Features of light catching

Seneka, I offered you a PWM stabilizer - its efficiency is more than 90%!
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_st...ator_extension

Why can't it be enabled like this? what is the current strength, because 4 diodes are connected in series to 12V, for each 3V-this is slightly lower than the rated voltage, which means that the current will not be higher than the rated one. At least ordinary diodes behave in this way, that is, although they are calculated by current, the current depends on the applied voltage. (unlike, for example, flasks from DRL)

By the way, the element is li-ion, its voltage is 3.7 V, as a result, 4 will produce approx. 14V and THAT'S EXACTLY THE KIND OF BATTERY THAT can't be connected directly. But I don't think the PWM from 14 to 12 will start either. Put a current-limiting resistor or krenku, if it works, by the way, too - there is also an acceptable minimum voltage difference.

In short, an additional resistor is needed in this case. Not aesthetically pleasing - but cheap, reliable, and practical!
And the battery is afraid of a full discharge.

In general, a cool battery! One piece approx. 70W per hour!!! Well, let 55 watts per hour really. But this is already cool. This means that the 10 W diode will last for more than 5 hours!

DanMar, this is just what you need for that option

I have already referred to the battery:
http://www.a123rc.com/goods-468-Excitingly...ATIC+CELLS.html

Such plates need 4 pieces sequentially.

Well, this element has a voltage of 3.3 V. http://www.a123systems.com/products-cells-...-pouch-cell.htm
And the diodes have a voltage of 3.3 V.
4 plates = 13.2 V. 4 diodes = 13.2 V. Full compliance. Or is there something I don't understand?

Seneka, I offered you a PWM stabilizer - its efficiency is more than 90%!
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_st...ator_extension

This should be considered.

Well, this element has a voltage of 3.3 V. http://www.a123systems.com/products-cells-...-pouch-cell.htm
And the diodes have a voltage of 3.3 V.
4 plates = 13.2 V. 4 diodes = 13.2 V. Full compliance. Or is there something I don't understand?

I don't understand that. There are no resistors with resistance =1 and >=1 (i.e. neutral and boost)
It is not recommended to connect without a resistor, and a weak resistor will either burn out or be useless.
In this scenario, standard formulas do not work,
because the requirement for calculating a resistor is that the battery voltage must be higher than the voltage across the diodes.

In general, a cool battery! One piece approx. 70W per hour!!! Well, let 55 watts per hour really. But this is already cool. This means that the 10 W diode will last for more than 5 hours!

DanMar, this is just what you need for that option

And in Lumens even cooler!

Gentlemen, allow me to interject a little. All these LED strays shine brightly and for a long time for the simple reason that they are used in pulsed mode with a high duty cycle (the ratio of pause duration to pulse duration). This allows you to solve cooling problems and minimize power consumption. An additional bonus is the ability to pump them with a current significantly higher than the stationary one, i.e. significantly increase the brightness. The luminous flux, of course, turns out to be intermittent, but for the human eye, the pulses are invisible due to the high frequency and inertia of the retina. I don't know about insects, though
Usually, ready-made chips or modules are used to create a pulse mode. this is the best option. But all this is implemented quite simply and on the knee. I, of course, have long since moved away from practical electronics, but it is done something like this:
1. a simple generator is assembled. In your case-on two CMOS valves 2 AND-NOT. The widespread 564/561 series of chips operates in the voltage range of 3-15V, i.e. generation will not fail even when the battery is almost completely discharged. For the generator, you will need two capacitors and two resistors in the feedback loops of the valves. The duty cycle and frequency are selected by changing R and/or C, usually put a variable resistor. You can do with one RC-chain and one valve. In this case, the pulse duration is equal to the pause duration.
2. next, a key bipolar transistor is used, the power and gain are selected taking into account the current flowing. Collector - to the plus of the battery, base through a series resistor and parallel zener diode - to the output of the generator, in the emitter-parallel connected LEDs (the second end - to the minus of the battery). The voltage of the zener diode is 3.6-3.9 V.
3. If you do not want to use the battery until it is discharged to 4 volts, connect the LEDs in parallel-in series (2-3 in series) and change the zener diode to a higher voltage (7-10V).

