawned em off to the next guy for all my money back.


you clearly haven't visited the hydro shop I frequent, I see lots of lumatek returns, one melted pretty badly. although the phantom that scores good there I just returned. first return the shop has had of the phantom.


----------



## theo212 (Dec 16, 2012)

found this somewheres just now: 

"I've been pretty intrigued by this theory. Apparently UV light in the early stages of flowering encourages heavy, and early, trichrome formation. I've seen a few side by side grows and the results are pretty interesting. There is definitely a difference between using a UV and not. However there isn't too much info on using UV light in flowering."

and this:

"I believe that trichome production is a form of self-preservation by the plant against UV radiation. Think natural sunblock. There are many, many papers out there supporting this. 

Thus it would make sense that UV bulbs, alongside regular grow lights, would increase trichome production. I wonder how a combination of UVB and UVA bulbs would do. I belive you can buy blacklight bulbs that emit mostly in either region: UVB= 290-320nm, UVA= 320-400nm, visible light= 400-700nm, and infrared= >700nm. I definitely wouldn't want to be around the UVB lights when they're on though. That's the stuff you put sunscreen on for.

A big upside to this theory is that the lights are cheap and easily found at pet stores and online. Also they don't require massive amounts of power to run so your electricity bill is not really affected by running them."

and this:

This definitely seems to be the way to go. THC has high capabilities of absorbing UV-B, protecting the plant from the radiation. The idea that the plant would produce more THC to protect it from its presence would seem reasonable. It should also be noted that HPS essentially provides no UV-B, which is most commonly used for indoor flowering. It would definitely seem that there would be a significant opportunity for THC production that is being lost without a source for UV-B. 

The reptile lights would probably be the best source. You'd probably need a few unless you found one with a lot of watts (like this one). A tanning light would do it too, but would be pretty expensive I would assume. 

I've heard that its best to not leave them on for more than four hours a day because UV-B is harmful to plants, but I would think this is something best determined through one's own experimentation."

also helpful: 
I've done a lot of reading about the addition of reptile UV lights in the grow room in the years past. Its best to keep them on a separate timer and have them come on for 4-6 hours in the middle of the photoperiod. So if you on a 12/12 and run the UV Fluorescents for 6 hrs, you would kick them on 3 hours after the lights turn on and 3 hours before them turn off. Most Metal Halide lamps have some UV-B but most of that is blocked by the glass on the cooled reflector.

thoughts anyone? that stuffs all just off forums so who knows?


----------



## dbkick (Dec 16, 2012)

sunpulse, good luck with whatever you decide.


----------



## yesum (Dec 16, 2012)

I doubt the sunpulse gives off much uvb. they do not list numbers on it.

the reptile bulb I use does give off a lot of uvb and I measure it with a uvb meter so I know. Metal halides have uvb but the glass barrier stops it dead.


----------



## whazzup (Dec 16, 2012)

UVA and UVB has a significant influence on plants. Not only the thickness of the leafs and morphology are influenced, but also the levels of terpines, flavonoids and cannabinoids. The trichome is the only part of the plant that actually absorbs this high energy radiation. Have a look at plasma lamps. That's one of the reasons why they work so well (the Gavita have a UVA/UVB transmitting filter). I would administer the UV during the complete grow, and in the right amount, and prefrably using a wide spectrum light. . 

here is a some bud grown under a combo of HPS and plasma.





edit: this is a huge bowl btw


----------



## Ztelthy (Dec 16, 2012)

Hi, I'am gonna watch this thread... I am interested to know what my UV-B lamp will do in my small DIY Cab, if I come across any decent info I'll let y'all be the 1st to know  - ZTELTHY


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

here is good place to start this is where i started gleaning the most info and best questions to ask.
https://www.rollitup.org/advanced-marijuana-cultivation/507322-uvb-full-12-hours-during.html


----------



## theo212 (Dec 16, 2012)

Thanks polyarcturus, that's a great thread. the last question i guess i have is whats the most efficient time to have them running? I'm thinking btwn 4 and 6 hrs a day. Also should they be turned off the last 2 weeks of flowering to stop from degrading THC?


