Noobin up a PPK

[delta9nxs]

after seeing the root ball i think i will go with the slow drain for 90% and a bunch of shit and the wrong ferts in the res for 10%. that coco is way too fine looking!

flower farmer has some nice pics of the atami loose fill on his thread. there is a mixture of fibers giving it the proper consistency and performance. 30% air porosity!

dave, dave, dave. if you want to go drain to waste i put up my construction of a dtw ppk on posts 175, 176, 177 of the "wicked pulse" thread.

i have a porosity test on my big plant thread. it really should be done with any new or unknown medium.

the drain time should not take more than 10 minutes and i consider that to be a max. 3-5 minutes is much better.

air gap with coco 3-4" probably closer to 4". screened tailpiece.

you can use the maxibloom all the way through if you add the mag sulfate and calcium nitrate as i posted. you've got maxibloom and epsom on hand, all you need is a little calcium nitrate. since you are getting the maxibloom somewhere don't the same folks have flora micro?

until you get a grow done without issues you should refrain from putting anything but nutes in your res.

please!

 

[DaveTheNewbie]

after seeing the root ball i think i will go with the slow drain for 90% and a bunch of shit and the wrong ferts in the res for 10%. that coco is way too fine looking!

flower farmer has some nice pics of the atami loose fill on his thread. there is a mixture of fibers giving it the proper consistency and performance. 30% air porosity!

well i can only get the coco i can get. Cutting it with perlite or hydroton is easy tho.

dave, dave, dave. if you want to go drain to waste i put up my construction of a dtw ppk on posts 175, 176, 177 of the "wicked pulse" thread.

yup i have referenced that a few times.

i have a porosity test on my big plant thread. it really should be done with any new or unknown medium.

the drain time should not take more than 10 minutes and i consider that to be a max. 3-5 minutes is much better.

well again i have what i have ... it never occoured to me that my coco could be crap.

air gap with coco 3-4" probably closer to 4". screened tailpiece.

check.

you can use the maxibloom all the way through if you add the mag sulfate and calcium nitrate as i posted. you've got maxibloom and epsom on hand, all you need is a little calcium nitrate. since you are getting the maxibloom somewhere don't the same folks have flora micro?

maybe plain maxibloom would have done it as well. Maybe the dripclean was the culprit from day 1

until you get a grow done without issues you should refrain from putting anything but nutes in your res.

please!

To recap i was running a mixed system of a few blumats as well as the PPK. I was using a successful formula on the blumats that included the very recommended drip clean. At no point did it ever occour to me that this would be a problem. Even so there was no way i could have taken it out.

EDIT : i can get canna brand coco as well. If the current coco is bad, maybe thats why my blumats are always so troublesome?

 

[DamnUglyDogE]

Do you think a few holes (1/8")along the sides of the pot could have saved(like a safty measure) this lady if she died due ta not being able to drain fast enough for air exchange and moving nuits ?

Not ta say you should or shouldn't use drip clean. Yet..
If you have used it other systems
then it seems it would have been ok had the coco been able to drain..

So - correct me if im wrong- The diagnosis by those that know is..

Due to none/very slow drainage the drip clean built to harmful/counter productive levels that blocked the ladies food and she starved ta death..

I was looking at drip clean as I have the full line of house-garden feeding and want to use it before it gets to old..
Was worried about my 1/4" lines..
Guess I could just sell it off as im hooked on Jacks.

Thanks for documenting this experience so well bro..

Cant wait ta see you have a smooth sailing grow.. Going ta be epic..

Forever forward ma friend. .


----- -----



*

 

[DHF]

That plant didn`t starve to death guys.......It drowned...I`ve seen that same look on DWC plants as well as krusty buckets far too many times back in the day and over the yrs.......and .......

The jury`s still out on dripclean being the culprit in a recirculating setup , although the premature yellowing off did appear to be from lockouts and imbalances from "something" in the mix or NOT in the mix showing either lack of N , or it being locked out , but dunno what caused it and no one else will ever know as well for sure now will we......

All we can do is move forward and hope yas get things worked out for future reference Dave......and as stated for the record.....

