passive plant killer

[disciple]

 

[delta9nxs]

hey hossauce! i had a nice reply all done and it got dumped on the way here. i'm too tired to do it again right now but i''ll do it tomorrow.

d9

 

[Hossauce]

Delta9 - don't worry about it, and thanks for taking the time to write up a response.

Disciple - Thanks very much for clarifiying about the wick...I saw someone's ppk have a piece of cloth covering the tailpiece, and also hearing Delta9 refer to microfiber wicks, I wasn't sure if the wick was the tailpiece itself, or if it was another piece of material, like an actual wick.

I have managed to locate the Turface at a local Irrigation store, but haven't found the Rice Hulls yet. Where is the best place to find these? Was it you Delta that mentioned a brewing supply store? I'll have to check that out today. Thanks again !

 

[delta9nxs]

Quotes by hossauce

“First time poster here, and I'd like to start off by giving a HUGE thanks to delta9, as well as everyone else who has contributed to this phenomenal thread.”

thank you!

“So my journey begins...I'm going to be setting up a 12-unit PPK in a 10x10 room, running 4K Hortilux's. I've only had two moderately successful micro closet soil grows a few years back, but with the help of my knowledgeable brother and this forum, as well as his plethora of equipment, I'm ready for this exciting challenge. I'm going to be following your design as close as I can, in order to hope to achieve half of the success you are with your ladies. So, I've read through basically the whole thread, have everything planned out, and am about ready to start buying all my supplies online. I do have a few questions first though, if you wouldn't mind answering, or anyone else who could potentially help me out.

I've seen mentioned several times that a lot of people are just using straight tap water, and to NOT use RO water. I live in Vegas where the water is particularly awful, giving me a reading of just over 400ppm. I obviously need to use RO in that case, correct?”

you could get an analysis of the water and have jrpeters try to match up a fertilizer package for you but it still won't work as well as the jack's pro hydro, which was designed for ro or distilled water. The people who make statements like “not using ro water” are misinformed. They think that just because their tap water is ok that everyone else's is. Your 400 ppm water is liquid rock. I wouldn't even mess with it. Gh's hardwater micro can't touch that stuff. It's just too much to deal with without a custom nutrient package. Commercial greenhouses cannot afford to use ro water so they get an analysis done and have someone make up a custom blend for their water and crop. I use a little spectrapure mpro 90. I have it hooked up off the washing machine plumbing. The waste drains there too. It goes to a drum with a float valve. From there via hose to the mixing tank and then it is pumped up into the volume tanks. Marinedepot.Com is a good source. Also to consider, the spectrapure uses industry standard replacement elements. They sell a complete set for under 40 bucks. Mine produces 5 ppm water from 250 plus when new and I let them get up to about 50 ppm before I replace them.

“I was going to go with Atami Coco, per your recommendation, but I noticed lately you've been all about the Turface/Rice Hull combo. I found a store right down the street that sells the Atami, but the Turface I'm having trouble locating. Do you think the benefits of the Turface mix are greater than the ease of the Atami/Perlite 3/1 mix? How do you prep the coco for use, and also, what medium are you using for cloning?”

there is nothing wrong with coco. If it is the closest, easiest, cheapest option for you use it. The atami does not need to be amended. Other coco's might. I pretreated it by rinsing heavily with tap water in an attempt to wash out salt and their nutrient pretreatment. You'll notice the atami is shipped moist. This is so that the treatment can begin to work on the cec issue while in the bag. I then take ec 2 nutrient solution and do a one time rinse through to displace the tap water and further condition the coco. I grew huge plants with no issues with this scheme.

“I've read through the wick sections over and over, and still am having trouble pinpointing exactly what you're using as wick material, and how you are using it. Any chance you could clarify for me?”

I use the same medium I use to grow in. the wick is a pvc tube packed with it.

“I saw you mentioned that you were using a Cyclestat timer, and that you wish you had gotten a Cap Controller instead? Would you mind pointing me in the right direction of which specific repeat cycle timer I should be using?”

I bought those terribly overpriced cyclestats because I was in a hurry and I thought I would be using the photocell shutoff feature which you don't need at all. The cap controllers can be had for 70 bucks and they will do the same thing. But now that i'm about done experimenting with pulse I think i'm going to get a set of the drt-1 sentinels. I like digital control and a backup memory.

