passive plant killer

[jjfoo]

D9's PPK design makes use of the pulse feed to maintain media solution uniformity and stability. If you are top feeding based on sub-water-table-level by way of a water sensor, you may be allowing salts to come out of solution at the top of your media. When you do top feed, it seems possible that you will then flush them back into the bottom reservoir, thereby altering the concentrations of your feed batch. Can you adjust for this? Probably.

I would hope this would equalizing the EC in the container (and reservoir below). Salts will go from high concentration to low, so you too may have salts moving down from the top to the bottom. If there is a path of moisture and the top builds up salt, I think it can make it's way down by osmosis.

Even if the upward water flow or somethng else stops the salts, I was thinking it a good thing to have some leaching of the top of the containers on a regular basis.


If I'm understanding things right, my way would simply flush the media. The other way has some water going in to keep it wet but no water makes it from the top to the bottom.

That said, I feel that this addition undermines the elegance of D9's current design.

Of course, the comments above presumes that your plant uptake is such that there is a drying cycle in the upper zone of the media between the on-off top feed cycle.

If your plant is drinking faster, then you are saturation feeding more often... and whatever comes of that comes of that.

You may be flushing root exudates into the feed batch. Whatever comes out of that comes out of that (but those sugars do feed microbes...).

If you plants are feeding unevenly, do you set up individual top-feed-controlling valves for each plant?

How do you handle this problem? Right now I have top feed drip lines with small sprinkler like things that throw the water out from the center a few inches. I would like to set it up so I can actually flood the pot, but I don't have a manifold that I can use for 1/2 tubbing.

If you have a failure in the pump or control system, you have no passive back up to maintain the plant until you realize the what went wrong and take corrective action.

I am using wicks to bottom water

---

As you can see from this post, I strongly favor a float controlled lower reservoir, with automated pulse feedings compared to what you are suggesting.

---

I do not want to sound like I'm arbitrarily defending the existing PPK tech like some kind of adoring devotee.

Not to say that I'm not an adoring devotee.

But there is a cohesiveness in D9's design. Your proposed system is different from D9's, but might suit your needs and existing equipment better. Hell, it might grow better plants for reasons other than those I noted above.

Either way, I'd like to follow your progress. Start a thread with whatever design you choose?

Yea, I am really open to changing things. After reading some of the university research I'm starting to see that a small amount of dialing in say air gap can make significant diff in total yield.

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

@jjfoo:

I would hope this would equalizing the EC in the container (and reservoir below)

A full top-to-bottom flush should contribute to the momentary equalization of the EC in the container, but might destabilize the EC of the feed container. One of the beauties of the PPK is that the feed solution is kept in isolation from the growing dynamics. When you find a feed that works in equilibrium, all you have to do is remix that batch in the bulk and let the res controller do the rest. If you flush back into the feed container, you are mixing whatever is in the root zone with your feed solution. If there's any unstable concentrations in your root zone, you've now contaminated your feed container. Additionally, plants produce sugars that symbiotically feed the microbes in a natural environment. While there is much discussion and speculation on the exact mechanics (and degree of sentience) that's involved in this process, I pretty confident you will be flushing at least some sugar into you feed container.

If you are running Jacks through a clean set up, your microbiology within your feed container should be limited, as you have not included a good environment for their life cycle. When you include sugar, you have improved their environment. And that same sugar feeds the good guys and the nasties. If you have a microscope, and bennie cultures, and want to get involved in that game, more power to you. Someday, I'd like to be there beside you. Just be aware of this implication on a full root zone flush into your feed container.

Salts will go from high concentration to low, so you too may have salts moving down from the top to the bottom. If there is a path of moisture and the top builds up salt, I think it can make it's way down by osmosis.

Salts in solution will seek equilibrium. This is not an instantaneous mechanic. Salts dissolved in agitated or flowing water (i.e. a stirred container, active flush) essentially move more quickly to equilibrium than a system with lower net kinetic energy. The pulse system (i.e. a few quick ounces distributed over the surface of the media) seeks to keep all salts in solution through frequent low volume pulses, allowing for equilibrium migration, without the consequences of reservoir contamination... That is, the pulse's purpose is to keep the surface of the media damp to counteract the effects of evaporation.

