passive plant killer

hi, mistress!

i've built 4 ppk's so far and used 100% turface in all four. as i've been curious about coco i'll run perlite and coco in #5. i will be near a grow store tuesday and will pick up some coco. what brand/type do you recommend? would you like to see a 50/50 mix? also i will need a little help on prepping it. what nutrient would you like to see me use? i have on hand all the shit listed somewhere above. i'll do #6 with turface and coco, but i'm thinking of a lighter % of coco. do you think 10-15% coco is sufficient to wick moisture all the way to the top. so far, it looks as if the plant is really enjoying this setup. zero spotting or discoloration, no ph symptoms, nothing but normal, healthy growth. but it never hurts to do a side by side for yield comparisons. if all i have to do is change my medium slightly to get a significantly better yield, i'm going to do it.

about h2o2, how often do you add it? i added 1 T per gal to the res last week.

nice link on the humics. i'm thinking of brewing up a little worm crap tea. maybe 1/4 cup in a quart jar shaken regularly for 24 hours, strained and poured a little at a time into the medium. humics and fulvics, all kinds of good innoculators to chelate for you, good stuff. i have a media report (complete soilless media analysis) on the batch i have done by a pro soil lab. i'll post it if anyone is interested.

well, later on

use any brick coco readily available... have also used black gold coco blend, though it contains worm castings & peat & perlite & pumice...

any generic coco brick will do. mixed @ 33-50% coco... would situate the coco to be in top+middle part of the bucket, or the root ball of a plant in a 2-2.5 liter container, w/ turface surround laterally (sideways root growth) % bottom & top dressed for the remainder. always top-dress coco ~2"... this should facilitate air roots.

use many media in imagination. last batch of clones were placed in bonsai mix (bark, cinder brick, sand); ew castings; orchid bark; coco+perlite; perlite; coco fibers... the orchid bark plants have been the most vigorous. next bonsai mix aerated by perlite (bonsai mix by itself a little thick). perlite surrounding coco is also up there w/ speed of growth...

prefer square containers, so can squeeze & see roots coming out to inner-wall of container seeking water... orchid bark plants apparently have more air space to simply shoot thru; w/out any thick media to fight thru...

clones initially like the bonsai mix due to support & ability to hold water + drain water well. then to perlite + coco & they flourish...

if only want to use 10-15% coco, would make that amount be the media directly surrounding root-ball, w/ remainder being air-channels of turface...

nutes can be any... gh flora nova seems 1-part that is doable...

h202 is added to spray bottle until level reaches 5:1. then water added. this is for normal weekly foliar feeding + spraying surface & sides of container. this is to discourage bugs & fungus that grow on outer edge of media-ball, next to inner-wall of container...

when coupled w/ feeding used @ tablespoon per gallon....

enjoy your garden!

hey D9, was wondering where you went to, havent seen you in the hempy bucket thread since hempy had one of his meltdowns. Good luck bro

hey, bostrom! i'm still lurkin'. i'm back in the corner, in the dark, observing, planning, waiting for the perfect moment to pounce upon my unsuspecting prey. thanks for stopping by.

whoa! i just mixed my first batch of perlite/coco 70/30 in ppk#5. i always pre-soak, pre-charge my medium to get a head start on whatever affinities for cations and anions it might have. normally with perlite or turface i get runoff at around 1 1/2 gals. with the above mix i think it held around 2 1/2 or 3 gals. it is going to be really interesting to see how this mix performs in a ppk.

the first 4 ppks are 100% turface. #5 is as above but i'm waiting a few days for a clone to become available. #6 i intend to use turface and coco, maybe 90/10 or 85/15. just enough to maybe keep the medium more moist a little higher up

while #1 is growing rapidly and seems well adjusted it is a little disconcerting for an old hydro guy to see a plant sitting in such a dry setting. still though, when you go down about 1 1/2" there are air roots everywhere.

last night #1 was showing a little tip burn so when i topped off i used only ro water applied through the medium. this remains the only time since 10-2 that any liquid has been added through the medium. the res was ph 6.3@1018 ppm on a .5 meter before the water was added, 6.1@870 after. still no liquid has been removed. 5.1 gals total have been added. there is a full res holding 3.66 gals so approx 1.44 gals is absent. this is now a 14", fast growing plant. at 3 1/2 weeks i expected more consumption. more thinking about a plants real needs. i will lower the strength of my topping solution and try to keep res ppm below 900 to avoid tip burn.

that's all, folks!

