High Light efficiency tests (TEKNIK) - 2.47 umol/j CRI 94.2

Stephenj37826

Stephenj37826

Well-Known Member
Or_Gro said:
I’d just like to clarify, that my attitude toward hlg has always been admiration for the technology and prodding for better support of its customers....yes, i have been hard on stephen and hlg, but it sincerely has been about pushing the company to live up to its potential.

On a personal note, i’ve been watching some gml show lately(still in the mid-60s episodewise) and really appreciate @Stephenj37826 ’s participation and contribution, especially at the end of a long day. He’s a good guy.

Not looking for handout, i usually pay retail for what i test, and surely not looking to outfit a fourth identical 4x4, as well as, all the work it takes managing individual dwc buckets while trying to do as close to identical conditions as i can...not to mention the f#cking trimming!

In fact, i’m near burnt out doing these smackdowns along with my two regular jobs...the HL smackdown will likely be my last...for a while, at least.

But if hlg wants in, i’ll consider it, and gladly return lights afterwards....could be the supplemented 288v2s that i’ll be running are essentiall mimicking the 288Rs....
Click to expand...

The trinity (actually Trident) is a 4k +630+660. Its spectrum is similar to the qb96 elite v2s but at nearly 3 umol/j system level. The white LEDs on hybridways sample are a year old. The prototype has been around awhile. At 1500 umol+ it's a bunch of light for sure.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
The real aim was to simply broaden the spectrum with more emphasis on the red range 620-660nm with a bit more far red, some UVA (or near UV), and to have all of this on one board with one channel and one driver. The extra expense of the LEDs is offset by only needing one common driver. Plus, they're in no way inefficient - for CRI 95, they're actually pretty good!
Click to expand...
While I understand the attraction of having everything on one board, I really don't think it's a good idea to put UV sources on daylight boards, for several reasons. First; safety. People simply underestimate the long term eye damage that UV can cause. Macular degeneration is real. So is skin cancer.

It is also true that at least for now, florescent lamps are better UV sources. On a separate circuit one can easily accommodate a wide range of UV lamps to match the needs of the space.

This is why I advocate for running the UV lighting on a separate circuit; both because of different sources and intensities and so that it can be shut off while people are in the space. This should be seen as an advantage because the UV exposure can be tuned and timed independently of the main lighting. Less UV early in bloom and more later, for example.
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
While I understand the attraction of having everything on one board, I really don't think it's a good idea to put UV sources on daylight boards, for several reasons. First; safety. People simply underestimate the long term eye damage that UV can cause. Macular degeneration is real. So is skin cancer.

It is also true that at least for now, florescent lamps are better UV sources. On a separate circuit one can easily accommodate a wide range of UV lamps to match the needs of the space.

This is why I advocate for running the UV lighting on a separate circuit; both because of different sources and intensities and so that it can be shut off while people are in the space. This should be seen as an advantage because the UV exposure can be tuned and timed independently of the main lighting. Less UV early in bloom and more later, for example.
Click to expand...
We’ll see what prawn says...i bet the amount is very low....and i agree with the concept of having uv switchable...i have a uvb meter and i checked the lights, 000, no uvb...so highly unlikely any C...so just A....

In each 4x4 i run two 4’ t-5 arcadia 14%uvb-30%uva, i have stronger uvb tubes, and a couple handheldr uvc lights for killing pm.

I also have a milder form of skin cancer, from childhood overexposure.

So, in any area that has uv, i either dress for success or i shut the lights off.
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
While I understand the attraction of having everything on one board, I really don't think it's a good idea to put UV sources on daylight boards, for several reasons. First; safety. People simply underestimate the long term eye damage that UV can cause. Macular degeneration is real. So is skin cancer.

It is also true that at least for now, florescent lamps are better UV sources. On a separate circuit one can easily accommodate a wide range of UV lamps to match the needs of the space.

This is why I advocate for running the UV lighting on a separate circuit; both because of different sources and intensities and so that it can be shut off while people are in the space. This should be seen as an advantage because the UV exposure can be tuned and timed independently of the main lighting. Less UV early in bloom and more later, for example.
Click to expand...
Hi mate, have you looked at the spectrum? There is no UVB on the board and only a small amount of near-UV/UVA in the 400-420nm range.

Unless you spend a significant amount of time in your flowering room each day (and even then), I'd suggest there is almost no risk of skin damage at all. In fact, I'd suggest there is more chance of getting skin cancer sitting under a flurorescent light at home or in the office.

