Fanleaf's Huge 42 COB Array Build Plus Other Builds

OK guys, I've seen several post on here now about heat. I've got a few things to say about this and maybe this will help some of you.

First, let's all understand that any light that pulls like a 600W hps and a 600W cob array and a 600W blurple LED and a 600W Induction light will ALL PRODUCE THE SAME EXACT AMOUNT OF HEAT!!!!
Yes, I know I know, everyone says but going LED is suposed to make less heat for me to deal with right? Well yes but I will explain this in a bit.

OK guys let's explain it like this. Let's use a 600W hps to explain this with ok? While a 600W hps may be say only 38% efficient that means basically it's turning 38% (228 watts) of that 600W into light and the remaining 372 watts are pure heat watts. Now, light is not just imaginary but is photons that travel from the light bulb outwards ok? Light travels at (the speed of light) 300,000,000 meters per second. If it traveled really slow there would be a noticeable delay when you flip a light switch off. You would be able to see the light travel ok?

Now, your plants don't suck up but a fraction of this light because it also lights up your whole grow room right?
So what happens when you flip a light switch off is the photons still bounce off your walls and plants and everything in your grow room at speeds so fast you cannot comprehend until those photons absorb into heat. The photons bounce around until they are either used by the plant or absorbed into your walls or floor as heat!

Basically what I'm trying to say is 600 watts is ALWAYS 600 watts of heat period! Another way to look at it is like this;

600 Watt hps at 38% efficient.......372 pure heat watts straight off the bat just to work and 228 light watts that eventually turn into heat whatever is not used by the plants. Result 600W of heat.

600W Cree CXB 3590 array running at 60% efficient.......240 pure heat watts straight off the bat just to work and 360 light watts that will eventually turn into heat as well!...Result= 600W of heat!!!


This is the reason I ALWAYS PREACH EFFICIENCY!!!!
So how can we deal with a ton less heat thaen the 600W hps and get a better yield and lower heat you ask......Simple, our LED with 1 chip per square foot allows better canopy coverage, better penetration, and we can use 15-25% less wattage and still out perform the hps easy! How??? Because we turn more power to light by a big margin depending on how efficient you make your array.

So now we see this
600 Watt hps =38% efficient
372 pure heat watts
228 light watts that eventually turn into heat

vs

600W LED 60% efficient
240 pure heat watts
360 light watts that will eventually turn into heat


IT'S THE SAME HEAT EITHER WAY!

So in this rough example you can see the key is efficiency here. So how do we make our LED outperform the hps and create less heat???? The answer is right there. Let's see how far we can turn our 60% efficient 600W LED to still create as many "light watts" as the 600Whps.

600W 60% efficient LED array dimmed to 400 watts in this example would provide 160 pure heat watts and 240 light watts!!!! BINGO, YAHTZEE!!! 240 light watts is more light watts than the 600 watt hps makes at 600w!!! But to sweeten the deal the LED array still has way better, more even canopy coverage too!

So this example would tell us that we could yield more with our array dimmed to 400w and have 200 less heat watts to deal with!

This is exactly why regardless of what you read LUMENS PER WATT IS HUGE HUGE HUGE in building an efficient array.
The whole key is we can use less total power that will all eventually turn into heat and still create more light with less total wattage.

Yes, par is for plants and lumens are for people no doubt guys but lumens are IN THE PAR SPECTRUM! This means lumens that a cob chip produces are somewhere in the PAR spectrum and can be used by our plants. The more lumens you can create per every watt of power used means you are making your light more efficient plain and simple.


Now, we can also relocate our drivers outside of the grow area and let that heat go where we don't care about and keep the grow areas even cooler at high wattage too.


I hope this helps a few of you.
Build them efficient boys......Only a few cobs ran at really high power drives the chips at a much less efficient level. The softer you can run them the more efficient they get. That's why 1 cob per square foot is the killer of ANY light out there. You can run soft, efficient, less total power and still create more light and less heat.
 
Just tested 5 vero29 's on a 240h c1400b driver. Fires right up, according to spec I should have been a little short voltage. At 1400ma the veros use less than 37v, less than spec sheets. I was afraid I couldn't get 25 chips on 5 drivers. I wanted to max out driver and be able to dim each row individual. I'm using 15 35k, and 10 4k vero29 d series

Sent from my SM-G900V using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
Just tested 5 vero29 's on a 240h c1400b driver. Fires right up, according to spec I should have been a little short voltage. At 1400ma the veros use less than 37v, less than spec sheets. I was afraid I couldn't get 25 chips on 5 drivers. I wanted to max out driver and be able to dim each row individual. I'm using 15 35k, and 10 4k vero29 d series

Sent from my SM-G900V using 420 Magazine Mobile App
Cool man...Pics please

Sent from my VS980 4G using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
The Vero 29 D series at 1400mA is my biggest seller. It uses 170w and puts out 37000 lumens. Less than half the consumption of a HPS and 7000 lumens brighter. A great system for a small tent.

37000 Lumens at 170w is 217 Lumens per watt.

The figures dont seem to add up when I check the Official Vero Datasheets.

Vero 29 D - 40Tc @ 1400mA 36v(50W) gives 160 Lumens per watt.

Driving the mA any higher results in less than 160 Lumens per watt, So how have you managed to get 217 L/pw?

Even with the Vero 29 D 40Tc @ 500mA (17W) gives 174 Lumens Per watt, Running one of these at 17W is highly cost inefficient...


