Pig-Pen said:
Right on brother. Not trying to be a know-it-all, but just wanted to be sure the info is correct; he gave the dimension of 32" tall, and that's definitely the 44gal.. and i just bought one
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
"the high-pod"
- Thread starter inefectualize
- Start date
Right on brother. Not trying to be a know-it-all, but just wanted to be sure the info is correct; he gave the dimension of 32" tall, and that's definitely the 44gal.. and i just bought one
Kodaxx said:
Looks ok to me.
Found the tubeguards today.. and The PVC elbows that fit them are 1.25"
Also, for an extra $10, i'll consider 2 workhorse 8 ballasts, in case i want to add extra lamps later.
And I went with (4) 3000k bulbs (4.17 each) and (2) 5400k bulbs, just to experiment a bit.
and you'll need (6) 2G11 lamp sockets
Now to look for a FAN.
Last edited:
inefectualize
Member
yeah my bad on the gallons....32 gallon is the smaller one i think....so stoked some people are trying to put some of these together!
to your list add
flat white PLASTIC spray paint
heavy duty velcro
the whole thing is actually velcrod together...a ton easier than pop rivets or another fastener. and allows you to easily remove lights, tubes, ballasts... for the top fan you could also use a bathroom extraction fan, it would be a little more low profile, but i like having the space in the bucket because i will be adding a light up in there.....also i used a piece of dry erase board for the internal light baffle (also found at home depot), and yes that is velcro as well....
everyone that puffs that does not grow should build one of these! for a single smoker i think the yield is far more than enough....5 ounces every 4 months should do it for me
you guys got me all fired up and now i want to build another one hahahah
to your list add
flat white PLASTIC spray paint
heavy duty velcro
the whole thing is actually velcrod together...a ton easier than pop rivets or another fastener. and allows you to easily remove lights, tubes, ballasts... for the top fan you could also use a bathroom extraction fan, it would be a little more low profile, but i like having the space in the bucket because i will be adding a light up in there.....also i used a piece of dry erase board for the internal light baffle (also found at home depot), and yes that is velcro as well....
everyone that puffs that does not grow should build one of these! for a single smoker i think the yield is far more than enough....5 ounces every 4 months should do it for me
you guys got me all fired up and now i want to build another one hahahah
GrizzleB said:
Haha...that's exactly what I was thinking! However, I'm going to try and figure it out, and if I'm as successful with mine as Infectualize was with his, then I will post the whole building process with pictures and all!!
But if someone who knows what's going on did the same thing i wouldn't complain....LOL
inefectualize
Member
sleepyrz said:
are you regurgitating info you have read on the internetz or do you have personal experience with this? i think 2700 is too warm....also there is a lot of difference between these cfl tubes....a 4100 k from one company does not equal a 4100 k from another and the peaks and valleys in the spectral composition are also different. think of a good evenly distributed cfl more like a CMH lamp and less like the antiquated notion of "oh you need 6500 k for veg and 2700 k for flower" i have grown many many many species of plants under artificial light and would only run a 2700k if i was trying to balance the spectrum out.....also many of the lower k rated cfl lamps have a lower lumen rating than their cooler temp brothers.....show me some examples of what you are talking about please
sleepyrz said:
Yea, I bet he won't get any buds at all with those bulbs.
My argument would be this post by Head Seeds on how a warm white cfl is in the perfect spectrum for plant growth...
And I'm not doubting Infectualize at all his yield was great but I think the quality may be better using 2700K bulbs but thats just me, I would mix them using half 2700K and half 5000K.... I love how us CFL growers can just switch our spectrums so easily we are the new school of Cannabis Horticulture
Grat3fulh3ad said:WHY CFLs WORK SO WELL:
Simple Science.
Canopy penetration is irrelevant, if the light penetrating the canopy is not of the ideal wavelengths.
Plants use wavelengths between 410 nm and 455 nm the most effectively.
Plants use the wavelengths between 620 nm and 670 nm the second most effectively.
Wavelengths between 500 nm and 600 nm are fairly useless to chlorophyll molecules.
The majority of light from a MH bulb Is between 500 and 600 nm and therefore much less efficient than if the majority of energy was producing usable light.
The majority of the light from a HPS is between 560 and 620 nm... also alot of wasted energy and useless penetration.
