Blumat auto watering

[ak-51]

AK-51, there should never be any run-off with the blumats. That is over-saturating the media, and not healthy for the roots.

To clarify, I am using coco. I have always heard "you can't over-water coco". Did I misinterpret that adage, or is it just wrong?

Regarding the sediment, it sounds like you are having some precipitation problems. I encounter bio-film buildup in my lines, but no sediment.

If I flush the lines every few days it seems to help a lot. You can see how much stuff is in the lines and it's easy to tell when the stale stuff in them is all gone because clear(er) water will start coming out. At least in my setup.

That's great info and I happen to agree with every point. I used to have airstones in the bottom of pails. No more.

Agree. I think the only systems that acutally need additional aeration are DWC/RDWC systems where the plants are constantly submerged. I use to run air stones in my res just to help it keep things stirred, but I just switched to using pumps instead.

what do you guys think about compaction levels? I'm new to coco

I have always just packed it in by hand when I filled up the pots. I don't really try to smash it down too hard, just hard enough to make sure there aren't any huge air pockets in the coco.

 

[rrog]

Interesting, Rives. Seems the ceramic cone needs a lot of (moist) soil contact to operate. Makes sense as the system relies on wicking water in and out through the cone, and since there's no standing water, you're 100% reliant on firm soil contact to fascinate the wicking

 

[catman]

I go for the heavier feel. In my experience,the moister pots ALWAYS out-perform the drier pots.

This has caused me to seriously re-think the accepted roots need vast amounts of air dogma we have always been sold.
It is also "common knowledge" that soil should have "wet and dry cycles" to "breath", this is bullshit. They do FAR BETTER with a consistent moisture level, as several years of blumatting have

Great post sunny

When I began studying "soil dynamics" in regard to growing plants I jumped on the "air porosity" bandwagon and before that I believed that a cycle of drying out was best. delta9's PPK thread is full of good information, but also some misinformation that sheds light on the details of what your talking about. Anyway, what I've learned is best is to water the medium, not the plant.

Have you noticed anything related to temperature and humidity with the blumats and success with the plants?

In an environment where humidity is high and temperatures mild, plants pull the moisture from the air into the leafs which means the roots are up-taking less water. Roots up-take water separately than they do a nutrient solution, but there are a few elements that rely on the water up-take like calcium. Now, in an environment where the humidity is low at the same temperature, plants will up-take more water and grow slower because of how this interferes with the plants ability to intake CO2.

Anyway, I think humidity levels and temperature plays a big role in having success with mediums that are always moist because we all should know with certainty that stale water is our enemy. However, if our roots go without water, they die and then they can't supply our leafs with moisture so they eventually die too. Our plants go into drought mode and growth pretty much stops.

Now to nitpick the supposed necessity for a consistent moisture profile.. It seems widely believed and easy enough to see with one's own eyes that our plants do produce different looking roots depending the moisture levels they live in. Air roots which are roots with tons of little branches and fine hairs form typically at the top of a medium while thicker and less branchy water roots form at the bottom where the moisture is the highest. Ebb & Flow hydro growers are well aware of this because they can drown and kill the air roots, but like sunny emphasized, what people are doin in this thread ain't hydro and we gotta be careful what information learned from it we apply. To get to the point.. We've all seen rubbermaid tubs jam packed with roots and then the smaller amount of mass formed in root balls of plants grown in soil or soil-less. What is ultimately important is at least not entirely consistent moisture, but the spread or uniformity of the moisture. I mean, we don't want the top of our medium to be too dry nor do we want the bottom to be too wet. We just gotta create a nice place for more root mass to thrive.

To elaborate on this let's think of hempy buckets. I'm sure there are varying opinions, but at least I believe hempy buckets out preform a hand watered soil counterpart. A hempy bucket that uses perlite is entirely saturated at the bottom as roots sit in stale water, while (depending on the size of the container) the top of the medium will quickly dry out which roots do not like and instead of following dogma, I've been asking myself why? Is it as simple as the medium is drier towards the top so roots simply die? I don't think so. Roots are like the ultimate wicks and like good neighbors, they support themselves. If the medium is drier towards the top, more water will be wicked up from the bottom to support them. When ya water the perlite with a nutrient solution and it quickly dries out, the nutrient salts are left behind which means the strength of it is extremely concentrated and strong. So, when the poor little air roots have some moisture, the salts kill them off. In attempts to prevent this growers flush their mediums by hand or use a pulse feed like in the PPK thread. Another common belief that is actually harmful is flushing mediums with clean water (unless ya really screwed up.) Roots sort of have a balance of nutrients inside of them and they try to keep it equal with the moisture in the medium that surrounds them. So what happens when ya feed plain water is nutrients come back out of the roots, into the medium, which then dries and again salts are left behind. Now what works is making it so we never have any dry salts to begin with by keeping our medium always moist!

