What's new
  • Please note members who been with us for more than 10 years have been upgraded to "Veteran" status and will receive exclusive benefits. If you wish to find out more about this or support IcMag and get same benefits, check this thread here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

HPA Aeroponics for Commercial Production

queequeg152

Active member
Veteran
"NSF International, formally knows as The National Sanitation Foundation, is an independent, not-for-profit, neutral agency, serving government, industry, and consumers in achieving solutions to problems relating to public health and the environment. NSF Standards for equipment, products and services are developed with the active participation of public health and other regulatory officials, users and industry. NSF publishes Listing Books which identify equipment, products, components, materials, ingredients or services that have demonstrated conformance with NSF requirements and are authorized for Certification. Materials used for NSF approved devices must often comply with NSF material standards. Three commonly referenced NSF Standards for plastics materials are 14, 61, and 51. NSF Standard 14: Plastics Piping Components and Related Materials applies to thermoplastic and thermoset plastics piping system components in contact with potable water and primarily addresses physical properties of plastic components in piping and plumbing systems. ANSI/NSF Standard 61: Drinking Water System Components – Health Effects covers indirect drinking water additives. This standard addresses health and toxicity effects of plastic resins. NSF Standard 51: Plastic Materials and Components Used in Food Equipment defines the material requirements for foot protection, considering extractables using FDA guidelines. For further information on NSF Standards, contact NSF International, 3475 Plymouth Road, P.O. Box 1301140, Ann Arbor, MI 48113-00140. By phone; (313)769-8010."


http://www.plasticsintl.com/food_compliant_materials.html

potable water is regulated yes, ground water by the EPA, but where do you find the FDA regulating greenhouse use of materials?

the NSF is not the fda fwiw.
 

Mad Lab

Member
93% might be a well repeated statistic, does not mean it is accurate.

Plants are 90% water, transpiration carries nutrients throughout the plant, restricting the water will restrict the growth of the plant.

A plant must process a great deal of water to remain healthy, does not matter if hydro, aero, or soil. This is why we buy dehumidifiers.

Hydro and aero are more efficient but not 93% more.

Very true. But we can't really sit here and argue with NASA statistics until we have our own research and creditability.

But I think your point is valid and maybe newbies that read that statistic may be fooled into really saving 90% water if they switch to HPA, even if HPA is definately the most efficient DTW drain to waste system out there.
 

Mad Lab

Member
potable water is regulated yes, ground water by the EPA, but where do you find the FDA regulating greenhouse use of materials?

the NSF is not the fda fwiw.


I'm not so sure greenhouse use of materials even matters to FDA does it? It's food grown with certain plastics, regardless of GH or not. Cannabis will be the same as food for the use of consumption so you dont think the FDA regulations will apply?

I stated a question about FDA regulations, not a statement. I have no idea about what FDA regulations will apply but I'm sure plastics will be one of them.

But so far, your not showing me anything that shoots down the link i provided about the NSF which is part of the FDA.

And speaking with AgriHouse and Indoor Harvest Corp, they both state plastics are FDA regulated when it comes to food production.
 

Mad Lab

Member
I still highly recommend HPA, it is by far the easiest cleanest and most productive method I have ever used.

In two years the only equipment failures were a loose wire from the factory on the pressure switch and one solenoid not closing so it was using a lot of water.

I will check back in, looking forward to see what you come up with.

thanks for stopping in, hope to hear from your experience and knowledge on the subject.

what brand solenoid valve were you using? try ASCO stainless solenoids.

also, so many HPA guys fail and opt out, can you tell everyone a little bit about your individual success?
 
I'm not that impressed with Aero anymore. When I first saw it I thought it was amazing and way of the future, but once the tires hit the road and you realize plants are not meant to be grown with suspended root systems, you realized you have almost everything going against you.

Theoretically you may be able to get 15% more yield or something, but it doesn't scale well, prone to failure, and extremely skill intensive and time intensive. Compare that with growing in Coco and can you really justify HPA?