However, The majority of light from an 'off the shelf' warm white CFL bulb is emitted at about 420 nm, 435 nm, and 540 to 680 nm... Perfectly in range of the wavelengths usable by chlorophyll (410 - 455 AND 620 - 670).
Absolutely logical... and once it is broken down like that... Elementary, dear watson...
And I'm not doubting Infectualize at all his yield was great but I think the quality may be better using 2700K bulbs but thats just me, I would mix them using half 2700K and half 5000K.... I love how us CFL growers can just switch our spectrums so easily we are the new school of Cannabis Horticulture
Last edited:
Danger Mouse
Member
Infectualize, dude, I really like the way your mind works. Brilliant idea and outstanding execution.
I'm going to Home DePot after work and get the stuff. Several months ago I bought a blue plastic 55 gal. drum (used to contain vanilla syrup. $5), for collecting rain water, but I think it'll be perfect for this application. Just need to find a lid that'll fit once I cut the top off.
Respect,
DM
EDIT: My 100th post!
I'm going to Home DePot after work and get the stuff. Several months ago I bought a blue plastic 55 gal. drum (used to contain vanilla syrup. $5), for collecting rain water, but I think it'll be perfect for this application. Just need to find a lid that'll fit once I cut the top off.
Respect,
DM
EDIT: My 100th post!
yes it is from experience
if you dont believe me
well i really dont give a shit
i was just trying to help the noobs who have no fukkin clue
in veg the 6500 k will give you a nice compact bush with short internodes kinda like a natural scrog
and for flower the 2700's are yield wise, superior. 4100 is crap and will always be crap
learn something
did i say "o he wont get any weed omgzbbq"
no, so dont jump on my cock about something i didnt say
personally i love his grow and the ingenuity
but that whole crap about 4100 makes me question his grow knowledge
simple as that
go read any in depth thread about lighting
not the mickey mouse crap
hell just go search for posts by knna
that man will school any one of us in his second language any day of the week
so before you noobs come in riding infects coat tails
go read some shit and learn some shit
before i stuff one of my 1k bulbs down yer throat
again mad props on the grow
looks good and will probably be bomb ass smoke
but yea go read
if you dont believe me
well i really dont give a shit
i was just trying to help the noobs who have no fukkin clue
in veg the 6500 k will give you a nice compact bush with short internodes kinda like a natural scrog
and for flower the 2700's are yield wise, superior. 4100 is crap and will always be crap
learn something
did i say "o he wont get any weed omgzbbq"
no, so dont jump on my cock about something i didnt say
personally i love his grow and the ingenuity
but that whole crap about 4100 makes me question his grow knowledge
simple as that
go read any in depth thread about lighting
not the mickey mouse crap
hell just go search for posts by knna
that man will school any one of us in his second language any day of the week
so before you noobs come in riding infects coat tails
go read some shit and learn some shit
before i stuff one of my 1k bulbs down yer throat
again mad props on the grow
looks good and will probably be bomb ass smoke
but yea go read
Last edited:
alphacat
Member
Alright chilluns, ever'body play nice now, m'kay?
I have no intention of trying to fan a flamefest or play devil's advocate, but for what it's worth to anybody here's what I know:
First off, you already all likely know that Kelvin is, at best, a general reference since it's the perceptible range of light and accompanying coloration for human eyes. Unfortunately, most light manufacturers don't provide nanometer charts unless they're for something like saltwater aquaria. Secondly, as stated before - not all bulbs are the same, even those with identical Kelvin & wattage ratings.
As you can tell by all the pretty color charts and whatnot a bulb's range is rated based on where it peaks, but that's not the only place in the spectrum it's putting out lumens. Rather, there's rolloff into other color spectra on either side.
3000k to about 5200k (human green range) is mostly useless to plants. But if the rolloff range of a 4100k bulb was 'sloppy' enough, meaning lots of bleed into other colors, then sure, it's possible to grow with it. But is that's what's best? Probably not. Especially if you use a 4100, which is closer to red range than blue, for your entire grow - you're probably gonna stretch the plant unnecessarily for starters.
I mean, we're talking about emulating the sunlight that the plant gets in the wild - blues for veg like the deep blue sky of a summer day, then reds like the red/orange autumn sun for flower. Why do you think MH (blue) and HPS (red) are used in those respective stages? Why don't people use Halogens all the time (usually in the 3500-4500k range)? As to the folks who said Sleepyrz didn't know what he was talking about or was just buying everything he read online: come on guys. There's a TON of lighting threads here that lay this to rest, many with real links to real scientifical-type whitepapers if you really wanna get all scrutinizing on it.
