MY True HP Aero Plug&Play Pods

Status
Not open for further replies.

Atomizer

Well-Known Member
The 4 sprayer cross piece works better with the medium pressure pump as there is on that fits the Iwalki pressure range perfectly. The one that is set for 22 psi. You would just set the timer for a shorter spray time. ie 0.5 to 1 second of spray.
The 4-way grey nozzles are rated for 4 - 5 bar so the droplet size will suffer, its no biggy as most nozzles will to some extent at that pressure. The adv will help to give a better start/stop response.
The grey nozzles deliver a fair amount of water, i`d recommend using purple nozzles if you can find some.
Its worth noting the actual misting pulse will be at least 0.5 seconds longer than the timer setting, a timer that can go down to almost zero is very useful.
 

fatman7574

New Member
no they dont look like that. im still at a low EC level compared to any other hydro system im familiar with. im finishing at 650ppm .5 conversion. i actually think the only thing wrong was i was a little to light on the feeding going into the first couple weeks of high demand requiered from flowering.

I wasn't implying that the degree of damage would have been so great so as to have brough the degree of damage as shown in the photos. That person actually went two full weaks with no nutrients during the last tow eeks of budding.

You had indicated an earlier dull green followed by some purple coloration. That is a typical effect of a phosphorus deficiency that is followed by the purple then the yellow and brown. If caught early usually only the dull green and some purple results. The photos are obvious "gross/extreme" examples of a phosphorus deficiency that has gone full stage to the point of causing death in the large leaves as shown by the final brown coloration.
 

travish413

Well-Known Member
Plants in early growth and in budding are considered low light plants as they leaf mass is low in the early veg state and the leaves are thick and shading each other during budding due to the thickening dud formation. In low light conditions the roots take up more of their nitrogen as ammoniun nitrogen if it is available. However when it takes up ammonium nitrogen its roots release H+ as it acculmalates in excess. With most tap water there is a higher concentration of carbonates in your nutrients beacuse both the tap water and the nutrient formula provides carbonates or calcium, phosphorus and or magnesium that forms carbonates. The carbonates neutrailize the acids released by the roots. With RO water you have lower amounts of carbonates to absorb the acids as they are released.
If someone had their system already hooked to an RO tank feeding their res could you just add a little baking soda in the water to neutralize the acid?
 

fatman7574

New Member
If someone had their system already hooked to an RO tank feeding their res could you just add a little baking soda in the water to neutralize the acid?

It is better to use a mix of carbonates. ie if adding baking soda it is better to add a combination of baking sodas and sodium carbonate. It is better to add a combination of both of those plus some magnesium carbonate. In nature water would also contain cacium carbonate and carbonates with phospohorus, iron and sulfur attached. Nature seldom puts all its eggs in one basket. Most commonly though just adding potasium hydroxide is all that would be done to raise the PH then a carbonate would be added not to raise the pH but to neutralize future acids so that the pH would not drop so easily or quickly.
 

travish413

Well-Known Member
It is better to use a mix of carbonates. ie if adding baking soda it is better to add a combination of baking sodas and sodium carbonate. It is better to add a combination of both of those plus some magnesium carbonate. In nature water would also contain cacium carbonate and carbonates with phospohorus, iron and sulfur attached. Nature seldom puts all its eggs in one basket. Most commonly though just adding potasium hydroxide is all that would be done to raise the PH then a carbonate would be added not to raise the pH but to neutralize future acids so that the pH would not drop so easily or quickly.
I thought about KOH but thought it would be to harsh on the plants... Thats some pretty nasty stuff isnt it? I assume that you would just use a very small ratio?
 

fatman7574

New Member
I thought about KOH but thought it would be to harsh on the plants... Thats some pretty nasty stuff isnt it? I assume that you would just use a very small ratio?
Takes very,very little to raise the pH with an hydroxide. Depending on the concentration it will typically have a pH between 12 (1/10 mole per liter) and 14 (1 mole per liter).
 

tree farmer

Well-Known Member
Fatman
wouldnt one expect the runoff PH to be higher if the input ppm was 650 PH5.3 and the runoff came out at ppm400 ph 5.8. just the lowering of the total ppm should cause the ph to rise. am i wrong on this.
 

fatman7574

New Member
Fatman
wouldnt one expect the runoff PH to be higher if the input ppm was 650 PH5.3 and the runoff came out at ppm400 ph 5.8. just the lowering of the total ppm should cause the ph to rise. am i wrong on this.