10-16

today victim #1 has 4 weeks in the ppk. It has not been top watered with nutrients since 10-2 and has been top watered only once with straight ro water on 10-14.

no liquid has been removed or changed so the input figures are the same as 10-14. It is currently ph 6.0 and ppm 689 at .5. No ph adjusters have been used at any point.

It looks as if consumption has increased.

I mentioned earlier that I had found a layer of air roots about 1 ½” down. Today there is a uniform layer at around 3/4”. the medium is very dry to the touch there.

This week I began pruning the 6 axials from the bottom up. The plant is showing a good growth rate in the face of the continuous pruning regime.

Physically, the plant is nearly perfect. No symptoms of anything except minor tip burn that I caught immediately and corrected for.

Still no roots showing from the sump.

#5 was started today. It is 70/30 perlite/coco. I soaked it 2 days ago and the top is still wet. coco coir is amazing stuff.

later

plants seem to like water vapor & hardened air root formation...

... nice plants.

what is the wick material in ppk#5?

enjoy your garden!

Hi! the material in all ppk's is 100% polyester upholstery batting. It is called “thermolam plus” and is sold at hobby lobby and fabric stores. I've used it before on tables with large groups of clones.

I did some research on wicking material and found that 100% acrylic is best, followed closely by polyester. Most knitting yarns are acrylic. Nylon and dacron are in the top group but are considered to be slower in transport.

Also, you have to be careful about which form of a material you use. Cheap yellow twisted polypropylene rope is not good while expensive braided polypropylene is good.

Surprisingly, extremely hydrophilic fabrics like the “shamwow”, which I originally thought to be a good choice, are really bad because they won't
release water without physical force of some kind.

editing this 8-23-10 to say that the microfiber fabrics seem to work extremely well regardless of the statements made in this research paper.

The medium in #5 is still very moist from the saturation treatment on wednesday. I'm thinking I may not have to top water at all with this mix. Do you have any pointers on this?

Later on

thx for the acrylic & polyester tip...

have used nylon 1/2"-1" braided nylon rope... white, non-marine, which may contain lead...
washing prior to use is good. just used what was readily available.

would not let coco dry out completely, even though only 30%. the perlites water-holding capacity should share moisture w/ the coco. would base top/bottom feeding based on plant, but w/ consideration of keeping coco @ least slightly hydrated... should be doable whether top or bottom feeding...

enjoy your garden!

perched water table

perched water table

this is from a discussion on daves garden. i can't find the authors name, but thank you, whoever you are.

Container Soils - Water Movement and Retention

A Discussion About Soils

As container gardeners, our first priority should be to insure the soils we use are adequately aerated for the life of the planting, or in the case of perennial material (trees, shrubs, garden perennials), from repot to repot. Soil aeration/drainage is the most important consideration in any container planting. Soil is the foundation that all container plantings are built on, and aeration is the cornerstone of that foundation. Since aeration and drainage are inversely linked to soil particle size, it makes good sense to try to find and use soils or primary components with particles larger than peat. That components retain their structure for extended periods is also extremely important. Pine and some other types of conifer bark fit the bill nicely and I’ll talk more about them later.

The following also hits pretty hard against the futility of using a drainage layer in an attempt to improve drainage. It just doesn't work. All it does is reduce the amount soil available for root colonization. A wick will remove water from the saturated layer of soil at the container bottom. It works in reverse of the self-watering pots widely being discussed on this forum now.

Since there are many questions about soils appropriate for use in containers, I'll post basic mix recipes later, in case any would like to try the soil. It will follow the Water Movement info.

