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

[Orange's Greenhouse]

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]

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...?

 

[Orange's Greenhouse]

do you know what physics is...? are you serious or just trolling me...?

Well, you know google? You're telling me that there isn't any UVB diode worth a dime, that heat pumps don't exist.
Both can be refuted by 1 minute of googling.

 

[Rocket Soul]

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]

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.

 

[Rocket Soul]

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.

Of course but its about the best thing we have to go with currently. From the anecdotals of real great growers i know who tried it i have enough to reach my limits for doing tests on it, but im an easily tempted guy
I wouldnt expect completely great results on all cultivars. And in all honesty i found little effect in using uvb 295nm: no great potency jump but you could clearly see a plant stance reaction (happy and transpiring, leaves stretching out) 5 mins after on, and another sad plant reaction after we accidentally left it on for too long (about 30-40mins). It does something, just wanna find out if it is worth it for myself.

 

[Orange's Greenhouse]

It does something

It sure does! But if you want to break things there are less involved gadgets to use.

Another point is safety. You need interlocks to keep it off while opening/entering the room. Sun burn and skin cancer are no fun.

 

[Rocket Soul]

It sure does! But if you want to break things there are less involved gadgets to use.

Another point is safety. You need interlocks to keep it off while opening/entering the room. Sun burn and skin cancer are no fun.

Indeed but all in the realm of figureout-able.