Is Cxb3590 A Top Contender To Replace 1200w Hps?

[fishwhistle]

Very nice tags,30Gs in lights but i bet its efficient as hell.

 

[tags420]

Very nice tags,30Gs in lights but i bet its efficient as hell.

That is pretty cheap for that size facility with LED when you price things out. Not to mention it a large grows get large scale pricing. They also make money to support such purchase when they make sense. It's not like it's guys spare bedroom with 30g's worth of lighting...it's a full warehouse for a legal dispensary. From about 10-12 lights and on, led setups can be scaled up pretty linearly. So whether you're a small garage, or a big warehouse...they will be relatively close per canopy area.

It's honestly easier to be larger scaled with led's than a small time grower. Financially and results.
PLC is working on rebates in CO and WA with the new gear, that puts pretty much everything on Uncle Sam's bill. So it's only getting easier to implement and the cost argument keeps getting weaker. But ya, they are more expensive to start up than an HID setup. Heat extraction or cooling and lighting are some of the biggest variable expenses in a grow facility. And they are what is directly affected the most positively by led adoption. As well as time being money. As long as they don't really sacrifice yield(with in 2-5%), they are in the positive cash flow. And if they do it right from the beginning and give enough light, they will definitely not sacrifice a thing...maybe gain a little. The hardest thing is to get a company to tell exactly how much light(PPF) their fixture produces. It's pretty simple request...nothing but that really matters. No snake oil spectrum can save anything from a lack of photons. Once that PPF is known and matched, if the grower doesn't succeed, it wasn't the lighting. Or the cost to do it right was out of their league and they tried to still make it happen.

Anyways...ya, leds work great on a commercial scale.

 

[We Solidarity]

ceramic metal halide draw 315 watts each which is comparable to most LEDs.

They produce about the same amount of heat- I've run led lights that get way hotter but I've been told those are complete garbage. You can cool about 8 cmh per ton but that gets better the larger the room- currently 30 light rooms have 10 tons between two units, but only one 5 ton unit is ever running at a time. I doubt I'll spend $2400 on cooling per light over the course of a 5 year span (Which is how long I'm told LEDs last running 12/12)

The LEDs that can compete with a 315w cmh ($325-$500 retail, $180-$250 wholesale) cost between $750-$3,000 per unit. 315s need bulb changes every year @ $55 per bulb (cheaper from Chinese manufacturers) but even still, that's $250 over 5 years. (If I'm wrong about the 5 years correct me- ive heard they start to lose efficacy after that long)

Would love more LED heads to chime in, I've been wondering about this for a while.

 

[Toaster79]

50.000h-100.000h life span of LED declared by the manufacturer means that LEDs are gonna put out 75% minimum running at nominal power with adjecent cooling (junction temperature - Tj<85°C). In reality it's more like 90-95% if lights are built right. So for CXB3590 (35mm footprint, 90W nominal power) that's 81W of light after 50.000h and maybe 70W worth at 100.000h (where I would change emitters)

CHM differ in their life span between 10.000-20.000h. What is the output of this bulb after this time?

 

[tags420]

That light in the grow I showed, cx300's, is a direct replacement for the cmh world. Like a CMH/LEC on roids. Coverage, and intensity all boosted while pulling almost the exact same at the wall. All that comes with a nice boost in yield that more than makes up for upfront difference. And saves that and more on the bulbs, specially if you want to ride the fixture to the end...most will upgrade early in the 3-5 year range.
They cost ~$725 retail and ~$610 small scale bulk. Let's talk 1000's and we can get them down more. They will hold over 90% of their output for at least 50,000hrs(12 years of 12/12)...and all the electronics will hold that long or more too. no bulbs, no ballast replacements for as long as you use it.
The new models coming out are passive, so no fan power(~10w) to sacrifice and they are waterproof plus even a bit more efficient. Let it rain baby!