“How do you feel about increasing the size of the drip line to the pulse terminal? You've done so, and you said you haven't noticed much as far as results, besides being able to pump more water through per pulse? You said your biggest plant to date was still off the standard 1/4" line, correct? And your only issue with this was that it started to clog after around a year or so? So currently, all of your drip line is the 1/4" ID, 3/8" OD, and the connectors are 5/16" black latex, with .625 tire valves?”

correct, I still haven't grown a bigger plant with the new plumbing but I will. I have been running it in flower for over a month and think i'm seeing better bud development. But I could be hallucinating. The standard drip line works well. It just takes longer to deliver the pulse.

“And last, but not least. I saw you recently mentioned to stagehand about instead of using your pulse terminal, to just go ahead and use T's instead. Are you no longer using that H design made from the John Guest fitting and pvc? If not, which T's would you recommend? And is the John Guest fitting necessary, or would a standard fitting religiously wrapped in Teflon be sufficient?”

if you are going to use the 1/4” od drip line the drip t's will work fine. Lowes and home depot. Each terminal gets 3 t's putting the outlets in the H pattern. The 22 oz plant was grown using these.

“Sorry for the long list of questions, I just really want to get everything squared away before I start my build. Thanks again for everyone's amazing input to the thread, and hopefully soon I can share my experiences to those that have helped me so much.”

no problem, that's what we are here for. This is the antidote for plant count restrictions.

Later, d9

 

[stagehand099]

~~But now that i'm about done experimenting with pulse I think i'm going to get a set of the drt-1 sentinels. I like digital control and a backup memory.~~

I went with the DRT-1 for the same reasons and more. I have a CAP thermistat (day/night temp controller) in that same little plastic box that the recycling timer comes in and the thing is cheesy and the box will flex plugging it in to the wall. IT WILL BREAK sooner or later. On the other hand, the Sentinel is big and solid and smells like quality to me for $35.00 more shipped.

stagehand

 

[delta9nxs]

How much pulse is enough? How do we determine pulse duration and interval when we all use different pumps with different capacities?

This is further compounded by the use of different size containers with different hole patterns. Different media and different size delivery lines.

And some are using different diameter wick tubes.

I think there is a universal answer that fits all versions.

At the point solution first comes out of the sidewall holes is the point of maximum displacement of gases.

The perched water table has fully formed and is being overwhelmed by the volume even though it is draining the medium fast.

Adding additional volume at this point is redundant.

 

[Snook]

How much pulse is enough? How do we determine pulse duration and interval when we all use different pumps with different capacities?

This is further compounded by the use of different size containers with different hole patterns. Different media and different size delivery lines.

And some are using different diameter wick tubes.

I think there is a universal answer that fits all versions.

At the point solution first comes out of the sidewall holes is the point of maximum displacement of gases.

The perched water table has fully formed and is being overwhelmed by the volume even though it is draining the medium fast.

Adding additional volume at this point is redundant.

YAY!

No water out the side holes = not enough, 'a little' more.. ala: drain to waste but with no waste.

 

[mcfly420]

No FNB yet - I think those burnt plants were fed diluted jacks, checked w/ hydrobuddy just to be sure on the numbers. I'm still using a rooting powder too, but after reading more about dip n' grow that will soon change. The problem was most likely a combination of low humidity in that area and using unknown tightweaved wicks. Helps to know you don't see it at all. I still want to use cups w/ wicks, despite your experiences. The roots of clones (with a few days of veg) can split the cups down the sides when finished -but no real complaints about growth/yield. Got a few moms in 1gal square containers and thats pretty much the largest this setup can handle. Plant counts kinda don't apply here ~yet. Really liking the thermolam material though, kicking myself for not getting it sooner. I had somehow missed your reply to zeke99 about wicks. How much do the cloners typically cost anyways?

 

[bloyd]

How much do the cloners typically cost anyways?

4.50 per container at my mart so ~9 per cloner.

 

[mcfly420]

Thanks, thats a bit less than I had seen online. My 1gal square containers are $5 each but also filled w/ decent enough ice cream for milkshakes. Washing them w/ bleach before using. They are 6"H x 7"W and create a 1.5" gap when stacked. I'm slowly getting more of them and adding a third bottomless one as a spacer to create a larger res.

 

[catman]

I just wondered if roots in the tail pipe when there is a little gap might aid or help with wicking action.... more "pull" on the solution...

Well, you know what heath would say about the air gap I assume, but will say for the sake of others. Any air gap leads to cord roots which are not optimal.