----------



## sandmonkey (Dec 16, 2012)

whazzup said:


> UVA and UVB has a significant influence on plants. Not only the thickness of the leafs and morphology are influenced, but also the levels of terpines, flavonoids and cannabinoids. The trichome is the only part of the plant that actually absorbs this high energy radiation. Have a look at plasma lamps. That's one of the reasons why they work so well (the Gavita have a UVA/UVB transmitting filter). I would administer the UV during the complete grow, and in the right amount, and prefrably using a wide spectrum light. .
> 
> here is a some bud grown under a combo of HPS and plasma.
> 
> ...


Looks awesome! those Plasma lamps do look impressive... amazing how such a small bulb can produce so much


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Dec 16, 2012)

I did some research on this subject and it's 10% total UVB light output.
400watt = 40 watt reptile lamp
600watt = 60watt reptile lamp
1000watt =100 watt reptile lamp


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

i run mine all day for the ease of timing and for noting more resistant plants, i see no ill effect from running them all day but for maximum efficiency, 4 hours would be sufficient. i would not turn them off last 2 weeks but that is option that is up to you, it does not degraade the growing thc for a short time and thc production should be at its peak in the last 2 weeks i would think this owuld serve to make a riper fruit so to speak, but you could, it would not hurt most would feel the opposite way about it tho, turn it on last 2 weeks to increase potency and change thc to cbn which is still a drug substance.


----------



## Halamaya (Dec 16, 2012)

I use the uvb reptile lights and led lights my friend uses hps. I olny use 180 watt light he use's 600 watt hps and my buds come out more floral and tighter. I also feel more trichome production. I will continue to use just a couple of 26 watt uvb bulbs through the my whole flower cycle. I read in Ed Rosenthalls book he recommends 10% uvb light. In nature they get the most uvb in the start of the summer, and the least during flowering. The plants really seem to like the uvb bulbs.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 16, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> I did some research on this subject and it's 10% total UVB light output.
> 400watt = 40 watt reptile lamp
> 600watt = 60watt reptile lamp
> 1000watt =100 watt reptile lamp


that would be if you could merge the light sources but often thats not possible. it would be better to think of what you need UV wise in terms of coverage. also note the UV light will not be as intense as say the uv would be if it came from a 400w source. that is important to keep in mind, the lights intensity.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Dec 17, 2012)

That's true. These are pretty good. http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2752589&f=PAD/psNotAvailInUS/No. I wish they would just come out with HPS bulbs with an added 10% UVB bulb built into an aircooled reflector.


----------



## hereshegrows (Dec 17, 2012)

It's worth a try, humans produce melenon as a result of UV so it stands to reason but remember to wear 100% UV glasses when working with or in the light. It's very dangerous for your eyes and also not good for exposed skin either. I use a UV light early on to run over my plants to kill off moulds and bacteria. It's in the form of a hand held wand. I also run it in my room for two hours before initial set up as an additional means of sterilization. Hospitals use UV lights to sterilize their rooms and tools, I work in the field.


----------



## sonofdust (Dec 17, 2012)

hereshegrows said:


> It's worth a try, humans produce melenon as a result of UV so it stands to reason but remember to wear 100% UV glasses when working with or in the light. It's very dangerous for your eyes and also not good for exposed skin either. I use a UV light early on to run over my plants to kill off moulds and bacteria. It's in the form of a hand held wand. I also run it in my room for two hours before initial set up as an additional means of sterilization. Hospitals use UV lights to sterilize their rooms and tools, I work in the field.


hereshegrows;
Is it the UV-C lighting used in hospitals ? Germicidal ?


----------



## cannawizard (Dec 17, 2012)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_germicidal_irradiation

i think thats correct, hospitals use UVC not UVB.. but i could be mistaken


----------



## hereshegrows (Dec 17, 2012)

Sonofdust: Correct UV-C light for killing bacteria, viruses, fungi and mould. UV-C light is invisible to the human eye. It works by destroying DNA and RNA...so in theory would also damage plants genetic as well, so I'm careful with exposure. UV-B light is what's used in tanning salons.


----------



## sonofdust (Dec 17, 2012)

Thanks Hereshegrows..
That site you posted was full of good info.. I'll need to make a little adjustment to my filtering system now.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 17, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> That's true. These are pretty good. http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2752589&f=PAD%2FpsNotAvailInUS%2FNo. I wish they would just come out with HPS bulbs with an added 10% UVB bulb built into an aircooled reflector.