(Just being a bit technical here, but osmosis is the tendency to seek equilibrium through a permeable membrane. If we were discussing the relative concentrations of components in the media vs. within the roots of the plant, osmosis would come into play. Insofar as we are talking about concentrations within the media itself, we are simply discussing the tendency of a concentration of solution to establish equilibrium over time.)

ImaginaryFriend: "If you plants are feeding unevenly, do you set up individual top-feed-controlling valves for each plant?"

jjfoo: "How do you handle this problem? Right now I have top feed drip lines with small sprinkler like things that throw the water out from the center a few inches."

I bottom feed with a volume controlled reservoir. D9 has observed that even with pulse feeding, once lights are on, there is a constant drip into his control bucket, implying that the bottom feed is the primary source of feed solution for his plants. As the level in the base of all of my reservoirs is constantly maintained by a float valve, if one plant takes up five gallons, it does not run dry. If one plant takes up two ounces, it does not run dry.

I guess, if you link all of your buckets with a recirculating system (I'm nervous of cross-contamination) the level of all of your bottom reservoirs should be maintained at at even level. There are various mechanical reasons why this might not be the case, but that is beyond the scope of this thread, and can be found in by looking into any RDWC discussion.

BUT:

ImaginaryFriend: "If you have a failure in the pump or control system, you have no passive back up to maintain the plant until you realize the what went wrong and take corrective action."

Even if you use a bottom feeding wick, and you are relying on a pump based top flood to supply that bottom reservoir, you are relying on a pump based system supply for that bottom feeding wick. Should your pump fail, you loose the benefit of a passive float system.

jjfoo:

I'm starting to see that a small amount of dialing in say air gap can make significant diff in total yield.

Asked and answered in D9's thread. The float valve on D9's control defines the air gap, and is adjustable.

jjfoo, no disrespect intended, but I'm growing increasingly convinced that there are some fundamental mechanics of the PPK's function that you are overlooking. (That said, it's probably true that I haven't fully wrapped my brain around the mechanics of what you are describing.)

I am coming of failed gardens. The challenges that has presented in my life are significant.

I'm presuming there is a reason that you grow. If you grow as an expression of your divine creativity, then be divinely creative. If you want to develop a better grow system for those who need, keep being "really open to change things".

But if you grow out buds for the sake of something practical like meds for yourself or others, my suggestion to you is build out D9's system exactly. Have a stable garden. Knowing that the PPK will provide you with your basic needs, whatever they might be. Then experiment a few cells, to learn if your top-flood/bottom-wick system is better suited to your personal life and circumstances.

 

[SCROG McDuck]

I'm new to coco but was reading where coco is prone to fungas gnats.

I do not like bugs in the house... are they, generally, a coco problem? How are they delt with??

I used soil once for mother plants and had f'ing gnats in 2 days.
I now clone, grow for a month or so, then clone again.. etc..

 

[SCROG McDuck]

Jacks in DWC

Jacks in DWC

hey, McDuck!

i'm still using turface and flora nova bloom for cloning. in a wick cloner the combination is magic.

i've tried coco and jack's for cloning, and while they rooted, they just did not look as good by transplant.

i keep them in the cloners until transplant, no steps in between.

you will find the jack's to be the most stable hydro nute you've ever tried in ro water.

850 ppm jack's at the .5 conversion is achievable with 510 ppm jack's and 340 ppm calcium nitrate. 1/.67.

1.02 ec jack's and .68 calcium nitrate = 1.7 ec

i don't remember reading about anyone using it in dwc but it should work fine. very clean stuff.

let me know before you start building, i'd like to help.

later, d9

I appreciate the 'build help' offer... I'll be back next month!

I'm already on the wick cloner apperatus.. thanks

But in the meen time.. pics of the BF-LSD.
LSDR, (the one on the right) was switched to Jacks + CalNit/RO (&15ml sweet for ph up):
755ppms @ 5.6Ph: from Lucas + AN SensiCal Bloom @ 850 @ 5.8.
They are both at, 14th day of bloom (from seed).

