High Light efficiency tests (TEKNIK) - 2.47 umol/j CRI 94.2

So the results from TEKNIK's goniometer testing came back today and we're pretty happy with the results.

2.47 umol/j for a CRI94 board isn't too bad at all. The other board tested 2.46 umol/j at CRI95.

First thing I'd like to do is thank TEKNIK for donating their time and resources to this project. Having actual data instead of "guesstimates" is invaluable. This data will be used to create IES files for typical light footprints and will save a lot of time compared to physically PAR mapping each light.

One thing that did surprise us is that there was almost no difference in efficiency between the three-LED board (Nichia V3F1 2700K CRI90 + Optisolis 2700K CRI98 + Seoul Semiconductor Sunlike 6500K CRI95) and the two-LED board (no Sunlike). So the revised Sunlike UV white phosphor LEDs are running at similar efficiency to the Optisolis.

The CRI ratings were a little bit off from those tested with our hand-held spectrometer: the three-LED board came in at 94+ and the two-LED board at 95.

Board readings were taken at 1.5A (1/3 power), 2.5A, 3.5A and 4A. These boards will both go up to 4.5A.

Here are the three-LED board results:

Here are the results for the two-LED board

Thanks @TEKNIK!

Yeah, he did a stellar job - and all for free. All the more reason why I wish he'd stuck around.

Now, I don't mean to brag (yes I do!), but to give you an idea of what 2.5 umol/j means, it is also what HLG claims for their 550 V2 with Samsung's latest LM301B 3000K/4000K CRI80 LEDs here: https://horticulturelightinggroup.com/products/hlg-550

Some many not realise how hard it is to get those figures from a mix of high CRI 2700K leds, including relatively inefficient UV-based white phosphors, but that's basically where all the money goes in purchasing the latest Nichia 3030 LEDs with top Flux, low voltage bins.

Not a pissing match, just giving everyone a real-world comparison of what the figures mean.

I guess it also explains why I was surprised with your PAR map results coming in a bit better than expected.

Prawn Connery said:

Yeah, he did a stellar job - and all for free. All the more reason why I wish he'd stuck around.

Now, I don't mean to brag (yes I do!), but to give you an idea of what 2.5 umol/j means, it is also what HLG claims for their 550 V2 with Samsung's latest LM301B 3000K/4000K CRI80 LEDs here: https://horticulturelightinggroup.com/products/hlg-550

Some many not realise how hard it is to get those figures from a mix of high CRI 2700K leds, including relatively inefficient UV-based white phosphors, but that's basically where all the money goes in purchasing the latest Nichia 3030 LEDs with top Flux, low voltage bins.

Not a pissing match, just giving everyone a real-world comparison of what the figures mean.

I guess it also explains why I was surprised with your PAR map results coming in a bit better than expected.

Click to expand...

I plan to give em a real world pissing match...

That sounds a bit low, no..? QB's reach 2,49μMol/J at max current.. Hmmh?! So what's the reason for that?
The main reason are the different test methods!
QB are sphere tested which means brightness is measured on board level. Tested at canopy level (with a certain distance to the sensor) the efficiency is a good bit lower and I think these boards are indeed in the same ballpark.
Maybe we will see QB genio tests soon and compare them direcly cuz as far as I know HLG was also interested in those tests and plans to send him(TEKNIK) a few of their boards.
A few of you may know the testing vids of the Migro owner? That's already a hint what we can expect getting out of a QB on canopy level.
So, before you decide they are not worth it wait for the QB tests. These results are really not comparable 1:1 cuz sphere test don't tell us whole story.

Randomblame said:

That sounds a bit low, no..? QB's reach 2,49μMol/J at max current.. Hmmh?! So what's the reason for that?
The main reason are the different test methods!
QB are sphere tested which means brightness is measured on board level. Tested at canopy level (with a certain distance to the sensor) the efficiency is a good bit lower and I think these boards are indeed in the same ballpark.
Maybe we will see QB genio tests soon and compare them direcly cuz as far as I know HLG was also interested in those tests and plans to send him(TEKNIK) a few of their boards.
A few of you may know the testing vids of the Migro owner? That's already a hint what we can expect getting out of a QB on canopy level.
So, before you decide they are not worth it wait for the QB tests. These results are really not comparable 1:1 cuz sphere test don't tell us whole story.

