jonesfam7715
Well-known member
Along with blind test smoke reports
DIY leds Discussion Thread for all your how tos and doubts and anything related
- Thread starter Thread starter Rocket Soul
- Start date Start date
i've grown cbd plants on a large scale indoors for 3 years. as of yet, cbd hemp plants do not have the decades of indoor breeding and production that thc plants do.
i think there is a significant difference in the two types as far as requirements and reactions go.
so, we shouldn't accept research done with cbd plants as gospel for thc plants.
for example, this plant, purple mesa, was grown solely with 6500k light. it produced 18% cbd with less than .03 thc at 8 weeks. the flowers had size and potency.
if you grew a thc plant with only 6500k you would still get the potency but, with most indoor hybrids, you would not get the size flowers you might expect.
i think there is a significant difference in the two types as far as requirements and reactions go.
so, we shouldn't accept research done with cbd plants as gospel for thc plants.
for example, this plant, purple mesa, was grown solely with 6500k light. it produced 18% cbd with less than .03 thc at 8 weeks. the flowers had size and potency.
if you grew a thc plant with only 6500k you would still get the potency but, with most indoor hybrids, you would not get the size flowers you might expect.
Attachments
There was a paper somewhere in the led bud quality thread that also showed on some differences between how THC plants and CBD plants react differently to growing; it was pretty much opposite. I think the paper was on playing around with the lights on lenght; going from 12/12 to 14/10 mid cycle vice versa. Some conditions got a very big change in total cannabinoids extracted but the reactions where pretty much opposite between cbd nad thc rich plants. As far as my memory goes.
Those are some pretty big grows with lightbulbs; are they yours? I know ive told you before, but let me know if you ever get ready to switch up to a more proper DIY set up. Light bulbs with internal AC to DC transformer arent very efficient; and switching them out one by one really becomes a drag: there are on the market strips (and not really expensive tbh) which could make the whole thing as easy as changing over a set of cables in a terminal block/wago connector. Bridgelux vesta strips have 2 separate channels, one warm white one cold white all in the same strip.
Also, sorry cause i hate myself and the optics of telling a grower of your calibre what to do, its more about wanting to see how you would do with a full on setup, aswell as being a lot less work intensive
Much love and respect
not mine, but i was hired to design the place, supervise construction, install my ppk system, and direct operations.There was a paper somewhere in the led bud quality thread that also showed on some differences between how THC plants and CBD plants react differently to growing; it was pretty much opposite. I think the paper was on playing around with the lights on lenght; going from 12/12 to 14/10 mid cycle vice versa. Some conditions got a very big change in total cannabinoids extracted but the reactions where pretty much opposite between cbd nad thc rich plants. As far as my memory goes.
Those are some pretty big grows with lightbulbs; are they yours? I know ive told you before, but let me know if you ever get ready to switch up to a more proper DIY set up. Light bulbs with internal AC to DC transformer arent very efficient; and switching them out one by one really becomes a drag: there are on the market strips (and not really expensive tbh) which could make the whole thing as easy as changing over a set of cables in a terminal block/wago connector. Bridgelux vesta strips have 2 separate channels, one warm white one cold white all in the same strip.
Also, sorry cause i hate myself and the optics of telling a grower of your calibre what to do, its more about wanting to see how you would do with a full on setup, aswell as being a lot less work intensive
Much love and respect
we were capable of producing an average of 30 lbs per week. when we started we were getting $1500 a lb, which is over 2 million per year. at the end of the 3 year period we could only get around 500 per lb so they decided to shut it down.
i had gotten estimates for lighting from 3 of the major companies in 2019 when we started the project and they were between 185,000 and 225,000 dollars to outfit the room. i did it with these bulbs from china for 20,000. they are 18 watt with cree diodes, 240 volt. i ordered them without the diffusers to save labor removing them.
i'm not in love with screw-in bulbs, they have a higher failure rate than proper leds and are much less efficient electrically than the latest ones you guys are talking about here.
but, for my personal experimental grows over the last 6 years, they were the only thing i could think of that gave me total control over the ratios of spectra. i have tried every % combination of 5000k and 2700k that you can think of and that got me thinking about using them separately during the veg and flower stages.
i don't want a one size fits all hobby light. i have proven to myself at least that using 5000k during veg up until the end of stretch makes a shorter plant with tighter nodes and more flower sites. then switching to the 2700k for flower. once stretch is done you do not get the elongation response anymore. instead, you get flower expansion. i got good size flowers with just the 2700k leds but when i added the incandescent they got a lot bigger and heavier.
changing them out takes about 30 minutes per light and it is a pain in the ass but the lamp holders are too big to fit two different spectrums simultaneously in the space allowed.
with modern leds i could easily fit both 2700k and 5000k circuits in the space. i could just turn them on and off. i don't want to mix them.
the electrically inefficient incandescent could be replaced by leds as well but i think that instead of just one wavelength of dark-red we should have several and maybe instead of one far-red wavelength we could have two.
far-red is the hottest part of infrared. many seem to think that, as you go on up in the infrared spectrum it gets hotter and hotter but the opposite is actually true. it gets cooler and cooler.