Both have been DFed, the one on the left (LSDL),
is still on the Lucas formul with AN sensical Bloom @ RO, hasn't been DFed as much.

LSDR is lighter green than LSDL.

 

[SCROG McDuck]

Yep forgotem'

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

McDuck...

We are on the same day of flower. How long do you think you'll be running to chop?

 

[jjfoo]

But if you grow out buds for the sake of something practical like meds for yourself or others, my suggestion to you is build out D9's system exactly. Have a stable garden. Knowing that the PPK will provide you with your basic needs, whatever they might be. Then experiment a few cells, to learn if your top-flood/bottom-wick system is better suited to your personal life and circumstances.

I currently am maintaining a system with 16 5 gal buckets inside 16 buckets that are connected with tubbing. The top bucket has a wick that extends into the bucket bellow that contains some standing water.

I find it hard to keep the EC equal in the buckets now that I have added top watering. I need to learn how to set up a top watering system that waters more. My current system doesn't flood the bucket. It is more like drip. I also have to pick up the bucket if I want to measure the runoff.

I plan to add a media wick to my pots for my next crop and get my top watering system in better shape. I have 16 vegging plants that I plan to move into 5 gallon pots this week.

It seems like I'll need a big pump, if I want to pulse 16 5 gal buckets enough to cover the top with water and not jut drip in one spot. I have a 1100 gph pump that I'll start with...

 

[delta9nxs]

I currently am maintaining a system with 16 5 gal buckets inside 16 buckets that are connected with tubbing. The top bucket has a wick that extends into the bucket bellow that contains some standing water.

I find it hard to keep the EC equal in the buckets now that I have added top watering. I need to learn how to set up a top watering system that waters more. My current system doesn't flood the bucket. It is more like drip. I also have to pick up the bucket if I want to measure the runoff.

I plan to add a media wick to my pots for my next crop and get my top watering system in better shape. I have 16 vegging plants that I plan to move into 5 gallon pots this week.

It seems like I'll need a big pump, if I want to pulse 16 5 gal buckets enough to cover the top with water and not jut drip in one spot. I have a 1100 gph pump that I'll start with...

hi, jjfoo, this is in response to your statements and also is for everyone interested in view of recent conversations on the thread.

in a slow moving system there will be a naturally occurring spread in ec and ph readings. i don't know what your flow rate is but mine is very slow. so i get slightly different ph and ec readings in every reservoir. as long as they stay within certain parameters i don't worry about it any more. the plants look great. no two plants are alike. it's normal for them to vary slightly. the ppk is very forgiving in this regard.

i am pulsing 6 oz's every two hours in veg and 12 oz's every two hours in flower and it does not flood the medium either. this is in a 5 gal bucket of coco. also i'm doing this around the clock, not just during the photo period. so really i'm watering the medium.

i run open lines on the pulse system with a 950 mag drive on each system. flower and veg.

i like the big pump idea because it throws the water out onto the top of the medium fast and causes a greater "plunger" effect.

moving into an already moist medium causes the pulse wave to travel through the medium and into the reservoir. displacing not only air but water also. as the medium comes to equilibrium the excess water causes a back flow into the control bucket, which was drawn down by the pump firing, and now is being fed from the float and the individual reservoirs. it then soon equalizes and the flow reverses as sub-irrigation begins again.

this constant pulse/wave motion and flow reversals cause the salts to be re-blended back into solution, avoiding salt build-up in the medium and continuously refreshing the air pore spaces as well as keeping the air/water ratio nearly perfect.

later on, d9

 

[jjfoo]

i am pulsing 6 oz's every two hours in veg and 12 oz's every two hours in flower and it does not flood the medium either. this is in a 5 gal bucket of coco. also i'm doing this around the clock, not just during the photo period. so really i'm watering the medium.

i run open lines on the pulse system with a 950 mag drive on each system. flower and veg.

i like the big pump idea because it throws the water out onto the top of the medium fast and causes a greater "plunger" effect.

moving into an already moist medium causes the pulse wave to travel through the medium and into the reservoir. displacing not only air but water also. as the medium comes to equilibrium the excess water causes a back flow into the control bucket, which was drawn down by the pump firing, and now is being fed from the float and the individual reservoirs. it then soon equalizes and the flow reverses as sub-irrigation begins again.