Those suck, unless you have them 6 inches away from your buds. If you're going to PetSmart, you want something more like these:

http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2752615&f=PAD/psNotAvailInUS/No
http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=12462460&f=PAD/psNotAvailInUS/No


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Dec 18, 2012)

PJ Diaz said:


> Those suck, unless you have them 6 inches away from your buds. If you're going to PetSmart, you want something more like these:
> 
> http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2752615&f=PAD%2FpsNotAvailInUS%2FNo
> http://www.petsmart.com/product/index.jsp?productId=12462460&f=PAD/psNotAvailInUS/No



Those bulbs suck! They put out so much heat they are useless for our hobby! The fluorescent bulbs don't put out heat and they last longer. The fluorescents will work great for SOG but your right they dont have much canopy penetration.

The bulbs you posted would work really good if you built a homemade aircooled relfector and ran them so they wouldn't interfere with your HPS lighting.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 18, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> Those bulbs suck! They put out so much heat they are useless for our hobby! The fluorescent bulbs don't put out heat and they last longer. The fluorescents will work great for SOG but your right they dont have much canopy penetration.
> 
> The bulbs you posted would work really good if you built a homemade aircooled relfector and ran them so they wouldn't interfere with your HPS lighting.


you are wrong, they do put out heat but not unmangable heat, just need a small fan blowing across.

also they will last much longer and emit UVB much longer than fluorescent, and if cooled well a years worth of use is not unreasonable. the issue is the 2 different kinds of glass used, the chemicals in florescents, and the amount of UVC emitted causing polarization in the glass.

they have much better spread and intensity(penetration), while fluorescent is limited in both distance and penetration, it has more spread when used up close, has the advantage of being placed vertically, which effectively means more UVB across more of the plant, but in a horizontal situation as most are forced to use by the design of their grow room, the MVB would be more efficient, UVB spectrum wise, price and wattage wise.

the order of the most effcient come in this order, specialty MH bulbs,mega ray, they use special glass emits less heat, a little less uvb than MVB but with the added bonus of more blue spectrum, MVB(mercury vapor bulb, specialty reptile ones), then last but not least in the case of micro growers fluorescent.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 18, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> you are wrong, they do put out heat but not unmangable heat, just need a small fan blowing across.
> 
> also they will last much longer and emit UVB much longer than fluorescent, and if cooled well a years worth of use is not unreasonable. the issue is the 2 different kinds of glass used, the chemicals in florescents, and the amount of UVC emitted causing polarization in the glass.
> 
> ...


What he said ^^

..except this part..



> the order of the most effcient come in this order, specialty MH bulbs,mega ray, they use special glass emits less heat, a little less uvb than MVB but with the added bonus of more blue spectrum, MVB(mercury vapor bulb, specialty reptile ones), then last but not least in the case of micro growers fluorescent.


I believe there are some HID type external ballasted MV lamps which are the most efficient form of UV. I could be wrong though, but I'd bet $20.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 18, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> Those bulbs suck! They put out so much heat they are useless for our hobby!


So, are HPS and MH also useless due to the heat? No, they are not. We as indoor growers simply need to manage the heat.

Seriously, the flouro uvb lamps are a complete waste of money, unless you are growing a couple of tiny plants, or have a shitload of the lights all over the place.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Dec 18, 2012)

Not true! Flouros should work great! You know you only need 200milliwatts/cm2 of UVB! I will stick to flouros! Reptile MH more heat and electricity, it's overkill.

You need so little UVB you could get away with LED UVB!


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 18, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> Not true! Flouros should work great! You know you only need 200milliwatts/cm2 of UVB! I will stick to flouros! Reptile MH more heat and electricity, it's overkill.
> 
> You need so little UVB you could get away with LED UVB!


200milliwatts/cm2 of UVB? IDK where you came up with that number, but let's look at the math of what that would mean real quick..

Lets assume a 4 x 4 growing space. 48 inches is about 122 cm. 122 x 122 = 14884, so the space is 14,884 cm2.

200milliwatts = .2watts

14,884 cm2 x .2watts = 2976.8 watts

Surely you can't expect to have 3kw of those little reptile tubes in your tent do you?


