UVB/Cannabis science report

MichiganMedGrower

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
OldMedUser said:
Done the testing on the first 3 bulbs off the MH ballast and think I'll be sticking to the Hortilux Conversion bulb as it blew the others away. The scale on my light tester only goes to 2000 so by moving it back until it hit 2000 I guestimated how far off scale they were.

Bulb 1ft 2ft 3ft

SunMaster Warm Deluxe off scale 2500? 600 450

PlantMax MH 7200K off scale 3500? 1500 700

Hortilux Ultra Ace way off scale 5000? off scale 2500? 1500

Gonna have to try the same experiment with my 400W lights. Hortilux Super HPS, Gavita and a SolarMax.

:peace:
Click to expand...

Spectrum is why. The red heavy bulbs likely trigger the cheap lumen meter more than the full spectrum bulbs with more blue.

Only way to know what you like is to grow cuttings with the different bulbs of same wattage.

My 600w super hps shows 20% higher than the Hortilux Blue 600w which is really an hps conversion bulb.

Both cover the same area and seem to penetrate pretty close. The differences are in plant growth and bud structure.
 
OldMedUser

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
MichiganMedGrower said:
Spectrum is why. The red heavy bulbs likely trigger the cheap lumen meter more than the full spectrum bulbs with more blue.

Only way to know what you like is to grow cuttings with the different bulbs of same wattage.

My 600w super hps shows 20% higher than the Hortilux Blue 600w which is really an hps conversion bulb.

Both cover the same area and seem to penetrate pretty close. The differences are in plant growth and bud structure.
Click to expand...
Totally agree but that difference has got to mean better overall energy going to the plants especially considering Hortilux is for sure supplying decent PAR light compared to the cheapo PlantMax.

I would think that the Hort. Ultra Ace and the SunMaster, both being conversion bulbs, (tho the Sunmaster is marked MH but has enhanced red), would have had similar intensity levels but the difference is huge. I've only got the one room capable of handling the 1000W bulbs so would be hard to do a side-by-side but would be nice.

Last night when I fired up the Sunmaster I reset my heat controller to allow up to 90F so the fan wouldn't kick in for a while and I could fire up the alcohol lamp and get some extra CO2 happening. I have a remote temp/RH monitor so sat here watching TV until 3am and the temp never went over 82 with about 60% RH and the humidifier off. Today with the Hort in there it's getting up to 89 with 70% RH. Same wattage bulb but a hell of a difference. The first seemed to hit an equilibrium but the Hort really heats it up in there. Think I'll dial down the heat controller, cut out the alcohol lamp and let the exhaust fan kick on more often to bring in fresh air. Getting moist in there and I suspect I might have a little PM going on so don't want that getting away until I spray some silica on the plants to keep it at bay.

Either that or put the Sunmaster back in and feel like I'm losing out. Hmmm . . .

:peace:
 
MichiganMedGrower

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
OldMedUser said:
Totally agree but that difference has got to mean better overall energy going to the plants especially considering Hortilux is for sure supplying decent PAR light compared to the cheapo PlantMax.

I would think that the Hort. Ultra Ace and the SunMaster, both being conversion bulbs, (tho the Sunmaster is marked MH but has enhanced red), would have had similar intensity levels but the difference is huge. I've only got the one room capable of handling the 1000W bulbs so would be hard to do a side-by-side but would be nice.

Last night when I fired up the Sunmaster I reset my heat controller to allow up to 90F so the fan wouldn't kick in for a while and I could fire up the alcohol lamp and get some extra CO2 happening. I have a remote temp/RH monitor so sat here watching TV until 3am and the temp never went over 82 with about 60% RH and the humidifier off. Today with the Hort in there it's getting up to 89 with 70% RH. Same wattage bulb but a hell of a difference. The first seemed to hit an equilibrium but the Hort really heats it up in there. Think I'll dial down the heat controller, cut out the alcohol lamp and let the exhaust fan kick on more often to bring in fresh air. Getting moist in there and I suspect I might have a little PM going on so don't want that getting away until I spray some silica on the plants to keep it at bay.