I have 16 plants and a 1100 gph pump. Doesn't seem like enough to actually fill the top with water, but rather it just soaks in. I guess if I want to follow your model I should get a bigger pump.

this constant pulse/wave motion and flow reversals cause the salts to be re-blended back into solution, avoiding salt build-up in the medium and continuously refreshing the air pore spaces as well as keeping the air/water ratio nearly perfect.

later on, d9

I read in the thread that you periodically remove water from your system. Do you still do this, if so, why? I've read that the solution can be come out of balance with nute ratios and I've also read the opposite in that plants take up the water and nutes equally so the ratio shouldn't change. Seems common for recirculating systems to be changed out even in industrial hydroponics. I'd like to see half my room drain to waste (the waste can go to my second half), and the other half with 0 runoff...

 

[delta9nxs]

I have 16 plants and a 1100 gph pump. Doesn't seem like enough to actually fill the top with water, but rather it just soaks in. I guess if I want to follow your model I should get a bigger pump.


I read in the thread that you periodically remove water from your system. Do you still do this, if so, why? I've read that the solution can be come out of balance with nute ratios and I've also read the opposite in that plants take up the water and nutes equally so the ratio shouldn't change. Seems common for recirculating systems to be changed out even in industrial hydroponics. I'd like to see half my room drain to waste (the waste can go to my second half), and the other half with 0 runoff...

you don't need to fill the top with water. as an experiment take a measuring cup, put 6 oz's of water in it and pour it over your medium. in one steady motion. in coco it should go right through. you should not have any pooling on the surface. maybe a little for just a second.

the only time i remove water from the system is when i move a plant. i then take that reservoir only and dump it, rinse it out with some dish detergent and a brush and put it back on line.

this happens in veg once a week and flower once a week. i will also sometimes do this if i have to move a plant within a room for any reason. each reservoir contains around 2.81 gallons as i'm currently running a 3.5" air gap.

typically, therefore, about 5.62 gallons a week are dumped out of a total volume of 56.20 gallons in the recirculating part of the system or 136.2 total volume if you count the bulk tanks.

anyone who hasn't read the andrew olley presentation and grows in coco should read this.

http://www.iasa.co.za/downloads/sym...at - A farmers perspective - Andrew Olley.pdf

 

[oldone]

...as i'm currently running a 3.5" air gap.

Very interesting and I guess it makes sense. I run (about) a 3.5" air gap as well and that fits with the PWT description. IE, that a PWT will occur in the same zone vertically no matter what size container of coco is used.

The cool thing is that the 3.5" air gap seems to be standard no matter if your using media or fabric wicks.

What do you think?
OO

 

[delta9nxs]

Very interesting and I guess it makes sense. I run (about) a 3.5" air gap as well and that fits with the PWT description. IE, that a PWT will occur in the same zone vertically no matter what size container of coco is used.

The cool thing is that the 3.5" air gap seems to be standard no matter if your using media or fabric wicks.

What do you think?
OO

hi, i don't think it makes a lot of difference whether you use media or fabric wicks as long as you have the ability to fine tune the moisture content of your medium. using one substance for both wick and grow medium could get better moisture distribution than a stratified substrate.

one thing i would caution about is having your fabric wick exposed to air in your reservoir. for some reason i believe it works better if the wick is in a tube. i can't really explain why i feel this way, but i think it will help keep your solution more stable. the difference in effect may be slight, if at all, but together with other management techniques i believe this kind of stuff adds up.

 

[oldone]

Greetings D9,

hi, i don't think it makes a lot of difference whether you use media or fabric wicks as long as you have the ability to fine tune the moisture content of your medium. using one substance for both wick and grow medium could get better moisture distribution than a stratified substrate.

one thing i would caution about is having your fabric wick exposed to air in your reservoir. for some reason i believe it works better if the wick is in a tube. i can't really explain why i feel this way, but i think it will help keep your solution more stable. the difference in effect may be slight, if at all, but together with other management techniques i believe this kind of stuff adds up.