Consider this if you will:

Soil need fill only a few needs in plant culture. Anchorage - A place for roots to extend, securing the plant and preventing it from toppling. Nutrient Sink - It must retain sufficient nutrients in available form to sustain plant systems. Gas Exchange - It must be sufficiently porous to allow air to the root system and by-product gasses to escape. And finally, Water - It must retain water enough in liquid and/or vapor form to sustain plants between waterings. Most plants could be grown without soil as long as we can provide air, nutrients, and water, (witness hydroponics). Here, I will concentrate primarily on the movement of water in soil(s).

There are two forces that cause water to move through soil - one is gravity, the other capillary action. Gravity needs little explanation, but for this writing I would like to note: Gravitational flow potential (GFP) is greater for water at the top of the container than it is for water at the bottom. I'll return to that later. Capillarity is a function of the natural forces of adhesion and cohesion. Adhesion is water's tendency to stick to solid objects like soil particles and the sides of the pot. Cohesion is the tendency for water to stick to itself. Cohesion is why we often find water in droplet form - because cohesion is at times stronger than adhesion, water’s bond to itself can be stronger than the bond to the object it might be in contact with; in this condition it forms a drop. Capillary action is in evidence when we dip a paper towel in water. The water will soak into the towel and rise several inches above the surface of the water. It will not drain back into the source. It will stop rising when the GFP equals the capillary attraction of the fibers in the paper.

There will be a naturally occurring "perched water table" (PWT) in containers when soil particulate size is under about .125 (1/8) inch.. This is water that occupies a layer of soil that is always saturated & will not drain from the portion of the pot it occupies. It can evaporate or be used by the plant, but physical forces will not allow it to drain. It is there because the capillary pull of the soil at some point will surpass the GFP; therefore, the water does not drain, it is "perched". The smaller the size of the particles in a soil, the greater the height of the PWT.

If we fill five cylinders of varying heights and diameters with the same soil mix and provide each cylinder with a drainage hole, the PWT will be exactly the same height in each container. This saturated area of the pot is where roots seldom penetrate & where root problems frequently begin due to a lack of aeration. Water and nutrient uptake are also compromised by lack of air in the root zone. Keeping in mind the fact that the PWT height is soil dependent and has nothing to do with height or shape of the container, we can draw the conclusion that: Tall growing containers will always have a higher percentage of unsaturated soil than squat containers when using the same soil mix. The reason: The level of the PWT will be the same in each container, with the taller container providing more usable, air holding soil above the PWT. Physiology dictates that plants must have oxygen at the root zone in order to maintain normal root function.

A given volume of large soil particles has less overall surface area when compared to the same volume of small particles and therefore less overall adhesive attraction to water. So, in soils with large particles, GFP more readily overcomes capillary attraction. They drain better. We all know this, but the reason, often unclear, is that the height of the PWT is lower in coarse soils than in fine soils. The key to good drainage is size and uniformity of soil particles. Mixing large particles with small is often very ineffective because the smaller particles fit between the large, increasing surface area which increases the capillary attraction and thus the water holding potential.

When we add a coarse drainage layer under our soil, it does not improve drainage. It does though, conserve on the volume of soil required to fill a pot and it makes the pot lighter. When we employ this exercise in an attempt to improve drainage, what we are actually doing is moving the level of the PWT higher in the pot. This simply reduces the volume of soil available for roots to colonize. Containers with uniform soil particle size from top of container to bottom will yield better and more uniform drainage and have a lower PWT than containers with drainage layers. The coarser the drainage layer, the more detrimental to drainage it is because water is more (for lack of a better scientific word) reluctant to make the downward transition because the capillary pull of the soil above the drainage layer is stronger than the GFP. The reason for this is there is far more surface area for water to be attracted to in the soil above the drainage layer than there is in the drainage layer, so the water "perches".

I know this goes against what most have thought to be true, but the principle is scientifically sound, and experiments have shown it as so. Many nurserymen are now employing the pot-in-pot or the pot-in-trench method of growing to capitalize on the science.

