Induction Lights? The newest (supposedly) technology in Induction Grow Lights

Kite High said:

As for as induction goes the ibeams impress me more than the indagros...and the research continues

Click to expand...

Ahh a little sliver of recognition! I knew it was just a matter of time before we got off those hot box HID's. Now we'll get to work on a couple of LED panels for you and you'll be fully converted. Beef where ya at? Hook this guy UP!

I have only completed one complete run with these lights and if was my first indoor grow. So there were some issues.1. I learned that ph-ing when watering and feeding is a must. 2. They make Cal-Mag for a reason. 3. CFL's really heat up a room and 90 degrees is to hot. Lessons learned. I was running 2 plants and still pulled 9 ounces. I like the fact I have no heat issues. I run my whole flower room on one circiut. Lights, fans(4) CO2 regulator, and filter. As far as what they are capable of producing I will keep trying and find what works best. I could not compare to any other lights since I have never ran anything else. PRETTY NICE BUDS TOO.

what is the concern regarding the weight of the light that I keep reading about?

I beams weigh 17lbs. I think the others weigh much more.

my inda-gro 420w weighs 15lbs. but whats the big deal?...hanging problems or what? my rooms are conventionally framed with MDF walls. I guess thats why Im not concerned about the weight. but at 15lbs for the 300w ibeam vs the 15lbs for the 420 in a tent that might make a difference. I just didnt understand what the concern was. maybe I answered my own question

Mr. Outdoors said:

I have only completed one complete run with these lights and if was my first indoor grow. So there were some issues.1. I learned that ph-ing when watering and feeding is a must. 2. They make Cal-Mag for a reason. 3. CFL's really heat up a room and 90 degrees is to hot. Lessons learned. I was running 2 plants and still pulled 9 ounces. I like the fact I have no heat issues. I run my whole flower room on one circiut. Lights, fans(4) CO2 regulator, and filter. As far as what they are capable of producing I will keep trying and find what works best. I could not compare to any other lights since I have never ran anything else. View attachment 2521191View attachment 2521193View attachment 2521194 PRETTY NICE BUDS TOO.

Click to expand...

nice looking buds Mr. O. Can you tell us the size of the tent and what the wattage of each light was? it seems to me you could have gotten by with fewer fixtures with wider spacing. What do you think?

chazbolin said:

Ahh a little sliver of recognition! I knew it was just a matter of time before we got off those hot box HID's. Now we'll get to work on a couple of LED panels for you and you'll be fully converted. Beef where ya at? Hook this guy UP!

Click to expand...

Dude I am NOT closed minded and constantly researching...for instance ...you mention leds

here you go:

​

LED GROW LIGHT

$2,500.00
Quantity

If you don't see the size/style you'd like in the list, please call us at: 541.228.3650 for a quick quote

[HR][/HR]Type: Grow Lights

[HR][/HR]
[HR][/HR]



Think you've seen everything in an LED Grow light? Think again! The LBI GL-700 utilizes 80watt high density arrays to create the perfect color mixing to deliver what plants need. Don't let anyone else fool you into thinking that because they use 3watt or 5watt chips, and use a bunch of them, that it's the same as using an 80watt array that puts out more light intensity than and HPS 1000watt unit!!
Our LED Grow Light is the result of years of research. Proprietary - high output LED arrays are tailored for optimal performance throughout the entire growth cycle. A self-monitoring thermal management system ensures optimal LED performance and longevity. The spectrum is well-balanced for all photosynthetically sensitive regions. A high-grade reflector collects all normally unused light and redirects it uniformly down to the grow area. This reflector system is a major difference between our light and the competition.
Download the LBI Grow Light Spec Here

APPLICATIONS:

• Indoor horticultural operations
• Greenhouses
BENEFITS:

• Efficient design, energy not wasted producing heat
• Only emits light plants can use
• One light needed for growing, flowering, and fruiting
• Reflector designed for peak efficiency
• Virtually maintenance free
FEATURES:

• Proprietary LED array
• Self-monitoring thermal management system
• Optimized light spectrum
• High intensity light output
• High performance reflector
• Long life design, over 50,000 hours
We are looking for a National and/or World Wide Distributor for this product. Please contact us for further details.

