Remote CFL Ballasts..... Who has the skinny on these?

Hey everyone!

I'm looking for anyone who has experience with using remote ballast CFL's. Overdriving CFLs and just plain wiring them up experience.

I can't imagine they're too different from the regular flouros but I'm not an electrician so I don't know.
I'm specifically interested in using the 4pin-plugin type.

Are there any Digital 4-lamp ballasts for these that I can run 2 lamps on for an overdriven light system?


Where's the best place online to get sockets for these bulbs?

The bulbs list higher lumens per watt ratings than the screw in self-ballasted types. Is this because they're not counting the energy the ballast draws?
(I.E. a 36W 4pin plugin bulb gives off 2,800 lumens; as also does a 42w screw in, self-ballasted bulb)


Being able to put the ballast somewhere else will really let me increase the lumens in my small area without increasing the heat as much....

*** Edit *** found the TG-11 Base Sockets!!! $1.97 each. (They're not listed on the 1000bulbs.com website though)

Call 1000bulbs.com and place a phone order. Use this item number for the sockets: SOCK-EG36070

They're the simple mount ones that just use 2 screws to hold them in place.

The Fulham Workhorse 8 ballast is 220w and will run 4 55w lamps.

3 3000K 55w lamps
1 5600K 55w lamp
1 Fulham Workhorse 8 ballast (220w)
4 TG11 Base Sockets
Shipping
220 watts of Remote CFL Goodness...... Less than $110 from 1000bulbs.com 12/2008

If anyone can find a U.S. Dealer for 2700K or lower lamps, please post a link.

*** Edit ***

Ok. So it appears most people do not use these types of CFLs

After a bit more research I came across a bit of insight while in chat.

(crap.... now I can't remember who it was that I was talking to bit I had a thought about 5 minutes after I quit the chat)

So I went looking and re-read all the crap that I'd already read and figured that I'm just a dumbass or something.

If you look here at this link you'll see the 1-2 lamp ballast listed for driving this particular type of 4pin CFL.
36w Electronic(?) Ballast for 1-2 CFL lamps

If you go to this particular link you'll see the "Flat" 36w CFL with the 3000K 2,800 lumen output. (Again, no curled tubes in a circle wasting light)

36w FLAT Coil CFL 4-pin remote ballasted

Questions:

1.) Is one 36w ballast for "1-2" lamps capable of running 2 36w lamps?

2.) Are these ballasts just rated for whatever lamp is used (within it's designed range) and the "Overdriving" is simply a wiring method used to activate the ballast as if it were connected to multiple bulbs when it isn't?

3) Could I simply use a 1-lamp rated ballast of a higher wattage than the bulb i'm using or would it not make a difference.


I'll eventually be running tests of my own in a few months but if anyone has done any research themselves I'd love to increase my chances of not wasting any cash.

The bulbs look like this........



Thinking of a flat scrog

I haven't found any information on 4 lamp ballasts for CFL's yet.

Here's what I've found on general overdriving. (Some of you have probably seen it before)




I'm assuming that the ballast comes with wiring for 4-pin bases, at least. I'd hate to have to wire it in by hand since I'll probably end up changing them often.

I'm wondering if the following diagram will be of any use?


I also read mention of overdriving causing a change in the spectrum. According to the following chart, if it changes much in the wrong direction I can't use these bulbs for overdriving and flowering. (Not a Bad(tm) thing at all)




Even without overdriving these lamps I can still fit about 16,000 lumens/sqft *** EDIT Actually it's 8,400 l/sqft. Sorry. *** with a completely even light density. At 3000K, of course.

(If overdriving these lamps changes their spectrum significantly enough the 27W flat coil lamps could be used for vegging when overdriven. At present they are 4100K so not actually great at all for vegging. Speculating on medicinal value of having some 4100K spectrum in flower though.)

It doesn't look like I'll have any spare cash for quite some time so it looks like I'm going to have to play with these later.

If anyone knows what the spectrum change would probably be from overdriving these, I'm definitely interested.

Ive always used remoted ballast CFLs. Type L ones are the most efficient of any CFL avalaible. I prefer to use the 55w models, instead of the 36w.

