What's new
  • 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.

Off the shelf retail store screw-in LED and CFL bulb comparisons

f-e

Well-known member
Mentor
Veteran
at what distance?

It's not a factor.
If I take a 1 lumen lamp, and illuminate 1 meter, that meter will be at 1 lux.
If I move that light up, to cover 2 meters, the two meters are illuminated at 0.5 lux.

The circle math people use can look confusing. It says that moving the light upwards, lowered the illumination over my meter. People interpret this to mean that my light somehow wore out as it traveled the greater distance. This is not true. The light has simply spread over a larger area.

Lets say I have a panel of these 14w lamps, making this 40w per foot. But my panel is huge. Say a square mile. And it's 5 meters above my plants. If I raise it to 10 meters. Nothing should happen. At least, not in the middle. At the edge, my lux reading drops as I'm now lighting more area outside the square mile. That is a loss of light by raising the panel. In the middle though, all the photon's are still coming down, and photons don't wear out.

This is upset a little by a dust storm. Fog. Birds and bugs. But a 1mW laser pointer can easily manage 10 miles over a city. It's limitation being the fact it spreads out eventually. It's not perfectly straight.

I know using a light meter can seem to go against this. Because it's a fixed size, and we expect a certain result. So lets try a smaller scale experiment. I'm going to take my torch, that makes a nice defined circle, and point it at the floor. In the middle of the circle, I place a light meter. Just outside the circle, I place another light meter. I take the readings. Then I move the light up, so that both light meters now fall within the circle. Without reading the numbers off the meters, you can see the combined illumination has risen by raising the light. If you had two buds, not sensors, you would raise the light and do better. Yet using a single meter you might be guided not to.

The drawing shows a lamp, giving off 32 of these photons that don't wear out. You can position the sensor to catch any number. Close up looks good, but then you soon surround the lamp. Further looks bad, but look how much space there is. This picture seems simple enough with only one light source. There is an ideal distance the meter can find.


This image is what we are doing.


Once you get between a few lamps, the distance from them becomes less important.


If you can get the 1 lumen at source, to illuminate 1 meter, it's illuminated to 1 lux. The distance is unimportant. Photons don't wear out within the scope of our understanding. They're magnetic waves, not particles.


I must add, this is all in my opinion. I'm not stating it as fact. I think it's fact, but you can all decide for yourselves.




Why are we still at 108 Lumens per watt in our stores.
I was just looking on the philips site, and their dome was just 95. Yet the filament looking led lamp was 138. While it's a few years since they made the 200 lumen per watt dubai lamp, that has to be used in all new builds over there.
I have to wonder if our 108 lamps are measured values with the dome intact, and what sort of performance gain we get taking that dome off. Just a light meter won't help. The dome is a diffuser and by nature scatters the light over a wide area. Removing just that effect will see big gains at a fixed position below. Without any more light leaving the lamp.
 

blynx

WALSTIB
Moderator
ICMag Donor
Veteran
It's not a factor.
If I take a 1 lumen lamp, and illuminate 1 meter, that meter will be at 1 lux.
If I move that light up, to cover 2 meters, the two meters are illuminated at 0.5 lux.

The circle math people use can look confusing. It says that moving the light upwards, lowered the illumination over my meter. People interpret this to mean that my light somehow wore out as it traveled the greater distance. This is not true. The light has simply spread over a larger area.

Lets say I have a panel of these 14w lamps, making this 40w per foot. But my panel is huge. Say a square mile. And it's 5 meters above my plants. If I raise it to 10 meters. Nothing should happen. At least, not in the middle. At the edge, my lux reading drops as I'm now lighting more area outside the square mile. That is a loss of light by raising the panel. In the middle though, all the photon's are still coming down, and photons don't wear out.

This is upset a little by a dust storm. Fog. Birds and bugs. But a 1mW laser pointer can easily manage 10 miles over a city. It's limitation being the fact it spreads out eventually. It's not perfectly straight.

