BigBudBalls
Well-Known Member
Well, with that given, what spectrum do you feel they respond to?. What spectrum(s) can I cut out with no ill effect?
14x1750=1750 WTF, Small Cfl Array, Input Appreciated
- Thread starter P@ssw0rd
- Start date
Well, with that given, what spectrum do you feel they respond to?. What spectrum(s) can I cut out with no ill effect?
LoganSmith
Well-Known Member
So Al are you saying that the amount of energy that the lights put off is what we need to be looking at? How is this measured?
So If I'm using two four foot vs. four four foot flou. bulbs I still will have the same amount of energy that the plants need.
Thanks for the help
So If I'm using two four foot vs. four four foot flou. bulbs I still will have the same amount of energy that the plants need.
Thanks for the help
Garden Knowm
The Love Doctor
My understanding of this subject is that the term "Lumen" covers alot of ground because of its improper use in most cases when talking about what were talking about,stacking lights does add to the intensity of light perceived by the eye but it does not add to the lumen output,this is where the confusion starts,in most cases the confusion is because this method of (stacking lights) will show more visable light but it will not show up on a lumen meter, because the lumen output never changes,even with more bulbs,confused yet? So am i but dont worry there's more
The added light that is clearly visable by the human eye is not due to added lumens,it is because by running more lights you are adding to the "Radiant Light" which is the total amount of light visable at any time,Radiant Light is what we see, not lumens.
So to answer your question about lumens,whatever the lumen rating is from your strongest bulb that will be your total lumen output, even with all the lights running in a dasiy chain,what will increase with the added lights is the Radiant light in the area.
Lumens don't 'add.'
Here's 2 CFLs with a lux meter sensor within 2" of each.
Here's the meter reading one of the two CFLs as pictured above:
huh, they're almost exactly the same....
So, am I fucking retarded, is my lux meter fucking retarded, are my CFLs fucking retarded or is the science fucking retarded?
Note the glaring omission of the possibility that YOU could be fucking retarded...
So, as Dr Julius Sumner Miller would say- WHY is it so?
Luminous intensity (in lumens) is a measure of brightness. Putting a lamp next to another makes it no brighter. The lux meter is reading the intensity of the brightest light source- it is not counting the number of photons.
Luminous intensity in parallel is a lot like voltage in parallel. You get the same voltage/luminous intensity but you can source more current/light more area at the same voltage/same luminous intensity. However, it's not possible to add luminous intensity in series as one can add voltages of batteries in series. If you want more luminous 'voltage' you have to get a higher 'luminous voltage' single source- aka a more intense light... like HID.
The lumen unit measures the energy of or 'push' behind the photons, not the quantity of them.
1x or 1,000,000x 1750 lumen CFLs over a certain area will yield 1750 lumens. You can cover more area at 1750lm with your million 1750lm CFLs, but none of the lights gets any brighter than 1750lm.
WOW... thanks...
This added info is fantastic!
iloveyou
Al B. Fuct
once had a dog named
Easy as HPS for flower and MH for veg.
Yep, measured in lumens.
My only point in all this is that if you want more lumens, you get a brighter light, not a greater quantity of dim lights.
Depends on the lumen rating of the tubes. What you're looking for is the brightest (highest lumen rating) single light source. A pair of 1200lm, 24" fluoros are NOT brighter than a single F40CW making 2200lm.
Thanks GK.
Just being a good citizen.
Al B. Fuct
once had a dog named
Too bad this part of it isn't quite right:
The concept is right but I used the wrong units to quantify it.
A lumen is a measure of intensity. The correct unit for light intensity over a certain area is the lux. 1 lux = 1 lumen per m2.
BigBudBalls
Well-Known Member
Ok, quick question:Easy as HPS for flower and MH for veg.
Yep, measured in lumens.
My only point in all this is that if you want more lumens, you get a brighter light, not a greater quantity of dim lights.
Depends on the lumen rating of the tubes. What you're looking for is the brightest (highest lumen rating) single light source. A pair of 1200lm, 24" fluoros are NOT brighter than a single F40CW making 2200lm.
Thanks GK.
Just being a good citizen.
Using standard tungsten bulbs:
How come when I put 4 60W bulbs in my overhead light the livingroom gets brighter then just one? One 60W or 4 by you calcs should be the same?
(i'm just playing devil's advocate, and just striring up poop. Still luvs ya!)
panhead
Well-Known Member
BigBudBalls
Well-Known Member
If he tweaks my grow NO PROB!!!Big Al is gonna come to your house if you keep that up
.