PS. The scheme can be optimized. Good luck

Gentlemen, allow me to interject a little. All these LED strays shine brightly and for a long time for the simple reason that they are used in pulsed mode with a high duty cycle (the ratio of pause duration to pulse duration). This allows you to solve cooling problems and minimize power consumption. An additional bonus is the ability to pump them with a current significantly higher than the stationary one, i.e. significantly increase the brightness. The luminous flux, of course, turns out to be intermittent, but for the human eye, the pulses are invisible due to the high frequency and inertia of the retina. I don't know about insects, though
Usually, ready-made chips or modules are used to create a pulse mode. this is the best option. But all this is implemented quite simply and on the knee. I, of course, have long since moved away from practical electronics, but it is done something like this:
1. a simple generator is assembled. In your case-on two CMOS valves 2 AND-NOT. The widespread 564/561 series of chips operates in the voltage range of 3-15V, i.e. generation will not fail even when the battery is almost completely discharged. For the generator, you will need two capacitors and two resistors in the feedback loops of the valves. The duty cycle and frequency are selected by changing R and/or C, usually put a variable resistor. You can do with one RC-chain and one valve. In this case, the pulse duration is equal to the pause duration.
2. next, a key bipolar transistor is used, the power and gain are selected taking into account the current flowing. Collector - to the plus of the battery, base through a series resistor and parallel zener diode - to the output of the generator, in the emitter-parallel connected LEDs (the second end - to the minus of the battery). The voltage of the zener diode is 3.6-3.9 V.
3. If you do not want to use the battery until it is discharged to 4 volts, connect the LEDs in parallel-in series (2-3 in series) and change the zener diode to a higher voltage (7-10V).

PS. The scheme can be optimized. Good luck

This is great wisdom for me! Mikee, we would like a diagram and a drawing we would start a turntable.

3.3 V is obviously an average voltage, after a full charge, such batteries produce 3.7 V and hold them very well, and for a long time!

There are now special drivers that work as mikee wrote, that is, you can buy them.


The resistor must be selected experimentally, but using a preliminary calculation, starting from max. voltage levels. For example, at a rated voltage of 13V, the rated current will be 2.46 A at rated voltage of 13V. power of 32W. So the conditional resistance of the diodes will be equal to 5.28 ohms. Hence, to maintain a current of 2.46 A at 14.8 V, you need to set the limiting resistor to 0.736 ohms. When the voltage drops to the nominal value, the power will decrease to 28W, that is, 4 watts will be lost.

But that's all if you don't use the driver! With the driver, all these problems disappear, since there is already current stabilization, high efficiency, and so on. But it still needs to be found or made.

3.3 V is obviously an average voltage, after a full charge, such batteries produce 3.7 V and hold them very well, and for a long time!

There are now special drivers that work as mikee wrote, that is, you can buy them.
The resistor must be selected experimentally, but using a preliminary calculation, starting from max. voltage levels. For example, at a rated voltage of 13V, the rated current will be 2.46 A at rated voltage of 13V. power of 32W. So the conditional resistance of the diodes will be equal to 5.28 ohms. Hence, to maintain a current of 2.46 A at 14.8 V, you need to set the limiting resistor to 0.736 ohms. When the voltage drops to the nominal value, the power will decrease to 28W, that is, 4 watts will be lost.

But that's all if you don't use the driver! With the driver, all these problems disappear, since there is already current stabilization, high efficiency, and so on. But it still needs to be found or made.

Why bother looking for it? Pull out from any LED flashlight. If the flashlight is made in China, then the price of the issue is minimal. Next, you need to:
- check whether this garbage can withstand 12 V (they work from 3-4. 5 V), if it does not survive, then lower the battery voltage either with a voltage stabilizer (the 145 series of chips mentioned here is a ROLL), or just a chain of a resistor and a zener diode;
- find out with a tester or an eye where its output is (it is optimal to use any oscilloscope for this purpose);
- attach a power key to this output. Moreover, in this case, the parameters of the switch (transistor) will be much softer from the point of view of choosing a transistor, since a significantly smaller current gain k-t is needed.

