Hempy Headquarters

[TorturedSoul]

interesting discussion about hole height.

Yeah, I was sort of hoping that, in all the time since the method first became popular, at least one person would have done done experimentation in regards to what percentage of the root zone should be within the reservoir space. Or what percentage of the container's total capacity should be turned into the reservoir - however you want to look at it. But I've done a little bit of web-searching ("little" because I'm using my cell phone, and that's comparable to getting a root canal only slightly less pleasant), and haven't really found much.

Instead, it's just the generic "one size fits all" recommendation about how far up the container to place the hole. Which, like "one size fits all" articles of clothing... Doesn't.

The clothing ought to be labeled something like "The majority of the population can wear this. But they'd probably rather not - because, for the majority of that majority, it'll be a little snug, or a little loose, or way too tight, or way too big. However, the majority of people can manage to put this crap on. And wearing a thing that doesn't fit right will probably be less uncomfortable than the night you'd spend on jail after getting arrested for indecent exposure. And you might be one of the lucky (relatively) few people on the planet who would find that this article of clothing actually fits perfectly."

Kind of like the hempy hole, I suppose . One height is good enough for fits all. It gives no consideration to the fact the containers vary. Vary in capacity - but also in their dimensions. In practice, not only does this mean that two containers can have two different capacity reservoirs... It also means that two containers of the same capacity can have different size reservoirs, if one is taller and narrower than the other. Or that a container with a larger overall capacity can end up having a smaller reservoir that the one with the smaller overall capacity; all it requires for this to happen is for the container having the greater capacity to have a smaller diameter. Et cetera.

Well, crap. I just deleted a bit chunk of text that was mostly just me bitching about there not having been anyone who'd had the ability to perform some tests with a bunch of different sized containers (several of each) and clones (several from each mother), and placed the holes at different heights for each set... in order to come up with some kind of suggested guideline in regards to intelligent hole placement that was based on a percentage of total capacity (or on whatever ended up being the determining factor in regards to whether it's a decent grow, a great one... or a poor one). And lamenting that circumstances leave me unable to perform such experiments myself.

But in the process of deleting all that text, lol, I also deleted the rest of your post. Whoops. Anyway, yes, if your hole is placed too high, your plant (plus evaporation, I suppose) won't use empty the reservoir before the level of dissolved oxygen in the liquid falls to the point where it becomes hostile rather than supportive.

In your case, a bigger plant, warmer temperatures, a higher rate of airflow might have meant that you'd have been fine... Larger plants tend to consume more moisture, and ones in warmer environments tend to take in and transpire more as a way of self-cooling. On the other hand, warmer temperatures might have caused the reservoir to become stagnant faster, so... Who knows, lol? Just one of those things that have to be considered when using a passive hydroponic method.

 

[bluter]

Yeah, I was sort of hoping that, in all the time since the method first became popular, at least one person would have done done experimentation in regards to what percentage of the root zone should be within the reservoir space. Or what percentage of the container's total capacity should be turned into the reservoir - however you want to look at it. But I've done a little bit of web-searching ("little" because I'm using my cell phone, and that's comparable to getting a root canal only slightly less pleasant), and haven't really found much.

Instead, it's just the generic "one size fits all" recommendation about how far up the container to place the hole. Which, like "one size fits all" articles of clothing... Doesn't.

The clothing ought to be labeled something like "The majority of the population can wear this. But they'd probably rather not - because, for the majority of that majority, it'll be a little snug, or a little loose, or way too tight, or way too big. However, the majority of people can manage to put this crap on. And wearing a thing that doesn't fit right will probably be less uncomfortable than the night you'd spend on jail after getting arrested for indecent exposure. And you might be one of the lucky (relatively) few people on the planet who would find that this article of clothing actually fits perfectly."

Kind of like the hempy hole, I suppose . One height is good enough for fits all. It gives no consideration to the fact the containers vary. Vary in capacity - but also in their dimensions. In practice, not only does this mean that two containers can have two different capacity reservoirs... It also means that two containers of the same capacity can have different size reservoirs, if one is taller and narrower than the other. Or that a container with a larger overall capacity can end up having a smaller reservoir that the one with the smaller overall capacity; all it requires for this to happen is for the container having the greater capacity to have a smaller diameter. Et cetera.

