passive plant killer

[ImaginaryFriend]

McDuck's mPOST.

I think there's a different a million different approach to what you are trying to achieve.

If you start right at the beginning, there will be a set quantity of Jacks and calnit in the full reservoir, that achieves a certain PPM.

Lets imagine you have ten gallons of solution when you start out, at EC 2.0. It drains down halfway but has remained at a concentration of 2.0. Top it off with RO and your new EC reads 1.0.

(Difference between your current and initial EC/Your initial EC) * Initial Jacks Hydro = Jacks quantity addback.
(Difference between your current and initial EC/Your initial EC) * Initial CalNit = CalNit add back quantity.

In the example above you would have:

1/2 Initial Jacks imput would bring you back up to your target Jacks concentration.
1/2 Intial CalNit addback would bring you back up to your target Cal Nit concentration.

And that makes sense, because the is only half as strong before the add back.

Unless you have a variable conversion factor... but lets just ignore that.

 

[oldone]

OO,
Who said that?
Where?
Where else are people taking about PPKs?

I think it was somewhere in this thread that the blasphemy occured. I took a look but the somewhat, ah "limited" search option would'nt find it for me. I'm sure the miscreant has paid for his misdeeds...If not who gives a shit?

the fact we have to sell this invention/compilation to the growing community astounds me, but whatever...

I hope you were being sarcastic here because IMHO we dont need to sell anything. I get the sense that all of us PPKers have tried many different grow systems, always searching for that one that "just works". Me I went form soil to DWC to RDWC (insert 18 year interval) and last year soil to E&F. For me the search is over, the promised land has been found!

I remember reading this thread for the first time and saying to myself "no fucking way it cant be this easy". I thought D9 was out to lunch in a big way and just didnt believe his pics.

But then I tried it and sure enough he is/was right. If people cant see it for themselves then I wish them luck. There are many systems, they all work more or less (its a weed after all) and to each his own.

I'll always be delighted to help anyone get their ppks going, but I wont try and sell anything...

I do think we should collaborate on a ppk tutorial so the unenlightened dont have to wade through a 1000 posts to get the idea...

peace all,
OO

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

I do think we should collaborate on a ppk tutorial so the unenlightened dont have to wade through a 1000 posts to get the idea...

Hum... I know someone who is trying to do that... How about a little collaboration here people?

While eating some snacks, I started re-reading this thread from the beginning. I only got through a couple of pages.

I burnt my snacks and that was disconcerting.

So I threw them out and brushed my teeth.

My point is this: When I prepped for my thread, I did more skimming and remembering than actually reading. Starting at the beginning, and reading (almost) every word is a reminder that the density of ideas included here is retarded. Revisiting them now, after spending the last few months really trying to get my mind around the basics, opens my eyes to some depth contained here. I suspect that a summary of the thread would in fact be more expansive than the original. While there is some repetition here, the links to the research and reports that are the impetus to many of the quick comments thrown back and forth are often an entire course of study in their own right.

I dunno. The tech is simple enough. I think I did a decent job summarizing it. What makes the PPK relevant is the simplicity with which it accomplishes so many of our goals. What makes this thread relevant is observing the envelopment of that simplicity.

In my opinion.

Of course.

 

[oldone]

Jeeze IF you write so well...it makes me wonder,

You summarized it beautifully...Vast respect for the job you did and are in fact doing. (I cant give you anymore rep at the moment) Please dont misconstrue my demented musings as any kind of criticism. I hope this doesn't surprise you but I must confess that I occasionally am known to imbibe a banned substance and lately have come in to possession of some rather strong samples of same. Perhaps this explains my apparent lunacy...

I'm finding it difficult to explain what I mean.

Perhaps just a simple how-to tutorial that shows the various designs and how they're built.

And I also have to wonder about my motives here. After just commenting on daggerinmyback's selling post, I dont know why I give a shit. If others cant see the value with the current info why do I care?

This is really strong shit,
OO

 

[SCROG McDuck]

Hum... I know someone who is trying to do that... How about a little collaboration here people?

While eating some snacks, I started re-reading this thread from the beginning. I only got through a couple of pages. I burnt my snacks. And that was disconcerting. So I threw them out and brushed my teeth.

My point is this: When I prepped for my thread, I did more skimming and remembering than actually reading. Starting at the beginning, and reading (almost) every word is a reminder that the density of ideas included here is retarded. Revisiting them now, after spending the last few months really trying to get my mind around the basics, opens my eyes to some depth contained here. I suspect that a summary of the thread would in fact be more expansive than the original. While there is some repetition here, the links to the research and reports that are the impetus to many of the quick comments thrown back and forth are often an entire course of study in their own right.

I dunno. The tech is simple enough. I think I did a decent job summarizing it. What makes the PPK relevant is the simplicity with which it accomplishes so many of our goals. What makes this thread relevant is observing the envelopment of that simplicity.

In my opinion.

Of course.

