SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
what is the typical life of the best sodium, halide, gas bulb? what is the life of the associated ballast?
Anyone know about these new LED lights
- Thread starter moemoe420
- Start date
SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
re the bulbs: im guessing a typical grow is 2 months, so 30 days for 18 hrs per day + 30 days for 12 hrs per day = 900 hrs for 1 grow... so 1800 hrs for 2 grows... to be liberal, you expect about 2000 hours out of a gas bulb? is that correct?
A typical grow is closer to 3 months. Most veg for about a month with part being 24 hrs then an 18/6 week or 2, followed by 8 to 15 weeks of flower on 12/12. The bulbs will last longer but the output starts to degrade the second it's turned on. The quality of the bulb plays a large part as well.
SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
just trying to get an idea of abt how long a decent bulb lasts:
so about 2 weeks 24 hours p/d + 2 weeks 18 hours p/d + 8 weeks 12 hours p/d = 1260 hours per grow = 2520 hours for 2 grows = so bulb life expectancy of about 3000 hours? is that about right?
so about 2 weeks 24 hours p/d + 2 weeks 18 hours p/d + 8 weeks 12 hours p/d = 1260 hours per grow = 2520 hours for 2 grows = so bulb life expectancy of about 3000 hours? is that about right?
I've had one ballast for close to 20 years, works just fine and still has the original bulb. I have another 1000 switchable ballast, 8 years going strong both bulbs still going strong. It sounds to me like yall are trying to scare people away from there best lighting option. With would u replace a ballast every 2 years? Every retail store and there parking lots on the planet just about use the same lighting. I don't see ikia or walmart replacing there lighting ever 2 years. My grow room is NOT climate controlled. It's 78 degrees with only a box fan exhausting out the window. Oustide its close to 90 degrees where i grow. Do they make heat, yes? Is it going to double your power bill, not a chance. Sounds like a bunch of led manufacturer propaganda to me.
Hosebomber
New Member
Gelite, this is the last post I am going to address you in. Yes bulbs and ballast may last for well over their rated time. However, the efficiency of the bulb drops by 30% after the first 10,000 hours and below 70% after 50,000 hours. That information is provided by the manufactures of the product. This means that IF you use the bulb longer than that it is producing less light and less light the longer that you use it. The main reason this happens is from the burning of the gases in the bulb that cause it go give off it's spectra of light. Likewise, the efficiency of the internal components of the ballast breakdown over time as well. They lose efficiency, and the overall lose of photon output is greater than the total output. Ikia and Wal-mart are not attempting to grow plants in their parking lot using HID lighting. They are illuminating an area. There is a major difference. Your self noted $120 setup (which again is above your quoted $100 price) still does not have a reflector/hood. You do not HAVE to use a hood... you are just wasting over half of the output of the light. As for telling you that you didn't get you light for that price... well you are the one that stated you have had your light for 20 year... ebay wasn't around 20 years ago and those low international rates where not available... you bought what the local store had available.
In each of your now 21 post you have made an absurd claim. When hard facts are given to prove you wrong you resort to name calling. The fact is that: In no place in the developed world can you be on the power grid and run two 1000 watt HID light systems for 12 hours per day and only pay $20 per month for it. You cannot get a full 1000 watt HID system for under $100 on a steady consistent basis (you may find a great deal on craigslist or ebay from time to time, but that is not the normal buying conditions).
Superfunker, The average bulb will give a 10% reduction in output at around 5000 hours of burn time. Some people change their bulb every grow, some do it every 6 months, and some only when they burn out. I personally do it every third grow/test. That is when I can see a significant drop in the lux with the cheap meter that I have. When I had access to much better equipment, they would change the bulb ever experiment because the numbers we where working with were much closer.
My last comment will be a general one. This is a laid back community that is here to help others and learn more about growing our beloved plant. There is a wealth of information and knowledgeable people around these forums. No one here is the end all be all on information but there are quite a few that have years if not decades in advanced research and studies. Please take the time to state you questions clearly and make educated responces. Giving false information, or making comments that you know to be half truths or misleading is looked down on and may result in someone or multiple people bashing your ego. That is never my intent or goal. However, it is very hard to use tone or body language over the internet and our words my not always come out just right.
In each of your now 21 post you have made an absurd claim. When hard facts are given to prove you wrong you resort to name calling. The fact is that: In no place in the developed world can you be on the power grid and run two 1000 watt HID light systems for 12 hours per day and only pay $20 per month for it. You cannot get a full 1000 watt HID system for under $100 on a steady consistent basis (you may find a great deal on craigslist or ebay from time to time, but that is not the normal buying conditions).
