VerdantGreen's 63 Watt LED Micro Cab.

[VerdantGreen]

ukganjafarmer - thanks

blimey -yep they work, true they arent cheep - but then neither is Jack Daniels

pinstripe - yes you are probably right about that. i must try and measure the power if i can work out a way to do it.

WizeWizo - well, smell is obviously very subjective, but i found that under regular HPS, only certain strains would really stink my house up when you open the jar such as blueberry. Under CMH everything ive grow seems a lot more resinous and stinky. early days for LED comparisons but it seems just as stinky as CMH. this could be for two reasons - the first being spectrum. as far as i know terpenes are increased by blue light which the CMH and LED certainly have more of. secondly heat will vaporize the aromatic oils quite quickly so the extra heat from HPS probably burns off a lot of smell, CMH is cooler and of course LED is cooler still. having grown weed outdoors i would say that it has an extra width and depth of potency than i found under HPS (HPS still grow decent weed though) CMH has a spectrum much closer to daylight and LED units from Hydro grow/LEDGirl have a spectrum targetted at weed so should also be better.

MeanBean - thanks! - the 205 watt LED grow is still a couple of weeks away , just finishing some plants off and vegging the new ones .

b00m - thanks - ill try and get some bud shots but my camera doesnt do very well with closeups or macros - i tried a macro this morning and it didnt come out that well. i'll give them another go later.

yesum - yes not a bad guess! - agreed these lights are going to take over the small scale grows eventually. HID get hugely more efficient as you get higher wattage lamps. i think 600 is the most efficient. lower wattage ones give out less light per watt so LED is definitely a contender but i think another huge advantage is the reduced heat too.

mad - yep i was very high last night after a couple of smokes of this bud. there is definitely nothing lacking compared to HID and i suspect there may even be something extra in the potency but it is far too early to make that call yet - again very subjective.

grow2bfree - thanks and welcome!

---
fairly poor macro shot of the MMG nug

here are the lemon thai a week ago before going under the LED unit to veg.

and here they are after a week vegging under LED - pretty decent growth rate i would say. looks like a but of deficiency, possibly magnesium, on the rear right one but could be just that seed's genetics. i topped them after this pic and gave then a bit of molasses and higher pH water so hopefully it will go way.

not sure what i will flower in here next, kind of depends on how many lemon thai girls i get etc and what ends up going in the quarters.

cheers

V.

 

[Irie_Lion]

Excellent job VG....i think u just got HGL a bunch of orders lol. SO u a fan of lost ? I watch it too and think its a good show....lots of interesting stuff goin on right now

 

[mad librettist]

lol I used to love lost but then I got... lost.

 

[Irie_Lion]

lol I used to love lost but then I got... lost.

haha yea i think that happens to everyone....im just wondering how they gona tie all them loose ends up in only 8 epsiodes lol. 5 yrs of questions to be answered.

Btw VG what was the final height size of the plant when it was finished? Sorry if i missed it somewhere in the thread but i dont recall seeing it. Thanks again!

 

[VerdantGreen]

im absolutely obsessed by LOST and the whole mythology with its philosophical and religious symolism. some of my early theories were pretty much on the mark too - i predicted there would be godlike powers pulling the strings over 3 years ago when most people were expecting a scientific explanation. - anyway dont get me started on that or i wont stop best show thats ever been on telly imo.

irie - the height was pretty much the same as before - i think i measured the heights in the cab like between the tops and lights a few pages back.

 

[Irie_Lion]

yea man i'm with u on lost its definitely a show i look forward to seeing each week....like u said trying to figure out whats goin on is half the fun. I might have to go and get the dvd set once its all said and done to watch it from the begining again

Ill take a look back a few pages to find it thanks!

 

[LEDGirl]

so, the dry yield - and i mean bone dry - was 59.2 grams, just a whisker short of the gram/watt mark. some of my strains yield over 30% more than MMG so with some warmer temps, and perhaps two indica dom less stretchy plants in there i am confident that 1gpw can easily be exceeded with this 1st generation unit, and with the higher targetted spectrum of a second gen unit that could even get higher.

