[gunnaknow]

I've heard of greatly improved yields when growing vertically, if it's dialed in properly but I'm not so sure that it really makes that much difference to yield, in all honesty. The argument for vertical systems using the light more efficiently may be a valid one but I wouldn't have thought that it would be by much. Where are these large increases of light efficiency meant to come from exactly?

The only real waste of light in a flat garden is when the light is too high because of temp issues and the 10% or so absorbtion of light from the reflector. So long as you use air cooled hoods, you shouldn't have to raise the lights too high and the light foot print wouldn't need to be larger than the area of plants.

The only real difference between vertical and flat then would seem to be the 10% or so of light absorbtion from the reflector in a flat garden. In any case, between a third and a half of the light from the bulb goes directly to the plants without being reflected first, so that 10% loss is more like a 5-7% loss. For all of the expense and/or effort in setting up a vertical system, a 5-7% gain hardly seems worth it. Am I missing something here? I can't see how a well dialed in vertical system could live up to the hype of producing vastly more yield than a well dialed in flat system. Thanks.

Gunna

[freeradical]

I'm skeptical myself about trying vertical. The following is in regards to smaller vertical grows (not trees).

If all the light you are using is straight from the bulb, and not reflected, you will gain much more overall intensity at your plants over using a reflector. This is because reflectors require light to travel a longer distance before reaching the plants. Reflected light also loses intensity as no reflector material is 100% reflective (light is lost).

In addition, getting a reflector to distribute light evenly is very difficult, and uneven light distribution is not desirable.

Lastly, reflectors throw a lot of light in a direction much higher than the canopy, and this light is either lost, or reflected if you have something to reflect light, but even this will result in the longer distance+reflected=less intensity.

Now in regards to vertical growing, it seems efficient after reading the above information, however there are some problems with vertical growing. First off, there is potentially a lot of light lost since plants are being hit with light from the side. There is plenty of light to be lost between the plants, unless you arrange them to capture all the light (using two rows with one row filling the light gap of the other)...or you could always do a "vertical scrog" aka "v-scrog".

Another problem with vertical is you need to make use of the light that is being thrown above and below the lamp, which means you need to have a somewhat tall garden to make efficient use of that light.

Other problems include the difficulty of accessing the plants in certain vertical setups. Cooling is said to be tricky. A setup is usually more complex when there are multiple levels of plants as well (watering, runoff, etc). This causes your choice in grow methods to be more limited. Finally, there is the problem of plant size. Vertical growing is usually inefficient with smaller/younger plants. When your plant are a few inches tall, there is a lot of empty space being lit, whereas in most horizontal grows, the area of the canopy that needs light doesn't change nearly as much (plants grow much more vertically than horizontally).

...If you can build a setup to make efficient use of vertical lighting by capturing all the light that is thrown, directly, while solving the other problems mentioned above, then it is definitely worth going vertical.

[C21H30O2]

Originally Posted by gunnaknow

I've heard of greatly improved yields when growing vertically, if it's dialed in properly but I'm not so sure that it really makes that much difference to yield, in all honesty. The argument for vertical systems using the light more efficiently may be a valid one but I wouldn't have thought that it would be by much. Where are these large increases of light efficiency meant to come from exactly?

The only real waste of light in a flat garden is when the light is too high because of temp issues and the 10% or so absorbtion of light from the reflector. So long as you use air cooled hoods, you shouldn't have to raise the lights too high and the light foot print wouldn't need to be larger than the area of plants.

The only real difference between vertical and flat then would seem to be the 10% or so of light absorbtion from the reflector in a flat garden. In any case, between a third and a half of the light from the bulb goes directly to the plants without being reflected first, so that 10% loss is more like a 5-7% loss. For all of the expense and/or effort in setting up a vertical system, a 5-7% gain hardly seems worth it. Am I missing something here? I can't see how a well dialed in vertical system could live up to the hype of producing vastly more yield than a well dialed in flat system. Thanks.

Gunna

your considering direct reflection but not the distance the light has to travel. I think its closer to a 40% loss overall. So with a reflector you get 60% return in light from the side facing the reflector. You get more intense light in one area but lose efficiency. On top of this you've got the heat to deal with. I have gotten plants within inches of a 1000w in a cool tube without burning. Vertical grows run cooler. the ability to set the plants closer to the bulb and the increased coverage area more than offset the lack of reflected light.

[freeradical]

Originally Posted by C21H30O2

the ability to set the plants closer to the bulb and the increased coverage area more than offset the lack of reflected light.

It seems obvious, but I never really thought about that! Hmm, I'm going to look into going vertical. I'm tight on funds, though. =(

I know theres some threads on other sites about vertical grows. keith something or another has a big thread. Apparently his results are pretty impressive.