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 18, 2012)

If you need to use flouro, these are ok: http://www.zoomed.com/db/products/EntryDetail.php?EntryID=1522&DatabaseID=2&SearchID=20&SearchContext=YTo3OntzOjg6IlNlYXJjaElEIjtzOjI6IjIwIjtzOjEwOiJEYXRhYmFzZUlEIjtzOjE6IjIiO3M6NzoiS2V5d29yZCI7czoyMDoiTGlnaHRpbmcgQWNjZXNzb3JpZXMiO3M6MTU6IlByb2R1Y3RDYXRlZ29yeSI7czo4OiJMaWdodGluZyI7czo3OiJIZWFkaW5nIjtzOjk6IlRlcnJhcml1bSI7czo4OiJTZWFyY2hfeCI7czoxOiIwIjtzOjg6IlNlYXJjaF95IjtzOjE6IjAiO30=


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 18, 2012)

Here's the real deal:
http://www.buylightfixtures.com/400-watt-mercury-vapor-ballast-kit.aspx?gclid=COq2ho3Zo7QCFQhyQgod-SwANw
http://www.buylightfixtures.com/400-watt-mercury-vapor-light-bulbs.aspx

View attachment 2446903


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Dec 18, 2012)

PJ Diaz said:


> If you need to use flouro, these are ok: http://www.zoomed.com/db/products/EntryDetail.php?EntryID=1522&DatabaseID=2&SearchID=20&SearchContext=YTo3OntzOjg6IlNlYXJjaElEIjtzOjI6IjIwIjtzOjEwOiJEYXRhYmFzZUlEIjtzOjE6IjIiO3M6NzoiS2V5d29yZCI7czoyMDoiTGlnaHRpbmcgQWNjZXNzb3JpZXMiO3M6MTU6IlByb2R1Y3RDYXRlZ29yeSI7czo4OiJMaWdodGluZyI7czo3OiJIZWFkaW5nIjtzOjk6IlRlcnJhcml1bSI7czo4OiJTZWFyY2hfeCI7czoxOiIwIjtzOjg6IlNlYXJjaF95IjtzOjE6IjAiO30=


Actually these are what I ment to post.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Dec 18, 2012)

PJ Diaz said:


> 200milliwatts/cm2 of UVB? IDK where you came up with that number, but let's look at the math of what that would mean real quick..
> 
> Lets assume a 4 x 4 growing space. 48 inches is about 122 cm. 122 x 122 = 14884, so the space is 14,884 cm2.
> 
> ...


I was talking about the bulb output, not room coverage. There was a great youtube video showing good success with these flouros, it has been removed.He was using Repti Glo 5.0 200mW/cm2 UVB. The one you posted is the one I ment to post and will work perfect. I also meant microwatt, not milliwatt. 200 microwatts = 0.0002 watts

"Ultraviolet radiation is expressed in microwatt per square centimetre (mW/cm2) and varies
tremendously from the poles (low) towards the equator (high). The amount of UVB radiation
received on the equator on a clear day at noon lies around 270 mW/cm2. However, this high
amount of radiation decreases as the day passes, in the same way that it had increased since
sunrise and taking into consideration that not all days are clear."

"Many commercial reptile lights today exceed this 270 mW/cm2 in an attempt to show the greatest
UVB radiation. Some even exceed over 2000 mW/cm2, which is absolutely dangerous! Especially
if you know that the 270 value of the sun is only measured at high noon on a clear day while most
light bulbs are on between 10 and 12 hours with constant values."



Repti Glo 5.0 200mW/cm2 UVB
Repti Glo 10.0 400mW/cm2 UVB


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 18, 2012)

PJ Diaz said:


> What he said ^^
> 
> ..except this part..
> 
> ...



there are external ballasted MV bulbs, though they produce more UV, they produce less usable PAR, i guess it would matter on your opinion more UV or more PAR.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 18, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> Not true! Flouros should work great! You know you only need 200milliwatts/cm2 of UVB! I will stick to flouros! Reptile MH more heat and electricity, it's overkill.
> 
> You need so little UVB you could get away with LED UVB!



they dont make led uvb.


----------



## hereshegrows (Dec 18, 2012)

If you really want information overload on UV lighting in general, I found so much on the subject by reading posts from Tanning salon owners. They deal with similar issues and know their lights.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 18, 2012)

Nightmarecreature said:


> PJ Diaz said:
> 
> 
> > 200milliwatts/cm2 of UVB? IDK where you came up with that number, but let's look at the math of what that would mean real quick..
> ...


