DIY with Quantum Boards

hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
Humple said:
Question for @Stephenj37826 - I took a closer look at the v1 QB288s I just bought, and noticed that the diodes are using the 2835 form-factor. I was out of the scene for quite a while, so maybe I missed something that everyone else knows, but did Samsung put out the LM561C in form-factors other than 5630? Or are these not 561C diodes? If not, I'd love to know what they are!
Click to expand...
Same here on a v1 Kit bought this month, that is how they appear, besides being exceptionally bright.
 
hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
HLG Boards right from them, all trademarked etc. but just wondered on the shape of the diodes vs picture in HLG catalog.
 
ilovereggae

ilovereggae

Well-Known Member
Humple said:
Oh, and no logo, but "Horticultural Lighting Group" is stamped along the edge.
Click to expand...
I noticed that "Horticultural Lighting Group" plus their website url are in more of an sans serif type font instead of the serif type Times New Roman looking font like on the v1/v2 288 boards on the website.

With that in mind, comparing it to all of their other boards, it looks to be similar in design to the QB120 and QB132 V1 generation of boards. Those both have the board info stamped in the center in an arial type font.

I am guessing these had to be early gen v1 boards? I just looked at the specs for the 2835 diodes and they seem to be a lot less efficient (150 lm/w) than the 561c (210 lm/w). The lm301b are (226 lm/w). That would make the v2 lm301b boards 40% more efficient than these v1 2835 boards. Would definitely like to know the answer to this since I bought 14 of these expecting that they were 561C diodes.
 
Humple

Humple

Well-Known Member
The most efficient 2835 I can find (from Samsung) is the LM281B+, at 165 lm/w luminous efficacy. Very curious. If it's being labeled as a v1 board, I would expect the board-level efficiency to be at least equivalent to the 561C-based v1 boards, but I don't see how that would be possible.
 
ilovereggae

ilovereggae

Well-Known Member
Humple said:
The most efficient 2835 I can find (from Samsung) is the LM281B+, at 165 lm/w luminous efficacy. Very curious. If it's being labeled as a v1 board, I would expect the board-level efficiency to be at least equivalent to the 561C-based v1 boards, but I don't see how that would be possible.
Click to expand...
I just emailed them. Will see what they say.
 
ilovereggae

ilovereggae

Well-Known Member
Humple said:
The most efficient 2835 I can find (from Samsung) is the LM281B+, at 165 lm/w luminous efficacy. Very curious. If it's being labeled as a v1 board, I would expect the board-level efficiency to be at least equivalent to the 561C-based v1 boards, but I don't see how that would be possible.
Click to expand...
I am guessing they are the LM281BA+ since those are the only 2835's that are 0.2W which is the same as the 561C and 301B diodes. They are also only 150 lm/w.
 
Humple

Humple

Well-Known Member
ilovereggae said:
I am guessing they are the LM281BA+ since those are the only 2835's that are 0.2W which is the same as the 561C and 301B diodes. They are also only 150 lm/w.
Click to expand...
Thanks, didn't look that deeply at the specs, so good to know.

This is so very odd. I would have expected this information to come out before now?
 
ilovereggae

ilovereggae

Well-Known Member
Humple said:
Thanks, didn't look that deeply at the specs, so good to know.

This is so very odd. I would have expected this information to come out before now?
Click to expand...
I am willing to give HLG the benefit of the doubt that they didn't even realize the backstock of the v1 boards was the older design. My guess is the ppl in the fulfillment center or warehouse just see v1 printed on the bag and fulfilled the orders like usual. I could see inventory records on backstock getting lost/mixed up. Definitely disappointed either way at the moment.
 
Airwalker16

Airwalker16

Well-Known Member
ilovereggae said:
I noticed that "Horticultural Lighting Group" plus their website url are in more of an sans serif type font instead of the serif type Times New Roman looking font like on the v1/v2 288 boards on the website.

With that in mind, comparing it to all of their other boards, it looks to be similar in design to the QB120 and QB132 V1 generation of boards. Those both have the board info stamped in the center in an arial type font.

I am guessing these had to be early gen v1 boards? I just looked at the specs for the 2835 diodes and they seem to be a lot less efficient (150 lm/w) than the 561c (210 lm/w). The lm301b are (226 lm/w). That would make the v2 lm301b boards 40% more efficient than these v1 2835 boards. Would definitely like to know the answer to this since I bought 14 of these expecting that they were 561C diodes.
Click to expand...
Probably should add @Stephenj37826 to this...
 
Airwalker16

Airwalker16

Well-Known Member
Chip Green said:
Page 139, first post, has the very first picture of a QB 288, in this thread, or anywhere I can find....
Click to expand...
Here's a link to it

DIY with Quantum Boards

The 288 in its natural environment. I've been sick and haven't had the energy to wire them up despite my excitement. Hanging out under a 600w hps in a 3x3x6' and over vanilla kush on the left and tangilope on the right. I will be taking 30 or so cuttings from these two soon and once rooted, they...
www.rollitup.org
 
Barristan Whitebeard

Barristan Whitebeard

Well-Known Member
ilovereggae said:
I noticed that "Horticultural Lighting Group" plus their website url are in more of an sans serif type font instead of the serif type Times New Roman looking font like on the v1/v2 288 boards on the website.

With that in mind, comparing it to all of their other boards, it looks to be similar in design to the QB120 and QB132 V1 generation of boards. Those both have the board info stamped in the center in an arial type font.

I am guessing these had to be early gen v1 boards? I just looked at the specs for the 2835 diodes and they seem to be a lot less efficient (150 lm/w) than the 561c (210 lm/w). The lm301b are (226 lm/w). That would make the v2 lm301b boards 40% more efficient than these v1 2835 boards. Would definitely like to know the answer to this since I bought 14 of these expecting that they were 561C diodes.
Click to expand...
I have also heard a couple reports of V1 QB 132 boards with diodes that were not LM561C.
I believe the owner thought they were Lumiled diodes.
 
Humple

Humple

Well-Known Member
Barristan Whitebeard said:
I have also heard a couple reports of V1 QB 132 boards with diodes that were not LM561C.
I believe the owner thought they were Lumiled diodes.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Well, if Lumiled has a 2835 diode of comparable efficiency to the 561C, I'm okay with the change. It's still odd that the change wasn't publicized though?
 
ilovereggae

ilovereggae

Well-Known Member
Ok so a deep google search I discovered this:

ALL

High Efficiency Quantum Boards® Grow Lamps, Horticulture Modules, Kits and accessories by Horticulture Lighting Group
horticulturelightinggroup.com horticulturelightinggroup.com

The 260 v1 kit says it includes:
QB288 V1- 288pcs 2835 LED

The photos are of the 561C boards tho.

The 135W v1 kit page says it comes with 561C tho.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top