New Light

ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
SSGrower said:
^^^^this last bit shows how much fun youre having.
Group uv, green, red (620-660), fr, ir.
Maybe group the greens with the white main? Then you could isolate a day night initiator with the extra channel, or split that 310 to its own. Whats your timing plan with uv btw?
Click to expand...
Ya, that's what I was thinking, split the 310 off, maybe pull the 680nm to its own channel too. Or maybe just seperate every WV to its own channel lol.

The scheduler is channel specific, so you can create different UV schedules if you wanted. Its something I was definitely going to play around with haha but was thinking I'd probably just tune it to plant response.

The 54w agromax's are only run for 15min × 4 per day, or 54w total. So 54w ÷ 12hrs = 4.5w/hr but the agro is a 75:25 blend of UVB/UVA, so I'm guessing that 4w max of UVB will be close to the right amount over a 12hr period. With the dimmer I only need to make sure I have enough UVB as I can turn down as low as I need.

And ya it's fun haha some obstacles take a little effort to overcome but I like doing this kinda stuff :bigjoint:

When its all done Ill be excited to see what local channels I can pick up on it lol
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
SSGrower said:
Nah, google image. I put effort in when necessary.

Just a comment on the use of monos and penetration/distribution as it relates, more of an observation with no technical backing. I notice spots on the floor of my garden from distributed monos (amare se350), this is not apparent with the monocobs (cobs of red mono leds) there is a red shade but no spots like with individual monos. I am of the opinion an intense difuse light is ideal and if the light source is too much like a point source, it seems to have a damaging affect. I feel like clusters of same color monos might mitigate this, so with all that said, how many of each mono and what wattage range per?
Click to expand...
I just tried searching for that light but couldn't find it. I did come across possibly a later model, the se500. I didn't know anyone had UVB in their light yet! I was even toying with adding receptacles like what I think I see on this later model as well, I think it's a good idea.

I was curious what monos you were referring too, I think I'll be ok with 1w-er's, but was trying to compare. The LEDs circling the COBs look like they are bigger than 1w to me (or is that just the optics?), is that your assumption too? Or are you talking about monos you added seperately?

https://www.ledgrowlightsdepot.com/products/amare-solareclipse-se500-uvb
 
SSGrower

SSGrower

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
I just tried searching for that light but couldn't find it. I did come across possibly a later model, the se500. I didn't know anyone had UVB in their light yet! I was even toying with adding receptacles like what I think I see on this later model as well, I think it's a good idea.

I was curious what monos you were referring too, I think I'll be ok with 1w-er's, but was trying to compare. The LEDs circling the COBs look like they are bigger than 1w to me (or is that just the optics?), is that your assumption too? Or are you talking about monos you added seperately?

https://www.ledgrowlightsdepot.com/products/amare-solareclipse-se500-uvb
Click to expand...
IIRC the se500 uses a t8 solarcure? No uv leds.
Looks like Victor has updated his website but the description there for the se300 still seems off as does the one on led grow lights dot com,
https://www.ledgrowlightsdepot.com/collections/amare-led-grow-lights/products/amare-solareclipse-se300

the one one I have has citi cobs and 4 color of monos (warm white, cool white, red, far red no blue) given the description and based on certain posts re the solar bar 8 I'd contact Victor directly with questions on how the light is sold now.

But he also uses a lens over the mono (I think they are 5 watts ea) but it was my understand g the lense was to diffuse, not focus, so having the spots on the floor leads me to believe a focused light is still present. So yeah, you might not see the same thing with 1 watts.
 
D

Dave455

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
I just tried searching for that light but couldn't find it. I did come across possibly a later model, the se500. I didn't know anyone had UVB in their light yet! I was even toying with adding receptacles like what I think I see on this later model as well, I think it's a good idea.

I was curious what monos you were referring too, I think I'll be ok with 1w-er's, but was trying to compare. The LEDs circling the COBs look like they are bigger than 1w to me (or is that just the optics?), is that your assumption too? Or are you talking about monos you added seperately?

https://www.ledgrowlightsdepot.com/products/amare-solareclipse-se500-uvb
Click to expand...
whats wrong with reptile T5 ?
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
Dave455 said:
whats wrong with reptile T5 ?
Click to expand...
Haha I don't think there's anything wrong with them! I think they work great! I use them currently.

