Freakin great info, thanks
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more 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"!
Something wicked this way comes
- Thread starter delta9nxs
- Start date
Freakin great info, thanks
hey d9. towards the end i was measuring by PPM, cal nit to "X" amount ppm, Jacks till X amount ppm. i forget the numbers and or correct mixing order.
I tried using megacrop for a few months. started getting same type of growth an lack of oils. the next run i went back to Veg bloom an Things are good again.
atleast the problems forced me to learn more about specific nutrients an their role. or atleast i like to think i try to.
towards the end of my jacks an cal nit saga i had showed some leaf samples to a respected member. He immediately responded that it seemed like chloride scorching. some plants where fine, and others looks liked heavy Potassium deficiency.
So i then had my ro sample tested, then a ro jacks an cal nit, then a ro GH calimagic and jacks an cal nit.
everything but the ro came back with high levels of chloride an sodium, then the sample with calimagic was very very high in sodium an chloride. yara was suggested to replace the jacks cal nit. Yara was said to have significant less sodium an little or no chloride. then i started mixing my own calcium and magnesium solutions. leaving out the calcium chloride an substituting with mainly diosolivine calcium edta .
pushing forward with better results it seems..
bwell
D9 checking in on the 9 year anniversary of ppk 9/23/09. Lets do ppk fest for year 10!
I'm amazed you can compete in the concentrate market with indoor out there given the lb prices. I suppose growing 20 lb plants helps��
On the jacks should we shoot for 1/.66 if measuring by meter? I've been mixing equal parts in 55 gallon barrels and agree that gives too much N in flower.
Thanks for everything d9!
I'm amazed you can compete in the concentrate market with indoor out there given the lb prices. I suppose growing 20 lb plants helps��
On the jacks should we shoot for 1/.66 if measuring by meter? I've been mixing equal parts in 55 gallon barrels and agree that gives too much N in flower.
Thanks for everything d9!
Had my first flower run with ppks not too long ago. I screwed up a bunch of stuff.
Ended up with my second largest harvest even after culling almost half the room due to stem rot.
My gb foxtailed like crazy, I think my ratios caused this.
Got my room ready to flip. Glad I read this, just mixed a new res 1 to .66 hoping this brings a denser flower out of my gb
Ended up with my second largest harvest even after culling almost half the room due to stem rot.
My gb foxtailed like crazy, I think my ratios caused this.
Got my room ready to flip. Glad I read this, just mixed a new res 1 to .66 hoping this brings a denser flower out of my gb
Good to see you Delta9nxs
.. no pictures!?
EDIT: you used to have a saying about 'no pictures'
none of this ever really happened!
of course the jack's should always be mixed in first. i'm re-stating it for new folks!
i think with your input here about the sodium in the jack's calcinit is telling because i've personally never used it. i know there is some sodium chloride in their 5-12-26 but it is apparently not enough to cause problems on it's own.
i've only used yara brand calcinit and my plants are green and lush looking so i think that it probably does have less sodium.
my large mixing/feed/bulk reservoir holds just under 1500 gals. i am mixing by weight not meter according to the ratio on the bag. i think right now we are mixing in 5400 grams of the 5-12-26 and 3600 grams of the yara calcinit. adding 1/2 gal of potassium silicate and then 450 ml 85% phosphoric acid all in that order. my tap water is excellent and around 70-80 ppm and altogether it all comes out to around 860 ppm at the .5 conversion. ph in the main tank 5.2-5.4 but runs at 5.6-6.0 in the recirculating systems
this is then split off to two separate recirculating reservoirs. one feeds the flowering and large veggers in frames and it will run about 1050-1100 ppm in that system and the same 860 ppm input solution will run about 750 ppm in the small plant veg system which is purely vegetative so it is a classic demonstration of selective uptake.
but my main point is that i'm getting really dense buds now and that is also driving up weight. and the extractor says my stuff is really terpy.
i have rebuilt the intermediate veg system in the blue containers after removing it in june to comply with plant count restrictions only to be allowed to use it again in october. bastards at olcc don't seem to care that this jerking people around at their (olcc) whim and fancy costs people a lot of time and money complying.
they are trying as hard as they can to pressure medical growers out of existence.
later
wow! you guys have incredible fortitude to wade through 9 years of bullshit!
in addition to using genetics that get huge i also will only run strains that yield over 20% wax by dry volume.
also only strains that veg to fill the frames within a 9 week window. and must have significant stretch in flower.
some strains make beautiful pull snap or shatter and some make a sloppy, dark, nucleated mess.
it's a tough world out there and competing is getting more intense daily.
i have been through so many lovely, dank strains that i really liked only to dump them because they don't meet a certain requirement.
at this point i really recommend mixing by weight for late veg and flowering because it eliminates error. you will have to experiment a little to determine concentration.
for example i found mixing to their (jack's) recommended 1050 ppm or ec 2.1 to be too strong once it gets to the recirculating system. it would float up to 1300-1500 ppm and i would see significant tip burn.
you can achieve a balanced recirculating system that runs in a very stable fashion with both ph and concentration.
i think i'll show some of our daily readings to demonstrate this. unbelievable long term stability with no mass change outs. we haven't dumped an entire system in years.
it shows that the starting elemental ratios are very good with jack's mixed like this. approx 3-1-4 with calcium only slightly less than nitrogen and magnesium at 6.36% so i use no supplemental cal-mag type products.