I know using a light meter can seem to go against this. Because it's a fixed size, and we expect a certain result. So lets try a smaller scale experiment. I'm going to take my torch, that makes a nice defined circle, and point it at the floor. In the middle of the circle, I place a light meter. Just outside the circle, I place another light meter. I take the readings. Then I move the light up, so that both light meters now fall within the circle. Without reading the numbers off the meters, you can see the combined illumination has risen by raising the light. If you had two buds, not sensors, you would raise the light and do better. Yet using a single meter you might be guided not to.

The drawing shows a lamp, giving off 32 of these photons that don't wear out. You can position the sensor to catch any number. Close up looks good, but then you soon surround the lamp. Further looks bad, but look how much space there is. This picture seems simple enough with only one light source. There is an ideal distance the meter can find.
View Image

This image is what we are doing.
View Image

Once you get between a few lamps, the distance from them becomes less important.


If you can get the 1 lumen at source, to illuminate 1 meter, it's illuminated to 1 lux. The distance is unimportant. Photons don't wear out within the scope of our understanding. They're magnetic waves, not particles.


I must add, this is all in my opinion. I'm not stating it as fact. I think it's fact, but you can all decide for yourselves.




Why are we still at 108 Lumens per watt in our stores.
I was just looking on the philips site, and their dome was just 95. Yet the filament looking led lamp was 138. While it's a few years since they made the 200 lumen per watt dubai lamp, that has to be used in all new builds over there.
I have to wonder if our 108 lamps are measured values with the dome intact, and what sort of performance gain we get taking that dome off. Just a light meter won't help. The dome is a diffuser and by nature scatters the light over a wide area. Removing just that effect will see big gains at a fixed position below. Without any more light leaving the lamp.

Lumens are measured with the domes on. Lumens are measured by putting a light inside a spherical device. The sphere measures light hitting the surface 1ft from the bulb.

LED manufacturers use the sphere to spread/diffuse the light so it's more 'usable' in terms of what we humans use most light bulbs for, ie omnidirectional lighting, not flashlight style lighting.

We the growers take advantage of this and remove the globe. In addition to it increasing the lumens that would be read in the device measuring them if it was stuck back in there. It gives us the advantage of using an increased light source that is directed instead of spread out.
 

f-e

Well-known member
Mentor
Veteran
I had been thinking a mylar lined box might be an option, but it's still in the low 90s and 10% is an error of some magnitude. The globe sounds similar, but I bet it uses a stack of sensors. Too many to build for a quick test.

Good info. Some like coming your way.
 

Terpene

I love the smell of cannabis in the morning
Veteran
So let's see how the measurements compare (lux readings at 100x scaling)

10w 2700k LED with lens
12" 24 lux
6" 110 lux
9" 534 lux

10w 2700k LED with no lens
12" 37 lux
6" 165 lux
9" 707 lux

So much bench racing, so little growing.
Let’s just assume based on post number 8 from the 1st page of this thread that we can expect roughly 45% more light than advertised with the globes removed.
 

f-e

Well-known member
Mentor
Veteran
So much bench racing, so little growing.
Let’s just assume based on post number 8 from the 1st page of this thread that we can expect roughly 45% more light than advertised with the globes removed.

The threads about lamp comparisons.

LED grade polycarbonate diffuser, 1/8th thick, is proven to be up to 5% better than normal polycarbonate. With tests showing losses around 10-15%

"the Bayer polycarbonate generally tests at between 87% and 90% light transmittance when using the ASTM D1003 method, but we have seen results anywhere from 83% to 93% using the integrated sphere for the same materials"
https://www.powerelectronics.com/lighting-systems/diffusers-get-better-handling-leds
That was 9 years ago.
 

Drop That Sound

Well-known member
I dunno what is worse now. Bayer's secret proprietary blend of "particles" in the polycarbonate globe diffusers ( possibly off gassing and causing cancer?)... or the glare from the diodes destroying our vision, as we go way over the limit one would normally use in a household...

How many of us actually use LED safety glasses, Even with SIL's? I think i'll be investing in a pair.. Even a few bulbs could cause damage i'm sure, bright little lights they are!


I wonder if the globe actually cost more to produce than say the PCB or any other SIL component.. I suppose it would depend on the manufacturer.

Either way I'm still thinking of a way to recycle them all into a cool project.
 

xxPeacePipexx

Well-known member
Veteran
All to often, these lights are overlooked by people of general. I can only imagine what I could have done in my younger days of closest setups when the only thing available was massive florescent bulbs even if you used the circular styles.