Also, I think a lot of the claims of efficiency may be incorrect. The loss of water in using coco/soil would be due to 2 things
1) evaporation
2) runoff

However depending on your room condition, 1) may not be a big factor, or 2) can be minimized.

tl;dr HPA is more of a hobby than an actual effective method for growing
 

queequeg152

Active member
Veteran
tl;dr HPA is more of a hobby than an actual effective method for growing

perhaps, but im convinced you can grow lettuces and similar plants with this system, and reap much of the benefits without most of the potential downsides. whether or not it makes sense commercially is up to the agronomists and buisness majors however.
 

Mad Lab

Member
I'm not that impressed with Aero anymore. When I first saw it I thought it was amazing and way of the future, but once the tires hit the road and you realize plants are not meant to be grown with suspended root systems, you realized you have almost everything going against you.

Thanks for your opinion. Plants arnt supposed to be grown with suspended root systems? Funny, I thought we do all sorts of things that the plant was not naturally ment for, to make growth more efficient and effective as horticulturist. Care to elaborate more on possibly your failure to support your plants?

Theoretically you may be able to get 15% more yield or something, but it doesn't scale well, prone to failure, and extremely skill intensive and time intensive. Compare that with growing in Coco and can you really justify HPA?

Theoretically, if you tell me I can get 15% more yield from a 100,000 sq ft grow space, I would say where do i sign? Do you realize how much 15% of a large number is.. Another large number. Prone to failure? Thats a subjective statement. Skill intensive.. well good things should be.

Tell me I will save 0% medium costs, 50% nutrient costs and lets just lowball it and say 10% labor savings and 10% water savings. Wait, I get better results? No brainer.

Comparing that to coco, justified? Absolutely. If it's not enough for you I think the bedroom is a good place for you to stay.

In a commercial operation we are talking about saving anything possible.

The loss of water in using coco/soil would be due to 2 things
1) evaporation
2) runoff

Thanks, I agree. Your statement on estimates is noted, but by any authority valid, no. Please provide some links to your statements because there's a little too much opinion.

HPA is more of a hobby than an actual effective method for growing

I have grown many years, practically every medium and method, as well as had a lengthy relationship with each. I love them all in a way.

But this is business, not a closet. Well, this thread is business because it's titled as such "commercial".

While I welcome non-commercial HPA as well, when we are talking about commercial, lets talk business not hobby.
 

Mad Lab

Member
perhaps, but im convinced you can grow lettuces and similar plants with this system, and reap much of the benefits without most of the potential downsides. whether or not it makes sense commercially is up to the agronomists and buisness majors however.

I think "downsides" are subjective obviously but I hope to change your opinion queequeg's with some results on this thread.

I am not worried about anything anyone has mentioned because HPA growers have found answers to all your worries and have been using them for years.

I understand what most growers "think". But lets be honest, I'm sure alot of you had an opinion on growing before you had enough experience to have a good opinion. I think HPA is the same way, and until you've done it, for enough time, do you really think you have room to make such statements?

I'm all about opinions, but lets back some opinions up with some info guys! :)
 

wantaknow

ruger 500
Veteran
If center mass root zone wetting is a significant challange ,why not incorporate an ebb and grow deep root chamberfor primary and hpa as a secondary ,?i have an ebb and grow set up and the h20 usage increases with plant size even if room parameters are kept at optium conditions ,but mine is set up with a fail safe if power outages occure ,and after much attention to detail and dialing in. ,i have have had exelant results with this system ,
 
A lot of the math doesn't weight up. They claim you can save 50% on nutrients, so that means you are using half the nutrients. Then where do the other nutrients go that the wasteful gardener is using?

I can understand in an outdoor field you will have a ton of nutrient waste, since it just goes into the soil and may decompose, or go where the plant cannot utilize it, however say you are growing in rockwool or coco 5 gallon pots, your only "loss of nutrients" will come from run off, and if you minimize run off you aren't losing any nutrients. Plants cannot magically synthesize NPK that I know of so this 50% less fertilizer claim may actually be a lot less compared to a good hydroponic system (like 10% say). A healthy plant will use the nutrients in the soil if they are available and needed, especially with a developed root system ... some medias can lock in some nutrients but you can reuse it and eventually it will be broken down.

