Philips 315w CDM Elite (CMH)

[Gloomshade]

I totally agree it confuses the topic, and that seems all too common in the Cannabis world: terms used incorrectly in this (formally) very insular industry, which when it was so insular created its own language of sorts. But now it's not so insular those incorrect terms (like light, "PPF," and "strain") cause confusion when one expects terms to be used correctly - or not at all in terms of 'stain' - and makes companies look foolish, like Sun Systems (and Gavita, regarding PPF).

A few things about "LEC" that are inaccurate, and why LEC should not be used:

- "Light" is defined as visible radiation, which generally is from 380 nm toabout 760-780 nm; the term light is used in photometry (regarding human sight), not radiometry (regarding plant use of photons). In the case of CMH, they emit radiation below 380 nm and above 780 nm, therefore they're not really "light emitting ceramic," they're "radiation emitting ceramic." Granted, lots of scientists mess this issue up as well (like how Philips and Gavita messes up by using 'PPF' they way they do in relation to plant use of radiation). When referring to photons for plants, 'radiation' should always be used over 'light,' simply to cause less confusion (even though 'light' isn't incorrect when dealing only within 380 to about 780 nm waveband).

- "Light emitting ceramic" to me makes it sound like it's a piece of ceramic that's being heated up to emit radiation (like black body and Kelvin), not like it's a lamp with glass, etc. To me, and this is just personal opinion, it's not accurate in what it makes one imagine in their mind. But this is much less of an issue than the use of the term 'light,' which is just wrong.

- "LEP" is also wrong for the same reason "LEC" is wrong, because plasma lamps emit radiation below 380 nm and above 780 nm. Also, it's an equally silly marketing gimmick to call a plasma luminaire "LEP," when simply using "plasma" is fine. No other horticultural industry uses "LEP" or "LEC" that I'm aware of, and rightly so, because it's wrong (inaccurate) and silly.


"Radiometric quantities and units used in photobiology and photochemistry: Recommendations of the Commission Internationale de L'Eclairage (International Commission on Illumination)"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17115802

"Principles of Radiation Measurement"
http://www.licor.com/env/pdf/light/Rad_Meas.pdf

"Definition of PPF in plant biology"
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6865588&postcount=659

I reckon you've given it entirely too much thought. Radiation emitting ceramic? Really? Is that a term you tend to use a lot?

"probably gonna switch my radiation emitters to 12/12 next week"
"need to change out the bulbs on my radiation emitters soon"

Its a light...it emits light (and radiation) and it contains ceramic...

That's enough for me to be okay with it having a name like Light Emitting Ceramic. It's just a name...

 

[Beta Test Team]

I reckon you've given it entirely too much thought. Radiation emitting ceramic? Really? Is that a term you tend to use a lot?

"probably gonna switch my radiation emitters to 12/12 next week"
"need to change out the bulbs on my radiation emitters soon"

Its a light...it emits light (and radiation) and it contains ceramic...

That's enough for me to be okay with it having a name like Light Emitting Ceramic. It's just a name...

I give everything too much thought. Which is why even though I'm correct most of the time people get annoyed...

I wasn't suggesting 'radiation emitting ceramic,' I was just pointing out that term would be better than 'light emitting ceramic.' But like I wrote, CMH is what they should use for the lamp, not some marking bull (LEC) just to make what they sell sound special.

Not sure why you think I am suggesting the term luminaire or fixture or reflector should be changed to 'radiation emitters.' I'm not.

The "LEC" luminaire they're selling should be called a CMH luminaire, because that's what it is, it's not a LEC, which in my mind refers to the lamp (LEC = lamp), not the luminaire or the fixture.

I was just pointing out something that seems odd, another instance of the Cannabis industry being silly and caring more about hype than fact.

Nothing of what I wrote was directed at you, I apologize if it seemed like I was directing anything at you.

 

[Gloomshade]

To be honest I didn't even know that LEC was a term limited to Sun Systems advertising. I even did a quck peruse of the Dpap website to see if they used the same term, which they don't.

I shall endeavour to refer to it as a CMH.

Serious question though, is the technology in the 315s the same as in the old 400w CMHs?

Or has there been some advancement made which the 315s use?

Watt for watt are we looking at the same thing in different packaging?

 

[psyphish]

To be honest I didn't even know that LEC was a term limited to Sun Systems advertising. I even did a quck peruse of the Dpap website to see if they used the same term, which they don't.

I shall endeavour to refer to it as a CMH.

Serious question though, is the technology in the 315s the same as in the old 400w CMHs?

Or has there been some advancement made which the 315s use?

Watt for watt are we looking at the same thing in different packaging?

The 315w is completely different from the 400w retro white bulbs. They can't be compared, the 315w is better in every way.

 

[Gloomshade]

The 315w is completely different from the 400w retro white bulbs. They can't be compared, the 315w is better in every way.

