Aussie Growers Thread

Bongsmoke420

Bongsmoke420

Well-Known Member
Don't laugh at my tiny setup it's literally just a perso closet, I'll get a better whole plant pics before I chop, it's the small one on the left, that pheno needs to be trained into a big bush then flowered, would yield crazy really dense nuggets on both, n yes I have seedlings down the bottom, a quick sex test won't hurt them then back to 18/6 for a few weeks before I flip them @klx haha I'm photographer bro I go for the frost shots lolB28E0E65-C154-4947-A618-F801386D0988.jpeg
 
klx

klx

Well-Known Member
Bongsmoke420 said:
Don't laugh at my tiny setup it's literally just a perso closet, I'll get a better whole plant pics before I chop, it's the small one on the left, that pheno needs to be trained into a big bush then flowered, would yield crazy really dense nuggets on both, n yes I have seedlings down the bottom, a quick sex test won't hurt them then back to 18/6 for a few weeks before I flip them @klx haha I'm photographer bro I go for the frost shots lolView attachment 4537253
Click to expand...
haha nah man no judging I was just interested in the structure. I am getting annoyed by OG type structures, and all the topping, training, trellising needed
 
Rewerb

Rewerb

Well-Known Member
klx said:
So to sum up, you decarbed 50g of bud, chopped it up, added it to the magical butter machine with 500ml of rectified spirit and let it run for 8 hours. You can then use that as tincture and the dose is 1ml, or add 1ml to 4ml of PG/VG and vape it?

I miss anything out? Seems nice and easy.
Click to expand...
I didn't chop-up the bud because the machine has a rotating blade that breaks up the plant material during processing (it runs about every 10-15 mins during the cycle). You end-up with a fine green sludge at the end.

I also ran it at 55C for 4 hours (the manufacturer's recommendation & my own research on recipes backed that up), whereas my mate runs it on 71C for 8 hours. Since 71C is getting close to the boiling point of ethanol, I wanted to minimise my losses to evaporation. Apparently, an 8-hour process produces a stronger flavour & greater intensity, but I just wanted to try the "basic" one first.

My mate normally uses an oz/500ml & I checked with him again & he reckons he gave me 2.5-3ml as an oral dose. I deliberately made mine stronger because I wanted a vapable product & just decided to start with 1ml:4ml of PG/VG as a starting point.

After last night's experience with what I made, I'd probably use half of what I did in the PG/VG mix, so that you can micro-dose yourself until you find the place you want to be over several hours. I also found it rather "alcoholic" on the inhalation initially, but then got used to it.

Bear in mind I'm a bit of a "lightweight" when it comes to cannabis consumption, so depending on your own pattern of use & tolerance, your mileage may vary from mine.

I'm yet to try an oral dose of my own batch & I'll definitely ONLY be starting with 1ml!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: klx
reza92

reza92

Well-Known Member
viewer1020 said:
From the datasheets I've looked at, LEDs are always more efficient at lower current. I've never seen an exception, but if you know of one, I'm ready to learn.

For example, if you look at the graph of relative flux vs current on page 9 of the Cree XBD datasheet (PDF warning):

Reading approximate values from the graph of the White LED:
At ~165 mA you get 50% relative luminous flux.
At 350 mA : 100%
At 700 mA : maybe as high as 175%.

Note that if you want to double the relative flux, you have to more than double the current.

This is well below the 1 Amp rating for these chips, and you see the efficiency reducing as the current goes higher, even with a consistent junction temperature.

In practice the savings should be greater than the graph implies, for two reasons:

1. Lower currents are produced by lower voltages, so two chips at 150 mA consume less power than one chip at 300 mA (Watts are equal to Volts times Amps).

2. Lower current produces a lower junction temperature for the same heatsink arrangement. Lower temperature produces higher radiant flux, as shown by the graphs on page 7. For blue and white diodes this effect isn't so extreme, but look at what happens to the efficiency of red diodes when the temperature rises! Below 70% at 50 degrees celcius, well below 50% at 75 degrees C.

I'm not saying you should run your diodes at a lower current (though I do, and if I want more light I add more diodes). I am saying that LEDs do lose efficiency at higher currents, as shown by tests run by the manufacturer.
Click to expand...
What I’m saying is that the bridglux gen 2 strips data has the strips max at approx half of what the actual max of the strip is. People literally run those strips at max current without heatsinks and up to double with decent heatsinks, if I remember correctly someone pushed them past double with water cooling.

Plus with grow lights efficiency isn’t the most important factor. Yeah you can run them Super low current but then the amount of light they’ll actually produce will be insufficient for growing.

Having run gen 2 strips I wouldn’t run them softer then (1ft) 500mA veg 700mA (2&4ft) 1A veg 1.4A flower. But if I was using strips again I’d run 1ft strips at 1A and 2&4ft strips at 2-2.4A
 
Last edited:
reza92

reza92

Well-Known Member
weed-whacker said:
Ok sorry but Ur idea about needing to drive them hard to get through the canopy defies physics

A photon is a photon dont matter how many per watt or at what current they were produced


Can U explain this part of the data sheet please?