If using extra lights or supplemental arrays, including UV, you often need to find room to add them on the same plane that you hang your existimg lights from. Sometimes this can be problematic in tight environments. Also, some supplementals are different intensities and can't be hung at the same height and then are either blocking light from above or being blocked from a light hanging lower.

The light I'm designing is meant for a 2'×2'.

If trying to minimize space, a smaller 2ft UV fluoro is more ideal than a 4ft and an option I'm leaving open, but because I think the spread is not uniform enough for me with using (1) 2ft tube in a 2× 2 I'd opt for 2 tubes per light. If using 2 tubes I'd still get stronger light on the sides vs top and bottom, as well as have hot spots of UV in between lights if scaling an area with more than 1 light. I thought you could rotate each panel 90° from its adjacent so still haven't ruled it out, but it just means more bulk and extra space to add the receptacles.

In terms of spread and fluoros, I think the simplest and cheapest way to add in UV would be (4) E27 sockets in the corners that I could screw in and unscrew reptile bulbs from, but then I'm facing the issue I described earlier with overhead light being blocked from lower obstructions.

My ideal solution is dimmable UV chips integrated into the board so that 1 fixture does everything. That way there's no light be obstructed, and the UV portion of the light is only UV then and not any other WV. No green, red or blue light like some of the reptile bulbs have, only UV, hopefully more effecient and easier to deal with in the grow.
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
The hollow center facilitates 2 roles. The first is providing a more even distribution, and the second is plant structure. With light emitting from the outside edges compared to directly over the top I'm hoping the plant will reach OUT more than UP, and provide for greater air flow and easier scrogging as well as increased yield. I'm still not sure yet, but may put inward facing COBs at the corners to help exaggerate this dynamic and provide better side lighting.
 
SSGrower

SSGrower

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
The hollow center facilitates 2 roles. The first is providing a more even distribution, and the second is plant structure. With light emitting from the outside edges compared to directly over the top I'm hoping the plant will reach OUT more than UP, and provide for greater air flow and easier scrogging as well as increased yield. I'm still not sure yet, but may put inward facing COBs at the corners to help exaggerate this dynamic and provide better side lighting.
Click to expand...
I am not sure a 19 x 19 in frame is big enough to justify angling the led at the perimiter? I hold a belief that multidirectional light can be benificial and have 2 angled cobs on my cob "waterfall".
20181228_133840.jpg
It seems on the smaller frame light would just cross over (in a horizontal) or in front of (in a vert), while not having a significant impact on the amount of energy incident on the leaf surface that would be avaliable for photosynthesis. It seems the light would be tied to some very specific growing conditions in order to optimize it's functionality. Not the worst thing in the world but something to consider if it is eventually intended to market.
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
SSGrower said:
I am not sure a 19 x 19 in frame is big enough to justify angling the led at the perimiter? I hold a belief that multidirectional light can be benificial and have 2 angled cobs on my cob "waterfall".
View attachment 4315705
It seems on the smaller frame light would just cross over (in a horizontal) or in front of (in a vert), while not having a significant impact on the amount of energy incident on the leaf surface that would be avaliable for photosynthesis. It seems the light would be tied to some very specific growing conditions in order to optimize it's functionality. Not the worst thing in the world but something to consider if it is eventually intended to market.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. Its not effecient for leaves sitting parallel with the overhead light, but I think diffuse light where the greatest intensity is shot sideways, will be getting better penetration as well as maximizing leaves that arent parallel with the overhead light. We keep trying to add more light in only one direction, it seems that canopy saturation is easily achieved now but with how low the lights are hung it seems leaf shade limits penetration, I figure skinny angle "side" lighting would help. The mid power LEDs already throw a 120°, but the intensity at that skinny side angle is crap, so I want to angle a few bigger ones to help the plant stretch out and maybe provide better penetration and yield.

Btw cool idea. I like the term "COB waterfall." :bigjoint:

Was thinking of hanging a row of LEDs with Emma LEDil reflectors in the shape of a skinny rowed square directly under the main square, or dangling small 4direction squares like Xmas icicle lights, but it just doesn't seem pratical and maybe a bit of an electrical safety issue, so that's why I'm brainstorming with angled in corner lighting??? If you got idears throw em out! :)
 
Last edited:
SSGrower

SSGrower

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
LM301b & Nichia 757 V3 EAGLE libraries..
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=1HGq6clKrR63rqt_kdpLqJY7FoizSQ2PS

I'm pretty sure it's going to be 5 channel. I keep flip flopping on many things lol but IR is one of them.