Base nutes with as few additives in ANY recirculating setup is advised so there`s less chance of knowing what`s fuckin shit up when and or if things go sideways.....

No setup`s bulletproof as we see first hand with the first official documented death by PPK , and......

Any recirculating hydro setup that can grow big plants without a chiller and as few moving parts , bells , and whistles as the PPK is a winner in book.....but.....

Yas still gotta have a copy of the rules and follow em without too much experimentation , or bitches `ll turn on yas and go belly up as Dave`s witnessed first hand....and finally......

If yas got a recirculating setup in the same room as DTW plants Dave , the PPK MUST not be fed by the same rez as the other plants....anyways......

Just tryin ta help Bro.....hope shit turns around with the quickness....

Peace....Freds.........

 

[DaveTheNewbie]

So - correct me if im wrong- The diagnosis by those that know is..

Due to none/very slow drainage the drip clean built to harmful/counter productive levels that blocked the ladies food and she starved ta death..

i BELIEVE that the drown theory and the dripclean theory are unrelated. Its one or the other (or something else)

That plant didn`t starve to death guys.......It drowned...I`ve seen that same look on DWC plants as well as krusty buckets far too many times back in the day and over the yrs

that was my first thought too. BUT if it drowned due to lack of draining in the water then the bucket would have overflowed. This didnt happen therefore there was enough drain that every 2 hours it was back to normal. Is it possible that it drowned due to over-wicking?

The jury`s still out on dripclean being the culprit in a recirculating setup , although the premature yellowing off did appear to be from lockouts and imbalances from "something" in the mix or NOT in the mix showing either lack of N , or it being locked out , but dunno what caused it and no one else will ever know as well for sure now will we......

that could be due to dripclean causing a lockout (very feasable) or due to maxibloom lacking N

Base nutes with as few additives in ANY recirculating setup is advised so there`s less chance of knowing what`s fuckin shit up when and or if things go sideways.....

i could only use what i had setup and had been running for over a year or so.

Yas still gotta have a copy of the rules and follow em without too much experimentation , or bitches `ll turn on yas and go belly up as Dave`s witnessed first hand

i was trying

If yas got a recirculating setup in the same room as DTW plants Dave , the PPK MUST not be fed by the same rez as the other plants....anyways......

the blumats were isolated from the recirculating part of the system. Or more technically the recirculating part of the system was isolated from the blumats and gravity res. The gravity res fed both the blumats and the control res, but neither one ever fed back to the gravity res.

oh yeah : its nutrifield coco brand i was using.

 

[DHF]

That`s what I love about you Dave...You`re always tryin.....I see whatchas mean about rez`s now so that`s why even though isolated , the 1 rez fed both setups........now.....

D9 can explain that gas exchange/fluid equilibrium shit better than me , but if the plant didn`t drain by his max time of 10 minutes , the plant was sittin in solution "drowning" a slow agonizing death from lack of O2 to roots....

Gotta be that as time went on with feed after feed that the tailpieces compacted and caused that hydraulic plug D9`s warned about with ANY medium other than the pre-screened/thoroughly washed turface.....

That plant was waaay too healthy to have died so abruptly from just lack of N or lockouts and imbalances......so.....I gotta call em like I see em Bro....

Tailpieces had no roots.....that means they hadta try and grow elsewhere cuz down through the tailpieces stayed too wet and wouldn`t drain properly.... regardless........That plant drowned Dave IME........

Good luck on next run.....

Peace.....Freds............

 

[FlowerFarmer]

I thought the idea was to not have roots grow much into the tailpieces... as it was supposed to remain too wet to create undesirable conditions for the roots.

Did you pack your tailpiece Dave? I was initially under the impression that the tailpiece was supposed to be packed with the media, but D9 corrected me on this before I loaded my system thankfully. Not sure where I came up with that. The OCD in my caused me to sprinkle a little perlite down into my tailpieces before filling with coco. I'm not sure if this is good or bad, but I thought it might help prevent the finer coco from washing through my screened end.


