Led 8:1 versus fluorescent color 840 – 965.

Now the seedlings grown under different light sources a number of weeks, and now you can actually see some differences.

At first the image so it's chili “Naga Morich” the left plant is in the joint 8:1 therefore a lighting with very red light. The right plant in the picture has been placed under fluorescent lights with color 965 and 840. You can see a difference in both growth and color, the under Part is smaller and paler.

At picture no 2 It is chili “7 Pod Brain Strain” the left plant is in the joint 8:1 therefore a lighting with very red light. The right has been placed under fluorescent lights with color 965. This is the same result here, the under fluorescent lights have evolved faster and greener in color.

What is due? Fluorescent tubes produce more blue light than Led lighting, the blue light promotes both chlorophyll formation (green color) and width growth. Fluorescent lamp emits infrared radiation (IR, heat radiation), Infrared radiation from fluorescent tubes affects plants by increasing leaf temperature and thereby increase the evaporation. Low leaf temperatures result in slower development of plants. Led lights emit very little to close again at all of the infrared radiation. This would of course be able to compensate by raising the temperature in the room but then disagree argument “energy saving” I will return to later in a new post.

The lights that I use for equal Watts power for them to be fair, they are also the same distance away from plants.

So far, it is no doubt that the correct fluorescent lighting at uppdrivning of chiliplantor works at least as well if not better than Led lighting for plants with the relationship 8:1 Arguments claiming that Led 8:1 would be more efficient and better for uppdrivning of chilli I do not believe in.

Do you have any other experience that proves the opposite of what I have so far come up with so please comment my posts.

 

This entry was posted in Chili cultivation. Bookmark the Permalink.

11 Responses to Led 8:1 versus fluorescent color 840 – 965.

  1. Mats says:

    Good that you are testing properly instead of going on the representative's arguments! If I would have done this test myself so I would look to compare 8:1-led against 827 tubes, rather than 840-865-lamps. As you say it contains the 865 tubes much more blue light than both 8:1-led and 827 tubes and then it's not so strange if you get more aracaea from fluorescent tubes as a result, because it is precisely this that the blue light creates. Then I wonder a bit about the distance between the lamps and the plants also. In principle one can have lights 10-15 cm from the plants, and given that the light intensity decreases with the square of the distance and bearing in mind that different bulbs produce differing much heat so this is also a pretty strong factor to take into account when comparing light sources, IE 10 cm from the plants is four times as strong as 20 cm from the plants even if it is only a few centimetres, etc. It is not the Red wavelength that is in your LED lights, that is, if it's or or both 660nm 630nm, or whatever that thing. (Personally, I advocate personally for other fluorescent lamps as the main lighting, and red LED lights as a supplement.)

    Many questions. 🙂

    • Stig Häggkvist says:

      Hi Mats.

      Why I do not test this led lighting with fluorescent lighting with color 827 is that the most common colors of fluorescent tubes that you andväder at the uppdrivning of plants is 840 and 965. There are many claims that this particular combination of Led colors would be better and more efficient to use than the fluorescent lighting that is most used by uppdrivning of plants. But it is as you say more right to test it against 827 but there are not many that use only the fluorescent color at uppdrivning of plants.

      It is nowhere in advertising or on plant led the sides that red led is better than warm white State-fluorescent lamps but it says that the Led is very good and more effective than many other lighting sources and then I expect that the mean ones that are most common to use at uppdrivning of plants

      Data is now available at Parus 8:1:1 in the main menu on this site during the LIGHTING TEST

  2. Schonke says:

    It's a lot of hype in the JOINT area and absolutely ridiculous claims from manufacturers/dealers.

    The LED lights with low power sold at various spots is shit. Often they have very bad diodes instead of high efficiency 3W diodes (However, it seems not to be the case for Parusen you tested.) To get effective LED lighting that is far better than fluorescent lights and approaching high pressure sodium do you put a couple of hundred dollars (http://www.hydrogrowled.com/Penetrator-84X-PRO-LED-Grow-Light-P84.aspx or http://www.gothamhydroponics.com/featured-products/lighthouse-hydro-blackstar-240w-led-grow-light-uv.html are popular examples.)

    Many manufacturers claim that their 90W lamps could replace 400-600W high pressure sodium which is quite absurd. The consensus among people who use the LED seems to be that you need hardly 2/3 of the effect to get equivalent, and even when penetration is much worse. Worth mentioning in the context of the effect is in addition to any manufacturer run their diodes at low voltage level to increase life expectancy and reduce heat. A 3W diode often runs on 1.8 W.

    Than does not LEAD up to professional lamp performance, but give it a few more years they will probably large. What I find most interesting is what you get for performance per watt because it offers savings in the long run. 🙂

  3. Stig Häggkvist says:

    Hi!
    Some led low power would be crap that I know nothing about so it must be for you but I can agree that it should probably not the effect you would like to have for the amount of money but putting out. All the plant led lighting that I tested works more or less good. Those who to date is the best way to do it is the lighting products that have a broader light spectrum than those who only have red and blue in relation 8:1. Bar red and blue is probably good to “adult chiliväxter” but it is the fluorescent lamps with. I test the only lights that are directed to us hobby growers so I compare not with, for example, high pressure sodium and the like but only for fluorescent lamps and compact fluorescent lamps.

    What I am looking for in my tests is about to get better and finer chiliplantor using led for plants instead of fluorescent tubes and compact fluorescent lamps. In the tests I've done so far, there is no evidence to suggest that. I have not saved any energy then I always test the lights with the same watt strength against each other. So according to me, there is no need to buy expensive led lighting for plants to start with hobby breeding of chili.

    Fluorescent and compact fluorescent bulbs have a broader light spectrum than led for plants and I think led suppliers must design their lighting with a broader light spectrum and not just focus on the red and blue frequencies that they have today to get a better result.

    To tell me how wrong it can be when discussing with one of Sweden's largest plant led supplier, I can tell you the following:
    I told her that I had a very good result by growing chillies in my fluorescent lamps with 6500 k or 4000 k
    He replied:
    I cannot understand how you can get a good result in white light!
    Do not know one of Sweden's largest plant led supplier to white light contains all colors including red and blue? You may think I was surprised…

  4. IDA says:

    I am soooo glad I found your blog! I wrote a comment in another of your posts on LED vs fluorescent tubes from my iPad but the comments seem to have disappeared somewhere (I find it not now from your computer anyway) but it doesn't matter because now I have through this post got answers to my questions.

    Even though I myself is not a chilifantast, I will return, There is a lot to improve in!

  5. Stig Häggkvist says:

    Hi Ida!
    No, your last comment has not gone away it is just so that I have to accept the first comment for it to appear, If it is approved, your other comments made in the future to be published directly.

    I have now responded to your concerns in your last comment.

  6. IDA says:

    Hello again!
    Now I see what you mean. Sorry I'm a bit confused… 😉 Och tack för svaren!

  7. Daniel says:

    Hi Mats,

    Vad är det för watt på dina lysrör? Jag funderar på att köpa lysrör och antingen bygga egen armatur eller köpa färdig, beroende på om jag går på 14w eller 24w. Men jag funderar på om 2x14W räcker bra till en chiliodling eller om de behöver 2x24W i stället.

    Ha det gott!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

mildly-parishad

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.