Have you actually used flouro UV lamps in a full grow? I have used them with a clone strain that I've also run without the t5 UV tubes. IMO, the UV tubes are worthless and don't make any noticeable difference.


----------



## cannawizard (Dec 19, 2012)

actually.. the amount of UVB around (near) the equator is <est> 400+ µW/cm²  and its rising.. the readings were taken on clear days around noon.

#cheers


----------



## cannawizard (Dec 19, 2012)

*they do make L.E.D. UV-b , its just not cost-effective 

http://www.s-et.com/uvtop.html


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 20, 2012)

PJ Diaz said:


> Here's the real deal:
> http://www.buylightfixtures.com/400-watt-mercury-vapor-ballast-kit.aspx?gclid=COq2ho3Zo7QCFQhyQgod-SwANw
> http://www.buylightfixtures.com/400-watt-mercury-vapor-light-bulbs.aspx
> 
> ...



also note that this style of mercury vapor emits little UV due to the glass shielding. reptile bulbs use special glass that allows the transmission of UV thes type of MVB will not work for out intentions.


----------



## whazzup (Dec 20, 2012)

Many MH lamps are NOT rated for open fixtures! Take good care of selecting the correct lamp. When placed behind (normal) glass filters, you will lose the UV they might emit. Stay away from any UV LED that are not made of glass.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 20, 2012)

whazzup said:


> Many MH lamps are NOT rated for open fixtures! Take good care of selecting the correct lamp. When placed behind (normal) glass filters, you will lose the UV they might emit. Stay away from any UV LED that are not made of glass.


these are made with cheap glass envelopes, not only do they emit UVB they emit tons of UVA and enough UVC to be very dangerous.
and applies to both MH and MVB


----------



## whazzup (Dec 20, 2012)

You can never really see from the glass if it is blocking UV or not, sometimes it is specifically mentioned. But very important is that MH or CMH rated for open fixture have a double glass envelope, or a cylinder of glass around the arc tube, or a wire circling around the arctube, or even several of these measurements together to prevent the outer bulb from shattering when the arc tube should violently explode. MH go down with a real big bang sometimes.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 20, 2012)

the ansi code would note whether it was for an open rated fixture or not. the law requires a posting of this information it is always specifically mentioned.

sometimes they do add a wire around arc tube or a double envelope(inner one usually filled with argon) but this has nothing to do with the UV or the fixture rating, that is still relevant to the type of glass used and its chemical properties. they just do this as safety precaution but its not required or has to be noted in the ANSI code


----------



## whazzup (Dec 20, 2012)

Manufacturers will specify whether the lamp is suitable for open fixture. A much worse accident would be when the outer bulb fractures and the lamps does not extinguish. You will get huge amounts of UVC which is normally blocked by the outer bulb. See here and here for example.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 20, 2012)

whazzup said:


> Manufacturers will specify whether the lamp is suitable for open fixture. A much worse accident would be when the outer bulb fractures and the lamps does not extinguish. You will get huge amounts of UVC which is normally blocked by the outer bulb. See here and here for example.


your point being? beside confirming what i just said and adding that UV is dangerous a well known fact. and of course if the outer bulb is damaged it will let out UV, i dont need to "click here" because i know what photoconjunctivitis is already, so your point there is null.

i have already proved my knowledge to you and your lack off, now sit back and read more, input less, ive done my research that for god damn sure. so just chill man its not a smart contest, i dont give a fuck that i know more about this subject, perhaps you know more in other subjects.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 20, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> also note that this style of mercury vapor emits little UV due to the glass shielding. reptile bulbs use special glass that allows the transmission of UV thes type of MVB will not work for out intentions.


I'm sure you're right. I posted that one real quick, but there are indeed high power MV lamps which are specifically designed to be UV producers. I think you knew that already though, and are just trying to clarify. Thanks.


----------



## polyarcturus (Dec 20, 2012)

PJ Diaz said:


> I'm sure you're right. I posted that one real quick, but there are indeed high power MV lamps which are specifically designed to be UV producers. I think you knew that already though, and are just trying to clarify. Thanks.


yep and your right but they arent exactly easy to find on the net, more of a zoo order only thing but they exist. and definitely not applicable for MJ growing they are designed to be 15ft in the air for like rooms full of alligators and shit.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 20, 2012)

polyarcturus said:


> yep and your right but they arent exactly easy to find on the net, more of a zoo order only thing but they exist. and definitely not applicable for MJ growing they are designed to be 15ft in the air for like rooms full of alligators and shit.


