It's A Fuct World

drgreentm

Well-Known Member
Yep, cutting out the vegging will give you much shorter internodes. Don't forget to trim off all the branching on the lower 1/3 of the plants. Any branch more than about 1" long gets the snip. This will encourage large, dense bud formation on the terminal (top) colas.

Clay pellets etc. are a pain in the ass. They're heavy, expensive and hard to dispose of. Cleaning them for re-use is a messy, wet job and there's no guarantee that you'll be able to sterilise them enough to prevent transmission of root diseases from crop to crop. Using fresh, sterile disposable media is a much better way to go.
ok well my other batch in flower is at 14 days now so i went in last night and started trimming off the lower branches and they are actually looking quite nice. didnt want to do to much on one pass so figured i will do another in a week i will take some pics so you can tell me if im heading in the right direction. im always leery to hack full branches lol but they look great today.
I can see why there would be a lot of failures. The UnderCurrent system would not lend itself to easy cleaning. It's also not SoG friendly. SoG involves growing a large number of small plants. UnderCurrent would work better in situations where you, for legal reasons, must restrict the numbers of plants you grow. Plants would have to be vegged and then cut back a couple of times before flowering. This would have the effect of giving you a larger number of small, fluffy buds. SoG gives you a smaller number of highly dense buds. There's no growing method which can beat SoG for sheer yield per sq ft of lighted floorspace and for best bud density. SoG wins every time because the method puts the main bud mass of all the plants in the highest intensity area of the lighting's pattern.

UC is kinda like DWC without the benefit of having an air stone in each grow container. No wonder people are having problems.
very well said
 

hellraizer30

Rebel From The North
hey al got a bit of a problem with foam and my res smell, just running
GH, superthrive, greatwhite, calmag, nitrogen suplament. temps are 70 in the water and my ph keeps going up, was stable for a week now all is fd up. i did post a thread but i need help cant wait
 

drgreentm

Well-Known Member
you think the outside ones could be rotated in every few days? they look great, but you can see the sloping outer plants.
actually those 4 outside plants are my og's that get insanely tall so i topped them. dont be fooled by there stunty look they are very deceiving and will spring up quite quickly!! going to actually stop using this strain on the new op when the time comes.
 

Al B. Fuct

once had a dog named
ok well my other batch in flower is at 14 days now so i went in last night and started trimming off the lower branches and they are actually looking quite nice. didnt want to do to much on one pass so figured i will do another in a week i will take some pics so you can tell me if im heading in the right direction. im always leery to hack full branches lol but they look great today.
Yep, I usually do 2 or 3 passes of branch pruning, at the ends of wks 2 & 4, but I keep a sharp eye on 'em and snip any branching that looks like it's going to get long. Branches produce small, leafy buds that are a pain in the ass to manicure, yield very little and take away from the yield/density of the tops.

hey al got a bit of a problem with foam and my res smell, just running
GH, superthrive, greatwhite, calmag, nitrogen suplament. temps are 70 in the water and my ph keeps going up, was stable for a week now all is fd up. i did post a thread but i need help cant wait
A rising pH is a pretty good indicator that there's a high pathogen (pythium, fusarium) load in the system. Ditch the 'great white' (whatever that is), Cal-Mag and nitrogen supplement. You don't say what you're doing for pathogen control, so I'll assume you're not doing anything. You need H2O2 50% grade at 1ml/L every 3-4 days in the tanks, but begin with a once-off shock treatment at 10ml/L, following up every 3-4 days at 1ml/l. That'll get rid of the foam & funky smell.

here is some pics man good for a start ya think??
Everything looks pretty healthy, but you do have an awful lot of branching. A lot of branching not only will reduce the density of the top colas but restricts airflow around the plants.

Since you didn't start out by chucking your just-rooted clones straight into the flowering area, the branching is understandable. Follow the SoG pruning method in your subsequent batches, but you could remove a bit more of the lower branches in this crop.

Yo Al Whats up with the rusty nail nailed into the stem to increase potency. Im ready for that shit.
I'll bet you are. :D

You still working with the sweet tooth? Im want to use this strain as your SOG method what you think? Check out the site let me know what you think about the gear Im really excited about this strain. http://www.sanniesshop.com/killing-fields-fem-en.html
Yep, I'm still using Sweet Tooth #4- in fact, from the same batch of beans sprouted in 2002. Anyone who tells you that you can't continually replace mums with cuttings from them is talking shit. You can keep replacing mums with cuttings from them approximately forever.

