Citizen Horticultural COB CLU04H - Plant RB

Randomblame · May 3, 2017

bles said:
This another lamp I build. This time I've used 5 CLU048-1212C4-403H7M4-F1.
They have >97 CRI AND the colors are breathtaking. A must have for diagnosing plants. I plan to make a mobile version of it too diagnose on the go.

I like the idea of a high CRI diagnostc light.
Like one of these XM-L flashlights, only with a high CRI chip instead of usually used CRI70 whites.
They are really easy to disassemble and use rounded 20mm pcb's with Cree XM-L2's, easy to replace and cheap to get.
I got mine for 3,25$, free shipped, on ebay.

bles · May 3, 2017

Also a great tool! Thanks.

numen.talpa · May 15, 2017

bles said:
Also a great tool! Thanks.

Hi! How's it growing?)

stardustsailor · May 15, 2017

bles said:
Thank You for this info. Can You point me where to look for more info about green and other parts of color spectrum being used by cannabis plants?

Unzip the"New folder ".
Study carefully.
Draw your own conclusions.

And a snack for thought :
Our "skewed" human vision makes plants to appear green.
They are not green.It's us that we are unable to see their true color.
Our "skewed" human "logic"(as it is based on skewed sensing systems ) ,
thinks that a part of an energy spectrum is not used .
(I've come to understand -long time ago -that plenty of so called "scientists" ,probably they are not so "bright" ,after all ...)
It's used and actually even more than any other part of the energy spectrum:

-Blue photons of sunrays disperse in Earths atmosphere and those few photons that reach the leaves ,
still carry lots of energy.
Not an ideal main source of energy for most plants.

-Red photons,from the other hand , are ideal for the job (photosynthesis) but they are not always present in adequate amounts to support vigorous growth due to atmosphere absorption and clouds ,geographic position ,etc.

-Both they get massively absorbed by top canopies.

What is left is the green part.
Always there,no matter the angle of the sun or the weather or the season.
Readily available energy for top and bottom leaves.Young and old.

-Plants have evolved their energy uptaking systems ,based upon these simple and basic facts.
Sure ,they can adapt to new forms of energy (like some weird burple "stars" ... ),but within limits.

When we -humans- relate ENERGY and NATURE (especially Cannabis plants ) together ,we have / owe to forget about terms like "not utilised or " waste".

Big mistake ,if otherwise.

Cheers.

nachooo · May 15, 2017

stardustsailor said:
Unzip the"New folder ".
Study carefully.
Draw your own conclusions.

And a snack for thought :
Our "skewed" human vision makes plants to appear green.
They are not green.It's us that we are unable to see their true color.
Our "skewed" human "logic"(as it is based on skewed sensing systems ) ,
thinks that a part of an energy spectrum is not used .
(I've come to understand -long time ago -that plenty of so called "scientists" ,probably they are not so "bright" ,after all ...)
It's used and actually even more than any other part of the energy spectrum:

-Blue photons of sunrays disperse in Earths atmosphere and those few photons that reach the leaves ,
still carry lots of energy.
Not an ideal main source of energy for most plants.

-Red photons,from the other hand , are ideal for the job (photosynthesis) but they are not always present in adequate amounts to support vigorous growth due to atmosphere absorption and clouds ,geographic position ,etc.

-Both they get massively absorbed by top canopies.

What is left is the green part.
Always there,no matter the angle of the sun or the weather or the season.
Readily available energy for top and bottom leaves.Young and old.

-Plants have evolved their energy uptaking systems ,based upon these simple and basic facts.
Sure ,they can adapt to new forms of energy (like some weird burple "stars" ... ),but within limits.

When we -humans- relate ENERGY and NATURE (especially Cannabis plants ) together ,we have / owe to forget about terms like "not utilised or " waste".

Big mistake ,if otherwise.

Cheers.

Thanks for the papers...it is ironic that the people that did those studies trying to bust weed from air, finally revealed us the spectrum that cannabis uses....
Very interesting info...also notice the important role of far red ..and greens..,

NoFucks2Give · May 15, 2017

I picked up a few Citizen, Ra97 Super High CRI Model, P/N CLU028-1204C4-273H7K4

It is similar to the Citizen Horticulture CLU03H-25/55-PW

This is why you cannot use Lumens to evaluate LEDs.

This spectral distribution was measured using a StellarNet Blue Wave Spectrometer.

Same CoB as above. Measured in µMoles rather than Lumens.

The above superimposed over the CLU028-1204C4 datasheet to show the accuracy of the measurements.

NoFucks2Give · May 15, 2017

If there were a "full spectrum" horticulture CoB it would be this one.

This is the color of the Fresh Focus Red Meat CoB reflected off a white ceiling.

In Lumens.

CobKits · May 15, 2017

NoFucks2Give said:
This is the color of the Fresh Focus Red Meat CoB reflected off a white ceiling.

looks a lot like the red-augmented white spectrums (fluence, chilled, etc)

NoFucks2Give · May 15, 2017

CobKits said:
looks a lot like the red-augmented white

It is a white with a pink tint. Not many white LEDs peak higher than 630nm. This one peaks at about 645nm. It is made to make red meat look good in the meat counter. They have one for marbled meat that peaks like 650-660nm but it also has more green.

