Lec 315 Questions

[oldjarhead100]

So growers House is having a black friday sale and the 315s are pretty cheap , Priziom Lighting have a 315 for $150 and a 600 for $249 .

That being said will a 600w Lec replace a 1000w hps and can you use mhde bulbs in bloom or is there a special bloom bulb ,

I have 6 300w leds in my Auto room would 2 315s replace them and uses about the same amount of Electric

The reason I want to change the hps out is my reflector is huge the big Cahunna and its right at the maximum weight for my light mover . plus its so expensive to run hps

In the Auto room The leds are 300w and they produce really hard small nugs and I hear so much about the 315s doing better with Autos than the leds so maybe the buds will be bigger

So could all the growers who have 315s would chime in and give me there opinion I would really appreciate it Thanks all

[DrPhoton]

I do not use or have CMH but they have had extensive radiometric testing that fully quantifies the efficacy of the technology. With this data i can tell you that the CMH you have mentioned, will not replace your 1000w with respect to total output capacity. But will be undeniably more efficient by about 15%. Equivalent but not better than the efficiency provided by a standard 600w sodium discharge.

One thing to keep in mind is that CMH is apart of the halide family and so degrades just as fast, requiring the same frequency of replacement. When using CMH with auto periods this will require a replacement of the bulbs about every 9 months.

[starramus]

I used this guide to purchase my 315. https://101growlights.com/ceramic-metal-halide-reviews/ Sometimes cheap is not the best choice. The bulbs like size do matter. The Philips lamp is rated the highest. As the guide will tell you not the best choice for flowering. I bought this highly recommended system. https://www.amazon.com/Grow-Co-Ceram...SIN=B06XJG73B3

[starramus]

For bloom you should stick with your HPS.

[D.A.A.S.69]

Morning Oldjarhead, I had trouble with those cheap ones ,getting to hot,
Check out the new EyeHortilux, 315, they are saying it does better than the SunSystems, idk, about that, though.
According to my lux meter, my lamps are still as strong as they were, when new, or real close, an that's been way over a year, since i bought mine.
Just watch out for those cheap ones,
HappyGrowing

[DrPhoton]

Yes it does appear that CMH have extended bulb life compared to regular MH technology. With reports of lifespan equivalent to sodium discharge. Thanks for your input

[oldjarhead100]

Thanks guys since I cant use it in the bloom room I think I may try one for the auto room or even 2 lol

[PRIMO]

Hey O.J.H I can't speak for anyone else. We all have our opinions. with that being said, I got my sun 315 LEC with a philips 3100 lamp a month shy of 3 years ago, and as far as I can tell still works as good as new. I've had great results with it both in veg and flower with no problems. It's in a 48x48x80 temps run low 70's with a 6" filter with cheapo duct fan. They are kinda pricey, but worth it in my mind. This pic is harvest with 14 months on the bulb.

[starramus]

The guide I cited above states: Long-Lasting

"Honestly Speaking, CHM light do last longer because ceramic arc tubes are very resistant and that’s why, they don’t breakdown easily. It can easily run up to 24,000 hours which is almost equal to 3 years. It also keeps their original strength (80%) up to 20,000 hours"

I cannot verify this as i have had mine only a few months.

[whitebeard]

I do not use or have CMH but they have had extensive radiometric testing that fully quantifies the efficacy of the technology. With this data i can tell you that the CMH you have mentioned, will not replace your 1000w with respect to total output capacity. But will be undeniably more efficient by about 15%. Equivalent but not better than the efficiency provided by a standard 600w sodium discharge.

One thing to keep in mind is that CMH is apart of the halide family and so degrades just as fast, requiring the same frequency of replacement. When using CMH with auto periods this will require a replacement of the bulbs about every 9 months.

I recently read a side-by-side grow on a pro growers’ board, one 630w CMH and one1000w hps, and the grower assessed the 630 as a functionally superior light.
he made specific reference to superior penetration and better, larger, as-dense buds, lower / more manageable heat, and significantly lower electric cost. Another advantage I’ve seen frequently and explicitly mentioned is the LONGER bulb life and the improved spectrum of the light. Said grower decided after this to replace all his 1000w HPS equipment with the double-bulb CMH 630s, so there may be deal out there if you know where to look (I don’t).

I’ve already decided on the CMH for my own use.

[DrPhoton]

The paper on "economic analysis of greenhouse lighting" provides enough data to show otherwise. This is not really a debate when you have research like this, as the measurement systems used, quantify the radiometric capabilities with accuracy above 95%.

[whitebeard]

I’ve no doubt there is opinion on the subject, I’ve read lots - I know from experience that a data-only approach becomes reality-blind before you know it. If *all* you look at is technical data then the story is told, as you say.

However, theory and practice are the same *only* in theory: in practice, they can be very different.
Practical results are what drive decision - if results *dont’* matter then it doesn’t matter what you do.

