new bridgelux model? VESTA® 90CRI, 130lm/W

[LEDG]

That's a pretty major hit to efficiency. I'd be inclined to go 80 CRI instead.

[tazztone]

it is 3x cheeper but u need aprox 3x more... no?

no, you need 1.39x more (6500lm vs 9000lm)
but since lumen are for humans this is not really relevant. we would have to know their YPF (photon amount, adjusted for plants needs).

That's a pretty major hit to efficiency. I'd be inclined to go 80 CRI instead.

so people (and plants for that matter) don't value this higher "aPPF"/W and red shift of CRI90 vs 80? i mean people are adding red/farred diodes, and CRI 90 are delivering more of these wavelengths out of the box

[Osash78]

it is 3x cheeper but u need aprox 3x more... no?

no, you need 1.39x more (6500lm vs 9000lm)

Sorry my noobnes
that is interesting...

[LivingLight]

You guys are right saying you can't compare these leds using lumens, but you should know the PAR isn't a really good alternative either. If the PAR is the emitted photon flux for the 400-700nm range, it doesn't take in account the 700-750nm range that is a non negligible part of a 90CRI, actually producing photosynthesis and that are physiologically usefull wavelenghts.
The PAR is a noob unit, if you are considering photosynthetic active radiation only, then go for a 300-750nm range. If you consider that the 700-750nm and the 300-400nm ranges are not producing enough photosynthesis then use a photosynthetic efficiency curve to calculate the exact rate rather than just cut off what you are not sure about. Because thinking like that, i would take only 550-700nm range as PAR cuz i consider the rest is too low at producing photosynthesis.

[tazztone]

if you are considering photosynthetic active radiation only, then go for a 300-750nm range

like YPF?
what would the YPF/W of VESTA be compared to F-series or EB Gen2? can this be calculated? if anyone can do it it's probably you.

this shows the limitations of PPF. PPF is not adjusted for plants needs and doesn't count photons at below 400nm and above 700nm).
the CRI90 typically have 5% less PPF than CRI80. this might come from the fact that their peak shifts from 605nm to 630nm. this also results in more far red (above 700nm) which are disregarded by PPF.

this study showed:
"Adding far-red (735nm) light immediately increased quantum yield of photosystem II(ΦPSII) of lettuce by an average of 6.5 and 3.6% under red/blue and warm-white light, respectively."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 1716302826

the spectrum shift might also contribute to the emerson effect...

[LivingLight]

if you are considering photosynthetic active radiation only, then go for a 300-750nm range

like YPF?
what would the YPF/W of VESTA be compared to F-series or EB Gen2? can this be calculated? if anyone can do it it's probably you.

this study showed:
"Adding far-red (735nm) light immediately increased quantum yield of photosystem II(ΦPSII) of lettuce by an average of 6.5 and 3.6% under red/blue and warm-white light, respectively."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 1716302826

the spectrum shift might also contribute to the emerson effect...

I did it with 2700k so tell me if you want it for the 5000K
All the values are given for 1 radiant watt so u may need to calculate the efficiency using the lm or "the lm to photons conversion factor" cuz i didn't check the lm output of the leds. (divide the lm/w from the led's datasheets by the lm emited for 1 radiant watt in the tab below and you got the efficiency)



Your study seems interesting im gonna try to read that if i got enough time thx

[Paulie109]

Thinking of putting 2 2' strips, 1 on either side of a QB 288 2700k board running off a 150h 54, does it sound correct to run the 2 strips off a hlg100h 48 in series. Sound correct?

[tazztone]

unfortunately i don't really get everything you did there. it's a little bit over my head.
But thank you very much.

the VESTA 560mm:
2700K = 129 lm/W (3192 lm)
5000K = 135 lm/W (3352 lm)
combined (3850K) = 132 lm/W (6544lm, 49.6W)

u may need to calculate the efficiency using the lm or "the lm to photons conversion factor" cuz i didn't check the lm output of the leds.

129 lm/W * 0.0175 = 2.26 VESTA 2700K CRI90 (0%)
144 lm/W * 0.0173 = 2.49 LM561C 2700K CRI90 (+9%)
175 lm/W * 0.0145 = 2.54 EB gen2 3000K CRI80 (+11%)(which would be similar to LM561C 3000K CRI80 i suppose)
what did i calculate here? QER (photons per watt)?
so next step would be weighing the photons at each wavelength according to mcCree curve to get YPF, right?
i am also interested to know how you got these conversion factors.

divide the lm/w from the led's datasheets by the lm emited for 1 radiant watt in the tab below and you got the efficiency

129 / 286.01 = 0.45 VESTA 2700K CRI90 (0%)
144 / 287.96 = 0.50 LM561C 2700K CRI90 (+10%)
175 / 332.93 = 0.53 EB Gen2 3000K CRI80 (+15%)
no idea what efficiency i have calculated here either. anyway plants don't care about Lumen, but YPF.

[LivingLight]

u may need to calculate the efficiency using the lm or "the lm to photons conversion factor" cuz i didn't check the lm output of the leds.

129 lm/W * 0.0175 = 2.26 VESTA 2700K CRI90 (0%)
144 lm/W * 0.0173 = 2.49 LM561C 2700K CRI90 (+9%)
175 lm/W * 0.0145 = 2.54 EB gen2 3000K CRI80 (+11%)(which would be similar to LM561C 3000K CRI80 i suppose)
what did i calculate here? QER (photons per watt)?

here you get the photon flux your lamp is producing for each watt of power consumption (umol/s/w or umol/j)
it is important to make the difference between power consumption (electricity) and radiant watt (light)
The QER if i remember well, is the photons per radiant watt (not electrical watt) so the QER would be what i've calculated in the tab
Now you got to multiply what you've calculated here by the photosynthetic efficiency score if you want to compare the led's efficiency at producing photosynthesis (at least instantaneous production cuz it's not related to morphological changes induced by spectrum)

divide the lm/w from the led's datasheets by the lm emited for 1 radiant watt in the tab below and you got the efficiency

129 / 286.01 = 0.45 VESTA 2700K CRI90 (0%)
144 / 287.96 = 0.50 LM561C 2700K CRI90 (+10%)
175 / 332.93 = 0.53 EB Gen2 3000K CRI80 (+15%)
no idea what efficiency i have calculated here either. anyway plants don't care about Lumen, but YPF.

Ofc they don't care about lumens, by chance you didn't calculate any lumen here lumens is just a tool to calculate the energy efficiency rate of the lamp.
45%, 50% or 53%, these are the amount of energy that is transformed by your lamp into light energy (radiant watt)relatively to the power consumption.
From this value you can calculate the photon flux, exemple :
Vesta 2700k:
0.45 so 45% efficiency
QER: 5.01 umol/s per radiant watt
45% x 5.01 = 2.26 umol/s per watt of power consumption
Exactly what you calculated using the lm to photons conversion factor.

i am also interested to know how you got these conversion factors.

It is quiet easy, in the tab i gave for 1 radiant watt:
the amount of lumens and the amount of photons related. You just got to divide this photon flux by the lm and you got tthe conversion factor

[LivingLight]

Thinking of putting 2 2' strips, 1 on either side of a QB 288 2700k board running off a 150h 54, does it sound correct to run the 2 strips off a hlg100h 48 in series. Sound correct?

What you mean exactly? you wanna use the driver of your quantum board to drive additional strips?