Rocket Soul · May 16, 2017

NoFucks2Give said:
It is a white with a pink tint. Not many white LEDs peak higher than 630nm. This one peaks at about 645nm. It is made to make red meat look good in the meat counter. They have one for marbled meat that peaks like 650-660nm but it also has more green.

These look very similar to the vero decor line, 1750K, very interesting. Have you done any comparison? Does your lightmeter give you the LER for the spectrums so as to calculate efficiency? And what are the pricepoints like?

wietefras · May 16, 2017

NoFucks2Give said:
This is why you cannot use Lumens to evaluate LEDs.

Unles you compare leds with the same spectrum (ie for uniformity of light distribution over your canopy). Or when you know the conversion factor from lumen to par, you can get a decent estimate which would suffice for 99% of our applications.

stardustsailor · May 16, 2017

nachooo said:
Thanks for the papers...it is ironic that the people that did those studies trying to bust weed from air, finally revealed us the spectrum that cannabis uses....
Very interesting info...also notice the important role of far red ..and greens..,

Just take alook at the "Spectral Discrimination of Cannabis sativa L.Leaves and Canopies " pdf.
At page 195 ,figure #2 .
Notice that as cannabis plants move towards their end of life cycle ( towards peak of flowering /end of September )
the FR region .
Light can be absorbed ,transmitted or reflected.
At end of September cannabis plants reflect less FR (>700nm ) ,
but also transmit less FR ,than when being on growth stage (5th of July ).
That means one thing and only : Cannabis plants are absorbing more FR towards their end of life cycle.
And that explains a lot ,especially regarding the high CRI white LEDs.
:wink:

Zulunature · May 16, 2017

Rocket Soul said:
These look very similar to the vero decor line, 1750K, very interesting. Have you done any comparison? Does your lightmeter give you the LER for the spectrums so as to calculate efficiency? And what are the pricepoints like?

Exactly my thoughts when I looked and compared the 2 charts side by side.
I've purchased a number of the 1750K vero C's and will run them this time round.

What I see is that it will give me a huge boost in photon's in the 620-680nm range and go right on out to the IR 730nm+ with the added
bonus of some 380-400nm area which currently get zero from with the CXB3590 CD bins I've been running.

Adding some 730nm into the garden as well this run.

Very interesting regarding the 730nm absorbed vs transmitted vs reflected and the theory of greatly increased absorption rate toward the end of flowering.

I've followed the debate regarding UV and HPS or HID lamps which turned out to be a bit of a urban myth once put it in the sphere.

What did show was the enormous amount of IR !!!

Anyway I'll just get on with my lot and see what comes this time round.... adding fogger unit to my second table after 2 runs on the experimental table, I have never had roots anything like what I get now and using only 4" net pots to grow.

I really must stop making LED bars I've reached a total of 18 bars now and that doesn't include my side and interior canopy bars...

NoFucks2Give · May 16, 2017

wietefras said:
you can get a decent estimate which would suffice for 99% of our applications

When you are comparing CCTs in the same series (e.g. CLU04H) lumens will only confuse the issue.

If a 4000K 80CRI has 1000 lm and 2700K 90CRI has 950 lm, that does not mean the 4000K will have more PAR.

Lumens is skewed, to give green too much emphasis and red not enough, when converted from radiant flux to luminous flux.

NoFucks2Give · May 16, 2017

Rocket Soul said:
And what are the pricepoints like?

The Vero at first glance appears to be a better deal. I will very likely buy a Vero BXRC-17E4000-B-74 and measure it against the Fresh Focus Red Meat.

@ Qty 100
BXRC-17E4000-B-74, 2416 lm @ 900mA = $10.15
L2C5-RM001208E1500 2059 lm @ 900mA = $12.14

Rocket Soul said:
Does your lightmeter give you the LER f

My Blue Wave Spectrometer is the blue box shown below with the photon detector. It has a USB port and software where I can export the Lux and/or PAR values for each wavelength.

Samples from the CLU028-1204 measured at just a few inches above the photon detector. Both sets of PAR and LUX were exported at the same time. Total PAR=460 µMoles, LUX=27,209 lm

PAR VALUES:
530.00 1.3094E+000 µMoles
531.00 1.3197E+000
532.00 1.3279E+000
533.00 1.3404E+000
534.00 1.3544E+000
535.00 1.3606E+000
536.00 1.3684E+000
537.00 1.3845E+000
538.00 1.4099E+000
539.00 1.4325E+000
540.00 1.4446E+000
541.00 1.4704E+000
542.00 1.4934E+000
543.00 1.4979E+000
544.00 1.5097E+000
545.00 1.5351E+000
546.00 1.5558E+000
547.00 1.5564E+000
548.00 1.5529E+000
549.00 1.5726E+000
550.00 1.5895E+000

LUX VALUES

530.00 1.7399E+002 lm
531.00 1.7776E+002
532.00 1.8016E+002
533.00 1.8231E+002
534.00 1.8532E+002
535.00 1.8915E+002
536.00 1.9292E+002
537.00 1.9561E+002
538.00 1.9907E+002
539.00 2.0284E+002
540.00 2.0551E+002
541.00 2.1024E+002
542.00 2.1552E+002
543.00 2.1763E+002
544.00 2.2042E+002
545.00 2.2573E+002
546.00 2.2842E+002
547.00 2.2772E+002
548.00 2.2754E+002
549.00 2.2894E+002
550.00 2.3180E+002

thetr33man · May 16, 2017

Going back to blurple, NO THANKS!!!