I don't think I'd choose Killing Fields for a SoG op as the breeder says that it's a sativa dominant hybrid. Sativas tend to get taller and don't yield the weight that indica dominant hybrids do. I don't think that Spice of Life are doing Sweet Tooth #4 anymore, but last I heard, they had an indica dom hybrid called Blockhead which might be a better way to go.
 

hellraizer30

Rebel From The North
ok your right about the h202 but i can only find 29% whats the dose per gallon?
il ditch the other stuff. im wondering though what could of cause this I would
like to understand it, one thing i noticed was all my nutes are inorganic and
the nitrogen is a organic product :( might that be the weak link? either way
im not going to use it.
 

Al B. Fuct

once had a dog named
ok your right about the h202 but i can only find 29% whats the dose per gallon?
Whip out Mr Calculator! The rate is 1ml/L for 50%. 50/29=1.724, so 1.724ml/L. 1.8ml/L is close enough for rock'n'roll. A US gallon is 3.78L. So, 3.78x1.8ml=6.804ml/gallon, 7ml/gal is close enough.

il ditch the other stuff. im wondering though what could of cause this I would
like to understand it, one thing i noticed was all my nutes are inorganic and
the nitrogen is a organic product :( might that be the weak link? either way
im not going to use it.
Technically, nitrogen itself is an inorganic element. However, the source of this nitrogen additive is probably some manure of some kind- manure is organic, being that it comes from a biological process.

Good quality inorganic hydroponic nutes have everything your plants need. There's no reason to add anything else. In most cases where you see what looks like a nutrient deficiency, the actual cause is pH out of range. The magic number for pH is 5.8. More than about .1 up or down will lock out certain nutrients for cannabis.
 

Tiger Woods

Well-Known Member
Al great to see you back around, much respect for all the valuable knowledge!

Are your feelings still the same towards electric(digital) ballast? As in its still not worth the ridiculous amont of dough.

When every I see a question about are digi's better I always give them your quote. The one where you did a test in your local shop and found that they put out the same lums as a good ol standard magnetic ballast. Even though lumatak says their ballast produce 30% more blah blah blah bs bs exc......

They've even made types now that can go from 400/600 just with a flip of a switch just like a hps/mh switchable. Wouldn't it be safe to say that even if you did have it running on the 400 wouldn't it still be using just as much energy as it would if it were on 600watts?

Thanks in advance
 

shnkrmn

Well-Known Member
I don't know about efficiency or lumen output. Don't really care. But digital ballasts are damn near silent and don't radiate immense amounts of heat. For many, those are rather important factors.
 

Al B. Fuct

once had a dog named
Al great to see you back around, much respect for all the valuable knowledge!

Are your feelings still the same towards electric(digital) ballast? As in its still not worth the ridiculous amont of dough.

When every I see a question about are digi's better I always give them your quote. The one where you did a test in your local shop and found that they put out the same lums as a good ol standard magnetic ballast. Even though lumatak says their ballast produce 30% more blah blah blah bs bs exc......

They've even made types now that can go from 400/600 just with a flip of a switch just like a hps/mh switchable. Wouldn't it be safe to say that even if you did have it running on the 400 wouldn't it still be using just as much energy as it would if it were on 600watts?
I've been away from commenting on this sort of thing for long enough that I thought it would bear fruit to go looking around to see what I've missed. Strangely enough, nothing's changed in my absence.

As regards the Lumatek 400/600 ballast, yes, you can run either wattage HPS lamps off one but you will have to have BOTH a 400HPS lamp to run the ballast at 400W and a 600W HPS lamp to run it at 600W. You can not crank up a 400W HPS bottle to 600W.

Due to the nature of operation of HPS lamps, it's the characters of the lamp itself in operation which sets the conductivity hence the power rating of the lamp. If you connect a 400W lamp to a 600W ballast, the ballast will apply a 1.5x higher voltage to the lamp tube than it is designed for- and the result will be about 30s of operation (if you're lucky) before the lamp tube catastrophically fails. The quartz tube within the borosilicate glass envelope will crack, pressure will be lost and the lamp will stop emitting light. If you're lucky, the quartz tube won't explode with quite enough force to shatter the envelope, but if you're not lucky, you'll end up with bits of glass, quartz and mercury/sodium amalgam all over the place.

Having said that, I suppose it's going to be tremendously convenient for some very few users to be able to switch between 400 & 600W, but they'll still require 2 lamp tubes.

Lumatek say that some models of their ballasts are dimmable; you can dim a lamp to 50% of normal rating- but.. why... the... fuck... would... you... want... to...?!

