We had discussed it earlier and didnt add it till just now, great catch.Not mentioned : HLG Horticulture Lighting Group one of the top "makers" of LED in the USA they have one of the highest PPFD for plant cultivation
Veg time is 30 + days big factor how many crops a year can you pull from one location ?G/w is to me is an old way to measure a grow, much less important today: whats best: a 240w watt fixture that can grow you 480g in a meter or a 400w that does 650g per meter? Im all for the higher yield per m2. And maybe throwing in kwh or how many weeks of flower is needed.
G/w is tied to efficiency, which has been the main criteria for a growlight for some years now. But if you really think about it: no matter what your desired quality of bud is there is going to be an ideal light condition to reach it : both spectrum and intensity. And efficiency basicly measure how many watts you need to reach there. Home growers : extremely few are watt limited; maybe heat limited which means not being able to use too may watts but literally noone is going to find its impossible to grow with a light that uses 20% more watts. So why do we focus so much on this? What if we can find ways of growing with a better spectrum, beat our yields and quality benchmarks, using just a little more power? To me that is a win; if using 10% more power means 10% more yield and a better quality then im fine with that.
G/w goes even crazier when comparing autos, the longer cycle means those watts give more light during the day per watt.
Not mentioned : HLG Horticulture Lighting Group one of the top "makers" of LED in the USA they have one of the highest PPFD for plant cultivation
I think you are reaching for the graphs meaning also. They were grown at 425umol. Not 90 or 1200, which are figures not actually in the paper I linked to for free.Just went by google lens blurb (couldnt find the non paywall paper):
View attachment 19053889
The black line means theyve been grown (i assume for veg or something) under 91 ppfd and then taken thru the whole register of ppfd; were +600ppfd didnt give any new increases in CO2 intake. I had it wrong; its after 5 weeks of veg its in 5 week of flower. I could only fond paid versions of this. Blue line: grown under 1200ish to start with.
I think your mind is trying to reach here: its a bit of a stupid study: results are give little light and the plant will only be able to handle little light. More light and later it will be handle more light. From those graphs its so easy to think that theres some golden nuggs of info while its just saying that light sensitive plants are light sensitive. Cheers
Didnt realy have much time for a proper discussion earlier on the paper, now i able to read back and skim copy paste etc. I have been searching diligently for max PPFD you know light stress how much is too much and what is the min that gives results. Seen alot of light manufacturers post charts but im always a skepticI think you are reaching for the graphs meaning also. They were grown at 425umol. Not 90 or 1200, which are figures not actually in the paper I linked to for free.
This looks a lot like my peers can't read it either. So I'm guessing it's the work of someone compiling other works, they too don't understand.
There is surrounding chatter. This is looking at saturation, but only measuring at the very upper fresh leaves. This means the plants keep getting better, past this point. As leaves lower on the plant, also come closer to saturation. As we turn up the light, the top gets saturated first, then the top and middle, and with enough light we could saturate the bottom leaves to. It's simple enough, and part of what they are trying to show. Note PPFD is talked about as tips, then area, and this Lppfd term comes in, but not a hppfd, as it all falls apart.
I think I'm going to shift the dunce hat from my head to theirs. It's a shit presentation.
So.. Moving on now ty
Never got a chance to see the full paper only the blurb under the pic i got from image search. Rest of the paper is unknown to me. But yeah, this is likely not one of those papers with some sweet breakthrough infoI think you are reaching for the graphs meaning also. They were grown at 425umol. Not 90 or 1200, which are figures not actually in the paper I linked to for free.
This looks a lot like my peers can't read it either. So I'm guessing it's the work of someone compiling other works, they too don't understand.
There is surrounding chatter. This is looking at saturation, but only measuring at the very upper fresh leaves. This means the plants keep getting better, past this point. As leaves lower on the plant, also come closer to saturation. As we turn up the light, the top gets saturated first, then the top and middle, and with enough light we could saturate the bottom leaves to. It's simple enough, and part of what they are trying to show. Note PPFD is talked about as tips, then area, and this Lppfd term comes in, but not a hppfd, as it all falls apart.
I think I'm going to shift the dunce hat from my head to theirs. It's a shit presentation.