The pH is a reflection of what is up taken by the roots and what balancing ions are released by the roots plus any effect caused by dying roots adding acids and also carbonates neutralizing acids. Only acids can neutralize hydroxides released by roots. There is no common acid equivalent of a buffer such as carbonates.

The fertilizer that is normally added to neutralize the pH rising effect is ammonical nitrogen. It just so happens that when conditions are such that the plants is up taking fertilizers that cause the roots to release hydroxides that the plant will uptake ammonical nitrogen instead of nitrates if they are present. In doing so it tends to balance the roots ions levels so that ions are not released in abundance in either direction H+ or OH-. If however you have too much ammonical nitrogen taken up your roots will put out more H+ ions causing a low pH. The denser the buds or the bushier the plants the more ammonical nitrogen that can be taken up if it is present. Combine that with the better the roots systems the better and larger the take up of phosphorus.

So with typical formulas there is not only a shortage of phosphorus once the plant bushes up, buds thicken and the root mass gets huge the higher demand for ammonical nitrogen to balance out the amounts of phosphorus that is taken up. Nearly all phosphoros in hydroponic fertilizers comes from mono potassium phosphate. Each phosphorus has tow hydroxides attached to it. ie thoase are hydroxides are dumped by the roots back into the water if there is not enough H+ taken into create a balance.

If a water analysis was run on the waste water I imagine you would find the chief nutrients being taken up at this time are phosphorus and any ammonical nitrogen available. The present uptake o phsophori us is fairly klarge as the phophorus in Lucas Formulas is 10%. However the ammonical nitrogen amount is small at 0.30% of the total formula analysis. While the percentage of ammonical nitrogen to nitrate may not seem small, you must also consider that the percentage of phosphorus to nitrgen is 1:2 If more ammonical nitrogen was available it would be taken up and your pH would drop. If both phosphorus and ammonical nitrogen was added the ppm output would be proportionally smaller as both would be taken up readily. Your pH would then depend upon your ration of phosphorus to ammonical nitrogen. That is if your carbonate levels are not high and therefore neutralizing the H+ released by the roots as a result of the ammonical nitrogen up take.

I really did try to make the answer simple.

Most commercial hydroponic nutrient formulas have ammonical nitrogen levels at minimal amounts (3% to 6% of total nitrogen or even lower). Even HW micro by GH is only about 8 percent. With high pressure aero or atomized aero with large root masses of hair roots I would mix formulas containing 15% ammonical nitrogen. That is the upper maximum level recommended for lesser efficient systems so as to not have large daily drops in pH.

Ammonium nitrate should be readily available at any garden shop in small boxes. (It can be used to make gun powder though so maybe not in Europe, in the US it just requires a permit for bulk loads) Just add a very small amount of it to your nutrients and your waste water pH will drop. However your ppm uptake will likely not increase anymore than the amount of ppm added by the ammonium nitrate.

A simple way to look at it is like this ammonical nitrogen is NH 4+ That 4+ means four hydrogen ions. ie acid Nitrate however as is typically present in calcium nitrate becomes 2HNO3 ie only 2 hydrogen and they combine with oxygen and become H2O (water) ie CaCO3 + 2 HNO3 → Ca(NO3)2 + CO2 + H2O so there is very little effect on the pH from nitrate uptake.

