Built my own light rotator- wanna see?

[darkmatter]

macgyver would be stoked, maybe even the a-team

 

[ttystikk]

Good Creativity, but light movers suck. You get so many grams per watt not square foot. Like motherlode said it has been proven time and time again. Good luck with you venture.

Yeah, I think MacGuyver would be stoked up- although I'm not sure how this could be used to create a cheap diversionary stunt to save the pretty girl...

I'm so damned sick of hearing this, seriously; "light movers suck. I have NO evidence to back this up, but I'm gonna shit all over your idea cuz I heard someone else say it once and I have some silly-ass pseudoscientific jargon that sez so."

GIVE ME A BREAK! You know, the sun moves across the sky every day- plants evolved to take advantage of that a billion years ago, and the same is true today, and just because we make our own sun with bright lighting in caves doesn't negate that. Hence, stationary lights don't solve the problem of leaf shading, and therefore don't get good light penetration.

Point two; With enough brute force- in this case, lights and watts- you can make anything grow, but the light mover is about efficiency. Half the watts with a mover gets similar results, because less light is wasted. I ask everyone who tells me light movers don't work to provide me with SOME documentation, ANYTHING, and you know what? Nobody has stepped up to the plate with anything! Columbus knew this feeling, after all, 'everyone knew' the Earth was flat and if you sailed too far to the west, you'd fall off the edge! Galileo got tired of hearing about how the rest of the universe revolves around the earth, and invented the telescope to prove that his hunch was what really squared best with the reality he knew.

I'm not as sharp as either of those guys, but I am not going to let someone with no evidence tell me that everything I know about physics, agronomy, biology and engineering is bunk 'just because!' BRING ME EVIDENCE. I did- have a look at the pics, and I'll tell you that my own results bear out my thinking, that is, with a decent rotator, installed correctly, with an appropriate reflector and a good reflective canopy edge treatment will flat suck the doors off a stationary light setup in terms of grams per watt, and usually performs like twice the watts on a square footage comparison.

Why is this useful knowlege? I don't like to waste my money, and I think that wasting power is expensive, unnecessary and bad for the environment. Just as I don't piss my spent nutes down the drain but put them on my fruit trees and in my garden, I think that if I can get the same results with half the lumens and half the bulbs, then I'm farther ahead. That simple.

No matter what you grow, if you can spend less in terms of inputs to get the same results, then it's an improvement, period. Right this minute, the price of ganja is falling around the country due to the slow advance of medical marijuana laws, and in a few years at most, it will be legal for recreational use, at least in more liberal places like California and Colorado. That means that there will be an ever shrinking margin for growers to live on and those who produce a quality product for lower cost will be able to keep more of their hard earned cash in their pocket. My device will help you claw back fully half of what you spend on power and bulbs. How is that so terrible?

 

[ttystikk]

What I have not yet done is test high power LED arrays in a light mover setup. I am sure that it will help, but just as moving an HID can be done well or poorly- with commensurate results- I'm just as sure that moving an LED light source, especially the new ones with high intensities, will improve their efficiency as well. Anyone care to get involved and help out with some actual science? I propose an experiment; on one side of a growroom, place a stationary LED over some plants. Measure the biomass of those plants and record it. On the other side of the same room, perhaps behind a curtain, place the same type and wattage of LED on a light mover over the same biomass of the same plants in the same square footage. Now, I am willing to bet that the height of the light source over the plants will need some tinkering to get right, as will the period of rotation, but I'm as sure as the sun rising in the east that it will make for better results. Soooo... instead of merely parroting stuff you've heard, how about doing some science? Anybody game?

 

[5280HigH]

Hey whats up ttystikk I was lookin at ur pics and thats a pretty cool way to fix some shit up you know but if you ever wanna upgrade let me know im a welder for a steel company and a grower just if u wanna get a metal frame ill help u out cheap just cause im not makin a living off work like that but if so hit me back on here we can wrk somethin out I am in the mile high city as well

 

[cannarado]

Schwinn called. They want their gear back

 

[ttystikk]

Gitcher punhat on!

Schwinn called. They want their gear back

Don't get HUFFY with me, pal.

I think this is a GIANT idea!

I'll just TREK on over to my local hydro store and see if they'll let me put one on their ceiling.

Might mount a CANNONDALE on the front to make some noise!

If this hits the big time, I might make a movie; 'Gone with the SCHWINN!!'

George Carlin would be proud...

 

[ttystikk]

update; rotator still makes good growth, the room is staying reasonably cool even though the temps have been hitting the 90s here, and massive growth from tops to bottoms of plants.