But a fabric wick must be exposed. Would you be willing to test this hypothesis in the mothership? I'd love to see the results.

What are you doing up so late?
OO

 

[delta9nxs]

Greetings D9,
But a fabric wick must be exposed. Would you be willing to test this hypothesis in the mothership? I'd love to see the results.

What are you doing up so late?
OO

you could put the wick in a tube as in my original build, have it come out into the bucket, and put a piece of cloth over the hole going to the tube to keep the medium out.

but i don't know why you would want to as a tube full of coco works great.

i had a long road trip today and i'm still unwinding. my third bowl of unwinding. might have to break out the kif.

later

 

[*mistress*]

simple wick system

simple wick system

4 gal square bucket/pail
5 gal round bucket/pail
1-2 yards twisted/braided nylon rope 3/8, 1/2, or 5/8in...
wood drill bit

4 gallon square bucket fit well inside of 5 gallon round bucket. the lip of the 4gal rests on top edge of 5gal. simple to insert & remove for maintenance...both free @ deli, bakery, donut shop, etc...

there is maybe 4-6in space between bottom of 4gal & bottom of 5 gal.

drill 1-4 1/2in-5/8in holes in corners of 4gal bucket. why corners? water naturally seek 90* angles. since water in roots, & roots seek water, & roots geotropic, use corners...

once holes drilled/cut out, insert 12-18in, 1/2in-5/8in twisted nylon rope thru hole(s) in 4gal. can be 1 hole, or 4 holes.

pour in 1/2 media (coco, perlyt, rox, etc, etc...). splay the ends on the rope so that it un-raveled. distribute vertically, to the sides of the center of the bucket. keep 1 rope end, or a thick part of the un-raveled rope, to place directly under root ball of in-coming plant...

insert plant into 4 gal container. 1 spalyed/ slightly un-raveled rope end directly under root ball. other rope ends distributed to the sides of root ball, like upside-down triangle.

fill remainder of 4gal bucket w/ media. coco/perlyt 50/50 work well. 100% perlyte work well. bark mulch, or orchid bark work well.

the bottom end of the rope should touch the bottom of the 5gal bucket...

top-feed @ 1/5 volume of container every 48hrs....

w/ 4 gal container, this

4*128=512

512/5=102oz per 48hrs

or,

51oz per day,

or,

24oz regular stadium cup poured @ light on & 24oz @ light off, +/-...

maybe little less, w/ smaller plants.

when top-feed, the media (espcially coco/perlyte mix) absorbs maybe 30% of input water, leaving roughly 16oz to drain into the space between the 4 & 5 gal buckets.

depends on size & type of plant, amount of light, temps, rh, air-flow, etc how much of that 16+/- oz is wicked up during the 12-18hr cycle. adjust feeding amount based on how much is wicked up @ which stage of growth.

16-32oz of liquid in a 5gal bucket (the run-off from watering 24oz of liquid) will leave approx. 5/16-3/4in in bottom bucket, if media retains 30% of input solution. this enough for plant to wick up if needed, w/in 24hrs...

the remainder evaporates, especially if lots of air flow in garden.... as there is slight gap between the 4 & 5 gal buckets, @ top, can view water content (res), & even feed thru this gap, sub-irrigating - once the plants get larger.

can also attach a clear 1/2 vinyl hose to the bottom of the 5 gal, to view res volume & also to turn the hose downward, to drain the res, if needed...

but, maybe, can simply run feed-water-feed &,

1. never dump res...
2. never waste any water or ferts...

there is also more air in the media when plant is not over-watered... they seem to prefer moist to wet. if they desire more, they draw it up thru wicks...

delta9nxs makes interesting point about keeping wick in tube... the ambient air does tend to evaporate some of the solution - even w/ just small gaps (4) @ lips of bucket. also, the air may affect ph of solution held in wick. maybe... but, the tech works w/out tubing the wick(s), too... the small gaps between the 4 & 5 gal may provide just enough air that it does not affect the solution, but keeps the media aerated, maybe...

