Ceramic Metal Halide (CMH)

[big-ultimate]

I contact LASTO LIGHTING
I think I'll try this bulb

cycloptics not offer me discount ........ (I'm french can be that ....?)

 

[LargePrime]

So I just got of the phone with Flip and put in an order for 3 setups. They're waiting for a shipment to come in so it's not gonna get shipped out till next week. With shipping they're about $400 a pop.

I ended up deciding to go with the 942 bulbs after our conversation and learning that some people are using those bulbs for their entire run. Adam actually is using that bulb and also another person he was telling me about that has a degree (I think that's what he said) in horticulture, and they are choosing the 942's over the agro bulbs. I did pick up one Agro bulb also so I can experiment and see what difference there is between the bulbs.

Excited though to get started with them.

I can say that the 942 is better in veg in my experience.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Just got an email with an example layout for the lights. Gonna post them up for anyone interested in specs.

This is for a 4x8x8 room.

Room Dimensions 4ft x 8ft x 8ft H
Wall Covering 96% Diffuse White Orca
Lamp 315W Agro CMH
Aperture Distance 84” above the floor
Illumination Plane 18” above the floor, 66” below reflector
Average Intensity 637 μmol/m2/sec
Max 675 μmol/m2/sec
Min 573 μmol/m2/sec
Max/Min Uniformity 1.18
Avg/Min Uniformity 1.11

Room Dimensions 4ft x 8ft x 8ft H
Wall Covering 96% Diffuse White Orca
Lamp 315W Agro CMH
Aperture Distance 84” above the floor
Illumination Plane 36” above the floor, 48” below reflector
Average Intensity 745 μmol/m2/sec
Max 792 μmol/m2/sec
Min 683 μmol/m2/sec
Max/Min Uniformity 1.16
Avg/Min Uniformity 1.11

Room Dimensions 4ft x 8ft x 8ft H
Wall Covering 96% Diffuse White Orca
Lamp 315W Agro CMH
Aperture Distance 84” above the floor
Illumination Plane 54” above the floor, 30” below reflector
Average Intensity 875 μmol/m2/sec
Max 941 μmol/m2/sec
Min 815 μmol/m2/sec
Max/Min Uniformity 1.15
Avg/Min Uniformity 1.07

Room Dimensions 4ft x 8ft x 8ft H
Wall Covering 96% Diffuse White Orca
Lamp 315W Agro CMH
Aperture Distance 84” above the floor
Illumination Plane 64” above the floor, 20” below reflector
Average Intensity 1015 μmol/m2/sec
Max 1146 μmol/m2/sec
Min 902 μmol/m2/sec
Max/Min Uniformity 1.27
Avg/Min Uniformity 1.12

One thing Flip also mentioned is that these numbers were taken from the Agro lights. With the 942's I can expect about 10% less intensity.

So, I need to look into this more. I have about a week to decide before he finalizes everything.

Anyone have an idea why someone would choose the 942's for flower instead of the Agro's?

 

[tenthirty]

Remember you are lighting a canopy not a room. There will be walkways don't light them if you can. Put the orca around the canopy not the walls.

 

[HorseBadoritiz]

Anyone have an idea why someone would choose the 942's for flower instead of the Agro's?

The retro's are 4000K, and flower pretty well!

I'm thinking of using both Agros and 942's... mix dem spectrums up

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Remember you are lighting a canopy not a room. There will be walkways don't light them if you can. Put the orca around the canopy not the walls.

Thanks buddy yeah I'm planning to build a custom cab around these so no light gets wasted. Still trying to figure out the ideal dimensions for 3 of them. On the site they have a few options. Depends on what I want my PAR to be which is still up in the air.

The retro's are 4000K, and flower pretty well!

I'm thinking of using both Agros and 942's... mix dem spectrums up

That is definitely a possibility. Trying to source people who are growing with the 942's.

Edit- Just sent an email to Adam inquiring about the 942's and why he chose those over the Agro's. Hopefully he can offer some info on what's up with them.