With my simple bucket I just top watered to waste while vegging until roots began to grow out the tail piece and down into the bottom bucket. Sometimes I would water and drain the lower bucket of run off so the roots would be in air for 48 hours and still be moist to the touch. They also were fine after 10 days of constant submersion with no waste removal. So, I never submerged my lower bucket res over the tail piece and it definitely helped. At harvest I'll try and weigh a saturated bucket that had a root wick and see how it compares to the weights I measured by allowing the tail piece to be the wick.

that would be a good pattern except that my drawing is to scale on everything but the plants.

it's really tight in there.

I had a strong hunch them plants were drawn too small.

So do you plan on just running a column of lights or are you going to try a pattern?

I was trying to do a layout with room to work, but I image it must be pretty awesome sneaking around through a jungle.

That reminds me. Has anyone here experimented with rock dust, azomite, or something similar as a supplement in a ppk? I know it's recommended that the turface be rinsed to minimize clogging. Have not worked with turface so I'm not sure how similar it is, in clogging properties, to rock dust or azomite. I use these products in my hempy buckets and would like to continue in ppks. Any thoughts on this?

Turface should be thoroughly rinsed in my experiences, especially if you are running the solution through pumps. With Turface MVP, I'd just give a bucket of it a long and cold shower. The dust that comes out is so fine and it sticks together so it's better described as a mud. This stuff will fill a tail piece, but I don't recall if it would actually clog it. The finer particles would actually probably wick better, but perhaps too well.

There is dust and then there are smaller pieces of turface I call fines. Here are some images I took. I run the turface and perlite through screens to get the fines out, but this does not remove the dust from the larger screen pieces. I think becuase turface is so porous, it is fragile such that dust will be created from friction with other medium particles that lead to fractures. I'm just nearly completely a first experiment with something like a simple PPK bucket that is watered by hand and I still get some dust that settles to the bottom of my lower buckets.

First image shows my screened material with the second being a mix of turface sizes with some perlite fines (not dust.) Beyond the first 2 pictures is a plant that I started growing in fines of turface and perlite. There was a single hempy hole just above the bottom of the container. I wasn't even intending to flower this unsexed plant at the time and I couldn't drown her when I tried too. She vegged, transplanted, and took to LST, topping, and defoliation well.



I've never seen anyone use rock dust or azomite so would you please tell us your experiences with them?

How much pulse is enough? How do we determine pulse duration and interval when we all use different pumps with different capacities?

I think there is a universal answer that fits all versions.

At the point solution first comes out of the sidewall holes is the point of maximum displacement of gases.

The perched water table has fully formed and is being overwhelmed by the volume even though it is draining the medium fast.

How far above the sidewall holes should water get, if ever?

Adding additional volume above the PWT created by the sidewall holes would not be simply redundant, but would temporarily raise the height of the solution in the medium into "air root zones." Whether this would be good or bad would largely depend on the duration between pulses. If there is a long duration between pulses, extra contact and higher wicking could benefit the air roots, but with more frequent top feeds there is less, if any, need to essentially 'flood and drain' with a pulse. The more/higher the solution pulsed above the sidewall holes, the faster it will initially drain, but the total duration to drain will still obviously be longer than if less solution was pulsed. Is there still a cycle of events we are trying to map the optimal times of or can we just admit we are just being led to the same conclusions that have already been demonstrated with RDWC?

I've never ran a RDWC so anyone please correct me if I'm mistaken, but more current leads to more yield until the point roots are being significantly damaged by the turbulence. I've read how some plants prefer to grow under higher or lower pressure and if this is why RDWC has such vigorous growth, I don't think this could ever be achieved through a medium-based method like PPK. Medium would waste space where roots would otherwise grow and I would think the high flow of current along with the medium would lead to more risk of damage to the roots. Medium is going to prevent current flow and I don't know any numbers, but I'm guessing it would be impossible to move even a fraction of the volume/time that a RDWC system is capable of through say turface. Keeping in mind that it may be the pressure which is of major benefit and not the mere flow of water, which generally coincides with higher pressure. Turface could be used in a closed system (pressurized) if the hassle of caring for a RDWC reservoir was taken or if the system cycled between being closed and allowing gases in.

My question more simply said..You have said when to stop pulsing, but in-line with your logic, when does one know when to optimally pulse again? Or is it that we are just trying to pulse as much and as often as possible without drowning any air roots?