Don’t get me wrong, I always take data into account, but I also always heed the voice of experience whether my own or of others who have come before me.

I have seen HPS and MH rigs virtually collapse in price since the 70s; at this point they’re stunningly cheap, and just as effective as they’ve always been, but their bad aspects are I think pretty well-know: heat, utility cost, the virtual need to use both if you’re using either. None of that has really changed at all AFAICS.

For my interests the only thing that has changed in lighting is the ceramic halide, and I think the case for it is compelling.
I have been digging into them for the last six months, and the consensus among growers based on my research so far is that they put out more light and less heat compared to an equivalent wattage of MH/HPS, they are half the cost due to the single bulb basic rig, and their results are comparable or superior to the equivalent dual-bulb system.

I don’t know for a fact if these things are reflected in lab data, and I *do* know that it’s all anecdotal until we empirically verify it as true from our own experience; but I figure that if a guy with a bunch of MH/HPS posts a big grow log on a side-by-side test full of photos, and says he’s going to replace ALL his old rigs and switch because it works out better gram/watt without sacrificing quality, I figure THAT has to mean something too.

Let me not misrepresent myself. I am planning my first set-up. I have been planning it for nearly 50 years.
(I’ve always sought to be an informed consumer...)

Since I’ll only have one shot at it, and practice extreme efficiency in doing so, I need to plan short-to medium term, and in the short-term, ONE light is doable; ONE tent. Research continues. I appreciate your comments.

[PRIMO]

Well said whitebeard, and may I say welcome, glad to have you here. If you feel the need for any help or tips getting yourself set up and growing, just holler. We all have opinions and love to share em.

[DrPhoton]

However, theory and practice are the same *only* in theory: in practice, they can be very different.
Practical results are what drive decision - if results *dont’* matter then it doesn’t matter what you do.

Hey whitebeard. Appreciate your very respectful point of view.

In practice they can be different. This is due to the issues of variabilities not accounted for. But this is not always the case and this depends on the area in which this is applied with. Many of todays technological advancements have been made through theoretical data only approaches. It has been proven many times through physics, electronics, data communication and more, how previsional data from theories, can predict a certain result. This makes the importance of theoretical data very important and useful. And is continuing to be applied on a daily basis.

Of course one can always say that in practice it may not apply. But you have to be aware with what you are referring to understand whether that will be true or not.

As far as light technologies go, this is very quantifiable and predictable due to the current theories and technologies available to us. Which through the work of lighting physics and measurement equipment we can ascertain accurate and usable data that will be reproducable in the field and used for predictions. This is how we can use theoreticle data and laws, to predict how light will behave in specific environments. Which can be used to calculate how and where lights can be placed in a commercial facility to obtain very specific levels of radiant or luminous flux.

The kind of theoretical data i am talking about is not mathematically calculated data. It is raw measured data with the use of radiometric equipment such as integrating spheres. Highly complex and expensive gear. But it measures the full capacity of a light source, including all accounted variables such as reflection and internal air losses, uniformity and can precisely quantify data such as electrical efficiency, photon efficiency, radiant and luminous flux and much more. All these are data which can be used to accurately predict certain variables with a given application. And has been used as such for a long time.

There is the issue of how plants behave to light, with respect to light quality. Which through my extensive research of photobiology and the work from researchers such as bruce bugbee, we can say with great certainty how plant anatomy and growth responds to specific wavelengths of light. As of the last 5 years, many lab studies have shown that light quantitiy is the biggest influence on plant anatomy and growth. And the quality of the spectrum is so very insignificant with multispectrum light sources. The only time light quality becomes a factor, is when monochromatic light sources are used. Which is not a standard type of technology used except for in non vegetative stages where plant morphology characteristics are abscent. The data from these researches have been used to develop some of the best grow lights for commercial applications today. Some examples are fluence, california lightworks, hortlix, and more. I know this for a fact because i have relayed emails with some of these companies, discussing their R & D.

As it stands, ceramic metal halide has not been replacing sodium discharge technology for commercial facilities. As the lighting engineers that work for these major companies are well aware of the capability and practicality of current technologies. The only technology that is looking to do so, is LED. Which based on haitz law, will inevitably happen with time. There is most certainly a place for ceramic metal halide for the hobby industry, as it adds a certain added practicality.

[Farmall]

Here is my own non technical 2 cents.... I have a 10x12’ area to grow in and on the left is a 6bucket dwc, top feed and 20 gallon reservoir. The top shines 3. 300w at the plug LED lights with 1000 to 1200 watt claims of replacement HPS power (about 3200 total watts)
On my right are 4 soil grown plants with a 1000w hps at a 45 degree angle for top and side exposure to the two edge plants, a 315 LEC CMH Phillips 3100k bulb for flower, and a 1200 watt (304w at the plug) LED suspended over the canopy. Except for the LED, these are connected in series with the cloud line t6 exhaust fan blowing out of the room. Light are cool and air temp over the canopy is a reasonable 73-75 degrees....both sides although have 2 20” oscillating fans to move top air around and two 6” fans blow a breeze just above the tops of the buckets at the stalk level on dwc and same for soil.