IF.. I agree with your evaluation, to a point.. IMO, this thread is very specific at one moment
and vague at another but with comments from D9, you and many others the those comments are, if pertinant, with D9s' trials and errors/successes and always, answered quickly and, at least, to my satifaction. Somewhere... sometimes 2 or 3 or 4 more times, somewhere.

But the topic, ppk, was/is a moving target.

I learn best thru repititon of information and pictures that reinforce my interpretation of the event being described. Others learn in other ways.

this thread 'is' long enough to loose track of information...
I've create an index.. as I read, for the 2nd and 3rd time, about specifics, creating an excel spreadsheet in which I copy and past the url, and type: topic, and post #..
I still search sometimes but it's getting easier, as I gain functional logic/knowledge.

Now for your addback remarks above...

your example is for the perfect rez... logical but I rarely get there.

Lets imagine you have ten gallons of solution when you start out, at EC 2.0.
It drains down halfway but has remained at a concentration of 2.0. Top it off with RO and your new EC reads 1.0.

(Your current EC/Your initial EC) * Initial Jacks Hydro = Jacks quantity addback.
(Your current EC/Your initial EC) * Initial CalNit = CalNit add back quantity.

In the example above you would have:

1/2 Initial Jacks imput would bring you back up to your target Jacks concentration.
1/2 Intial CalNit addback would bring you back up to your target Cal Nit concentration.

Let me ask.. what if your rez was 636ppms and Ph is 5.4?
how do I cypher that back to 1000ppms?
I'm gussing here, so do not think I'm being a PITA.

And I have brain lock about adding back the water and then adding back the nutes, dry, to the rez.
There is no room for error..

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

oldone:

I think the tone of this thread was set off in the first few pages, where he invited... well, let me just quote him (POST 15):

oh, btw, to everyone, i don't care if it's passive or not,or on topic or not. the only thing that matters is that we have a good time and use this thread as a learning experience. i like to laugh and play. show me yours and i'll show you mine. lets talk about it.

This thread is info dense. D9s garden layout prohibits complete 'warehouse' pics (can someone say 'fisheye'?). While his yields are silly, when they are reported, they are almost apologetic (p.714):

well, here it is. i am a little hesitant to post this weight because some people won't believe it. i am having trouble wrapping my little brain around this figure.

Then he mentions it 18.4 oz dry.

Not to mention, its not a high flow RDWC system.

AND IT'S BORING.

 

[ImaginaryFriend]

mCduck:

Let me ask.. what if your rez was 636ppms and Ph is 5.4?
how do I cipher that back to 1000ppms?
I'm guessing here, so do not think I'm being a PITA.

If you put in 50g of Jacks to get your initial full res to 1000ppm, you would just plug those numbers into my super sweet formula...

So the first thing you would do is addback RO to get your inital volume.
Then take a PPM reading. Say is 636 AFTER the RO is added back...
Then: you would go (1000ppm-636ppm)/1000ppm * 50g = 18.2g Jacks addback.

Same thing for Cal-Nit.

All you need to know is the total amounts you mixed in your initial reservoir.

Bring the reservoir back to that same volume/level with RO, and then remix your powder back into it. (By weight or volume... both work out the same in my super-sweet add-back equation.)

(I have the chronology of the development scribbled out in pen on paper. But it seems like every time I go to find something, something big pops out... like "Oh, and I didn't drill out the top half of my pots so that the hydraulic pressure of the pulse feed forces gas exchange." I always wondered why he did his style the way he did... I remember reading he was thinking about drilling it totally out... but now I see there was a superior reason behind his madness. Oh, that was post 613 by the way.)

 

[daggerinmyback]

I hope you were being sarcastic here because IMHO we dont need to sell anything. I get the sense that all of us PPKers have tried many different grow systems, always searching for that one that "just works". Me I went form soil to DWC to RDWC (insert 18 year interval) and last year soil to E&F. For me the search is over, the promised land has been found!

I remember reading this thread for the first time and saying to myself "no fucking way it cant be this easy". I thought D9 was out to lunch in a big way and just didnt believe his pics.

But then I tried it and sure enough he is/was right. If people cant see it for themselves then I wish them luck. There are many systems, they all work more or less (its a weed after all) and to each his own.

I'll always be delighted to help anyone get their ppks going, but I wont try and sell anything...

I do think we should collaborate on a ppk tutorial so the unenlightened dont have to wade through a 1000 posts to get the idea...

peace all,
OO

I meant sell them on the idea, as in getting them yo use one, you say hydro, ebb and flow, hydroton pebbles and rockwool and suddenly you have the Pope on board with you these days, say passive easy stable and cheap with low maintenance and its like pulling teeth...