36w model may run both on electronic and mag ballast (the same a 36w floro tube), but with floros, electronic ballast clearly worth. Only slighty more expensive, but reduce watts consuption and enhance bulb's duration. 55 and 80w models only works on electronic ballast.

I use ballast for 2 55 bulbs. Ive used the Osram Quicktronic and the Phillips HF-II Basic (with only one start a day, the cheaper choice of rapid start ballast works pretty similar than preheat start ones, which are way more pricey). But i belive this ballast arnt on sale on the US, but just on Europe.

The HF-IIB draws 107-108 watts in total when driving 2 55w bulbs. Measured with a wattimeter, but it match with manufactiurer's specs (50.5w drown by each bulb and 7w dissipated by the ballast). With high frecuency ballasts, you get the same light output using lower wattage than the nominal of the bulb (in this case, 50.5 vs 55w).

Multibulb ballast often only works when you conect bulbs to all the outputs: most 2 lamp ballast dont work if you connect just one bulb, except if you overdrive it (joining two outputs on the same bulb). But overdriving froros is a expensive practice, as it reduces both efficiency (about 15% less) and duration (variable, but up to 1/10 of running between specs). There are some which works independ of the load, but they are rare and usually more expensive.

Apart of the ballast, you need to buy the sockets (2G11). If you cant find them, its possible to wire them using standard electrical conection pieces (one side on each lamp's pin and the other for the wire coming from the ballast). If you use non dimmable ballast, you only need to conect 3 or the 4 pins of each lamp. Each ballast has its own way of wiring: a electrical diagram always comes picted on the ballast (aswell as the wire thickness avalaible).

There are many shops which sells systems with 2 55w lamps, reflector and ballast together. For example, this: http://www.htgsupply.com/viewproduct.asp?productID=51907

At 70$ all, its going to be difficult you may save too much doing it yourself. And its just plug and play.

knna said:

Ive always used remoted ballast CFLs. Type L ones are the most efficient of any CFL avalaible. I prefer to use the 55w models, instead of the 36w.
I use ballast for 2 55 bulbs.

Each ballast has its own way of wiring: a electrical diagram always comes picted on the ballast (as well as the wire thickness avalaible).

Click to expand...

Sweet Knna! Thanks for the tip on the 55w bulbs. Those look GREAT! (Can't believe I missed them)

What's the maximum width of those bulbs? I know they say 20.7 inches...... what's the width of that base? (***Edit*** called em up and they say it's under 3")

Knew there had to be someone who knew what was up with these lamps. (thanks so much for replying. Saved me some cash ya did.)

Have you used the screw in self-ballasted CFLs before? How do you rate being able to handle the heat issues?
(With the output of the 55w lamps and their configuration, I wouldn't need to overdrive them. That's 19,200 lumens from 4 lamps. At 2 sq feet = 9,600l/sqft......Sweet! My space is 11x21 so I'll have to wire them directly )

55w ones are 53-54cm long (it depends of the brand; Osram Dulux L are the shorter im aware of, but i believe the GE Biax L is shorter than the Phillips PL-L too). 53cm is 20.8". Plus the pins and socket, i think they arnt going to fit in 21"

In the US they sell too a 50w version which is still more efficient than the 55w one. I dont know if its same lenght or slighty shorter. With 1/2" less, they will fit for sure.

Anyway, i think you can use the 36 aswell. They are 4" less, so they will fit without any problem. You can put 4 on top and two on sides. Similar total amount of light than from 4 55w, but evenly distributed. these lamps, as any fluorescent, dont have much penetration. I grow 1ft tall plants (SOG style) with them: they dont give good buds farer than that. Some side lighting would allow you to grow somewhat taller plants.

About heat, just slighty less than same wattage of other CFLs (yep, ive used screw in CFLs before: more than heat, the difference is yield per watt, way better for the PLL). I exhaust the heat from 4 55w lamps with a 12cm (~5") computer fan (87CFM). But when ambient temp start to raise, i need to use 2 fans. You can place the lamps at less than 1"plants, but you must avoid direct contact, as they will burn leaves. Difference in grow having the lamps 2" from plants is negligible and avoid burnings due fast growing.