If you discover you need to increase drainage, you can simply insert an absorbent wick into a drainage hole & allow it to extend from the saturated soil to a few inches below the bottom of the pot, or allow it to contact soil below the container where it can be absorbed. This will successfully eliminate the PWT & give your plants much more soil to grow in as well as allow more, much needed air to the roots.

In simple terms: Plants that expire because of drainage problems either die of thirst because the roots have rotted and can no longer take up water, or they starve/"suffocate" because there is insufficient air at the root zone to insure normal water/nutrient uptake and root function.

To confirm the existence of the PWT and the effectiveness of using a wick to remove it, try this experiment: Fill a soft drink cup nearly full of garden soil. Add enough water to fill to the top, being sure all soil is saturated. Punch a drain hole in the bottom of the cup & allow to drain. When the drainage stops, insert a wick into the drain hole . Take note of how much additional water drains. Even touching the soil with a toothpick through the drain hole will cause substantial additional water to drain. This is water that occupied the PWT before being drained by the wick. A greatly simplified explanation of what occurs is: The wick "fools" the water into thinking the pot is deeper, so water begins to move downward seeking the "new" bottom of the pot, pulling the rest of the water in the PWT along with it.

inverted leaching

inverted leaching

This has been a great learning experience for me. I've been studying passive techniques and designs for about seven years total. Yet I am still finding new information.

We have seen so far how a wick device can be manipulated to control moisture content in the medium using the idea of a controlled water table.

We have seen that a perched water table exists in most plant containers with most media and how to eliminate it using a wick.

Now I have found another aspect of wick culture that functions to help control salt build up in the medium.

It is termed “inverted leaching”. I was searching for old patent applications when I came across U.S. Patent #4962613, which describes a device for growing that utilizes the medium as a wick. In the application they describe how salts move from an area of heavier concentration to an area of lesser concentration via osmotic pressure.

In a wick fed container that is bottom watered, where nutrient solution is not being added by pouring it through the medium, salts do not accumulate as much as a top watered container. This is because the salts tend to equalize throughout the container due to osmotic pressure.. In this case this means the reservoir as well as the medium. The wicking action of the wicking material and the medium in the sump will pull salts from the growing medium down towards the reservoir against the upward capillary flow of water and nutrients. This happens at an extremely slow rate and the salts blend into the incoming nutrient solution, thereby diluting the excess or initially unused salts.

This suggests that a lower strength input solution may be beneficial.

It could also mean that a reservoir change out may be inevitable at some point. Although I feel an occasional top watering with pure ro water would go a long way towards preventing the necessity from occurring.

I think i'll try ec 1.5 for input and 1.8 for topping.

Later on, d9

nice info...

both water & salts will move to area of lower concentration... have had success feeding 1 time per week - 10 days... this means that during the flowering season, plants are only fed ~4-5 times... the rest of the input is water... out of max 3 waterings per week, 2 are water w/ no npk/ferts; just water w/ molasses, h202, or plain tap h20... the lower doses of higher ppm nutes, w/ steady low npk/trace elements seems to work well over the life of a 8-10 week flowering plant...

during weeks 4-7, a plant in a 5 gal bucket can drink 1-3 gal a day. this is water the plant is drinking & returning to atmosphere... nutes only make up 4% total of a generic plant.

when a plant is harvested, the dry fruit weight of the plant is based on root wt & is ~1/3-1/5 of the total wet wt... this means that plants hold tremendous amount of water. only want the nutes present to facilitate main ingredients of water, carbon, hydrogen, etc... but supply too much water & offsets the oxygen needed & ability to perform gas exchange in media & thru leaves...

less=more... give plant all needs & let it decide when it uses what. this seems to be capable in simple wick methods/passive hydro...

enjoy your garden!

hi, i want to talk about the way the plant is growing just a little.

it is not as tall as usual at 4 weeks 5 days veg, but it seems to have the mass. the stem at the medium and the 6 axials at the bases are larger than normal. internodes are much closer together than usual. i don't know exactly what is causing these physiological changes. light and nutrients are the same.

all 4 plants in 100% turface are doing well and the one in perlite/coco looks great.

i'll post some pics friday. d9

Delta - Man this stuff is interesting! Some very neat things going on in your PPK. Even if it turns out that the PPK is an underachiever in yield, it is worth running anyway since it looks like a great learning laboratory. I'm traveling too much this month to play along so I'm extra interested in your progress and living vicariously.

