Get a harvest every 2 weeks - Page 101

daddychrisg · #**1001** 03-26-2008, 11:22 AM

I hear ya AL, I second your wise statement...."Critique the data, not the person." enough said....this is the best thread on this site for many reasons.....

stickyicky77 · #**1002** 03-26-2008, 11:26 AM

AL, i am waiting on my mothers to get a little bigger before i start taking clones off of them. I am getting everything ready though. I got 14 pot that were made for my 2x2 flood and drain table. I have some 1" rock wool cubes to start my clones in and some 3" cubes to transfer the clones in before it put them into the pots. My question is should i veg a little longer once the clones show root through the 1" cubes and i put them in the 3" ? Should i wait until the roots show through the 3" cubes before putting them in the pot in my table?

Al B. Fuct · #**1003** 03-26-2008, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyicky77

AL, i am waiting on my mothers to get a little bigger before i start taking clones off of them.

Patience pays.

Quote:

My question is Should i veg a little longer once the clones show root through the 1" cubes and i put them in the 3" ? should i wait until the roots show through the 3" cubes before putting them in the pot in my table?

Are you sure those are 1"/25mm cubes? Didn't know there were any 25mm cubes made, thought the smallest around was 40mm.

I don't think you really need to use an intermediate cube before planting out your cubes of rooted clones into pots of media. It sounds like it would add several days to the schedule, while the roots are biting into the larger cube, but I can't really see the benefit.

Maccabee · #**1004** 03-26-2008, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Al B. Fuct

JC also tends to take his old version and polish it up before releasing a new edition rather than write entirely new stuff for each edition. No doubt, I would do the same but I think I'd be a bit more enthusiastic about removing old data. JC is pretty thorough for the most part, though- more so than Ed Rosenthal on his own, anyway.

Yeah, I always feel a little silly citing J. Cervantes, E. Rosenthal, or M. Frank as if they were totally authoritative, but in their own way they are the common references for our subculture here. Fewer people own the books by G. Green, T. Flowers or J. Mowta so while they are a little better on that account and generally more rigorous I don't usually cite them or give out references to them. From time to time I do cite Clarke or for more general questions, Capon. I would agree that Cervantes' stuff is often poorly edited. However, it also seems to be the most widely owned guide.

Quote:

My 'tubed 1000s are about 300-350mm (~12-14" or so) clear of my growing tips. One good guess put the luminous output of a 'tubed 1000 at about 85K lumens/sf @ 12".

You can run a tubed 1000W @ 12" above the canopy? How much air are you moving through it to accomplish that, out of curiousity?

Quote:

Critique the data, not the person.

This thread is at 100 pages and nearly 1000 posts, 56,000 reads so far at close to 1000 per week! It does not remain lively and interesting because ppl have spent a lot of time bitching at one another.

Amen to that. It's a hell of a thread! I wonder if there's a tool out there to dump VB threads into a PDF.....

LoudBlunts · #**1005** 03-26-2008, 11:38 AM

i love this thread.

informative, resourceful, get questions answered, discuss new technology and gadgets.

hell what more could we ask for!!!

LoudBlunts · #**1006** 03-26-2008, 11:40 AM

im not Al, but 200cfm is a plenty to cool a 1000watter

lush1 · #**1007** 03-26-2008, 11:54 AM

Al, what do you reckon to these lights instead of standard cooltubes:

http://www.wormsway.com/detail.asp?sku=UCX108

The situation would be to cool 2x600w lights in a small room.

The theory being that they have an 8" flange which could then be used in conjunction with an 8" fan to avoid having to use reducers etc.

They are also enormous (28"x24"). I'm thinking however that their size may be a disadvantage in that it would disrupt airflow considerably. This could be a problem if your only extraction for the room was sucking out through the lights. Am thinking that maybe any advantage gained by not having to use reducers would be countered by the fact that air has to suck through two of these beast-like hoods.

What do you think would be better,

A) daisysychain two of the above together,
B) daisychain two cooltubes with homemade reflectors (as you have done),
C) Use two supernovas with a central spigot (see below):

Cheers.