The '30% greater lumens' is still nonsense. The luminous output of an HPS tube is a function of how much power (in watts) is dissipated across the tube. You can increase the wattage dissipated in the tube if you increase the supply voltage. However, this will cause the thermal dissipation within the tube to exceed the design's limitations and will reduce the life of the tube. So, how do Lumatek substantiate their '30% more lumens' claim? They can't. If you connect a sample 600W HPS bottle to a Lumatek ballast and measure light output with a lux meter, you're going to get the very same luminous output as you do with a standard magnetic ballast.

Now... if Lumatek shift the goalposts & claim '30% more lumens/tube lifespan,' the waters become murkier. HPS lamps naturally lose luminous output with ageing. Electronic ballasts start the tube a bit more gradually, which consumes the Hg/Na amalgam more slowly, meaning the tube will strike more times over its lifespan, potentially giving more lumen/hours of useful operation. This probably is useful if you're an operator of municipal street lighting, where you don't really care if you're getting 100% of rated luminous output or 80%. You might get another year of operation with a ballast that 'soft-starts' the tube. Mind, horticultural HPS tube makers recommend tube replacement every 12 months- because horticultural users DO care about the degradation of luminous output with tube ageing. Electronic ballasts are probably a very good thing for streetlighting operators- that is, if they can justify the 2-3x cost of an electronic ballast over a standard magnetic type against savings in reduced tube replacement frequency and power cost savings.

Electronic ballasts don't have iron-cored inductors. Iron-cored inductors have inherent eddy current losses which generate heat in their laminations, so they're less efficient. A standard magnetic 600W ballast will draw about 695W in operation, after tube warmup. If Lumatek's figs are to be believed, their 600W ballast will draw 615W. The 80W is significant, but significant enough to justify the 2-3x higher purchase price of their product? My local hydro shop sells 600W magnetics for $120, 600W Lumateks for $360, a difference of +$240. How long would it take to recover the extra $240 cost of the electronic ballast? At my local (very high) rate of 19c/kWh an 80W draw costs $0.0152/hr (1.5 cents/hr), it'll take 16,000 hours for me to recover the additional $240 spent on the electronic ballast in power savings. A lamp used in a 12/12 flowering application runs about 4000hrs/yr, so the payback time is about 4 years. I have a friend in Tennessee who is paying about 5c/kWh for electricity. In that person's case, the payback time is roughly 16 years. Woohoo, let's hear it for power cost reduction!! *applause*

Poor quality magnetic ballasts don't have securely bolted inductor laminations. Over time, they'll become noisy- if they're not already noisy when new. Good quality ballasts are silent from day 1 and remain so for many years. My 1000W ballasts are now about 12 yrs old and are still silent. Anyone who whinges about noisy magnetic ballasts apparently has never owned a good quality magnetic ballast.

As regards heat dissipation from magnetic ballasts- yes, there's a significant amount of heat generated by eddy current losses in the iron inductor core. This can be a problem for some users. So, you mount the ballast outside the grow room airspace... problem solved. However, in some cold winter weather localities, having a little heat from a ballast dissipated into the grow room airmass is a very helpful thing, particularly in winter.

I've been an electronics techie for more than 30 years. I have YET to find a semiconductor junction which is as durable as a coil of copper wire wound on an iron core. The useful lifespan of magnetic ballasts is measured in DECADES. If you buy a good quality magnetic ballast, it's reasonable to expect that it may be the only ballast you ever buy. Lumatek warranty their ballasts fully for 3 years. After 3 years, there's an additional 2 year pro-rata warranty, where you will get partial credit of the purchase price in case of failure. Any questions?

So, are electronic ballasts worth the dough? Same luminous output, despite mfr claims. Lower power consumption, but many years to recover the much higher purchase price compared to magnetic ballasts. Yes, Lumatek ballasts have a 3 year full value replacement warranty, but what happens when one fails? You'll have to return it for repair or replacement, but how long will your grow room be dark in the process? As cheap as magnetic ballasts are, it's economically practical to keep a spare ballast on hand, meaning zero downtime.

In the net analysis, magnetics are simply more practical.
 

hellraizer30

Rebel From The North
and there it is the main reason i dont own a ditgital, that and rfi signal not for me, plus i got buddys with them and there always returning those darn things. way to lay it out AL
 

TruenoAE86coupe

Moderator
Just one quick question before you go, I picked up some 29% hydrogen peroxide, strongest i could find locally, will running this help to prevent disease even if i am fighting water temps a little bit? Just before lights off my water hits 74 degrees, obviously above the 68 recommended and the 72 everyone seems to say to keep it below, but i cannot afford to renovate to fix this problem until the end of this run.
 