I don't know if it matters to you guys but with my little system figure out, I am mixing a 1/4 cup of 5/12/26 Jacks in each of my 44g brutes with a hair under 1/4c with yara. getting 1000ppm. starting with 0-20ppms RO.
this goes for vegging-flower. 1.5" tail 2.5 gal buckets and doing it Ok with #ers up heya in Maine.
Nothing big but consistent and thats what I like in this ever changing world.
Just pulled down some Cindy 99 and cookie Kush that was so sticky.
this goes for vegging-flower. 1.5" tail 2.5 gal buckets and doing it Ok with #ers up heya in Maine.
Nothing big but consistent and thats what I like in this ever changing world.Just pulled down some Cindy 99 and cookie Kush that was so sticky.
some strains will foxtail with the excess nitrogen in flower and some don't. i had one where the buds just kind of exploded outward and looked like inverted witches brooms. impossible to trim.
try using weight to mix for flower, i think you'll like it!
Good to see you Delta9nxs
you too bro!
I don't know if it matters to you guys but with my little system figure out, I am mixing a 1/4 cup of 5/12/26 Jacks in each of my 44g brutes with a hair under 1/4c with yara. getting 1000ppm. starting with 0-20ppms RO.
this goes for vegging-flower. 1.5" tail 2.5 gal buckets and doing it Ok with #ers up heya in Maine.
Just pulled down some Cindy 99 and cookie Kush that was so sticky.
you should weigh it at least once to see what your fill level should be for the calcinit. then you will have a rough visual reference for speed and ease of use.
I wasnt there either...You weren't where?
I'm pretty sure it wasn't.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't.
nothing specific in this one. just some random shots to show what everything looks like with no mass change out of solution since april 15, 2017. that's 18 mos of nothing but input of solution.
the only solution removed was whenever a plant was moved for any reason we would scrub the container with a stiff brush and then vacuum it out and allow it to re-flood.
the only solution removed was whenever a plant was moved for any reason we would scrub the container with a stiff brush and then vacuum it out and allow it to re-flood.
Attachments
1. shows how we wrap up a large vegging plant that's been trained flat into a net for 2-3 weeks. we move them to the flower room and tie them right back down as they were in the veg room.
2. the ultimate pulse ring. this design makes the roots travel laterally and fill the container faster than any other design we have tried. there are no holes in the bottom of the ring just the ones holding a fitting that you see.
3. this shows the 16 3/16" holes that we are using in the bottom to accelerate the gravity propelled portion of the draining sequence. this gets a large portion of the solution to by-pass the tailpiece and diverts roots from it. i feel it also allows more air into the bottom of the medium. sort of a breath through effect between pulses.
4. just a shot of the xtra large plant version of the container. we got the 19.6 lb plant from one of these. just to clarify for new folks that's 19.6 of fresh, wet, individual florets. the buds were completely taken apart for extraction. so that means no stems and no fans. unless you are growing monsters this container is overkill. we were getting 15-17 lbs from most strains in the regular version.
5 and 6. two shots of the same plant, an iranian x c99 on the day it went to flower and 8 days later in stretch just to show an idea of growth rate. it was one of these that yielded 19.6 lb's.
those that said i would end up using two screens were right. yields went up when we began double netting.
2. the ultimate pulse ring. this design makes the roots travel laterally and fill the container faster than any other design we have tried. there are no holes in the bottom of the ring just the ones holding a fitting that you see.
3. this shows the 16 3/16" holes that we are using in the bottom to accelerate the gravity propelled portion of the draining sequence. this gets a large portion of the solution to by-pass the tailpiece and diverts roots from it. i feel it also allows more air into the bottom of the medium. sort of a breath through effect between pulses.
4. just a shot of the xtra large plant version of the container. we got the 19.6 lb plant from one of these. just to clarify for new folks that's 19.6 of fresh, wet, individual florets. the buds were completely taken apart for extraction. so that means no stems and no fans. unless you are growing monsters this container is overkill. we were getting 15-17 lbs from most strains in the regular version.
5 and 6. two shots of the same plant, an iranian x c99 on the day it went to flower and 8 days later in stretch just to show an idea of growth rate. it was one of these that yielded 19.6 lb's.
those that said i would end up using two screens were right. yields went up when we began double netting.
Attachments