If Aeroponics was really such a better growing method, than more people would be using it, however they aren't and there must be a reason (maybe people are too stupid?). I am not trying to hate on your thread or party poop, but I think an aeroponic (possibly even LPA) hybrid system would be a much more effective and practical for something for growers to look into. A mix of coco/aero in a setup similar to an Undercurrent would take away a lot of the "went out for coffee and lost all my plants due to system failure" struggles that I think is holding back pure aero.
 

Mad Lab

Member
If center mass root zone wetting is a significant challange ,why not incorporate an ebb and grow deep root chamberfor primary and hpa as a secondary ,?i have an ebb and grow set up and the h20 usage increases with plant size even if room parameters are kept at optium conditions ,but mine is set up with a fail safe if power outages occure ,and after much attention to detail and dialing in. ,i have have had exelant results with this system ,

Yes, thank you for pointing out one of the only problems most HPA growers have.

Try implementing foggers in the chamber when the roots get overgrown throughout the chamber.

Also, your chamber should be large if not doing a semi-SOG. Because it should be at least 2 feet deep, a two-tier nozzle manifold is also great. One on the bottom and one in a foot above.
 

Mad Lab

Member
A lot of the math doesn't weight up. They claim you can save 50% on nutrients, so that means you are using half the nutrients. Then where do the other nutrients go that the wasteful gardener is using?

The math doesnt add up for you? Let me help you.

Let's try this.. You run what ppms in a hydro system? 500ppm-1350ppm (500ppm meter).

We'll in HPA you run half of the nutrient ppms. So say you're in veg in hydro and your running 800ppms. Well in HPA you'd be running 400ppm.

Seems like 50% to me...

If I can help with any other math let me know.

I can understand in an outdoor field you will have a ton of nutrient waste, since it just goes into the soil and may decompose, or go where the plant cannot utilize it, however say you are growing in rockwool or coco 5 gallon pots, your only "loss of nutrients" will come from run off, and if you minimize run off you aren't losing any nutrients. Plants cannot magically synthesize NPK that I know of so this 50% less fertilizer claim may actually be a lot less compared to a good hydroponic system (like 10% say). A healthy plant will use the nutrients in the soil if they are available and needed, especially with a developed root system ... some medias can lock in some nutrients but you can reuse it and eventually it will be broken down.

Answer is above. You misunderstand the 50% number. We can argue water savings. If you think you cant save with HPA, 1 second feed time every 5 minutes as opposed to a medium which gets fed many more gallons per day, fair enough. But HPA makes sense to me.

If Aeroponics was really such a better growing method, than more people would be using it, however they aren't and there must be a reason (maybe people are too stupid?). I am not trying to hate on your thread or party poop, but I think an aeroponic (possibly even LPA) hybrid system would be a much more effective and practical for something for growers to look into. A mix of coco/aero in a setup similar to an Undercurrent would take away a lot of the "went out for coffee and lost all my plants due to system failure" struggles that I think is holding back pure aero.

Because other mediums are easier and resources at a small level are more abundant. Who cares if you waste some water of a few more bucks on nutes then.

Also, commercial cannabis producing isnt new but it is hardly a well-established industry. You have growers that say," I cant lose this big harvest, Ill go with something I know and feel safe with, coco etc. Thats understandable.

But just you wait for a true business man with capital... He's gonna leave you guys in the dust.

Lol, I think its so funny when i see soil growers indoors, most of them just are scared to progress and possibly fail in their attempts to get to a better place. Dont get me wrong I love soil, but not efficient and slow for indoors.
 

queequeg152

Active member
Veteran
I think "downsides" are subjective obviously but I hope to change your opinion queequeg's with some results on this thread.

I am not worried about anything anyone has mentioned because HPA growers have found answers to all your worries and have been using them for years.

I understand what most growers "think". But lets be honest, I'm sure alot of you had an opinion on growing before you had enough experience to have a good opinion. I think HPA is the same way, and until you've done it, for enough time, do you really think you have room to make such statements?

I'm all about opinions, but lets back some opinions up with some info guys! :)

i went into HP aero not believing the hype. i did it because it sounded fun. i got real good results initially, but nothing extraordinary.

id happily look at what ever threads you are aware of wherein good results are shown with large plants. i havent persued the subject in years. back when i did there was almost 0 information on the subject... what there was available was played very close to ones chest... there were several folks on rollitup fucking with air atomized systems, but they were not willing to share info regarding root chambers.