defcomexperiment

Well-Known Member
so i decided to give my h2o2 another whirl tonight @.5ml/gal in a small veg dwc i have. the plants are well established, and im waiting to see if i notice any drooping. i called the chemical company and verified there is no stabilizers in their 35% food grade h2o2, so all should be well.


edited to add:
quite a few other posts ive read say to add it at 2-5 drops per gallon, which would be 1/4ml per gal of 35%. i dont understand why there would be such a large discrepancy between the figures. either way, at a rate of .5ml to a gallon i should be more than fine considering you said i could at 5 or 10 times the amount and it wouldnt hurt my plants... im still shit scared they are gonna get shocked...
 

hellraizer30

Rebel From The North
so i decided to give my h2o2 another whirl tonight @.5ml/gal in a small veg dwc i have. the plants are well established, and im waiting to see if i notice any drooping. i called the chemical company and verified there is no stabilizers in their 35% food grade h2o2, so all should be well.


edited to add:
quite a few other posts ive read say to add it at 2-5 drops per gallon, which would be 1/4ml per gal of 35%. i dont understand why there would be such a large discrepancy between the figures. either way, at a rate of .5ml to a gallon i should be more than fine considering you said i could at 5 or 10 times the amount and it wouldnt hurt my plants... im still shit scared they are gonna get shocked...
hey i added yesterday 7ml per gal and had no signs of anything plants are doing great, pior to that I didnt use it and overnite i got foam and brown slime so
im a believer in it.
 

defcomexperiment

Well-Known Member
hey i added yesterday 7ml per gal and had no signs of anything plants are doing great, pior to that I didnt use it and overnite i got foam and brown slime so
im a believer in it.
yea i dunno, its lookin like my leaves are slightly drooping.

also are you in dwc? and what percentage are you using? 7ml seems like a lot.
 

Kaptain Kron

Well-Known Member
i have to reply to all and zem on this one im sorry guys you dont have to jump on the LED boat but i can tell you from my own side by side experience with the panel and 400w hps i own that the LED panel is most definately better. I can also tell you there was no loss in yeild for me but i think that is because the LED is actually more equivalent to a 500w hps. I would say with LED generally there is a SMALL however negligable loss in yeild as the gains you get on your power and heating/cooling bills more than pay for the slight loss. Lighthouse Blackstar 240w 6 band panel. All i will say about LED's is i KNOW the panel i just stated works better than a 400hps. As for other manufacturers no idea. Oh and BTW i paid 60 bucks more for the LED panel than i did for my 400 hps. I spent well under 300 bucks for a brand new one. Most LED companies are full of it though and i will completely agree with you on that one. It is next to impossible to go out and buy and LED and get a good one on the first try unless you really know or have seen it work before.

that being said i am also using just base nutrients it happens to be left over sensi a and b i had from a soil grow, will be switching out to somehting cheaper soon not sure what yet, thanks for takin the time to talk with us al.

I agree most LED's dont work and are WAY over priced but lets be honest things have changed in the last couple years there ARE good LED manufacturers out there. I only like 2 though out of ALL the ones i've read about. One company Kessil NASA is using, their shit really works the only problem is such a small footprint and 200 bucks a light... So a light mover becomes a neccesity if you want to run kessil's. That is why i am running the blackstar panel i previously mentioned. That and due to power constraints (not paying for power where im at, my roomates are and they dont know whats going on) so i could not run my 400 or purchase the 600 i wanted to and HAD to go LED. Fortunately it has been a invaluable foray in to new lighting tech and i will NEVER go back to HID again now that i have found a CHEAP alternative that performs as well as my 400w hps does. I highly reccomend trying one out if someone is in the market for a 4 or 600 hps. you can get a 240w panel which falls somewhere in between a 4 and 600hps for the same price so why not give it a shot. I've been converted and i still own my 400hps it just sits in my closet though until i have the power available to use it again. I just wont be buying anymore HID's than i have already and once they die no more ever unless i have to go very large scale and even then i doubt it. Im on a small to mid scale right now. I've been made a believer in somthing i used to rip on people for. Things have changed take a look around maybe experiment if you got some extra money.

But above all DONT FIX IT IF IT AINT BROKE!!

yes! the LED evangelists! those are my favorites! i actually analysed their psychology. imagine you have bought a light for like 800-1000$ it will be hard for you to admit that it doesn't work now wouldn't it? worse though is to try convince people to do the same stupid mistake you did lmao up until they swallow their loss and switch to hps they would have convinced a dozen to buy LED all of whom will be telling others to do the same, compounding the inefficiency and the lost efforts. sometimes i ask myself why i even bother, all i care for actually is to have a world with more free weed! haha
 
Top