gh fnb (shake well! for calcium) work well in the ^^^ set-up, but water-solubles work better. fnb has humic acid & can become sludge in bottom bucket. water solubles dont coagulate like that...

either/or, 1/2 strength of either work w/ wicks...

rectangular totes work well, too, for external basin, but take up more room. no need for aeration... the air-flow of the garden provides aeration... why many holes are drilled into the 4gal...

w/ wicks & sub-irrigation seem to water only enough that res is depleted, no more... a lower 5 gal w/ 2-3in of water not required. just enough to get thru 24-48hrs... makes easier to adjust ph, adjust feed, determine/correct deficiencies - w/out dumping lots of water/ferts in huge res to do so... if dump any water, it will be only 16-32oz... less waste...

generally, if maintain ph between 5.0-5.5 (input), the drift only get to 5.8-6.2, if that. feed-water-feed @ 1/2-3/4 strength only give what plant require - both in water & ferts suspended in water... easily correct any issues as the plant only have 48hrs of solution, not huge tank that more difficult to adjust if plant dont like...

@ end of season, if examine media & ropes, the roots will inter-twine into the ropes. inside of container, & if veg enough, they will also travel down (w/ & in rope) into lower 5 gal res... keep rope moist @ all moments! even if only 1/4in of solution in 5gal... can also just pour ph adjusted water into gap between buckets, to sub-irrigate, w/out making media wet, if desired.

:2cents;

hope this help

 

[jjfoo]

If I used square buckets I could easily stick my EC meter down the side of each container to make sure the EC isn't fluctuating between containers too much... but I would rather not have evaporation in my room.

51oz per day,

Don't you think that the amount of water you give your plants will depend on the environmental conditions? I'm trying to say that in my experience you can't tell how much water plants will take.

but, maybe, can simply run feed-water-feed &,

Why not just give them a lower strength nute solution everyday? Basically just average out the nutes so the are the same everyday. This lets you give your plants the same nutes over their lifetime and avoids spikes in EC. Plants can drink easier with lower EC.

 

[jjfoo]

delta,

I'm not saying I disagree with you, I am just trying to change my ideas. Most everything I have read, from Al Tapla, to stuff on canna forums, to container gardening books has unanimously said that run off is a must for optimal plant conditions.

you mentioned that because this system does a good job of dissolving salts you don't need runoff (correct me if I'm wrong...)

It seems like DWC also does a great job of dissolving salts and it seems like it is standard to dump nutes periodically. I have a friend who reported to me that his nutes changed color (yellow) one day after a long period of just doing add backs of water and nutes as needed to maintain his target EC. Maybe, he had a different problem. I mean I can't say his not having runoff caused the problem, so I'm not trying to say this is proof that you need runoff.

From what you have seen, would all the DWC people have the same results if they never dumped their res?

 

[SCROG McDuck]

delta,

From what you have seen, would all the DWC people have the same results if they never dumped their res?

I'll let you know jjfoo... running 2, LSDs in individual 5gal rezs',
4 days ago, I switched out one @ 850ppms+ Lucas with Jacks+CN@750ppms.....

The other is still running 0-8-16 w 3/ml/galSCB..
in the 700ppm range.. both stilll looking great... ph=5.7
I have no intention of dumping the rez... either,
unless something gets 'out of wack'.. i do not think so.

I've never run such low EC/ppms....

 

[daggerinmyback]

carl, thanks for this link. really interesting. a lot of info on that site.

it would be convenient to just hook up the ro line straight to the float valve and forget about it.

but even if you had to supplement with liquid feed for a bigger yield it would be worth it.

i'm very hesitant about using organic amendments in this thing. if you seal openings and use a water soluble program like peter's or jack's, the reservoirs stay really clean.

hey, what do i have to do to get you to try a pulse fed ppk? i'll build it for you and deliver it loaded with clones, give you a 4 month supply of ferts, and an unconditional lifetime guarantee.

all you have to do is sign this contract giving me perpetual rights to 25% of your yield.

and your soul for all eternity!