75% sure-ish lol...
Chan 1 - 160w (50:50 - 5k Optisolis / 3k 80CRI 757)
Chan 2 - 20w 660nm
Chan 3 - 10w 730nm
Chan 4 - 20w 525 nm
Chan 5 - 12w UV (4w 290nm, 4w 365nm, 4w 380nm)

Board dimensions are 19" × 19" w/ 8.5" × 8.5" square cut out of middle. ~288in^2.

View attachment 4305407

I'm having to upgrade to a 240h or buy additional drivers to power the supp channels. :/ Though, I want it to perform over 1100+ evenly, should I want it too.

I've found MCPCB large enough to print the fixture in one piece, but the company I was originally speaking with has a 17" size limitation, so I'll be printing it myself.

Using this, or some variation of this method...
I don't think I can soak my entire board in etchant because the aluminium will also be etched, so I think I'll have to use a spray bottle and be more selective in my etchant application. Ill be using H202 + HCl. (There is a thin insulating layer between the aluminium and copper)

I'm having a local print shop print my "PCB glossy paper" transfer template. Ill be hoping they can cut me a vinyl solder stencil as well.

Fixture will have an averaged max thermal dissipation rate of .76w/in2 (220w/289in2), which I'm fairly confident can be thermally managed using only the aluminum backing from the MCPCB. For comparison, an HLG QB120 is ~104in2 and operates at 75w max, or .72w/in2.

FLIR is soooo cool but also an immediate $40 addition. Upgrading the driver adds cost as well. The MCPCB comes at a premium too, once you start to add up all these "cheap" things it really starts to snoball. It would be much easier to buy premade stuff, so this build is not prioritizing cost (well as much as I can), and I'm admitting a reality that I can achieve the same for cheaper. This is just a fun project for me. Ill add links to all libraries I make (EAGLE).

Why green light? Refer to attachment.
Click to expand...
What have you been able to source for the 290nm? Or 305 or 310? Anything in that range?
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
SSGrower said:
What have you been able to source for the 290nm? Or 305 or 310? Anything in that range?
Click to expand...
Haha you've been looking too? That's kind of an issue at the moment. Trying to get 1 made that's between 280 & 320 as that's all I've been able to find. I think I might have a 300-310 but not so sure. Idk yet how to confirm the SPDs, and think the sales ladies will tell me anything to get a sale, so I've been searching continually to find. I've talked to some guys on here about making them but not sure if it'll happen. I will buy some but they are expensive, so I want to make sure I get the best fit.


On a bit of a different note:
Idk which companies are currently using nano-wire technology (or on prices either) but seems effeciency increases immensely. A bunch of nanowires emitting on top of a substrate vs 2D planar emmision. Im just barely reading about "epitaxial" and LED design so I don't know much but it seems pretty fascinating. You seem like the inquisitive type and I think you might enjoy looking into it...

daa3371f01_hr.jpg 4-Figure6-1.png
https://www.eenewseurope.com/news/gan-based-nanowire-leds-beat-oleds-both-flexibility-and-longevity

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2018/nr/c8nr02615g#!divAbstract
 
TEKNIK

TEKNIK

Well-Known Member
Technology changes every few weeks sometimes they end up going back to an older technology and redeveloping it for reliability issues.
Its easy to make a UVB led board. The issue is how to make it reliable and safe. There are several parameters to take into account before making a product available on the market, that's if you want to do it right. Most likely someone will release a uvb led system soon but it won't be done right or tested properly before it's released.
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
TEKNIK said:
Technology changes every few weeks sometimes they end up going back to an older technology and redeveloping it for reliability issues.
Its easy to make a UVB led board. The issue is how to make it reliable and safe. There are several parameters to take into account before making a product available on the market, that's if you want to do it right. Most likely someone will release a uvb led system soon but it won't be done right or tested properly before it's released.
Click to expand...
Ya... reliability isn't such a big deal with UVB. The currently used alternatives suffer in the same regard. It's the nature of UVB EM radiation. As long as it's at least comparable to fluoro is what matters.