some research i have seen suggests that you can give too much dark-red and get negative results. the incandescent produces more dark-red as a portion of par than the sun.
think of how the incandescent curve is continuous with no omissions.
in my little composite graph you can see where the incandescent crosses the 2700k led in the 600 range so, yes, a 660 but maybe also 680, 700, 720, and 740. maybe even a 760. the close proximity of these only 20nm apart might equal the effect of the continuous curve incandescent.
this would be a very expensive light to buy so i would have to build them myself.
and i will rely on your expertise and advice when it is time.
i thank all of you guys participating here for your input. i have learned a lot from you.
the last year has been a real struggle with failing kidneys. sometimes unable to move or do anything, unable to function. i got a new kidney on the 3rd of april and i'm a new man. i have energy and high function and it's only been 11 days since the operation. i was out of the hospital and home in 5 days.
i had a liver transplant in 2009 and the anti-rejection drug slowly destroys the kidneys. most liver transplant patients don't live long enough to get to the kidney failure point so it doesn't matter in most cases.
i'm 16 years past the liver transplant so my kidneys were shutting down. i had started dialysis in feb but now i won't need it anymore. another chance for me and i intend to use it constructively doing what i love.
funny, i have to almost croak to get lucky.
Attachments
I know for ease of use and setup its hard to beat your system. I agree on the one size fit all lights: if you want good results you need proper and different tools for veg and flower. And the incandescant, at the rate you use, would give pretty much the spectrum i would recommend. maybe adding a bit more near reds around 630-640 but thats nit picking
The spectrum you used in the graph; is it from the manufacturer? It looks like a 70cri spectrum, the red bump is closer to 580nm than what youd find in most lightbulbs, standard 80cri (in most lightbulbs and pretty much any growlight)would peak around 600nm. Personally ive had better quality flower from a little higher cri, with red peaking around 625-630, but this comes with an small efficiency loss.
Congrats on all the health news its good to see you back here and everywhere
Congrats on your recovery! Doing what you love is your best life!
Because I'm growing taller plants in veg before flip, I didn't have much use for the blue lights in veg, so I get good results with 3500K "hobby lights." I think the objective should dictate what tools are used.
no, the graph is a composite of two generic graphs taken from one site so it was easy to overlap them. i don't consider them to be all that accurate but good enough for illustrative purposes. i don't think it is an accurate depiction of my lights but close enough to show the idea.I know for ease of use and setup its hard to beat your system. I agree on the one size fit all lights: if you want good results you need proper and different tools for veg and flower. And the incandescant, at the rate you use, would give pretty much the spectrum i would recommend. maybe adding a bit more near reds around 630-640 but thats nit picking
The spectrum you used in the graph; is it from the manufacturer? It looks like a 70cri spectrum, the red bump is closer to 580nm than what youd find in most lightbulbs, standard 80cri (in most lightbulbs and pretty much any growlight)would peak around 600nm. Personally ive had better quality flower from a little higher cri, with red peaking around 625-630, but this comes with an small efficiency loss.
Congrats on all the health news its good to see you back here and everywhere
as far as adding multiple diodes in the dark-red and far-red ranges i don't think they need to be very powerful. lower power would offset electrical and building costs.
i think they are more for hormonal signaling than photosynthesis. the 5000k and 2700k at high intensity, 1000-1200 umols, would provide the brute force to drive photosynthesis efficiently.
thank you for the kind words!
Neferhotep
Active member
This has been discussed many times. Incandescent may be needed as a raw energy source to evaporate water. LED is not a very good energy source. So in that case LED would not be a good replacement; electrical inefficiency is what's needed
As for hormonal signaling LED would be OK.
Glad to read you have a new kidney!
Last edited:
To be accurate, one Watt expended always, but ALWAYS creates 3.41 BTu of heat. There may be intermediate steps involved.This has been discussed many times. Incandescent may be needed as a raw energy source to evaporate water. LED is not a very good energy source. So in that case LED would not be a good replacement; electrical inefficiency is what's needed
As for hormonal signaling LED would be OK.
Glad to read you have a new kidney!
What we may really be debating is the ratio of infrared to PAR light the plants will best respond to.
In my own rooms, the plants liked the 30% efficient HID lights pretty well. I also got good results with 55% efficient LED lights.
Whatever "optimal" might end up being, it's clear that a wide range of such ratios is effective and that's encouraging because it gives us the ability to fine tune things for the results we want.
smirnoff420
Well-known member
True. For my situation using super efficient LEDs that don't emit enough heat doesn't make sense. I can either use only inefficient LEDs to get temps up high enough or use super efficient LEDs plus some heating mats. Only LEDs is simpler and cheaper as I dont need to buy heat mats plus the inefficient LEDs are cheaper.
great responses but remember that leds in the far-red range do put out more heat per watt than those in the par range. far-red is the hottest part of the infrared range.
for my own personal use i will probably stick with incandescents since they have worked so well for me.
for my own personal use i will probably stick with incandescents since they have worked so well for me.
well, i may have to correct myself.