For anyone wanting the "nitty gritty" as far as calculations go, here it is: The 1st generation 63W has an actual power draw of 60-63W from the wall, with 5-6W being consumed by the cooling fans. In all actuality, it creates 54-58W of actual light using 63 LED's, which makes this a 1.0 - 1.1 gram per watt grow. For such a low wattage though, I think you did great! Can't wait to see the 205W :friends:

 

[pinstripe]

For anyone wanting the "nitty gritty" as far as calculations go, here it is: The 1st generation 63W has an actual power draw of 60-63W from the wall, with 5-6W being consumed by the cooling fans. In all actuality, it creates 54-58W of actual light using 63 LED's, which makes this a 1.0 - 1.1 gram per watt grow. For such a low wattage though, I think you did great! Can't wait to see the 205W :friends:

I beg to differ. Cooling the LEDs is essential to maintain a high light output. Higher temperature means noticably less light. There's a reason why those fans sit there

On the other hand, what you can adjust for is the power used up by the power supply, as HID growers never account for the power used by the ballast. If I remember this right, a 250W HPS and ballast uses about 270-290W all together.

Also I don't believe it creates 54-58W of actual light. That would mean the LEDs turn 100% of the input energy into light.
Depending on what LEDs that sit in the lamp, 15-40% of the input energy comes out as light. For this lamp that would be somewhere between 9W and 23W of actual light.


All the best

 

[LEDGirl]

I beg to differ. Cooling the LEDs is essential to maintain a high light output. Higher temperature means noticably less light. There's a reason why those fans sit there

On the other hand, what you can adjust for is the power used up by the power supply, as HID growers never account for the power used by the ballast. If I remember this right, a 250W HPS and ballast uses about 270-290W all together.

Also I don't believe it creates 54-58W of actual light. That would mean the LEDs turn 100% of the input energy into light.
Depending on what LEDs that sit in the lamp, 15-40% of the input energy comes out as light. For this lamp that would be somewhere between 9W and 23W of actual light.

I have no idea where you seem to be gathering your information from, but Red 1W LED's consume approximately .8W of power, and blues and whites consume approximately 1.2W of power. That power is then turned into light at an exact lumen per watt ratio. So the 1W (.8W power) Red LED still emits 45 lumens, not 15-40% of that amount. Likewise, the 1W white (operating at 1.2W) produces 110 lumens, not 15-40% of that amount. So I'm sorry to say it, but you are incorrect. Try and find a MH or HPS bulb that emits 45 lumens of 640nm per watt, you won't find it.

So to correct you, our light uses 54-58W of power to create light. This is after you factor in the power consumption of all LED's. The power supplies are over 90% efficient as well, so they don't "drain" as much power as you'd like to think. Lastly, regardless of what the fans are used for, they are not a part of the "light" wattage. That would be like saying that the 4" inline fan you run for your 400W HPS is included in the overall light wattage... It just doesn't work that way. It would also be like saying that an A/C unit is a part of the light wattage, because it's essential to keeping your plants from dying with HID. Again, it doesn't work that way... Anyhow, thanks for your input.

 

[unthing]

With perfect conversion there would be no heat to cool..

But what VG has done with this light is great stuff.

 

[pinstripe]

Forgot to say I'mma try your organic soil mix out, VG. Thanks again for sharing your grow and experience.

I'm sorry for starting this LED panel tech argument. There's some misinterpretation on fundamental physics going here. I won't continue after this post.

------------------------------------------------------
EDIT: To not ruin VG's nice grow log, I started a new thread. Discussion continues here: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=164277.
The original of post is to be found in the new thread. Maybe one of our nice mods can transfer the off topic posts over there

LEDGirl: All I can say is you are terribly wrong.
------------------------------------------------------

 

[blimblom]

Pinstripe is right. LED efficiency is taken at 25C . Above that, the efficiency (and luminancy) of the LED goes down. that is true for their life expectancy also...

High heat damages the LED, damages the optics in front of it, and is a no-no.

Pinstripe, are you sure that lamps of equal wattage emit equal amounts of heat? Because if a kind of system has a watt/light conversion rate of 40% will emit less heat than one with 30%. Or am I wrong?

 

[renz]

I have no idea where you seem to be gathering your information from, but Red 1W LED's consume approximately .8W of power, and blues and whites consume approximately 1.2W of power.

Would depend on drive current, no? Which depends on how thermal resistance math works out.

But yeah, the ratios for red to blue power looks right.

Heh @ different color LEDs with the same current rating AND wattage rating.

 

[renz]

Instead of only using a big heatsink, we made the choice to mount the LEDs on a metal sheet and cool this with fans. The lamp do not work properly without the fans, and therefore IMO it is incorrect to say the fans aren't part of the light wattage.

