ttystikk
- Posts
- 6,891
- Reactions
- 8,392
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2011
- Points
- 313
Ok sounds good, how about micromoles instead of lumens? That one's needed correction for a long time.
Yeah that makes sense. Fyi there are places on the web you can rent a quantum meter for cheap, I think they give you a week free to account for the shipping, prob some kind of deposit obviously (my setup hasn't been consistent enough to bother with it yet, but soon..)
surprised a guy like you doesn't already have one. that's a compliment btwClearly, this is an instrument I'm going to have to buy in order to make decent measurements of my equipment in action.
surprised a guy like you doesn't already have one. that's a compliment btw
have you or your friends compared different bulbs same wattage or used dual-arcs?El cerebro, Speaking in lumens is the norm and also how manufact market their product unfortunately......also sunligt has a cheap lumen meter you can gather enough knowledge to make excellent decisions! Also milwaukee instruments, I have the waterproof one for measureing lumen applications underwater for my reef. 600's.. Thats a good question? I know that penetration is of "quality" up to 24" at most, however vert and side lighting can be tricky. Im working one garden Vert now but its all 1000"s. Are you straight vert or overhead too? Because thats a major consideration...
Again I tried 4x600 on a 4x8 for a total of 2400 watts and still my buddy with the 3x1000"s killed me. I have partners that wont budge off 600's and they get 1-1.25 per 600. In my opinion they are some of the best growers Ive seen, but one thing for sure, they use less electricity but still the lowers are only good for 2 feet and after that its "larf city". In my garden my lowers are where I noticed a huge increase in weight from the 6-1000. 30%+ in weight!
ttystikk, I live in the northwest and several close friends work for sunlight supply. You can call them and discuss reflector application with no stress as long as you dont straight up say you are medical. Over half the people working there are. Lol The Ochos cast a super wide pattern and are the shit over the botanicare tables for which they were designed. .
Yup. The older ones are suspect, think those are what people had problems with. I'll give up my source once the cart is cleared and cc charged, so you bozos don't buy them all up before me!Dude is it the dimmable dual 6 lumateks you found for that price? I thought it would be a knockoff brand.
I am sittin watchin this last round of plants just crawl along, not fattin up or finishin like I usually like so start thinkin about other current setups and past setups for answers. So I start figurin my watts per sq.ft on a bunch of my different setups and this what i got..
#1 setup is (2)600w over a 3x3 table or 1200w/ 9 sq.ft. = 133 watts per sq.ft. or 19,556 lumens/sq.ft. with this setup I can easily pull 3-3.25lbs from 9-16 plants on the 3x3.This is my all time favorite setup for yield, density, finish time, potency all that good stuff. Dual bulb hood used in a 3x3 Hydrohut tent.
#2 (1) 1000w over a 3x3 table or 1000w/ 9 sq.ft. = 111 watts per sq.ft. or 16,111 lumens per sq.ft. perfect for single bulb single hood setup and or in a tent.
#3 (3) 1000w over (2) 3x6 tables or 3000w / 32 sq.ft. = 83 watts per sq.ft. or 13,594 lumens per sq.ft.. This setup is on movers and does alright but could use another 1k to really kickit into gear, but overall decent.
#4 (1) 1000w over a 4x4 table or 1000w / 16 sq.ft. = 63 watts per sq.ft. or 9063 lumens per sq.ft. To me this setup is right at the edge of what you need to really kick it out like on a 3x3. I really like the 3x3 tables instead of the 4x4 all the way around.
#5 (2) 1000w over (2)3x6 and (2)3x3 or 2000w per 54 sq.ft. = 37 watts per sq.ft. or 5370 lumens per sq.ft.. This sucks bigtime, movers almost make it more painful because of the shadow dancin..lack of cash has dictated this setup but still it sucks.
#6 (3) 1000w over a 11x14 room on movers or 3000w / 154 sq.ft. or 19 watts per sq.ft. or 2825 lumens per sq.ft. this is at a buddy of mines and he is complaining about yield, density, and finish times. this setup is doin just well enough to piss you off, not really crawlin but not cruizin either. I am tryin to get 6-8k in there for he real kickin flower action.
So I was curious what everybody else was doin and experiencin..
The sun is roughly 100w per sq.ft. full tilt so that is my basic minimum benchmark for my indoor satisfaction..
Mo lumens, mo wattage, mo betta..
Tex
i find the results from number 1 to be very interesting. I was under the impression that with horizontal gardens the best one could achieve would be roughly maximum of 2-2.5 ounces per square ft. However in this claim apparently he got over 5 ounces per square ft.
Im having a hard time getting my head around that claim. Not calling him a liar or saying he is mistaken, just trying to understand. How to you fit over 5 ounces in a square foot. Has anyone come near those kind of results. Whats the best you guys can pull per square foot.
Im having a hard time getting my head around that claim. Not calling him a liar or saying he is mistaken, just trying to understand. How to you fit over 5 ounces in a square foot. Has anyone come near those kind of results. Whats the best you guys can pull per square foot.
i find the results from number 1 to be very interesting. I was under the impression that with horizontal gardens the best one could achieve would be roughly maximum of 2-2.5 ounces per square ft. However in this claim apparently he got over 5 ounces per square ft.
Im having a hard time getting my head around that claim. Not calling him a liar or saying he is mistaken, just trying to understand. How to you fit over 5 ounces in a square foot. Has anyone come near those kind of results. Whats the best you guys can pull per square foot.
You can get over 5 oz/sq.ft. when you're very, very good at what you do and you have all the parameters well dialed in; strain, training, nutes, environment... and of course lighting.
thank you all for your responses. Looks like i was mistaken with my assumptions. Very excited to hear that there are growers that can use space with such efficiency.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?