Either that or put the Sunmaster back in and feel like I'm losing out. Hmmm . . .

:peace:
Click to expand...

More lumens will always grow more plant faster but spectrum has a lot to do with plant health and compactness so best to find a balance in my opinion.
 
OldMedUser

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
MichiganMedGrower said:
More lumens will always grow more plant faster but spectrum has a lot to do with plant health and compactness so best to find a balance in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Again I agree but with such limited methods of evaluation I have to rely on my decades of growing to evaluate the results. Everybody is looking happy and growing fast so that's all I care about really. I've never been into figuring out how many grams per watt I'm getting as I think that whole methodology is badly flawed.

The plants I'm about to flip have been badly neglected and sickly but in the last two weeks I've wiped out the mites. repotted into their final pots and started feeding them right. All the new growth is coming in robust and perfect and the plants are praying to the light like they ought to.

More into growing high CBD plants now and that's a whole different outlook. Smaller yields, less nute demand but so much better medicine for me. :)

:peace:
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
Kingrow1 said:
I feel like hps is still numero uno. I mean cmh have had a run but ive not seen anything special, leds have always struggled and when you look at the par lumens mols of hps it aint far off cmh or led.

Yeild wise no new tech has impressed me enough yet or to stop the debate. More hype than actual yeild increase.
Click to expand...
The prob with hps is mostly in the popular size. 600/1k is very difficult to get optimal coverage while avoiding central heat stress.

The smaller 315's and cobs are way easier to increase intensity of over all coverage. The easier time in hitting the upper gpm of a strain is a good upside along with the attached quality increase. You can hit the same yield with hps but it takes way more canopy manipulation almost stadium style and the quality does not follow so closely.

The only consideration I'd give to hps now is a vert circle cage that perfectly suites it's coverage type. But so it would stacked cmh.
 
OldMedUser

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
The prob with hps is mostly in the popular size. 600/1k is very difficult to get optimal coverage while avoiding central heat stress.

The smaller 315's and cobs are way easier to increase intensity of over all coverage. The easier time in hitting the upper gpm of a strain is a good upside along with the attached quality increase. You can hit the same yield with hps but it takes way more canopy manipulation almost stadium style and the quality does not follow so closely.

The only consideration I'd give to hps now is a vert circle cage that perfectly suites it's coverage type. But so it would stacked cmh.
Click to expand...
For sure multiple points of light are better than one central point. I'm working with what I got tho. trying to find some GE 400W CMH bulbs to use in my 400 mag ballasts. I'd get better light and coverage using them over the one 1000W HPS for sure. My planned flowering room if I ever build it is 8x4 using two 600W Hortilux CMH mounted back to back horizontally on a light rail. I could use the 1000W and I'm sure it will do the trick but 2 - 600s would give me 50% more light for 20% more power.

I have the 1000W light on my rail now so it feeds in closer to the OG#18 I've vertically ScroGed to the wall at the back. The reflector is hanging off the light rail vertically at about a 20° off plumb with the other plants on either side or under the light.

Was thinking of rigging up some of that fencing like the back piece to make a circle around a bare bulb but I think this will work OK.

OG18BBetc13041803.jpg

:peace:
 
Kingrow1

Kingrow1

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
The prob with hps is mostly in the popular size. 600/1k is very difficult to get optimal coverage while avoiding central heat stress.

The smaller 315's and cobs are way easier to increase intensity of over all coverage. The easier time in hitting the upper gpm of a strain is a good upside along with the attached quality increase. You can hit the same yield with hps but it takes way more canopy manipulation almost stadium style and the quality does not follow so closely.

The only consideration I'd give to hps now is a vert circle cage that perfectly suites it's coverage type. But so it would stacked cmh.
Click to expand...
In nature half the light that hits the plant is ir at canopy level and of higher lumens.... what heat?
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
OldMedUser said:
For sure multiple points of light are better than one central point. I'm working with what I got tho. trying to find some GE 400W CMH bulbs to use in my 400 mag ballasts. I'd get better light and coverage using them over the one 1000W HPS for sure. My planned flowering room if I ever build it is 8x4 using two 600W Hortilux CMH mounted back to back horizontally on a light rail. I could use the 1000W and I'm sure it will do the trick but 2 - 600s would give me 50% more light for 20% more power.