Here I am thirty years later, still utilizing the clamp lights and whatever works when I need supplementary light, or a temporary secondary seed station.

With the right genetics, skills and customization a grower can actually harvest acceptable yields using nothing more then compact fluorescent lights and the led.
 

BoredToDeath

New member
So I´m gathering materials to get my first grow going soon. What would you recommend between either a 9W/806lm light with a chipcount of 20 or a 10W/1000lm light with a chipcount of 14?

I thought of mixing 2700K with 6500K but I also found some pretty cheap 4000K-leds (9W/1000lm). Would these be any good instead of 6500K? Or maybe a mix of 2700K, 4000K and 6500K?
 

Terpene

I love the smell of cannabis in the morning
Veteran
Boats N Hoes (Ace Seeds Zamaldelica x Panama) x Med Tree Seeds Catalina Wine Mixer - phenos 1, 2 and 3 are finished at 9.5 weeks:

Pheno 1 (the hairy, somewhat OG looking pheno):
picture.php


Pheno 2 (stretchier branching than 3, but basically the same) :
picture.php


Pheno 3 (more columnar development than 2):
picture.php


picture.php


The trio of purple phenos side by side:
picture.php


Two more Zamaldelica x Panama leaning phenos yet to finish. Ill post pics when they're done.
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
so, f-e, i guess i shouldn't have used the phrase in post 2618 referring to lumens as having "no relation to a measurement of light at the target".

i guess i should have said very little relationship to a measurement of light at the target.

even though it is true that 1 lumen over one meter is 1 lux the point i was trying to make is that, in the real world of plant lighting, an extrapolation of light delivered to the target, if the target is a plant, using lumen or lux, is going to be wildly inaccurate at best.

lumen is a measurement of light at the source only. a bulb comparison tool. lumen and lux are not the same thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(unit)

other than the definition, there are many factors that affect the accuracy such as shape and directionality of the emitter, shape of the reflector, material used in the reflector, and others i'm sure.

but you know all this. i think this quote from your post # 2616 is what made me think that you were saying that a lumen and a lux are the same thing.

"Without using any math, a 600 puts 92,000 lumens over a meter. Or it's 92,000 lux. However you want to say it. That is what the rating means. If you take all its light and spread it over a meter, it's 92k"

i think you know that practical reality and the need for accuracy precludes using these terms to determine the amount of light your plants are getting.

but here is another reason why everyone in the world of professional plant lighting uses quantum meters instead of lux or fc meters.

https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/conversion-ppfd-to-lux/

please watch the video as well as look at the conversion numbers.

i'm not trying to start an argument or clutter up someone else's thread but i think we just misunderstood each other and i hope this clarifies my intent, which is accuracy.

and here is your quote about photons from post # 2643.

"Photons don't wear out within the scope of our understanding. They're magnetic waves, not particles."

you might want to take a look at this;

https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/photon

so a photon is indeed a particle. a discrete energy packet. like a little bomblet. although light does propagate in a wavelike fashion.
 

Legalcdn

Well-known member
I have seen different temps used in this thread. I used 15w 3000k..15w 2700k..and 10w 5000k in 7-1 light adapters..only used about 5 in each adapter as it was too much light..thus i added the 10w 5000k.. 1st grow without 5000k..3.5oz off one c99. 2nd grow..i added 5000k..mainlined branches..too cold in dec..but harvested in time for xmas about 3oz with more trichs..
So yes..i even bought 15w 5000k lights for next run in a month..
Hope it helps..
 

Legalcdn

Well-known member
Page 250 and page 256..different temps used..

This thread was able to get my feet wet with 1st LED retail bulbs.. Thanks to the crazy weed generation in thinking..."what if I did this...would it work?".... Your time spent thinking outside the box is appreciated..
 

PCBuds

Well-known member
I found this site and thread when I searched for grows with regular LED bulbs.

Thanks blynx for starting this thread !

I've switched half my lighting to Walmart LEDs since then.

My next grow is looking good.






Excuse the black lines in the pics.
I think it's the strobe effect of the LEDs messing with my camera.
 
Top