Regarding shorter yet apparently robust plant in pure Turface - Have you considered that this may be related to Turface vs. your recent experience with perlite? I know when I run passive buckets with Turface vs. perlite/vermiculite the Turface ones seem slightly smaller yet more densely packed. Yield is similar, maybe because I unconsciously veg a bit more to compensate. Though I haven't been as analytical about it as you, I have noticed a slight difference in plant stature even though both mediums produce very healthy plants.

hey, cactus! i was wondering what happened to you.

it's been more than 10 months now since i've grown in turface so you may be right about the differences. since i posted last the plant has gone into a growth surge and is really putting on some height. maybe the continuous pruning did stall it significantly. there have been 25 total cuts made in the first 4 weeks. it did noticeably stall when i cut the meristem. took about 2 days to resume a decent growth rate. i won't be cutting much for the next 2 weeks so we will see if it can catch up.

as you said, even if the ppk doesn't produce the weight it is a great learning tool. i know i will be a better grower after this, no matter how it turns out. i
like passive techniques but i'm not so enamored that i will sacrifice yield. i made contingency plans before i even built one that include several other options for operation.

it could be operated as a "hempy" by pouring nutes through the medium at timed intervals that should be further apart than the standard "hempy" interval of 2 days because of the res. it should work better than a hempy as it will have more air root space and less chance of salt build up in the medium.

and, there is always the option of adding an air pump to it. i have an idea of powering this with a very low volume air lift on a timer. this approach, in conjunction with the res and wicking would allow me to increase frequency and reduce volume at the same time. some of the coco heads have shown this to be a viable method. this in step with normal res changes should allow the ppk to operate using more normal hydro principles.

we would have to change the name to the "not so passive plant killer", or nsppk for short.

i'll try to post some pics later today. d9

delta9nxs said:

like passive techniques but i'm not so enamored that i will sacrifice yield. i made contingency plans before i even built one that include several other options for operation.

it could be operated as a "hempy" by pouring nutes through the medium at timed intervals that should be further apart than the standard "hempy" interval of 2 days because of the res. it should work better than a hempy as it will have more air root space and less chance of salt build up in the medium.

and, there is always the option of adding an air pump to it. i have an idea of powering this with a very low volume air lift on a timer. this approach, in conjunction with the res and wicking would allow me to increase frequency and reduce volume at the same time. some of the coco heads have shown this to be a viable method. this in step with normal res changes should allow the ppk to operate using more normal hydro principles.

we would have to change the name to the "not so passive plant killer", or nsppk for short.

i'll try to post some pics later today. d9

Click to expand...

adding air line (aeration) is good idea... a modification to coco+perlite+wicks that is potentially advantageous... however, have found way to make entire room air pump... if place buckets in totes, rather than buckets, the drainage holes have greater acces to the turbulent+laminar air flows that go 24/7-on-high...

top feeding should always be an option, if consider this to be of benefit to plants... here, done ~1 time per week; or 1/3 of waterings are top-fed...

no reason to remain in confines of standard methods, or their accepted definitions/limits... modify to get best results... plants dont care if where they live is called hydro, active, passive, or soilles mix by gardeners - they just want best possible conditions...

keep innovating...

enjoy your garden!

10-24

yesterday marked 5 weeks the first ppk has been in vegetative growth. Still bottom watered only since 10-2 except for one ro water applied through the medium. No run off has been allowed. Total volume of liquid added is 6.6 gals in 5 weeks of which 3.66 is still there so consumption is approx 2.94 gals. There has been a total of 45 ml flora nova bloom used.

