Quest for 1G/W: 1K HPS Liquid Cooled on a 6' Mover in a 4x8 Tent

[TorturedSoul]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

yes I still want to define it. It's the only way to compare, and I want to do it as accurately as I can.

I admit that in each case I was of a mind to be (somewhat) facetious but realized afterwards that each had their respective merits depending on who is doing the grow and how they define their individual requirements and standards. BtW...

I guess g/w/hour has to be the best measure. Just wish it was the standard, because if I pull 1g/w with a 45 day veg, and someone else pulls .75 g/w from a 7 day veg who is using their resources more efficiently?

Wouldn't it even in that case further depend on each individual grower's style and method (along with everything else)? For instance, if your flowering times are such that the 38 day vegetative differential are more than offset by your .25 gram per watt difference, you might seem to have a clear victory. But an it come to light that the other person not only has shorter vegetative times, but also a separate vegetative room in which to do it - and that this fact is enough to turn the balance in the other direction.

Hmm... Did someone mention the word, "standard," lol?

I decided long ago that the only way - for me - to keep score, as it were, would be solely against myself. In that case, the numbers were just a means of helping me see somewhat objectively whether I had improved, stayed the same, or degraded in performance. But even then, I realized that my subjective impressions - did I enjoy that particular grow more than the last, find it easier, et cetera - were also of equal and, upon occasion, even greater import to me (for I am not a machine and my subjective impressions carry great weight indeed). And in my particular case (not growing to sell), the financial aspects must be considered as well.

<SHRUGS> So it seems that whatever you define as your standard of measurement is valid - to you. However, owing both to the differences inherent in each person's grow and in each person's mind... Direct comparisons are rather nebulous, IMHO.

And that's without having even a stem of a good sativa to gnaw on. Catch me at 45,000 feet (and climbing) and I'll even confuse myself, lol.

I feel that you're current grow will in all liklihood eclipse your most recent previous ones. As for how much, the numbers will tend to show... But only you can give us the definitive answer.

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

For me, my labor on grows has to factor into the efficiency equation somehow, whether formally or informally. It's not going to happen formally because I'm not quite anal enough to carefully document how much time I spend in the grow room, but on future grows where I'm not comparing anything, I would tolerate a certain amount of decrease in yield if my labor was significantly reduced and I was still in the green on my usage.

That's why I'm excited about the resin-coated, one-time application, time-release ferts. I'm not even sure they would decrease yields, but if they do by a tolerable amount, the "just add water" benefit would reduce my labor enough to make it an efficient nute option for me.

I agree with Tor that our yields are best used as an index to judge how we're doing against ourselves, but that's not much fun .

 

[StinkFinger]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Searching my internal feelings like one of those kids in school that was afraid to raise his hand in class, I'm just gonna do it.

There seems to be an awfully lot of smart people here, and wondering why we can't formulate some type of algorithm or formula that would help to set a "standard"?

I know it's not as simple as a+b, but would think with all the collective brain power, we could definitely come up with a working formula to test?

I don't claim to be a Math major at all, just posing the question if this is something that everyone views as possible to accomplish?

If someone thinks I should move my ass to the corner, I'll be glad to do that also.

Sf.

 

[MountainHigh]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

For me, my labor on grows has to factor into the efficiency equation somehow, whether formally or informally. It's not going to happen formally because I'm not quite anal enough to carefully document how much time I spend in the grow room, but on future grows where I'm not comparing anything, I would tolerate a certain amount of decrease in yield if my labor was significantly reduced and I was still in the green on my usage.

That's why I'm excited about the resin-coated, one-time application, time-release ferts. I'm not even sure they would decrease yields, but if they do by a tolerable amount, the "just add water" benefit would reduce my labor enough to make it an efficient nute option for me.

I agree with Tor that our yields are best used as an index to judge how we're doing against ourselves, but that's not much fun .

Doc has me seriously looking at Osmocote...how wierd...it use to be my absolute favorite for house plants. Maybe it is just good stuff.

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Quoting one of my engineer friends:

"the great thing about standards is that there's so many of them"

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Doc has me seriously looking at Osmocote...how wierd...it use to be my absolute favorite for house plants. Maybe it is just good stuff.

I think the company has been reformulating and refining their products since about 1942.

Compared to ferts like MG, they're relatively expensive, but compared to popular growing nutes like FF and AN, they're way cheaper and have decades of professional R&D behind them, as their primary customers are professional commercial vegetable growers.

Maybe a bloom booster at the end to pump things up, but they may not even need that.