Well, crap. I just deleted a bit chunk of text that was mostly just me bitching about there not having been anyone who'd had the ability to perform some tests with a bunch of different sized containers (several of each) and clones (several from each mother), and placed the holes at different heights for each set... in order to come up with some kind of suggested guideline in regards to intelligent hole placement that was based on a percentage of total capacity (or on whatever ended up being the determining factor in regards to whether it's a decent grow, a great one... or a poor one). And lamenting that circumstances leave me unable to perform such experiments myself.

But in the process of deleting all that text, lol, I also deleted the rest of your post. Whoops. Anyway, yes, if your hole is placed too high, your plant (plus evaporation, I suppose) won't use empty the reservoir before the level of dissolved oxygen in the liquid falls to the point where it becomes hostile rather than supportive.

In your case, a bigger plant, warmer temperatures, a higher rate of airflow might have meant that you'd have been fine... Larger plants tend to consume more moisture, and ones in warmer environments tend to take in and transpire more as a way of self-cooling. On the other hand, warmer temperatures might have caused the reservoir to become stagnant faster, so... Who knows, lol? Just one of those things that have to be considered when using a passive hydroponic method.

whoa TS easy easy there..

don't over thunk it .. 2" - 2 1/2" have proven to work in circumstance after circumstance

remember it's also about the frequent watering to 10% run off - keeps oxy moving to the root zone and ph in a zone the plants love to take up nutrients..

play with the basics and you change the parameters the plants like to sit in

 

[TorturedSoul]

Yeah, I've done a few DWC grows in which a pH meter was not a participant.

They worked.

Optimum?

Good enough.

.

There'll be a sweet spot. It probably won't be a... It'll likely vary (somewhat) depending on conditions.

But "Aw, fuck it, this'll work" seems to be the crowd favorite. Who am I to argue?

 

[CADBOY]

Personally I just put the hole in my hempy buckets around 10% volume at the bottom of bucket "which is likely around 1.5"/2" roughly. I water till 10% run off and thats it. Never any issues with roots. So could it be safe to say that a better "one size fits all" could be just calculate 10% of your buckets volume?

 

[FelipeBlu]

In the containers I tend to use (Dollar Tree wastebasket, the DT black 2 gal bucket, and the 2 gal Lowes bucket), a hole 2” above the bottom provides a reservoir volume between 17% and 22% of the container volume (however, it takes a hole 7cm up in a 5 gallon bucket to gives you a 1 gallon reservoir).

From my experience, I believe 20% is a good number to aim for.

But as I noted above, this is a big reservoir for a young plant, and more frequent fertigation is usually needed to keep the solution in the reservoir from getting oxygen-depleted, because the plant isn’t using it fast enough.

 

[DrDoob]

If the plants grow beautifully in pure perlite why mess with it adding other things?

I’d personally like to water less than pure perlite allows for. But basically I feel the same way as you, why change what works? I’ve had a huge bag of vermiculite just sitting here unopened for two years, cause pure perlite, although a bit inconvenient, works great. Now I’ve got a watering system that’s much easier, I doubt I’ll ever open the vermiculite.

 

[beez0404]

When my hempy/perlite plants are full grown and into flowering I do not have to pour off excess in the mornings. The plants have sucked it dry. That is the reason I keep the duct tape on all the time. It allows me to "overfill" the reservoir giving the plant more nutrient rich water to uptake each day. If there is still water in the reservoir then I reduce the amount I'm adding each day. But my goal is to have just enough leftover that I know the plant got all it wanted but not more then it needed.

 

[SweetSue]

interesting discussion about hole height. i am dealing with so many hempy issues right now,, mostly ph,, but i recently raised the height of the holes in my pots from 2 3/8 to near 2 3/4 ", so i am wondering if this might be adding to my issues,,

two inch high holes would indeed require watering every two days,, which i was hoping to avoid

lots to ponder,, thanks, and cheers

@BrixNewb was growing hempy monsters in 5 gallon buckets, I believe with the reservoirs at 2”.

I don’t see how that small increase in depth in reservoir depth would make that much difference nivek, but the system is designed for frequent watering to keep the plant well-oxygenated, if nothing else. When they’re small I let them go up to four days, but once they get big and bushy it’s time to go to every other day.

Dial in the pH to around 5.5 and you should be golden.

