126W Penetrator LED Full Bloom

[HydroGrowLED]

Any idea what you would expect to yield with 4 plants under one LED?

About a half pound, maybe a little more. It really depends on strain though. I'm not currently growing my highest yielding strains for this test. Ice (2 in this grow) is one of my lowest yielding plants, and ABC is decent. I've never grown Purple Ice before, so we'll see on that one... Also, these plants have now undergone about 2 weeks of stress, so I'm guessing it will affect the yield a bit. Oh well, there's always time for more tests.

 

[HydroGrowLED]

I have two questions for you:

Is your current setup using the spray mist (areoponic) or the water is a flow like most of the ebb/flow?
How would you compare a single 126W unit of yours, to a 2x 90W quad band UFO in such a small space?

Thanks in advance for looking into my questions.

DOXA

I ordered my systems from Botanicare as bare-bone units (plastic only). I put in my own pump, sprinkler assembly, and 360 degree sprinklers, making it an aero unit.

Honestly, I think the 126W will outperform 2, 90W Quad-bands even within that small area. Almost all UFO's use 120 degree LED's, which lack penetrative power. A lot of weight can be made by flowering out the entire plant, but their design isn't efficient at doing so. I also don't know what the exact spectral output is in nm, but it's likely off on several of the points from the peaks on our plants. I've seen a lot of UFO grows posted online, but none that have produced anything like what the 126W has done. We'll be finding out soon how our 126W compares to the 180W Jumbo UFO from ProSource Worldwide, and against the 186W Haight PPF-800.

 

[MeanBean]

Is there a reason for that other then protection and wouldn't they work better without the plexy...I'm no scientist but doesn't the light lose something having to go through the plexi...what grows better something outside or behind a window?

I'd like to hear the answer to this as well. I mean the LED's are covered by there own lens. Did you ever consider how much that piece of plexi glass effects the light beam?

 

[HydroGrowLED]

I'd like to hear the answer to this as well. I mean the LED's are covered by there own lens. Did you ever consider how much that piece of plexi glass effects the light beam?

Are you implying that the plexi-glass on my units has a large effect on light transfer? It doesn't. It's a super-thin layer of ultra-clear plexi-glass that's literally right on top of the LED's. Light passes through it like it wasn't even there. Without it, you'd have moisture making contact with the LED circuit board, resulting in possible rust and failure. If you want a unit without plexi though, just say the word and I'll get you one (minus the 3 year warranty of course).

 

[MeanBean]

I knew there was a reason!

 

[Flurple]

what exactly was the problem with the nutrients? i cant tell from the photo. were the leafs effected or just the roots?

 

[blasterman]

Can I honestly ask why most of you just don't build your own LED fixtures and save a lot of money? Seriously, I've been doing this myself for about a year now, and can hit that same PAR (photosynthetic active radiation) values as the HydroGrow for about 1/4 the price using Crees and knockoff 3-watt emitters. It's absurdly easy to do and requires just basic electronic knowledge. While I understand that you have to make a profit, these type of units are becoming all to common in chinese manufacturing. Frankly I wouldn't touch a unit with 1watt emitters because they are increasingly a dime a dozen, but to each their own. You don't need dimmers on grow lights or color controllers either.

The Japanese are already using red dominate LED fixtures for promoting flower and bud growth in commercial agriculture, and NASA is using them for spaceflight. The technology is proven, and offers a substantial power improvement over HID and fluorescent.

The comparison shots on the HydroGrow site show LED fixtures typically 1/2 to 1/3 the distance to the plants as the HID and HPS. Law of squares dictates that for each doubling of distance you have a four fold change of intensity value, which means the LED fixtures are getting a 4x advantage for no reason. Please turn off 3 out of four LEDs to make it a valid comparison.

If I put HID as close to the plants as the HydroGrow LEDs I'd likely start a fire. While this may seem like an advantage for the LED units, the problem is theres a big deviation in light hitting the top vs middle of the plant. The further away the light from the plant is the more even the lighting density is, and this DOES matter. This is why HID can do some things LED can't.