 

[IrishBoy]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

man how did i miss this thread? ur girls look so green and nice, i have to still go threw the thread and read whats going on and get caught up, but the pics look great. hope u reach ur gola

 

[TorturedSoul]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

If someone thinks I should move my ass to the corner, I'll be glad to do that also.

Being seriously ADHD - although in my time they were still just calling it "being an incorragable trouble-maker," lol, I could suggest that the only ones that belong in the corner would be those who didn't put forth their opinions (but in actuality, those would be the ones that needed some kind of special-needs help and/or a good swift kick in the ol' motivator).

For me, my labor on grows has to factor into the efficiency equation somehow, whether formally or informally. It's not going to happen formally because I'm not quite anal enough to carefully document how much time I spend in the grow room

Yeah, speaking of anal labor record-keeping, there's "fun labor," such as wandering around (or staring with glazed eyes) the plants while producing copious amounts of CO2 and drool, and then there's "tedious labor," such as the measuring, mixing, and changing of reservoirs - and the severely OCD among us might reverse the two categories - and each would by necessity be modified by whether the grower had other things that he/she needed to do (or, alternatively, things he/she was looking for excuses to put off until later) or had nothing else on the "to do" list.

That's why I'm excited about the resin-coated, one-time application, time-release ferts. I'm not even sure they would decrease yields, but if they do by a tolerable amount, the "just add water" benefit would reduce my labor enough to make it an efficient nute option for me.

You mean for soil/soilless applications? I would wonder how the stuff knows how long you plan on growing in a vegetative phase and so when to stop "time-releasing" relatively high amounts of nitrogen (and, arguably, when to switch the formulation of the nitrogen-bearing compounds) since everyone seems to have their own ideas on how long to grow any given strain before switching to flower. And then how it would know when to start ramping up other elements/ingredients during the transition ("stretch"), and on into the non-stretch phase of flowering, and then ramping things up until the final flowering period when most tend to start flushing.

Or did you mean a one-part for vegetative and a separate one-part for flowering (or just the flowering part with reasonably healthy soil covering the "average length" vegetative period)?

I know that General Hydroponics makes a two-part (one vegetative/growth part and one flowering part) dry nutrient called Maxi. I assume that it is roughly analogous to their FloraNova (and slightly more gritty, lol). They also make a dry nutrient called FloraMato which is a true one-part that is supposed to be for "continuously fruiting or flowering plants" such as tomatoes, peppers, and possibly cannabis (just guessing about that last part).

I have been known to fortify the soil in the vegetable (etc.) garden with things such as blood/bone meal, some 5-10-10, 10-10-10, 12-12-12, or even a little 34%(?) ammonium nitrate (depending on the crop), things such as super-triple-phosphate, the odd dead animal or two (generally fish unless a pet conveniently expired) or whatever the spirit moved me to use at the time. But I usually went back and scratched in other things as time passed. I don't know that it was required, I just never could leave well enough alone, lol. Since such was based upon spur-of-the-moment decisions, I can't say that it was helpful so much as something to do. I generally managed to harvest enough to keep from going hungry though so who knows?

I agree with Tor

Are you sure that's wise?

Doc has me seriously looking at Osmocote...how wierd...it use to be my absolute favorite for house plants. Maybe it is just good stuff.

I ended up with a sample pack of the stuff several years ago and intended to use it the following year but it got wet in the interim. It didn't "run away" like the NH4NO3 does when it gets hosed but I figured it was probably no longer the same as it started and ended up pitching it into the compost pile. Now I wish I had used it on some plants.

Well, enough rambling (apologies to WheeloFortune).

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Yeah, speaking of anal labor record-keeping, there's "fun labor," such as wandering around (or staring with glazed eyes) the plants while producing copious amounts of CO2 and drool, and then there's "tedious labor," such as the measuring, mixing, and changing of reservoirs - and the severely OCD among us might reverse the two categories - and each would by necessity be modified by whether the grower had other things that he/she needed to do (or, alternatively, things he/she was looking for excuses to put off until later) or had nothing else on the "to do" list.

hmmmmmm, kinda scary the degree to which I can relate to the above .

You mean for soil/soilless applications? I would wonder how the stuff knows how long you plan on growing in a vegetative phase and so when to stop "time-releasing" relatively high amounts of nitrogen (and, arguably, when to switch the formulation of the nitrogen-bearing compounds) since everyone seems to have their own ideas on how long to grow any given strain before switching to flower. And then how it would know when to start ramping up other elements/ingredients during the transition ("stretch"), and on into the non-stretch phase of flowering, and then ramping things up until the final flowering period when most tend to start flushing.