Here is a typical CFL lamp you might have in your home - note the UVA from 380-420nm:
CFL2700K.png

There is no doubt fluorescent is the most economical form of UV, and that's why we also produced a board without the UV-based phosphor for growers who are already running UV in their rooms. @Randomblame and @Frank Cannon both have theses boards. Here is the spectrum:
Screen Shot 2019-04-03 at 13.57.00.png

I really don't think there is anything to worry about.
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
We've all seen these photosynthetic action and pigment absorption graphs. If you subscribe to them, then it could be argued that most blue-based LEDs end where a lot of the action happens below 450nm. That was the reason behind adding a UV-based white phosphor to the board. It was never intended to give it a large UVA/B boost, but to provide something that is missing in a lot of other LED grow light spectra. Most growers who are serious about providing UVB and enhanced UVA will be doing it with fluorescents or, in some cases, multi-channel boards that have UV mono LEDs (though personally I believe fluoros have a much broader UV spectrum than targetted UV LEDs, and are cheaper, too)

absorption-and-action-spect_med.jpeg

Photosynthetic-and-other-light-absorbing-pigments-Absorbance-spectra-of-selected.png

Actionspectrum.gif

High Light
Production Board.png
 
Last edited:
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Or_Gro said:
We’ll see what prawn says...i bet the amount is very low....and i agree with the concept of having uv switchable...i have a uvb meter and i checked the lights, 000, no uvb...so highly unlikely any C...so just A....

In each 4x4 i run two 4’ t-5 arcadia 14%uvb-30%uva, i have stronger uvb tubes, and a couple handheldr uvc lights for killing pm.

I also have a milder form of skin cancer, from childhood overexposure.

So, in any area that has uv, i either dress for success or i shut the lights off.
Click to expand...
Well done! How do you like those UV lamps?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
Hi mate, have you looked at the spectrum? There is no UVB on the board and only a small amount of near-UV/UVA in the 400-420nm range.

Unless you spend a significant amount of time in your flowering room each day (and even then), I'd suggest there is almost no risk of skin damage at all. In fact, I'd suggest there is more chance of getting skin cancer sitting under a flurorescent light at home or in the office.

Here is a typical CFL lamp you might have in your home - note the UVA from 380-420nm:
View attachment 4333573

There is no doubt fluorescent is the most economical form of UV, and that's why we also produced a board without the UV-based phosphor for growers who are already running UV in their rooms. @Randomblame and @Frank Cannon both have theses boards. Here is the spectrum:
View attachment 4333572

I really don't think there is anything to worry about.
Click to expand...
Cool, man. I like to bring it up occasionally just to raise awareness. I still think there gonna be a lot of old growers in years to come who have macular degeneration.
 
ANC

ANC

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
While I understand the attraction of having everything on one board, I really don't think it's a good idea to put UV sources on daylight boards, for several reasons. First; safety. People simply underestimate the long term eye damage that UV can cause. Macular degeneration is real. So is skin cancer.

It is also true that at least for now, florescent lamps are better UV sources. On a separate circuit one can easily accommodate a wide range of UV lamps to match the needs of the space.

This is why I advocate for running the UV lighting on a separate circuit; both because of different sources and intensities and so that it can be shut off while people are in the space. This should be seen as an advantage because the UV exposure can be tuned and timed independently of the main lighting. Less UV early in bloom and more later, for example.
Click to expand...
The only light I saw use it, has a super annoying strobe light that flashes while UV is running. I wish I can remember where now, but it was in the last 2 weeks or so.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
ANC said:
The only light I saw use it, has a super annoying strobe light that flashes while UV is running. I wish I can remember where now, but it was in the last 2 weeks or so.
Click to expand...
At least it's hard to ignore or forget.
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Well done! How do you like those UV lamps?
Click to expand...
They seem to be going great. When I trialled the boards, I noticed my plants had a slightly stronger, oilier smell to them. But that's subjective, so I don't really know how to quantify it without a gas chromatography–mass spectrometer.

What I do know is we have a couple of boards running side-by-side against a couple of QB324 V1s and a bunch of 600W HPS and they are holding their own at 350W to the boards (vs 400W for the QB324s). This room will be filled with High Lights soon, and they will all be paired to 480 drivers set at about 400W to the boards. We expect good things.