If center mass root zone wetting is a significant challange ,why not incorporate an ebb and grow deep root chamberfor primary and hpa as a secondary ,?i have an ebb and grow set up and the h20 usage increases with plant size even if room parameters are kept at optium conditions ,but mine is set up with a fail safe if power outages occure ,and after much attention to detail and dialing in. ,i have have had exelant results with this system ,

i think a better solution would be to fabricate cones or pyramides, or for that matter, any geometric shape that could be placed immediatly under the center root column. this i imagine could force the roots out radially, while maintaining ( hopefully) a thin enough mat, such that they can remain healthy. you could fabricate shapes like this with the corrugated plastic i mentioned some page or two back.

furthermore, i think the container holding the plant should be made as small as possible, so as to minimuse the potential diameter of the root column... however this can manke very large plants unstable, and therefor in need of more support.

one could perhaps produce a container that runs the entire depth of what ever rooting chamber, and fastens to the bottom for added stability.
 

CHEFfy

Member
A lot of nit-pickers in this thread. Very promising system done right. Interested to see how things pan out!
 

Me2

Member
If center mass root zone wetting is a significant challange ,why not incorporate an ebb and grow deep root chamberfor primary and hpa as a secondary ,?i have an ebb and grow set up and the h20 usage increases with plant size even if room parameters are kept at optium conditions ,but mine is set up with a fail safe if power outages occure ,and after much attention to detail and dialing in. ,i have have had exelant results with this system ,

Its a misconception, the roots in a dense center mass simply remain smooth and develop differently to the rest. The droplets will easily penetrate into the center to maintain sufficient moisture and oxygen levels.
Soaking a densely packed, warm, root mass is counterproductive, it leads to oxygen depravation and an open invitation to root rot.

Facts become distorted by attempting to fix something that aint broke and it leads to the death of the plant. If the root mass is bone dry in the center you dont have the right mist.
 
I think a good "aero" setup, would be to have like a 1 Gallon netpot with medium like Coir or even Rockwool/Peat (something that can hold moisture a bit).

Have this netpot suspended so the roots can grow out and downwards in an aeroponic environment into a chamber with misters. Let me make a shitty paint diagram

aero.jpg

So basically I think ANY aeroponic system should have a failsafe (coco/medium in this case) or else you are just at the mercy of a broken solenoid/cable/wire/pump/timer to have a dead crop in a few hours and that's why even commerical agriculture growers with tons of money aren't using HPA.
 

Me2

Member
Mostly hydro supplemented by a little aero then? lol

I see more distortion of the facts here that will only serve to confuse people about hpa in general.
Failures can be designed out for the most part, redundancy fixes the rest. The components in a hpa setup are typically much higher quality than those found in hydro setups so reliability isnt an issue.
If a design is flawed and it fails, its unreasonable to say that every hpa setup will fail. The blame rests squarely with the designer, not the method. HPA can be as reliable as any other method if designed correctly.
You are entitled to your opinion but failsafes such as 1 gal netpots filled with media arent necessary with a properly designed hpa.
 

Mad Lab

Member
Mostly hydro supplemented by a little aero then? lol

I see more distortion of the facts here that will only serve to confuse people about hpa in general.
Failures can be designed out for the most part, redundancy fixes the rest. The components in a hpa setup are typically much higher quality than those found in hydro setups so reliability isnt an issue.
If a design is flawed and it fails, its unreasonable to say that every hpa setup will fail. The blame rests squarely with the designer, not the method. HPA can be as reliable as any other method if designed correctly.
You are entitled to your opinion but failsafes such as 1 gal netpots filled with media arent necessary with a properly designed hpa.

Thanks for stopping in Me2. We need some support around here, lol.

Too many failures who didn't stick with it and find success in engineering the right system.

Those who embrace failure as a good thing, something to check off the list and likely not to repeat, will most likely prevail in anything.
 

Me2

Member
Only dropped in to address the myths, misconceptions and add some balance.
Personally i wouldnt use a big netpot full of rockwool, peat?! or coir in an aero chamber that can saturate over time. Accident waiting to happen for some, a failsafe for others ;)
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top