That said.. the below picture has worried me from the start. This is exactly what my buckets looked like when I 1st tried to do my initial rinse. Thought it might be the perlite in the tailpiece so I dumped one and reloaded it without.. no change. It wasnt until I drilled a bunch of holes in the bottom of my upper container that I could eliminate this "flooded" look. I could reach it with a fast feed from my 1/2" wand, but after drilling the holes it almost immediately "drained off" after I stopped giving it water.


I know D9 stated that holes are not necessary and that the media ultimately has to finish draining through the tailpieces to lower the perched water table, but maybe with coco the holes are a bit of a "Safety net".

Did your coco get like this with every pulse? And if so.. how long draining until it looked like my picture below yours. As DHF stated, if you remained like this for any length of time this was defiantly your culprit.

This is how my ppk looks after drilling holes and immediately after water turns off. Saturated, but no longer flooded/pooling.

D9, can this death that Dave experienced happen merely by maintaining too small of a air gap. My hole in my float container must be too large because it is allow in too much water during a fill cycle..shortening my air gap over time. I've taped over my original hole and made a smaller one, but curious if a 1-2" air-gap in coco would result in water logging the upper container resulting in drowning and mushy roots.


I agree with DHF that the plant drowned.. now was it because of coco compacting, and if so is coco compacting (forming a plug in the tailpieces) going to remain an issue despite having drilled additional drainage holes in my upper containers.

 

[DHF]

Maybe I`m wrong bout the tailpieces FF....I was goin off of what HL45`s avatar pic from a healthy big plant rootmass looked like.....but....

Still standin by my decision of lack of O2 to rootzone as the primary factor behind the plant dyin due to roots sittin in solution too long without adequate drainage to "pull" O2 down through said rootzone , thus the drowning effect.......

Peace...Freds..........

 

[bobblehead]

I've killed many plants many ways... But never drowned a plant. That would also starve the plant by locking up Ca, and I think its more probable than the dripclean theory.
The roots don't look mushy, so an anaerobic environment isn't the cause most likely imo.

 

[DHF]

I've killed many plants many ways... But never drowned a plant. That would also starve the plant by locking up Ca, and I think its more probable than the dripclean theory.
The roots don't look mushy, so an anaerobic environment isn't the cause most likely imo.

I defer to the science end of things as far as locking out Ca starving the plant for food , but it died cuz pot was NEVER supposed to grow under water on planet earth.....till artificial indoor cultivation was invented......that said...

With proper O2 to roots and accelerated flow in fast hydro setups , plants can thrive and yield accordingly ...but.....

If them bitches sit in solution without constant O2 to said rootzone for any length of time , they`ll fall over dead and turn to mulch....bet on it....Now....

Let`s hope the extra holes in your upper containers are taking care of the pooling FF as it looks , so.....

I`m gonna fare on the side of whatever and however it takes to maintain that fast juice exchange back to rez per each pulse feed for max O2 to roots and accelerated growth......

Peace.....Freds.........

 

[delta9nxs]

well, there's no doubt it drowned and once the o2 gets cut off everything else goes bad in a cascade too.

coco had the highest perched water table for me, i think close to 2". screened turface is about 1.5".

so with coco, you would want a minimum of 2" just to get the pwt out of the root zone.

but, this is not enough with coco as it also has a higher capillary capability than most other media so it's moisture profile should be moved downward.

not to imply that all media do not need an appropriate adjustment.

the moisture profile in a container is distributed along a vertical gradient being more dense at the bottom and less dense at the top.

so by dropping the controlled water table down 2 more inches to a total of 4" below the grow container you can create a more aerated condition in the lower part of the container by lowering the start point of the moisture profile.

this also aids in draining the container as once the perched water table has formed the additional draining is accomplished by capillary siphon not gravity.

the additional holes everyone is speaking of will only assist draining to the point where the perched water table would normally form in your medium. at that point all additional draining, the entire perched water table, will be through the tailpieces using the principles of a capillary siphon.

so if the tailpiece does not flow, you cannot grow!

 

[DaveTheNewbie]

wow this thread got interesting quickly.

1) i am very happy to agree that it drowned. Thats what it looked like to me at first and thats what i said way back before dripclean was mentioned.