Click to expand...

I personally really like the in-my-4x4 test...and it’s comin...

Randomblame said:

That sounds a bit low, no..? QB's reach 2,49μMol/J at max current.. Hmmh?! So what's the reason for that?
The main reason are the different test methods!
QB are sphere tested which means brightness is measured on board level. Tested at canopy level (with a certain distance to the sensor) the efficiency is a good bit lower and I think these boards are indeed in the same ballpark.
Maybe we will see QB genio tests soon and compare them direcly cuz as far as I know HLG was also interested in those tests and plans to send him(TEKNIK) a few of their boards.
A few of you may know the testing vids of the Migro owner? That's already a hint what we can expect getting out of a QB on canopy level.
So, before you decide they are not worth it wait for the QB tests. These results are really not comparable 1:1 cuz sphere test don't tell us whole story.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen the sphere test (did @CobKits do one?), just numbers that appear to be based on "estimated" QER. Any links?

Or_Gro said:

I personally really like the in-my-4x4 test...and it’s comin...

Click to expand...

Yeah, they are top notch, no question!
Would be nice to see a direct PAR or spectrometer comparision with 1 QB and 1 HL board, both at the same wattage and distance to the sensor and above a 2x 2' area or inside a 2x 2' tent. I'm sure the average PPFD numbers at let's say 100w would be pretty close. And when we set the drive current so that the diodes on both boards run with the exact same current we would compare Samsung against Nichia. Not really a fair comparision because the Optisolis it not Nichia's brightest diode and use a purple photon pump but nevertheless interesting to see.

Also there are 450 LEDs on a High Light and only 288 on a QB, so the individual diodes won't be running at the same currents. Plus the High Lights are configured to supply different currents to different LEDs, so not all LEDs get the same current when the boards are on.

Prawn Connery said:

I haven't seen the sphere test (did @CobKits do one?), just numbers that appear to be based on "estimated" QER. Any links?

Click to expand...

Don't know if @CobKits still has the test. I believe it was in one of the Citizen COB threads where he has mounted 4 or 5 Citizen 1212's on the backside of a QBv1 and has run them at the same wattage to beat QB numbers but this was with gen 1 boards.
I've seen the QB test video of the Migro owner(best growlight 201.
Wait, I will have a quick search and post the link in a minute...

And here it is already..

Best growlight 2018

QB288v2 with acrylic sheet, 1,91μMol/J

QB288v2 without.. +3%

QB96v2 1,98μMol/j

Prawn Connery said:

Also there are 450 LEDs on a High Light and only 288 on a QB, so the individual diodes won't be running at the same currents. Plus the High Lights are configured to supply different currents to different LEDs, so not all LEDs get the same current when the boards are on.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I know, buddy. I was somehow involved..., lol!
I only want to relativise the results to make sure everyone understand why those numbers look low in the 1st moment.
2,5μMol/J at 150mA drive current with LM301b looks much better like 2,18μMol/J at ~140mA with Nichia.
But this difference is because of the test methods.
Measured at the recommended hanging heights and in the recommended area the values are much lower. Pretty sure when we do a side by side test and run both types of diodes at the same drive current(same height, same space) the results would be pretty close. And at this point the better spectrum makes the difference. I could even imagine we see even higher average numbers for the Nichia boards if we do a side by side like the Migro owner.
He may is interested to test a HL board too when they really become available sometime.

