A question for the growers using Jacks 5-12-26

[dr-dank]

Is the hydro label wrong regarding sulfur @ 246 PPM!?

Is the hydro label wrong regarding sulfur @ 246 PPM!?

Hey all, I am hoping someone can confirm if the current hydro label has a typo regarding sulfur, or if perhaps they changed the formula.

This pdf matches the label on the jacks 5-12-26 I just bought:

http://www.kellysolutions.com/erenewals/documentsubmit/KellyData/ND%5CFertilizer%5CProduct%20Label%5CJACKS_HYDORPONICS_HYDROPONIC_7_30_2012_12_43_52_PM.pdf

Can that 246 PPM at 3.6 g/gallon for sulfur be right? I say no. This thread indicates it should be more like 82:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=231574


Also, as a sanity check, I seem to get diferent ppm values based on .67 weight vs .67 of ppm. Asn an example take a 600 ppm target (.5), which is said to be 360/240 PPMs using the 1:67 jacks/cal-nit ratio.

Using the ppm values at above link my math works out for the cal-nit. @ 2.44g per gallon I get N 100 and CA 122, which is 222, reasonably close to the 240 target for cal-nit.

The problem is for the hydro at 3.6g/gallon (2.44/3.6 = .67). This should give me around 360 but I'm getting closer to 470, even when I correct the (assumed) typo for sulfur.

Using the value from above link:

1 gram of Jacks Hydroponic in 1 gallon of water = aprox

N=13 ppm *3.6 = 46.8 (close to 50, as advertised)
P=14 ppm *3.6 = 50.4 (close to 52, as advertised)
K=57 ppm *3.6 = 205 (close to 215, as advertised)
Mg=17 ppm *3.6 = 61.2 (close to 60, as advertised)
S=22 ppm *3.6 = 79.8 (label says 246!!!)
iron =.8 ppm *3.6 = 3 (close to 3, as advertised)

When I add the totals I get: 446.


From this it seems the correct by gram mix for .67 ratio that gives 360/240 hydro/cal-nit is 2.8/2.44.

But threads and label indicates it should be 3.64/2.44

Thanks for any clarity.

 

[dr-dank]

Answering my own question as to the S content and label stating 246 v. 86.

The label is right. This is because its sulfate, not sulfur, the later being unavailable/insoluble. The former is one S bound to 4 0s, and so is heavy than just S.

The result is that sulfate has 3 times the mass as elemental S, due to the bound oxygen. But as O is not an ion, the actual S content PPM contribution is 1/3, or 85. I guess that PPM is really based on weight and not parts. Hence the higher ppm due to the higher weight due to the bound oxygen, which makes it seem a higher PPM, but most of that is O.


Some info from web:

Ok then as to the "multiply the surfer by 3 to get sulfate" because:

The atomic number of surfer is 16

Sulfate is one surfer and 4 oxygen

the atomic number of oxygen is 8

one sulfate has a combined count of (1 * 16) + (4 * 8 ) = 48

48 (sulfate)/16(sulfur) = 3

therefore the weight of the sulfate in solution is equal to 3 times the weight of the sulfur reported by ward labs (assuming all surfer is in the form of sulfate)?

 

[coldcanna]

Hey pardon me if this has been talked about earlier in the thread, but is anybody supplement the base 2 part system with bloom boosters / bulking agents at the end of flower? I still intend to use roots excel early on.....

 

[Treetroit City]

Hey pardon me if this has been talked about earlier in the thread, but is anybody supplement the base 2 part system with bloom boosters / bulking agents at the end of flower? I still intend to use roots excel early on.....

While I'm sure some do I see no reason to add "boosters". I get giant dense buds that have tested over 30% thc with just the two parts used at 600 ppm. They burn clean and taste good so why bother?

Don't go chasing waterfalls.

 

[Treetroit City]

 

[xxxstr8edgexxx]

some switch from whatever base feed they use in bloom and veg over to jacks bloom booster for two weeks beginning at flower set. middle of 2nd week essetially. 10 days in start booster then switch back,
its not an add on but a complete switch. its formulated to have micros etc. its a complete feed with the booster in there.

 

[rover747]

i use promix hp to grow ,and i start using jacks 5-12-26 and cal 15-0-0 for veggie plus epsom salt ,but week ago i flip them to flower ,and i was wonder if i should keep same feeding schedule 3-2-1 ,jacks - cal nit - epsom ? My PPM stays at 1200 ,is too high ? Do i need to change ( 3-2-1 ) formula to different feeding in flower or it should stay the same ?
Thank you

 

[bskl76]

No Epsom salts with jacks

No Epsom salts with jacks

i use promix hp to grow ,and i start using jacks 5-12-26 and cal 15-0-0 for veggie plus epsom salt ,but week ago i flip them to flower ,and i was wonder if i should keep same feeding schedule 3-2-1 ,jacks - cal nit - epsom ? My PPM stays at 1200 ,is too high ? Do i need to change ( 3-2-1 ) formula to different feeding in flower or it should stay the same ?
Thank you

Hey Rover, I haven't used jacks yet, been researching it before the switch but everytime I have read never use Epsom salts with jacks. Already has plenty of magnesium.

 

[J man]

Jr slab is nt here he left the building for a smoke. Como tel

 

[dr-dank]

Not fully disolving

Not fully disolving

Hey all,

Mixed up second bath of diluted jacks/cal-nit ion quart bottles using 220/147 grams of each. (1:.67)

Once again I find the hydro does not dissolve completely. I read of another with similar issues and just wanted to say he was not alone.