NoFucks2Give · May 16, 2017

Zulunature said:
Adding some 730nm into the garden as well this run.

You need to be careful with Far Red. Far Red is not considered to be needed for photosynthesis. It is used more for signalling modulated metabolic responses. Most notably the R:Fr ratio triggering SAS (Shade Avoidance Syndrome) See: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpls.2016.00236/full

Far Red can signal various metabolic responses in different development stages. In the following study it says "Ratios of far-red to red light can also impact growth, development and stress tolerance, and therefore yield and quality..." . This is a very interesting study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5007804/

You do not want to negatively impact growth using Far Red incorrectly. You said you saw something regarding Far Red and flowering. You need to be careful because in a different stage Far Red may produce negative changes. I recall something about modulating stress with IR during flowering can increase THC, but was anecdotal not proven theory. Far Red can also induce stress, as can UV. UV is dangerous. You should keep in mind UV is often used to kill living things. Sometimes UV is used for pest control.

wietefras · May 17, 2017

NoFucks2Give said:
When you are comparing CCTs in the same series (e.g. CLU04H) lumens will only confuse the issue.

If a 4000K 80CRI has 1000 lm and 2700K 90CRI has 950 lm, that does not mean the 4000K will have more PAR.

Lumens is skewed, to give green too much emphasis and red not enough, when converted from radiant flux to luminous flux.

That's why I explicitly stated the situations where it works just fine. Which is 99% of the cases where we need a light meter for actually.

It's of nu use to spends hundreds of dollars on a PAR meter just to be a few percent more accurate in knowing light quantities. The plants don't care and if it's a bit more or less.

NoFucks2Give · May 21, 2017

bles said:
point me where to look for more info about green and other parts of color spectrum

Lighting is not only about photosynthesis. Various wavelength can mediate photochrome metabolic responses.
Green is a color that is known to signal photochrome responses, for example blue light is known to affect minimize elongation for short dense plants. Green is know to reverse this. Green can signal shade avoidance.

This is where you need to be careful with the "other" colors. Far Red is not know for photosynthesis buy more for mediating response. The ratio of red:far red is a know photochrome signal.

This is a historic look at green. Written in 2007.
Green light: a signal to slow down or stop
https://academic.oup.com/jxb/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/jxb/erm130

Green light induces shade avoidance symptoms.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21852417

Green light signaling and adaptive response
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3357375/

Green light reversal of blue-light-stimulated stomatal opening is found in a diversity of plant species
http://www.amjbot.org/content/89/2/366.full

NoFucks2Give · May 21, 2017

Rocket Soul said:
These look very similar to the vero decor line, 1750K, very interesting. Have you done any comparison?

I did this weekend. When you mentioned the Vero 1750, I ordered one and it arrived Saturday.

I compared the Vero 1750 C RI 90, Citi 2700 CRI 90, and Luxeon 2200. Luxeon has no CRI.

Vero: BXRC-17E4000-F-24 1750K 97 CRI
Citi: CLU028-1204C4-273H7K4 2700K 97CRI
Luxeon: L2C5-RM001211E1900 220K

The Vero peaked at 635nm, Citi @ 637nm, and Luxeon @ 643nm
The Vero 1750 Vf measured 27V the other two, 34V.
All at 290mA using the same Mean Well LDD-300H LED driver. I would mover the driver from one to the next.

All are on the same scale and they were driven with the same 290mA current.

The Luxeon Fresh Focus Red Meat L2C5-RM001211E1900 may have been damaged. It looks like a row or two were not lit. It has overheated and had the solder melt the power leads off multiple times.

The Citi 2700 CRI 97, is so much whiter due to the small part of the curve that is a little bit higher than the other two in the green region.. Keeping in mind the eye multiples green by 4x over red and 10x over blue.

It appears the Luxeon Red Meat is the big winner. It had a PAR flux about the same as 12 Deep Red (658nm) and 4 Deep Blue (451nm) Luxeon Rebel LEDs on a 12" strip with a Forward Voltage of 35.5V.

Took pictures of each reflecting off a white sheet of paper (97 bright).

I also compared the Citi 2700 CRI 97 with a Citi 3000K 80 CRI

Citizen Horticultural COB CLU04H - Plant RB

Well-Known Member

Attachments

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Attachments

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member