Will have some killer ribs on the smoker waiting!!!!!!!!!
(and depending on when he gets pissed enough, might have a few buds waiting too!)
JohnnyBravo
Well-Known Member
Can you do the same experiment with the meter 6-12 inches away and post the results....very curious to see the resultsLumens don't 'add.'
Here's 2 CFLs with a lux meter sensor within 2" of each.
Here's the meter reading one of the two CFLs as pictured above:
huh, they're almost exactly the same....
So, am I fucking retarded, is my lux meter fucking retarded, are my CFLs fucking retarded or is the science fucking retarded?
Note the glaring omission of the possibility that YOU could be fucking retarded...
So, as Dr Julius Sumner Miller would say- WHY is it so?
Luminous intensity (in lumens) is a measure of brightness. Putting a lamp next to another makes it no brighter. The lux meter is reading the intensity of the brightest light source- it is not counting the number of photons.
Luminous intensity in parallel is a lot like voltage in parallel. You get the same voltage/luminous intensity but you can source more current/light more area at the same voltage/same luminous intensity. However, it's not possible to add luminous intensity in series as one can add voltages of batteries in series. If you want more luminous 'voltage' you have to get a higher 'luminous voltage' single source- aka a more intense light... like HID.
The lumen unit measures the energy of or 'push' behind the photons, not the quantity of them.
1x or 1,000,000x 1750 lumen CFLs over a certain area will yield 1750 lumens. You can cover more area at 1750lm with your million 1750lm CFLs, but none of the lights gets any brighter than 1750lm.
Al B. Fuct
once had a dog named
Aha, a trick of the light!
With multiple identical point sources light reflects off objects to your eye from more angles. This helps human visual acuity but is not brighter. If you were to put your 4 60W filaments parallel in the same glass bulb envelope and compared it to a normal 60W, this would become more apparent. Keep in mind that a single filament 240W incandescent lamp is not the same as 4x 60W in parallel in the same globe. A single 240W filament of a physical length comparable to that in a 60W globe will be designed for much higher temperature operation and will incandesce more brightly than a 60W filament.
BigBudBalls
Well-Known Member
And isn't that meter reading the *human visible* light spectrum? Same spectrum you said wasn't viable to canibis?
Ribs are still on the smoker for ya man! (only jabbing at ya man. c'mon down! Good ole smoked ribs from some yuppie yanky trash.)
Ribs are still on the smoker for ya man! (only jabbing at ya man. c'mon down! Good ole smoked ribs from some yuppie yanky trash.)
FilthyFletch
Mr I Can Do That For Half
I dont understand the use of these cfls in this fire hazrad setup. If its for clones and veg just get a simple 4 foot shop light for about 8-$10 which will be perfect for clones and vegging a good amount of plants.Then go hid since a 250 watt light can be found at homedepot for under $70 or a digital switchable 400 watt setup can be bought for $99 new online and will save money time and out perform??
BigBudBalls
Well-Known Member
Ok, I'll bite (but not a Know everything) why is a plant different from a human?Aha, a trick of the light!
And how do I put a bulb in parallel when it is not coherent light? There is no S *or* P polarization and just scattered.
Wouldn't the plant 'see' the intensity the same way as a human?
I deal with high power CO2 lasers and yes it true length matters to power output. But a star Vs 00 vs multi mode is the difference between cutting and welding a plate/sheet.
BigBudBalls
Well-Known Member
Al B. Fuct
once had a dog named
It is- but more dim lights do not a brighter light make! You're just spreading around more low-intensity photons.
I didn't say any part of the spectrum 'wasn't viable' to cannabis.
Lack of eyes and human judgement on perceived brightness.
By putting one lamp next to another.
What has polarisation got to do with pairing or ganging incoherent light sources?
A human making a guess about light intensity is using judgment, something plants don't do.
hey, that's really nice. You grow plants with those?
Al B. Fuct
once had a dog named
Yep, I'll have a crack at that soon.
This is awesome.
Now I have a couple of questions.
Consider a single plant about a foot wide with one 26w CFL on the right and one 26w CFL on the left about 15 inches apart (plant in between).
1) The lumens is the same as if there was only one CFL, and the greatest lumens will be right next each bulb respectively, right?
2) But if we took away one of the bulbs, the plant's benefit due to light will be halved, right?
3) Is it correct to say that lumens is *not* the right unit to measure the benefit of light to plants?