Al B. Fuct · #**1008** 03-26-2008, 12:35 PM

lush, I saw your query over on Grass City and have replied there. Copying here for the convenience of RIU readers:

Quote:

Originally Posted by lush1

What do you think would be better,

A) daisysychain two of the above together,
B) daisychain two cooltubes with homemade reflectors (as you have done),
C) Use two of these with a central spigot (see below):

I'm not a fan of Euro hoods, which is basically what these hoods from Worm's Way are. They do not have an efficient reflector shape- much of the light is reflected straight back to the tube. A double parabola aka batwing is a much more efficient shape. All light reflected from a batwing is going to the plants, not back to the lamp's tube.

Further to that, the pictured hoods don't have both inlet and outlet flanges so you can run a closed air circuit. These will take their inlet air from the room's airmass. This will make temps less stable than cooltubes on a closed air circuit and you will have to treat the exhaust air for scent, while you would not have to do so if they were getting their cool air supply from outside the room's airmass.

Also, without both inlet and outlet flanges, you won't be able to daisy-chain or 'series' them. They will have to be run in parallel with a Y-pipe to the blower.

My last complaint is that warm air has to be drawn out of the hoods and run through the blower instead of the blower pushing cool air though them. This will unnecessarily expose the blower motor to heat from the lighting, potentially shortening its life significantly.

My reflectors are not homemade; they are Adjust-A-Wings, but the socket and movable lamp mount has been removed and replaced with cooltubes. I had the AAWs for several years before I put in the cooltubes, though. If I was going to start from scratch, I would have made my own reflectors. AAWs are not cheap and I'd have a hard time justifying buying a pair just to throw away half of the parts. It's very easy and much cheaper to make up a set of batwing reflectors on your own.

I was a bit iffy on how well 2x 1000W would work in seriesed cooltubes, so I did some testing in mockup on the garage floor before installing the cooltubes. I found the air temp output from 1x 1000 in a cooltube was about 6-7C higher than the intake air. With intake at 21C, the output from cooltube #1 was 27-28C. I didn't feel too bad about feeding 28C air into the second tube. Now that they are installed, with a couple of 90 deg bends in the ductwork, the output air from both cooltubes inline is about 34C.

So, my choice from your list is B.

Al B. Fuct · #**1009** 03-26-2008, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maccabee

Yeah, I always feel a little silly citing J. Cervantes, E. Rosenthal, or M. Frank as if they were totally authoritative, but in their own way they are the common references for our subculture here.

[...]

I would agree that Cervantes' stuff is often poorly edited. However, it also seems to be the most widely owned guide.

Of course, the cited writers are well known- and pretty much the best we had for a number of years. Most if not all of that group however, started writing about cannabis growing years before there was public access to the 'net. In those days, you had to be an out-n-proud cannabis activist to be a grow book author. You'd really be pushing your luck if you were not anonymous and also ran a grow op. I doubt all the cited authors were active, continuous, hands-on growers, though some of them surely are, like Ed, at very least post Prop 215.

In the age of the 'net, with some reasonable chance at anonymity, it's easer for more writers to participate without putting their necks on the line. The law of averages says there will be more good (and more bad) writers/editors and probably more active growers writing about cannabis. That anonymity has its downside, of course. I can change my username and lose my old reputation if I really balls it up. Jorge and Ed are stuck being Jorge & Ed.

Quote:

You can run a tubed 1000W @ 12" above the canopy? How much air are you moving through it to accomplish that, out of curiousity?

Yep, all OK at 12". I'm using an Allvent A60 150mm axial to drive the cooltubes. The A60 is rated 192CFM.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoudBlunts

i love this thread.

informative, resourceful, get questions answered, discuss new technology and gadgets.

hell what more could we ask for!!!

I don't know, but at one point in this thread, some guy DID offer to get his sister to give me a blowjob. That sounded like a pretty good addition.

LoudBlunts · #**1010** 03-26-2008, 01:11 PM

lol!!!! blowjobs and green gardens.... ha!

and al...you're going to get on my case, but ummm....i think imma get the cool star plus.

them AAWs DO look fucking sweet tho...how much those run?