But if you really think he (and all of the decades of anecdotal and academic research) is wrong, prove it. Set up two grows side by side, one with 4100's, one with 2700's, and one with 5700's or something and come back and let us all know how it went. If this whole body of information is wrong we'd all love to know!
PS - major props on the overall design concept of this grow.
I have no intention of trying to fan a flamefest or play devil's advocate, but for what it's worth to anybody here's what I know:
First off, you already all likely know that Kelvin is, at best, a general reference since it's the perceptible range of light and accompanying coloration for human eyes. Unfortunately, most light manufacturers don't provide nanometer charts unless they're for something like saltwater aquaria. Secondly, as stated before - not all bulbs are the same, even those with identical Kelvin & wattage ratings.
As you can tell by all the pretty color charts and whatnot a bulb's range is rated based on where it peaks, but that's not the only place in the spectrum it's putting out lumens. Rather, there's rolloff into other color spectra on either side.
3000k to about 5200k (human green range) is mostly useless to plants. But if the rolloff range of a 4100k bulb was 'sloppy' enough, meaning lots of bleed into other colors, then sure, it's possible to grow with it. But is that's what's best? Probably not. Especially if you use a 4100, which is closer to red range than blue, for your entire grow - you're probably gonna stretch the plant unnecessarily for starters.
I mean, we're talking about emulating the sunlight that the plant gets in the wild - blues for veg like the deep blue sky of a summer day, then reds like the red/orange autumn sun for flower. Why do you think MH (blue) and HPS (red) are used in those respective stages? Why don't people use Halogens all the time (usually in the 3500-4500k range)? As to the folks who said Sleepyrz didn't know what he was talking about or was just buying everything he read online: come on guys. There's a TON of lighting threads here that lay this to rest, many with real links to real scientifical-type whitepapers if you really wanna get all scrutinizing on it.
But if you really think he (and all of the decades of anecdotal and academic research) is wrong, prove it. Set up two grows side by side, one with 4100's, one with 2700's, and one with 5700's or something and come back and let us all know how it went. If this whole body of information is wrong we'd all love to know!
PS - major props on the overall design concept of this grow.
Last edited:
inefectualize
Member
i guess it is only a matter of time before this starts up in a thread...lets all be civil in here please, and thanks for attacking my "grow" knowledge. I just searched for threads by "knna" and nothing came up. The kelvin temperature assigned to any specific bulb is really just what is perceived by the human eye, and can only really be accurately read for filament type bulbs in which the current plays a direct roll on the quantity and quality of light. two bulbs rated at 4100 k can have different spectrums but they both can appear to give the same K rating. we are not dealing with LED's that throw specific nM's. I also do not buy into the idea of providing plants with solely the spectra that is PAR, both for aesthetic reasons (yes that's right i like to look at my plants when they are growing) and also just because i prefer "whiter light" does not mean that it is significantly deficient in the spectra that 2700k would provide. I try to get as full a spectrum as possible and then lean a little to the warm side so that i can veg and flower with the same bulb set. I also did this so that if someone wanted to duplicate this it would be a little simpler. I tend to think about growing plants more from a natural history perspective and less from a reductionist mechanical perspective.
Read this http://www.sankey.ws/plantlumen.html
"The result of such analyses is clear: very few 'plant growth' or 'aquarium' lamps outperform cheap standard-spectrum fluorescent tubes or compact fluorescent lamps for growing aquarium plants.
Graph 3 at right shows why. Three lamps are shown, with their output in relative photons per second in 10 nm bands. The black curve is a standard warm-white tube, the others two different plant-growth lamps. The extended spectrum of most plant-growth lamps is obtained at the expense of total output. And, the tiny production volume of the specialist lamps compared to standard warm-white makes them much more expensive."
How could you know if a 4100 k fluorescent has less PAR than a 2700 K? you need a PAR meter or an accurate spectrogram from both bulbs.
i just think that you attacking my "plant knowledge" was very unwarranted.
I have been working professionally as a horticulturist for 6 years specializing in indoor displays lit with both natural and artificial light.
This exhibit below is lit by CFL lamps, hqi metal halides on light movers, and spectral morphing computer controlled LED clusters that i programmed to match the changing spectra of light from sunrise to sunset in the tropics.
