HenDokuYaku
Member
question answered.
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
GAVITA Pro 1000 DE
- Thread starter TacomaComa
- Start date
read the discription. it takes the heat out without cooling the bulbs.
samba
Active member
Does that actually work. It can't work as good as "airflow on bulb" hoods.
Anyone have experience/data on the cooling efficiency of this hood?
This would be great for my as I can't AIRCON.
I dont know guys I have not tested it yet.. IMO this would be good for any bulb. Cooling the bulb in a no no it drops the temp on the bulb which makes the bulb run at a diferant spectrum. we dont want to cool the bulb we want to extract the heat this hood has some kind of channeling where the air does not rush passed the bulb. I will know more when I see it.
The AC/DE’s patent pending design allows removal of heat generated by the lamp without cooling the lamp below proper operating temperature
The AC/DE’s patent pending design allows removal of heat generated by the lamp without cooling the lamp below proper operating temperature
HenDokuYaku
Member
Exactly, I understand that. Whazzup has always made that clear. I'm just unclear how it could be better at dissipating the heat without losing light. I should've made my question more clear. Thanks, I'll edit it now.
drknockbootz
Member
Yo hammerhead cant wait to see the papillon in action.
Yo whazzup how do you feel about the papillon reflector? compared to gavita?
Yo whazzup how do you feel about the papillon reflector? compared to gavita?
I just finished installing the Gavita remote ballast on the Sunlight supply reflector. I wont try any normal digital ballast on these bulbs as it can smoke theM voiding the warranty...I will take some par measurements tonight under the E-P and the Gavita Remote on the Sunlight reflector....
First test more to come
My initial readings are as follows. I will set up a better test with something to hold the sensor. I can then set up Logging. every 30 sec it takes a reading. I will do this for both light and give the Ave over the time period I set. This was done with the sensor about 12" from both lights.
The Gavita with remote ballast and sun reflector 2230
The E-P WAS LOWER @ 1940.....
My initial readings are as follows. I will set up a better test with something to hold the sensor. I can then set up Logging. every 30 sec it takes a reading. I will do this for both light and give the Ave over the time period I set. This was done with the sensor about 12" from both lights.
The Gavita with remote ballast and sun reflector 2230
The E-P WAS LOWER @ 1940.....
Last edited:
Gavita Room
Gavita Room
I hope this helps. This is a calculation I had done for the room. Ceilings are 10"3. Lights are hung at 8'5". Room is 15'6" x 16. There is only 8 lights in there right now the other 2 are on the way.
Plants have to be worked on a ladder. 25 7+ ft high. Dense nugs on the bottoms.
r:
Here was xxxxx reply
Dear *****,
sorry for the delay, I have been out of the running for a while. I made a calculation for you. However, you are not going to make it with 8 lamps, the light levels will be too low. You have 21 square meters, and 10% wall losses at least, so a requirement for 12 Pro 1000 at 1000W, or at least 10 at 1150 continuous. With this setup you will reach an average of 1000 umol m-2 s-1 using 10 lamps. I calculated all the intensities and uniformity from the plant size to full grown size keeping the lights at the same distance. I recommend using about 650-700 umol for the vegetative phase when using these light levels.
The uniformity near the walls is always less than on the actual surface as you can see on the iso digrams. I did the calculation keeping very short distance from the wall. If you keep paths of about 1 ft around your crop the uniformity is >90%.
Best regards, met vriendelijke groet,
****** XXXXXX
Gavita Room
I hope this helps. This is a calculation I had done for the room. Ceilings are 10"3. Lights are hung at 8'5". Room is 15'6" x 16. There is only 8 lights in there right now the other 2 are on the way.
Plants have to be worked on a ladder. 25 7+ ft high. Dense nugs on the bottoms.
r:Here was xxxxx reply
Dear *****,
sorry for the delay, I have been out of the running for a while. I made a calculation for you. However, you are not going to make it with 8 lamps, the light levels will be too low. You have 21 square meters, and 10% wall losses at least, so a requirement for 12 Pro 1000 at 1000W, or at least 10 at 1150 continuous. With this setup you will reach an average of 1000 umol m-2 s-1 using 10 lamps. I calculated all the intensities and uniformity from the plant size to full grown size keeping the lights at the same distance. I recommend using about 650-700 umol for the vegetative phase when using these light levels.
The uniformity near the walls is always less than on the actual surface as you can see on the iso digrams. I did the calculation keeping very short distance from the wall. If you keep paths of about 1 ft around your crop the uniformity is >90%.
Best regards, met vriendelijke groet,
****** XXXXXX
Last edited by a moderator:
OG BURNT UP
Member
Does the Gavita remote ballast have 0 acoustic resonance or is that only when you use it with the attached reflector?
I hate mis-information. So if a company really talks crap I can't resist.