2) it was draining VERY slowly, and while i didnt time it with a clock regularly, it could easily have been 20 minutes that it was soaked and flooded every pulse. This is when i first planted the plant.

3) if the mechanics were bad from the start i would never have had such success in the first few weeks. Something HAD to change over time.

4) something changed over time, and got worse very quicly in the last week or so. The only explanations i can come up with are a) nute lockout over time or b) tailpiece clogging up so that the drain speed slowed. b) would have to be the premier theory IMO.

5) the draining did not ever stop completely. If that had happened then it would have flooded at every feed.

Soooo, if i suffered a 4b (which is tailpiece clogging) then why and how do i fix it. Many people here have done coco PPKs successfully. I had 3 tailpieces in the pot not 1. And the air gap would be at least 4 inches but closer to 5.

Can it really be that Nutrifield coco is that different to Atami coco and thats the only reason / difference? That seems a little bit far fetched.

I wonder what coco other people have used that worked?

It would seem that cutting the coco with perlite or hydroton or whatever would have to be a good insurance policy based on this theory.

Is there any disadvantage to cutting the coco with rocks/stones/pebbles/chips/hydroton/perlite/turdface/your grandmothers undies?

Its good to see D9 state categorically that no matter how many other holes you drill in the bucket, if the tailpiece is clogged your dead. This shuts off a tangent theory from developing.

It also makes the recirc/DTW tangent irrelivant because if the tailpiece is clogged nothing else matters.

So what do i do next time around? I have some clones that need a home in the next week or so, and i dont want them to suffer the same fate.

I want to move forward from this.

 

[FlowerFarmer]

I believe D9 has mentioned in the past that perlite will not work as a cutter. If doing a full pulse saturation it will work its way free and float to the top of the container.


Not sure about the others. He recommends rice hulls as cutter.


Ya guys got me worried now. Hope my tailpieces don't clog with my atami. I know yall state that it is a good fibrous blend, but it still seems rather fine to me compared to other coco's I've saw.


When you say chips are you referring to coco chips/bark? If so I'd give that a shot if your forced to stick with coco. A good blend of husk in with the finer coco would ensure that you cannot form a plug. Doing a full pulse saturation you might be able to get by with totally chip/husk, so long as it still has enough capillary ability.


I'm praying my coco PPKs work out for me, but ultimately I want to get into turface or some type of similar stone.

 

[SecondAttempt]

This is likely what killed my plant too... it looked drowned out of the blue... SHIT!!! I have 12 plants in coco RIGHT NOW. I will be running screened oil dry (diatamaceaous earth) moving forward. Sorry again for your loss Dave.

 

[FlowerFarmer]

In the event that one starts to witness "drowning" is it possible to come back or has the damage already been done.

One could easily take the lower container to waste so that there is little to no water in the lower container (the tailpieces just hanging in air). The upper container could drain into the lower where that run-off would be carried away.. just like a typical DTW setup.

Only if absolutely necessary of course... but are there any early warning signs. Since I have additional holes drilled into my upper there really would be no way of knowing if I'm forming a plug in the tailpieces.

At least to get one through to harvest without total crop failure.

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

This drowning is the result of fumbling between two different feeding styles

There are two different approaches to pulse feeds.

1. Sufficiency.

2. Saturation.

The sufficiency approach was introduced by D way back in the day in the original PPK thread.

I think I summarized it in my 'Interpretation' thread in the first few pages. I haven't linked to anything in so long that I'm not even going to try right now.

A coco-tomato study demonstrated that the plants responded better to small, frequent, fast doses of feed (i.e. pulses) better than slower, more continuous drip feeding.

It was speculated--in our purposes--that the pulse feed over drip feed might have been more effective because of gas exchange in the media.

So if that's the case, we could try and really slam the media with a lot of solution, and try and push all the gasses out for an exchange.

The purpose of the pulse in this case (2.) isn't to saturate the media with solution (i.e. make it wet), but to saturate the media to displace the gas. But this is done to a relatively porous media/rapidly draining media.

