A) Id like 3000k strips not, 2700k strips. B) If we just look at the 2700k side of the Vesta strips and compare it to the EB gen3 2700k 90CRI data sheet, you would see the gen3 has over 20% greater luminous efficiency than the Vesta. Considering people are paying 1.5x or more for a 6-10% jump of efficiency in 80cri strips and boards I don’t see how my desire for the 90CRI EB gen3 strips is baffling to you or even reinventing the wheel as you have claimed.
Any one want to go in on an order of the gen 3 3000k 90cri bridgelux strips?
Its 300k diff will give you denser nugs. As it relates to a 20% jump in luminous efficiency you should read up on par, ppfd, etc - lum eff is great for your eyeballs and that's it, so youd be paying a premium to satisfy you not the plants. vestas will put more usable light energy to the plants, are better performance and price point. You don't have take my word.
If your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.
I used luminous efficiency to compare the strips as both strips I listed have the same spectrum.... thus not only is their luminous efficiency 20% higher but their over all efficiency should be increasing a very similar amount if not the exact same. At least that is my understanding.
The spectrums are different, vestas shift more of its energy into the red, far red and infrared which isn't accounted for with lum efficiency. Compare the peak wavelength in the red region for both and you'll see the difference. At 680 nm the gen 3 is about 25%, the vesta is at about 56%. This gives the vestas a better balance of light spectrum and more red overall, better for flowering.
If your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.
I checked the data sheets to see the spectrums, in CRI90 the gen 3 is very similar to the Vesta. The gen3 should give a 15-20% boost in efficiency regardless of if they are 3000k or 2700k.Nuggie wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:18 pmThe spectrums are different, vestas shift more of its energy into the red, far red and infrared which isn't accounted for with lum efficiency. Compare the peak wavelength in the red region for both and you'll see the difference. At 680 nm the gen 3 is about 25%, the vesta is at about 56%. This gives the vestas a better balance of light spectrum and more red overall, better for flowering.
I haven't tested the gen3 yet, apparently I will be getting some soon to test but i would guess that a 2ft strip in 3000k cri90 would hit about 2.8m/joule running at 12 Watts.
Find me on Instagram led_teknik
Fark yeah I was referencing the 80 cri, I stand corrected on the performance. Now it boils down to price, the vestas are the clear winner bc the gen 3 80 cri are $0.84/watt where as I can get the vesta for $0.50/watt at 50% of max, both at 3000k (using both channels). My next project after this build I am working on is going to be 400 to 500 strips, that will work out to about $4000 savings on light build, so yes still reinventing the wheel as the gen 3 90 cri will most likely be higher in price yet.
If your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.
I think Nuggie just likes arguing. Digi-key gives no special discount for orders over 100 on the 2' Vestas, while offering a 500ct discount price <2.5k on orders of 500 2' Gen3 strips.
lets assume his given future needed strip count of 500 is referring to the 2' Vestas(ironically these strips are not currently available for purchase). They would cost $4450 and total 12500W if ran nominally. 0.80*12500W=10000W from Gen3 strips ran at nominal current. This would take just under 720 Gen3 strips and cost $3540. If he chose to use the Gen3's instead of Vestas he would save about $900 initially, and If we assume a electrical cost of $0.15/KWhr on a 12/12 cycle he will save $500+ a month. Within 6 months the choice to use the Gen3 strips over the Vesta's would completely negate purchasing cost of the strips themselves. Ironically generating an amount very close to $4k saved after 6 months....
This math assumes he would only use the 2700K side of the Vesta strips, as running both sides produces a spectrum that is not nearly as ideal to flower under.