List your current nute mix.

[spurr]

Thanks for the update spurr. That was my assumption for your feeding schedule. I just thought it would be good include that with the nute mixes on this page. Over fertilizing was never an issue for me but I met many newer growers who see a formula and assume they use that with every watering.

I use 50/50 RO water as well and have a similar alkalinity of my tap water. Before 50/50 RO I was filtering through peat to remove chlorine and chloramine. I was just debating with myself whether or not I should be doing something like adding Ascorbic Acid to remove those from the tap half of my water mix. Based on what you wrote I am assuming you feel they should be left alone for a source of chlorine despite the addition of chloramine as well.

That is my current line of thinking, but I'm not sure it's the best route. I need to look into whether plant can using chloramines in place of chlorine, and/or conversion of chloramines into chlorine (or other forms) by root exudates and/or microbial exudates.

My plants do not 'look' better when I remove all chloramines via ascorbic acid vs not removing chloramines from the 50% tap water ... ex., citric acid can 'remove' Cl via chemistry based process, and I think citric acid can do something similar to choloramines; and citric acid is a very common root exudate and often found as exudates from some type of microbes.

If I were growing organically I would remove the chloramines from tap water because they can hinder the microbes I would be trying to cultivate. That said, Cl can be found upwards of 10 ppm in top soils closer to oceans; Cl is ubiquitous in nature, often as NaCl. Plants use Cl, mostly within chloroplasts, it is helpful to them.

Also really glad to hear about how well the IceBoxes are working. Looking forward to your grow logs that show pictures that setup. There really haven't been many threads that go into detail about icebox setups and success rates using them.

Yea, I agree, I have yet to see a single thread where IceBoxes were used to cool the heat from lamps and to cool the room. And in my case, it's done with a lower cost water chiller (~$1,000) and lower cost water pumps (both EcoPlus, for the IceBoxes I use one ECO-2245 GPH and for the chiller I use one ECO-1056 GPH). And I use an el-chepo' 32 gallon trash can from HomeDepot for my rez with 30 gallon of tap water I change every 2 weeks (so it has chloramines to help kill microbes so they don't easily populate my rez).

To make the pumps useable (i.e., so I could attach the 0.5" I.D. hose) I had to use a step-down rubber adapter made for use with washer machines; to enable use of the larger than 0.5" male connecter provided by the pump manufacture. I also had to use an ad-hock method to attach the 0.5" I.D. hoses to the water chiller, too. But I will write about that and take pics, etc., for my grow logs soon; maybe today.

FWIW, here are some links to products so you can see what I use:

EcoPlus 1 HP commercial grade water chiller (the white version, *DO NOT* get the black one; ~$1,000 plus a hundred or more in LTL shipping depending upon where you live)

EcoPlus water pump model "ECO-1056" (for the water chiller, this is a correct sized pump; bigger can damage the chiller; ~$55)

EcoPlus water pump model "ECO-2245" (for the IceBox(es), it has max head lift of 16.5 feet so it should work for most situations, but there are better pumps than this one; ~$110)

IceBox thermostat (separate day/night temp pre-sets, so the fan will speed up or slow down depending upon air temp, but the fan never stops, even at night; ~$110)
​

 

[spurr]

NSPB: FLF...

and a bit of water.


dank.Frank

I'm curious, what does NSPB and FLF stand for?

 

[bloyd]

Hey spurr could you list your mix that you talked about with dry salts?

 

[spurr]

Yes, but it's not complete listing yet. I need to polish it for public consumption, I will post it sometime this week. Cheers.

 

[tester]

You're welcome, re the soil solution access tube(s). I called up and asked for the average pore diameter (in micron) of the ceramic interface but they claimed it is proprietary so they wouldn't tell me squat.

I don't know what are you talking about, but if it fit's under a microscope it can be measured easily.
A reticule or a stage micrometer can be useful. I had an error level of +/-1 micron with a stage micrometer and imageJ with a cheap microscope, but a ruler can also be used.

I was using this method to check the pore size on the sieves of bubble bags. (They were completely off BTW, 230 micron bag was 500 in reality, 150 was 200, 25 was 100. Later I checked store bought proper sieves with known pore sizes, where only +/- 1 micron was the diff.)

 

[spurr]

You're welcome, re the soil solution access tube(s). I called up and asked for the average pore diameter (in micron) of the ceramic interface but they claimed it is proprietary so they wouldn't tell me squat.

I don't know what are you talking about, but if it fit's under a microscope it can be measured easily. A reticule or a stage micrometer can be useful. I had an error level of +/-1 micron with a stage micrometer and imageJ with a cheap microscope, but a ruler can also be used.