Happy growing

knna said:

55w ones are 53-54cm long (it depends of the brand; Osram Dulux L are the shorter im aware of, but i believe the GE Biax L is shorter than the Phillips PL-L too). 53cm is 20.8". Plus the pins and socket, i think they arnt going to fit in 21"

Click to expand...

I hear ya. I re-measured and I have (Maximum) 22.5 inches to work with. If I have to I'll wire them direct without sockets.

This should work out perfect. At 220Watts plus a few for the two ballasts the lumen saturation should be wonderful.

I checked into the 50w's and only found ones that were 22 inches and longer? Weird.

If I go with the 36w's I have to get another ballast and run 6 bulbs instead of 4. Would be a bit more lumens but my budget is pretty tight and the heat would probably begin to be a hassle. Something I'd like to try in the future.

Your ballasts are cooled separately, no?

Does that 5" fan draw from the center of all the bulbs or does it draw from a corner of your space? I'll be using a 50cfm fan that's built directly above the lamps and drawing air _through_ the gaps around the lamps and up.

What's your approximate lumens per square foot?

I'd take this to PM but you don't have enough posts yet

I understand why your yield would be higher with these bulbs. More lumens are directed at the plants instead of at the backside of another dang coil in the bulb.

With 22.5" the 55w will fit for sure, and using sockets if you want.

I use less than half light than what you are planning to use. I have 4 55w lamps over 5 sq ft (or slighty more). Its about 3600 lm/sq ft. Im running on the low end of the aceptable light density for growing MJ, while you plant to go over the upper end.

I think there is little advantage using more than 7500 lm/sq ft. I know that when you have a small cab, you try to install as more watts of light as possible, in order to get as much as you can of a reduced space. But increase in yield beyond 7500lm/sq ft without CO2 is very small, and often dont worth the problems it creates, temp wise.

I think a 50CFM is going to be insufficient to cool down 4 55w lamps (the ballasts are outside the cab in my setup: its more due to ballast's reliability than to the aditional 7w they dissipate as heat). Seek for 12cm computer fans, their airflow is much better than 4" ones.





This two plants were grown in 2.5 sqtf (half the cab) with 2 55 watts lamps. For sure you may add more light, but doubling it for sure arnt going to double yield. Light saturation issues for sure. I think you can use 4 55w lamps in your space, but two on top and two on sides (or hanging between plants with a fan just below them, to avoid leaf burns) probably will report you more yield than the 4 lamps of top. With 2 lamps is more than enough on your space until the last month of flowering, IMHO.

Type L CFLs not only are more efficients than any screw in CFL, but the light use is way better: evenly distributed and lower optical losses due some tubes blocking the light of other tubes as happen on typical multitubes CFLs.

Puting a V of polished aluminium (or any material painted flat white) over the lamps further reduce the optical losses, by avoiding the light bouncing back from the reflector (or top of the cab) to the tubes. If the lamps are going to be adjustable in height, do a reflector for each one: an V with two wings, letting a space between both over the V allow to fully use all the light emited while letting the hot air to raise without the need of doing a hot air bag below the reflector (abliguing to keep it farer from plants). Ive done them using many materials, and all work fine (some are flat white painted with thermal resistant enamel and barite, enhancing reflectivity).

knna said:

With 22.5" the 55w will fit for sure, and using sockets if you want.

Click to expand...

Sweeeeet!

knna said:

I use less than half light than what you are planning to use. I have 4 55w lamps over 5 sq ft (or slighty more). Its about 3600 lm/sq ft. Im running on the low end of the aceptable light density for growing MJ, while you plant to go over the upper end.

Click to expand...

Wow! I figured there'd be a difference with the coils all stretched out. More efficient and all. But only 3600 lm/sq ft and you're growing nice meds like that?

What the heck is your average yield under that lighting? That's insane!

It would make sense though. Up until now all the lm/sq ft guesstimates have been taken using CFLs with the coiled tubes. Of COURSE it would require more lumens (as rated by the bulb packaging).

knna said:

I think there is little advantage using more than 7500 lm/sq ft. I know that when you have a small cab, you try to install as more watts of light as possible, in order to get as much as you can of a reduced space. But increase in yield beyond 7500lm/sq ft without CO2 is very small, and often dont worth the problems it creates, temp wise.

Click to expand...