Well, some of us are thinking that just possibly, the manufacturers of expensive nute lines and supplements have created an industry based on cannabis having nutritional needs and requirements far above and more complex than other plants. We suspect that all of the conventional and traditional "wisdom" as regards changes during the grow cycle may at best be overblown, and at worst just a complete ripoff.

Or did you mean a one-part for vegetative and a separate one-part for flowering (or just the flowering part with reasonably healthy soil covering the "average length" vegetative period)?

These ferts I'm talking about are applied once and that's generally it. They are complete including micros, and are encased in a resin sphere that releases them in a controlled manner over the whole grow cycle. I have one that's completely organic and feeds for up to 3 months. It's made by Osmocote and called Dynamite Mater Magic.

I know that General Hydroponics makes a two-part (one vegetative/growth part and one flowering part) dry nutrient called Maxi. I assume that it is roughly analogous to their FloraNova (and slightly more gritty, lol). They also make a dry nutrient called FloraMato which is a true one-part that is supposed to be for "continuously fruiting or flowering plants" such as tomatoes, peppers, and possibly cannabis (just guessing about that last part).

Maxi and FloraMato are dry water-soluble nutes that you have to mix each time you use them. The time-release nutes I'm talking about are just worked into the upper soil layer once and that's it. They also work in soil-less and passive hydro, being complete with micros.


I apologize also for the hijack wheelo.

 

[WheeloFortune]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Thanks Irish, perfect timing as today is the first day of flower. Go ahead and read it all if you have the patience, I am a pic slut so it should go quickly.

Too much to quote, but obviously one thing is true, people are interested in both increasing their own efficiency and comparing their efficiencies with others. I have been a part of a few discussions and have read many more.

I was a math major, so i could easily figure this out. . . if I had ULTIMATE POWER OF KNOWLEDGE. lol.

If you really wanted to figure out absolute efficiency, you could do this:

First, you have to define efficiency. Like me and tor were saying, is it total cost vs. return, or is it total energy vs. yield. Different people want to measure different things. Let's say that we want to measure the latter, because it has less factors to consider and makes this explanation easier to understand.

so first you have to find out all of the factors that have a statistically significant impact on either energy or yield. for instance, all of your equipment uses energy, depending on stage how much per day you are using, how long. . . plus everything that effects yield, such as if you mess up the nutes or which nutes you use, or if you get a pest problem, etc. etc. etc. and lets not forget about the genetics of the plant. there's a million factors right there.

lets say after all is said and done you have 100 parameters. (depending on how accurate you want to get, the actual number of parameters could be a lot larger) If you then could figure how each parameter interacted with the others so that you could write an equation as some ratio that effected your yield in some way.

for example:
some amount of light * amount of genetic ability to process light * Amount of Nutes available * Amount of CO2 available * space * (all the other facotrs) = total yield

subject to the constraints:
minimum plant ability < X amount of light < maximum plant ability.
minimum plant ability < Y amount of nutes < maximum plant ability.
minimum plant ability < z amount of Co2 < maximum plant ability.
.
.
.
.
minimum plant ability < _ amount of _ < maximum plant ability.

then you can set it all up in something called a matrix, or matrices in plural, that look like tables of numbers, and put it through an algorithm that will solve it for you, and if you knew all of the genetics in your plant, you could calculate exactly how much of each constraint to use to maximize your yield.

And knowing your Maximum possible yield, it would then finally be possible to compare your output with the maximum possible for your equipment and space and get your TRUE EFFICIENCY

lol Stinky now you see why people just give up and say "IF consumption < production THEN Efficiency cannabis = YES ELSE back to the drawing board "

but those of us who care to, can do much better than that without pulling our hair out. Its all about how much data you wish to record. and what can be calculated out with no tracking. For this lets consider total expense vs return.

Lets say you don't want to keep track of anything at all daily. You can still get most of what you need as long as you have final wt.


*you can easily figure out the energy used over your entire grow. not just the light, but everything. . .This is what you pay for energy. I have a kill-a-watt meter, so it would be especially easy for me to get real sample data, not theory. But

*You can also figure out Nute cost pretty easily. this is a type of energy too, it's plant food energy and is a significant cost as we all know.

*I say we ignore cost of equipment, as most of it is a one time purchase and it makes our lives easier. also expendables like gas as tor is right does play into the big picture, and time like SS says, if its a labor of love, it's not a chore, you want to do it.

*Space is important, but in reality we don't care too much about vertical space in our houses, just footprint. That's why I thought I would excel in an omega.

so for me a simple cost vs return would be:

Total Yield / (Total Electricity cost per day * Nute Cost per day * Footprint * Number of days) = An easily comparable overall efficiency rating.

a simple energy vs. return. . . What I am aiming to maximize in this grow would be:

Total Yield / (Watts of Light * Total Hours * Footprint) = Grams / kilowatt hours * sq ft.

however since this is not standard, i have no numbers to compare to and no way to guess good efficiencies. i will have to revert to the good old, overly simple g/w to have to compare myself to.