   This is great wisdom for me! Mikee, we would like a diagram and a drawing we would start a turntable.

Nikolai, I already wrote something in Hieropsis ' answer, but I don't have time to count and draw, and I've long forgotten the element base, but I don't know much about the modern one. Find some craftsman friend, there is nothing complicated there.

OK. We will think in the direction of PWM or more complex drivers.

But about the batteries, not everything is so clear. LiFePO4 - more frost-resistant, have a longer service life(many thousands of recharges) and a larger discharge current. However, neither one nor the other, nor the third is critical for us. In terms of energy density per unit mass, they are worse than Li Ion, but this is a critical parameter for us. In addition, Li-Ions have a sufficient, albeit shorter life, 800 cycles before the capacity drops by 20%.

Here I found this option

Panasonic NCR18650 3100MAH
Voltage::3.7V
Capacity::3100mAh
Weight::45g

3.7 V x 3.1 Ah / 0.045 kg = 254 Wh / kg (vs. 131 Wh / kg for LiFePO4)

They are lighter, although they are larger in total volume, but this is not critical.
But they have a more suitable voltage for LEDs = 3.7(nominal) and up to 4.2 (when fully charged). They can be used and changed separately, like finger batteries.

Let's estimate how long 800 recharge cycles will last.
If you recharge every day for 14 days (vacation) and make 4 such expeditions a year, then you get 56-60 recharges, taking into account the gradual loss of capacity, they will last for 10 years, or do I think incorrectly? During this time, they will become obsolete and pay off many times over.

In addition, unlike other types of batteries, Li-Ion recovers its properties during a deep discharge. Periodic deep discharge and charge, this is a way to repair and maintain them, and we need just such a mode.

From 1.920 kg of battery, you can power 40 LEDs, they will shine for the same 8 hours, at 150-160 Lum each, in the amount of at least 6000 Lum (and not 4500Lum, as in the previous version), and the color temperature will be what you need, i.e. in the region of 7000K-10000K

Only there are much more fakes(replicas) on the market! You need to be careful.
And they're a little more expensive.

This post was edited by Seneka - 01.03.2012 15: 00

OK. We will think in the direction of PWM or more complex drivers.

But about the batteries, not everything is so clear. LiFePO4 - more frost-resistant, have a longer service life(many thousands of recharges) and a larger discharge current. However, neither one nor the other, nor the third is critical for us. In terms of energy density per unit mass, they are worse than Li Ion, but this is a critical parameter for us. In addition, Li-Ions have a sufficient, albeit shorter life, 800 cycles before the capacity drops by 20%.

Here I found this option

Panasonic NCR18650 3100MAH
Voltage::3.7V
Capacity::3100mAh
Weight::45g

3.7 V x 3.1 Ah / 0.045 kg = 254 Wh / kg (vs. 131 Wh / kg for LiFePO4)

They are lighter, although they are larger in total volume, but this is not critical.
But they have a more suitable voltage for LEDs = 3.7(nominal) and up to 4.2 (when fully charged). They can be used and changed separately, like finger batteries.

Let's estimate how long 800 recharge cycles will last.
If you recharge every day for 14 days (vacation) and make 4 such expeditions a year, then you get 56-60 recharges, taking into account the gradual loss of capacity, they will last for 10 years, or do I think incorrectly? During this time, they will become obsolete and pay off many times over.

In addition, unlike other types of batteries, Li-Ion recovers its properties during a deep discharge. Periodic deep discharge and charge, this is a way to repair and maintain them, and we need just such a mode.

From 1.920 kg of battery, you can power 40 LEDs, they will shine for the same 8 hours, at 150-160 Lum each, in the amount of at least 6000 Lum (and not 4500Lum, as in the previous version), and the color temperature will be what you need, i.e. in the region of 7000K-10000K

Only there are much more fakes(replicas) on the market! You need to be careful.
And they're a little more expensive.

