Gavita-Pro 1000w 400v (new generation hps)

[Doc420]

I believe the operating voltage of the lamp is 400v

Correct.
This lamp is normally used in big greenhouses.
The ballast only runs this 400v 1000w Greenpower lamp.
I have seen one in a shop and it looks really nice.
I will start a growreport as soon as i have it.

I can't see these system selling in NA at retail hydroponic stores. The all in one system never sold and they have been around for ages. A few people might buy them but i'll always remain speciality system.

The system is also made in a remote version.

 

[whazzup]

let me shed a bit of light

The new thing that GAVITA did is develop a 230/240V ballast for a high frequency high voltage electronic lamp. As it was made specificly for 400V ballasts, it was called a 400V lamp. Of course the lamp voltage is not 400V, and neither is the lamp voltage of a 230V lamp 230V. No hobby grower (except a few swiss growers ) use 400V 3 phase systems, so GAVITA made an input circuit for 230V. For the 600W they did that with Philips, the 1000W they did themselves.

What philips promises as lamp output has a lot to do with their guaranteed light output program. In fact the lamps perform better but Philips specifies it a bit lower. Also these are measurements in the ulbricht sphere with a naked lamp.

The about 1900 - 2000 micromoles it produces is more than enough for 5x5". If you take 5% reflector loss into account (hortistar HR 96) you have about 1900 micromoles to spread over that area, coming to an average ppfd of about 850 micromoles. This is running on 100% of course. At 1150 watt the have about 15% more light, so a ppfd of about 980 micromoles on that surface.

Philips defines the ppf from 400-700nm as "growlight" - 8% more light translates in 8% more photons in the 400-700 nm PAR region than the normal 230V GreenPowers.

With the new high frequency electronic ballasts complete fixtures are very good news actually! They prevent emi, that you will always have with remote ballasts. Also the wiring of your room is a lot simpler.

The GAVITA Pro 600 is available in a 230V phase/nul EU version and a 240V phase/phase version, the 1000W has a somewhat broader range of input voltage but is also aimed at a normal 240V phase/phase connection.

They will become available very quickly, last news is a bit of red tape from CSA, sometimes it is incredible what they come up with.

here are the GAVITA lights in Barcelona last week, at the Spannabis. You also see the adjustable TripleStar reflector, the plasma lights and the new DigiStar ballasts.

 

[laylow]

see one of these in my local hydro shop 600W version the guy has dismantled it already and stuck it in a cool tube lol.... he has 6 on order i am next in line for at least one but they arnt cheap

All i can say is there was 2 x 600w hps on either side at 8ft up in the air display model on the ceiling and this was hanging at about 6ft in the middle, you could not even see the other 2 x 600HPS untill he turned he Gavita off..... i work with bare bulbs everyday this thing was horizontal in a shade and was the brightest thing i ever seen!!!!

 

[Doc420]

I have seen the same thing.
They are bright as hell.
The 600w is crazy
The 1000w is..........

 

[Electrician]

The good thing about these is that 277volt is a common voltage and you can run a shit ton of ballasts on a 3phase 400amp 277/480Volt system. A shit ton.

 

[Aerohead]

So, how can we modify these for vert growing

 

[laylow]

Hey aero they come apart really easy... The ballast on the back can be left separate and the bulb put on a longer lead... Have seen one dismantled and put in a cool tube already so no reason you couldn't loose the tube and hang it vert

 

[Doc420]

Can you place a picture of that cool tube situation??

 

[laylow]

in about may i can lol.... its just the same as any other cool tube setup the bulb goes in the tube and the wire goes to the ballast.... test that have been done so far are the lights have been placed at the top of a tent 7ft and buds as low as 2ft from the floor are developing as good as the ones on top....

 

[Doc420]

By cooling the bulb you lower the lamp voltage.
This will dim the lamp.

 

[Wiggs Dannyboy]

Who sells these?

How much do they cost?

Couldn't find any distributors except 1 in California and they didn't have a website with info. I got the 1 distributor from Gavita's website.

 

[Bobby Stainless]

Yeah I gathered that the PAR watts are 8% better, but since it uses considerably more power you would be better off using current technology 1kw lights. Adding lots of wattage for a small gain in efficiency isnt exactly a step forward, dont you think?

I use 1ks, and add in 800 watts of CMH on a light mover.

I get more spectrum, but this would probably have a cheaper NRG cost.

I like where the ballast is placed!

 

[messn'n'gommin']

Is there something wrong with me that these are givin me wood?