If you can get a better standard started stinky, i would be impressed. lol, I don't think it would be easy. these things just happen.

ok, this novel has to end somewhere. forgive my run on post . . .

 

[WheeloFortune]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Yeah, speaking of anal labor record-keeping, there's "fun labor," such as wandering around (or staring with glazed eyes) the plants while producing copious amounts of CO2 and drool, and then there's "tedious labor," such as the measuring, mixing, and changing of reservoirs - and the severely OCD among us might reverse the two categories - and each would by necessity be modified by whether the grower had other things that he/she needed to do (or, alternatively, things he/she was looking for excuses to put off until later) or had nothing else on the "to do" list.

hmmmmmm, kinda scary the degree to which I can relate to the above .

me too. . . trimming gets real old a couple of days in, if you have that much. can't complain about it though, we all think its easily worth it.

Maxi and FloraMato are dry water-soluble nutes that you have to mix each time you use them. The time-release nutes I'm talking about are just worked into the upper soil layer once and that's it. They also work in soil-less and passive hydro, being complete with micros.

Most miracle grow from home depot and such all have time release nutes in their soil for "up to 3 months"

I agree with tor that you won't be able to max them out like if you were dosing a multipart plus program, and knew how to do it right.

But I figure if something else is a more limiting factor than nutes, say growing under T5's or something, it wouldn't matter.

anyways, I'll be watching if you try it. would be good to help set up newbs.

Well, enough rambling (apologies to WheeloFortune).

I apologize also for the hijack wheelo.

BAH HUMBUG. ramble on bitches.

 

[WheeloFortune]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

also, btw, stinky: the way i set up to solve that problem in that book of a post, will only work if all of those factors can be setup in a linear equation. it probably could be if you had enough information.

that whole subject is called operations research, and you can get a graduate degree in it and go work somewhere figuring out how to save them tons of money.

 

[StinkFinger]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

It's an excellent post man!

I'm still trying to digest/grasp some of it. Thanks for explaining.

I'll have a follow up question or two, Prof WoF.

Sf.

 

[Green007]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Wow, that's alot to digest. I like the way you guys think. +reps

 

[WheeloFortune]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

thanks greeny, always love a rep or two

no prob stinky, but not a prof. just a student. . . a student of life. . . for life.

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

me too. . . trimming gets real old a couple of days in, if you have that much. can't complain about it though, we all think its easily worth it.

well, compared to the gross financial inefficiency of buying weed from someone else, it's all worth it, but like most any task, I love some parts of the labor more than others .

Most miracle grow from home depot and such all have time release nutes in their soil for "up to 3 months"

I agree with tor that you won't be able to max them out like if you were dosing a multipart plus program, and knew how to do it right.

But I figure if something else is a more limiting factor than nutes, say growing under T5's or something, it wouldn't matter.

anyways, I'll be watching if you try it. would be good to help set up newbs.

Not sure when, but I'm going to run a comparison between the Dynamite organic and probably FF in the future.

BAH HUMBUG. ramble on bitches.

 

[TorturedSoul]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

I was a math major, so i could easily figure this out

Math majors are good at those story questions that they assign children in grade-school?

BAH HUMBUG. ramble on bitches.

Tommy grew 756 grams of bud using 600 watts with a 72-day flowering period. Becky grew 127 grams of bud using 430 watts with a 65-day flowering period.

Becky grew some kick-ass diggity-dank while Tommy only grew mid-grade. But Tommy's mids were tastier than Becky's bomb. Becky wanted to score Tommy's tasties, but Tommy would only trade for Becky's blah at a rate of five grams to one.

At the end of the day, who had the highest efficiency?










































It's a trick question. Becky is a stone cold fox.

 

[blackbeast]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

tortured soul. we know becky got her bud hot chicks always do

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Did Becky have a headache?

 

[Keith Lake]

Re: Quest for 1g/w: 1k hps liquid cooled on a 6' mover in a 4x8 tent.

Perfect, let pull out an orthogonal array and give Taguchi a ring

DOE software packages are perfect for this application. The only struggle would be getting reasonably reproducible replicates.

That would get the interactions characterized anyway

Lets say after all is said and done you have 100 parameters. (depending on how accurate you want to get, the actual number of parameters could be a lot larger) If you then could figure how each parameter interacted with the others so that you could write an equation as some ratio that effected your yield in some way.