I would but I'm kinda at the point where I have so many different nutrients sitting around that I hate to add anymore to the collection.
If I can't get it right with what I've got, then I have waaay bigger issues to deal with...
Did you run that UV formula at the flower switch?
I think another issue I had was lighting intensity. When I ran 80% HID in the flower room I always ran 75% power for the 1st 3-4 weeks. No later than week 5 I would increase the output to 100% then 115% overdrive mode a few days later through the end of flower. This cycle I had this false sense of security that I could run the lights at full power at week 2. I was dead wrong. In addition to the K deficiency due to starting flower at 600ppm I made the problem worse by blasting them with too much light too early. All I did was cause a good amount of leaf damage. Everything was looking fantastic with leaves pointing to the ceiling just eating up the light as if they couldn't look any healthier. Then I cranked the lights up to full power emitting more light than the plants could take resulting in leaf damage. Coupled with the K deficiency I made the perfect recipe for a rough flower cycle.
Next cycle I'll be adding the 10-20-30 for 2 weeks at the 12/12 flip, I'll be running the lights at 50% power until week 4 after flowers have set and are entering their bulking phase. At the beginning of week 4 I'll increase to 75% then 100% weeks 5-10. That should yield much better results.
Have you seen those cool new bar style lights that are taking over the LED light scene? The reason those are being made is the same reason HLG began spreading 6 small qb's on a metal frame. They're both addressing the exact same problem - too many diodes packed too tightly together creates a small footprint that emits far more light than the foliage can take. Plants get burned badly. By spreading the diodes, whether by strips on frame or qb's on frame, addresses that issue while creating a larger light footprint reducing the probability of light burn.
Checkout the HLG 600 Rspec:
https://horticulturelightinggroup.com/collections/lamps/products/hlg-600-rspec
The 4 qb288's are spread out on the frame increasing the light's footprint while eliminating the likelihood of light burn. It's simply more efficient and a more appropriate way to design a light using LED chips. The diablo board takes this concept into overdrive, but still the same concept. Spread the power, spread the chips, spread the light, and enjoy the results.
I keep giving this fella a shout out but it's well deserved and checking out his journal will help put some rubber to the road on what I'm saying here.
@DoubleAtotheRON has a great example in how he setup his lighting over his canopy:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/compound-hqs-grows.1003300/
He's running the HLG 550V2 R-Spec @500w. See how high his lights are mounted? That's because if he had them any closer he would observe light burn on the foliage rather than healthy blossoming growth. I have low ceilings so I do not have the option of raising the lights. All I can do is reduce wattage, and I think that's a problem most of us deal with. Particularly folks that are growing in tents. Unless you're in a gorilla XL with the added headspace (who buys those expensive things?) it's difficult to mount a qb high enough to operate at 100% power start to finish. That's why there are so many threads about a new LED grower burning their plants to a crisp with a 450w qb stuffed in a 4x4 16" from a canopy of vegging plants.
I think your ladies may be suffering a bit of the light burn issue. It may at least be something to consider. Maybe experiment next time with one of your flower tents. Try monkeying with the intensity and see if it was a light intensity issue or a nutritive issue. Or a combination of the two.
I'm stoked to see how the next cycle goes with the changes I plan to incorporate. It should be a much smoother run with more sticky nugs