Creating a better environement - LED for 3x5 Tent

[ToughCall]

Ayeo!

I was listening to a podcast featuring Joel from Remo Nutrients, a guest on the DGC podcast today. He made an interesting statement - supplements are secondary to your environment and lighting was more important as its the plant's energy source.
He stressed reducing the amount of nutrients used - don't do the 10% to 15% runoff. It's bad for the environment & wastes money throwing nutes down the drain. He also added measuring soil PPM was not advisable, as runoff catches all the salt medium from the sides of the pot (especially fabric pots). So unless you suspect a lockout issue, where your showing 3000 PPM from your runoff, don't bother...

The take away was - Feed Quantity, Feed Strength & Feed Frequency
Feed quantity = use 1/5th of the grow size medium. If your growing in a 5 gallon pot, use 1 gallon of water with nutrients. And remember "if its dry then apply, if its wet, let it set". And runoff essentially can stress your plant!
Also, if your using bottled nutes, only use basic soil as your using the bottled nutrients to create the soil environment. Buying and combining amended soil and using bottled nutes is an necessary cost, and the initial risk of overfeeding is higher.

Anyway, he didn't elaborate on the lighting more than the initial statement. But that was honestly enough for me, as I've been thinking about a new LED for my 3x5. I had purchased a SF2000 for my 3x5 initially, and planned to purchase a 2nd of the same, so the two combined could cover the 3x5. But two SF2000 only provide 400W combined. My research on LED's presented me a formula for grow space that I found interesting = LxWx50 = watts. So 3x5 = 15 x 50 = 750W. I'm not going to toss my SF2000 based on the equation, I'll add it to my 4x4 which has an SF4000 and produces 400W, adding the SF2000 brings it to 600W, which will be better, even though it's still under powered based of this formula.

Real life example - My first and only grow was in my 4x4 with the SF4000, I had reduced my plant count from 5, down to 3 because I noticed as the plants stretched during flower, more side branches were shaded and the penetration through the canopy could have been better. How much by? Not certain, but I could tell there was a lot of shade on the sides and below the initial canopy. Is this a good example without a PAR meter? For me, I think so as more watts would expand the lighting coverage and penetration.

The first image is 3 year ROI value use costs, the second image is PAR Output per $. Not all these vendors are sold in the US, or if they ship to US, I'm a bit weary regarding service and support. Would appreciate your thoughts on getting the right set up for a 3x5 that provides the deep penetration and coverage. IR is important, UV is not as, since I've purchased 4ft T5 UV lights.
, ,

Thanks,

[ToughCall]

Ugh, the images are screenshots and are hardly readable....

[GEORGE]

Check with our sponsor, just about the only place you will get A decent Warrenty, and lights JMO

[vividled]

Which one buddy?

[GEORGE]

His chorse I guess

[ToughCall]

I had a chat with BUDGET LED, they recommended their series 3+ for my 3'x5' tent, which is the Infinity LED Board switchable spectrum technology - (Veg or Flower - UVA on/off) (330W @$480), or a 250W version of the same board, but qty 2 for a total of 500W @ $720 US.
Their calculation was LxWx30 for home users, and stated my calculation of LxWx50 was for commercial growers.
$1,030 for 660W or $720 for 500W. Separately, Mars Hydro offers the SP6500, a 650W bar style led with equally impressive HW (Samsung & Osram) with a 3yr warranty for $814. The question now, do two 250W boards provide better coverage vs. a single bar led with 150W more.
I'll leave off the energy savings, because that's subjective. Impact costs and ongoing maintenance are unfair measures. This is a lifestyle hobby, and scrutiny of costs spoil the passion.

So two bars @500W or one @650W? That is the question.

Thanks!

[ToughCall]

So two bars @500W or one @650W?

Which would produce more yield from an environment perspective. Both offer same UV - Budget led is switchable for Veg & flower, 150W less, and $96 less. Or am I chasing watts?

[GEORGE]

Which would produce more yield from an environment perspective. Both offer same UV - Budget led is switchable for Veg & flower, 150W less, and $96 less. Or am I chasing watts?

I think you might be chasing watts, in today's lights, we are measuring in Uolems/ PAR. I learn something yesterday that I had always been told was wrong. There is A video on here some where that explains light and Uolems/PAR, in a way that was always said to be wrong. This dude is A professor at Uthaul and has been studing Hemp for over 30 Years. I'll see if I can find it for you and post it over here.

I found it, this is well worth Watching. Especially for yall Coco growers.

https://redirect.viglink.com/?format...s_verified%3D1

[ToughCall]

BRUCE BUGBEE!!!!!!!

I always get that video recomended to me in Youtube from my serch history and I've blown it off. I guess I need to watch it. Thanks!

[LEDTonic - Daniel]

Hey!

I'm not going to comment on the nutrient situation as there are plenty of people out there who know more about that than I do. I do, however, know a fair bit about light.
We at LEDTonic sell grow lights ourselves so we're obviously a bit biased but I'll give you my 2 cents then you can decide for yourself if it's applicable or useful to your situation.

I'd first like to address the IR/UV statement. IR is primarily used as a "sun down" effect. It's meant to replicate the path of natural sunlight as the sun sets. In other words, IR should not be on all the time from seed to harvest. It's uncommon that people bother with IR but those who do usually use it during the last 30-60 minutes before the lights switch off for the night.

UV is even more tedious. UV diodes have much lower longevity than white diodes. Growers who want to incorporate UV in their light setup usually buy separate UV bulbs that they connect to a separate timer. Your T5 UV lights are spot on.

While I generally like Migro, he has mixed up the term PAR with PPFD. PAR is a spectrum range within the light spectrum that drives photosynthesis, i.e. 400-700 nm light.
PPFD on the other hand is a term for light intensity, or rather photon density. When Migro says PAR he actually means PPFD, which leads me to my main point.

How light is distributed is a much more important factor than how many watts a lamp pulls. Using the classic watt per square feet rule of thumb is a simple way of comparing lamps, but it's not entirely accurate. When using this principle, the generally accepted value is 30-40 watts/sq ft.
There are plenty of lamps out there that have a very, very strong hot spot (high PPFD) underneath the lamp but the light intensity quickly diminishes away from the center.
A PPFD map (or light footprint map) will instead show you spot measurements of light intensity (PPFD/PAR) over a certain area.
We know that mature cannabis plants do well when subjected to PPFD levels of 600 to 900. So what you should be looking for are lamps that deliver this over the area you intend to grow on.

Below are the official PPFD maps for the SF2000 and SF4000, compare them to our Q7 lamp which are attached underneath. Then decide which lamp gives the best possible coverage and bang for your buck for your space.




LEDTonic Q7



With the Q7 you also get the flexibility of adjusting each of the two panels independently to the other. Raise and lower them as needed according to your plant's growth.

Also, if you want a cheap and somewhat easy way of checking how much light reaches certain spots on your plants then a lux meter is a decent option. You can then transform the lux value to PPFD. Search for "lux to ppfd" on Google.


Good luck!