It is really simple. The e-papillon is a wide reflector, which is by nature less efficient and penetrates not as deep as our design reflector. Furthermore in any room you will have much higher wall losses from a wide reflector. I have just seen the manual of the 1000W papillon and they recommend about the same distance as our reflector, even a bit more. That will certainly result in lower light levels.
The plus is that the lower light levels will result in less heat on your plants, but do you really want lower light levels and less penetration?
It is not true that the e-papillon generates less heat: it just distributes the light (and heat) wider. Light on your walls will be partly dissipated in heat, and that will also warm up your room. So less reflector efficiency and more light on your walls, together with less penetration makes this reflector imho less suitable for indoor growing. If you love light you need to cope with the heat, it's that simple.
Last difference is that they mount the reflector under the ballast, which results in a higher fixture. Do take a look at the finishing of the two fixtures and observe the finishing details. Our power cords and IEC connectors for example are watertight IP rated models, the e-papillon does not have a waterproof IEC input. But do take a look at them for yourself and be the judge yourself, don't take my word for it.
lol philips does not compete with us, philips does not make horticultural fixtures. I do not know where you got the impression that Philips would compete with us
.
yes there is. There are a few actually, but the computer models of our reflectors are not public domain, they are company capital. So there is not much use using them. Also using light calculation software does not make you a lighting designer, as buying photoshop will not make you a graphic artist
of course, it is a wide reflector. You can not compare total output of a reflector by measuring under a reflector. The e-papillon for example will benefit much more from overlapping as it is a wide reflector.
Acoustic resonance is not a ballast issue, it is a lamp issue. Actually it is the combination lamp/ballast. You need to use the correct combination in order to prevent acoustic resonance, it is frequency/lamp dependent.
HenDokuYaku
Member
I hate mis-information. So if a company really talks crap I can't resist.
It is really simple. The e-papillon is a wide reflector, which is by nature less efficient and penetrates not as deep as our design reflector. Furthermore in any room you will have much higher wall losses from a wide reflector. I have just seen the manual of the 1000W papillon and they recommend about the same distance as our reflector, even a bit more. That will certainly result in lower light levels.
The plus is that the lower light levels will result in less heat on your plants, but do you really want lower light levels and less penetration?
It is not true that the e-papillon generates less heat: it just distributes the light (and heat) wider. Light on your walls will be partly dissipated in heat, and that will also warm up your room. So less reflector efficiency and more light on your walls, together with less penetration makes this reflector imho less suitable for indoor growing. If you love light you need to cope with the heat, it's that simple.
Last difference is that they mount the reflector under the ballast, which results in a higher fixture. Do take a look at the finishing of the two fixtures and observe the finishing details. Our power cords and IEC connectors for example are watertight IP rated models, the e-papillon does not have a waterproof IEC input. But do take a look at them for yourself and be the judge yourself, don't take my word for it.
lol philips does not compete with us, philips does not make horticultural fixtures. I do not know where you got the impression that Philips would compete with us
Thanks for the information. I am a little confused about Philips not competing with you. Are they not responsible for the epapillon fixtures? Also does Gavita build both the 600pro de and 1000pro de ballasts?
You're saying Philips doesn't make any luminaries? Sweet, that is new information for me. Thanks for the education.
I run the ultimate setup for my seed testing room. Check the thread to see how nuts the resin gets, as well as how naturally they mature with the addition of the Gavita Plasma; https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=267226
Confident on passing 3 Ps per light sometime in 2014 when my main room gets the conversion to Gavita DE.
Stay up.
Confident on passing 3 Ps per light sometime in 2014 when my main room gets the conversion to Gavita DE.
Stay up.
OG BURNT UP
Member
Thanks for the response, Whazzzup
Is there a difference in acoustic resonance and total harmonic distortion? Does one matter more than the other?
Is there a difference in acoustic resonance and total harmonic distortion? Does one matter more than the other?
LEDfoot
Member
I was curious about the dPapillon 315 watt ballast so I went to the epapillon.com site. From the About Us:
"Lights Interaction Agro b.v. was set up in December 2002 following Philips Lighting’s decision to withdraw from the market for assimilation lighting luminaires for use in Glasshouse Horticulture. Thus although Lights Interaction Agro b.v. is a young company, it has a great deal of experience in assimilation lighting, since the majority of its employees have worked in Philips for long periods of time."
"Lights Interaction Agro b.v. was set up in December 2002 following Philips Lighting’s decision to withdraw from the market for assimilation lighting luminaires for use in Glasshouse Horticulture. Thus although Lights Interaction Agro b.v. is a young company, it has a great deal of experience in assimilation lighting, since the majority of its employees have worked in Philips for long periods of time."
we all need to keep in mind that Wazzup is Biased. Won't matter if we produce good facts. he will find another passage somewhere to try a refute it. he is not going to talk shit about Gavita thats his product lol. To me that's whortles info if you dont look at your competitors gear and just talk shit about them. Thats called Biased . I did my test for this thread I wont be posting any other info here. If you wont to know the truth it will be posted at Canna Culture thats if your a member (invite only)