Also the 29 D is not the most Efficient L/pw, its the 29 C...
 
Fanleaf's Huge 42 Cree CXB3590 COB Array Build Plus Other Builds

Ya I got that wrong. 35,924 lumens at 200w. My meter is showing 179. New meter from china. Not sure if it's accurate.

Just checked the meter again. Now it's reading 167 w.
Pretty sure this meter is crap.


Edit. Just tested it a 3rd time. We were both right. I was getting 35,924 lumens at 165 w.
Problem is...I was plugging it into the meter, reading the result and writing it down.
I didn't let the system heat up.
Watched it rise from 165 to 175 in 10 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
So after your 3rd test you are getting 35924 @ 165W? Thats still too high, at 218 L/pw.

Vero's 29 most efficient C would struggle to get that in unrealistic scenarios (ie 25tc, <16w), so I think your meter is off by quite a alot.

I would be surprised if you are getting above 170 L/pw(highest end) for the Vero 29 D, which at 200w = 34000 Lumens.

A realistic high efficiency setup from a 29 C would be

Vero 29 C - 40Tc @ 760mA 65V(49w) = 192L/pw

Whereas the 29 D at the same 40Tc 49w (1400mA 36v) outputs 160L/pw.

Not trying to be a pain here, just want to get to the actual L/PW, as I myself am interested in efficient builds.
 
So after your 3rd test you are getting 35924 @ 165W? Thats still too high, at 218 L/pw.

Vero's 29 most efficient C would struggle to get that in unrealistic scenarios (ie 25tc, <16w), so I think your meter is off by quite a alot.

I would be surprised if you are getting above 170 L/pw(highest end) for the Vero 29 D, which at 200w = 34000 Lumens.

A realistic high efficiency setup from a 29 C would be

Vero 29 C - 40Tc @ 760mA65V(49w) = 192L/pw

Whereas the 29 D at the same 40Tc 49w (1400mA 36v) outputs 160L/pw.

Not trying to be a pain here, just want to get to the actual L/PW, as I myself am interested in efficient builds.

420-magazine-mobile1889409199.jpg

177 Lm/w on paper.
If you go with the the C series it will cost you twice as much in Drivers.



Sent from my iPhone using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
The problem with that pdf is the results are at unrealistic 25tc.
Once the COB temp goes above 25tc the L/pw drops.(most passive cooling = above 35tc minimum)

Do you have the tool bridgelux provides in the .zip file? It allows you to set the TC to whatever you want.
 
Fanleaf's Huge 42 Cree CXB3590 COB Array Build Plus Other Builds

And I look at it this way. If I'm off by even 10 lumens per watt (which is a lot) I'm still 300% more accurate than Mars Hydro's results with their 1000w panel that only draws 620w. (Speculative/exaggerated numbers....please don't jump down my throat for not "crunching the numbers to the 3rd decimal place")
This is lighting. If the temperature changes so do the Lm/w. If this light was outside in the -10c cold I would get a different result. I'm not about to attach graphs and asterisks to all my work. I understand you want accurate results but those results will change the longer you run the light. My customers are happy with their their lights and no one would put up a fuss over using "optimum results" posted by the company. Look at every other lighting company on the market. They intentionally mislead their customers by HUGE numbers. Like huuuuuuuugggggeeeeee!


Sent from my iPhone using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
Hey fanleaf, got a Q for you

In a youtube video comment you said

"According to Citizens "LED Selection Tool" which is the new one with the 6th gens added the best 1212 @150mA runs at 31.3 volts and at a 55 degree TC runs at 195lm/w. That's 4.7 watts and 915lm!"

Can you tell me where you got the Citizen 6th Gen selection tool?

Because to my knowledge they only offer the 5th Gen tool...

COB Series Version5-Lighting LED | CITIZEN ELECTRONICS CO.,LTD.
 
Did you test your 100k ohm pot? I have 60% of them come in at 85k ohms. I have to test them and use the ones that are at least 97k.
Also. Disconect 1 of the wires from the 100k pot then turn the array on and read your max wattage. With 1 wire disconected from the pot it will tell the driver to go 100%. If you do that and see now you have higher wattage you know your 100k ohm pot is junk.

Sent from my VS980 4G using 420 Magazine Mobile App

I did not think of testing my pot. So you are saying that the best pot out there will never give me 100% of my output and that I should expect at best 232W instead of the full 240W?
 
I did not think of testing my pot. So you are saying that the best pot out there will never give me 100% of my output and that I should expect at best 232W instead of the full 240W?

If you get a good pot it should be much more accurate. I'm not sure if it will be 100%. I take my meter to the electronics store and test the pots before I buy them. The best I've found in the 17mm format are the TT electronics part # P160KNP-0EC15B100K
It's a 100k linear electro-conductive plastic for about $1.50. They make a Carbon one but it's $10.00.
Before I started buying these about 1 out of every 3 pots I purchased was off by as much as 30k. Cheap pots will just give you long term headaches.


Sent from my iPhone using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
I did not think of testing my pot. So you are saying that the best pot out there will never give me 100% of my output and that I should expect at best 232W instead of the full 240W?
I ordered 5 100k linear pots, only 2 tested high enough to use. I had 2 that tested 97, the rest were in the 85 to 92 range. I guess if you order, just get a bunch because half or more will be bad for this application

Sent from my SM-G900V using 420 Magazine Mobile App
 
Back
Top Bottom