So.. Moving on now ty
Didnt realy have much time for a proper discussion earlier on the paper, now i able to read back and skim copy paste etc. I have been searching diligently for max PPFD you know light stress how much is too much and what is the min that gives results. Seen alot of light manufacturers post charts but im always a skeptic
fpls-12-646020.pdf
drive.google.com
Yield and Quality
Cannabis yield increased linearly from 116 to 519 g·m−2 (i.e., 4.5 times higher) as APPFD increased from 120 to 1,800 μmol·m−2·s−1 (Figure 7A). Note that yields in the present study are true oven-DWs. Since cannabis inflorescences are typically dried to 10–15% moisture content to achieve optimum marketable quality (Leggett, 2006), dividing DW by the proportion of marketable biomass that the DW comprises (e.g., for 15% moisture, divide DW by 0.85) will estimate marketable yield. The harvest index increased linearly from 0.560 to 0.733 and (i.e., 1.3 times higher) as APPFD increased from 120 to 1,800 μmol·m−2·s−1 (Figure 7B). The apical inflorescence density increased linearly from 0.0893 to 0.115 g·cm−3 (i.e., 1.3 times higher) as APPFD increased from 120 to 1,800 μmol·m−2·s−1 (Figure 7C).
***
Cannabis yield increased linearly from 116 to 519 g·m−2 (i.e., 4.5 times higher) as APPFD increased from 120 to 1,800 μmol·m−2·s−1 (Figure 7A).
From_physics_to_fixtures_to_food_current_and_poten.pdf
drive.google.com
frontiers is usually free tech papers
added them on the cloud for everyone
some im sharing to read from the cloud required login but im not paying either
Whats the moisture content of your dried product?Never got a chance to see the full paper only the blurb under the pic i got from image search. Rest of the paper is unknown to me. But yeah, this is likely not one of those papers with some sweet breakthrough info
This study doesnt seem too reliable or maybe not applying directly to a good grower: 519g/m at 1800ppfd? A good grower should be able to get that (or more) with only 900 ppfd. Its hard to apply scientific results like these on to your own grow if its obvious that who ever doing the study hasnt really reached the full yield potential of the light intensity they have available. 1800 ppfd would be like +600w of leds per m2. I sure as hell would expect more than 519g for over 600w of leds.
Readers should be mindful that this study reports yield parameters as true dry weights; marketable yield can be easily determined by factoring back in the desirable moisture content of the inflorescence. For example, for a 400 g·m−2 of dry yield, the corresponding marketable yield would be 440 g·m−2 at 10% moisture content (i.e., 400 × 1.10).Never got a chance to see the full paper only the blurb under the pic i got from image search. Rest of the paper is unknown to me. But yeah, this is likely not one of those papers with some sweet breakthrough info
This study doesnt seem too reliable or maybe not applying directly to a good grower: 519g/m at 1800ppfd? A good grower should be able to get that (or more) with only 900 ppfd. Its hard to apply scientific results like these on to your own grow if its obvious that who ever doing the study hasnt really reached the full yield potential of the light intensity they have available. 1800 ppfd would be like +600w of leds per m2. I sure as hell would expect more than 519g for over 600w of leds.