As far as efficient sources, there are a few, but there are ranks of output/input(µmol/j)...
Sun(who care, it's free)>LED(2.5+)>DE(2.0)>CHM(1.9)>HPS(1.8)>MH(1.2)>PLASMA(1.2)>Induction/T5(.8-1.0)

Problem is that out of 1200 led manufactures...I would recommend less than 10 companies... and personally would only use maybe 4 if it was myself.

 

[Warmhands]

I have done a lot of Googling and I asked for help on another forum but I am not positive I have reviewed all the options. I want to build my own LED system and from what I have gathered I like the CXb3590 driven at 350ma. Is there another option I should review?

My biggest worry is I am looking at out dated approaches.

Have you looked up commercial led lights. Like high bay lights or spot lights. I fond a commercial high bay light with Cree cxb leds made in the U.S and it's $370

I would get myself but I don't have the money.

Tell me what you think. Thank you. Best of luck.

 

[We Solidarity]

if I were to switch bulbs 8 times (once a year) it would be about $450 over the span of 8 years. I hardly ever need to replace ballasts but when I do here all under warranty. Even if I was paying for the ballasts id still be paying less for a 315 than an LED :(

I can't find the justification spending 6x more on lights when literally everything else has gotten cheaper exponentially...if I were to buy 1000 LED lights that would by FAR be the most expensive aspect of the grow, even more expensive than the electric. Even if they were 500 a pop idk if it's justifiable. 1000 315s costs like 160k from China, how the hell is a 350k-500k difference in ONE piece of equipment justifiable in a project that only costs 2.3 million to begin with? There's no way you're going to tell me over the span of 5, even 7 years those lights are going to give me a better deal than 315s. I've grown under 315s for almost 5 years now, I have original fixtures with Philips ballasts still going like the day they were put in.

I'm sure sometime in the next 5 yrs there will be LEDs that can keep up in performance and not be retardedly expensive, right now though I'm just not seeing it.

 

[tags420]

There's no way you're going to tell me over the span of 5, even 7 years those lights are going to give me a better deal than 315s. I've grown under 315s for almost 5 years now, I have original fixtures with Philips ballasts still going like the day they were put in.

I already showed you it would. And comes with a nice yield increase over the cmh too you seem to want to ignore.
If that is not up your alley...that's your deal. But don't ask for something then when it's presented exactly as you ask...try and put it down. Tip the cap and move on then if you don't like it. It was seriously almost exactly word for word what you asked to see.
If we want to talk second rate, they can use second bins and save more just like going to china for cmh. second rate equipment, and second tier pricing. It's all relative.

 

[Raj Jah]

https://www.fluence.science/innovators-spotlight-the-guild-san-jose/

I would think that investing that much $$$ into a setup, one also gets the benefits of the customer service of the company? These guys dropped about $60k on lights. Gotta think they might be on the cutting edge since the manufacturer has been working with universities and large scale commercial ops for years.

I totally biased tho! I've got a SpydrxPlus going into 4th week of flower next to an old 600w hps at the same stage and the difference isn't even close imo. The coverage, the heat, the ease of use. I don't have access to an A/C and wouldn't be able to grow as easily with reg lights so it's worth it for me.

 

[HughJassBud]

Lol, I wasn't aware this was going on in another thread too. Those are some pretty big commercial grows using LEDS.
I don't really think LEDs/COBs are cost prohibitive if you look at them over 5-6 years. I did the math elsewhere in another thread, but if you compare them to HPS over a 5 year span they pay for themselves without accounting for the indirect savings in cooler running temperatures. Take that into account and LED can beat HPS for cost efficiency hands down.

As far as CMH, DE, or some of the other exotic stuff....I don't know yet.

I may need to include a CMH in my comparison.....I'll see if I can find one from a friend or something.

 

[HughJassBud]

Here is what CREE has to say on the subject. Of course, you could claim they're bias and maybe their testing needs to be done a little differently.