It is really sad that the administrators do not set the forum up to allow sub text and super text.
 

sherriberry

New Member
before you guys get too jelous, i wanted to correct my 1 male plant statement.

it has officially risen to 3 (2 might have been hermie), but all other plants are females, so thats it for the males for sure :)

im working on my big rubbermaid tub setup, ill let you know when its done
 

clydefrog

Well-Known Member
thanks for the thread treefarmer...how's your growth looking? are you getting a good idea yet of what kind of results you're going to see?
 

akaru

Member
I just finished prototyping a siphoning nozzle/air compressor setup. I'm using the #8 nozzles. Works nicely, but one issue I'm working on is the placement of the liquid. If the liquid must travel upwards, there is a loss of air due to the nozzle having to siphon the liquid back up. If it is gravity fed, or even placed horizontally, the liquid will continue to siphon through the nozzle, dripping or flowing. Looks like I could either place the tubing so that it must be sucked back up through dead space, and just deal with the losses in air, or I'm going to have to put a solenoid on the liquid flow as well. I wonder if there's a simpler way, some sort of check valve that I could put on the tubing to stop flow until there's a certain amount of pressure (the nozzle's siphoning).

Probably need a larger air tank as well. It's cycling on every four or five sprays (which are currently 3 seconds long).

This is fun.
 

tree farmer

Well-Known Member
I just finished prototyping a siphoning nozzle/air compressor setup. I'm using the #8 nozzles. Works nicely, but one issue I'm working on is the placement of the liquid. If the liquid must travel upwards, there is a loss of air due to the nozzle having to siphon the liquid back up. If it is gravity fed, or even placed horizontally, the liquid will continue to siphon through the nozzle, dripping or flowing. Looks like I could either place the tubing so that it must be sucked back up through dead space, and just deal with the losses in air, or I'm going to have to put a solenoid on the liquid flow as well. I wonder if there's a simpler way, some sort of check valve that I could put on the tubing to stop flow until there's a certain amount of pressure (the nozzle's siphoning).

Probably need a larger air tank as well. It's cycling on every four or five sprays (which are currently 3 seconds long).

This is fun.
what type of psi you have going to the nozzels to allow the siphon action. maybe increasing the pressure will cause the siphon action to speed up. or maybe you can shorten the length from which it has to siphon upwards. that might cause it to siphon quicker. also using a solenoid to open the feed line would be quit simple since you can use any cheap solenoid cause there is no pressure thru it.

yea i suspect youll need a bigger tank.that could also be contributing to the long siphon action. as the small volume in the tank goes down the pressure i would think would decrease also.

hows the mist looking like coming from the those nozzels? is it look like a fine mist and hows the cone looking as far as dispersion wise.
 

tree farmer

Well-Known Member
thanks for the thread treefarmer...how's your growth looking? are you getting a good idea yet of what kind of results you're going to see?
everything is finished. i didnt break any records of mine but im happy with the results cause what i learned from this will help me in the future to dial this system in. the biggest problems i had was not having the mist cyle right from the start and too small chambers, and didnt quite have the nute levels right. the girls looked healthy all the way to the end ,better than in my lp systems. the roots finished nice and white although some of the fine white hairs disappeared because there was not enough room in the chambers towards the end for the mist to disperse.

the system itself worked great no failures or mishaps. very reliable. only a few clogs thruout the whole run.

As far as is it better than lp i cant say cause i have yet to use the same pheno in both and have not got the thing completly dialed in yet for a complete run. it will take more time.
 

fatman7574

New Member
Siphoning issues:
There are many outlets for simple ball type foot valves used for siphoning sysytems such as this (Cole Parmer), but usually they are made for laboratory applications and are therefore expensive. There rae footvalves used on all commercial restaurant dish washing machine detergent systems. They are likely a lot chepaer than laboratory grade. In the US ECOLAB is a service contractor that maintains the machines and sells detergents for them etc. I am sure they price would be fairly economically for their foot valves and they are for smaller tubing so would work quite well. The Laboratory ones are really the same but better materials and beefier construction. Theayare simply a small tube with a ball, usually glass ball, that rests on a beveled seat. They prevent the tubes fluid from draining between siphons. They are installed all the way down at the inlet so aresubmerged in the fluid so the tube will be fluid fi ull up to the inlet at a minimum. I would think a simple little air line check valve used for aquarium air lines would work well, but would need to be replace regularly as the valve flap would not hold up long term to all the salts etc. But as labe foot valves are $100 plus ans an aquairium airline check valves is lih kely justone or two dollars?