Light looses alot of power for every inch it travels. I dont know the eaxact formula. So the light being reflected has to go up then back down. Plus the hood doesnt reflect all the light.

Then consider the space. Vertical use space much more effieciently.

Its actually something I would like to try

[stevewinthrop]

I don't know if you've heard this yet, but take 1000 watts, that covers roughly 20 sq ft with 50 watts per square foot on a horizontal grow. Take the same 1000 watts, and cover 80 sq ft with 50 watts per square foot.

It's not the light being more efficient, it's the growing area being bigger.

I have a vertical i'm running right now, and I can tell you, the 1200 watts I'm running in there is putting out a WHOLE lot more than 1200 watts would on a traditional grow.

And using a reflector doesnt neccessarily amplify your wattage, as far as I can tell, you're still getting the same amount of lumens whether your light has a reflector on it or if it doesn't. The reflector just reflects the light that's already there onto a smaller area. If you grow on 4 walls, as opposed to 1 floor of the same area, it's not dividing the light into 4.

There's several colliseums that come ready with 500 total watts, and 1200 watts, but the square footage is unreal.

Yes, it's really that much more efficient...


Think of being in a concert. (i'm only using this analogy because light is like sound, travels in waves) The stage is in the middle of an arena, and there are speakers surrounding the stage. It doesn't matter if there is 10,000 people in the crowd, or just 3, when the band comes on stage, you will all hear the same amount of ear shattering rock. The only thing that will change it, is if you get further away from the stage... same with the vertical lighting... Every plant in the room gets the same amount of light, that doesn't change. It's the distance from the light that weakens it.

Now if you think that reflectors "double" the light by reflecting it back down onto the horizontally laid plants, that's fine (although untrue in so many ways), if you double the wattage of your vertical lights, you'll still be hitting twice as much growing space as you would if you doubled the lights in a horizontal setup.

But, don't take my word for it... As soon as H.G.4.2.0. comes back up, take a look at their vertical section. (sorry for mentioning a rival message board? but IC doesn't have a vertical board)

You have people pulling in steadily heavy amounts off of vertical grows. In sogs where you'd typically see .75 grams per watt, you'll see 2-3 grams per watt. In colliseum grows, even more. (the fiberglass colliseums are engineered to have the radius be the same as the footprint of a 1000w light)

Ever seen an omega garden in action? As far as I know it's the only horizontal vertical system in the world... Spins a big wheel around with a light in the center, everything facing the light... A guy was busted in Tacoma, WA with 4 of them running and he was pulling over 5 lbs each run off of each omega (i think he had them custom made locally, but still same concept).


I can't stress it enough, it's very little extra work, a lot more startup cash, but in the long run, it's much much much more efficient.

Right now I'm working on a 4x4 vertical room with 4" pvc filled with rockwool croutons, with a drip feeder... So far, the maintenance has been filling res and cleaning the filter... that's it. Just as easy as a regular drip system, minus the labor of building the vertical manifold and setting up the pump and filter. (those things were definately harder than a conventional drip system)


So as far as I'm concerned, flat grows are for squares, haha.

-- steve

[chef]

I'm an old vert guy new to horizontals & have pretty much decided to go vert again for a 4x1000w flower room.

My take is...
I love these new horizontals for veg.
The straight down light is great for reaching max foliage for max veg growth.
Reaching max foliage unfortunately causes max shadowing, so...

I'm leaning towards 1k verts w/3-4ft domes for flowering because:
1. When running multiples, the light distro patterns are better for each fixture cross lighting its neighbor. Max wall to wall blazeage.
2. They basically LST your upright vertical plants from the 45-90 degree side lighting.
Similar results as a straight down light on a 45-90 degree LST'd branch, without doing any LST work.

I was really tempted to go with 6x600w horizontals, but #2 was the clincher.
So I'm going to build some oldskool vert dome Lumateks

cheers

[stevewinthrop]

Originally Posted by yamaha_1fan

Light looses alot of power for every inch it travels.

Yes, the wavelength changes as well once it hits the reflector. Just like sound changes when it hit objects.

-- steve

[Haps]

I have done some work with this, vertical can be productive, but I usually was wasting some of the light. If you plan well, it can be worth it. I go hort now, simply because it is working better for me.
H

[chef]

Yeah, the coliseum racks look like a lot of work, but probably worth it too.

I'm limited in plant #'s, so no racks for me. Simply gonna blaze a 12x12 w/good reflective walls.
We used to just coliseum our canopies in the old days, bigger plants to the outside & tie'em down a bit in the middle. Cheap, easy & effective!
probably be doing a bit of that now too.

cheers