That's wicked keen to hear. It makes my pocketbook happier for sure and so too my future plants.

knna said:

I think a 50CFM is going to be insufficient to cool down 4 55w lamps (the ballasts are outside the cab in my setup: its more due to ballast's reliability than to the aditional 7w they dissipate as heat). Seek for 12cm computer fans, their airflow is much better than 4" ones.

Click to expand...

It's a bathroom fan. They tend to push 50cfm a bit better than the PC fans but you're correct. I'll be upgrading it to an 80 or 95cfm fan as soon as possible. It'll also be pushing or pulling through a carbon scrubber so it'll need the extra kick. I hear the panasonic whisperline fans work quite well.

knna said:

Type L CFLs not only are more efficients than any screw in CFL, but the light use is way better: evenly distributed and lower optical losses due some tubes blocking the light of other tubes as happen on typical multitubes CFLs.

Puting a V of polished aluminium (or any material painted flat white) over the lamps further reduce the optical losses, by avoiding the light bouncing back from the reflector (or top of the cab) to the tubes. If the lamps are going to be adjustable in height, do a reflector for each one: an V with two wings, letting a space between both over the V allow to fully use all the light emitted while letting the hot air to raise without the need of doing a hot air bag below the reflector (abliguing to keep it farer from plants). Ive done them using many materials, and all work fine (some are flat white painted with thermal resistant enamel and barite, enhancing reflectivity).

Click to expand...

I wonder if there's a high-temp, high reflective paint I could paint the backside of the bulbs with? I know you can do some types of silver tape on bigger flouros, wonder if there's any high-temp tape that would do it.

Just amazing. Can't thank you enough for stopping by and sharing.

About that overdriving thing though. Do you happen to know which way in the spectrum the bulbs shift?
In other words, will a 2700K overdriven Flouro or CFL reach 2500K or will they go to say 3000K?

Some of these other bulbs are a bit off in the spectrum I'm looking for. Might be handy to have one overdriven one for spectrum balance...... IF they fall into the right spectrum that is.

I'm also waffling between scrog or a two plant staggered harvest. I think scrog will rock with that flat of a light density setup.

May be just easier to set up a second chamber in the future as that space looks a bit small for a staggered setup.

Any idea what type of canopy penetration I'd be looking at with 3 55ws in that 22x11 space? Approx 13,700 lumens / 2 is a rough 6,850lum/sq ft.
That's 2 3000K lamps and a 5600K lamp.

Trying to get some figures on where the screen would go but from what you're showing/telling me about these lamps the data from coiled types are pretty off.

Hydro-Soil said:

Sweeeeet!

Wow! I figured there'd be a difference with the coils all stretched out. More efficient and all. But only 3600 lm/sq ft and you're growing nice meds like that?

What the heck is your average yield under that lighting? That's insane!

Click to expand...

Many people uses those lamps on veg chambers. For sure they give way better results watt per watt than typical CFLs.

Those pics are from 2 years ago. Now i supplement the CFLs with red LEDs. They are done one to the other, a perfect couple! (that grows nice girls )

Dry weight is very relative to the way of manicuring and dryness. With a perfect manicuring and very dry (i like that way), those two plants yielded 54gr (little less than 2oz). Other ways of manicuring and less dry, as other people likes, surely yield more than 80g, and up to 100g. The strain is not a superproductive one, but decent.

Depending of the strains, i got 0.4-07g/w with those lamps.

Hydro-Soil said:

It would make sense though. Up until now all the lm/sq ft guesstimates have been taken using CFLs with the coiled tubes. Of COURSE it would require more lumens (as rated by the bulb packaging).

Click to expand...

Yep, what matter is the lm avalaible (i prefer to think in photons, as lm is a unit weighted by human sensitivity) to plants. While L CFLs gives about of 75-80% of lm avalaible of the initial total emission, typical CFLs may be a little over 50% of initial emission due the large optical losses.

Hydro-Soil said:

It's a bathroom fan. They tend to push 50cfm a bit better than the PC fans but you're correct. I'll be upgrading it to an 80 or 95cfm fan as soon as possible. It'll also be pushing or pulling through a carbon scrubber so it'll need the extra kick. I hear the panasonic whisperline fans work quite well.