 

[thc420]

Wow

Inginuity and they say stoners are lazy and dumb.It's a bit ghetto i'll agree with the second post.But that's the whole appeal of it.The manufactures are getting rich off physiclly sick and finacilaly strapped people....GREAT WORK 8 THUMBS UP.LOVE THE PROJECT

 

[ttystikk]

Thanks for the props, peeps- To recap, I have successfully tested the light mover concept with one HID light, and with two HID lights. I've installed ductwork on a moving light rotator and successfully pulled heat out of the room. I've even installed dutwork TO the HID lights, to prove it can be done in a sealed room environment.

And for my next trick, I will be proving the concept of water cooling the HID hoods while they're rotating on the light mover. Pics to follow.

In other words, this idea is ready for the next stage, that is, preproduction prototyping. Anybody wanna come play in this sandbox with me? I think there's some coin in here somewhere, we just need to keep at it until we find some...

 

[Chilewig]

It sounds like to me, you are confusing two points. Efficiency and output. Yes a light mover will have some benefits, but you are way off in thinking half the power for same result.

 

[ttystikk]

Ok, Chilliwig- where's your research? You actually have something concrete to base that assertion on, or are you just talkin' out your ass? In case you haven't read the whole thread, I'm doing research, and the results I'm getting are pretty clear.

I can provide details. I can give theory as to why and how my rotator works. I can cite others' findings that back up my claims. Most of all, I WALK MY WALK.

Where's your PROOF, jack? Until you have some, I really don't want to hear your opinion- especially if the best you can do is shit all over my work.

 

[ttystikk]

Quick definition; efficiency is the act of getting the same results with less input. In most industries, people get pretty excited when you can show them efficiency gains of 5%- and 10% is hailed as a revolution! If y'all think double sounds too good to be true, then I invite you to drop me a line and have me come set up your lighting system. In other words, put your penny where your piehole is...

 

[motherlode]

serious question here

you do realize that rotating light movers hit the grow scene around the late 80's?

 

[wobbly goblin]

light movers DO work and that was proven back at cannabis world and overgrow
it is a fact that you can gain up to about 30% or use up to 30% less lighting to achieve the same growth due to the rotisserie effect (lights closer to plants for short durations)
there are a few tricks to doing this though such as if you are using a single 1000 watt bulb, you only want to move it about 18 inches or less for example because if you go farther out then the photonic energy available to the plant diminishes below the plants saturation level

fwiw

 

[ttystikk]

serious question here

you do realize that rotating light movers hit the grow scene around the late 80's?

Yes, and indeed I saw what was available- and built my own even then. There were lots of differences between the rotators of the day and what I'm working on now. First, many of them didn't move fast enough. Second, many were frankly flimsy and broke down, leaving a bad taste in growers' mouths as they cooked a nasty foot wide hole in their precious canopy! Of those that did work properly, not everyone set them up correctly and thus got poor results.

And the differences in technology available then and now are pretty striking too- hoods are more efficient, and there are more choices than ever. Plus, I don't know if many were using the sealed room approach 20 years ago- and that can make a huge impact on yields, irrespective of rotating lighting.

Thus, while I think that rotators got a bad rap back in the day for a lot of reasons- some deserved, some not- I also think that taking advantage of today's technologies will make them work better than ever.

I think, for instance, that the choice of reflector has an enormous impact on the overall success of the system. If a reflector is chosen that shrouds the bulb too much and doesn't allow it to shine to the sides then the advantages of the rotator are significantly curtailed. The ideal reflector might be something along the line of an adjust-a-wing, since it can be set up to allow for lots of sideshine. This approach maximizes the benefits of moving the light source.

Something else that makes a big difference is exactly how the wall treatment is handled. I'm working with several approaches, but the main thing I'm seeing is that the rotator isn't a cure-all, and it works as part of an integrated lighting system. The better all the components are matched, the better the results, as you might expect. These synergistic tweaks, working together, is where I think rotating the light can provide such a notable performance gain over stationary approaches.

Henry Ford invented the car- but as anyone who drove one in the early days can tell you, good roads made all the difference. Without those, the Tin Lizzie and all who followed would have been mere curiousities.

 

[ttystikk]

light movers DO work and that was proven back at cannabis world and overgrow
it is a fact that you can gain up to about 30% or use up to 30% less lighting to achieve the same growth due to the rotisserie effect (lights closer to plants for short durations)
there are a few tricks to doing this though such as if you are using a single 1000 watt bulb, you only want to move it about 18 inches or less for example because if you go farther out then the photonic energy available to the plant diminishes below the plants saturation level

fwiw

The 30% gain quoted here is easily believable, and I have it from personal experience that even better results can be achieved by tuning the rest of the light delivery system to take maximum advantage of moving the light source. After all, doing right by your lighting isn't a new idea, and it also stands to reason that the right reflector and canopy edge treatments for moving applications would be different from stationary ones.