I was using this method to check the pore size on the sieves of bubble bags. (They were completely off BTW, 230 micron bag was 500 in reality, 150 was 200, 25 was 100. Later I checked store bought proper sieves with known pore sizes, where only +/- 1 micron was the diff.)

Hey tester,

We are talking about the "soil solution access tube" (SSAT) tool, from Irrometer, a type of "suction lysimeter" (here is the link); they are about $100. Additional tubes are cheap so many containers can be used for less money from one initial kit (ex., pump, suction tube, etc.). I wrote a thread about them in the organic soil section maybe a week ago.


Suction Lysimeter:

​

A suction lysimeter is used to suck out a sample of soil solution, aka soilless solution, from media for analysis. The soilless solution is the thin layer of water surrounding media particles, and the water within capillary pores. The soilless solution is water holding ions from fertilizers, roots and microbes; just like the rez in ebb/flow hydro. IMO, the soilless solution and rez in hydro are pretty much the same thing, serving the same purpose (except in the case of biological organics); ex., in both cases root and microbial exudates affect the working solution, i.e., ions in soilless solution and rez, even for conventional growers; as well as the pH of the soilless solution and rez, etc.

Using such a suction lysimeter is the best way to test media (soilless solution) pH, EC, elemental makeup of soilless solution (ex., NO3, P, Ca, etc.), presence of amino acids, etc., etc.

I have tested the Hanna Soil EC Tester, an EC pen with a long tip. Supposedly accurate testing of media EC when media is near container capacity, that is, when the media holds as much water as it can, but also air; ex., a few hours after being non-heavily watered (not saturated). Anyway, it sucks big time; so I have used it to test water (~50 ml) when using North Carolina State U. PourThru method to test media EC; it seemed to work better (at least was much more accurate).

Using suction lysimeter is way better than using the North Carolina State U. "PourThru" method to test media (soilless solution) pH, EC, etc. It's not only easier and much faster, but also more accurate than using the PourThru method, IMO.

Of all the scientifically valid/accepted and commonly used methods to test media pH and EC, i.e., 1:2 method, 1:5 method, SME (Saturated Media Extract), PourThru, etc., using a suction lysimeter is the best option for media that is supporting organisms (plants, microbes, etc.).

All you do is extract the sample, and test with pH pen, EC pen, etc., check out under microscope for bacteria/archaea, etc.

I have been itching to test the SSAT from Irrometer, maker of the tensiometer (which every soilless grower should be using for best plant growth, nutrient (ion) uptake, etc.), the "LT" model (here is the link).


Tensiometer:

​

I am planing on using SSATs to check and track pH and EC, as well as other uses. That is where the topic of micron size comes in ...

I am also interested in using the SSAT to extract soilless solution with good representation of microbes comprising the soil foodweb (aka soilless foodweb); re direct microscopic enumeration of microbes types (fungi, bacteria/archaea, protozoa, nematode).

I am unsure if you are familiar with average sizes of various microbes, by micron, but that is one way to qualify a microbe type, by size. So your suggestion about using my microscope* to measure the pore size is good, and I will do so, but the internal pore size is also important. The 'thing' I would measure the pores of, is a small ceramic 'head' to a glass tube; the soilless solution is sucked into the tube through the ceramic head. The head acts of as a filter, AFAIK.

What I am thinking about doing is using a traditional extraction method for soilless solution to get a sample of the soil foodweb (for biological organics) and then take a sample of soilless solution via SSAT. Then use my microscope to count both samples for biota, then compare the test. And repeating it maybe a couple dozen times are various points to get more reliable data. It would show if using the SSAT is worth a damn in terms counting biota and microscope. I think using the SSAT might not be worth a damn for counting microbes in terms of a good representation of what is 'going on' in media; but it's worth checking out I think.

One thing I doubt, is that I will be able to accurately measure the pores, even if only the outside edge of the pores. I assume some will be less than a micron in size, or could be much less than a micron in size.

* I bought the 'large' microscope that Microbeman sells (MicrobeOrganics (dot) com). He has them made/customized to his specs, IIRC, and he knows more about microscopy than anyone I have ever met. They are very good for the price, it may be better than other microscope that can cost >~$2,000, IMO. Just in case you are in the market for a good and very fairly priced microscope .
​

 

[YosemiteSam]

CaNO3 1.3 grams per gallon
KNO3 1.9
MKP 0.67
MgSO4 1.6
Met Ca 1.3 (Albion's amino chelated Ca...Metalosate)
micros 0.1

For N-P-K-Ca-Mg of 120-40-240-160-40

I have AgSil 16 on the way so the formula will change when I get that in to include 100 ppm SiO2. Also at the end of stretch I will bump the P to either 60 or 90...not decided yet.