You don't have any alligators in your grow room?

They also use them for Equatorial birds and stuff.


----------



## whazzup (Dec 21, 2012)

lol I'm not arguing with you polyarcturus, I wanted to say (and agree with you) that indeed they do (or at least should) specify the suitability for open fixture or not. I understand that you understand that a MH is very dangerous when the glass breaks. Adding to that I just wanted to warn people who don't and who do not check if a lamp is suitable for open fixture. It's a serious enough problem that I believe a lot of people underestimate.


----------



## fg2020 (Dec 23, 2012)

Do these efforts to bring UV into the picture really make a difference? I find it doubtful. Simple test: grow the same clone both indoors and outdoors and test the difference. I have, and the difference is negligible. I do believe that the UV produced by the sun is going to exceed anything you can produce artificially.


----------



## Nmccray420 (Dec 23, 2012)

Currently using two 20 watt UVB Bulbs with my Afghan Kush and Purple Wreck. They are 30 days into flower and are frosting up real nice. I use for 4 hours during the middle of the day, emulating the sun when it is at its highest peak. They definitely have already earned they're spot in my grow cycle
.


----------



## Kite High (Dec 23, 2012)

wow....ok...these are the ONLY fluorescents that produce the 150-400 uw/cm2 required to produce the affect

http://www.lightyourreptiles.com/ard3t546in54.html

and some Metal Halides that will

http://www.reptileuv.com/megaray-metal-halide-uvb.php

if you do not achieve at least 150/cm2 ime you will not tell a difference...I apply the uvb radiance throughout the entire grow timed with the main lighting

Hope it helps


----------



## Kite High (Dec 23, 2012)

colonuggs said:


> suppopse to add 100 watt uv2 per 1000 watt... helps to increase resin production... not raise/increace THC % content
> 
> [video=youtube;aQPC6oAMK4k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQPC6oAMK4k[/video]


ime experience it does NOT increase resin production but rather alters the cannabinoid ratios in favor of psychoactivity....lower cbd, increase of 10% average thc, and 7% average thcv validated on numerous lab tests on many compare grows with sativa or sativa dominant strains...indicas to a lesser degree as well as seems to make indicas take a bit longer to mature...hope it helps


----------



## PJ Diaz (Dec 24, 2012)

Nmccray420 said:


> Currently using two 20 watt UVB Bulbs with my Afghan Kush and Purple Wreck. They are 30 days into flower and are frosting up real nice. I use for 4 hours during the middle of the day, emulating the sun when it is at its highest peak. They definitely have already earned they're spot in my grow cycle
> .View attachment 2453592View attachment 2453593


G13 Haze @ 29 days 12/12, w/NO UVB, Ushio 600w HPS only:







Genetics are more important than UVB in determining resin production.


----------



## whazzup (Jan 4, 2013)

I don't get this. How can one define the output of a lamp as _power _per _surface_? That is irradiance, not radiant flux. Now let's look at a 35W 10% UVB lamp and let's even assume that it is 100% efficient (it is not of course )


A quick calc (correct me if I'm wrong)

Power lamp35W% UVB10%UVB output3,5WLit surface1m[SUP]2[/SUP]UVB Irradiance0,00035W/cm[SUP]2[/SUP]0,35mW/cm[SUP]2[/SUP]350µW/cm[SUP]2[/SUP]

Let's assume that the efficacy of the lamp is quite good then 250-300 uw/cm2 would be possible *IF* you would be able to spread this evenly over a 1m2 surface 

I have done tests with HPS versus plasma/HPS versus HPS/CMH versus plasma . Now the plasma light of course adds more than just UV to complete the spectrum, but so does the CMH: this lamp doesn't emit any significant UVB though. That way I was able to see the differences between the different light sources, using clones from the same mothers. 