Click to expand...

A bathroom fan is generally better than a axial one, because at same CFMs, they give more pressure. But if its pulling from a carbon filter, its perfomance is reduced. A low pressure fan is unable to pull from a filter and get enough airflow. You need a fan powerfull enough for that task. Minimum 90CFM and decent static pressure.

Hydro-Soil said:

I wonder if there's a high-temp, high reflective paint I could paint the backside of the bulbs with? I know you can do some types of silver tape on bigger flouros, wonder if there's any high-temp tape that would do it.

Click to expand...

I remember a guy at Overgow who used to do it. He said it worked fine. Ive never done it, i prefer to run the lamp at specs. The external layer (white enamel for radiators or silver tape) send back the light throught the tube, and that block a good percentage of light, at the time does the tube gets hotter. I prefer a good reflector, but that guy said it worked fine and only detrimental effect seemed to be a somewhat reduced bulb life. So at least i can say its doable. If it works better than a good reflector, i dont know, but there is nothing as trial error to know things.

Hydro-Soil said:

Just amazing. Can't thank you enough for stopping by and sharing.

Click to expand...

you are welcome. Im glad to help. Ive posted info about these lamps before on this board, but i still dont see many people using them here (they are very popular in Europe).

Hydro-Soil said:

About that overdriving thing though. Do you happen to know which way in the spectrum the bulbs shift?
In other words, will a 2700K overdriven Flouro or CFL reach 2500K or will they go to say 3000K?

Click to expand...

No idea. Spectrum shift is unpredictable, i think.

Hydro-Soil said:

Some of these other bulbs are a bit off in the spectrum I'm looking for. Might be handy to have one overdriven one for spectrum balance...... IF they fall into the right spectrum that is.

Click to expand...

There are many spectrums avalaible to mix. But 827 and 830 alone works very well on flowering. Specially on a strong lit cab.

Osram used to sold some special tones for Dulux L lamps, as the Natural de Luxe (lots of deep red), but at least in my country they gave up selling them. During one year they sold the Fluora too in this format (pretty similar to Grolux spectrum, not the wide but the standard).

Hydro-Soil said:

I'm also waffling between scrog or a two plant staggered harvest. I think scrog will rock with that flat of a light density setup.

May be just easier to set up a second chamber in the future as that space looks a bit small for a staggered setup.

Click to expand...

Yep, is way easier with more space. On a side note, whats the avalaible height of the cab?

These lamps seems designed to grow SCROG. I do a short high density SOG because i dont like the work of tie the plants.

Hydro-Soil said:

Any idea what type of canopy penetration I'd be looking at with 3 55ws in that 22x11 space? Approx 13,700 lumens / 2 is a rough 6,850lum/sq ft.
That's 2 3000K lamps and a 5600K lamp.

Click to expand...

You may expect good and compact buds up to 10" from lamps. For a dense canopy (small cab), below that there are only small buds if you dont give supplementary light to bottom areas.

I only mix the warm white bulbs with daylight for vegging. In flowering, i prefer all warm whites. But as you are going to use higher light densities, maybe adding the daylight bulb works better. On lower irradiances, not.

knna said:

Depending of the strains, i got 0.4-07g/w with those lamps.

Click to expand...

Excellent. I think I'm dead set on scrog now. I've worked with twin 150HPS lamps before and would love to do a flat scrog like this with even canopy lighting.

knna said:

You need a fan powerfull enough for that task. Minimum 90CFM and decent static pressure.

Click to expand...

Yeah, looking at a Panasonic whisperline fan. 95cfm or the 110. They run around $150 though so it'll be a few months LOL.

knna said:

Yep, is way easier with more space. On a side note, whats the avalaible height of the cab?

Click to expand...

31 and 1/2 inches max height.

knna said:

You may expect good and compact buds up to 10" from lamps. For a dense canopy (small cab), below that there are only small buds if you dont give supplementary light to bottom areas.

Click to expand...

Perfect. That's actually about what I was getting with the 150w though your meds look better than they did.

knna said:

I only mix the warm white bulbs with daylight for vegging. In flowering, i prefer all warm whites. But as you are going to use higher light densities, maybe adding the daylight bulb works better. On lower irradiances, not.