I am also running another formula that is essentially the same but with double the Mg. I wanna know what the best Ca:Mg ratio actually is. I suspect, given plenty of Ca, that a 4:1 ratio will work...but we will see.

 

[spurr]

CaNO3 1.3 grams per gallon
KNO3 1.9
MKP 0.67
MgSO4 1.6
Met Ca 1.3 (Albion's amino chelated Ca...Metalosate)
micros 0.1

For N-P-K-Ca-Mg of 120-40-240-160-40

I have AgSil 16 on the way so the formula will change when I get that in to include 100 ppm SiO2. Also at the end of stretch I will bump the P to either 60 or 90...not decided yet.

That is pretty much what I did this grow, I used ~39 ppm P until ~2nd week of flowering, then increased P to ~54 ppm (along with increased K, MG, S, etc., from the increase in GH Bloom).

I am also running another formula that is essentially the same but with double the Mg. I wanna know what the best Ca:Mg ratio actually is. I suspect, given plenty of Ca, that a 4:1 ratio will work...but we will see.

I have studied this topic, and I can post good refs for you if you like to read studies and reports on this exact topic, re Ca:Mg ratio. What it comes down to, is there is no ideal Ca:Mg ratio, anywhere from ~1.5:1 to ~8:1 (and above) is fine. The original claim of ideal Ca:Mg of 3 came from a very flawed study in soil (sandy?), circa 1940.

I for one think 1.5:1 to 6:1 Ca:Mg is a good goal for cannabis; ideally maybe 2 to 4.

 

[YosemiteSam]

My opinion of "references" is that they are fine for getting you in the ballpark but then you got to fine tune based on your exact grow conditions.

I know I am in the ballpark and I know, from experience, that 2:1 works.

The main reason I am trying 4:1 is to see if it improves taste (provided it does not cause a deficiency). Since Mg is at the center of the chlorophyll molecule I find meself wondering if it may not be the real culprit in bad taste...wondering if lowering to the lowest number possible without hurting the plant might not reduce my curing time.

And once I wonder what follows is always me fucking around with something. The way she goes.

 

[darkhorse]

ionics

*grow

*bloom

*molasses

 

[spurr]

@ YS,

I wonder ... whether a problem with trying to lower Mg to try and lower Chl, is that you will also end up lowering S, which is thought to positively affect flavor/smell. As an option you could lower Ch A/B by reducing irradiance, maybe you could try to move your lamp further from canopy as a separate solution; or give your plants a few days of darkness before harvest, that will reduce Chl, IIRC.

Anyway, make sure to let us know what you find

 

[YosemiteSam]

With epsom at 1.6 grams per gallon my S will still be at 53 ppm. Technically I would probably like it a little higher than that but not a whole lot. If I end up liking the low Mg formula I may just switch to H2SO4 for pH down instead of citric acid.

 

[krunchbubble]

EcoPlus 1 HP commercial grade water chiller (the white version, *DO NOT* get the black one; ~$1,000 plus a hundred or more in LTL shipping depending upon where you live): http://www.horticulturesource.com/ecoplus-ecoplus-1-hp-commercial-gr-chiller-p9710/
​

why not the black one? i have a 3/4 hp just sitting here......

 

[JAY LENWEED]

seelings and clones
AN sensi a&b
B-52
H-2
Voodoo Juice
Pirahna & Tarantula
H&G root excellerator
Grow and Mammas
Canna coco A&B
Rhizotonic
Cannazyme
H&G drip clean
Bloom
Canna coco A&B
Rhizotonic
Canna PK 13/14
cannazyme
Canna boost
H&G drip clean
Coco is my medium of choice

 

[spurr]

Hey krunch,

It has to due with BTU of cooling power. A true 3/4 HP water chiller should produce ~9,000 BTU of cooling power; but the black EcoPlus produces far less than ~9,000 BTU of cooling power. The newer white commercial model from EcoPlus offers considerably higher BTU of cooling power than the black models, hell, the 1 HP white model only produces 8,525 BTU.

The only problem using the black model is the lack of BTU of cooling. you should try to find out the BTU of cooling from the black model. Ex., the BTU for my 1 HP white model is 8,525 but it should be 12,000 ideally; it was listed on the box.

You should then figure out the BTU of heat produced in your room, or at least the amount of BTU you want to cool. If that BTU of heat is at least ~10% below the BTU of cooling power from the black EcoPlus chiller, the chiller should work fine.

See this thread I just started for more info and some examples, etc:

"H2O-cooled heat exchanger: design, setup & use (ex., IceBox)"
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=4491493​

 

[analogue]

coco, DTW.

