Best placement for strips?

Going to be re doing my lights here soon, any thoughts on my


this will cover a 3 x 5 area and can be hung up to 9 ft.

The build uses
2 x XLG 240 H AB
1 x HLG 150H 54A
10 x Samsung B8T521560WW 4000k
2 x HLG QB96
I have the strips mounted inside 2 4ft shelving brackets. With extra material to mount the QBs inside the same bracket by their heat sinks.

i have the drivers mounted outside the grow space to help with heat issues.

Any light gurus available to help me out?
Just trying to get the best out of what I’m working with.

Looks like a good plan !


Increasing overall size would improve coverage, however I am not sure it is necessary.

Better in my mind to have more than you need, light is our driving force, period. I'd keep it nice and tight like you have it and shoot for max par watts per square ft, you won't regret it lol, I started with 4 strips per fixture, ended up having to add another to beef it up a bit, and are those quantum board square or rectangular just curious

Gweedo's Growroom said:

Better in my mind to have more than you need, light is our driving force, period. I'd keep it nice and tight like you have it and shoot for max par watts per square ft, you won't regret it lol, I started with 4 strips per fixture, ended up having to add another to beef it up a bit, and are those quantum board square or rectangular just curious

Click to expand...

They’re rectangle but really small, around 4 x 3 inches roughly for the board itself.

You may have to run the quantums side by side to avoid a darker spot where they are placed in your current layout would shorten your fixture a bit but also ensure you've got good even cover over the canopy space you'll be using

I would like to illustrate my suggestion in order to provide my reasoning.

Law of inverse Square. If I double the distance from the light source I measure 25% of the original output.

A wider array would provide more consistent readings across the entire canopy, while avoiding hot spots at the expense of shaded areas.

This is a theoretical drawing based upon my experiences measuring light intensity.

In this diagram two fixtures are superimposed atop another. The underlined readings are from a compact fixture. The 800 ratings (again theoretical) are provided by a larger fixture using the same LEDs.

(( drawn out of scale to embellish my debate))
Again I am making this all up ,,,,,it does appear logical to me.

If spreading out the light source does not provide adequate intensity across the canopy :: compacting the layout would only exasperate the problem.

Just my 2 cents ( no cash value)

Jewels has it dead on if the coverage is good with a spread fixture go for it if not compact the fixture and run a little less canopy space, you'll yield the same with say 2 less plants, need a decent way t ok measure the output under your fixture