a wicked pulse

[Ichabod Crane]

thanks, but again, i don't want anybody to think that i think that this is an efficient way to grow.

the way to do it right would be more like ichabod's screens, keeping the bud layer as flat as possible.

but no matter how you do it, tying plants to screens does not scale up well.

thank you for taking the time out of your life to even read that mess! it desperately needs editing and condensing.

My screens are a work in progress. I have not had enough experience yet growing to perfect them.

I have some strains that are just terrible and some that are great with the screens. Like you I have some that I just have to hack the crap out of or suffer from to much plant. This seems to be the really stretchy ones or the really bushy ones.

I also don't want anybody to think screens are the best way. It depends on what the grower is looking for. My screens work great for me but may not for others.

I think your grow looks great though.

 

[delta9nxs]

it's a brand new day!

hey, ichabod, i don't mean to convey the idea that screens are inefficient because they can be very efficient.

what i'm alluding to is the size of the operation and the labor involved. there is a point of diminishing returns on labor as you scale up.

and if one or two people have to do it all it becomes tedious.

and i just plain screwed up the timing.

but i think i might get something to smoke out of it.

 

[Ichabod Crane]

it's a brand new day!

hey, ichabod, i don't mean to convey the idea that screens are inefficient because they can be very efficient.

what i'm alluding to is the size of the operation and the labor involved. there is a point of diminishing returns on labor as you scale up.

and if one or two people have to do it all it becomes tedious.

and i just plain screwed up the timing.

but i think i might get something to smoke out of it.

I messed up the timing and it is indeed a nightmare with the screens. And yes they can be harder to scale up. I am limited by plant numbers and they just make it easier for me. Not in the training aspect, that takes more time, but in the maintenance issues. Easier to water as I hand water, to inspect for problems, and to remove fans and entire plants.

 

[ashesashes]

It's the scaling that presents the challenge.

I could never keep up with my garden if it wasn't on a perpetual cycle. Plants going in get some pretty serious attention, moving main laterals in to position. (If I was trying to get that done with all of the girls, instead of just a few at a time, I wouldn't have time to sleep for a few days.)

Then it's generally gentler treatment over the next few weeks as they start to respond to the changing of everything. Lots of whimpy-cropping, and bending and tweaking and repositioning. Under five minutes per day per plant. By about week five (of nine), I make sure that all the main limbs are supported as they start to get heavier, and then it's just cleaning them out as they finish up.

My most labor-intensive training stuff definitely happens in the first five weeks, but I only have to deal with it for about half of my garden at any given time.

But there is a direct correlation between the daily work and my final results. So I don't mind. Hell, it's what I live for.

 

[catman]

I get ya didn't meet your lack of labor goal and since I'm guessing the next layout will be different, so how about some experimentation? Ya could try moving some pulse lines from smaller plants to larger ones and maybe they'd support the flower weight better.

Strings sound really good right now. Ya could horizontally span each row of plants with string or wire to easily prop them hanging buds up without much effort. I really dig using pipe cleaners then to space buds out if they are too close together. It won't look pretty, but nothings that's too easy is, haha. On a second thought..maybe this is the wrong approach as I'll elaborate why below.

I've been scratching my mind over DHF saying it's good to let the laterals lean into the plant and this has always seemed counter intuitive to me because I'm fixed on the notion of having the maximum amount of light exposed to the greatest surface area of bud. DHF talks about this when doing relatively large plant colosseum plants tilted at a 45 degree angle. Obviously the tilt allows for one to cram in more container plants, but 45 degrees is interesting for another reason. Plants seem to prefer this angle for protruding lower branches giving rise to the xmas tree shape and maybe we're better off just letting nature follow a working design with a little help from individual strings only as much as needed. With all them lights ya got D9, maybe alternating the angles (..something like this | \ | / | ..where the tops of the bulbs on the angles actually are coming out or into your computer screen..) and height of the bulbs should be adapted rather than the plant. Maybe ya can still do 'half trees' if the light encourages them to grow into a natural half xmas tree instead of being so focused on 2D plants when we are trying to maximize 3D space. Moving bulbs around sounds a hell of a lot less labor intensive than training, eh? Would love to see ya try something like this...