PWM in this whole story is only needed to lower the voltage on the LEDs. And household batteries rarely last more than 5 years, regardless of the number of recharge cycles. Moreover, their life span is a statistical value with a normal distribution, i.e. they can die both in a year and in 10.

It is clear that everything is written with pitchforks on the water, but what to choose and by what criteria?

Hello!
I read here about LEDs and their properties and really didn't understand anything((
In general, I'm a layman in electronics, but my task is to assemble a light trap on LEDs(only on them) with minimal weight and dimensions(electronics plus power) with work up to a maximum of 4 hours without recharging.
Questions:
Is it true that ultraviolet diodes (with a power of 1-3 W) are not suitable for fishing due to the narrow spectrum of ultraviolet light or something else? Maybe someone has experience using it?
Assembly scheme as I understand it, a chain of diodes-a driver (stabilizer)"battery power?" Are there any ready-made driver options so that a teapot like me can assemble the entire scheme? Which is the best battery in terms of weight / capacity?
Well, I still want to make a budget design, there will be a little money allocated for this...

 
Is it true that ultraviolet diodes (with a power of 1-3 W) are not suitable for fishing due to the narrow spectrum of ultraviolet light or something else? Maybe someone has experience using it?

Even if there is experience, the result does not matter, because no one has collected powerful UV emitters on diodes, and weak ones are not an indicator. As for efficiency and a narrow spectrum, this is purely my speculation, I myself very much hope that they are wrong. If the whole system is built on diodes, then there is simply nothing else for UV. You can try to recruit different UV diodes from different manufacturers, bad and good, to create a spectrum. Do it and tell us what happened.

the system will be assembled no earlier than April and May, I think whether 3x uv single-watt lamps will be enough,interspersed with four white light single-watt lamps.
And our UV lamps are expensive 350 rubles/piece

to tiger33: catch on DRL 125 / 250W. If you do not want to mess with the throttle, then on the DRV 160 / 250W - not so catchy, but also quite effective.
Everything has been written here for a long time about these lamps.

If your goal is to check the effectiveness, then it is clear, but if you want to catch normally, then do not engage in nonsense and do not waste time.

The goal is to minimize costs and weight, as I will travel by public transport and on foot. It is also planned to take trips not dedicated to collections for the collection.
Have you tried this method of fishing to talk about nonsense? I believe that in any case, only those who have tried all the options covered can say so. And there is no trial. And my question was not about comparing LEDs and DRL, but about the circuitry, problems and features of the LED trap.

This post was edited by tiger33 - 03.03.2012 15: 59

Will it be good to fly to this one a lamp?

Will it be good to fly to this one a lamp?

Depending on where: already discussed starting with this the post.

Will it be good to fly to this one a lamp?

Whether it will be good or bad depends on many factors.
Such lamps are almost always used when fishing, in parallel with others. In light summers, there are almost always more insects on the part of the screen where the housekeeper is located.
In the spring, they were launched at a distance of 30m from the DRV 250, the impression was that they flew more at UV.

The goal is to minimize costs and weight, as I will travel by public transport and on foot. It is also planned to take trips not dedicated to collections for the collection.
Have you tried this method of fishing to talk about nonsense? I believe that in any case, only those who have tried all the options covered can say so. And there is no trial. And my question was not about comparing LEDs and DRL, but about the circuitry, problems and features of the LED trap.

I collect on DRL. Effectively.
Other methods (ostensibly less expensive) are much less effective.
You will get more trouble with drawing up diagrams than just buying a throttle, a lamp, a few meters of wire and a ceramic cartridge. At least look at what lamps are caught by collectors who live on it. You won't see any LEDs on them. DRL and DRV flasks and Black Light lamps.

However, try it and please tell us about your success. Always with photo illustrations.
I'm interested. I will follow the topic. Especially since the season is opening soon.

I forgot to mention that Black Light is quite suitable for a light trap

This post was edited by Morozzz - 03.03.2012 17: 34

I collect on DRL. Effectively.
You won't see any LEDs on them.