Also, given the typical surface area most of us are growing plants a 150-175watt HID or 4x-6x T5 is more than sufficient. Hell 4x T8's work just fine if oyu use warm phosphor lights. However, you have to be smart with reflector placement, and use colored reflectors. Yes, it's easier and more power efficient to do this with the same PAR value with LEDs but not at the price I'm seeing here for an array of 1watt LEDs.

A 1000watt HID should be able to illuminate a 100sq foot area for growing purposes with augmenting red reflectors. How many HydroGrow systems would it require to hit the same PAR for 100sq feet?

There are only two colors really required for crop growth, and they are deep blue and far red - both colors are efficiently handled by cheap LEDs. Green, yellow and UV wavelengths are wasted, so there's no need for white light of any type. This is what makes LEDs so darn good for this practice because you can choose the ones that only emit in photosynthetic active regions while even the best HID wastes energy emitting light in spectral regions plants don't want.

Again, nothing against the HydroGrow. A tightly packed array of 1watt emitters is just not the most efficient way to do this and is starting to become rather cliche'.

Peace -

 

[Flurple]

id say blaster has some valid arguments. for a company to make a profit they need sell products at double or tripple the value. then again im sure lots of people can afford one of these and many more who dont want the hassle of building one. unless you have a soldering gun and a voltimeter you will need to buy them. and you cant make one without knowledge of watts volts etc.

as for the grow test, in the past i have seen a lack of wavelengths reducing yield so i dont care too much about how many panels are on the plants but i certainly wouldnt consider comparing the lights unless wattage is the same or PAR is equal at the same distance.

 

[Bolivar]

id say blaster has some valid arguments. for a company to make a profit they need sell products at double or tripple the value. then again im sure lots of people can afford one of these and many more who dont want the hassle of building one. unless you have a soldering gun and a voltimeter you will need to buy them. and you cant make one without knowledge of watts volts etc.

as for the grow test, in the past i have seen a lack of wavelengths reducing yield so i dont care too much about how many panels are on the plants but i certainly wouldnt consider comparing the lights unless wattage is the same or PAR is equal at the same distance.

Yeah, and I'm here to learn what I can.

There's only one person in this thread so far who's actually putting his creation up for scrutiny, and that's the lady from HydroGrow...

 

[HydroGrowLED]

Can I honestly ask why most of you just don't build your own LED fixtures and save a lot of money? Seriously, I've been doing this myself for about a year now, and can hit that same PAR (photosynthetic active radiation) values as the HydroGrow for about 1/4 the price using Crees and knockoff 3-watt emitters. It's absurdly easy to do and requires just basic electronic knowledge. While I understand that you have to make a profit, these type of units are becoming all to common in chinese manufacturing. Frankly I wouldn't touch a unit with 1watt emitters because they are increasingly a dime a dozen, but to each their own. You don't need dimmers on grow lights or color controllers either.

Interesting how you say you can hit the same PAR values as my light, when that information is not publicly available. What's funny to me is that you talk about 3W LED's, when they have nowhere near the luminous efficacy of 3, 1W LED's, so your assumption is false.

If it were absurdly easy to make LED panels, everyone and their grandma would have their solder guns out, and their electrical boards making these things. They'd have the correct nm's, divided up into the correct ratios, on panels that give generous watt per square foot values with high intensity, 60 degree beams, but not even 90% of the companies selling LED's are anywhere close to figuring all that stuff out (even though the research is posted on my website). "Do-it-yourselfer's" making their own panels, have limited spectral output, and poor design configurations. Leave it to the plant scientists who have already done the math...

The Japanese are already using red dominate LED fixtures for promoting flower and bud growth in commercial agriculture, and NASA is using them for spaceflight. The technology is proven, and offers a substantial power improvement over HID and fluorescent, but some facts here have been scewed a bit for the sake of marketing.

Sorry, but no. The Japanese recently began testing Showa Denko's red 660nm LED's at their METI research center, along side CFL's, to see how they affect growth/flowering rate. Nasa was using panels built by SolarOasis that have nowhere near the power or spectral output to support growth comparable to HID. The technology has not been proven by either of these research companies, or it would be widely used, instead of tested. They are using nowhere near the level of LED technology that is incorporated within my lights, to grow plants.