He's also correct about the careful attention given to sizing and distances, although I differ slightly on the specifics- I've sized these things up and down and get good results if one 1000w HID moves around a circle of up to about 42" in diameter. Again, choice of reflector is critical- do NOT bury it high in a flashlight box, let that bulb shine out to the sides! Then, arrange your reflective material around your plants in a circular or stop sign shape, centered on the hub, between 6 and 7 feet in diameter.

Here's one last trick that really makes the whole system produce eyepopping results: Think of your rotator, light, reflector and walls as a photon distribution system, the goal of which is to provide strong, even coverage without hotspots. Logically then, its target- your plants' leaves and buds- should also be the optimum shape to get the most gain from the energy aimed at it. Tall, upright plants can't take full advantage of what the moving light offers, so top and train your plants to spread out and make a level canopy, about 15-18 inches below the plane of the bulb. Using SCROG, or screen of green, is one good approach.

Do this, and I dare you to come crying back to me about anything but the burden of carrying all the extra loot in your pocket!

 

[Chilewig]

Maybe I am missing something, but have you provided any evidence other than what you think? You have not provided any factual information or even documented any results and/or comparisons at all. You make estimates backed by nothing. You are a joke, anytime someone says anything you don't like, you begin the insults. You don't want an exchange of ideas, you want everyone telling you that your idea is great.

 

[cemchris]

Killer DIY. "RAD" lol. I give you probs man.

Motherlode is right though. Movers are good for veg when it comes to flower they cut your weight in half. 2 4x4 with 2 600s on a mover yielded less then half vs 2 stationary lights over each table. Movers main goal is heat buildup. Also using it to lets say move lights a foot and a half each direction over a single table to get 100% coverage for example. Other then that your yield will suffer. Just the facts. If it didn't everyone would be rocking light movers.

 

[ttystikk]

Maybe I am missing something, but have you provided any evidence other than what you think? You have not provided any factual information or even documented any results and/or comparisons at all. You make estimates backed by nothing. You are a joke, anytime someone says anything you don't like, you begin the insults. You don't want an exchange of ideas, you want everyone telling you that your idea is great.

Yeah, you missed something, all right; not only have I been putting up pics and sharing results of my own original research (that's called DOING, not just THINKING), I notice that you mouthed off about how they don't work WITHOUT providing any evidence yourself. I didn't insult you, either- just the fact that you don't seem to want to bother citing any corroborating evidence or coming up with anything else to support your contentions.

I'm interested in an open exchange of factually based information. If you sense my frustration with unsupported opinion and mythology, well, you'd be right. If someone told you it was safe to strip naked and kick a hornet's nest, would you do it?

If you're too busy telling the world how things are to read up on your subject, then I can see where you might have missed some citations- so I'll provide a starter for you:

High Times, Sept. 2011 issue, on sale now; page 110, 'Light Through the Eyes of Cannabis', written by Dr. Herb Spadowski, PH.D. He specifically mentions the benefits of light movers in the last paragraph of the article, on page 116. The rest of the article is a top notch read, too.

See also Marijuana Horticulture; the Indoor/Outdoor Medical Grower's Bible, by Jorge Cervantes. Multiple references to the benefits of light movers sprinkled liberally throughout its pages, use the index in the back of each copy to find them...

Chilewig, the differences between debate and simple sophistry are that in a debate, one doesn't take the fact that others disagree with you personally, and that any contentions you make are backed up by personal experience, research results, and/or citations of experts in the field doing related and relevant work. When you started whining about being insulted- without providing one whit of actual support for your position, you made it clear which side of that fence you stand on.

 

[Smokey503ski]

OH boy, you are going by Behind Times, I mean High Times magazine. Also the joker Jorge Cervantis for research.
I want to know what your grams per watt are after this harvest. That is where the proof is. You may be growing large looking buds, but after dry, not too much weight on them.
I used light movers when they came out. Only due to the fact I was running around 100 watts per square foot. The light movers were only used to move about a foot to stop the lights from burning the plants, known as light bleaching.
After the mover burnt out, It was not worth the money to replace it. You get more weight when you use more lights.
I don't have a pic of me throwing the light mover in the garbage if that is what you are asking for.
There have been a few people on here telling you there experience using them. There is a reason why people do not use them anymore.
You might as well be placing a strobe light above your plants. That is pretty much what the movers do to the plants.
No matter how fast you spin the lights. There will alway's be a dark spot. Even for a slight second, you still have one. Now times that every time it goes around a light cycle. Now add those up and see how much light you actually lost.
I give you props to the idea. But not on listening to people that have used them in the past.