I now work designing and installing large vertical air filtering vegetated walls....
i can show you pictures of many exhibits/species thriving under "full spectrum" cfls ranging from temperate conifers to high elevation pleurothallids....
have you grown under this light bulb? do you have the spectral graph of this bulb? have you compared this spectral graph to a 2700 K cfl? what is your experience in growing under triphosphor linear cfls?
of the bulbs i had to chose from when purchasing these were the least expensive and had the highest initial lumen rating, and i think that they performed quite well for such "crap" as you put it....
ok enough ranting i will run the next batch with warmer bulbs and see if my yield results are any better....i would be willing to bet that any yield increase in this application would be negligible but fuck....maybe im wrong. I have been running these HO CFLs since '97 and i think i have a pretty good handle on how they grow plants....
Read this http://www.sankey.ws/plantlumen.html
"The result of such analyses is clear: very few 'plant growth' or 'aquarium' lamps outperform cheap standard-spectrum fluorescent tubes or compact fluorescent lamps for growing aquarium plants.
Graph 3 at right shows why. Three lamps are shown, with their output in relative photons per second in 10 nm bands. The black curve is a standard warm-white tube, the others two different plant-growth lamps. The extended spectrum of most plant-growth lamps is obtained at the expense of total output. And, the tiny production volume of the specialist lamps compared to standard warm-white makes them much more expensive."
How could you know if a 4100 k fluorescent has less PAR than a 2700 K? you need a PAR meter or an accurate spectrogram from both bulbs.
i just think that you attacking my "plant knowledge" was very unwarranted.
I have been working professionally as a horticulturist for 6 years specializing in indoor displays lit with both natural and artificial light.
This exhibit below is lit by CFL lamps, hqi metal halides on light movers, and spectral morphing computer controlled LED clusters that i programmed to match the changing spectra of light from sunrise to sunset in the tropics.
I now work designing and installing large vertical air filtering vegetated walls....
i can show you pictures of many exhibits/species thriving under "full spectrum" cfls ranging from temperate conifers to high elevation pleurothallids....
have you grown under this light bulb? do you have the spectral graph of this bulb? have you compared this spectral graph to a 2700 K cfl? what is your experience in growing under triphosphor linear cfls?
of the bulbs i had to chose from when purchasing these were the least expensive and had the highest initial lumen rating, and i think that they performed quite well for such "crap" as you put it....
ok enough ranting i will run the next batch with warmer bulbs and see if my yield results are any better....i would be willing to bet that any yield increase in this application would be negligible but fuck....maybe im wrong. I have been running these HO CFLs since '97 and i think i have a pretty good handle on how they grow plants....
inefectualize
Member
ah, i just also wanted to mention as an example the CMH bulbs. They are white light probably around 5000 k and they throw as much red/near red as a 2700 k hps but also include the blues that are lacking in hps.....are you saying a 400 watt hps will out yield a 400 watt cmh?
I don't think this argument began based on facts. It began because sleepyz came in with a shit attitude and regurgitated something that was already discussed.
you can not compare HID lighting to CFL
CFL dont have the bleed that HID's do
CFL are more to the tune of specific wavelengths where HID's throw out a huge band
the fact is that with 4100's you are missing the most efficient parts of the color spectrum
awesome you know LED's perfect
which means you know that you have to pick the right colors
or you wont get shit
which is the flaw here
now dont misunderstand me because i assume most of you are
im not saying that the 4100k lights wont grow plants as we all know it will
but say if you wanted to get more yield at the end (2700k) or say if you wanted them to veg more compact and with more budsites(6500k)
that is the way you would go
its just that out of all the bulbs to pick you picked the one in the middle of the spectrum where the plant uses the least
CFL dont have the bleed that HID's do
CFL are more to the tune of specific wavelengths where HID's throw out a huge band
the fact is that with 4100's you are missing the most efficient parts of the color spectrum
awesome you know LED's perfect
which means you know that you have to pick the right colors
or you wont get shit
which is the flaw here
now dont misunderstand me because i assume most of you are
im not saying that the 4100k lights wont grow plants as we all know it will
but say if you wanted to get more yield at the end (2700k) or say if you wanted them to veg more compact and with more budsites(6500k)
that is the way you would go
its just that out of all the bulbs to pick you picked the one in the middle of the spectrum where the plant uses the least