 

[tenthirty]

3x9 or even better 6x6 and use 4 of them

 

[Beta Test Team]

Scrappy-doo those PPFD values were calculated with 96% reflectivity for walls, but ORCA, what you're using, is 94%, so you have to adjust all those PPFD values by 97.91% (but using 98% is close enough).

For a reach-in style growth chamber you're irradiating GB is ideal, no floor space for wasted light (walkways and such).

When using those brand of luminaires you account for the whole room area, not just the canopy area. But now with new modeling (from LI directly) it's more focused on the canopy area than it was before (earlier this year).

We're doing the math next week, but that 10% figure Flip mentioned is a bit high.

If you're interested I'll post the plans we had done up a few weeks ago. We're using 12 units for a 6'x8' canopy in a room that's 9.5' x 11.5' (approx.). Irradiance at the top plane is about 750 to 850 PPFD. And they will be installed with a dimmer function so we can dim by for example, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90% and at 100% (which is important to effect DLI, and too much light is not good).

Very cool to see other Cannabis growers using Greenbeams.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Scrappy, I would also suggest maybe dialing back your top plane irradiance, though that may make too big a hit on your uniformity.

You should account for DLI when choosing your irradiance (PPFD) for GreenBeams (GB). For Cannabis, between a wide ballpark of about 25 to 50 DLI can be used (even greater than 50, but that doesn't seem useful). We tend to use between 30 and 40 DLI for vegetative and flowering stages.

To calculate DLI it's easy: PPFD x photoperiod x 0.0036.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Our spreadsheet we hope to release next week will include the 930 and 942, pre-analyzed by us focused on how Cannabis absorbs photons. So you'll have more data to compare the lamps than you can throw a bunch of buds at!

That's the whole reason we started working on the spreadsheet, to better compare the 930 and 942, as we are using one or the other lamps for all our up coming research on Cannabis (using GreenBeams in our growth room). We're using the 942 until it's proven that the 930 is better for Cannabis growth and photosynthesis (which are spreadsheet to help show).

Our spreadsheet is a complete overhaul, update, and bug fix of knna's work (ca. 2006), which knna got originally from a PhD astrophysicist from Brazil, ca. 1999.

If you don't know what I'm referring to, check out the Cannabis abosprtance thread.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Here's our new room plans using GB and 942 for all vegetative and flowering stages. This isn't yet built but we already have the 12 GB units.

In these figures the bottom irradiance plane is 16 inches from the floor, and the top irradiance plane is 55 inches from the floor, and the GB apertures are 22 inches from the top irradiance plane. We did this so we can grow short (SOG) to tall (trees for RDWC), and in-between (like SCROG or bushes). Because we know the top and bottom plans we can calculate the irradiance at any plane between them.

To grow short plants we use an adjustable tray stand, for tall plants we put containers or trays on the floor.

SPECS:

Room is approx. 9.5' by 11.5' by 8.5', the canopy is 6'x8':

LAYOUT IN ROOM:

Approx. two 1.5' and one 2.5' walkways on 3 sides of the 6'x8' canopy, the last side is 1' and it's not a walkway, it's to have air movement and better reflection from the walls:
​

UNIFORMITY OVER THE WHOLE CANOPY:

​

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Wow BTT some awesome info there, thanks for all of that! Looks like I'm getting into these at just the right time.

For large images I just :

1- go to my albums in a new tab, and open each pic I want to post in a new tab
2- scroll to the bottom of each pic and copy the 'BB code'
3- paste in my reply

You can also access your albums by scrolling to the bottom of whatever thread you're in and clicking the 'go advanced' button, then click on 'forum albums'

That will open your album on a separate web page though which for me is more time consuming so i find the first method more user friendly.