Click to expand...

I've been using this chart:



According to it there's a spike in clorophyl absorption at the 5600K range. Everyone else recommends 6500K but I think that's only because it's generally the only available spectrum for the big flouro tubes.

There seems to be quite a bit more selection for spectrum when using the CFLs. I'll be experimenting as much as possible. Especially since I'll be building 2 cabs

ETA for beginning first construction is approx 4-6 months from now.

Thanks again!

Hydro-Soil said:

31 and 1/2 inches max height.

Click to expand...

Although 22" is a little tight for doing it, have you thought on doing a vertical scrog?

Using only one side wall to put plants, it gets you a grow surface of 31*11" vs 22*11 of a horizontal one (and a bit more using the diagonal of the cab, and placing the lamps inclinated).

Using the two side walls, you need to keep plants on 11". Difficult, but doable (as pots are in angle, and you can use a wide but short one for scrogging). No reflector, full use of all the light and a surface grow area of 62*11". On this setup, 4 lamps would be better. 2 Plants at each side (one for each half net, one over the other, for fast growing cycles, or side by side (easier to tie). The four lamps in the middle with 2 PC fan blowing from the bottom (allowing the buds to be very close to lamps).

Just a suggerence, there is nothing wrong on a typical scrog. But on a small cab, often going vertical increase the grow surface area, apart of the decreased light losses.

Hydro-Soil said:

Perfect. That's actually about what I was getting with the 150w though your meds look better than they did.

Click to expand...

Take in mind i was refering to the SOG style i grow most often. With LST'ed plants, i was training the bottom developing buds on the clear areas of the canopy, so they get more light.

Hydro-Soil said:

I've been using this chart:



According to it there's a spike in clorophyl absorption at the 5600K range. Everyone else recommends 6500K but I think that's only because it's generally the only available spectrum for the big flouro tubes.

There seems to be quite a bit more selection for spectrum when using the CFLs. I'll be experimenting as much as possible. Especially since I'll be building 2 cabs

ETA for beginning first construction is approx 4-6 months from now.

Thanks again!

Click to expand...

That graph is no sense. They took a chlorophill absorbance chart (not a photosynthetic response one, both are very different) and changed the scale of the x axis from nanometers to CCT (correlated color temperature). Thats have no any sense.

CCT is calculated from the whole spectrum distribution. Same CCT, for example 3400K, have almost infitite spectrum distruibutions able to fit in it. MHs, CMHs, and floros are avalaible at that CCT, and each with a very different distribution. In floros, there are coolwhites with that CCT, but the growlux, which emit very little on the green and yellow, have 3400K too. CCT says very little of its own. We talk about floros CCTs because they often have very similar spectral distributions at each CCT, but its a simplification. You need to know the SPD of the bulb. Triphosphors warm whites (830) have a very good flowering spectrum. If any, they lack (as most lights) of deep red (~650-660nm). But you can only provide efficiently that wavelenght with LEDs currently.

The main peak of chlorophils (and photosynthetic response in the blue) is about 440nm. All fluorescents have a huge peak on that area. Still 3000K ones, which hold way more blue than any blue enhanced HPS.

If you want a good introduction about light and plants, read this thread: Needed lighting concepts

I appreciate the vertical suggestion. I would hope I get time to work into it later. For now I just need steady, guaranteed meds.

knna said:

That graph is no sense. They took a chlorophill absorbance chart (not a photosynthetic response one, both are very different) and changed the scale of the x axis from nanometers to CCT (correlated color temperature). Thats have no any sense.

Click to expand...

Thank you for straightening me out.

So...... If the CFL bulb choices I have are
3000K
3500K
4100K

Full spectrum bulbs available are
5300K
5400K
5600K



Which one(s) would you recommend for the best Veg growth?

Which one(s) would you recommend for the best Flower growth/potency/medicinal value?

It looks like I have to go research a whole new set of data. Everything I have is based on the kelvin scale LOL.

For veg, standard (not full spectrum) 5400-5600K. But if the veg is done for a scrog, you wont want too sort internodes, so i would use directly 3000K both for veg and flowering.