Superfunker, The average bulb will give a 10% reduction in output at around 5000 hours of burn time. Some people change their bulb every grow, some do it every 6 months, and some only when they burn out. I personally do it every third grow/test. That is when I can see a significant drop in the lux with the cheap meter that I have. When I had access to much better equipment, they would change the bulb ever experiment because the numbers we where working with were much closer.
My last comment will be a general one. This is a laid back community that is here to help others and learn more about growing our beloved plant. There is a wealth of information and knowledgeable people around these forums. No one here is the end all be all on information but there are quite a few that have years if not decades in advanced research and studies. Please take the time to state you questions clearly and make educated responces. Giving false information, or making comments that you know to be half truths or misleading is looked down on and may result in someone or multiple people bashing your ego. That is never my intent or goal. However, it is very hard to use tone or body language over the internet and our words my not always come out just right.
SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
HB... i read that the emerson effect is not necessarily dependent on the number of far red lights; rather, it is dependent on the quality of the light... that is, it is critical to ensure exposure to the correct spectrums... for ex: exposure to 1 730nm LED in a full spectrum configuration is as effective as exposure to 10 730nm LED's... is this correct? if so, does the same hold true for the activation of accessory pigments at 520nm?
Hosebomber
New Member
Context means a lot in what you are referring to. Could you link the article you are referring to? Intensity and dispersion has a much larger overall effect than quantity. Likewise, from my research it is more about a ratio balance. In some of the prior links you should see a section (or 5) on PSI and PSII. That will go into very in depth discussion of how photo chromes transfer from Pr to Pfr and back. This is due to a direct ratio between red and far red.
As for the accessory pigments, very few of them are "turned on" they are always active. If they do not receive the photons required for them to complete their movement (be it chemical, electrical, or mechanical) it will simply stunt or deform the production from that process of the plant. This is the reason that very few strains performed under the first few generations of LED lighting (red and blue only panels)... IMHO that is.
As for the accessory pigments, very few of them are "turned on" they are always active. If they do not receive the photons required for them to complete their movement (be it chemical, electrical, or mechanical) it will simply stunt or deform the production from that process of the plant. This is the reason that very few strains performed under the first few generations of LED lighting (red and blue only panels)... IMHO that is.
SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
thanks HB, will locate the article and link it
SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
HB... having difficulty locating the aforementioned article; however, the following study maintains that although photon absorption is low at 750nm, PS2 electron transfer is still efficiently induced... your thoughts?
Defining the Far-Red Limit of Photosystem II in Spinach
Defining the Far-Red Limit of Photosystem II in Spinach
Hosebomber
New Member
That study confirms pretty much everything we know (or thought we knew) about how far red interacts in the PSII system. The flash methodology works for what they were trying to achieve, but is not something I would recommend for growth. One of the key factors of adding far red light to a panel is to keep the constant transfer of electrons from the PSI to the PSII system and back. There are reports of extended far red only illumination reducing the required dark photo period by as much as 4 hours. That however is a whole different discussion.
SuperFunker
Well-Known Member
thanks HB
thaAlchemist
New Member
i have used that particular brand as well as philips. i have found that those light do in fact promote excellent growth especially in lower branches. unfortunately, it seems no matter what the wattage (reported or true) the light must be kept at a minimal distance of 18-22" from the canopy. light burn is a serious issue with these lights. not good for a closet grow or anyone with a small space looking for lighting on the cheap. although these can be supplemental lighting although destructive interference can be an issue. (more on that latter). i will be using these light in conjunction with 4' T5 ho's. interesting note: not mentioned in any thread on any of the forums I've come across online, is the subject of destructive interference. as light waves travel and "crash" into other light waves from light fixtures they will cancel each other out. Evidence can be found in videos posted on youtube as dark bands cascading down in certain videos. unseen by human eyes it is witnessed by plants in the form of uneven/lack of growth in certain areas.(https://robynsrevison.weebly.com/uploads/2/6/1/0/26107053/1560643_orig.jpg.) something else to keep in mind is the inverse sq law. in summary: in my opinion those light can be used to cover areas not exposed to light but care must be taken not to cause any light burn. and yes although it is in the 5-5500k area which is not optimal but it should be enough to cover any smaller areas of growth.