 

[CADBOY]

I’d personally like to water less than pure perlite allows for. But basically I feel the same way as you, why change what works? I’ve had a huge bag of vermiculite just sitting here unopened for two years, cause pure perlite, although a bit inconvenient, works great. Now I’ve got a watering system that’s much easier, I doubt I’ll ever open the vermiculite.

My current grow is 50/50 pearlite and vermiculite, I honestly believe that vermiculite itself may actually soak up some nutrients. Although I originally added it for water retention so the roots could suck up more from the mid section as well as the bottom of the root. Id recommend not adding any more then 30% at max. Just from what ive learned in the last few grows.

 

[nivek]

I don’t see how that small increase in depth in reservoir depth would make that much difference nivek, but the system is designed for frequent watering to keep the plant well-oxygenated, if nothing else. When they’re small I let them go up to four days, but once they get big and bushy it’s time to go to every other day.

Dial in the pH to around 5.5 and you should be golden.

hmmm, well, my issues are always a combination of small issues re imagining themselves as one big issue,, ha

i think, perhaps, partly because my plants 'were' better with the holes lower, but they were always at least 2.5 inches, perhaps too high to begin with,, but then i was messin with ph.s and shite, so what was the main culprit,, only further adjusting will tell me that

i have upped my ph tho,, i had it down to 5.5 and my plants went to total crap,, yellowed right up,, but was that the hole height?? oh my,,

no, ph,, perhaps even my cheapo meter off a bit,, but i now , for the last cpl weeks, am ph ing at 6 and things are lookin up,,

all about dialin it in,, and i have yet to do so,, indeed,, what a day it will be when i do,, oh ya

cheers Sue,, tight lines

 

[TorturedSoul]

In the containers I tend to use (Dollar Tree wastebasket, the DT black 2 gal bucket, and the 2 gal Lowes bucket), a hole 2” above the bottom provides a reservoir volume between 17% and 22% of the container volume (however, it takes a hole 7cm up in a 5 gallon bucket to gives you a 1 gallon reservoir).

From my experience, I believe 20% is a good number to aim for.

That's in the range I was considering, and <25%, so that'll work for me. Now I have to decide how much Osmocote Plus to put in with the perlite. It's a Train Wreck Auto (Crop King Seeds) and it's going into one of the Dollar Tree wastebaskets, marked "5.5 liter / 5.8 US quart" on the bottom, although I couldn't swear to the accuracy of that. I do not have a scale. For measuring devices, I have the lid from the little one-pound bottle of Osmocote Plus, the little red "spoon on each end" thing I found in that bottle (might have come from the larger sack, but I don't remember dropping it into the bottle, and I do not think I have had to refill the bottle yet) but neither end is marked and three of the larger spoonfuls doesn't fill up the lid (which is supposed to be three tablespoons) - so IDFK what's going on, there. I've also got a little "medicine cup" that is marked in half (liquid) ounce graduations and might also be marked in five ml ones. And I can count out a given number of individual prills, although without knowing how much they weigh (or more likely, since they're probably not all uniform, how many are in a gram/etc.). The bottle states one capful per two gallons of soil. It doesn't add "...for autoflowering cannabis strains," though .

I guess I could divide one capful by (two gallons divided by 5.8 quarts). Then fill the capful to the brim with prills, dump them into a bag, and try not to lose count as I count each and every one... then divide that number by the result of my previous calculation () or multiply it by (5.8 quarts divided by 8 quarts), which is .725. Then count that many prills back out and add those to the bucket.

Or just say f*ck it and fill a container with whatever soil I have out there and stick the plant in it. Looking at little prills with my eyes is going to be a royal pain in the ass, is guaranteed to make my headache worse - and, as the "cost of admission," feels like it'll be way too high just to grow a little crappy autoflower bud . I need to do something with the plant, it's two or three weeks old and is all of three inches high with about six leaves if I count the single-fingered pair - therefore, I'm guessing that it has consumed the nutrients that were in the couple tablespoons (or less) of 75% Fox Farm Happy Frog / 25% perlite mix.

IDFK. I should have just dumped all the 35- to 60-year old record albums that Mom has me storing for her out of one of the ~23-gallon totes in the other room, stuck my aquarium power head into it, and grown a... ONE of some kind of photoperiod plant like I used to. Seems like a lot less hassle than trying to grow a bunch of easy autoflowering plants with that easy Osmocote Plus crap. Can't just use a pipette or syringe to draw up n ml of it like you can normal nutrients.