On vegging, adding a incandescent lamp during the last hour of light increase branching and canopy cover (by doing leaves larger and thinner) so plants reach and fill the net faster. This is useful aswell on the flowering induction phase, by shortening it (not much important on scrog).

knna said:

For veg, standard (not full spectrum) 5400-5600K. But if the veg is done for a scrog, you wont want too sort internodes, so i would use directly 3000K both for veg and flowering.

On vegging, adding a incandescent lamp during the last hour of light increase branching and canopy cover (by doing leaves larger and thinner) so plants reach and fill the net faster. This is useful aswell on the flowering induction phase, by shortening it (not much important on scrog).

Click to expand...

Sweet!

With these lamps and the choice of spectrum I should be able to control stretch very well. I have a girl right now that has tremendous flower potential but stretches like MAD under HPS lighting.

As for the incandescent light idea, I hadn't thought of that. Makes sense as I remember reading somewhere that the CFLs don't have the far-red that HPS does.
By not having that far-red spectrum available at the end of the day the plants take longer to switch to nocturnal activities. The incandescent light would definitely supply that.


I'll make a prediction now and say that there will be a great many more folks, on this side of the pond, using these plugin CFLs before long.

My guess is that the self-ballasted have enjoyed more popularity because they're more widely available and also because it's more complicated and expensive to set up the ballasts. I looked for flat CFLs about 5 years ago. Either they didn't exist then or I wasn't looking in the right places.

What other information do you have locked in that head of yours Knna?

What other information do you have locked in that head of yours Knna?

Click to expand...

Lots, specially about lighting.

Having Asperger as me, you understand it if i say you one of my areas of interest (obsesion) is light. But i dont feel confortable sharing it at this board. Im doing an exception, but since some time ago i almost only lurk on this forum, for the little threads that worth the read.

On a side note, do cannabis help you with the Asperger? Enhance your empaty? It dont work for me. (i know its more MP talk, but i deleted so many post that now im below the 50 post).

knna said:

Lots, specially about lighting.

Having Asperger as me, you understand it if i say you one of my areas of interest (obsesion) is light. But i dont feel confortable sharing it at this board. Im doing an exception, but since some time ago i almost only lurk on this forum, for the little threads that worth the read.

On a side note, do cannabis help you with the Asperger? Enhance your empaty? It dont work for me. (i know its more MP talk, but i deleted so many post that now im below the 50 post).

Click to expand...

I have to admit you know enough about lighting to make my eyes glaze over. That's a good thing!

I find that sativa dominant hybrids tend to help with my Asperger's. I find I can focus more and I tend to be more motivated and agreeable. I'm definitely much more productive and less confused. The trick is to reach a saturation point and maintain that threshhold or whatever. My goal is to reach a quantity/quality point where I can make tinctures or some other appropriate ingestion method and get on a truly regular dosing schedule.

Life is REALLY good when I reach that saturation point with a strain that works. I'm looking forward to finding that magic combination for me

The hard part is finding a strain that allows medicating properly without getting so high I can't function. I'm looking forward to working with CBD honey oil to mix with some of the strains I've run across.

Theoretically it should allow me to increase my consumption (eating it) and increase the medicinal value while combating the 'High' enough that I can function normally.

I find that ANY hybrid or indica that has that head 'stone' tends to fog my brain and make my AS worse. I've run across strains that were indica that didn't have any head 'stone' that still gave me problems after about a day or two.

Strains I've personally found to be helpful:
Cinderella-99 (My personal favorite)
Sour Diesel (Only lasts about 45 minutes though)
Silver Haze
Lemon Diesel
Lemon Skunk
Trainwreck

I've tried a LOT of others.

Yeah, i noticed the same. Only pure or near pure sativas works for me. But ive needed to grow indicas for other problems, and only now that i need less of them im thinking to grow sativas.

Ive noticed that almost anything with skunk in it tends to isolate me from the world.

Last year i grew two wild Zamal, and they work fine, but flowering time was very large (close to 6 months) and low yield, so i need to find a commercial strain which works better.

I proved the Sour Diesel from a friend, and i liked it very much. But ill follow your advice and i will look for Cinderella 99.

Thanks for the suggestions, ill tell you how it works for me.

Peace

i love these bulbs and have a good collection of odd shaped ones just in case

this:


came from this....