Randomblame said:

Oh yeah, I know, buddy. I was somehow involved..., lol!
I only want to relativize the results to make sure everyone understand why those numbers look low in the 1st moment.
2,5μMol/J at 150mA drive current with LM301b looks much better like 2,18μMol/J at ~140mA with Nichia.
But this difference is because of the test methods.
Measured at the recommended hanging heights and in the recommended area the values are much lower. Pretty sure when we do a side by side test and run both types of diodes at the same drive current(same height, same space) the results would be pretty close. And at this point the better spectrum makes the difference. I could even imagine we see even higher average numbers for the Nichia boards if we do a side by side like the Migro owner.
He may is interested to test a HL board too when they really become available sometime.

Click to expand...

I wouldnt fret about those numbers. The 2700k 90 cri spectrum is a beast in itself. We had some dinky Vesta strips out-flower our other boards with 25w per square foot against +35w on the 3000k/80cri. This spectrum.is so productive i suggest it might be hard growing under 1000ppfd without deficiencies.

PAR numbers measured with a spectrometer and a 380-780nm wide measuring range would say even more cuz most PAR meters stop reading above 700nm.

Rocket Soul said:

I wouldnt fret about those numbers. The 2700k 90 cri spectrum is a beast in itself. We had some dinky Vesta strips out-flower our other boards with 25w per square foot against +35w on the 3000k/80cri. This spectrum.is so productive i suggest it might be hard growing under 1000ppfd without deficiencies.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I followed the Vesta test thread, bro, and it seems the Vesta's are far, I mean really far, under rated.
2,47 fu....n μMol/J at 500mA...?!? I thought to have something in my eyes, lol!
And the lumen output was below 140lm/w.. That's somehow strange cuz I believe the Nichia diodes have an even higher lumen output and are above 150lm/w and the CRI is even higher too.
Really crazy numbers for such a low priced strip with color tuning option. I already consider to use a few of them for side light in my small veg area. Have tested sidelights the 1st time and really like the results. No larf down to the bottom is for sure worth a few watts and the option to tune the spectrum is for sure useful in the vegetative stage. Think on blue light that hits the stem and cause stacked nodes and almost no internodial spacings.

But I still have a bad feeling.
If 137lm/w equals 2.47μmol/J, then that would be an incredible low conversion factor of 55.465 and that's the values for the 5000°k side at 500mA. That somehow tastes bitter..

Or_Gro said:

I personally really like the in-my-4x4 test...and it’s comin...

Click to expand...

@ Oregon fire burner, if you have an at the wall meter can you post these results as well pls, I know the results will be skewed because of the driver size running a lille inefficient but good for plebs like me that don't measure at the board and saves me having to extrapolate.
Chur chur

Randomblame said:

Yeah, I followed the Vesta test thread, bro, and it seems the Vesta's are far, I mean really far, under rated.
2,47 fu....n μMol/J at 500mA...?!? I thought to have something in my eyes, lol!
And the lumen output was below 140lm/w.. That's somehow strange cuz I believe the Nichia diodes have an even higher lumen output and are above 150lm/w and the CRI is even higher too.
Really crazy numbers for such a low priced strip with color tuning option. I already consider to use a few of them for side light in my small veg area. Have tested sidelights the 1st time and really like the results. No larf down to the bottom is for sure worth a few watts and the option to tune the spectrum is for sure useful in the vegetative stage. Think on blue light that hits the stem and cause stacked nodes and almost no internodial spacings.

But I still have a bad feeling.
If 137lm/w equals 2.47μmol/J, then that would be an incredible low conversion factor of 55.465 and that's the values for the 5000°k side at 500mA. That somehow tastes bitter..

Click to expand...

I wish it came with 2 x 2700k channels.

Rocket Soul said:

I wish it came with 2 x 2700k channels.

Click to expand...

Yepp, 5000°k, 2700°k and 5k+2.7k tuneable. I hope we will see a v2 soon as well as EBgen3.

Frank Cannon said:

@ Oregon fire burner, if you have an at the wall meter can you post these results as well pls, I know the results will be skewed because of the driver size running a lille inefficient but good for plebs like me that don't measure at the board and saves me having to extrapolate.
Chur chur

Click to expand...

You mean during the slapdown? If not, lemme know what you’d like.