The plant looks good with no apparent problems. Growth does seem to be a little slower but as I have made 25 pruning cuts I would expect some stalling. In the last few days it has really put on some height. It looks like it has gained approx. 3.5” this week.

All the other plants in turface look good and are growing normally.

Plant in #5, which is 70/30 perlite /coco is growing very fast and looks good. I've been top watering it once per day from it's own res with about a pint and the top stays moist to the touch.

I've been running 1T h2o2 per gallon in all containers.

Victim #6, which I loaded with 90/10 turface coco 3 days ago is still moist just below the surface. I should have a clone ready for it tommorrow.

Later, d9

nice...

passive plant lifegivers...

fwiw, last batch of cuttings were grown in the following medias:
*coco+perlite (50/50)
*bonsai mix (cinder rock, fine bark & sand)
*perlite+coco+pumice (33/33/33)
*orchid bark (medium-large)
*perlite+coco (75/25) w/ pumice on bottom
*perlite w/ marble chips top & bottom dressed

orchid bark clones had most profuse roots @ transplant, by far... 2d was perlite+coco (75/25) w/ pumice on bottom... 3d perlite w/ marble chips top & bottom dressed...

the orchid bark (large bark nuggets) was a tester, but will remain... evidently, lots of air space for roots...

enjoy your garden!

hi, mistress!

what i intend to do with an air pump is use it to power a low volume air/water lift, rather than an air stone. i've built them before for fish. i want to build one ppk that's powered and gets regular res changes for comparison.

i want to keep the first ppk and the ones with coco in them free of pumps for control purposes. i will also stop top watering them at the appropriate times. the other 3, containing all turface, i've been top watering at least a pint a day and will continue to do so. i should be able to see which way grows a better plant.

so far i really like the way the ppk works. all plants are nearly perfect. i've built 6 and will build 1 per week for 10 more weeks.

i'm really enjoying not having to pour large volumes of water and nutes through them.

orchid growers use all kinds of weird stuff for media. turface is very popular in orchid culture. one thing i've found about orchid growers is that they tend to be excellent all-around gardeners. in our little hobby here we get a lot of folks who have never grown anything before. everyone has to start somewhere. i grow a salad garden outdoors every year. raised beds with plastic liners and soil less. this year i had tomato plants 16' long.

well, enough rambling, later, d9

10-30

victim #1 has been in the 1st ppk for 6 weeks. It has not been top watered with a nutrient solution since 10-2. it has had one top watering with ro water only. No liquid has been removed from the system and no change outs have occurred.

I have added approx. 1 ¼ gals this week and it needs another topping. This brings the grand total to about 7.85 gals of liquid. The amazing figure here is that there is approx. 3.25 gals in the res and so only 4.6 gals has actually been lost, either through evaporation or transpiration. this averages .76 gal per week. it will be interesting to see the water and nutrient totals at harvest. 10 more weeks. I would say i've put a rough total of 58 ml of flora nova bloom into #1. this is a 6 week total input with very little top watering.

The ppk's have all been extremely stable as far as ph is concerned. Most readings have been above 5.8 or below 6.4. I still have not used any ph adjusters. I have been using flora nova bloom at ec 1.5-1.6. the reservoir in #1 is 6.1 ph at ec 1.3 right now.

The plants are visually nearly perfect with no obvious signs of trouble.

The first 2 photos are the sick little clone I put into #1 6 weeks ago. It has had total of 25 major pruning cuts made so far. It stands 23.5”. the stem and axials are large for their age yet the plant overall is somewhat shorter than what i'm used to at this point. Maybe 3-4”. It looks to me as if it has more overall mass though. All the ppk's are following this pattern of growth. The biggest reason I prune so radically is to keep the plants foliage within the sweet spots of vertically hung lights during flower. This could possibly change my pruning strategy.