If I put HID as close to the plants as the HydroGrow LEDs I'd likely start a fire. While this may seem like an advantage for the LED units, the problem is theres a big deviation in light hitting the top vs middle of the plant. The further away the light from the plant is the more even the lighting density is, and this DOES matter. This is why HID can do some things LED can't.

I ran 3, 1000W HID's at that height, with air-cooled hoods and a nicely ventilated room, with no problems, and no fire. As long as you use our panels as directed (60 degree for plants up to 3' tall, 30 degree for plants over 4' tall), you will have better results vs HID at budding out the lower and middle branches of your plants. This has been proven now by two of our customers, one of which has a testimonial on our website. HID can certainly cover a lot more area than LED with a single bulb, but we aren't using multiple 1000W LED's here either...

A 1000watt HID should be able to illuminate a 100sq foot area for growing purposes with augmenting red reflectors. How many HydroGrow systems would it require to hit the same PAR for 100sq feet?

Let's take it from an expert: Ed Rosenthal, who is currently using our LED's in a test. He is using a 1000W HPS in a 4' x 4' area. If you try and spread it out over 100 square feet (10' x 10'), you'll barely yield anything, except what's right under the light. Real growers know that in order to achieve maximum yield with HID, you need at least 50W per square foot.

There are only two colors really required for crop growth, and they are deep blue and far red - both colors are efficiently handled by cheap LEDs. Green, yellow and UV wavelengths are wasted, so there's no need for white light of any type. This is what makes LEDs so darn good for this practice because you can choose the ones that only emit in photosynthetic active regions while even the best HID wastes energy emitting light in spectral regions plants don't want.

Marijuana requires 439nm, 469nm, 642nm, and 667nm for photosynthesis (439nm, and 483nm for Carotenoids). Plants absorb different colors at different efficiency rates. Chlorophyll A absorbs 439nm at 63% efficiency, while it absorbs 667nm at 43% efficiency. Chlorophyll B absorbs 469nm at 80% efficiency, and 642nm at 20% efficiency. This shows that Plants absorb lighter blue, and deep red for growth. Far red refers to infra-red, so again, you are mistaken. As far as your assumption that white has no value with plants, here's some research from a biotech firm indicating the contrary: https://envsupport.licor.com/docs/AppNote5.pdf It also shows that plants do absorb green light, even though we don't use green LED's in our units.

Again, nothing against the HydroGrow. A tightly packed array of 1watt emitters is just not the most efficient way to do this and is starting to become rather cliche'.

Peace -

We don't have a tightly packed array of 1 watt emitters. We use 126W on a board that our competitors pack 288W onto. We use 63W on a board that our competitors pack 112 to 119W on.

 

[MeanBean]

I just bought a LED panel for 450.00, I'm happy to pay it too! 99% of the things we buy, are priced for purchasing the tech behind the product, not so much the raw material.

A micro chip is made of sand, should i go dig some from the backyard and make my own motherboard???

whats the markup on the tech there?

 

[HydroGrowLED]

I just bought a LED panel for 450.00, I'm happy to pay it too! 99% of the things we buy, are priced for purchasing the tech behind the product, not so much the raw material.

A micro chip is made of sand, should i go dig some from the backyard and make my own motherboard???

whats the markup on the tech there?

Actually, if you go around asking for quotes from Companies in China for their standard 120W unit (available in red/blue/white or orange for no additional cost) and then ask them for a unit built to my specs, you'll realize right away that the quotes you receive back are nearly double.

When you buy from a retailer you get a warranty. If you make it yourself, good luck. And like you said, you're also paying for the knowledge that went into the lights, the time it takes to run the business, the website, advertising, shipping, merchant fees, etc... which all have extra costs in the background. I tried to price my units modestly in my opinion, and when I look at a lot of my competitor's, I feel that I have considering mine cost a lot more to produce. I wish I made the money half of these other companies are getting with their LED's, but if I did, most people wouldn't be able to afford them... Price is what has kept a lot of people away from LED, that and the fact that so many companies have posted claims, but nothing to back them up...

 

[groover]

Keep up the good work Cammie.

 

[DroJo]

Update? Pics?