The Inda Gro and I Beam both weigh 15 lbs. I Beam has 300 watts -$650 . Inda Gro has 420 watts -$795. both have same par rating at bulb 2000 umoles.. They both have the same spectrum for the most part. Coverage and par rating from distance 12, 18 , 24 inches is what would matter between the 2. Owners of both companies are homies....

I Beam states at 12 inches the par rating is 765 umoles. thats pretty low. According to growers house my hps digilux is 850 umoles at same distance but a 1000w so......

Inda gro ... I have no idea

The new A51 145w panels have a higher par rating than the Ibeam at 12 in, -1065 umoles

My bad ganja thought u were talking about the explosion of growth at the beginning of flower, have had some dullards on here try to tell me the amount of blue in leds makes it impossible for them to flower correctly...
I think they get a lil more trichs imo, guy who bought my last harvest agreed since he bought my whole harvest after buying a zip. Idk actual lab evidence tho cus i live in a non mmj state so getting anything tested is out of the question.

Ibeam is the light darryl deferred me to when i asked him about the pending indagro/igrow lawsuit, not real for those who do not know. Well i get paid on thursday so inda gro will prob be getting an order.

Chaz i totally overlooked the reflector situation, that definitely makes it a no buy for me since I am not a huge fan of diy, unless it makes sense too and i do not know enough about reflectors to make one since from what i hear this can make or break a light unit.. And i only have experience with cfl and led
Oh and kite could you ellaborate o why you think par (photosynthetic active radiation) is not a accurate measurement of light for horticuture, not picking a fight just curious.. That led is a fricking monster!
Hyroot is that the new series of area 51 lights? Do they got teasers on the web somewhere still have not seen anything on their site.

Ya it is. I emailed them asking when they are coming out with new lights. March 1st and just that light. Still will make others. But once af600 runs out. Thats it on that model.

Unit Dimensions: over-sized panel 13"x22"x2.75" for better coverage LED source: ODM Heliopto 5900k white, red and deep red LED power: 36pcs 5900k white 3.3v @ 550Ma + 36pcs red and deep red 620-670nm 2.4v @ 550mA Power consumption: 90w in veg mode; 145w in flowering mode Fixture body: 100% all around heavy duty aluminum alloy and metal chain hanging kit PAR: 1065 Umol'/s 12" below the center of the light Coverage area: up to 24"x36" @ 18"-24" above the plant tops Warranty: Guaranteed for life Retail price: $495 each, though coupon codes will be available for a $60 off discount for the 1st few months, and pre-orders we'll have a coupon code for $100 off.


Both models use the same components for the most part, except the new model is focused more on total durability and close to 100% as we can get with cooling + heat sinks + how much we drive the LEDs whilst maintaining enough power at the same time.... The AF-600 is more focused on raw power, but is built well, and is still backed with a lifetime guarantee. It draws 590w and has slightly over 1800 Umol'/s 12" below the center of the light. At 28" above the plant tops it provides 800 Umol'/s at the center and covers at least 48"x48". (600-800 is ideal) PAR-wise, because both lights- new model and AF600 use identical spectrum and ratios, they can be compared to each other in PAR and coverage quite easily. It will take 3 of the new lights totaling 435w to illuminate the same amount of square footage while providing the same amount of PAR as the AF600 consuming 590w. You're looking at a difference of 155w for the same amount of coverage and relative intensity, except the 3 new lights will provide 3 points of core coverage rather the 1 the big light will.

hyroot said:

The Inda Gro and I Beam both weigh 15 lbs. I Beam has 300 watts -$650 . Inda Gro has 420 watts -$795. both have same par rating at bulb 2000 umoles.. They both have the same spectrum for the most part. Coverage and par rating from distance 12, 18 , 24 inches is what would matter between the 2. Owners of both companies are homies....

I Beam states at 12 inches the par rating is 765 umoles. thats pretty low. According to growers house my hps digilux is 850 umoles at same distance but a 1000w so......