And here you are wrong , flashlights are now almost all LED

Whether it will be good or bad depends on many factors.
Such lamps are almost always used when fishing, in parallel with others. In light summers, there are almost always more insects on the part of the screen where the housekeeper is located.
In the spring, they were launched at a distance of 30m from the DRV 250, the impression was that the UV flew more.

So this is better?

So this is better?

Better than what?
If you mean DRL/DRV then no, it's worse .
If the incandescent lamp is 60 W or the housekeeper is comparable in power, then it's probably better, but you can't see what's flying, you still need a source of the visible spectrum.

Just so that it can be seen in combination with these two Black Light energy-saving devices, I use exactly this one a lamp. What I recommend if you really use energy-saving devices.

The topic is EXTREMELY necessary and useful, but EXTREMELY polluted by colleagues who are too lazy to read it from the very beginning and, at least a little, think about it. I will try to generalize for lazy people, WITHOUT claiming absolute truth and completeness.

To begin with - the axioms:
1. UV attracts insects better than visible light, all other things being equal. The reason is not known for certain;
2. more powerful light sources attract insects more efficiently than less powerful ones of the same type. The reason is to cover a larger area under equal conditions;
3. Weather conditions affect the effectiveness of UV and conventional lamps in different ways. Reason - in addition to the radiation spectrum of the source, there is also the absorption spectrum of the environment, water vapor (rain, fog) the stronger the absorption of light, the shorter the wavelength of this light (UV is absorbed more strongly than visible light).
4. Both UV and visible light are not one wavelength, but ranges of wavelengths. The most effective wavelengths for insects in both ranges are not really known to science and may be different for different species.
5. UV light is not visible.

Conclusions from the axioms:
out of 1 and 4, it is always better to use a UV source with the widest possible wavelength range;
out of 2, it is always better to use the maximum possible brightness source (note: some species land on the edge of illumination, so as the brightness of the source increases, it becomes difficult to detect such species in the fishing area);
out of 3, 4 and 5, features use broadband light sources or a combination of different sources. The second option is optimal.

Evaluation of light sources in relation to axioms and conclusions from them:
1. the widest spectrum in the visible and UV ranges of the available lamps are:
- DRL-type split lamps (with the bulb removed). Important note-harmful to the skin and vision!;
- non-split DRL lamps;
- DRV lamps.
All these lamps are available in high-power versions, at least 150 watts (up to 1000). All work only from AC, DRL require special additional devices (throttle, ballast resistors, etc.)
2. UV lamps are produced for specific practical purposes, so:
- as a rule, public lamps are not very powerful due to the harmfulness of UV. Note-there are also high-power industrial UV lamps, they are not generally available;
- public lamps are relatively narrow-band with a shift towards visible light.
UV lamps do not differ in the principles of operation from DRL/DRV and are powered by alternating current. Those that operate from direct current have a built-in converter and an electronic control circuit, which reduces their reliability, especially in the field.
3. LEDs:
- in principle, they are narrow-band, including ultraviolet ones. In this case, they are significantly inferior to the pricked DRL .
- their energy efficiency (the ratio of light intensity to power consumption) is currently NO better than DRL lamps.
- the power of the available single LED does not exceed 10W:
- high energy efficiency at high brightness is achieved by using in pulse mode. If you turn it on like a regular lamp, the benefits are largely lost;
- the advantage in the field is the operation of LEDs from a constant current of low voltage due to compatibility with batteries.

Choosing a fishing spot (based on practical experience). Axiom: maximum visibility in all directions is always desirable. Ways to achieve this goal:
1. on the plain - a higher elevation of the light source. Disadvantages:
- insects gather at the top, so raise to a reasonable limit;
- a number of species land on the border of light.
2. in the forest-fishing in large clearings, edges, roads and clearings;
3. in the mountains-fishing in the basin. Allows you to attract insects from all the surrounding hills, insects fly better down than up. When fishing at the top, shadow zones are formed along the slope and high vegetation interferes, i.e. you need to raise the lamp high.