BTW
whats a good temp to dry buds at in the dark closet? and how long do you guys wait before trim? I did a wet trim on em first but wanna re-manacure em out in a few days if I can... I'm looking for advice here as I trust those involved in this thread more so than outsiders(you guys are way deep)... and I searched but wanna know the techniques you guys used (I let the soil on my soilies dry for about 3-4 days before chopping too, heard somewhere that helped) and they had a good flush... and I harvested by trichs!

test buds put my friend to sleep after accidentally vaporizing everyone in my kitchen and living room (forgot the food dehydrator was on for 18 hours!) and those are ones she smoked! lol

 

[*mistress*]

I meant sell them on the idea, as in getting them yo use one, you say hydro, ebb and flow, hydroton pebbles and rockwool and suddenly you have the Pope on board with you these days, say passive easy stable and cheap with low maintenance and its like pulling teeth...

maybe some prefer difficult

I do think we should collaborate on a ppk tutorial so the unenlightened dont have to wade through a 1000 posts to get the idea...

this was prior topic in thread... few pages ago. teehee

this thred is the tutorial...

in the original kbs/kfb threads (lost ...) there were 10-20 pages just on air pumps & air diffusers topic

The tech is simple enough.

 

[daggerinmyback]

this makes me wanna pick up knitting as a hobby since im so bored with growing... it used to be a fun headache (not!) having to check pH every 6 hours and adjust every 12-18 and add nutes/water and OMG! its yellowy wilting but this ones not? WTF! lol this is like ... uh... maybe tomorrow I'll check it lol and thats the soil plugged into the coco ppk... crazy stuff ...

 

[oldone]

this makes me wanna pick up knitting as a hobby since im so bored with growing...

Ah... the quintessential experience of the ppk grower. Welcome aboard my friend...

Do you also have a bunch of equipment gathering dust?
OO

 

[daggerinmyback]

more than most people my age will ever see by the time they discover a PPK... ebb n flow tables 6 plant hex rDWC pods/units the stinkbud aero setup, a purchased aero rail setup ... massive crazy things.... about 30000 in gear sitting cause of 25$ in total plastics fittings and media...

 

[daggerinmyback]

thank god it doesnt make my lights useless or id shoot myself then...

 

[daggerinmyback]

welp time for the watching grass grow channel, but paint drying also changes colors... hmm the great debate is on...

and if the PPK had a way to make my HID's I just got useless, please save it for like two months so I feel I got some use out of them... then tell me cause I have three electric bills (450-925-1600) yeah all for electricity... FML

 

[SCROG McDuck]

Trying to accumulate as much of the goods as possible, before
starting the PPK voyage, I'm finding it difficult to obtain the
D9 prescribed, Atami B'Cuzz coco.. I'm new to coco so I dont know why I need B'Cuzz, wickability, I believe.

It's there, on the web.. $25/bag.. but $30-$50/bag shipping..
All the local shops that I can find (mid southern florida) that advertise it, dont have it (within 100 miles, I dont want to go to Miami).. is there a recommended substitute, one guy
said he had CocoGrow (??) no need to rinse.. recommendations?
Canna is everywhere but I remember reading here that it was too fine and held too much juice.

 

[oldone]

one guy said he had CocoGrow (??) no need to rinse.. recommendations?
Canna is everywhere but I remember reading here that it was too fine and held too much juice.

Hi McDuck, I'm the canna guy and I'm totally happy with it. My bag tested .2EC RO runoff so I didnt have to rinse it.

I have not had the "holds too much juice" problem. Or said another way...The Bitch likes it

Use it with confidence,
OO

 

[daggerinmyback]

he also said the Home depo t brick for 7.99 was adequate somewhere too just always rinse well then pretreat with jacks soak and youre good!

 

[SCROG McDuck]

I do remember that... and did go, 1st to HD x 3 in the area and
they have no idea whaat I'm talking about.

Maybe I'll try order online, pick up at store. Or Canna.

EDIT: Ordered on-line.. thks..

 

[jjfoo]

is there a recommended substitute, one guy
said he had CocoGrow (??) no need to rinse.. recommendations?
Canna is everywhere but I remember reading here that it was too fine and held too much juice.

I just bought some botanicare cocogrow. It had a runoff of about 2.0 right out of the bag. I don't know if they add nutes or if this is something that is undesirable. I put my plants right into it with no rinse and the plants look fine a week later...

I've used canna before and it worked great. Used it three times even with lots of dead roots in it. I did mix in about %40 perlite. I have read that canna is treated with bacteria or something and if you rinse it you are rinsing out value. Who knows...

 

[delta9nxs]

here are some shots of the lead plant in the defoliating in veg experiment.

the first is a repeat of 10-10 and then today's after.

this plant is at six weeks and is about 32" high. this is about 10-12" shorter than a non-defoliated plant at this stage.

it has been defoliated five times including today beginning at the end of the first week.

it has re-leafed each time to the extent you see in the before photo in an approximate one week time frame.

the greatest change seems to be thicker but shorter stems and branches accompanied by closer nodes.

when done to the extent you see there does not appear to be a significant slowdown or stall.

root development seems adequate so far with roots protruding from all holes.

the plants are shaping "square" again as they are not overcrowded in the space and are getting more light. i may be able to add an eighth position again.

this practice could make a more manageable plant with the same yields.