One step upfron an aquarium hobby grade valve is a laboratory grade inline check valve for about $5 each. Just place it on the end of your siphon feed line as if it was a foot valve.
http://www.coleparmer.in/catalog/product_view.asp?sku=9855310
 

travish413

Well-Known Member
Ok, I have an issue and need yalls opinion... The acc. tank i am using is 100psi max and i planned on running 90psi max on my system. The issue i have is that tank is going to be placed opposite side of the wall where i sleep... Would yall trust the tank or place it somewhere else and sleep better? :bigjoint:
 

akaru

Member
what type of psi you have going to the nozzels to allow the siphon action. maybe increasing the pressure will cause the siphon action to speed up. or maybe you can shorten the length from which it has to siphon upwards. that might cause it to siphon quicker. also using a solenoid to open the feed line would be quit simple since you can use any cheap solenoid cause there is no pressure thru it.

hows the mist looking like coming from the those nozzels? is it look like a fine mist and hows the cone looking as far as dispersion wise.
I'm running at 35 psi. Yes, increasing the pressure decreases siphoning time. A solenoid would be simple to do, but I think a foot vale like Fatman mentions would be the simplest option. The mist is looking like a fog, a narrow cone that stretches about five feet. Seems to linger for about a minute in the tiny testing chamber I have.

The tank I have now is 1.5 gallons...a 30+ gallon tank is looking nice.
 

tree farmer

Well-Known Member
Ok, I have an issue and need yalls opinion... The acc. tank i am using is 100psi max and i planned on running 90psi max on my system. The issue i have is that tank is going to be placed opposite side of the wall where i sleep... Would yall trust the tank or place it somewhere else and sleep better? :bigjoint:
i would shoot an email or call to the manufacture tech people and tell them you want to run it from whatever to 90psi and want to know if it would hold up to that. if they say no. i wouldnt put it by my bed. if they say yea then the closet sounds like a good place for it. ive had some in closets and they worked nice cause you can keep the temp and thus the solution at a different temp than the room.
 

tree farmer

Well-Known Member
I'm running at 35 psi. Yes, increasing the pressure decreases siphoning time. A solenoid would be simple to do, but I think a foot vale like Fatman mentions would be the simplest option. The mist is looking like a fog, a narrow cone that stretches about five feet. Seems to linger for about a minute in the tiny testing chamber I have.

The tank I have now is 1.5 gallons...a 30+ gallon tank is looking nice.
i agree as long as the air can overcome the resistance of whatever footvalve you use. let us know how your testing continues. thanks.
 

fatman7574

New Member
Surprisngly the cheapest large air tanks I have found are by going to whare house type stores such as Sam's club owned by Walmart, and buying a standard compressor and just removing the cheap oil type loud compressor. I bought a vertical 90 gallon tank 2.5 hp shop compressor that was returned as the pressure switch was improperly set (cycled the tank on at 50 psi and off at 62 psi) for only $149. I gave the motor away. I hooked up a silent oil less dental compressor to the tank. The compressor was an eBay purchase.
 

akaru

Member
Nice going Fatman, a 90 gallon tank for $150 is incredible. I'll keep a lookout. 90 gallons would be nice, but I'm thinking that would be a long run for my little 0.8 HP, 3.5 CFM compressor. Dunno, maybe it doesn't matter. That tank's gotta be 200 lbs+, eh?

I'm using a walk-in closet for my testing. In a quiet apartment building, so my biggest challenge is quieting everything down. The compressor is in a small silencing cabinet, and I have it bungeed off the floor to minimize vibration. It's still louder than I'd like, so I'm considering building another cabinet around it. I'm calling my setup the Screaming Eagle, because that's exactly what the atomizer sounds like when it sprays. It's cool now, but will probably become irritating quite soon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top