Even though I agree it is minimal curve

Consider this is at stable temp
U don't use heatsinks?

Mmm

Here are the averages from test done in a tent with an apogee par meter
Click to expand...
As I said the bridglux data sheets don’t tell the whole story. The actual potential max of the strips is almost double that listed therefore the graph for the efficacy range is also off. The harder you drive an individual chip the more energy the phontons from said chip will contain and from the inverse square rule have higher energy values at a distance set from the diode than a softer driven chip.
 
weed-whacker

weed-whacker

Well-Known Member
reza92 said:
As I said the bridglux data sheets don’t tell the whole story. The actual potential max of the strips is almost double that listed therefore the graph for the efficacy range is also off. The harder you drive an individual chip the more energy the phontons from said chip will contain and from the inverse square rule have higher energy values at a distance set from the diode than a softer driven chip.
Click to expand...
Interesting point regarding higher and lower energy photons this is something to look into for sure
I always assumed it was just more or less photons

I hear ya about the Vero and driving hard and the bridgelux were always good at holding efficiency at higher currents better than the data sheet described

EDIT: could U please link something about the drive current and the photons energy?

All I am.finding is about the lower nm being higher energy as the wavelength is shorter and higher nm being low energy
 
Last edited:
jungle666

jungle666

Well-Known Member
There's a bloke down town selling 10mm clear polycarbonate sheets, thinking about buying some for a greenhouse, does anyone have an idea if they'll be suitable,
 
klx

klx

Well-Known Member
Rewerb said:
I didn't chop-up the bud because the machine has a rotating blade that breaks up the plant material during processing (it runs about every 10-15 mins during the cycle). You end-up with a fine green sludge at the end.

I also ran it at 55C for 4 hours (the manufacturer's recommendation & my own research on recipes backed that up), whereas my mate runs it on 71C for 8 hours. Since 71C is getting close to the boiling point of ethanol, I wanted to minimise my losses to evaporation. Apparently, an 8-hour process produces a stronger flavour & greater intensity, but I just wanted to try the "basic" one first.

My mate normally uses an oz/500ml & I checked with him again & he reckons he gave me 2.5-3ml as an oral dose. I deliberately made mine stronger because I wanted a vapable product & just decided to start with 1ml:4ml of PG/VG as a starting point.

After last night's experience with what I made, I'd probably use half of what I did in the PG/VG mix, so that you can micro-dose yourself until you find the place you want to be over several hours. I also found it rather "alcoholic" on the inhalation initially, but then got used to it.

Bear in mind I'm a bit of a "lightweight" when it comes to cannabis consumption, so depending on your own pattern of use & tolerance, your mileage may vary from mine.

I'm yet to try an oral dose of my own batch & I'll definitely ONLY be starting with 1ml!!!
Click to expand...
Sweet man thanks all sounds good thanks for the info. Gonna have to give it a try at some point for sure. $70 a bottle that Polish rectified alcohol I noticed, not bad at all.
 
V

viewer1020

Well-Known Member
reza92 said:
Plus with grow lights efficiency isn’t the most important factor. Yeah you can run them Super low current but then the amount of light they’ll actually produce will be insufficient for growing.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree, efficiency isn't the most important factor. So many considerations go into each growing setup, there are no one-size-fits-all answers.

As for running them super low. I think it all depends on the scale you're operating at and how much micro-management you're willing to do for each plant. With a vertical scrog and a lot of micro-management, the canopy can be very thin and the lack of penetration doesn't matter too much.

For most growers, it makes perfect sense to use fewer panels at a greater distance and crank the current up high. I'm in awe of the results I see posted here, people are getting better yields and spending less on their setups than my little DIY job.

For my grow, I care about: discretion, the type of effect, potency, and taste/smell. In that order. I've seen some people disparaging low power setups because they don't produce the mass or density you can get with more power. At the same time, I've bought a lot of dense weed which didn't have the right kind of effect for me, or just wasn't very potent when measured by weight.

Growing my own on a micro scale, selecting a plant which does what I want and optimising within a tight power budget - I've always been happy with the results. For anyone else like I was a few years ago, wondering if it's possible to grow anything decent without running hundreds of watts - it's definitely possible, just don't expect the same yield you could get with more power. I've found that if I have the right kind of weed available at all times though, I'm satisfied with about half as much as I use when I buy it, and my tolerance doesn't go through big swings each time the batch changes.
 
Rewerb

Rewerb

Well-Known Member
klx said:
Sweet man thanks all sounds good thanks for the info. Gonna have to give it a try at some point for sure. $70 a bottle that Polish rectified alcohol I noticed, not bad at all.
Click to expand...
I've recently been looking at purchasing a reflux still to mount onto a piece of brewing equipment I already own in order to make my own neutral spirit for this kind of project/product. It would take some time to do the runs, but getting 5-6L of 90%+ spirit, it would pay for itself in the first use.

Even 'though I'm a pretty heavy drinker, there's no way I'd be using the output for anything other than making tinctures. I'll stick to beer - spirits & I don't play well together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top