I have the 1000W light on my rail now so it feeds in closer to the OG#18 I've vertically ScroGed to the wall at the back. The reflector is hanging off the light rail vertically at about a 20° off plumb with the other plants on either side or under the light.

Was thinking of rigging up some of that fencing like the back piece to make a circle around a bare bulb but I think this will work OK.

View attachment 4121789

:peace:
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to disrespect anybody's setup, no high horse here at all. We all do what we can with objectivity in mind. If money and setup were no issue I think the typical indoor grow would look very different. It's also pretty hard for the market to step away from the tried and tested when most consumers only give a shit about yield regardless of quality and efficiency. In my country atm people are complaining about street led lights being too bright, while it reduces our footprint as a nation. Buy some curtains.
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
Kingrow1 said:
In nature half the light that hits the plant is ir at canopy level and of higher lumens.... what heat?
Click to expand...
I run the risk of assumption here and apologize in advance if so. It comes across that you use hps and are invested in it or are unwilling to change for what ever reason. That's fine, totally your choice. However you can't shrug off the strong connection between high W light source increasing risk of heat stress when trying to push optimal coverage over a traditional indoor canopy. As I said, stadium style half tube canopy lends itself better to tubular bulbs for increase effective coverage at lower heat stress risk, but it takes a fair bit of experience to get right. Vert cages seem great because the cage is literally a fool proof guide on distance.

Anybody can hang hps and do ok, but it's damn hard to get the optimal coverage out of it in a horizontal setup. the initial investment on cmh/cob is high but the easier use means higher yield sooner. Easily enough to offset the learning curve on hps.
 
Kingrow1

Kingrow1

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
I run the risk of assumption here and apologize in advance if so. It comes across that you use hps and are invested in it or are unwilling to change for what ever reason. That's fine, totally your choice. However you can't shrug off the strong connection between high W light source increasing risk of heat stress when trying to push optimal coverage over a traditional indoor canopy. As I said, stadium style half tube canopy lends itself better to tubular bulbs for increase effective coverage at lower heat stress risk, but it takes a fair bit of experience to get right. Vert cages seem great because the cage is literally a fool proof guide on distance.

Anybody can hang hps and do ok, but it's damn hard to get the optimal coverage out of it in a horizontal setup. the initial investment on cmh/cob is high but the easier use means higher yield sooner. Easily enough to offset the learning curve on hps.
Click to expand...
Agreed but i address this by firmly stating that if you have healthy enough plants they will not suffer any heat effects from hps.

I agree hitting this level of health in indoor growing is a skill in itself.

I cannot overlook that in nature a much hotter radient and ambient temp sees weed plants do just fine.
 
Bugeye

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
Kingrow1 said:
Agreed but i address this by firmly stating that if you have healthy enough plants they will not suffer any heat effects from hps.

I agree hitting this level of health in indoor growing is a skill in itself.

I cannot overlook that in nature a much hotter radient and ambient temp sees weed plants do just fine.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you get perfect air exchange outdoors. That's the key to healthy plants at high temps.
 
OldMedUser

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
Bugeye said:
Maybe you are right, I always considered fresh air as better than stale indoor air, but not sure why, maybe just me going with a hunch. If anything I guess indoor would have higher CO2 levels so maybe I'm way off.
Click to expand...
I used to pull my air in from outside but when the air temp can go from 35C/95F in the summer to -40C/40 below F it throws things out of whack a bit. Now I pull all the air into the grow room from the larger basement area where it fluctuates a lot less. Maybe 5C/40F to 17C/62F from summer to winter. Free A/C for me and easier to keep the grow room at optimum temps. Always low humidity tho in the Great White North. :)

I have a temp/RH controller on my exhaust fan so I can maintain the room temp where I want it +/- 3 or 4 degrees F. If I only have 1 400W HID going it may not get warm enough in there to trip the fan so no fresh air gets drawn in and I use an alcohol lamp to make CO2. Too damned efficient tho and need to find smaller wicks to make one that can burn all the time and not use so much methyl hydrate. Easy to get my CO2 over 1500ppm. Just being in the room for a while can get it up over 1250 according to my CO2 controller.