And there's no special mystery sauce required to "do it right." Only a test to confirm WV and intensity is all that's needed. Possibly future random tests to ensure consistency.

I will be finishing my light that includes UVB LEDs sometime within the year, and it will be done right. If your testing equipment goes that low then maybe you can validate it.
 
TEKNIK

TEKNIK

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
Ya... reliability isn't such a big deal with UVB. The currently used alternatives suffer in the same regard. It's the nature of UVB EM radiation. As long as it's at least comparable to fluoro is what matters.

And there's no special mystery sauce required to "do it right." Only a test to confirm WV and intensity is all that's needed. Possibly future random tests to ensure consistency.

I will be releasing my light that includes UVB LEDs sometime within the year, and it will be done right. If your testing equipment goes that low then maybe you can validate it.
Click to expand...
My test equipment doesn't go that low at the moment, I need to do something to resolve it soon though as new par testing will range from 280nm to 800nm. It is not a big a deal for me to sort it out as it is for most companies using spheres. I am guessing I will need to buy a different spectrometer though. Uvb will destroy any plastic it is close to pretty fast, living in a place where the ozone is fucked I am pretty aware of how fast UV destroys plastic and causes skin cancer.
 
ChiefRunningPhist

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
TEKNIK said:
My test equipment doesn't go that low at the moment, I need to do something to resolve it soon though as new par testing will range from 280nm to 800nm. It is not a big a deal for me to sort it out as it is for most companies using spheres. I am guessing I will need to buy a different spectrometer though. Uvb will destroy any plastic it is close to pretty fast, living in a place where the ozone is fucked I am pretty aware of how fast UV destroys plastic and causes skin cancer.
Click to expand...
True story. A UVB CFL after only a months use looks pretty worse for wear. UVB can be nasty. Having a small cone reflector to keep emissions off the replaceable tiles will be required. I'm looking into flashlight cones as per the suggestion of one of the members here.
 
TEKNIK

TEKNIK

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
True story. A UVB CFL after only a months use looks pretty worse for wear. UVB can be nasty. Having a small cone reflector to keep emissions off the replaceable tiles will be required. I'm looking into flashlight cones as per the suggestion of one of the members here.
Click to expand...
You could machine a cone from solid aluminium, at least it won't deteriorate. The most important thing would be to direct the light to where it is needed and avoid it shining onto the mid power LED's
 
SSGrower

SSGrower

Well-Known Member
ChiefRunningPhist said:
Haha you've been looking too? That's kind of an issue at the moment. Trying to get 1 made that's between 280 & 320 as that's all I've been able to find. I think I might have a 300-310 but not so sure. Idk yet how to confirm the SPDs, and think the sales ladies will tell me anything to get a sale, so I've been searching continually to find. I've talked to some guys on here about making them but not sure if it'll happen. I will buy some but they are expensive, so I want to make sure I get the best fit.


On a bit of a different note:
Idk which companies are currently using nano-wire technology (or on prices either) but seems effeciency increases immensely. A bunch of nanowires emitting on top of a substrate vs 2D planar emmision. Im just barely reading about "epitaxial" and LED design so I don't know much but it seems pretty fascinating. You seem like the inquisitive type and I think you might enjoy looking into it...

View attachment 4319721 View attachment 4319722
https://www.eenewseurope.com/news/gan-based-nanowire-leds-beat-oleds-both-flexibility-and-longevity

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2018/nr/c8nr02615g#!divAbstract
Click to expand...
Yeah, Im inqusitive, but I dont have your drive.
I consider myself an idea guy.
I love building shit, I dont see myself building leds.
I will look through the links, maybe thatl change my mind.
TEKNIK said:
Technology changes every few weeks sometimes they end up going back to an older technology and redeveloping it for reliability issues.
Its easy to make a UVB led board. The issue is how to make it reliable and safe. There are several parameters to take into account before making a product available on the market, that's if you want to do it right. Most likely someone will release a uvb led system soon but it won't be done right or tested properly before it's released.
Click to expand...
Whatever the solution is it needs to be modular (seperate from main light). I am on the fence as to wether a focused or distributed source would be better. UV will bounce around until it hits something that will adsorb it, so I kind of feel a distributed lower intensity pattern would be better that a focused source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top