Thanks again for posting I will be on the lookout for your results.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Thanks for those tips, exactly what I wish I knew this whole time

For our info I posted, note we're also using ORCA on our ceiling and walkways (or something else close to 94% reflectivity or closer to 99% for the walkways). That means weekly cleaning of the walkways with Alconox and quaternary ammonium (as Physan 20), to keep the walkways bright and free from microbes, algae, etc. (The walls are cleaned every 2 weeks, with the same chemicals.)

Oh yea, if you want I'll post the how-to directions we developed with Flip to clean the inside of your GB so they're always operating at their best. Would you like that info?

 

[Beta Test Team]

Anyone have an idea why someone would choose the 942's for flower instead of the Agro's?

Spectrum. The difference in radiant PPF is not large. And the R:Fr ratio for the 942 is lower (closer to sunlight) than the 930, which we like. And the NIR is lower for the 942 than the 930, so, less radiant heat in the room.

All things being equal, such as PPFD (irradiance at canopy), we chose the 942 for all 12 of our GB units for vegetative and flowering stages.

The biggest benefit to the 930 vs. the 942 is the 930 has a little greater weighted radiant PPF (often termed "YPF"), which is the PPFD weighted with photosynthetic effect (relative, of each wavelength).

Now, it may be that the 930 is the better lamp for all growth stages for Cannabis than the 942, or it could be we're correct and it's the 942. That's why we're creating our spreadsheet, so we can know for sure. And our work includes how Cannabis absorbs photons, so the YPF rating for the lamps from our spreadsheet will be more relevant to Cannabis photosynthesis.

We will try hard to get at least a rough-but-working pre-alpha version out of our spreadsheet before you have to choose your lamp type. That way you can use our spreadsheet to choose the lamp you think is better for your situation.

Flip knows we're working on this spreadsheet, as well.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Oh yea, we're seeing if we can include Cannabis leaf reflectivity into GB modeling (like they do with walls and ceiling). What that means is the PPFD figures listed for you, us, and other GB users, may be lower than the real PPFD, due to not accounting for reflected photons off the leaves (like they do with walls, etc.).

This is something we are going to try and calculate, but also measure once our room is setup. I'm not sure if this has been quantified by the other research on Cycloptics reflectors, that's something we need to look into.

There is also interesting recent research on genetic algorithms to optimize luminaire placement for crops. We haven't yet dove into that topic, but after the spreadsheet is in beta phase we plan to.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Def agree about GPW being a semi-bogus metric. Grams per kilowatt/hour would be a lot more meaningful.

As you say, Gnome, there are a helluva lot more variables than just the lamp, as well.

We totally agree.

We're mulling over a new measurement using grams per mole per kilo-hour to harvest (g/m/kh), we think that is likely a good measure. kWh (energy), while better than watt (power), is still only about input energy, not irradiance. And the plants use irradiance (as photons) to produce those grams, so using irradiance seems maybe to be a better measure than input energy or power.

The main reason we want to use umol for yield efficiency value is the best measurement for lamp (and system) efficiency is umol per joule/s, or photosynthetic umol per joule/s. So we want to keep in form with that measurement of efficiency.

What do you all think? Can it be improved? If so, how?

The mole value is from umol taken from radiant PPF (lamp) or irradiance (PPFD) at canopy, using canopy irradiance is our preference. The radiant PPF value can come from lamp specs or our spreadsheet, and the PPFD from a quantum sensor or lux meter and our spreadsheet. (PPF is the same thing as PPFD, they're both umol/m2/s, so I try to distinguish when I mean photons from the lamp and at the canopy.)

The kilo-hour value is just to assign time to harvest. Maybe and keeping in form with DLI (moles/m2/day) would be better, so grams/mole/day?

We haven't yet started using this new yield measurement, but we will with our first harvest from the GB room we're building.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Scrappy and other users of GB, or any reflector with similar insert, here is our method for cleaning them. Once a month at least is a good way to go.

We haven't used this yet, but it has been run past the company's owner that produces the inserts for Cycloptics in terms of the cleaner (acid basic on citric acid) to make sure it's effective. This is pretty much as optimized as we can make it at this point.