 

[bloyd]

Hey D9, looks great despite your perceived shortfalls. Still an amazing job for running a variety of seedplants as I know that can be difficult. I just finished set-up of a new 400watt flip using the 3 gallon rubbermaids again, incorporating the new reservoir design for saturation pulse.

A question after rereading your posts in this thread, why did you abandon the 8 on 4 off 8 on 4 off veg lighting regime?

 

[delta9nxs]

Hey D9, looks great despite your perceived shortfalls. Still an amazing job for running a variety of seedplants as I know that can be difficult. I just finished set-up of a new 400watt flip using the 3 gallon rubbermaids again, incorporating the new reservoir design for saturation pulse.

A question after rereading your posts in this thread, why did you abandon the 8 on 4 off 8 on 4 off veg lighting regime?

thank you! i'm going to get a nice haul but it's not what i'm used to.

next time. the round of cuts i took from the first set of cuts taken at 5 weeks veg are all rooted now and will be on time for a shock-less transplant.

i didn't abandon 8-4-8-4 but went to 18-6 for temperature reasons. it let me turn everything off from noon to six during the 106-108 degree weather we had here this year.

i will use 8-4-8-4 in the upcoming grow.

when are you going to do a thread for the folks at home? perspiring minds want to know!

you know what? all new ppk growers owe me a thread. or 10% of their crop for life! take your pick!

 

[DHF]

thank you! i'm going to get a nice haul but it's not what i'm used to.

next time. the round of cuts i took from the first set of cuts taken at 5 weeks veg are all rooted now and will be on time for a shock-less transplant.

i didn't abandon 8-4-8-4 but went to 18-6 for temperature reasons. it let me turn everything off from noon to six during the 106-108 degree weather we had here this year.

i will use 8-4-8-4 in the upcoming grow.

when are you going to do a thread for the folks at home? perspiring minds want to know!

you know what? all new ppk growers owe me a thread. or 10% of their crop for life! take your pick!

LMAO......PPK franchises available for 10 % of each harvey till death do us part or a DAMN thread......

Sounds like an offer yas can`t refuse Fredo...... Onward and upwards ya`ll pot plant murderers.....

Peace....Freds...........

 

[village green]

Sounds like an offer yas can`t refuse Fredo...... Onward and upwards ya`ll pot plant murderers.....


Remind me to never go fishing with you...I always forget that Hail Mary prayer

 

[village green]

you know what? all new ppk growers owe me a thread. or 10% of their crop for life! take your pick!

Well if it doesn't have to be as long as yours I'll take the thread...sitting over here in genetic expectation. Figure I'll run Z7 and Vitality the first go round while I learn the kinks. Second round plan on the Sour 13.

 

[delta9nxs]

I get ya didn't meet your lack of labor goal and since I'm guessing the next layout will be different, so how about some experimentation? Ya could try moving some pulse lines from smaller plants to larger ones and maybe they'd support the flower weight better.

Strings sound really good right now. Ya could horizontally span each row of plants with string or wire to easily prop them hanging buds up without much effort. I really dig using pipe cleaners then to space buds out if they are too close together. It won't look pretty, but nothings that's too easy is, haha. On a second thought..maybe this is the wrong approach as I'll elaborate why below.

I've been scratching my mind over DHF saying it's good to let the laterals lean into the plant and this has always seemed counter intuitive to me because I'm fixed on the notion of having the maximum amount of light exposed to the greatest surface area of bud. DHF talks about this when doing relatively large plant colosseum plants tilted at a 45 degree angle. Obviously the tilt allows for one to cram in more container plants, but 45 degrees is interesting for another reason. Plants seem to prefer this angle for protruding lower branches giving rise to the xmas tree shape and maybe we're better off just letting nature follow a working design with a little help from individual strings only as much as needed. With all them lights ya got D9, maybe alternating the angles (..something like this | \ | / | ..where the tops of the bulbs on the angles actually are coming out or into your computer screen..) and height of the bulbs should be adapted rather than the plant. Maybe ya can still do 'half trees' if the light encourages them to grow into a natural half xmas tree instead of being so focused on 2D plants when we are trying to maximize 3D space. Moving bulbs around sounds a hell of a lot less labor intensive than training, eh? Would love to see ya try something like this...

