LED and COB Radiation Patterns: What You Need to Understand

The most important thing to understand is that LEDs and COBs are NOT point light sources. They do NOT radiate light equally in all directions in a spherical pattern. They put out a beam of light much like a directional radar antenna, or a vertical HID with a reflector. This beam is stronger in the center, and the power drops off as you rotate away from the center. This graph is published by a COB manufacturer for their radiation pattern. You should be able to find similar data from other manufacturers.
full
This graph shows the intensity of the LED or COB relative to the highest value at the center of the beam, as you rotate away from the center. It’s important to note that this is for devices without built-in lenses or reflectors. All further discussion is based on this chart. The best way for most people to visualize this is to reorganize the graph like this:
full
This shows the same data as we move around a semicircle centered on the emitter. It’s still not very useful to us as we need the data for where the light hits the flat plane of our ideal canopies. To do this we apply the inverse square law to the values from the graph above, and get the following:
full
This graph shows the relative power or intensity of the beam as it hits the canopy. The COB or LED is centered one unit above a canopy or plane four units in length. It doesn’t matter what the units are, inches, feet, meters, choose what’s most natural to you. I’ve done the calculations at half unit intervals along the canopy.

It's been several hours relearning material I haven't used for years, and running the calculations. It's important to remember these devices have no built-in lenses or reflectors to concentrate the light. As you can see from the last graph, you can choose light that varies greatly or wasting a lot of the light. The ways grow light manufacturers expand the usable area include lenses, reflectors, and using multiple emitters in larger fixtures. In addition, we as growers use tents or rooms with reflective surfaces to recover some or most of the light that doesn't directly hit the canopy. I'll look into these in another post, as I have the time.
 
Most fixtures use more than one COB or LED. We'll call them emitters from now on. It's worth taking a look to see what happens when more than one emitter is used.

full

full

full

These graphs show a few interesting things. The first that jumps out is that the maximum light under the fixture is more than than any one emitter. The second is that the usable area under the fixture has increased dramatically. The area between the first and last became flatter, as we added more emitters. A lot of light is still lost, but it is a much smaller percentage of the total produced by the fixture, than a single emitter loses.
 
Wow. Great information! Well done.

Thanks. I built my light using gut instinct. I'm now trying to figure out how best to use it, and whether or not to use the reflectors. The math is my substitute for Lux or Quantum sensors. When I can afford one, I'll get it and see how theory compares to practice.
 
think i understand all that! lol
which means its well presented and well explained, great for people like me with no real knowledge or understanding..
thanks old salt another great bit of info :)
 
Next let's examine how a reflector affects these results. I found the data for the reflectors I bought. I was surprised to learn that the same reflector can be used with many COBs, and performs differently with each. Here is the data:

full

Since the image was part of a PDF, I enlarged it, and copied it into Corel Draw. The image was slightly distorted, so that was corrected first. The angles in the diagram, now matched a line from Corel Draw as it was rotated through the image. Then came the task of getting the length of a line from the origin (0,0) of the diagram to the edge of the beam's envelope at three degree intervals. This data was normalized by dividing each value by the largest. The results were re-plotted. I also included the data for the COB itself so we can do a comparison.
full
As expected the reflector concentrated the beam. Note that the absolute intensity levels of the the COB and reflector, differ from the COB alone. This is not shown in the graph, as both data sets have been normalized. Most of the light between ±46° and ±90° has been reflected back to between ±45°. The next question to answer is "How does this affect the light at the canopy?" Stay tuned... I'm working on it.
 
:thanks:
lux divided by 65 Salt,

and awesome information bud,

I'm staying away from intensity values for now. The actual intensity can be varied, so I'm staying with levels that are relative to the maximum put out by the fixture. These should be valid at any intensity we can set the fixture at. This is worth testing with a meter at a later date.
 
:thanks:

I'm staying away from intensity values for now. The actual intensity can be varied, so I'm staying with levels that are relative to the maximum put out by the fixture. These should be valid at any intensity we can set the fixture at. This is worth testing with a meter at a later date.

hey man, do your thing.

im just sayin, i compared, and its good enough for my purposes, and for MY lights, it was dead on balls with a hydrofarm PAR meter.

I cant wait to see your findings for sure. Thanks for your work Salt, asset to many
 
Now let's look at how the light hits our canopy. I've included the graphs of the bare emitter data for comparison.

full


full


full


full


The results are a little surprising to me. Although the top of the multiple emitter graphs are flatter, and the drop of is noticeably steeper, I thought the difference would be more. It's time to go to my tent, and take a couple of readings with my light meter APP.

These are the readings I took:
Emitter 2 @ -0,5​
Center​
Emitter 3 @ 0.5​
Emitter Only
9385 Lux​
8940 Lux​
8340 Lux​
With Reflector
13820 Lux​
10715 Lux​
12675 Lux​
% Difference
47.26​
19.85​
51.98​

So yes, there is a marked difference between just an emitter, and the emitter with a reflector. The difference between the light directly under the two emitters can be explained as manufacturing variations.

These musings have dealt with the radiation patterns of an emitter, both with and without a reflector, and how they fall on a line directly under the emitters. It's interesting information, but doesn't show the coverage of the ideal plane for our canopies. That's next. It will be a lest two weeks, as I need to write a program for this. Each spot of interest will take over 40 computations, and there are 45 spots to perform them for. If I want to find the best height above the canopy for the fixture, it can take dozens of tries. Stay tuned, it will happen, just not in the next week or two.
 
This is the one that most fascinates me for it shows why I can see so much more lux at any single point on the table with all of the lights going vs just one light. The rise in lux is significant, and there seems to be much better overall coverage between lights, and I can see in my measurements that the other lights in the room are additive at any other point in the room. We know that what this chart shows had to be the answer to this and it is good to see it confirmed here. Very good job researching this out @Old Salt, it is much appreciated.
 
Back
Top Bottom