If I can just focus on trichome development I see earlier trichome development and faster maturement of trichomes when using UVB (so more trichomes and cloudy earlier). In some cases we also saw elongation of the stem of the trichome. But another influence (which is confirmed by peer growers) is the intensity of the smell. And we all know by now that terpenes specifically have an influence on how we perceive the product. UVB hardens the leafs, which makes the plants less sensitive for fungi, so that's another advantage. All in all I think there is enough reason to experiment with it. Personally I have found significant differences with all the varieties (indica dominant, sativa dominant) that I have grown under these combinations of lights (at the same time, same climate, same irradiance etc.).

What really shocked me the first time during the grow: The full plasma grow looked really disappointing during the grow. Though it was extremely white and fragrant the buds seemed to stay behind in volume. They were very dense though. How dense they were I found out when they were dry - rock-hard nuggets that didn't shrink much ! We had 5-8% more dry matter compared to HPS after drying. So of course the HPS proved still most (energy) efficient (I did not expect anything else), but I certainly saw great quality and plant health improvements (including extremely good rooting) when plasma was added. A few of these effects I contribute to the UVA and UVB that are present in the plasma spectrum: the glass filter used transmits UVA and UVB, but blocks UVC. As the Luxim LEP is Metal Halide based it is high in UV. 

Interesting read


----------



## Kite High (Jan 4, 2013)

the uvb meter I use is what quantifies my observations...the small reptile lights made no detectable difference...nor did just cmh


----------



## igothydrotoneverywhere (Jan 12, 2013)

PJ Diaz said:


> G13 Haze @ 29 days 12/12, w/NO UVB, Ushio 600w HPS only:
> 
> Genetics are more important than UVB in determining resin production.


i dont think you can say that as you nor anyone else has done a proper experiment. sure genetics matter and play a big role, but saying its more important is just a theory. light intensity then genetics, i can make a crappy strain produce under the right light but a great strain CANNOT make up for poor lighting or an incomplete spectrum.

one thing is for sure,weed grown properly outdoors is stronger gram for gram than indoor. outdoor plants have more trichomes per square inch than indoor plants, indoor plants grow larger longer trichs, but not as many as outdoor grown in uv light. look at them side by side under a microscope, i have several times. probably twice as many. thats empirical data not even from stuff from the equatorial region where uv/uvb is the greatest.

the people that say uv light is bad for plants, man, yall really put too much faith in what you read in your science books. use logic and all 5 of your senses to decide what is right for marijunana and put down the antipussygettin material. the dankest nastiest weed on the planet grows in the areas where uv and uvb is the greatest. along the equator. unfortunately it is also the most illegal around those areas. the sad truth

google. Global UV index map

the "safety glass" in front of and around your bulb filament blocks all uv and uvb light. fact. take out your hood glass and cool your room not your hoods for more resin


----------



## Kite High (Jan 12, 2013)

igothydrotoneverywhere said:


> i dont think you can say that as you nor anyone else has done a proper experiment. sure genetics matter and play a big role, but saying its more important is just a theory. light intensity then genetics, i can make a crappy strain produce under the right light but a great strain CANNOT make up for poor lighting or an incomplete spectrum.
> 
> one thing is for sure,weed grown properly outdoors is stronger gram for gram than indoor. outdoor plants have more trichomes per square inch than indoor plants, indoor plants grow larger longer trichs, but not as many as outdoor grown in uv light. look at them side by side under a microscope, i have several times. probably twice as many. thats empirical data not even from stuff from the equatorial region where uv/uvb is the greatest.
> 
> ...


no way environment can outdo genetics as the plant is limited by the genes, however your are correct that environment can bring out the genetics full potential

btw there are no hid grow bulbs which emit enough uvb to cause the effect as it requires at least 150uw/cm2 to have an effect...best hid bulb I tested was cmh and it was 20 uw/cm2 at 6 inches from the bulb...the outer envelope glass blocks almost all the uvb ...the glass formulations need to include quartz to allow its passage...so removing all that will increase lumens but not uvb


----------



## yesum (Jan 13, 2013)

Kite High said:


> the uvb meter I use is what quantifies my observations...the small reptile lights made no detectable difference...nor did just cmh



I also have a uvb meter (Solarmeter 6.2) and use a Reptisun 10.0 cfl. Did you measure the 150 uw on your plants and not get the results? The uvb drops off really fast I guess you know. Goes from close to a 1000 at a inch to around 100 or less at a foot. So it is hard to use the uvb really.

I have to have the closest buds at 500 or more so I can get the distant ones to have anything.