 

[turbolaser4528]

damn good info !

 

[YosemiteSam]

Does that include your water analogue? If it does not how much Ca and Mg are you getting from the water?

I find myself fascinated that 4:2:1 K:Ca:Mg works for some while I had to go 3:2:1 to avoid a Ca deficiency.

 

[spurr]

B ... Boron:

Boron is an often over-looked element that offers many important properties to plant growth, yield, etc. Just like Si (silica) is over-looked and highly under-valued, so too is B.

In my 'off the self' mix, I use General Hydroponics, which just released the percent of B in the FloraMico, i.e., 0.01%. While it's good to know the B present in fertilizers, that amount of boron will (probably) not offer ideal boron for plant growth. YS and I have discussed this topic, and for most plants < 2 or 3 ppm B (max) seems like a good goal. I for one plan to try for ~1 to 2 ppm (max) B for fertigation, using boric acid (aka orthoboric acid). My current mix using 5 ml/gallon of General Hydroponics FloraMicro provides ~0.167 ppm B.

One can use borax to provide B to the plants, but using boric acid is probably the better route in terms of quick solubility and purity. A set of examples about solubility of B: it takes up to 100 minutes, in warm water, for B from borax to reach point of highest solubility (see the paper attached to this post); but B from boric acid is available almost immediately (better in warm/hot water). Another set of examples, this time about purity: orthoboric acid, H3BO3, is 17.48% B; but borax, Na2B4O7.10H2O, is only 11.34% B and it has 12.06% Na. Note a good molar mass calculator is handy: link (thanks to Tester for the link).

One reason I would almost prefer to use borax is for the Na, which does help plants, in very small quantities. The problem is, IMO, borax has too much Na with respect to B.

Orthoboric acid (aka boric acid) [formula H3BO3]:

• 77.63% O (oxygen)
• 17.48% B (boron)
• 4.89% H (hydrogen)

Borax (aka sodium borate and sodium tetraborate) [formula Na2B4O7.10H2O]:

• 71.32% O (oxygen)
• 12.06% Na (sodium)
• 11.34% B (boron)
• 5.29% H (hydrogen)

To stick with my current 'off the self' paradigm for this fert regimen, I will use off the self orthoboric acid, from a local pharmacy. Orthoboric acid, H3BO3, is a source of B we can use for plants, even as foliar.

Below are a two links to info about boron, boric acid (H3BO3) and plants, etc. I have written much about this topic already, incl. posting of studies on higher plants and boron. I can post some of those in this thread, if anyone needs them.

• Boric acid (H3BO3) and info from Yara (worldwide wholesaler plant fertilizer company): link
• Boric acid info from ChemLand: link

If my math below is correct, I am going to use 0.015 gram/gallon H3BO3, for a total of ~0.857 ppm B. I may make a stock solution and use that for easy mixing of B to 1 ppm.

• 0.020 gram/gallon orthoboric acid:
  • ((0.1748)0.02/3785.41178)10^6 = 0.92 ppm B

• 0.015 gram/gallon orthoboric acid:
  • ((0.1748)0.015/3785.41178)10^6 = 0.69 ppm B

I think dissolving the boric acid in warm/hot water, then pouring it into the larger tank of fertigation water, is a good method. And not using 'cold' fertigation water is a good idea as always.

Uploaded files:

1. MSDS for boric acid, from Hydro-Gardens (a good source of salt fertilizer compounds and chelates, along with J.R. Peters and CustomHydroNutrients)
2. A paper about using borax as fertilizer, re solubility of B:
   Dissolution Kinetics of Boron Fertilizers, Boron Release in Soil and Effect on Rice
   Saleem M, Khanif Y.M, Fauziah Ishak, Samsuri A.W
   IV. Uluslararası Bor Sempozyumu • IV International Boron Symposium, 15-17 / Ekim / October 2009
   Eskişehir-TURKEY, © IBS, 2009 • ISBN: 978-9944-89-790-7​

Note ... Caveat Emptor!

I have not tested this yet, but it should work fine, orthoboric acid has been used for years in plant fertilizers. But if someone does try this now, and it messes up your plants, don't get made at me!

 

[analogue]

Does that include your water analogue? If it does not how much Ca and Mg are you getting from the water?

I find myself fascinated that 4:2:1 K:Ca:Mg works for some while I had to go 3:2:1 to avoid a Ca deficiency.

It does include my tap water. There is a center column for "adjustments".

Less distance for Ca to travel on my smaller than-yours plants .

We both do Calcium 25 every other week until fruit set. Plants really dig those "foliars".