IDFK. I'm just in a sour miid any more an b!tching, I guess. I don't know how I'm going to be able to run lights next month anyway. Probably have to set the plants under my South-facing windows or something .

 

[TorturedSoul]

Also, fertigating every watering with a half concentration is what I recall being promoted by the original Hempy in an old Mr Nice forum post.

That "eat one day, fast the next" isn't even a good idea for people, lol. As for plants... All it takes is reading one newbie's "Yeah, I feed one day, then only water the next two times - and each time I feed, they perk right the <BLEEP> up and there's a nice growth spurt!" post to figure out that plants aren't any happier to starve than I am, heh.

 

[TorturedSoul]

DLI = PPFD (in micromoles/m-2 x s-1) x (T x 3600)/1,000,000
Where T = duration in hours

For example, an LED light providing an average PPFD of 350 across the canopy, run for 12 hrs, results in a DLI of 15. If run for 24 hours, you get a DLI of 30, which some studies suggest is ideal for cannabis.

Do your calculations assume that 100% of the light hits the plant (or each plant, in a multi-plant garden)?

 

[TorturedSoul]

Hempy time!
​

4A70FD94-8A8B-4CA4-8051-3A24DF6DB359.jpeg

• FelipeBlu
• Jul 6, 2018

Hempy time!

I want to give a shout out to my Bro (@BTzGrow) for the Dollar Store waste baskets!

Find of the Year!​

​

Those are the ones I bought! Do you have a journal in which those things were used? Or have links to anyone else's journals that used them? If so, would you post them, please? Otherwise, I guess I'll just keep rereading the most recent 120 pages of this thread, lol.

 

[FelipeBlu]

Now I have to decide how much Osmocote Plus to put in with the perlite.

I know that @Tead has done quite a bit of experimentation on this very subject.

Those are the ones I bought! Do you have a journal in which those things were used? Or have links to anyone else's journals that used them?

I’ve been too occupied to keep a journal on my recent grows, but (if I recall correctly) my brother BTzGrow has done at least one journal with them.

Do your calculations assume that 100% of the light hits the plant (or each plant, in a multi-plant garden)?

Well, yes. What I do is measure PPFD in numerous spots and average those data for the area in question.

 

[TorturedSoul]

Tead, I know you have done extensive testing to determine that 3.3 to 3.4g/L of growth media (perlite, etc) appears to be the optimal dose for cannabis. The best off-the-shelf price around here is $22 for a 8 lb bag. At 12.7g of Osmo+ per gallon of perlite, the cost comes to about $0.02/gallon (of media, not water!).

^^^THIS^^^ can someone translate that into a measurement that doesn't require scales? Number of prills, or... IDK, round to the nearest 5ml, or half-ounce or something?

Then, just pH-adjust your water as needed. Truly lazy!

Plus add some form of calcium, I suppose (unless it's already in your water source - this appears to be a "tap water" nutrient these days).

 

[Chris Scorpio]

 

[FelipeBlu]

FelipeBlu said:
Also, fertigating every watering with a half concentration...

Actually, I now subscribe to more frequent fertigation (daily if possible), with even lower concentration. For example, with MegaCrop, which is suggested at 6g/gal, I start out with 2g/gal, and rarely go over 4g/gal, unless the plant is fading its lowest leaves.

Since I’ve had to work out-of-town 6 days a week for the past 3 months, I have some hempy buckets in an automated flood and drain setup, and others in a “fill from the top” automated system. Both work well, but I’m thinking I like the top fill better since it’s drain-to-waste, and I don’t have to deal with challenging reservoir (the 25 gallon tub, not the one in the hempy bucket) issues (shifts in pH and TDS) that I can’t address while away.

Hope all this helps, TS. Remember, it’s a weed..

 

[FelipeBlu]

Three plants in the 25 gallon F&D - the one on the front left is in a DT wastebasket. Essentially the same size as the other two in 2 gallon Lowes buckets:

The top fill plants:

 

[FelipeBlu]

^^^THIS^^^ can someone translate that into a measurement that doesn't require scales?

If I recall correctly, this was a little under 2 tablespoons.