hey catman! this is the best post you have ever done! you are extremely close to an idea that i have been playing with for over two years.

for some time i have thought that there is an aspect to indoor horticultural lighting that has been overlooked by everyone including the manufacturers.

but i didn't know what it was. i have been looking at various shapes and euclidian solids. platonic solids to be exact.

this was wrong.

then i started looking at cylinders, cones, and parabolas and it is in this group that i found the answer

i have stated that i thought the breakthrough would come from a trick of geometry and measurement.

a few weeks ago it finally hit me!

i'm still at the stage where i mentally build it a few hundred times and make drawings but i'm about to start putting hardware together.

if this works it is a light amplifier or spreader without increasing electrical consumption.

i think it will allow much greater coverage than any conventional light arrangement.

i'm not sleeping right now because of this.

the device is also patentable because there is absolutely no description of anything like this in patents and applications.

you doughnut holers are gonna love this.

 

[delta9nxs]

Well if it doesn't have to be as long as yours I'll take the thread...sitting over here in genetic expectation. Figure I'll run Z7 and Vitality the first go round while I learn the kinks. Second round plan on the Sour 13.

so, what's the launch date?

 

[catman]

then i started looking at cylinders, cones, and parabolas and it is in this group that i found the answer

if this works it is a light amplifier or spreader without increasing electrical consumption.

i think it will allow much greater coverage than any conventional light arrangement.

you doughnut holers are gonna love this.

I'll place my bets on a hyperbola. If we got space that ain't growing plants, might as well put something there to reflect as to cancel out what is lost by the inverse squared law. The only problem if your right about this is we will need a new, tilted bulb growing section!

Amplification as I understand it comes from an outside power source which doesn't fit with your saying, but amplification also comes with the introduction of noise.. and on that note we can exploit this property to light, perhaps. I think what your alluding to isn't just better coverage of light, but better coverage of the quality/spectrum of light and a way to get rid of that pesky radiance in the hot spot. I pondered about this sort of stuff before I understood how wavelengths shape our plants. Interesting idea indeed, if I'm even following ya.

I recall a fairly recent topic about 'vert vs hori' lighting where a good point was made that we can create a perceived sense of less radiant heat by moving air past it, but it doesn't go away. What tickles my fancy is that our plants can perceive the same thing, through evaportive cooling, but maybe this changes structural and hormonal aspects of a plant.

I've noticed (after DHF pointed it out, can't give him enough credit) that dominant parts of the plant transpire (or glutate whatever) more and previously the only ramification I could think of was because the highest part on the plant should be dependent on the depth of the roots to over come atmospheric pressure such that water can defy gravity. I do know water can move upwards otherwise because of different phenomena. But, if we can grow huge trees in shallow depths of medium.. well, regardless of why, I'm convinced we can. What I'm getting at is maybe the hot spot's interaction with a branch is what actually directs auxin to create dominance. I actually have one plant now with a split V shape running agaisnt one with the dominant bud as close as possible to the light. The later is probably not the best spot to put the plant's environmental sensor. We can move air past this bud to cool it down, but maybe we do so at the expense of an excessive transpiration signal that is spread throughout the entire plant, above and below ground.

But I like bleachin/burnin the buds around my donut hot spot! Maybe donuts won't be so round in the future..

 

[village green]

hey catman! this is the best post you have ever done! you are extremely close to an idea that i have been playing with for over two years.

for some time i have thought that there is an aspect to indoor horticultural lighting that has been overlooked by everyone including the manufacturers.

but i didn't know what it was. i have been looking at various shapes and euclidian solids. platonic solids to be exact.

this was wrong.

then i started looking at cylinders, cones, and parabolas and it is in this group that i found the answer

i have stated that i thought the breakthrough would come from a trick of geometry and measurement.

a few weeks ago it finally hit me!

i'm still at the stage where i mentally build it a few hundred times and make drawings but i'm about to start putting hardware together.

if this works it is a light amplifier or spreader without increasing electrical consumption.

i think it will allow much greater coverage than any conventional light arrangement.

i'm not sleeping right now because of this.

the device is also patentable because there is absolutely no description of anything like this in patents and applications.

you doughnut holers are gonna love this.

