1 of my drivers is hot to touch.

diggs99

diggs99

Well-Known Member
Thanks for that very well explained post Chief.

My main concern is comparing my lights to others that are built similar , some even running smaller drivers than i am, they are putting out 60-80-100,000k lux numbers at 12-14" from canopy, im only doing 60,000 @ 2-3"

Shouldnt 480w of LED be much better at producing light than a 600w hps? i know its 120 less watts, but its also 3-4x the price lol

Whytewidow warned me that i would need to dim my lights cause of brightness, but as it stands, i can max out both pots and slam the lights on top of the canopy and still only hit 60,000 lux, not even danger zone numbers. I dont know enough about all of this stuff, but i gotta say, i was expecting more from these fixtures than 600w equivalent

Maybe i was completely wrong when i thought these 480s were gonna be closer to comparing to a se hps 1k, than barely beating a 600w.

i coulda bought 6 more 600w hps lights for what i paid for these 2 fixtures lol
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
Ok you got me curious enough lol, after reviewing the data sheets, it looks like at 82mA your looking close to 127% flux, and the CRI 80 was 32lm and the CRI 90 was 26lm, so if the strips are a blend of the 2, you're looking at an average of 29lm per chip at nominal, and 82.5mA is 127% of nominal flux (rough guess looking at chart on data sheet), so 1.27 x 29 = 36.83lm per chip, there's 112 chips per strip and 18 strips so, 112 x 18 x 36.83lm = 74,249lm. Thats roughly 50k lux (74,249lm / 1.486 = 49,965lux), so if you're at 60k lux then at first glance it looks like your outperforming whats anticipated.

Also, because the SPDs of your LED and an HPS are different we realistically cant compare lumen to lumen. Have a look at these pics, the luminosity curve is weighted to 555nm and that means that the HPS will have more of its light being used to calculate a lux reading than the blended LED fixture, the 90 CRI SPD has a decent portion that is weighted poorly, and the HPS has almost its entire output within a higher weighted region (its why the CRI90 has less lumens, despite its umol/s output being almost the same to that of the CRI 80)..

The yellow curve is the standard luminosity curve, and the red & green curves are the curves of people that have differing types of color blindness...
Luminosity w Color Blindness.png

CREE 3V J...
CRI 80 & 90 Overlay.png


HPS...
HPS Luminosity.jpeg

EDIT:
Just now noticed the top CREE graphs were 4000k and higher... DOH!... so just look at the bottom CREE graph, the 80 CRI will be more inline with the luminosity curve but more out of line than any of the top 4000k and greater CCT curves, and just barely shifted more so into the luminosity curve compared to the CRI 90, Im assuming. So each of your LED lumens is actually worth more photons than an actual HPS lumen. Your LEDs have more photons per lumen than a standard HPS of any wattage, so your LED lumens are worth more. Though when quantifying light in lumens, you only get half the story, without the SPD it could be misleading, though same with photon count, lol but less so misleading.
 
Last edited:
diggs99

diggs99

Well-Known Member
I will read that post numerous times , probably still wont understand most of it, my god you guys are smart lol

Thanks for taking the time to do that Chief, i appreciate it.

Hopefully @whytewidow pops online soon and can clarify his numbers on the lights he built using same strips and drivers.

I coulda swore his numbers were much greater than 60,000. and he never runs his drivers at max....mine are at max and 60k is on top of the plants.


Sidenote chief,

another grower in another thread showed me his numbers from a 14 strip build using 300w , how could that out perform my fixture in lux if hes using less strips and a smaller driver? He was reading 60-70,000 lux at 12"

is it all based on what the strips can do?

I apologize in advance for all the what must seem like silly questions to you guys. Im just having a hard time figuring this stuff out and when i compare my lights to many others who went the diy route, they are all kicking my ass in lux umols/m2

Honest to god question, would you be happy with this light, performing as it is to cover 3x4 flowering tables? i was expecting more to be honest, so you wont hurt my feelings lol
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
diggs99 said:
I will read that post numerous times , probably still wont understand most of it, my god you guys are smart lol

Thanks for taking the time to do that Chief, i appreciate it.

Hopefully @whytewidow pops online soon and can clarify his numbers on the lights he built using same strips and drivers.

I coulda swore his numbers were much greater than 60,000. and he never runs his drivers at max....mine are at max and 60k is on top of the plants.


Sidenote chief,

another grower in another thread showed me his numbers from a 14 strip build using 300w , how could that out perform my fixture in lux if hes using less strips and a smaller driver? He was reading 60-70,000 lux at 12"

is it all based on what the strips can do?

I apologize in advance for all the what must seem like silly questions to you guys. Im just having a hard time figuring this stuff out and when i compare my lights to many others who went the diy route, they are all kicking my ass in lux umols/m2

Honest to god question, would you be happy with this light, performing as it is to cover 3x4 flowering tables? i was expecting more to be honest, so you wont hurt my feelings lol
Click to expand...
Lol no sweat!

Some thoughts...
Tilt angle of the meter will effect results, distance from source will effect results, SPD will effect results, proximity of reflective walls, different meters, ect, lots will effect the measurements, so its really hard to say where the disconnect in comparison is coming from.