"No, typically, LEDs in the far-red range do not produce more heat per watt than LEDs in the PAR range. In fact, red LEDs, which are within the PAR range, are generally known for their high efficiency. While all LEDs generate some heat, their efficiency in converting electricity to light is a more crucial factor than the specific wavelength of light they emit."
"No, typically, LEDs in the far-red range do not produce more heat per watt than LEDs in the PAR range. In fact, red LEDs, which are within the PAR range, are generally known for their high efficiency. While all LEDs generate some heat, their efficiency in converting electricity to light is a more crucial factor than the specific wavelength of light they emit."
I think you and the quote may be talking about different heats. Heat and Leaf temperature isnt the same thing. Radiant heat is quite different than heat from air temprature.
Not sure what is the most heating radiant heat but i do know that Far red cause some leaf temperature, cant remember who or when but i saw IR camera on a cannopy and thing heated up with a couple of degrees with a very moderate amount of far red.
Doesnt help that most light manufacturers will call their far red/730 diodes IR cause its much nicer to market that way.
Last edited:
Neferhotep
Active member
I'd like to add ambient temperature.
So PAR, infrared and ambient temp. (and infrared needs to be specified because the range is huge)
And I'd like to have 300 tents to do experiments with
True, but bombarding plants with too much PAR may be counterproductive.
Last edited:
This is something ive noticed, our CMH plants (back in the day...) would be much better at handling heat than our hps plants. With hps plants youd rapidly see loss of health and quality over 25C the CMH plants could handle 30C reasonably though not perfect. CMH spectrum has much better par to ir rates compared to hpsI'd like to add ambient temperature.
So PAR, infrared and ambient temp.
And I'd like to have 300 tents to do experiments with
True, but bombarding plants with too much PAR may be counterproductive.
Last edited:
so, i had two plants of the same strain side by side. one was under a 1680 watt fixture made from sils and the other was 1008 watts, also sils.I'd like to add ambient temperature.
So PAR, infrared and ambient temp. (and infrared needs to be specified because the range is huge)
And I'd like to have 300 tents to do experiments with
True, but bombarding plants with too much PAR may be counterproductive.
the 1680 fixture would produce 1500 umols at 30".
i set the lights so that they both produced 1500 umols at top dead center of each plant.
about 10 days later the plant under the 1680 light appeared stunted compared to the one under the 1008 watt light.
obviously, the stunted plant was getting a hell of a lot more total photons than the other plant.
i think that with a flat canopy under a flat light 1000-1200 umols is the sweet spot.
but, if we were growing upright with numerous small lights around the plant almost totally eliminating shading by lighting all parts simultaneously from all directions we could grow heavy plants with perhaps 700-800 umols measured at any given spot on the plant. this would represent maybe a 20-30% savings in energy needed to grow the plant.
this is a drawing i put up first on @Ttystikk 's thread.
i'm sure some of you remember Heath growing 4 plants upright in a 10x10 booth with 5 lights.
when i got to oregon some of my friends there were doing the same thing and getting outstanding yields.
i would go with a 12x12' room.
i would like to build led lights capable of replicating this arrangement. this shows the hps light arrangement that has been proven.
Last edited:
This is what i created the thread for
New and wild ways of creating new grow situations and throwing out ideas.
Yes, fixed centre light with some type of led strips. If you used a reasonably sized alu square tube for sinking, big enough for getting hands inside in order to be able to use a crew driver inside you could even extract air thru it (needs to big enough to be able to manage screws and nuts for fastening
). Or even just aircool the the inside of the square tube if you wanted to save the heat. As for rails on the ground: why not hang the light bars vertically from the ceiling seems easier to adjust height that way. If you have a hang friendly ceiling or rails attached to it you could just drag the bars backwards or towards at ease. Rails on the floor seems a bit more awkward to me,also needing poles for adjusting heights.
Neferhotep
Active member
How much was the yield?
I've grown 90 plants on 54 ft² under 4×600 W many times. Standard yield was 2400 g.
I switched to full LED now and have more photons available but dropping yields. This is why I feel I have to learn to grow grass all over.
i meant tracks on the ceiling. i should have been more specific.This is what i created the thread for
New and wild ways of creating new grow situations and throwing out ideas.
Yes, fixed centre light with some type of led strips. If you used a reasonably sized alu square tube for sinking, big enough for getting hands inside in order to be able to use a crew driver inside you could even extract air thru it (needs to big enough to be able to manage screws and nuts for fastening
As for rails on the ground: why not hang the light bars vertically from the ceiling seems easier to adjust height that way. If you have a hang friendly ceiling or rails attached to it you could just drag the bars backwards or towards at ease. Rails on the floor seems a bit more awkward to me,also needing poles for adjusting heights.
Latest posts
-
-
The Nevils Haze and Nevils Haze hybrids discussion thread.- Latest: CharlesU Farley
-
-
-
Latest posts
-
-
The Nevils Haze and Nevils Haze hybrids discussion thread.
- Latest: CharlesU Farley
-
-
-