Inda gro ... I have no idea

The new A51 145w panels have a higher par rating than the Ibeam at 12 in, -1065 umoles

Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you're getting your information but put a quantum meter on an Inda-Gro lamp and it'll peg the meter out. They read well in excess of 2000 uMole at the lamp. As to a comparison of spectrums I haven't seen the the iBeam's so I couldn't tell you what they emit. I do know that the usable PAR value of an Inda-Gro represents 1.8 uMole/watt to meet DLI in 12 hours.

uMoles only represent intensity between 400-700nm. There is no distinction whether that measurement is more to the red or the blue. Don't get too hung up on that value as the be all end all for what lamp performs better than the other. It will always be a function of plant response. That being said Inda-Gro posted 1,169 uMoles @ 12"from the lamp. Since the lamp is 42" long it appears to represent a higher intensity over a larger area than either of the other two lights you mention.

https://picasaweb.google.com/117165142682869295633/InHouseGarden2#5837835437970078018

As long as we're talking PAR intensity I'm impressed by the fact this little 100 watt lamp, that has been in use for over two years, still emits over 850 uMoles @ 12". Interesting that this hydroshop sells every lamp you can think of but to keep their power bill down and rock the plants the entire front of the store is setup with something like 8 of the Inda-Gro 100's spread out over the entire aquaponic garden.

https://picasaweb.google.com/117165142682869295633/MiscGardensSideBySides#5836285797038767538

I got the info from ibeams site, inda gros site, and emailed from a51. I stated I have no idea of inda gros par at a further distance.... I beams says all that on their site.

natro.hydro said:

My bad ganja thought u were talking about the explosion of growth at the beginning of flower, have had some dullards on here try to tell me the amount of blue in leds makes it impossible for them to flower correctly...
I think they get a lil more trichs imo, guy who bought my last harvest agreed since he bought my whole harvest after buying a zip. Idk actual lab evidence tho cus i live in a non mmj state so getting anything tested is out of the question.

Ibeam is the light darryl deferred me to when i asked him about the pending indagro/igrow lawsuit, not real for those who do not know. Well i get paid on thursday so inda gro will prob be getting an order.

Chaz i totally overlooked the reflector situation, that definitely makes it a no buy for me since I am not a huge fan of diy, unless it makes sense too and i do not know enough about reflectors to make one since from what i hear this can make or break a light unit.. And i only have experience with cfl and led
Oh and kite could you ellaborate o why you think par (photosynthetic active radiation) is not a accurate measurement of light for horticuture, not picking a fight just curious.. That led is a fricking monster!
Hyroot is that the new series of area 51 lights? Do they got teasers on the web somewhere still have not seen anything on their site.

Click to expand...

no offense taken or meant brah

1. can get 2000 par readings from all blue leds
2. is just a less middled positioned scope of the 400-700 nm range
3. ftc is a more readily understood analogy of light power

the analytic algorithm should average the blue and red leaning just a tad towards blue as it contains more energy but should not negate the red spectrum as it can and does

Cool. After reading urs and chazs replies it makes more sense how par can be misleading. I have an led that can runy blue or red only so it makes sense when you say you can get a saturation of light with just blue... Wasnt thinking much about it lol.
By ftc you mean footcandles right? Which is a measure of lumens if i am correct, get a lot of this light shit mixed up cus only been at this 2 years and there is only so much time in the day if you know what i mean.
If that is referring to lumens like i think it is thrn that first bulb you posred had a nice graph of the luminosity curve on it and showed that you could get a high reading of lumens with a high ouput of green/yellow just like you could par and blue leds.
So i guess what i am saying is that are par and lumens both not relevant so long as you have a graph of the spectrums and intensities the light burns at? Please let me know if i am wrong i try to understand i swear lol

the foot candles are just as indicative as par...but NEITHER is complete info...but with the spectrum graph for knowing the colors the light is emitting they both can indicate intensity

Kite High said:

no offense taken or meant brah

1. can get 2000 par readings from all blue leds
2. is just a less middled positioned scope of the 400-700 nm range
3. ftc is a more readily understood analogy of light power

the analytic algorithm should average the blue and red leaning just a tad towards blue as it contains more energy but should not negate the red spectrum as it can and does

Click to expand...

Lumens are how much light is visible by the human eye, measuring light energy for plants using lumens is even far more useless than PAR. Green light is most visible to the human eye, so having 150,000 lumens and attempting to equate that to energy a plant can use, is as useless as tits on a turnip.

You could literally have zero red and blue light, and just crank out green and have high lumens. Completely useless in terms of plants.

Kite High said:

the foot candles are just as indicative as par...but NEITHER is complete info...but with the spectrum graph for knowing the colors the light is emitting they both can indicate intensity

Click to expand...

