Why no reflectors on lights ?

  • Thread starter takeiteazy
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
takeiteazy

takeiteazy

5
3
Hi All

Got a small RDWC with 8 plants and want to switch ti 5 with DD design.

I have never come across this design before and lighting is confusing me ?

Mine have always just been above as standard wit normal reflector.

Are dd's hung in between the plants ? How do you know at what height to keep them ??

Cheers

ps. i will measure my room later and post a pic, based in UK so finding the gear will also be arkward.
 
sedate

sedate

948
63
takeiteazy said:
Are dd's hung in between the plants ? How do you know at what height to keep them ??

I generally raise my lamps so the base of the bulb is parallel with the top of the canopy or the top of the adjacent plant.

Why no reflectors on lights ?

This design is a bit of a waste of raw lumens - but it does optimize the light you can put on plants if you are limited in plant number but not in lights.

Small numbers of large plants: Vertical Lamps

Large numbers of small plants: Reflectors/Lamps
 
T

TyKaycha

352
0
Most of us here in the States are restricted on the plant numbers so DD's system is a great way to get impressive yield & still stay within our numbers. Luckily there's no limit on the number of lights one's allowed to have! :rofl
 
CelticEBE

CelticEBE

1,831
263
takeiteazy

It confused the hell out of me at first but then the lightbulb came on. With no reflector and the light hung vertically you can light 4 plants with one and none of the light is lost. There are some really cool diagrams on here but this is the general idea.

x=plant
o=light

xoxoxoxoxox
oxoxoxoxoxo
xoxoxoxoxox
 
takeiteazy

takeiteazy

5
3
takeiteazy

It confused the hell out of me at first but then the lightbulb came on. With no reflector and the light hung vertically you can light 4 plants with one and none of the light is lost. There are some really cool diagrams on here but this is the general idea.

x=plant
o=light

xoxoxoxoxox
oxoxoxoxoxo
xoxoxoxoxox

Know that makes sense, but still a bit confused at to what height to hang as i have only ever had it from above, this seems to be lighting the sides as well.

In UK we try to work at 1g per watt.

So i DoubleD's would be looking at 20k grams (20 x 1000w), i worked out it gave around 1500g.

So perhaps not the most efficient but legal.

Awesome site though.

Cheers
 
L

largepoppa

15
1
He is not getting 1500g total. He is getting 1500g per plant. If you take the diagram from above, it is 16 lights and 17 plants. 17 plants at 1500g is 25kg. 25kg for 16000W is 1.56g per watt.
 
M

mcattak

Guest
Luckily there's no limit on the number of lights one's allowed to have


Or space


So perhaps not the most efficient but legal.

Exactly
 
CelticEBE

CelticEBE

1,831
263
As far as heights go I believe they start them up high, then drop them as the plants take off a bit. Don't quote me on that though. I think this style of growing is more for people who are concerned about numbers of plants. Recently there was a court case here in California that basically said it was unconstitutional to limit the number of plants someone has for medicinal purposes. It has set a precedent and now all sorts of cases are being thrown out because of it.

Alot will change in the state of California over the next two years concerning prop 215 and I personally think one of the best things they can do is to tax it and forget about clubs not making a profit. I don't personally understand the thinking behind non profit medicine. The pharmaceutical companies are in the business of making medicine and they profit from it as do the retail companies who sell their medicine. Why should MMJ not be the same?

I think I began ranting here. Sorry about that.
 
M

mcattak

Guest
As far as heights go I believe they start them up high, then drop them as the plants take off a bit. Don't quote me on that though. I think this style of growing is more for people who are concerned about numbers of plants. Recently there was a court case here in California that basically said it was unconstitutional to limit the number of plants someone has for medicinal purposes. It has set a precedent and now all sorts of cases are being thrown out because of it.

Someone correct me if I am wrong but the cases I saw thrown out were for 99 plants or less.

Cali law is Cali law...24k and 15 mpb or 24k and 288 plants (probably the low end 12 plants per 1k)

Anything more than 99 and you could have fed issues..

Trees for freedom...
 
T

TyKaycha

352
0
So perhaps not the most efficient but legal.

Well that's arguable as he's pulled over 4lbs per plant (and before you ask - that's dry!) before. Except for outdoor growers who are growing trees, there's not too many systems that can do that. Lighting is just one factor. Try the vertical lighting with your RDWC. Completely surround each plant with lighting from all four sides. Would bet you see a nice improvement!
 
Top Bottom