IMG_0828.JPG
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
I think you're reading a bit more into it than there is. It was an innocent attempt to try to explain the differences between sphere vs gonio testing. Maybe he expected different results. As I said, he wasn't tying to spruik the boards. They are what they are - as you can see.
Click to expand...
Ach! Meanwhile it becomes clearer to me..
He just can't stop to try to make other peeps look bad. I've already said, I regret to have said something..
But for him it's not enough to say it one time .. in a respectful way.. he has to say it again and again and involve others too and it has to be in a way that the other one feels like an asshole that have to stand in the pillory for his different opinion..
That's seem to give him a kick somehow!
He is surely not blocked for nothing every few weeks .. He seem to like the fighter image ...and I'm btw not the 1st one who has to feel his wrath over the past few years.
No worry! I've a pretty thick skin and just laugh at him and his tries to make a fool outta me.
 
Fake stoker

Fake stoker

Member
I just bought one Mars SP250 a few days ago. They say the PPE is 2.40-2.57.
I loved their pro series, which brought me very nice yield. Hope the new light can be better than Pro.
 
grotbags

grotbags

Well-Known Member
Randomblame said:
Ach! Meanwhile it becomes clearer to me..
He just can't stop to try to make other peeps look bad. I've already said, I regret to have said something..
But for him it's not enough to say it one time .. in a respectful way.. he has to say it again and again and involve others too and it has to be in a way that the other one feels like an asshole that have to stand in the pillory for his different opinion..
That's seem to give him a kick somehow!
He is surely not blocked for nothing every few weeks .. He seem to like the fighter image ...and I'm btw not the 1st one who has to feel his wrath over the past few years.
No worry! I've a pretty thick skin and just laugh at him and his tries to make a fool outta me.
Click to expand...
@Randomblame i havnt been a member here long and i dont post much but i read loads and i have to say you must be one of the most helpful, calm, levelheaded, kind and respectful posters on any forum i have ever been on.

never change.

you sir are no fool.
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Well done! How do you like those UV lamps?
Click to expand...
They work fine, with proper ramp up...

stronger tubes have caused damage, you really need a dimable ballast to use appropriately. Off-the shelf T-5 fixtures with dimmable t-5 ballasts are a rare find, so expensive diy is required to use them appropriately without damage.

As for results, there is no way to tell by looking at plants . Apparently it doesn’t affect the amount of trichomes, rather, the uvb increases the thc% within them.

The plants i have grown with them, have all been potent, but i think you really need to have them lab tested to demonstrate the efficacy of the uvb treatment. I don’t plan to do this.

I have them installed, have adjusted my process to work with them, and am willing to pay the small incremental electricity cost, so i’ll keep them, in hopes that they are doing something positive.

So, i’m running these on faith...
 
Or_Gro

Or_Gro

Well-Known Member
Randomblame said:
Ach! Meanwhile it becomes clearer to me..
He just can't stop to try to make other peeps look bad. I've already said, I regret to have said something..
But for him it's not enough to say it one time .. in a respectful way.. he has to say it again and again and involve others too and it has to be in a way that the other one feels like an asshole that have to stand in the pillory for his different opinion..
That's seem to give him a kick somehow!
He is surely not blocked for nothing every few weeks .. He seem to like the fighter image ...and I'm btw not the 1st one who has to feel his wrath over the past few years.
No worry! I've a pretty thick skin and just laugh at him and his tries to make a fool outta me.
Click to expand...
i don’t mind disagreement, but at some point it’s just repeating what’s been already expressed, so you stfu. But this guy has to go on and on,and in the most aggressive way.

After my posts about this, above, the guy pm’d me, goin on about why do i believe randomblame’s “lies”.

My response:
How many dead horses you gonna beat with that stick today?
 
Randomblame

Randomblame

Well-Known Member
!
Or_Gro said:
i don’t mind disagreement, but at some point it’s just repeating what’s been already expressed, so you stfu. But this guy has to go on and on,and in the most aggressive way.

After my posts about this, above, the guy pm’d me, goin on about why do i believe randomblame’s “lies”.

My response:
How many dead horses you gonna beat with that stick today?
Click to expand...
LMFAO! Really..? What a little wanker..
I know he's here since a long time but was blocked pretty often because of some unknown reasons(something with the mods or so).
I never had a problem with him in the past. More the opposide was the case from my side... I've many peoples told they should have a look on his PLC strips.

Damned, he could have pm'd me directly to keep that shitty discussion out of here and find a compromise. Had he just shown me 2 tests that were made by 2 independent labs and show less than 0,5% difference I would have agreed immediately. I've chosen my username not for nothing... if I'm wrong I can admit it.
It's just so sad that he has never learned how to behave as an adult person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top