----------



## Sir.Ganga (Jan 13, 2013)

Well I have been playin around with UV for years and my findings tell me that what the bulbs used and the additional heat out put are not worth the the additional thrichs, if any.


I ran all the way up to 250 watt of uv lighting per 1000watt hid with no noticible difference in thric production. Didderent bulbs, hood on, hood off, vertical, horzintal any way you can think and my results did not show worthyness.

I have a shit load of bulbs for sale...I have moved on from this experiment but it is good to keep experimenting.


----------



## Nizza (Jan 13, 2013)

im pretty sure that uv application should only be for 10 minutes at a time, 3 times a day, spaced an hour apart, at the peak hours of your light cycle; NOT 4 hours on non stop... resulting in up to 10% more thc


----------



## polyarcturus (Jan 13, 2013)

Nizza said:


> im pretty sure that uv application should only be for 10 minutes at a time, 3 times a day, spaced an hour apart, at the peak hours of your light cycle; NOT 4 hours on non stop... resulting in up to 10% more thc


no, it is 4 hours non stop, i run my uvb all 12 hours of lights on. 10 min a day 3x a day is not gonna do shit.


----------



## whazzup (Jan 13, 2013)

the sun doesn't only emit UV a few moments a day. To get results of that method (half an hour of UV a day) intensities should be extremely high. I can't imagine you get 10% more THC out of that.


----------



## Kite High (Jan 13, 2013)

yesum said:


> I also have a uvb meter (Solarmeter 6.2) and use a Reptisun 10.0 cfl. Did you measure the 150 uw on your plants and not get the results? The uvb drops off really fast I guess you know. Goes from close to a 1000 at a inch to around 100 or less at a foot. So it is hard to use the uvb really.
> 
> I have to have the closest buds at 500 or more so I can get the distant ones to have anything.


not with the correct lamps it is easy....these are the only AFFORDABLE lamps that supply adequate levels without heat problems...all those other reptile uv lamps are useless for our goals...as you stated their output goes down too quickly or they run too hot....see NO REPTILES need 400uw.cm2...and from my testings yield suffers if you go over 500 and no added potency or more accurately ratio manipulation

http://www.lightyourreptiles.com/ard3t546in54.html


http://www.reptileuv.com/megaray-metal-halide-uvb.php

the arcadias supply adequate levels at 8-12 inches and the mh at 3-4 foot


also they get this supplementation throughout their life, from sprout to harvest

I run the t5s on the sides and the mh's on top...and for the entire lighting cycle...and there is A PROFOUND DIFFERENCE in the lab tests and even moreso upon consumption


----------



## echlectica (Jan 14, 2013)

BITD they used to make vertical and horizontal bulbs if you turned a vertical bulb horizontal it would kick out hard UVB. Worked awesome but then they stopped making them...


----------



## yesum (Jan 15, 2013)

Kite High, I am growing in a 2x2x5' tent so the cfl hung vertically in center of grow, is already a tight fit with 5 other lights in there already. Will not be able to use your lights in my tent.

The levels of uvb are 150 or so at the farthest from the light, so that should just barely do it.

I guess you read from Phaeton and his uvb experiences. He gave the 500 uw upper limit and the 150 minimum if I remember right.

If you have the thc levels and cannabinoid ratios and terpenes too if that is possible, I would be interested to know what happened with them. I am guessing thc increased and cbd lessened.

Was the duration of the high lengthened. Was the high more sedating or trippy with the uvb as well as just heavier? Phaeton mentioned the indica put him to sleep after the uvb was used.


----------



## yesum (Jan 24, 2013)

bump for kite


----------



## Kite High (Jan 24, 2013)

Apologies. IME above 400 reduced yield for no more enhancement. Most profound lab test result was 10% increase in thc and 7% increase in thcv With a minuscule reduction of less than 3% cbd. No presence of cbn. This was in a sari a Dom. Indicate to a much less about 1/3 1/2 of the same occurrence but lil thcv. It makes for a creeper high that though you feel it initially it continues to climb higher even after intake has ceased. Very very trippy and quite euphoric. Hope it helps. Believe it or not I feel and seem to think that phaeton had too much light in total And this altered his results a bit from what I see.

sorry but can't comment on the indies as they make me sleep anyways and I do not care for them much at all except for sleep aid and even then not so much.


----------