The best option at the moment is:
1. the presence of a generator or a fixed AC line;
2. a combination of a split DRL-250 with an incandescent lamp or a 100-watt energy-saving lamp. The DRL rises up and lures insects to a wide-spectrum UV, and the lamp is hung directly at the screen (or even on both sides) and pulls the baited insects down onto the screen. The high location of the DRL reduces the harmful effect of UV and makes it easier to protect yourself from it, for example, with a wide-brimmed hat;
3. periodically turn off one or two lamps at once for a short time in order to pull up insects that have landed far from the light source.

Low-power lamps based on UV lamps and light-emitting diodes seem to be the most effective when used in autonomous light traps, as they allow you to catch the most widely in rugged terrain. At the same time, you do not need a constant presence near them, which expands the time range of fishing for the whole night.

PS. Correct, supplement, and criticize, and the result should be posted at the root of the topic as a mandatory FAQ...

This post was edited by mikee-04.03.2012 23: 29

2 mikee: topic needs curator

3. video diodes:
- in principle, they are narrow-band, including ultraviolet ones. In this case, they are significantly inferior to the pricked DRL .

Naturally, all LEDs are inferior to the pricked DRL in efficiency, but they have a lot of listed advantages. It would be a mistake to confuse the characteristics of UV diodes and white light diodes. White light is a mixture of all ranges, it is by definition the widest range. Modern high-power LEDs are used in photographic equipment, as permanent (not pulsed) illuminators, because they have a near-ideal daylight spectrum that does not distort colors. Some models of setodiodes have a colder spectrum at high voltage (10000K is a bluish "hospital" shade), so they should attract insects better than conventional ones Energy-saving daylight lamps are 2500-4200K and absolutely safe for vision. Efficiency has already been discussed, 150-160 Lum/W is an unattainable ratio for either ES lamps or DRL/DRV. And if professional photography equipment and human vision do not distinguish between the pulsation of LEDs, then why should the vision of insects distinguish it, or why should the pulsation, if it is noticeable, scare them away, and not vice versa? Plants, for example, grow better when there is a noticeable ripple in lighting,

This post was edited by Seneka-04.03.2012 14: 27

Misha, dear! Not too lazy!
Beat me to it ))

Briefly and clearly,but everyone has their own bird of luck.

The topic is EXTREMELY necessary and useful, but EXTREMELY polluted by colleagues who are too lazy to read it from the very beginning and, at least a little, think about it. I will try to generalize for lazy people, WITHOUT claiming absolute truth and completeness.

To begin with - the axioms:
1. UV attracts insects better than visible light, all other things being equal. The reason is not known for certain;
2. more powerful light sources attract insects more efficiently than less powerful ones of the same type. The reason is to cover a larger area under equal conditions;
3. Weather conditions affect the effectiveness of UV and conventional lamps in different ways. Reason - in addition to the radiation spectrum of the source, there is also the absorption spectrum of the environment, water vapor (rain, fog) the stronger the absorption of light, the shorter the wavelength of this light (UV is absorbed more strongly than visible light).
4. Both UV and visible light are not one wavelength, but ranges of wavelengths. The most effective wavelengths for insects in both ranges are not really known to science and may be different for different species.
5. UV light is not visible.

Conclusions from the axioms:
out of 1 and 4, it is always better to use a UV source with the widest possible wavelength range;
out of 2, it is always better to use the maximum possible brightness source (note: some species land on the edge of illumination, so as the brightness of the source increases, it becomes difficult to detect such species in the fishing area);
out of 3, 4 and 5, features use broadband light sources or a combination of different sources. The second option is optimal.