Used R/O at ~ 25ppm. Heated to near boiling. Start with 50% of quart volume. Calnit no problem. The hydro, even after much shaking and the next day, leaves about .5 teaspoon of white chunks on the bottom. I find I have to use a wooden dowel to crush this up before it will "go away".

If this was a res I would likely not see it. But being a bottle I can tip it and view from the bottom.

On one hand, except for the last dose which may get the chunks, I suspect not that bad, but my fear is this is all the sulfur, or such, which would not be ideal.

As noted, second time have seen same. This time I used really hot water that burned my hands and really, really, shook the heck out of the bottle over the course of an hour or more. No real change for those last little chunks...

What gives?

 

[LSWM]

Does JR Peters instructions for mixing concentrated nutrient solutions include heating?

I have always assumed they were formulated for room temperature mixing. If the temperature changes the rates at which individual components dissolve changes which could cause precipitation for various reasons.

 

[Medium Pimpin']

are you even supposed to use hot water to mix?
i use room temp water from the ro tank.
i mixed a stock batch awhile back and let it sit.
got a little cloudy on the bottom, but a good shake got rid of it.

i do however have some schmeg floating around in the solution.
looks like somebody hacked up a loogie in it.
plants don't mind, maybe some algae growth?

 

[dr-dank]

Thanks for the comments. Yes, hot water is specified by the manufacturer:

http://www.jrpeters.com/Products/Ja...ecialty-Crop-Formulas/5-12-26-Hydroponic.html

"For Best Results



Jack's Fertilizers are made with 100% soluble raw materials that will form a true solution.



For best results, use warm or hot water (180 F) to dissolve product. Some raw materials are slower to dissolve than others. Most fertilizer compounds dissolve in an endothermic reaction which means they absorb heat from their surroundings during the process. In strong conentrations or stock solutions (1-3+ lbs per gallon) using cold water in a cold environment will drastically slow the dissolving process ( up to 24 hours to form a true solution). In all conditions, agitation will help speed up the dissolving process by exposing more particle surface area to the water.



Keep stock tank covered to reduce light and debris input."

 

[LSWM]

i do however have some schmeg floating around in the solution.
looks like somebody hacked up a loogie in it
plants don't mind, maybe some algae growth?

I had the same problem when I mixed my stock solutions too. Definitely bacteria/fungi/algae. It scared me so I stopped doing it this way.

For small reservoirs measuring stock solutions is the most accurate, followed by dry weight of the salts. With bigger reservoirs like 55 gal I've found measuring by volume to be perfectly acceptablr and by far the simplest and easiest method.

 

[growteam]

Hey all, I am hoping someone can confirm if the current hydro label has a typo regarding sulfur, or if perhaps they changed the formula.

This pdf matches the label on the jacks 5-12-26 I just bought:

http://www.kellysolutions.com/erenewals/documentsubmit/KellyData/ND%5CFertilizer%5CProduct%20Label%5CJACKS_HYDORPONICS_HYDROPONIC_7_30_2012_12_43_52_PM.pdf

Can that 246 PPM at 3.6 g/gallon for sulfur be right? I say no. This thread indicates it should be more like 82:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=231574


Also, as a sanity check, I seem to get diferent ppm values based on .67 weight vs .67 of ppm. Asn an example take a 600 ppm target (.5), which is said to be 360/240 PPMs using the 1:67 jacks/cal-nit ratio.

Using the ppm values at above link my math works out for the cal-nit. @ 2.44g per gallon I get N 100 and CA 122, which is 222, reasonably close to the 240 target for cal-nit.

The problem is for the hydro at 3.6g/gallon (2.44/3.6 = .67). This should give me around 360 but I'm getting closer to 470, even when I correct the (assumed) typo for sulfur.

Using the value from above link:

1 gram of Jacks Hydroponic in 1 gallon of water = aprox

N=13 ppm *3.6 = 46.8 (close to 50, as advertised)
P=14 ppm *3.6 = 50.4 (close to 52, as advertised)
K=57 ppm *3.6 = 205 (close to 215, as advertised)
Mg=17 ppm *3.6 = 61.2 (close to 60, as advertised)
S=22 ppm *3.6 = 79.8 (label says 246!!!)
iron =.8 ppm *3.6 = 3 (close to 3, as advertised)

When I add the totals I get: 446.


From this it seems the correct by gram mix for .67 ratio that gives 360/240 hydro/cal-nit is 2.8/2.44.

But threads and label indicates it should be 3.64/2.44

Thanks for any clarity.

Sulfur breaks into sulfate.

SO4 into S.

The 246ppm is for SO4.

 

[dr-dank]

Sulfur breaks into sulfate.

SO4 into S.

The 246ppm is for SO4.

Correct, this is in keeping with what jacks confirmed as well. Elemental vs molecular weight deal.

Regards

 

[growteam]

[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=48601&pictureid=1485906&thumb=1]View Image[/URL] [URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=48601&pictureid=1470785&thumb=1]View Image[/URL]

so beautiful.

 

[Treetroit City]

Thanks.

 

[CCfromTCC]

are you in coco treetroit? ive been thinking about giving this jacks a try...

 

[Rabbi]

Sup gang? Just wondering if you guys use the 1:67, hydro/cal-nit ratio in veg or do any of you guys adjust it at all? My veg with those ratios looks like it's lacking in nitrogen and was thinking of maybe trying more of a 50/50 ratio. Any thoughts on this?