d9

I'll take you up on that offer, less the soul part and I'll pay for everything and your time and send you back with some more breeds to have.... I really need this system as I am about to be split between my wife (stationed in Monterey CA, for 3 weeks at a time) and my imaginary garden half a country away...

went and got the timer cactus used from home depot

bought out two lowes of 1/4" OD drip line/sprinkler line

bought out all the 3.5 Gal buckets I could find at 2 lowes (need to find black ones as all they have here are clear with measurements)

have 50 5 Gal buckets and lids

have 2 66Gph pumps

have 1 1396 Gph pump

got turface for wick cloner/ppk initial design, although I do like my stinkbud aero for cloning

NEED FLOAT VALVE PART # and fittings part #'s and stores to locate at...

ALSO ordered jacks and calc nit... YAY!!! stability!!!!!!!!

STABILITY!!! GH flora, Lucas Formula, Botanicare PBP series, all I have bought .... UN-stable..... PH wise anyways... my aero system required too much ph managment (air put into the 6 site hex system(drip feed cont.) was swinging badly, apparently the unthought of thing ... Things in air when use air stone/pump alter Ph based on whats in ambient air.... sucks...

I may be young compared to most of you guys but I value and appreciate the wealth of info you guys have supplied... I would personally love to send OO and D9 and mistress some beans for thier imaginary Veg gardens and real ones lol but dont know how that would work out... if Admin could Id do it thru them...

the one PPK I built needs the float valve and auto fill possibility... its just a 5 Gal bottom with 3.5 gal top 1.5" sump/wick, flushed botanicare co co...

found a part to save a few cents on sump/wicks its the 18" double flared sink tailpiece cut in half and have two 9" wicks for bigger res... Lowes part # 29881(on receipt) or UPC# 0 46224 00451 6
for those who never build just one...

Read the whole thread before posting...

LOVE IT BIG + to all you guys... and *GASP* No trolls...

I also have always DF'd thru veg and after stretch/here n there before as well during flower... and again before chop ( 2 weeks)

welp I will follow this much like the k33ftr33z one that raised so much chaos... Hopefully theyll sticky the ppk...

 

[delta9nxs]

delta,

I'm not saying I disagree with you, I am just trying to change my ideas. Most everything I have read, from Al Tapla, to stuff on canna forums, to container gardening books has unanimously said that run off is a must for optimal plant conditions.

you mentioned that because this system does a good job of dissolving salts you don't need runoff (correct me if I'm wrong...)

It seems like DWC also does a great job of dissolving salts and it seems like it is standard to dump nutes periodically. I have a friend who reported to me that his nutes changed color (yellow) one day after a long period of just doing add backs of water and nutes as needed to maintain his target EC. Maybe, he had a different problem. I mean I can't say his not having runoff caused the problem, so I'm not trying to say this is proof that you need runoff.

From what you have seen, would all the DWC people have the same results if they never dumped their res?

jjfoo, hi, in most containers using a medium there exist a perched water table. because of the perched water table you must water wet/dry, wet/dry, wet/dry in cycles to keep the pwt from drowning air roots.

you must allow sufficient time for the pwt to be eliminated. this drying in between watering tends to concentrate nutrients in the medium. because of this tendency to concentrate a certain amount of overflow or "run-off" is used to reduce salt accumulation.

this is a commonly accepted practice in container growing.

what the ppk does is move the pwt downward into the sump and out of the root zone. no more drowned roots. constant moisture ratio. very little salt build up. you then feed a moderate dose of nutrients at about the right ratios, control evaporation by keeping everything tightly sealed, and you have a very stable situation.

with dwc there is a lot of evaporation in most cases. add to that the fact that most people are using unstable nutrient recipes that do not have the proper ratios to begin with and you end up with a situation where your solution is going out of whack every few days.

when i ran dwc and rdwc i automatically changed out the solution every three or four days. same with bio-buckets.

i can operate this way only because of the design.

later

in hempy's and regular nursery pots i used 15-25% run off. with the ppk i'm dumping 10% of the floor part of the system every week.

the way the bulk or volume tanks work supplying fresh nutrients at all times to the "contaminated" or floor part of the system has a beneficial long term effect on stability.