4) Is "lumens" (for our purposes) just a general indication of the energy level of the photons reaching the plants?
5) Is it correct that two identical bulbs next to each other would provide the same lumens as only one, but double the photons?
6) Can some multiple of lower energy level photons provide the same benefit as one higher energy level photon to the plant?
7) We have all seen the chart showing that lumens decrease with distance from the source, such that lumens 3 feet from the source is about 1/10 of what it is at the source. Is the chart correct concerning the decrease in lumens with distance?
Sorry if it seems like a quiz. Just trying to figure out the practical implications. I'm not primarily a CFL user, but I do use them for side lighting. And for all the CFL users out there, I'm sure they don't want to be spinning their wheels (on the electricity meter).
I mean lumens aside, the basic problem is about how we measure (ceteris paribus) benefit-of-light-to-plants. Since there does not seem to be such a measure, how do we approximate one, and what kinds of practical math can we do with it?
Now I have a couple of questions.
Consider a single plant about a foot wide with one 26w CFL on the right and one 26w CFL on the left about 15 inches apart (plant in between).
1) The lumens is the same as if there was only one CFL, and the greatest lumens will be right next each bulb respectively, right?
2) But if we took away one of the bulbs, the plant's benefit due to light will be halved, right?
3) Is it correct to say that lumens is *not* the right unit to measure the benefit of light to plants?
4) Is "lumens" (for our purposes) just a general indication of the energy level of the photons reaching the plants?
5) Is it correct that two identical bulbs next to each other would provide the same lumens as only one, but double the photons?
6) Can some multiple of lower energy level photons provide the same benefit as one higher energy level photon to the plant?
7) We have all seen the chart showing that lumens decrease with distance from the source, such that lumens 3 feet from the source is about 1/10 of what it is at the source. Is the chart correct concerning the decrease in lumens with distance?
Sorry if it seems like a quiz. Just trying to figure out the practical implications. I'm not primarily a CFL user, but I do use them for side lighting. And for all the CFL users out there, I'm sure they don't want to be spinning their wheels (on the electricity meter).
I mean lumens aside, the basic problem is about how we measure (ceteris paribus) benefit-of-light-to-plants. Since there does not seem to be such a measure, how do we approximate one, and what kinds of practical math can we do with it?
Al B. Fuct
once had a dog named
That'd be one mighty unhappy plant. Due to LPMA (fluoro) lighting's low intensity output, foliar penetration of CFL is only useful for a couple of inches.. but I realise you were going down Hypothetical Ave, so let's run with it.
Right. The luminous output of a lamp is measured in lumens, the amount of light energy hitting a particular area is quantified in lux (lumens per m2).
Since intensity reduces with distance from the light source by an inverse square function, the greatest lux figure available will be right up against the lamp's tube.
Yes.
Right again. You'd use 'lux' or lumens per m2.
Yes. It's possible to split hairs further by comparing the lamp's spectral output to the spectral response of chlorophyll. The lumen figure is good for general comparison of lamp brightness, though.
Yes. Double the low-intensity photons.
No. Cannabis needs the foliar penetration capacity of high intensity light to produce dense buds. Pairing or ganging low-intensity lamps does not improve their foliar penetration capacity because of the 'lumens don't add' concept.
I haven't seen the specific chart you're referring to, but the concept of reduction of intensity by an inverse square of the distance from the lamp tube is sound.
Adding side CFLs to an overhead HPS grow is a bit like strapping a model airplane engine to the front bumper of your Ferrari. If your foliar density is so great that you're not getting adequate penetration down to your lower leaves, the plants are too tall or could benefit from some judicious pruning.
This is one of the primary problems with a traditional veg-then-flower growing style that SoG overcomes. By flowering clones as soon as they have a good spray of roots as is done in SoG, the plants don't get very tall, helpful with the inherent foliar penetration limitations of indoor lighting (even the mighty 1000HPS). By removing the branches on the lower 1/3 of the plant as we do in SoG, foliar penetration requirements are again lessened, but more to the point, cannabis produces progressively smaller buds from the tip down- and no amount of light will make the lowers as big as a top cola. May as well not grow that part of the plant.
I agree that we don't have good figures on what amount of light produces what amt of growth in cannabis. However, there's a wealth of practical experience out there which allows you to make a darn good guess as to what sort of lighting will give you the results you want. When deciding between fluoro and HID light, it's fairly obvious which works best for flowering cannabis.