SE1200W Led Grow Light | User Manual |
Spectrum | 660-665nm,2800-3000K,4800-5000K |
PPF Value | 3528umol/S |
Lumen | 133214Lm±5%@AC120V 195055Lm±5%@AC240V 194231Lm±5%@AC277V |
Power draw | 1200W Minus 1-30%@AC100-120V 1200W±5%@AC220-277V |
Core Coverage | 4FT*6FT (120x180cm) |
Light Size | 67.47″X45.37″X3.02″ (171.39x115.27x7.66cm) |
Package Size | 118x107.5x11.4cm |
Net Weight | 12.51KG |
Gross Weight | 15.52KG |
Input Voltage | AC100-277V |
Amp | 6.635A@AC120V 3.266A@AC240V 2.847A@AC277V |
Frequency | 50/60HZ |
Operating temperature | -20-35℃ |
Diodes quantity | 3735pcs |
Diodes | Samsung LM301H EVO |
Samsung LM301H EVO if you have not read the specs on these I surely would |
SE1000W Led Grow Light | User Manual |
Spectrum | 660nm,3200-4200K,4800-5000K |
PPF Value | 2758umol/S@AC120V;2780umol/S@AC240V; 2788umol/S@AC277V |
Lumen | 186133Lm±5%@AC120V 187526Lm±5%@AC240V 187338Lm±5%@AC277V |
Power draw | 1000W±5%@AC100-277V |
Core Coverage | 4FT*4FT (120x120cm) |
Max Coverage | 5FT*5FT (150x150cm) |
Light Size | 45.31″X45.31″X3.03″ (115.1x115.1x7.7cm) |
Package Size | 117.4*32.8*23.6CM |
Net Weight | 15KG |
Gross Weight | 17KG |
Input Voltage | AC100-277V |
Amp | 8.208A@AC120V 3.973A@AC240V 3.444A@AC277V |
Frequency | 50/60HZ |
Operating temperature | -20-35℃ |
Diodes quantity | 3710pcs |
Diodes | Samsung LM301B |
Lifetime | 50000H |
DB | 0dB |
SF-G1000W | |
---|---|
Spectrum | 660-665nm, 2800-3000K, 4800-5000K |
PPF | 2940μmol/S 3020μmol/S@AC120V 3018μmol/S@AC240V 3016μmol/S@AC277V |
PPE | 2.9μmol/J |
Lumen | 152860Lm±5%@AC120V 152280Lm±5%@AC240V 151605Lm±5%@AC277V |
Power Draw | 1000W±5%@100-277V |
Core Coverage | 4' x 4' |
Max Coverage | 5' x 5' |
Light Size | 44.17'' x 45.39'' x 3.08'' (112.19 cm x 115.26 cm x 7.82 cm) |
Package Size | 46.46'' x 25.98'' x 4.49'' (118 cm x 66 cm x 11.4 cm) |
Net Weight | 10.51KG |
Gross Weight | 12.81KG |
Input Voltage | AC100-277V |
Amp | 8.196A@AC120V 4.001A@AC240V 3.465A@AC277V |
Frequency | 50/60HZ |
Operating Temperature | -20-35℃ |
LED Count | Total: 4872 pcs |
LED Source | Bridgelux |
Lifespan | 80000H |
Noise Level | 0dB |
SE7000 | User Manual |
Spectrum | 650-665nm,2800-3000K,4800-5000K |
PPF Value | 2044umol@120V; 2035umol@240V; 2030umol@277V |
Coverage | Max Coverage:5x5ft (150x150cm) Core Coverage:4x4ft (120x120cm) |
Lumen | 122036Lm±5%@AC120V 121700Lm±5%@AC240V 121688Lm±5%@AC277V |
Power draw | 730W土5%@ AC120-277V |
Light Size | 1151*1151*77MM |
Package Size | 1176*380*168MM |
Gross Weight | 14.3KG |
DB | 0dB |
Input Voltage | AC100-277V |
Amp | Amp:6.029A@AC120V 3.006A@AC240V 2.599A@AC277V |
Frequency | 50-60HZ |
LED | 2688 pcs |
BTU | 2490btu |
Cannabis (Flowering) Cannabis | 500 – 1050 | 30 – 40 |
Cannabis (Seedling) Cannabis | 100 – 300 | 12 – 16 |
Cannabis (Vegetative) Cannabis | 250 – 600 | 20 – 45 |
Model (click to view) | Watts | Grow Area | Plants | Max Yield |
---|---|---|---|---|
ARAY 1 | Seedling Light | 65 | 2ft x 1ft | 1 - 2 | 6 oz (160g) |
ARAY 2 | 125 | 2ft x 2ft | 1 - 3 | 11 oz (310g) |
ARAY 3 | 250 | 3ft x 3ft | 3 - 6 | 22 oz (625g) |
ARAY 4 | 250 | 4ft x 2ft | 3 - 6 | 22 oz (625g) |
ARAY 4X4 | 500 | 4ft x 4ft | 4 - 9 | 45 oz (1,250g) |
ARAY 5X5 | 750 | 5ft x 5ft | 9 - 12 | 67 oz (1,870g) |
ARAY 4X4 HIGH PAR | 750 | 4ft x 4ft | 4 - 9 | 67 oz (1,870g) |
No shade on your paper, broWhats the moisture content of your dried product?