 

[disciple]

 

[delta9nxs]

No FNB yet - I think those burnt plants were fed diluted jacks, checked w/ hydrobuddy just to be sure on the numbers. I'm still using a rooting powder too, but after reading more about dip n' grow that will soon change. The problem was most likely a combination of low humidity in that area and using unknown tightweaved wicks. Helps to know you don't see it at all. I still want to use cups w/ wicks, despite your experiences. The roots of clones (with a few days of veg) can split the cups down the sides when finished -but no real complaints about growth/yield. Got a few moms in 1gal square containers and thats pretty much the largest this setup can handle. Plant counts kinda don't apply here ~yet. Really liking the thermolam material though, kicking myself for not getting it sooner. I had somehow missed your reply to zeke99 about wicks. How much do the cloners typically cost anyways?

hey mcfly, i haven't done the numbers in a long time but i think there is a lot more nitrogen in jack's than the fnb. i have never burned a clone or seedling with 300 ppm fnb. i have with flora nova grow at the same dose.

i use the fnb until i see a root or two at the sidewall of the container. then it's straight to 600 ppm jack's.

 

[delta9nxs]

Quotes by catman

“I had a strong hunch them plants were drawn too small.

So do you plan on just running a column of lights or are you going to try a pattern?

I was trying to do a layout with room to work, but I image it must be pretty awesome sneaking around through a jungle.”


thanks again for the drawing, I wish I had done the plants to scale the first time.

In the drawing you see all lights are on the longitudinal center line of the room.

The five small circles are vertical 1k cooltubes. The 4 horizontals are also cooltubed.

I will run the verticals 6 hours and then the horizontals 6 hours.

We'll see how it works.


“How far above the sidewall holes should water get, if ever?”


I only get water out of the bottommost row of holes.


“My question more simply said..You have said when to stop pulsing, but in-line with your logic, when does one know when to optimally pulse again? Or is it that we are just trying to pulse as much and as often as possible without drowning any air roots?”


well, this is a very good question! We are still trying to pin it down exactly.

But here is the sequence of events in my system.

I am delivering 64 oz's every 30 minutes right now.
The main “black box” reservoir level drops about an inch and a half.

Within 9 minutes the entire system is at equilibrium again so theoretically it could be fired again at that point. This means that the medium has completely or nearly completely drained and has begun the drying process caused by plant uptake and evaporation. It sits at maximum air porosity and maximum water content.

For a while. Right now approx 21 minutes.

While i'm quite certain the plant does not need more water and nutrients in this short time frame it could need a refreshment of the o2 that has been consumed. And a purging of the co2 that has built up.

We have no way of determining this at home with the equipment we have available but we can watch the plants response.

In IF's scrog grow the plant went nuts and I think i'm seeing a positive response too. It's a little too early to make any conclusions.

We know that the plants o2 requirements are large because of all things that people have to do to replenish o2 in hydro systems that are dependent on o2 dissolved in water.

And you are right here in that it seems to be almost linear in these traditional hydro systems. More o2 = more vigorous growth.

Bio buckets, undercurrent designs, and rwdc come to mind.

That is where this system differs so radically from these other hydro techniques. This system derives it's o2 from the air primarily, not the water. It is not possible to do a valid comparison between the types of systems.

This system, built and used properly, can grow plants just as fast, just as big, and just as heavy with bud as any other system I have tried.

I have extensive experience with bio buckets, dwc, and rdwc, ebb and flow, nft, and hand watered hydroponics and nothing I have tried produces plants as healthy as this system does.

No hydroponic solution is perfect. There are continuous, subtle, chemical changes going on. These changes move ph around. When ph gets moved around excessively the plant displays symptoms of nutrient antagonisms and/or stimulations. The white or opaque spots you sometimes see on leaves are not from these or the oft misused term “deficiency”. They are actually from roots sitting in an anaerobic pool of water.

By limiting root growth into the solution we can limit the solution changes or the severity of changes that affect the plant. It is no longer necessary to maintain a poised position over your grow with a ph meter in one hand and a tds meter in the other while taking temperatures holding a thermometer with whatever you've got left.

This is further enhanced by the fact that most of your solution remains segregated from the “working” part of the system and is just replenished as needed.

You don't have to obsess about o2 delivery, tds or ph, or solution temperature.

No chillers needed because the roots are not sitting in solution. You will never get root rot in one of these. You will never have a water stress event. You will never over water.

I felt like I needed to go over some of this again to get to the point where we are not comparing this to other systems. There is no way to compare this to systems that get most of their o2 from fast moving water.

Here we are using the water to deliver water and nutrients to the plant and then we are using water as a mechanical tool to displace gas in the root zone. Not to deliver o2.

The more water you can get into the root zone before significant draining occurs the more gas you are displacing. Then the draining occurs drawing gas back into the root zone. This is what brings huge quantities of o2 to the roots.

