What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

DIY leds Discussion Thread for all your how tos and doubts and anything related

Is DIY led worth it.

  • No idea never tried and it seems complicated.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, i tried it and it was just shit/i burnt down my house/im just a negative nelly about it

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, its too expensive nowadays, can find cheaper than diy growlights

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • No, it takes up too much time and work for the results it gives

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • Yes! The time and effort it takes is what actually makes it enjoyable

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, with my prices considerations and needs its actually cheaper than bought lights

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • Yes, its actually safer with me doing the work since i know what im doing and can choose parts

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, it means i can repair it myself if it breaks

    Votes: 1 6.7%
  • Yes, it means i can get a light that is perfect for my unique space and needs

    Votes: 3 20.0%
  • Yes, cause i cant get the results i want which i cannot find in any light on the market

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • All of the above yes answers

    Votes: 7 46.7%
  • I dont know but im leaning yes

    Votes: 4 26.7%
  • I dont know but im leaning no

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    15

Orange's Greenhouse

Active member
Heat pumps are > than 100% efficient, right next to perpetual motion eh? Think you’re gonna loose most arguments stating nonsense like that in your posts - lol !
You know what a heat pump is?

They 'pump' heat from one system to another, creating a temperature difference in the process. The net energy is 0 so there's no energy created. Depending on the system they pump 2.5-4 times as much energy as they need to run the process, in household application. The 'used' energy is converted into heat and added to the hot side so the coefficient of performance is 1 higher, leading to 3.5-5 times as much heating as input as energy. It's an AC running in reverse. It's the future.

You cite medical applications. A field that is famously conservative, has high regulations and needs lots of certification. The cost to transition to a new technology is especially expensive and time consuming. I don't expect them to have widely implemented LEDs that only in the last few years surpassed fluorescent lighting for UV-B.
 

led05

Chasing The Present
You know what a heat pump is?

They 'pump' heat from one system to another, creating a temperature difference in the process. The net energy is 0 so there's no energy created. Depending on the system they pump 2.5-4 times as much energy as they need to run the process, in household application. The 'used' energy is converted into heat and added to the hot side so the coefficient of performance is 1 higher, leading to 3.5-5 times as much heating as input as energy. It's an AC running in reverse. It's the future.
do you know what physics is...? are you serious or just trolling me...?
 

Rocket Soul

Well-known member
What are you using to test nm specific wavelengths…?

That said LED UVB Tech still isn’t there; I’ve been involved in the lighting space for decades; UVB diodes are cost prohibitive & burn themselves out fast - ushio makes a Fluoro that peaks at 306nm & spectrum covers 280-320nm, it follows vitamin D synthesis curve too which is exactly what UVB erythema does & is an ideal pure UVB bulb, there’s a lot of science behind this tech and it’s used for various industries including the medical fields -

there's a reason you’ve gotta go fishing on alibaba for them “UVB” diodes, think about it - ;)




Heat pumps are > than 100% efficient, right next to perpetual motion eh? Think you’re gonna loose most arguments stating nonsense like that in your posts - lol !

If you don’t understand plants crave radiant energy being blasted on them you need to head back to AG class & the fields; anytime you wanna have a grow off of any species of plants lmk - friendly challenge :)

lol on new tech, led’s are replacing nearly everything, there’s zero replacement in the UV medical, health & industrial fields and for good cause, Fluoro tech dominates LED in the space, nature of the beast - do a bit of research & learn a few things before you speak condescendingly to someone whom knows a great deal of what their talking about…

I was the guy pushing LED back when everyone was calling me crazy (have probably 50 builds under my belt, spanning decades), now all those folk are pushing LED calling me crazy for still liking HID - it’s a trip

My only bias & agenda is to use what works best; I have more lights sitting @ here of all tech than I can count, the luxury to use exactly what I want ($$$ not a factor) and yet I use exactly as I’ve stated above for the very simple reason - it works best for now,

Id love me some new cutting edge tech though, please just point me in the actual direction(s) it exists and I’m game to test out myself…

99/100 times I hear people talking LED UVB and then they link to purple 380nm diodes, at least it seems you guys understand what nm range UVB Actually is

I’ve got expensive meters to test for UVB too, yet to find a diode actually putting out ANY !
It may be a misstake to target erythrema/vitamin D when you actually want to target uvr8 action spectrum, its somewhat different. The small tests ive seen with fluoros vrs led uva came out with uva on top but they were just one offs, no statistical analysis or significance behind.
For me ushio fluros at almost 100e per 1.4w of output outside the region im after seems more cost prohibitive.
Personally im happy to try out the led uvb track, sooner or later well change our minds and realize its actually cost effective and easy :);) but someone has to actually try it out properly first.
 

Orange's Greenhouse

Active member
I have never seen evidence that UV-B is required or beneficial. On the opposite, HPS has 0 UV-B output and is yielding high quality. This proves to me that THC is not functioning mainly as a photoprotectant.

Regarding the uvr8 absorption spectrum. As with other photoreceptors you have to evaluate the literature critically. Using purified protein to take the spectrum can yield different results than the action spectrum inside a cell due to interaction with solvent and other proteins. Maybe the experiment is done with a mutant or it is differently folded.
Maybe a different receptors or effect cause beneficial effects. I would use what is readily available first and establish that there is an effect, whether positive or negative. Then in a second round of experimentation look at variations of the spectrum.
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top