 

[Doc420]

In this topic i found a youtube movie about the new Gavita products.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=209704

 

[laylow]

thanks for the link Doc... them 1000w double ended lights look amazing...

i have ordered 2 x 600w 400V Gavitas was going to get 3 but was told i only need 2 for a test run in a 8ft x 4ft tent...

plants are seedlings vegging under T5's at the moment will drop a link in when the Gavitas turn up..

 

[Doc420]

Cant wait for a topic with these systems.

 

[laylow]

Not long now Doc not long now...

 

[spurr]

let me shed a bit of light

...

The about 1900 - 2000 micromoles it produces is more than enough for 5x5". If you take 5% reflector loss into account (hortistar HR 96) you have about 1900 micromoles to spread over that area, coming to an average ppfd of about 850 micromoles.

Hmm, I'm not sure that is quite right. IMO, it's too simple and isn't what happens in a real-world grow space. The claim made by Gavita is 1850 umol/sec, as PPF, not PPFD. That is only for the lamp without reflector. The foot print (light spread), irradiance peaks at canopy, direct vs diffuse light, etc., is controlled by the reflector. When the lamp is placed in the reflector the irradiance is much higher close to the lamp, due to the concentration from reflection, which isn't present in a U.sphere or when using a spectroradioemter.

For that lamp there would be more than 1,900 umol/area/second when it's in a reflector, just below the glass of the reflector. It's up to the reflector to do a 'good job' of getting the light to the canopy, ex., concentration vs spread.

For example, I have tested both 1,000 watt Digilux HPS and MH lamps using a new Galaxy electronic ballast in a BlockBuster 8" and SunSystem II reflector. With the lamps in the reflectors irradiance easily reaches ~1,500 umol/area/second (highest irradiance, under red light, for cannabis to reach peak rate of photosynthesis) below the lamp (many) inches from the glass. I have a Licor Li-190 quantum sensor and data logger, and I used it within my 5'x5' (I.D.) tent to test the 'useable' foot print area for high irradiance (i.e., > 800 umol/area/second) under both reflectors and all lamps. I tested using a 'hot spot' diffuser and not using a hot spot diffuser. Under no situations did any of the lamps or reflectors sufficiently irradiate the inside-center canopy area and the outside 1' (and more) of the 5'x5' canopy area (even in a reflective tent!). In all cases the irradiance was under 600 umol/area/second at the outside 1' (and more) of the 5'x5' area, when the inside canopy area was kept at high irradiance (~800 umol/area/second and higher). Granted, my tests were quick, dirty and flawed but they do offer worthwhile insight I think; this topic is something I plan to study correctly in the future.

Because of my testing with both reflectors with my quantum sensor, using a 600 watt Hortilux Super HPS, 400 watt MH generic and those two Digilux lamps, I am more convinced than ever that for horizontal growing, using narrower and longer canopies with a light mover is most ideal in terms of providing high irradiance at all plants. In other words square canopies are out, rectangle canopies are in; IMO anyway. I have setup a reflector and in-line fan (6") on a LightRail 3.5 without worry (just had to counter-balance the weight of teh fan); the LightRail 3.5 can hold/move up to ~150 lbs according to the LightRail tech support.

I am so unhappy with the irradiance at the outside 1-1.5' of the canopy in the 5'x5' tent (even with a 'Cadillac' light system and tent) I am setting up my 600 watt Hortilux SuperHPS in the SunSystem II reflector, to provide extra light for the outer row plants, on two sides.

This is running on 100% of course. At 1150 watt the have about 15% more light, so a ppfd of about 980 micromoles on that surface.

I don't follow you here, I might be dense, but could you elaborate please?

Philips defines the ppf from 400-700nm as "growlight" - 8% more light translates in 8% more photons in the 400-700 nm PAR region than the normal 230V GreenPowers.

That's good to know, thanks. So that 8% doesn't necessarily translate into 8% higher irradiance (PFPD) for the plants, but it does translate into 8% higher radiance (PPF).

With the new high frequency electronic ballasts complete fixtures are very good news actually! They prevent emi, that you will always have with remote ballasts. Also the wiring of your room is a lot simpler.

A problem I see is one of heat, I like to keep my ballast remote to my grow space, and at least remote to my canopy, to remove it as a heat source.




I can't recall, has anyone posted the SPD?

 

[laylow]

By cooling the bulb you lower the lamp voltage.
This will dim the lamp.

can you elaborate on this please?

thanks...

 

[whazzup]

Hmm, I'm not sure that is quite right. IMO, it's too simple and isn't what happens in a real-world grow space. The claim made by Gavita is 1850 umol/sec, as PPF, not PPFD. That is only for the lamp without reflector. The foot print (light spread), irradiance peaks at canopy, direct vs diffuse light, etc., is controlled by the reflector. When the lamp is placed in the reflector the irradiance is much higher close to the lamp, due to the concentration from reflection, which isn't present in a U.sphere or when using a spectroradioemter.