The second two photos are of the 70/30 perlite/coco medium ppk I started 2 weeks ago. It has had 4 axials pruned in the last 4 days and is still growing like it is being pulled by a tight rubber band. I'm very impressed with coco so far. The top of the medium stays moist all the time even when not watered for 2 days so I feel less coco could be used. also i am going to totally stop top watering this plant today. I have #6 in 90/10 turface/coco and #7 will be going into veg tomorrow. It will be 80/20 turface/coco. I want just enough coco to slightly improve capillary rise.

The big argument against wick growing is that large plants can't get enough water during peak demand so they produce less. #1 is now using around 3/8 gal per day so we'll see when they get to weeks 6-7 of flower.

Later

d9

Wick me crazy

Wick me crazy

Hey all,
I am super hyped up on this thread, especially the stuff Delta posted about the perch zone and such. I have some ideas and questions but let me start off by saying wicks work, and work well. I went to Aruba for over 2 weeks, left my girls all alone and they looked better than ever when I got back. With that said, I have had really no problems with the wick method, other than trying to run only 1 wick when 2 was needed.. I top water for the first month, then throw the wicks in their individual res. I never had any problems, except for a tiny bit of mold on some OG, but I like to keep my girlies separated so no cross contamination (res wise). I have tried many wick types and the non-nylon(or mixed), poly braided(like mentioned) works very well and is readily accesable. I am very happy reading about the other types of materials available to us, thanks super mucho for all your hard work guys. I also do a wick mat for cloning. 'biggish"rockwool cubes that stand up on their own and I can do a tiny bit a veg in before transplant, which works far better than anything I have seen, including aero, if setup right you can move the clones around, easily check for roots, no F'n hassel trying to get them out of containers, and also lets you "choose" the root mat size for transplanting. I have always done Perlite/soil mixes in the past, but now I am venturing into the coco thing.

With that all said, with regard to perch zone and drainage, I wonder about the wisdom of mixing perlite with coco, or mixing any different sized soil. Is there an optimum size soil particle for all pots (drainage wise), or is there a ratio to pot size, and what the hell is it? Is the perch zone all that important for us to "drain" if were bottom feeders, and most importantly had anyone tried sticking a wick/or part of one out and below the pot. It could theoretically be the same wick bringing the water in. Anyone got any ideas how to test this?(beyond what was expressed earlier in thread)
I love this thread and you guys for taking the time to post.
I have done other types of systems for 20 years. some work good, some are a waste, and some are just a pain in the arse. Wick systems work incredibly well for me, but I would always like to improve myself and meds. I will post more if I'm lucky enough to get a reply.

I read this earlier and I must concur.
"I have had Original Haze that was almost like acid, unexperienced smokers would white-out or pass-out, or throw up after a toke or two...
Oh, and it was Euphoric to say the least. I would feel like I was floating in a cloud, or held in the hands of a comfortable giant, I had no need for anything, I was totally blissed." - Sam the Skunkman

A friend and mentor of mine gave me 6 of these one day when I stopped bye his house. Told me to "get rid of them, too damn stong!"
Skipping all the disbelief and banter between us, I took them home.
After about a year, I too, came to the conclusion it was too damn strong.
After a hard day of work, 1 hit, that still was black and unfinished would sit in the bowl of your bong between your legs for 45 minutes while you visited mars. If you were dumb enough to finish the 1 bonghit, after you returned from you voyage, you would again transport in time like 30-45 minutes, not knowing what happened.
I once watched as 4 teen-age guys at a party all passed out, in a row, doing 1 b-hit of this stuff I packed them. Each one laughing at their friend saying he was a lightweight. The last guy actually sat down before (like recommended by us) and he still passed out. Each time we would have to grab the glass bong from them as they went down. It is by far the strongest weed I have ever smoked, and almost turned your stomach, and unforgettable taste and experience.
Blue Dream is my favorite, perfect compliment for the Haze, and my dream come true.

I had the m-39xHaze for years as well, most explosive strain I have ever seen, ever, just lacked the bouquet and flavor bliss of the Blue Dream. I dreamed of a better hybrid years ago and hadn't found it till this year.

I hope we can contribute to each other's grows and produce the best meds around. Thanks people, time for sleep.