Now, also keep in mind that during the introduction of this approach, we were still doing much more container-work than we are doing now... i.e. manipulating the side walls of the container with drills and saws and various other noisy things.

The container that was first exposed to 'Saturation Pulsing' had slits in the side walls and relief holes (about 12) drilled in both the bottom of the bucket and lid of the lower container. But the holes weren't drilled for drainage... they were drilled for gas exchange. Specifically, the ones in the bottom were a port for gasses to escape the as the 'plunger' of solution pushed the gasses downward in the bucket.

Secondary to that, it will allow for the media to drain faster down to the PWT... and the PWT--as is often brought up--is a factor of the tailpiece. So the tail-piece only has to drain down the PWT, not the PWT plus a couple of gallons.

Sorry if that bit of tech got left behind... and plants are drowning now.

Drilling holes in the bottom of the buckets can result in roots 'escaping'. If you are using the no-lid approach, or the drilled out lid approach, that can result in roots getting into your lower bucket. It's not the end of the world--but can be a problem for nute stability (pH) and clogging.

Shop Vac the individual cells between harvests can help.

 

[DaveTheNewbie]

This is likely what killed my plant too... it looked drowned out of the blue... SHIT!!! I have 12 plants in coco RIGHT NOW.

damn i hope it doesnt come to that SA!

Now, also keep in mind that during the introduction of this approach, we were still doing much more container-work than we are doing now... i.e. manipulating the side walls of the container with drills and saws and various other noisy things.

The container that was first exposed to 'Saturation Pulsing' had slits in the side walls and relief holes (about 12) drilled in both the bottom of the bucket and lid of the lower container. But the holes weren't drilled for drainage... they were drilled for gas exchange. Specifically, the ones in the bottom were a port for gasses to escape the as the 'plunger' of solution pushed the gasses downward in the bucket.

Secondary to that, it will allow for the media to drain faster down to the PWT... and the PWT--as is often brought up--is a factor of the tailpiece. So the tail-piece only has to drain down the PWT, not the PWT plus a couple of gallons.

Sorry if that bit of tech got left behind... and plants are drowning now.

so your theory is that coco wont work in a PPK without all the other air holes etc that seem to have gone out of fashion? Now im going to have to go thru all the coco PPK threads and see how many do and dont have these old style mods ...

EDIT :

PPK threads I found that have been edited this year.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=241442
Turdface

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=251863
Turdface

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=235494
diomite

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=253776
coco+perlite, Holes in bucket

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=256684
coco, unfinished.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=256451
coco + chunks, unfinished, one plant death

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=253987
coco, smartpots (lots of holes in bucket)

So i cannot disprove IF's theory. That doesnt make it true, but possible.

 

[delta9nxs]

this is about porosity and fine particle. there are no other problems here.

i'm somewhat at a dis-advantage as i've never run a plant in coco with a full flood saturation pulse before and haven't had time to observe the behavior.

but i have grown a bunch of plants in atami coco. a couple in the botanicare block coco, and a couple in the cheapest shit i could find, which is the block coco home depot used to sell and now does not offer.

all performed ok with a wave type pulse. the largest plant i have grown to date was in atami coco.

all you guys in coco should time the return to equilibrium in the reservoir. i put a yardstick in the res before the pulse and then time it's return to the same level.

it should be 90% at least at 5 minutes.

the porosity test is simple, cheap, and easy.

i found large differences in consistency with the 3 types of coco i tried.

some manufacturers apparently just grind it all up to powder and sell it. i wouldn't use this stuff even as a cutter.

some, like atami, separate and grade it and then re-mix to achieve the desired air porosity.

huge differences in performance.

all of it needs to be treated again. atami ships their loose fill stuff wet. this is so the pretreatment they use can be working on the cation exchange issue while still in the bag.

it is still not quite enough.

all of the coco's have large amounts of salt in them. and i mean plain old sodium chloride, which is bad for most plants.

the handbook on field and crop stress devotes at least 7 chapters to salt management.

so, i think coco is ok if you wash the hell out of it, amend it to 30% minimum air porosity, and retreat it.

maybe the finer stuff could be screened out?