Having medium mixes that have good air porosity doesn't help the plant by providing more oxygen so much as it makes it impossible to over water the medium and keep away from stale water where our enemies thrive. What this article below shows is that what is important isn't just having spaces for air and other gases, but how fluids and gases are able to move around and exchange. In other words, the study found that mediums that can better spread out out fluids and gases amounted to better plants. This is why if you're doing DWC or something that you need air pumps or why ya are better off recirculating water (and gases) around as fast as possible in RDWC.

I don't personally have experience to say what I have said in complete confidence, but I trust my understandings of theory with the trust I have for others who share their experiences enough to share what I think I know. The bottom line that will help more growers get better results was perfectly summed up by sunny's posts so if what I said is confusing and seems to contradict what he said, just keep your containers on the heavy side

I thing the dripping encourages good oxygenation of the water, and as the dripping water slowly works its way down, it's bringing O2 that it picked up in the highly oxygenated surface soil. That's my theory, anyway.

I'm not sure how much, if any, oxygen a droplet of water can really store and dripping helps like ya said, but I believe for different reasons that you might not even care about. Thinking like you are is just another instance of applying hydro know-how to oranges! What actually happens is that inside of our medium we have fluids in liquid (nutrient solution, duh) or gases (oxygen,co2, nitrogen) and if the medium is saturated and we add something to it, something simply has to be moved somewhere. So when ya add that one drop to a saturated medium that is already balanced between atmospheric pressure with gravity and resistance to those forces by capillary action, one drop of water will run off. Now think about what happens when ya fill a soda pop bottle all the way up with water and ya turn it upside down. The water leaves, but air bubbles up to create balance in the space the water previously occupied. Thus when that one drop leaves, a little bit of oxygen actually enters the container through the run off exit. There is an exchange. That's just my understanding of theories too and I've been wrong before.

Before I take off I'd just like to add that I'm at least not experiencing failure with 2 Maxis per 5 gallon bucket with a mixture of turface clay and perlite for those who are curious. I'm finding like what was said earlier that there is a very fine line between way too much run off and no run off (good thing with my buckets with the pipe underneath into a bottom bucket, I have a fail-safe against flooding. If the bottom run off water reaches the bottom of the pipe the water just gets wicked up to the point where the Maxis shutdown eventually because if they don't they will be totally submerged in water.) I understand why there shouldn't be any run off, but I just don't understand how I could possibly keep the upper portion of my medium as moist as I can without having run off. I suppose I just to need continue dialing not only the knobs, but the spacing between the drip lines and sensors. I'll be away for 2 weeks beginning in a week so I'm trying to keep my hands off things even if it means they aren't as perfect as I'd like them to be. I just want to return home to green plants like everyone else.

 

[rrog]

There's a big need for porosity. Limited or hampered gas exchange isn't a good thing. I think we're on the same page with that.

Stale water I'd define as low DO2. That's why it stinks. It's gone anaerobic.

I'd comment that the "one drop in-one drop out" concept would only hold for liquids / solids. Gasses dissolve and so gas exchange isn't volumetrically associated with water levels per say, other than more liquid allows for more dissolved gas.

My thinking isn't so much that the drop of water gets much DO2 during that initial 1" drop, so much as as water starts trickling down into the soil, it will have ample opportunity to get oxygenated as it slowly wicks down. It's a surface area / exposure time thing. As compared to a full-out pour which heads straight to the bottom of the pail fast.

Is it me or do the couple of sentences prior to the hilited text seem in contrast with that hilited text?:

"Lack of aeration limited plant growth"

"Plant growth was significantly correlated with both the gas diffusivity and the pore tortuosity factor."

VS. the hilited "No significant correlation was found between plant growth and air-filled porosity..."

Are they comparing perlite that has lots of air-filled areas but no tortuosity like coco has?

 

[catman]

The trickling down thing makes sense. In Areoponics the goal is to get small water droplets on the roots so they can just be absorbed instead of waiting for the surface tension to be broken down. I entirely agree with benefits of exposed surface area and further permeability (how the medium lets fluids flow in it) is of importance.