Nice thanks.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

I fried my socket in one of these and looking to replace it. I see the pzg18 sockets being sold for pretty cheap, is it easy to swap out? Don't have any experience wiring this sort of thing.

 

[rives]

I fried my socket in one of these and looking to replace it. I see the pzg18 sockets being sold for pretty cheap, is it easy to swap out? Don't have any experience wiring this sort of thing.

Changing out the sockets seems pretty basic to me, but I'm an electrician. The biggest challenge is that the mounting centers for the PGZ18 are slightly different than those for a mogul and need to be modified. If there are nuts on the back of the mounting bracket, you can simply file the screw hole into a slot and use it that way. If the bracket is tapped for the mounting screws, you can probably spin the socket 90 degrees and drill/tap new mounting holes.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Doesn't sound too difficult. How about the wiring? What's involved in reconnecting it? Or I don't know if it's possible to buy one pre-wired with a new cord that's what I was looking for but didn't see any. Not sure what caused it to fry like that and if I need a new cord anyway or not, but looking at it I can see inside that the terminals are burnt.

 

[rives]

All of my sockets were delivered with short lengths of wire already installed. A special, high temperature wire is needed for the socket feed, so they come with it pre-installed. The wires are normally about 12" long and will reach the makeup box where they connect to the cord feeding the reflector. At that point, wire nuts can be used to make the connection. High-temperature wire nuts are sometimes used in the higher-wattage fixtures, but the 315's put out so little heat that standard wire nuts should be fine.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Awesome man thanks for the info. Sounds like something I can handle.

I'm really enjoying these lights so far. I have 3 of them running now and they are so much easier to cool than the 1k I had up. Temps are perfect at 75° with only a 400cfm extraction fan dimmed to 75%. And it covers way more space as well.

 

[Ready4]

I give everything too much thought. Which is why even though I'm correct most of the time people get annoyed...

I wasn't suggesting 'radiation emitting ceramic,' I was just pointing out that term would be better than 'light emitting ceramic.' But like I wrote, CMH is what they should use for the lamp, not some marking bull (LEC) just to make what they sell sound special.

Not sure why you think I am suggesting the term luminaire or fixture or reflector should be changed to 'radiation emitters.' I'm not.

The "LEC" luminaire they're selling should be called a CMH luminaire, because that's what it is, it's not a LEC, which in my mind refers to the lamp (LEC = lamp), not the luminaire or the fixture.

I was just pointing out something that seems odd, another instance of the Cannabis industry being silly and caring more about hype than fact.

Nothing of what I wrote was directed at you, I apologize if it seemed like I was directing anything at you.

Smoke a few and chill. Nothing wrong with trying to be right or challenging information that may be not entirely honest.
But you have to realize that going on and on about a subject is sometimes like pissing in the wind. Many people do not want to be confused by trivial things like facts or reality etc. - their minds are made up and nothing will change that. People are not getting annoyed with you because you are "correct most of the time" , they get annoyed because they believe they are right (and just may be) and you keep going on and on, beating a dead horse ( Gavita /Epaps battle)
You take it way too personal if someone doubts you, you will not win with those folks.
And your comments on the Sunlight 315 LEC... wtf who gives a damn what Sunlight calls their light, you don't like it then don't buy one or start your own lighting company. Took about 30 seconds to figure out the LEC was just a brand designation. Anybody with an IQ higher than their coffee cup should be able to figure that one out, its certainly a non-issue.
Put all that time and thoughts into something positive, start your own light company

 

[Beta Test Team]

The LEC discussion was friendly and all those involved agreed it's pretty lame of SunSystems. The Gavita thread is something unto itself...where facts seem to hold no sway (I've never seen anything like it before, it's really odd).

If people post patently incorrect things I sometimes offer corrections, but not nearly as often as could be done. You're right that to some people ignorance is bliss, and they'll fight tooth and nail to not realize (or admit) they're incorrect. What I take offense to is companies that lie, tell half-truths, or otherwise take artistic license with facts, because they're taking advantage of their customers.

Though I will take your suggestion and smoke, because I'm about to go watch a movie

 

[Gloomshade]

The LEC discussion was friendly and all those involved agreed it's pretty lame of SunSystems. The Gativa thread is something unto itself...where facts seem to hold no sway (I've never seen anything like it before, it's really odd).

If people post patently incorrect things I sometimes offer corrections, but not nearly as often as could be done. You're right that to some people ignorance is bliss, and they'll fight tooth and nail to not realize (or admit) they're incorrect. What I take offense to is companies that lie, tell half-truths, or otherwise take artistic license with facts, because they're taking advantage of their customers.

Though I will take your suggestion and smoke, because I'm about to go watch a movie

*Gavita

 

[Beta Test Team]

Fixed

 

[T_B_M]

I totally agree it confuses the topic, and that seems all too common in the Cannabis world: terms used incorrectly in this (formally) very insular industry, which when it was so insular created its own language of sorts. But now it's not so insular those incorrect terms (like light, "PPF," and "strain") cause confusion when one expects terms to be used correctly - or not at all in terms of 'stain' - and makes companies look foolish, like Sun Systems (and Gavita, regarding PPF).