I think youre on the right track here Kite. got your PM but was unable to respond because your inbox is full bro. fyi

We're on a complex topic, lighting and it's measurement, that does not warrant one or two sentence responses. But I'm going to try and keep it as simple as possible for anyone who is new to this.

Any band pass type light meter is simply reading a net photon energy level.

A quantum meter is typically calibrated for sunlight and is not corrected for human vision sensitivity. It measures whatever net light energy is sensed and converts it to the calibrated numerical value between 400-700nm. It has no idea where it is landing in that range. I can actually take a PAR reading of a monochromatic green emission at a peak of 555nm and still read a high PAR value. A quantum meter does not utilize an algorithm that would avoid this region (if this is what Kite meant I take exception and if not forgive me as this is what I interpreted your statement to mean) and weight the PAR measurement more towards the red or blue bandwidths. A quantum meter will measure the blue spectrum's in higher PAR energy values than red spectrum's as the blue regions pack 1.5x the energy as the red regions. This relationship is defined in Planck's Constant as a quantum of action in quantum mechanics whereby, for example, a 400nm photon has 1.5X the energy of a 600nm photon. The quantum or PAR meter will read this value as such. It's just measuring the photon energy at the sensor.

A photopic light meter is corrected for human vision sensitivity (photopically corrected) and gives measurements in lux or footcandle readings and will have been calibrated to a certain kelvin value. These values are based on the human vision luminosity function whereby the highest photopic value is 555nm and the scotopic value is 505nm. This chart represents the peak photopic and scotopic values and the various points on the curve where human visual perception decreases.

View attachment 2521848

If anything a value that does not exist today for plant lighting should be created that represents a something in a Par/Lumen value whereby the PAR/Lumen (I made this term up) value would take into account the weight of energy at a given point on the plant sensitivity curve. But since this value doesn't exist (akin to lumens but more in line with a composite lumen:CRI value) all you can do is look to the spectral distribution charts to see relative intensities that the lamp emits to determine if you're catching the wavelengths you're looking for. If you're going through all this and still considering purchasing lights or lamps from a manufacturer that refuses to publish their spectral distribution graphs because they claim their spectrum's are proprietary than I have a really good deal on a bridge for you. What these manufacturers are essentially telling you is to buy our product based on just our claims and not the essential data you should expect that is as a minimum necessary to make an informed decision of your own.

At the end of the day you still have to determine what these values represent to you as the end user. For example the lumen is quantity and the CRI is quality. Which is more important as the balance between these two is ultimately up to you to decide. In plant lighting striking this balance between energy and spectrum is of even of greater importance since it will spell the difference somewhere between crop success or failure.

Even when presented properly it's easy to get confused as this is a complex topic. If you take nothing else from all of this just remember; A PAR measurement will be better than a photopic value since these values are expressly meant to apply to human visual regions. But just a PAR value, as measured in how many uMole are striking the sensor at a given time, should not be used to determine if the light being emitted from a given light source has adequate broad spectrum blue - red to successfully take a garden to harvest. Therefore I use my quantum meter to determine if there is enough energy hitting the plants where I want the light and I use a historical reference from my previous grows to determine if the light being emitted is of proper bandwidth. This enables me to repeat grows successfully from veg through flower with a minimum amount of stress to either me or my garden. Lights/Lamps that regularly accomplish this and are energy efficient, stable spectrum, low heat and long life are likely going to find a spot in my garden.

chazbolin said:

nice looking buds Mr. O. Can you tell us the size of the tent and what the wattage of each light was? it seems to me you could have gotten by with fewer fixtures with wider spacing. What do you think?

Click to expand...

My tent is 5, X9'. I had originally bought 3 I beams, I set them up spaced evenly in the tent, Turned them on, there was a noticeable diminishing of light between the fixtures unless they were lifted well above the tops of the plants. I try to keep the lights at 12" from the ladies, at that distance the light does not spread very wide. So I ran up and picked up another. The sales person at the hydro shop said 3 would be enough for the space I am running.
On that note I could be dead wrong and wasted money on the 4th light. I dont have light meters and this indoor world is all brand new to me, but just looking at the light and putting my hand under them I just didnt feel the light was even across the canopy. Some one suggested earlier that I might be better off not running them so close to the tops. Maybe they are correct, I dont know. Like I have posted earlier not alot of people ( or people without agendas) to really ask about these things. So for now I run trial and error and try to dial it in.