I think the strip style is maybe the most efficient way to cover a canopy with light. The distribution is almost perfectly even. I like the blend of CRI 80 and CRI 90 as well as 3000k as a CCT. Id probably jump to a 600h though if trying to flower under it, and then after that maybe add some UV bulbs, else its a pretty solid little fixture you've built I think.I like that the chips can handle about 3x as much as your throwing at them which means they are running efficiently. I wouldn't worry too much about the lux meter but thats just me. Ive used my cellphone before (some app I cant remember) but it only went to 50k lux and tilt angle really effected the readings and I was just eye balling distance, no apparatus to keep it constant. I then went out and bought a full fledged lux meter with coiled cord and all lol connecting the sensor to the CPU and even with that I could never get the lumen measurements to match the lumen rating of the lights I was testing. So i just threw it away lol, Ive been reading lots of people using meters to determine hang height ect, but I just let the plants tell me when to raise or lower now because personally i could never get a consistent measurement, each light was different, and both meters were different and I dont know what meter they used to print whatever lux you're supposedly supposed to have, or what CCT they used, or even what distance they measured at.

EDIT:
CREE is a pretty reputable chip manufacturer so Im leaning with some sort of variable throwing your measurement off rather than the chips are under performing. I didn't see any flux bins for the chips, but even if there are, when running at a 1/3 of max even the lower flux Chinese knockoffs will run really efficient. You already confirmed the power that your fixture was consuming by checking the Vout and Iout, so your chips are eating the power which means the light is being made, so I think there just some variable thats throwing the measurements off, different meters, different distance, maybe battery power, ect
 
Last edited:
diggs99

diggs99

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
Lol no sweat!

Some thoughts...
Tilt angle of the meter will effect results, distance from source will effect results, SPD will effect results, proximity of reflective walls, different meters, ect, lots will effect the measurements, so its really hard to say where the disconnect in comparison is coming from.

I think the strip style is maybe the most efficient way to cover a canopy with light. The distribution is almost perfectly even. I like the blend of CRI 80 and CRI 90 as well as 3000k as a CCT. Id probably jump to a 600h though if trying to flower under it, and then after that maybe add some UV bulbs, else its a pretty solid little fixture you've built I think.I like that the chips can handle about 3x as much as your throwing at them which means they are running efficiently. I wouldn't worry too much about the lux meter but thats just me. Ive used my cellphone before (some app I cant remember) but it only went to 50k lux and tilt angle really effected the readings and I was just eye balling distance, no apparatus to keep it constant. I then went out and bought a full fledged lux meter with coiled cord and all lol connecting the sensor to the CPU and even with that I could never get the lumen measurements to match the lumen rating of the lights I was testing. So i just threw it away lol, Ive been reading lots of people using meters to determine hang height ect, but I just let the plants tell me when to raise or lower now because personally i could never get a consistent measurement, each light was different, and both meters were different and I dont know what meter they used to print whatever lux you're supposedly supposed to have, or what CCT they used, or even what distance they measured at.

EDIT:
CREE is a pretty reputable chip manufacturer so Im leaning with some sort of variable throwing your measurement off rather than the chips are under performing. I didn't see any flux bins for the chips, but even if there are, when running at a 1/3 of max even the lower flux Chinese knockoffs will run really efficient. You already confirmed the power that your fixture was consuming by checking the Vout and Iout, so your chips are eating the power which means the light is being made, so I think there just some variable thats throwing the measurements off, different meters, different distance, maybe battery power, ect
Click to expand...
Man your posts make it easy for an LED noob to understand. I appreciate you bro.
I think i may take a similar path to you and just let the plants dictate what i do with the lights, ive had a decent eye for this stuff when running my hps and cmh, never used lux meters then and they did well lol.

Ya these lights are strictly for flowering, maybe 1 or 2 weeks veg at times, but thats it.

Rather than go with 600s, can i just add a 240 or 320 to each fixture? Would that be feasible? or would i just be better off and it be easier to toss the 480s aside and buy new 600s?
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
diggs99 said:
Man your posts make it easy for an LED noob to understand. I appreciate you bro.
I think i may take a similar path to you and just let the plants dictate what i do with the lights, ive had a decent eye for this stuff when running my hps and cmh, never used lux meters then and they did well lol.

Ya these lights are strictly for flowering, maybe 1 or 2 weeks veg at times, but thats it.

Rather than go with 600s, can i just add a 240 or 320 to each fixture? Would that be feasible? or would i just be better off and it be easier to toss the 480s aside and buy new 600s?
Click to expand...
Well idk.. I'm conflicted, you can add extra drivers, but after reviewing the info again, if you're working with only 12ft2 area as opposed to a 16ft2 area, you may want to try a bloom first before spending extra. The excess lighting on the edges is a bit of a wild card imo, and a bonus most likely. There have been some pretty crazy yields reported as of late, and aside from the frauds that I silently judge lol, I do have to admit there have been some reputable members achieving some pretty ridiculous results, if I were you Id lay it out so that the (2) outside strips were pulled in a bit from the 48" edge, perhaps only a total of 34" apart (?), and then Id lay out the remaining strips equidistant from each other and once that was completed Id slide the last few strips a bit closer to the newly-moved-in farthest outside strips and Id try to make the middle strips have a bit more spacing in between them. Personally, I think advancements in most industries are accepted with skepticism at best, if at all, and Im curious what a decent and honest grower has to yield from a setup like this ha, I think if RH is maintained around 55% or above you should have pretty significant results, but not really sure

EDIT:
LOL Hapyy birthday America!

and 34" only if you have reflective walls nearby, otherwise probably spread out to about 40"
 
Last edited:
diggs99

diggs99

Well-Known Member
Well theres no better way to find out than to try lol

Im going to finish out this run, if im unhappy ill make changes, if im happy with the results, the lights may live to grow another day lol

Heres what 2 of the tables look like as of last night, one thing is for certain, they have exploded in growth in the week they have been under these lights, so they must like them lol

Thanks for everything Chief
 

Attachments

Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top