The Mega Crop Thread

Everything looks pretty good to me up top. They are nice and green. The yellow is on the bottom. I see plants that are stretchy and cant see the light anywhere in the picture. I'm wondering if that its just that those leaves are so far from the light that they were useless and they are naturally dying off.
Exactly how I see it too. New growth looks good, bump your MegaCrop by +0.5g.

When was the last time your medium had a good rinseing just tap water? I dont water to run off (because im lazy and dont want to clean up the run off), I get a lot of buildup in my peat based. I have to rinse once every 4th water or the plant shows me its time. Rinse with 3 milk jugs, wait a day to dry out, come back with a full nute the next day.
 
Exactly how I see it too. New growth looks good, bump your MegaCrop by +0.5g.

When was the last time your medium had a good rinseing just tap water? I dont water to run off (because im lazy and dont want to clean up the run off), I get a lot of buildup in my peat based. I have to rinse once every 4th water or the plant shows me its time. Rinse with 3 milk jugs, wait a day to dry out, come back with a full nute the next day.
What size pots are you rinsing with 3 gallons of tap water?
 
If you have the Shogun PK Warrior (9 P, 18 K), and want to play with something around a 1:blushsmile:3 Ratio, use can use up to 3ml of it per gallon. Assuming you're doing 6g Mega, 5ml Cal-Mag, 5ml Silica, then the PK Warrior. Math still works if you're only using 5g of Mega instead of 6.


I’m curious how you got this result (1-1-3). For inputs, I used ProteKt instead of Faux-tekt, and couldn’t find the weight for a 1 liter PK Warrior (to calculate density), but I get something closer to 2-1-5 for 6g MC, 5ml CalMag+, 5ml ProteKt, and 3ml PK per gallon.

0D931877-8AC5-4244-AF26-DEEC5DA93CC9.jpeg
 
I didn’t like how I could have a 200-400ppm swing scaling out the same weight. This has me a little concerned. I ordered V3 so hopefully I will see a consistent number that I can put the meter away. I also ordered the bud explosion for the next run. I do find the MC ppm for 6-6.5gm is close to the numbers I look for with ppm.


wow. most i get for a swing is 30 - 50 ppm and i don't bother with a consistent amount of those silly calcium balls.

have you figgered a mixing method to hit your target ppm ?
 
Day 60 trichomes.. The Cheese is drinking less and smelling more. Dialling down her nutes by 1g each day. She's not going to live to see 2020 I'm afraid. Pink Kush is still going strong and maybe some bits of purple in the buds, I've been letting temps get to 16C and 25 percent RH briefly during their overnight the last couple days.
Cheese

Pink Kush
 
Just mixed 2 DWC buckets, both with RO Water . The PH is 7.5 and the TDS of 12 ppm Hanna scale.

After I added the MegaCrop nutrients 24 grams into 4 gallons of ro water, the PH went to 5.7 and the TDS 1001 ppm .


[GALLERY=media, 1738032r ][/GALLERY]
The Ph rose with just air , rose to 6.0 without any plant being in bucket with it . Phed to 5.3 before changing out the buckets .

 
The Ph rose with just air , rose to 6.0 without any plant being in bucket with it . Phed to 5.3 before changing out the buckets .


The pH was rising on me with MC and no roots too. I did notice it stayed down longer the next time, but it did start creeping again. Maybe 1/10 every 36hrs or so.

Something in MC likes to be mid 6’s, and fights a bit to get there.

i’ve got roots in the water now, so I’m fine with it drifting slowly and will down it if I need to.
 
my ro runs right to seven on it's own. comes out the tap at 7.1 before ro.
can ph it / no nutes, leave it alone in the bucket and it'll be in the 6's in 24 - 36 hrs all on it's own.
 
I’m curious how you got this result (1-1-3). For inputs, I used ProteKt instead of Faux-tekt, and couldn’t find the weight for a 1 liter PK Warrior (to calculate density), but I get something closer to 2-1-5 for 6g MC, 5ml CalMag+, 5ml ProteKt, and 3ml PK per gallon.