Physically, gases are fluids.

Coco has tortuousity, tortuousity just being how water moves through a medium. Yeah water moves around differently in coco than perlite, but that isn't what the study was about.

Think of perlite like glass and how water just bounces off glass. Now imagine pouring water on something the same geometrical shape as the glass, but made out of say cardboard, coco, or turface. The difference between the shaped objects has to do with the pores on(within) the actual particles. Think of how water would flow differently through a bucket of golf balls with and without the dimples. The actual psychics gets complicated real fast, but simply said when your dealing with such small pores and distances between them, water has a unique ability to bond them to the pores while also with its self (because of it's unstable hydrogen atom) in such a way that mediums like coco, turface, and perlite can hold water. The water perlite holds is just on it's surface so the moisture isn't held for long while coco and turface will hold on to water. My thinking is however the water is held on to, if a medium can hold onto enough moisture to make roots happy while still maintaining an open capacity of permeability, gases are free to flow. Not sure if that helped or made things confusing, haha.

 

[rrog]

Physically, gases are fluids.

Right, I was just referring to the "one in-one out" which is irrespective of gases.

I like to keep the BMs operating on the heavy side as well. Never have flow through the bottom of the pail unless I'm soaking in some compost or such.

I had an overwhelmingly (too much) lush grow this last round and the soil was a very stable moist. I really love these things.

Side note: have not had any issues so far with the BM pressure reducer, feed lines, etc with respect to mineral build up or related issues. I rinse everything with white vinegar after each round, which removes any rust film.

 

[Dave Coulier]

While we are letting the air out of accepted theories, what do you guys think about compaction levels? I'm new to coco, and in the middle of my first run with Botanicare ReadyGro Aeration mix. Initially I just filled the 3 gallon air pots and thumped them down on the counter 2-3 times to remove any voids (this was after hand-packing it around the perimeter to keep the water from pouring out). This is how I always ran the pots with SS#4.

I had a couple of small (1-2 quart) runaways right off the bat, and it seemed as though the blumats were "loosening up" in the mix. It actually appeared as though the root density was pushing the spikes up, out of the mix, which resulted in poor contact between the mix and the blumat. After this, I packed the mix down tighter, although it is still a long way from compacted, and it seems to be working better. Any thoughts?

Rives, I never compact my media any during filling, and my blumats perform great with no issues. I am using a SPM based mix(Promix Bx w/ Bio-Fungicide) amended with 10% Axis Regular, and 5% EWC.

I think we've touched on compaction once before in this thread, but I would not do it at all. If you compact the media, you are destroying the fragile pore spaces that exist within a properly moist and fluffed media. This is not ideal, but it wont prevent you from growing healthy plants, but they will grow slower than one in media that hasn't suffered any compaction.

AK, I dont use coco, but I have my doubts that it can't be over-watered. Use your own judgement in this regard. If you had some pictures of the rootzone I could give you more insight.

Ive got a few pics to share. The first is the rootball of CLS NL two weeks post transplant. At first glance it looks like a nice rootball. Lots of white roots, but they should be really really fuzzy if I had the proper blumat level set with this plant. The media was just too wet. Not saturated but a level below it. I want it a little bit 'drier'.

The next few pics are Black Widow two weeks post transplant. This plants moisture level was a little bit drier, and the root growth was pretty astounding imo. Tons and tons of root hairs. If you get your blumats dialed into this point, keep it there even if the container feels a bit too light. Its very tempting to me to tinker with mine, and go wetter, but I try to avoid the temptation.

 

[ekomsi]

Those are some sexy roots

 

[Dave Coulier]

Ty. Its the power of blumats. They do amazing things.

 

[rives]

Dave, I wouldn't really consider this "compacted", but trying to come up with an assessment of the degree of compaction would be difficult. I caught one plant in the midst of a runaway, and couldn't get it to stop. The spike was loose in the medium, and finally I pulled it out completely, checked for air bubbles in it, and placed it in a glass of water - it immediately stopped running. I put it back in the pot, and it started again.

I pushed the spike in further than it had been, and it continued to run. I wound up taking my fingertips and lightly compressing the mix down around it, and it quit running. This was with fingertips, under a screen, and the plant was in the back row of the tent, so there couldn't have been a great deal of compaction taking place in a 3 gallon pot.