You either need to get back on your meds or you need a good patent lawyer. I'll sign a non-compete, non-disclosure agreement..just PM me your idea

In answer to thread launch date, I'm waiting for Jack to come down the "bean"stalk...hopefully a couple of weeks. I want to solicit opinions from folks as it progresses;germination to harvest. I need to run Vitality and Z7 first although I doubt either will be a suitable candidate to test the yield potential of longer veg times in a PPK. Still, those two should give a good idea of vert scrog vs. flat scrog.

Really excited to see (sooner?....later?) what this here light gizmo is...unless you're back on the acid and watching Inda-Gro videos on Youtube.

 

[delta9nxs]

hey catman, once again you are close!

vg, you will have to let me know when you start your thread. i'm looking forward to it.

i've spent most of the day trolling engineering forums looking for pointers on how to build the components. i think it can all be built from the hardware store. it will take me a few days to get the pieces in one pile. then i've got to fabricate a working model. and test it by plotting and measuring. then test it by growing.

i'll let you know how it works out next year!

 

[mcfly420]

hope you are headed in a different direction than me

thought you were gonna try pulsing with light, like a reflector that rotates around the bulb.

 

[mcfly420]

then i started looking at cylinders, cones, and parabolas and it is in this group that i found the answer
i have stated that i thought the breakthrough would come from a trick of geometry and measurement.
if this works it is a light amplifier or spreader without increasing electrical consumption.
i think it will allow much greater coverage than any conventional light arrangement.

i've spent most of the day trolling engineering forums looking for pointers on how to build the components. i think it can all be built from the hardware store. it will take me a few days to get the pieces in one pile. then i've got to fabricate a working model. and test it by plotting and measuring. then test it by growing.

well Im completely LOST on what your planning to build.
Does it have anything to do with sunflecks? Lighting different parts/angles of the plant without actually moving the bulb? Creating ´waves´ of focused light by shaking/vibrating some mylar behind the plants?

If you were to suddenly alternate between VERY bright and low light conditions, the plant wont be able to adjust. So how light is put to use changes. Thats the only negative I can find with indoor lighting
The-enhancement-of-photosynthesis-by-fluctuating-light
interesting stuff at the end of this

 

[delta9nxs]

well, it will pulse light but not in the same manner as an on/off strobe. pulse in waves of varying intensity. pulsed light with a rhythmic undulation. A throb. An eccentric throb.

no reflectors or tubes.

there is a math advantage but i'm also hoping for a synergistic effect on the plant.

i'm sure all who have done both hand watering and pulsing with a ppk device will agree that the instant you switch to pulse it is as if the plant "turns on".

this draining of the root zone and the pulse wave together have a greater effect on the plant from a physiological standpoint than the individual actions would indicate.

i think this light trick may do something to "stimulate" or "excite" the photosynthetic process.

by maintaining the photosynthetic apparatus at a higher overall rate in the face of changing light conditions.

but even if it doesn't you will be able to grow more high quality bud from the same light.

sun flecking will play an increased role in this device compared to conventional.

even though the light hitting sub-canopy parts is brief it still has a cumulative effect on moles per day.

outdoors both the earth moving relative to the sun and the wind contribute.

 

[delta9nxs]

ok, since i got a double post here i will use this space to say that i don't want to play a guessing game here. i'll show it as soon as i build it. soon.

one thing that's obvious from the responses is that we all spend a lot of time thinking about tweaking light.

 

[village green]

I'll be patient so long as you unveil, illuminate and enlighten before my next pop.
When I read your post last night I got a chuckle thinking back to about 15 years ago when some people were theorizing about draping plants with light-transmitting filament.

Did you used to make porn movies? I mean what is it with all this wicked pulsing and eccentric throbbing?