Evaluation of light sources in relation to axioms and conclusions from them:
1. the widest spectrum in the visible and UV ranges of the available lamps are:
- DRL-type split lamps (with the bulb removed). Important note-harmful to the skin and vision!;
- non-split DRL lamps;
- DRV lamps.
All these lamps are available in high-power versions, at least 150 watts (up to 1000). All work only from AC, DRL require special additional devices (throttle, ballast resistors, etc.)
2. UV lamps are produced for specific practical purposes, so:
- as a rule, public lamps are not very powerful due to the harmfulness of UV. Note-there are also high-power industrial UV lamps, they are not generally available;
- public lamps are relatively narrow-band with a shift towards visible light.
UV lamps do not differ in the principles of operation from DRL/DRV and are powered by alternating current. Those that operate from direct current have a built-in rectifier and electronic control circuit, which reduces their reliability, especially in the field.
3. video diodes:
- in principle, they are narrow-band, including ultraviolet ones. In this case, they are significantly inferior to the pricked DRL .
- their energy efficiency (the ratio of light intensity to power consumption) is currently NO better than DRL lamps.
- the power of the available single LED does not exceed 10W:
- high energy efficiency at high brightness is achieved by using in pulse mode. If you turn it on like a regular lamp, the benefits are largely lost;
- the advantage in the field is the operation of LEDs from a constant current of low voltage due to compatibility with batteries.

Choosing a fishing spot (based on practical experience). Axiom: maximum visibility in all directions is always desirable. Ways to achieve this goal:
1. on the plain - a higher elevation of the light source. Disadvantages:
- insects gather at the top, so raise to a reasonable limit;
- a number of species land on the border of light.
2. in the forest-fishing in large clearings, edges, roads and clearings;
3. in the mountains-fishing in the basin. Allows you to attract insects from all the surrounding hills, insects fly better down than up. When fishing at the top, shadow zones are formed along the slope and high vegetation interferes, i.e. you need to raise the lamp high.

The best option at the moment is:
1. the presence of a generator or a fixed AC line;
2. a combination of a split DRL-250 with an incandescent lamp or a 100-watt energy-saving lamp. The DRL rises up and lures insects to a wide-spectrum UV, and the lamp is hung directly at the screen (or even on both sides) and pulls the baited insects down onto the screen. The high location of the DRL reduces the harmful effect of UV and makes it easier to protect yourself from it, for example, with a wide-brimmed hat;
3. periodically turn off one or two lamps at once for a short time in order to pull up insects that have landed far from the light source.

Low-power lamps based on UV lamps and light-emitting diodes seem to be the most effective when used in autonomous light traps, as they allow you to catch the most widely in rugged terrain. At the same time, you do not need a constant presence near them, which expands the time range of fishing for the whole night.

PS. Correct, supplement, and criticize, and the result should be posted at the root of the topic as a mandatory FAQ...

Thank you, mikee, for a short and clear explanation, even for a beginner! And at the expense of littering with all sorts of garbage, then just not everyone wants to read all 38 pages

Thank you, mikee, for a short and clear explanation, even for a beginner! And at the expense of clogging up with all sorts of garbage, it's just that not everyone wants to read all 38 pages

Doesn't the topic search work? Not....?
Just typed a word at the bottom, clicked on the button and got the result.
Like this (on the example of the lamp that interests you) :

Pictures:

pic.jpg — (46.05к)

Naturally, all LEDs are inferior to the pricked DRL in efficiency, but they have a lot of listed advantages. It would be a mistake to confuse the characteristics of UV diodes and white light diodes. White light is a mixture of all ranges, it is by definition the widest range. Modern high-power LEDs are used in photographic equipment, as permanent (not pulsed) illuminators, because they have a near-ideal daylight spectrum that does not distort colors. Some models of setodiodes have a colder spectrum at high voltage (10000K is a bluish "hospital" shade), so they should attract insects better than conventional ones Energy-saving daylight lamps are 2500-4200K and absolutely safe for vision. Efficiency has already been discussed, 150-160 Lum/W is an unattainable ratio for either ES lamps or DRL/DRV. And if professional photography equipment and human vision do not distinguish between the pulsation of LEDs, then why should the vision of insects distinguish it, or why should the pulsation, if it is noticeable, scare them away, and not vice versa? Plants, for example, grow better when there is a noticeable ripple in lighting,

No one disputes that LEDs, apparently, are the main path of development of lighting technology at the moment. Therefore, experiments with them are welcome. At the same time, I will allow myself to state that a plasma discharge in a gas (DRL) fundamentally gives a much larger width of the radiation spectrum than any semiconductor LED. A wide spectrum of LED radiation should be achieved by a large number of different impurities to the main semiconductor, which leads to a deterioration in the properties of the device as a diode, which is accompanied by an increase in power losses. However, let's ask a specialist in this field - Sergey-sdi. It seems to me that such quoted figures of light temperature are achieved not by a wide spectrum of a single LED, but simply by mixing the RGB-type stream from several narrow-band LEDs...