0D931877-8AC5-4244-AF26-DEEC5DA93CC9.jpeg

The difference is Gross vs Net. Your far fancier spreadsheet (assuming Hydro Buddy) is calculating the actual amount supplied per PPM (170-81-415} which is the Net. Feeling a bit lazy so I'll quote part of one of my favorite articles.

"Also, P and K percentages shown on fertilizer packages are not the actual amount of P or K in the blend. The percentage of P on the package is the percentage of P2O5 (phosphorous pentoxide) and you need to multiply the percentage shown by .43 to get the actual amount of P in the fertilizer. Similarly, the K level percentage shown is actually the level of K2O ( potassium oxide) and must be multiplied by .83 to arrive at the actual amount of K supplied."

So when I'm quoting numbers, it's more like the numbers on the front of a label, the Gross. Your program is making the .43 and .83 adjustments to show the true amount supplied. If you reversed the calculations to take those adjustments out, it would be more like 170-188-500 which is about 1-1-3.
 
my ro runs right to seven on it's own. comes out the tap at 7.1 before ro.
can ph it / no nutes, leave it alone in the bucket and it'll be in the 6's in 24 - 36 hrs all on it's own.
I wished mine came out at 7.1 this 8.3 sucks . After ro it’s 7.2 . Haven’t tried it without nutes to ph it and watch it rise . You have me curious now !
 
Haven’t tried it without nutes to ph it and watch it rise . You have me curious now !
it's a good idea to try it. nutes usually slows the drift down. it's good idea to see what it does on it's own.
 
I wished mine came out at 7.1 this 8.3 sucks . After ro it’s 7.2 . Haven’t tried it without nutes to ph it and watch it rise . You have me curious now !


That sounds like my stupid water. Comes out the tap at 8.4 and 360ppm.
 
After 24 hours of just water and nutrients the ph went from 7.5 to 5.7 . The next morning went to 6.0 so I phed it to 5.4 , then 24 hours with the plant in the mix the ph went back to 6.1 . Going to let it stay for 24 hours at 6.1 .


 
The difference is Gross vs Net. Your far fancier spreadsheet (assuming Hydro Buddy) is calculating the actual amount supplied per PPM (170-81-415} which is the Net. Feeling a bit lazy so I'll quote part of one of my favorite articles.

"Also, P and K percentages shown on fertilizer packages are not the actual amount of P or K in the blend. The percentage of P on the package is the percentage of P2O5 (phosphorous pentoxide) and you need to multiply the percentage shown by .43 to get the actual amount of P in the fertilizer. Similarly, the K level percentage shown is actually the level of K2O ( potassium oxide) and must be multiplied by .83 to arrive at the actual amount of K supplied."

So when I'm quoting numbers, it's more like the numbers on the front of a label, the Gross. Your program is making the .43 and .83 adjustments to show the true amount supplied. If you reversed the calculations to take those adjustments out, it would be more like 170-188-500 which is about 1-1-3.

Hey Farside! :high-five:
Thanks for the explanation. I took the divisors out of the equations (it’s only my simple spreadsheet) to calculate ppm of P (from P2O5) and K (from K2O), and the totals and ratios match what you provided in your post.

2CF534F8-D4BE-4602-878C-0F2B76E27801.jpeg

I guess what I’m curious about now is

Why express NPK ratios that we want to provide to the plant as N-P2O5-K2O ratios like the fertilizer manufacturers? Aren’t we really interested in the actual ionic content available to the plant?
:passitleft:
 
Hey Farside! :high-five:
Thanks for the explanation. I took the divisors out of the equations (it’s only my simple spreadsheet) to calculate ppm of P (from P2O5) and K (from K2O), and the totals and ratios match what you provided in your post.

2CF534F8-D4BE-4602-878C-0F2B76E27801.jpeg

I guess what I’m curious about now is

Why express NPK ratios that we want to provide to the plant as N-P2O5-K2O ratios like the fertilizer manufacturers? Aren’t we really interested in the actual ionic content available to the plant?
:passitleft:

Perhaps the better question is, why do manufacturers not quote what is supplies? I quote the gross as more of a "path of least resistance". That way I don't have to explain why the big numbers that are on the front of the bag aren't the real numbers.
 
Back
Top Bottom