For that lamp there would be more than 1,900 umol/area/second when it's in a reflector, just below the glass of the reflector. It's up to the reflector to do a 'good job' of getting the light to the canopy, ex., concentration vs spread.

For example, I have tested both 1,000 watt Digilux HPS and MH lamps using a new Galaxy electronic ballast in a BlockBuster 8" and SunSystem II reflector. With the lamps in the reflectors irradiance easily reaches ~1,500 umol/area/second (highest irradiance, under red light, for cannabis to reach peak rate of photosynthesis) below the lamp (many) inches from the glass. I have a Licor Li-190 quantum sensor and data logger, and I used it within my 5'x5' (I.D.) tent to test the 'useable' foot print area for high irradiance (i.e., > 800 umol/area/second) under both reflectors and all lamps. I tested using a 'hot spot' diffuser and not using a hot spot diffuser. Under no situations did any of the lamps or reflectors sufficiently irradiate the inside-center canopy area and the outside 1' (and more) of the 5'x5' canopy area (even in a reflective tent!). In all cases the irradiance was under 600 umol/area/second at the outside 1' (and more) of the 5'x5' area, when the inside canopy area was kept at high irradiance (~800 umol/area/second and higher). Granted, my tests were quick, dirty and flawed but they do offer worthwhile insight I think; this topic is something I plan to study correctly in the future.

Because of my testing with both reflectors with my quantum sensor, using a 600 watt Hortilux Super HPS, 400 watt MH generic and those two Digilux lamps, I am more convinced than ever that for horizontal growing, using narrower and longer canopies with a light mover is most ideal in terms of providing high irradiance at all plants. In other words square canopies are out, rectangle canopies are in; IMO anyway. I have setup a reflector and in-line fan (6") on a LightRail 3.5 without worry (just had to counter-balance the weight of teh fan); the LightRail 3.5 can hold/move up to ~150 lbs according to the LightRail tech support.

Philips uses a ppf of 1850 (or actually used, they have gone to 1900) micromoles ppf in their constant growlight guarantee program. Now initially we measure more than 2100 micromoles already from the lamp as a ppf, the HortiStar reflector is 96% efficient so that would leave you with even more than 2000 micromoles ppf to deliver to the surface. If you deliver that to 1 square meter then in theory you have a ppfd (d for density) of 2000 micromoles per second per square meter.

Now in a real world that will be a bit less because of losses to walls but I assure you that 2000 micromoles will leave that lamp. Tp calculate the ppfd you devide the number of photons per second by the surface in square meters.

The issue is that you can not measure the ppf of a lamp inside a reflector, you need an integrating sphere for that. You measure the ppfd at that specific spot. You can easily measure a ppfd of 5000 micromoles if you are close enough to the lamp. A MH delivers poor growlight in quantity micromols, I'm am not talking about light quality here. To get an even reading you need a good reflector of course. Uniformity is the result of a good reflector. Sometimes two overlapping lights provide better uniformity.

I don't see why you wouldn't be able to distribute that light evenly without moving construvtions. Think about 2x600 is you can't cover it with one lamp.

I am so unhappy with the irradiance at the outside 1-1.5' of the canopy in the 5'x5' tent (even with a 'Cadillac' light system and tent) I am setting up my 600 watt Hortilux SuperHPS in the SunSystem II reflector, to provide extra light for the outer row plants, on two sides.

Reflector issue or maybe use 2x600 for more uniform spread.

I don't follow you here, I might be dense, but could you elaborate please?

of course. 5x5 ft is about 2.3 square meters. With the Pro 1000 at 115% let's say you get 2300 micromoles. That would be about a 1000 micromoles per meter.

That's good to know, thanks. So that 8% doesn't necessarily translate into 8% higher irradiance (PFPD) for the plants, but it does translate into 8% higher radiance (PPF).

It does both. When you raise the ppf you will raise the ppfd given the same reflector. ppf is like luminous flux but only measured in PAR spectrum and photons are counted. ppfd is like illuminance but measured in photons per second in the PAR spectrum.

A problem I see is one of heat, I like to keep my ballast remote to my grow space, and at least remote to my canopy, to remove it as a heat source.

a HPS lamp converts about 60% or more to heat. The Philips 600W electronic ballast only dissipates 20W in heat. You can sleep on it, plus that convection heat will never reach your plants. For the 1000W it is a bit more but still nothing compared to the 600W+ of heat the lamp is producing.