Dead center over each side, is a 32w UVB Solarcure 4’ fluorescent bulb on for 2hours and 15 minutes each day during flower only. The dwc leaves are very dark green....almost black green in color while the soil is just a beautiful rich British racing green. Abundant trichomes on both but the soil started first by about 5-6 days.

The buds on the soil side are bigger and thicker and taller than the dwc by an estimated 25%. Unfortunately , some of this could be due to swings in pH and higher nutes as well as a magnesium and phosphorus deficiency early on that since has been stabilized and IN THE LAST 2 WEEKS...this buds are bigger and fuller and are catching up to the huge growth under the 315LEC and 1000w HPS. Where I would draw the line between nutrient and lighting is beyond my current skill set. But for the last few months, starring at these plants every day, I would have gladly abandoned the dwc and moved all future activities to soil. The last few days have changed my mind and reminded me to stay on top of the chemistry as it is easy to screw up and better to stay on target.

how this may help, sorry, I am afraid it doesn’t. However, this is a side by side comparison of right side versus left side. Maybe it’s just reporting an observation

[whitebeard]

Thank you, Doc, I enjoyed reading that. I have frankly no experience in lighting outside photographic and darkroom work, except to say that I know beyond question that a 40-watt fluorescent 12” bulb in a desk lamp is not an adequate source of light for cannabis....

So if I read you right, absolute intensity of light is all that matters on the subject of lighting a cannabis plant for max...what? Resin? Dried and trimmed bud weight?

Anyway, I’ll be the first one to admit I don’t know how to read these charts I see mapping the wavelengths of various bulbs; with your years of training and experience they are open books I’m sure. They seem to show intensity of the emitted light by wavelength. I can infer things from that that might or might not be correct because I don’t know what they *can* tell me.

Would you be willing to elaborate, please?

[DrPhoton]

Yes the radiant flux or photon flux of a light source is what mostly determines the yield of a plant. The spectrum charts you are referring to are a spectrum analysis of a certain light source, where the absolute energy of the source is broken down into its constituent wavelengths thats produced.

Resin development is mostly determined by genetics, but UV light has been shown to increase the biosynthesis when used in the later stages of flowering (used earlier on slows down photosynthesis). Though this is not through photosynthesis or photomorphogenic responses. But as a byproduct of genetic responses to ionizing radiation. Much of the same way when we get sun burned, when we show signs of inflammatory responses (red skin).

[oldjarhead100]

wow did we get technical had to read some of it 2 or 3 times lol good info thanks

[Farmall]

Oldjarhead100, Re-read this a few times... color me INSPIRED from reading about your new grow room. I AM going to re-assemble a new grow area. This place I am in now is a nice space but the extension cord comments did it for me. With so many power items running, I had to switch power cords to bigger 12 ga cables and triple extenders on the ends. And this space has gotten smaller and smaller as the plants decided to shake hands with each other from across the room. Each pass to the back of the room creates a potential for branches breaking. Gotta turn sideways to squeeze thru. This was set up in record time knowing the seasonal changes were going to work against me. And what’s even better....no more carrying 5 gallon water buckets 100 feet to change reservoirs or water soils. There is a wall on one side wired with its own 50amp breaker subpanel and even has a 220v wall outlet. Counted up the electrical plug ins.....18 outlets needed between .....Lights, fans, wi-fi temperature/ humidity monitor and CO2 monitor, 2 water pumps , air pump and 6” exhaust fan

[starramus]

Thanks guys since I cant use it in the bloom room I think I may try one for the auto room or even 2 lol

There are some who do not follow the consensus on LEC not for bloom. Such as this fellow.



nick


5.0 out of 5 starsYields equal to 1k hps verified.

"December 7, 2017

First harvest with this new light. Very happy with the results. Yield was easily as good if not better than an air cooled 1000w hps in a raptor hood reflector in a side by side comparison. All things equal, leaving the light as the only real variable."

How experimental are you feeling oldjarhead100 ?

I have seen more of these claims. Maybe just self congratulatory for going against the grain? I tend to go with the consensus on this question, but I haven't tried it yet.

[oldjarhead100]

has there been a cost to run vs an hps if its not cheaper IDK

[starramus]

affirmative....yes contains to few letters to post so brevity is out the door.

[uncledoug]

starramus, Thank you.

[DrPhoton]

There is an additional pull from the ballast which adds 20-30 watts, but yes for the most part its true draw.

[oldjarhead100]

so this came from an auto Jack herer not sure what this is I cut it a couple of days ago and no other stems are like this it looks like the beginning of bud rot, but its not any ideas