Remember that in two equal sized containers, one filled with water at maximum o2 saturation and the other filled with atmospheric gas, of which approx 21% is o2 at sea level, the container of atmospheric gas will contain approx 23,300 times the free o2 molecules as the container of water at maximum dissolved o2 capacity.

Well, I hope this helps, later, d9

 

[delta9nxs]

That reminds me. Has anyone here experimented with rock dust, azomite, or something similar as a supplement in a ppk? I know it's recommended that the turface be rinsed to minimize clogging. Have not worked with turface so I'm not sure how similar it is, in clogging properties, to rock dust or azomite. I use these products in my hempy buckets and would like to continue in ppks. Any thoughts on this?

hey slimm, i don't know shit about that stuff! sorry!

i would suggest that you check cec, bulk density, and porosity compared to turface.

later on!

 

[catman]

I've tried to get the water level above the sidewall holes but it just keeps draining out of them.

Do you get any water sitting on top of the medium and if so, how many inches above the medium?

I will run the verticals 6 hours and then the horizontals 6 hours.

Have ya seen anyone else try this yet? I haven't, but I would think it would work fine.

Within 9 minutes the entire system is at equilibrium again so theoretically it could be fired again at that point. This means that the medium has completely or nearly completely drained and has begun the drying process caused by plant uptake and evaporation. It sits at maximum air porosity and maximum water content.

The medium drains rapidly at first, but surely after 10 minutes it will still drip for a half hour or so. To me, this means that there was still water occupying space that could otherwise be gas. Every time a droplet of water falls, gas will replace it. Maybe this is why any signs of over-watering/deficit-oxygen is seen.

No hydroponic solution is perfect. There are continuous, subtle, chemical changes going on. These changes move ph around.

You don't have to obsess about o2 delivery, tds or ph, or solution temperature.

Here we are using the water to deliver water and nutrients to the plant and then we are using water as a mechanical tool to displace gas in the root zone. Not to deliver o2.

To make it clear, I am not comparing systems in anyway to suggest that someone should choose one or the other. I'm just trying to apply understandings from other systems that could be a benefit to this system.

I've understood everything you've said for some time now. Using a medium with CEC serves as a buffer which makes it easier/less-impossible to manage a solution and the plants compared to other systems. Totally understood the pulse is a "plunger" that pushes out gases and not merely adding water.

The more water you can get into the root zone before significant draining occurs the more gas you are displacing. Then the draining occurs drawing gas back into the root zone. This is what brings huge quantities of o2 to the roots.

If more water is being added than can be drained, a PWT will form and the lowering of the PWT is what displaces gases. If there are no sidewall holes, gases just bubble to the surface. Theoretically if you could add a volume instantaneously, you could create a vertical cylinder of water that would push all the gases down and out with the least amount of water. Would this really be all that different from adding water at any rate faster than the drainage regarding gas exchange aside from the duration between cycles? What I'm ultimately getting at is if you only have watering running out of your bottom row of sidewall holes, no temporary PWT is created to act as the plunger.

Add water, gas gets displaced. Remove water, gas replaces it. What if the pulse and drainage from the sidewall holes were balanced such that the bucket can become nearly entirely saturated with water, as to completely exchange all of the gas especially in the air root zones?

 

[disciple]

 

[disciple]

 

[disciple]

 

[delta9nxs]

hi, catman!

once again i find myself going down a road with you that i have been down before.

i find myself debating physical characteristics and properties with you about this device.

this is not something that i want to do or have time for. i'm not trying to be rude. it's just that i'm extremely busy right now and don't really have the time for long debates about a device that has been proven not only by me but by many others.

my advice to you is to build one of these devices just as you see it being used here. operate it for a while, and then you will be in a better position to contribute if you still want to.

or alternately, in your own thread, prove or disprove your ideas, and report your results. i, for one, would be interested to see how they work out. you know, document the experiments with photos and text. keep weight reports and so on.

as far as i am concerned i am almost done with this project. i see my role now as a facilitator for those wanting to build one.

i have other experimental interest i am pursuing right now and am trying to focus on them.

for example i think i have found a way to reverse sexual expression in clones from feminized seed stock without using exogenous phytohormones or any plant growth regulators at all. i'm very involved with this right now and spend a lot of time on it.

and i'm still playing with the light demon.

i'm really not spending much time at all on further development of the ppk. we are just fine tuning and tweaking now.

so please don't think i'm being intentionally rude as i'm not. i'm just very busy. thank you for your understanding.

d9