The problem hasn't reoccurred since, so it seems to me that the mix was a bit loose initially for the blumat to work properly, if not for the plant. I had never had this issue when using Sunshine Mix #4, which is similar to your Promix in that it is peat based. That is why I was curious if other people had noticed if coco-based mixes might require a bit more initial compaction.

Rives, I never compact my media any during filling, and my blumats perform great with no issues. I am using a SPM based mix(Promix Bx w/ Bio-Fungicide) amended with 10% Axis Regular, and 5% EWC.

I think we've touched on compaction once before in this thread, but I would not do it at all. If you compact the media, you are destroying the fragile pore spaces that exist within a properly moist and fluffed media. This is not ideal, but it wont prevent you from growing healthy plants, but they will grow slower than one in media that hasn't suffered any compaction.

AK, I dont use coco, but I have my doubts that it can't be over-watered. Use your own judgement in this regard. If you had some pictures of the rootzone I could give you more insight.

Ive got a few pics to share. The first is the rootball of CLS NL two weeks post transplant. At first glance it looks like a nice rootball. Lots of white roots, but they should be really really fuzzy if I had the proper blumat level set with this plant. The media was just too wet. Not saturated but a level below it. I want it a little bit 'drier'.

View Image

The next few pics are Black Widow two weeks post transplant. This plants moisture level was a little bit drier, and the root growth was pretty astounding imo. Tons and tons of root hairs. If you get your blumats dialed into this point, keep it there even if the container feels a bit too light. Its very tempting to me to tinker with mine, and go wetter, but I try to avoid the temptation.

View Image

View Image

View Image

 

[sunnydog]

I have definitely noticed a correlation between "fluffy" media and the tendency to over run. Seems not only does the cone require maximum contact, if the media is too fluffy, the water will just kinda run thru, not enough capillary action to trigger the sensor in a timely manner.
When I used to re-mix soil for each run, the soil would start out fluffier and had a greater over run rate. Since I have been doing lo-till, my soil stays more compact, and run on is pretty non-existent at this point. Some of the cones have been in place for 2-3 runs now, and can barely be seen poking out of the soil ,just the top of the dial visible. They get sucked down,it seems!

 

[rrog]

Sunny and Rives, these are very interesting observations. Just thinking back, after inserting the BMs into new medium, I "water" the BMs to settle the soil around them. Never thought much about that before, but it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Other than that I don't compact the soil, either.

 

[heady blunts]

i was at PEH the other day---check out the new 24 pack with pressure reducer!

 

[greenmatter]

^^^^^^ does that price tag say $299.95 ??????

 

[heady blunts]

^^^^^^ does that price tag say $299.95 ??????

yea it does

needless to say, i went home empty handed

it's basically the same price as two patio kits and a pressure reducer. i wish there were more of a discount for bulk orders...

 

[offthehook]

Quote: In my experience, the moister pots ALWAYS out-perform the drier pots. End quote.

This is one exemple of someone's moist indication in this thread and there are a plenty like this.

What I am wondering, since we calibrate our auto drippers with Blumat tensiometers anyhows... Why not PLEASE put here the number in millibars that you are talking about?

My best results have always been between 120 to 150 mb in veg and 150 to 180 mb in bloom.

Is there anyone's observation that's matching mines?

Ofcourse the composition of the medium plays a role too, so I'd like to add that I am on 30% clay chunks, 30% potting soil, 30% blonde peat or cocos & 10% home made compost.

 

[rives]

yea it does

needless to say, i went home empty handed

it's basically the same price as two patio kits and a pressure reducer. i wish there were more of a discount for bulk orders...

Sounds to me like they added in an extra $100 or so. The patio kits are going for roughly $75 apiece, and I paid about $45 for a Blumat pressure reducer....

 

[rives]

What I am wondering, since we calibrate our auto drippers with Blumat tensiometers anyhows... Why not PLEASE put here the number in millibars that you are talking about?

My best results have always been between 120 to 150 mb in veg and 150 to 180 mb in bloom.

Is there anyone's observation that's matching mines?

Well, this would be a great idea if anyone actually had the meter. I've only seen it on the Blumat web site - have you seen a US distributor that stocks them?

 

[rrog]

I wasn't aware they had a meter. This is a moisture meter? Analog or digital? I've looked at some cheap ones in the past and thought they were flaky. I'm sure the more expensive ones would be better.

 

[rives]

Here rrog. They've always looked pretty cool, and the price doesn't look bad, but I've never seen them for sale on this side of the pond.