As for ripples, don't compare human and insect vision. We don't see UV, insects see; we don't hear ultrasound, insects hear...

395-410 nm, here is the wavelength of single-watt LEDs from the online store. I don't remember exactly, but the store in my city is about the same.
Spectrum (offhand from the same site ) for LEDs, the white glow varies from 2670 to 10000 lm, which fully covers the spectrum of DRL and DRV.
Who can say anything about this range? I didn't find any such information on DRL and DRV.
I think if at least conditionally determine the wavelength for UV and the spectrum in kelvins for white light, which are considered effective for catching, it will be easier.
DRL-250 has a luminous flux of 12000 lm,drv-250 -5000 lm.
drl-125 -6200 lm, drv-160-2850 lm. (Examples of characteristics from the Internet)
As far as I understand catch on both varieties of different power? Then the spread is quite large.

PS I read the topic,if not completely, but 80% of it. And to be honest, I didn't see any specifics. If that I ask strongly not to scold if the question is idle....

This post was edited by tiger33 - 04.03.2012 21: 43

395-410 nm, here is the wavelength of single-watt LEDs from the online store. I don't remember exactly, but the store in my city is about the same.
Spectrum (offhand from the same site ) for LEDs, the white glow varies from 2670 to 10000 lm, which fully covers the spectrum of DRL and DRV.
Who can say anything about this range? I didn't find any such information on DRL and DRV.
I think if at least conditionally determine the wavelength for UV and the spectrum in kelvins for white light, which are considered effective for catching, it will be easier.
DRL-250 has a luminous flux of 12000 lm,drv-250 -5000 lm.
drl-125 -6200 lm, drv-160-2850 lm. (Examples of characteristics from the Internet)
As far as I understand catch on both varieties of different power? Then the spread is quite large.

PS I read the topic,if not completely, but 80% of it. And to be honest, I didn't see any specifics. If that I ask strongly not to scold if the question is idle....

Maxim, you are lumping together the spectral characteristics and parameters of the light flux... Especially in the phrase "Spectrum (offhand from the same site ) the white luminance of LEDs varies from 2670 to 10000 lm" In the physics of light, a lot of different characteristics and, accordingly, units of measurement are used. Try to figure it out for yourself.

Gentlemen, what is the resource of these very LEDs? I judge by the white LEDs from Chinese flashlights, which for the most part sit down quite quickly. It is for this reason that there is - does it even make sense to use them?

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 04.03.2012 22: 40

Thank you, mikee, for a short and clear explanation, even for a beginner! And at the expense of clogging up with all sorts of garbage, it's just that not everyone wants to read all 38 pages

Did you notice that I used expressions like "science doesn't know" in several places? But these 38 pages contain grains of invaluable practical experience of many of our colleagues. That's why you should read them all to:
1. extract these grains;
2. make sense of them;
3. organize them;
4. maybe come up with something new;
3.try it out without repeating mistakes.

It's just that you won't find it anywhere else... And, here, the repetition of unread questions in the topic leads to only one result - an increase in the number of pages. And subsequent participants will find it even harder to grasp the information. By the way, all of this applies to other forum topics as well.

Gentlemen, what is the resource of these very LEDs? I judge by the white LEDs from Chinese flashlights, which for the most part sit down quite quickly. It is for this reason that there is - does it even make sense to use them?

Theoretically, the lifetime of LEDs is infinite In practice, this is not so, but for all my many years of practice, I have met failed LEDs only in data transmission systems where they are used in extreme modes. We are talking about infrared LEDs, which are very hot by definition. When operating in the rated mode and with a normal heat sink, failures are rare.
In Chinese flashlights, it is not the LEDs that die, but the control scheme for them (a pulse generator with output keys). Oxidation of contacts in the battery compartment is even more common.