make damn sure it is draining well, and fast, before a plant goes in.

this is not an operational peculiarity of the ppk, this is endemic to growing in containers.

one of the problems i see using coco as an amendment with hydroton is that if the coco is too fine it will still travel to the screen and clog it.

i tried every combo of materials in the original ppk thread that i could find and i think you need a material that:

1. does not float

2. does not compress

3. has most pieces in the 2-8 mm range

4. has an air filled porosity of approx 30%

this is not new information!

this plant is in coco, i hate to keep showing it but look at it and realize that it was in 2.5 gals of atami coco and nothing else.

i used jack's and calcinit at ec1.2 and nothing else!

over 22 oz's of hard, dense, bud!

this thing is so incredibly simple and easy to use.

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

As above, "This is not new information."

Swimming in water is natural to a fish, and growing plants is natural to a gardener. There is danger in thinking that because fishes swim effortlessly in water, anyone can. There is a danger in thinking that because gardeners can grow effortlessly in PPKs, so can anyone else.

---

Here's what I wrote, a little bit grumpy. It was the morning. But it makes a little sense, so I'll post it anyway:

---

Geeze Dave...

Why you'd want to 'disprove' my 'theory' is mysterious to me. I would think you'd want to try and implement bottom relief and see if you bring some plants to harvest.

In the first 60 pages of the original thread, it was observed that while it was nice understand why things work, in our daily survival, it is enough to know they work.

At the end of the day, most people have to bring something to harvest to keep things going. If someone needs to understand more than they need to crop, then they should spend time proving and disproving theories. If they need to crop more than they need to understand, they should spend more time gardening.

I've been here from the ...almost... beginning, followed almost every PPK grow on this forum, and maybe I've even seen a little in real life.

So--just trying to be helpful--I'll tell you that I'm aware of coco based PPK plants running saturation pulses without side wall holes but bottom relief that ran without problems.

But these grows were in the hands of gardeners who knew there media, and how and why to ammend it for the PPK (and other systems). Based it on feel. The point: you have to understand your coco too. Inconsistencies in the coco supply is why some growers have moved away from it. All cocos are not equal. Coffee ground cocos are different from fibers are different from croutons. And any of them can be full of fucking bugs.

Be careful not to overlook the fact that in a system everything is interlocked.

Turface/8822 drains much faster than coffee ground coco.

Coffee ground coco will compact enough to keep the PWT wet enough to hinder root development in the tail piece... i.e. keep it out of the lower zone.

Rinsed turface/8822 will allow roots to grow all the way through and into the lower rez. Three tailpieces full turface/8822 will drain like a drain.

I guess my point is that: Horticulture may be Science, but Gardening is Art. At least a little bit.

Hope some of that helps someone succeed, with or without proof.

 

[DaveTheNewbie]

Hey IF, im not trying to disprove your theory because i hate you. Im spending some considerable time trying to disprove your theory because i respect your input hugely. If some twirp claims that the plant died because i didnt pray to Jeebuz enough them im just going to ignore that.

There are a number of theories here as to why the plant died. Nute lockout, drowning etc. Blame the dripclean, the quality of coco, or the buckets. Blame the temp or the humidity or the air density or that brutal gibbous moon we had last night.

Im trying to apply some science to narrow down whats real and whats not from the speculation.

Im struggling to believe that the difference between atami coco and nutrifield coco is so much that one would kill a plant and one wouldnt. Especially when crappy home depot brick coco didnt. And the nutrifield worked in smartpot/blumat systems.

I currently have a bunch of clones ready to go in a fresh new system and im trying to get it right this time because i dont want to repeat my last efforts.

...

D9 your comment about crap coco still clogging a drain when added to hydroton was my suspicion as well.

I got a message to call the people that might be able to ship turdface over here yesterday at work and i have to call them back. Even at stupid prices it would solve my problems. I know they charge $35 a bag before shipping, and i suspect the shipping would be about the same.

Would it be fair to say that for any given bag, after removing fines you are left with approx half the original bag worth of usable medium? And how much would you expect to loose when reusing it and throwing out the root ball?