--> Use only steam distilled, double-steam distilled, or deionized water for cleaning the inserts.

1. Turn OFF the power to the ballasts.

2. Put on clean lint-free cotton gloves.

3. Ensure the lamp is completely cool to the touch, then remove the lamp.

4. Use a “can of air” to blow off the reflector surface and lamp socket.

5. Cover lamp socket hole with blue painter’s tape to protect it from water and air.

6. Remove cotton gloves and put on a new pair of disposable surgical gloves (latex is fine); these are to protect hands from the Citranox solution.

7. In a bucket with hot water prepare a pH 3.25 solution of Citranox.

8. Use a clean lint-free cotton cloth soaked in Citranox solution to wipe down (clean) the reflector surface. Wring out the cloth so it's not dripping, and doesn't drip when lightly squeezed; it's a wipe not a douse. Be extra careful to not get water in the lamp socket.

9. Rinse hands in clean water to remove to remove Citranox solution from gloves.

10. Use a clean lint-free cotton cloth soaked in pure water to wipe down (rinse) the reflectors. Wring out the cloth so it's not dripping, and doesn't drip when lightly squeezed; it's a wipe not a douse. Be extra careful to not get water in the lamp socket. It’s important to rinse the Citranox off the metals quickly, do not let it dry.

10. Remove surgical gloves, dry hands, and put on a pair of clean lint-free cotton gloves.

11. Use a “can of air” to completely dry the reflector insert and the lamp socket.

12. Remove the painter's tape from the socket hole.

13. Screw the lamp back into the socket.

14. Turn ON the power to the ballasts.

Last step:
Neutralize the remaining Citranox solution that was used to clean the reflector with baking soda until pH 6.0 to 7.0 is achieved, then dispose of the solution, for example, down the toilet. If the solution is stored molds or bacteria are likely to use the citric acid as energy and grow in the bottle of stored solution.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Wow BTT some awesome info there, thanks for all of that!

Thanks again for posting I will be on the lookout for your results.

I forgot to write, if you're building a cab why not put the reflectors outside the cabinet? That's the way GB are best operated and that's how they where originally designed.

By doing that you remove much of the heat that would otherwise be in the cabinet (just put fans on top of the cab to blow on the reflectors). There are small vent holes drilled into the top of GB, so heat will escape that way as well).

Doing that also means you'll get at least an extra 12" of growth height, as the GB are about 10" tall and the connecters to attach to the ceiling will be another 3" to 5".

So what you do is just cut out the apertures areas from the roof of your cab, and install GB to the top of the roof.

P.S. You should also consider using a 6" to 12" space between the canopy and the walls, this allows for much greater reflection below the canopy and should increase PPFD at the canopy, too (a bit). This also allows for better air movement so leaf temperature is more uniform.

When we design whole warehouses just for growing Cannabis, we use 2' (at least) between walls and canopy, for best reflection, PPFD, uniformity, air movement, and space for working. Each growth room in a warehouse is large, and best setup is placing GB on top of their roofs. So when using GB that means you're lighting the non-canopy areas, as well.

 

[Hottish]

I contact LASTO LIGHTING
I think I'll try this bulb

cycloptics not offer me discount ........ (I'm french can be that ....?)

BU, did you figure out what lamps they are using , what do they cost?

 

[Beta Test Team]

I contact LASTO LIGHTING
I think I'll try this bulb

cycloptics not offer me discount ........ (I'm french can be that ....?)

Cool, we had no idea that company existed.

I've sent them an email already asking specifics about how they created those SPDs on their website. If they respond I'll request the raw spectroradiometer data used to create those SPDs so we can input those data into our spreadsheet and the LASTO 350 Bomber can be analyzed by our spreadsheet:
http://www.lastolights.com/spectrums

Also, we hope they will share with us the other SPD raw data, for example, the Hortilux data.

Thanks for posting about this company!