A few things about "LEC" that are inaccurate, and why LEC should not be used:

- "Light" is defined as visible radiation, which generally is from 380 nm toabout 760-780 nm; the term light is used in photometry (regarding human sight), not radiometry (regarding plant use of photons). In the case of CMH, they emit radiation below 380 nm and above 780 nm, therefore they're not really "light emitting ceramic," they're "radiation emitting ceramic." Granted, lots of scientists mess this issue up as well (like how Philips and Gavita messes up by using 'PPF' they way they do in relation to plant use of radiation). When referring to photons for plants, 'radiation' should always be used over 'light,' simply to cause less confusion (even though 'light' isn't incorrect when dealing only within 380 to about 780 nm waveband).

- "Light emitting ceramic" to me makes it sound like it's a piece of ceramic that's being heated up to emit radiation (like black body and Kelvin), not like it's a lamp with glass, etc. To me, and this is just personal opinion, it's not accurate in what it makes one imagine in their mind. But this is much less of an issue than the use of the term 'light,' which is just wrong.

- "LEP" is also wrong for the same reason "LEC" is wrong, because plasma lamps emit radiation below 380 nm and above 780 nm. Also, it's an equally silly marketing gimmick to call a plasma luminaire "LEP," when simply using "plasma" is fine. No other horticultural industry uses "LEP" or "LEC" that I'm aware of, and rightly so, because it's wrong (inaccurate) and silly.


"Radiometric quantities and units used in photobiology and photochemistry: Recommendations of the Commission Internationale de L'Eclairage (International Commission on Illumination)"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17115802

"Principles of Radiation Measurement"
http://www.licor.com/env/pdf/light/Rad_Meas.pdf

"Definition of PPF in plant biology"
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6865588&postcount=659

I'm in the "dude its just a name" camp. Don't you know by now everything is spiced up through marketing ploys. You still can't deny that the LEC lamp far surpases CMH and HPS when it comes to the total PAR available across the PAR spectrum.

 

[LargePrime]

At that point, wire nuts can be used to make the connection. High-temperature wire nuts are sometimes used in the higher-wattage fixtures, but the 315's put out so little heat that standard wire nuts should be fine.

I would crimp the connections. With 600V barrel or open connectors.

Also, rives, I think the teflon leads are not so much temp protected but high voltage rated. The leads are good to 7500v apparently.

 

[LargePrime]

I totally agree it confuses the topic,
<snip totally informative posting>
<snip scientific references of said post>

I'm in the "dude its just a name" camp. Don't you know by now everything is spiced up through marketing ploys. You still can't deny that the LEC lamp far surpases CMH and HPS when it comes to the total PAR available across the PAR spectrum.

HILLARIOUS!

 

[LargePrime]

Sorry for the slow reply. i didn't notice this.

The current problem with the 315 is that no one is making a decent reflector at a reasonable price.

Do you know the pricing on the dPapillion and Double dPaillion? To me, those are good reflecors, but I have no idea how much they cost.

when they first came out i saw 1000$ pricing on the 315, and laughed.
I think the 315 is ~600 and the 630 ~1200 last i looked.

I have no use for this reflector. to me it is very optimized for typical supplemental lighting in greenhouses. And it looks probably best in class at that. But that is not what I need so it is useless to me.

I was looking to chat with you about reflector optimization for "our" use. Can i PM you? or do you already have a thread on that?

 

[Beta Test Team]

Wow, $600 for the 315?! And $1,200 for the 615W? LOL, crazy. That's nearly has bad as the MSRP for the SunSystems CMH luminaire (around $575-$600 for 315W). And people complain about GreenBeams pricing (which is $420 per 315W).

About the reflector, yup, I posted a thread on that topic, comparing it to Gavita and other reflectors. The ePapillion reflector wins in many ways (though Greenbeams is still king in terms of uniformity). I think it's a good reflector for indoor gardens, and I would choose it over about any other reflector for large grows. If the Double dPapillion wasn't priced like they where high on meth I would use them as the sole source of radiation, but considering they where high on meth when they came up with that price, using Greenbeams seems the better option (for price and uniformity); by the way, we hope to have our 12 GB up and running next month and I'll do a grow journal.

"Gavita Pro DE vs. ePapillion: irradiance uniformity results"
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=297147

 

[Beta Test Team]

I'm in the "dude its just a name" camp. Don't you know by now everything is spiced up through marketing ploys. You still can't deny that the LEC lamp far surpases CMH and HPS when it comes to the total PAR available across the PAR spectrum.

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. Inflection is so hard to read on the interwebs. Just to be safe: LEC is CMH, they're the same thing, the same exact lamp is in use (Philips Mastercolor 942 T12 or the GreenPower), but SunSystems decided to call it LEC to make it sound special, which it's not.