Area 51 XGS-190

MrFlux said:

Is it beneficial for flowering to have so much blue? The XT-E 3700K has about 16% of its power in the blue range of 430-480nm.

Click to expand...

16% seems fine to me. It still leaves a lot for red. Do you happen to know how much % is coming from the red.


And more importantly that is not the official spectrum...this is



I have flowered out under all whites 6100k(quite a bit of blue) and had great results. So I have great faith in this new a51 spectrum. It's not like he went from monochrome to all white...they have tested and tried many different spectrums of whites and red/white mixes, and this new all white panel got the thumbs up for a reason.

MrFlux said:

Is it beneficial for flowering to have so much blue? The XT-E 3700K has about 16% of its power in the blue range of 430-480nm.

Click to expand...

Spectral characteristics of lamp types
http://cpl.usu.edu/files/publications/poster/pub__6740181.pdf

check the blue part of the sun


Spectral Effects of Three Types of White Light-emitting Diodes
on Plant Growth and Development:
Absolute versus Relative Amounts of Blue Light
http://cpl.usu.edu/files/publications/publication/pub__4124704.pdf


Differences in the Response of Wheat, Soybean and Lettuce to Reduced
Blue Radiation

http://cpl.usu.edu/files/publications/publication/pub__266323.pdf

Anyone who is interested in buying a Area 51 light can use the discount code DISCOUNT50 to get 50 bucks off (usable for both the SGS and XGS)

I wonder how long that discount will be good for.

Would 2 of these lights be needed to properly cover a 4x4 footprint?

If so, what would the required height be for optimal umol over the entire footprint, for having one light, and for having two?

Greengenes707 said:

16% seems fine to me. It still leaves a lot for red. Do you happen to know how much % is coming from the red.

Click to expand...

There is 21% of power inside the red 620-680nm range. If you are curious about the efficiency, it looks like the emitters are driven at 750mA which would put them on being 30% radiometrically efficient.

Guod thanks for the links. For the crops they discuss there is no benefit for having extra blue above some absolute minimum amount.

You would want two to cover the area. I have one SGS in a 4x4 tent. Coverage seems okay for 3-4 plant fairly close together, not using all space in the tent.

GrowinDad said:

You would want two to cover the area. I have one SGS in a 4x4 tent. Coverage seems okay for 3-4 plant fairly close together, not using all space in the tent.

Click to expand...

How big are your plants? Would the 2 lights be good for a SOG of 12-16 plants in a 4x4 tent? Also, do you have pictures of your plants and current setup? I'd be curious to see.

I am having some challenges with my girls right now. Here are some pics. If you go through my journal you can find much of the setup.

I am pushing limits a bit seeing how much I can keep under the light. I have three trained going into 12-12 today. Also are two clones from when I topped them. On the outskirts of the direct light I have some basil and it is holding up. What I don't get is whether technically the basil is stealing light/energy from the others or just grabbing what would have been wasted.

Here's some pics of that give you a better idea of the whole tent (just took them)

Got my XGS-190 delivered today. It came w 2 pulleys but was surprised it didn't come w hangers to connect to the gold posts on top. I had to rig some wire between the posts to hang it. Light is super bright all white. 25% brighter than my 210w HTG light on the meter. Penetration seemed significantly better as well. Would be interested to see how others hung their light.

There is more than 21% color inside of the 620-680nm range.

Do you own a spectroradiometer that will give you such info?

I own one.

MrFlux said:

There is 21% of power inside the red 620-680nm range. If you are curious about the efficiency, it looks like the emitters are driven at 750mA which would put them on being 30% radiometrically efficient.

Guod thanks for the links. For the crops they discuss there is no benefit for having extra blue above some absolute minimum amount.

Click to expand...

Eraserhead said:

There is more than 21% color inside of the 620-680nm range.

Click to expand...

color, the talk was on Power...


would say this is the weakest Part...after the green gap

Just tried sending a PM, but your box is full

Eraserhead said:

There is more than 21% color inside of the 620-680nm range.

Do you own a spectroradiometer that will give you such info?

I own one.

Click to expand...

This is what the spectro says:

350-400 -1%
400-450 7%
450-500 9%
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%
650-700 15%
700-750 3%
750-800 -1%

Eraserhead said:

This is what the spectro says:

350-400 -1%
400-450 7%
450-500 9%
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%
650-700 15%
700-750 3%
750-800 -1%

Click to expand...

41% of the spectral distribution is in the 500-600nm......wow........dat green gap

Gonna be an interesting couple months around here.

Eraserhead said:

This is what the spectro says:

350-400 -1%
400-450 7%
450-500 9%
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%
650-700 15%
700-750 3%
750-800 -1%

Click to expand...

------------------
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %

19% at 500-550nm against 22% at 550-600nm range


must be way less than 19%
----------------------------------
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%

and for the 550-600nm against 600-650nm range
here the Triangles have the same size


the area for 600-650nm is less than that at 550-600nm
-----------------------------

I'll check again. I posted the numbers yesterday just a minute after I got them, and got the number specifically just for that post, I didn't have them on hand prior. The spectrum chart I've had for about 2 months.

This time I'll leave the lamp on for at least an hour before getting figures for each color group. Also on Monday I'll call Stellarnet to make sure I did everything correctly, I've only had the spectro for about 4 months and am still learning all of its functions. So if there are errors in those numbers, I'll correct them. I'll post the results after I return from spending the weekend in Boston and can also call Stellarnet.

Y'all stay safe.

guod said:

------------------
500-550 19%
550-600 22 %

19% at 500-550nm against 22% at 550-600nm range
View attachment 2904234

must be way less than 19%
----------------------------------
550-600 22 %
600-650 24%

and for the 550-600nm against 600-650nm range
here the Triangles have the same size
View attachment 2904237

the area for 600-650nm is less than that at 550-600nm
-----------------------------

Click to expand...

^^ Appears there is a tiny crack in the sensor, that could very well cause inaccurate numbers. The crack wasn't there the last time I used it a couple months ago... So, on Monday I'll order a new sensor.

If Guod never pointed that out, I may have not discovered the crack until the 2015 lamps were in the making, which is when I would have probably used the spectro next.

So, thanks to Guod.

Hey, still waiting to hear from you. PM me if you like. You also have my personal email

Eraserhead said:

^^ Appears there is a tiny crack in the sensor, that could very well cause inaccurate numbers. The crack wasn't there the last time I used it a couple months ago... So, on Monday I'll order a new sensor.

If Guod never pointed that out, I may have not discovered the crack until the 2015 lamps were in the making, which is when I would have probably used the spectro next.

So, thanks to Guod.

Click to expand...

From the numbers it looks like the peaks are clipped: The integration time of the spectrometer is set too high. That, and not taking a dark reading first (for subtracting ambient light) are classic rookie mistakes of new spectrometer owners