:peace:
 
Kingrow1

Kingrow1

Well-Known Member
Yer like i have my place within human habitable zones, if the interior of your house is much over or under you need to get up off your ass and go buy somthing us developed countries call climate control.

Now if your to cheap to provide you your family and plants with a suitable environment then best go get a job and stop touting some ir bs about this years latest led.

Life sucks, im not your life coach....
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
Kingrow1 said:
Agreed but i address this by firmly stating that if you have healthy enough plants they will not suffer any heat effects from hps.

I agree hitting this level of health in indoor growing is a skill in itself.

I cannot overlook that in nature a much hotter radient and ambient temp sees weed plants do just fine.
Click to expand...
Nature has had a long time to get it right. What we collectively learned indoor is that hoods and some reflective material magnify hot spots most certainly. Expensive hoods drastically reduce that but they also tend to be closed/fixed, increase over all central intensity while reducing max outer and do not offer the flexibility in stadium setups to take advantage of more surface canopy area. Indoor light cycles are also constant max intensity for 12 hours straight with only a portion of spectrum.

When you add that to the inherent larger central hot spots of big light sources it becomes the lesser evil in too close or too far over a flat canopy setup. What is also noticeable is the lower gland count and even color under hps in any case. I don't know if the same would be true if growing under multiple lower W hps sources instead.
 
Kingrow1

Kingrow1

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
Nature has had a long time to get it right. What we collectively learned indoor is that hoods and some reflective material magnify hot spots most certainly. Expensive hoods drastically reduce that but they also tend to be closed/fixed, increase over all central intensity while reducing max outer and do not offer the flexibility in stadium setups to take advantage of more surface canopy area. Indoor light cycles are also constant max intensity for 12 hours straight with only a portion of spectrum.

When you add that to the inherent larger central hot spots of big light sources it becomes the lesser evil in too close or too far over a flat canopy setup. What is also noticeable is the lower gland count and even color under hps in any case. I don't know if the same would be true if growing under multiple lower W hps sources instead.
Click to expand...
Hps has had vastly superior spectrum to all leds for sometime now, not many understand par and micromols very well and wrongly apply them as hard and fast rules. Science is saying different to led makers amd growers, hps is still yeilding big, evidence that leds are wrong and im right i.e. they know shit and sell snake oil.


I think leds were the biggest cons on these boards, bovedas come a close second pmsl at any one who invested as i didnt and got the same results for a lot less.... suckers :-)
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
Kingrow1 said:
Hps has had vastly superior spectrum to all leds for sometime now, not many understand par and micromols very well and wrongly apply them as hard and fast rules. Science is saying different to led makers amd growers, hps is still yeilding big, evidence that leds are wrong and im right i.e. they know shit and sell snake oil.


I think leds were the biggest cons on these boards, bovedas come a close second pmsl at any one who invested as i didnt and got the same results for a lot less.... suckers :-)
Click to expand...
I mostly mean spectrum in general, some are better than others but none are the sun. A heat spot of an imbalanced spectrum probably has a lower threshold for negative effect, amplified by a stronger light source, being what I was getting at.

A lot of people took a hit with the traditional purple type leds and co, but why knock them so bad? it was an effort to move forward. All category's of products in any industry have snake company's, so it's a moot argument. From what I gather a big aspect of that bs performance was due to misrepresenting true W. I've never really bothered looking into it further such as spectrum etc as it's a mine field of miss information I don't care for. But anyway, It's just an example of one tech that out done another, doesn't mean you should hold on to that victory and never look around again. Have you flowered with cmh or cob?.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top