Thermal resistance for most power LEDs is very low. In fact this is the exact reason they are power LEDs. Calculating the needed thermal efficiency (C/W) of the heatsink is not a big deal, and passive heatsinks are more than capable in this application.

Huge amplifiers need fans, because they're made to run in environments that would kill plants, at the edge of a semiconductors capabilities.

A constant heat source (like a string of constant current LEDs) and an environment that is cool enough for plants to grow make fans a waste in this particular application, so since they aren't necessary, I would consider them a waste.

Yes, you get more output at lower temps, but are you getting more output than if you used the fan power in the LEDs, and in any case, you could have just used a more efficient heatsink and got the lower temps.

High efficiency passive heatsinks are expensive. Fans aren't.

Since this is about efficiency, high efficiency heatsinks are better.

Try and flame, but like it was said: Physics is physics. Dollars are dollars.

 

[renz]

On the other hand, what you can adjust for is the power used up by the power supply, as HID growers never account for the power used by the ballast. If I remember this right, a 250W HPS and ballast uses about 270-290W all together.

And no one ever seems to mention how their LED panels are current regulated. Possibly I missed it in this thread, but if it's not DIY usually all I read is OMG I GOT THIS PANEL IT HAS THIS MANY THE BOX SAYS THIS WATTAGE. 95% efficiency isn't impossible with switch mode current regulators, but if you cheap out on certain parts or run the switcher too fast because you just don't know, down to 80% efficiency wouldn't be surprising.

You can do 80% efficiency with resistors, a fuse, and a DC supply with semi-decent voltage regulation. It's not impressive.

I personally wouldn't believe any wattage rating that wasn't measured as voltage across the strings of LEDs (not the panel including current regs) multiplied by current measured going through them, after a warm up period of an hour minimum. And really, the device heatsink temperature is needed to really make the data valuable.

If you want to do an efficiency calculation, you need to use a true RMS power meter or other electronics test gear on the input of the device at the same time you take the voltage/current/temp readings for just the LEDs. Using the power draw on the box is ridiculous because those are safety numbers, meant to indicate loading to your homes electrical resources, and should have built in overhead. Like, if they're doing it right, the power drawn number should be inflated due to safety and liability concerns.

Marketing people are liars, it's their job.

 

[VerdantGreen]

guys im afraid you have lost me there, whilst i like a bit of data etc - this thread is about growing actual plants under the lights to see what the yield and quality is like. if you want to get into an in-depth discussion about physics and efficiency then - if you dont mind - perhaps you can take it to a more suitable thread like the one in the equipment forum.

cheers

V.

 

[renz]

This isn't in depth at all... and I actually kind of think the physics discussion in the equipment forum is a waste, because the main poster is basically ignoring the relevant part of his science to back his claims up.

Personally I think examples of grows in action is the best make or break proof for LED systems, I would just like enough information to make towards objective comparisons.

Bare minimum, accurate wattage across the LEDs is needed to do this (types of LEDs and temps they're run at is pretty important too, but that can be guestimated from pics. Voltages and currents can't be).

 

[VerdantGreen]

hi renz i know what you mean, secondtry isnt the easiest person to debate with i just dont want to get too bogged down in all that here and i know what you guys are like when you get going
afaik the fact that the red uses less and the blue slightly more than 1 watt (or visa versa) kind of cancels each other out. i think ledgirl has hooked these things up to a power meter and measured their usage - it comes out slightly less than the rating.

heat wise these give out virtually nothing compared to the hid lamps - i am quite happy to have the fans in them too as i think they help the general circulation in the cab.

and agreed, its hard to argue with a good yielding grow under LED. having said that i also get good yields under hps and cmh. i have one of the 205 watt units to replace the 250 watt hid in my other cab which should be interesting as i have mums of some of the strains i have already grown in there with pics etc. running them again in the same way under the LED;s should be pretty revealing.

cheers

V.

 

[renz]

afaik the fact that the red uses less and the blue slightly more than 1 watt (or visa versa) kind of cancels each other out.

Yeah with red and blue, it usually works out because one is high and one is low.

Hong Kong/eBay '5-chip' LEDs in a Superflux style package with 100mA current are rated as 0.5W, but the Vf of these red and blue are like, 2V and 3V, respectively, so really you don't get 0.5W unless you use a red and a blue together as a pair.

Shrug.

 

[Marijuanasaur]

are all the buds dense or just the tops?

any other updates?