Four Conditions
The water adsorption by mass (Am) is defined in terms of the mass of saturated-surface-dry (Mssd) sample and the mass of oven dried test sample (Mdry) by the formula:
- Oven-dry (OD) is defined as the condition of an aggregate where there is no moisture within any part of the aggregate. This condition can be achieved in a laboratory by heating the aggregate to 220 °F (105 °C) for a period of time.[11]
- Air-dry (AD) is defined as the condition of an aggregate in which there are some water or moisture in the pores of the aggregate, while the outer surfaces of it is dry. This is a natural condition of aggregates in summer or in dry regions. In this condition, an aggregate will absorb water from other materials added to the surface of it, which would possibly have some impact on some characters of the aggregate.[11]
- Saturated surface dry (SSD) is defined as the condition of an aggregate in which the surfaces of the particles are "dry" (i.e., they will neither absorb any of the mixing water added; nor will they contribute any of their contained water to the mix[11]), but the inter-particle voids are saturated with water. In this condition aggregates will not affect the free water content of a composite material.[12][13]
WILL TELL YOU THIS, NOT MANY PEOPLE ARE TAKING THEIR WET 80% MC CANNABIS
- Damp (or wet) is defined as the condition of an aggregate in which water is fully permeated the aggregate through the pores in it, and there is free water in excess of the SSD condition on its surfaces which will become part of the mixing water.[11]
AND DRYING IT DOWN LAB MC AS SPEC IN THE PAPER. MIGHT WANNA GO BACK AND CHECK
MAKE SURE WERE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES. IM PULLING FROM MEMEORY AND ITS NOT WHAT IT USED TO BE... TELL ME IF IM INTERPRETING IT INCORRECTLY?
CAPS JUST SO YOU CAN TELL FROM COPY AND PASTE STUFF I DO ALOT OF THAT
BEST >IBES
I wouldn't trust a thing Spiderfarmer tells ya mate they have been lying about specs since they started!
SF-G1000W Spectrum 660-665nm, 2800-3000K, 4800-5000K PPF 2940μmol/S
3020μmol/S@AC120V
3018μmol/S@AC240V
3016μmol/S@AC277VPPE 2.9μmol/J Lumen 152860Lm±5%@AC120V
152280Lm±5%@AC240V
151605Lm±5%@AC277VPower Draw 1000W±5%@100-277V Core Coverage 4' x 4' Max Coverage 5' x 5' Light Size 44.17'' x 45.39'' x 3.08'' (112.19 cm x 115.26 cm x 7.82 cm) Package Size 46.46'' x 25.98'' x 4.49'' (118 cm x 66 cm x 11.4 cm) Net Weight 10.51KG Gross Weight 12.81KG Input Voltage AC100-277V Amp 8.196A@AC120V
4.001A@AC240V
3.465A@AC277VFrequency 50/60HZ Operating Temperature -20-35℃ LED Count Total: 4872 pcs LED Source Bridgelux Lifespan 80000H Noise Level 0dB 2024 Spider Farmer Cost Effective G1000W Led Grow Lights For Plants
Spider Farmer Latest series. Designed for 5X5 indoor grow, full spectrum bar grow lights, high efficiency high yields. Cooling driver. Budget-friendly.www.spider-farmer.com
THIS IS THE THIRD DOWN FROM TOP IN PRICE AND STILL A PRIME CONTENDER ?
2024 Newest Version Spider Farmer® G1000W Dimmable Cost effective Full Spectrum High Yield Commercial LED Grow Light for 5X5
Rated 5.00 out of 5 based on 5customer ratings
(5 customer reviews)
$799.99 Original price was: $799.99.$679.99Current price is: $679.99.
● Dimension: 44.17'' x 45.39'' x 3.08''
● PPF: 2940 μmol/s
● PPE: 2.9 μmol/J
● Bar-style - better air circulation, effective light penetration through plant canopies, and reduced hotspots
● Foldable: You can complete the installation in almost 1 minute.
● Full spectrum - for growing from seed to harvest.
● High Efficiency 2.9 μmol/J - with high PAR and low power consumption.
● Coverage: 5' x 5'
● Dimmable and controllable with any universal controller 0-10V
● Maximize yield: There is a linear relationship between light intensity and cannabis yield.
● 5 years warranty
Grow Tent Compatible: 5′X5′
Recommended Fan Size: 6-Inch
ALL THREE CO2 LIGHTS ?
If the yield increased linearly from 116g to 509 when going from 120ppfd to 1800ppfd:
Yield at seedling ppfd 116 @ 120 is still close to indusrty standard 1gm/wattstage .. .......,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ppfd ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,DLI
Cannabis (Flowering)
Cannabis500 – 1050 30 – 40 Cannabis (Seedling)
Cannabis100 – 300 12 – 16 Cannabis (Vegetative)
Cannabis250 – 600 20 – 45
Photone - Grow Light Meter
growlightmeter.com
These numbers are a common theme, looks like this calc in theory is what 3 harvests a year ?