 

[Flurple]

hey cammie im still hangin on to the grow and your outcome, i love the LED info and research despite the negative feedback from a few... hoping for the best but can you provide more absolute info?

about the nutes and the issue with delayed flowerering, they skew your journal... what happened??? from what i see i cant tell if its the light or the nutes that slowed the budding... more info will help me determine if it was nutrients or the LED panels.

 

[HydroGrowLED]

what exactly was the problem with the nutrients? i cant tell from the photo. were the leafs effected or just the roots?

Sorry, didn't see this question earlier. The nutrients clogged up the roots, causing them to fill with the dark nutrient matter like a sponge. It in turn damaged the roots, causing the plants to have to grow out a completely new set of them. On one plant there was a lot of leaf burn, but I took them out one by one, so you don't really see it much in the photos. Of the other plants, only a few leaves got burned, so they didn't get hurt too bad, they were all just stunted. So the plants have now begun vertical growth, after about 2 weeks in bloom, and the Iguana Juice is bringing em back to life.

 

[HydroGrowLED]

about the nutes and the issue with delayed flowerering, they skew your journal... what happened??? from what i see i cant tell if its the light or the nutes that slowed the budding... more info will help me determine if it was nutrients or the LED panels.

from what i have heard i am skeptic so i need some convincing...my goal is to see yields comparable to the quality and quantity of light provided by anything else, but ive become confused with the last few posts...

i can be quite anal but now the empirical evidence is confusing me... and i have yet to see a benefit from the LED's on a large enough grow to validate the results for the cost

Yes, the nutrients will unfortunately skew the results, which was why I had contemplated starting the test over. I shouldn't have started a test, using a full line of nutrients that I'd never tested before, but oh well, mistakes get made lol. The nutes were 100% what caused the stunting, not the light. If it were the light, all of my other plants in various rooms would have been affected the same. The plants are starting to grow quite well now though, seeming to pick up where they should have been right after week 1. I still believe they'll yield close to a half pound though, once dried, but we'll see. As far as the bud quality, it's top notch, although I haven't shown any close-up pictures yet of the buds from my other plants (maybe later tonight). So I'm not really sure what you're confused on, but hopefully if you voice it a little better in your next response, I'll be able to answer better.

As far as other grow journals with my lights, there was a SC plant that yielded just over a pound under 2, 126W lights. That's a lot more yield than you'd get from 250W of HPS, so I'd say the lights are more than comparable.

As far as the "large enough grow" comment, I have a garden that has not been posted yet, with 2, 2' x 4' trays holding 8 plants each, under 1512W of LED (12 x 126W units). I save $160 a month in electric compared to my HID setup, and another $600+ per year on bulbs, meaning that I save over $2,000 yearly because of my switch to LED. My bud quality is better, and my yield is more consistent.

 

[Flurple]

thanks for the quick reply, it sure sounds like you're not pushing your product and i admire that... im glad you aknowledge the issues i mentioned and im sure in your next test you will try to avoid the issues.

in no way am i claiming your test a failure or invalid, as long as you get a good yield i cant argue against LEDs or your product. i just want to see a comparisson without any biass.

IMO, if LEDs can do what other grow lights can, its worth it in the long run just saving on electricity. i cant wait til harvest to get a yeild and smoke report.

keep the info comin Cammie

 

[MeanBean]

wow, I think your paypal account is gonna be blowing up soon!! the proof of your LED unit is stacking up and let me tell you we needed it here on this forum.

From all I've read youve nailed the current technology of led with a cost effective and productive LED unit. I can't wait to get mine. this is bigtires haha, don't ask...

Now I sure have thought alot about LED's this week.

You mention your units cost double to have made to you spectrum, I wouldent doubt thaty 1 bit. Also you got the 60 degree lens deal, thats clever as well. Also the larger coverage setup, that really helps getting bang for your buck per LED unit.

So yea I'm impressed!, but is this the end of the line? Is there more beta units in testing or do you think LED prices need to drop to make the next move?

Just asking cause with all the stats on the line other lurking companies could catch on! You have to keep beeting them to stay on top!

 

[PitViper]

How bout this. supply me with enuf LED's for my current area...9x8 and 2k of hps and Ill be happy to test them out for you and no Im not joking.