# Changes the Way you Think about Drainage



## Beansly (Apr 13, 2011)

I don't know if this ok or not, but after I read this I had to share it with my fellow THC farmers. I like many of us growing in soil, add a drainage layer in the bottom of my pots to create "better drainage." Lava rocks in my case. Turns out that drainage layers may actually be detrimental to drainage. Very interesting read posted by someone on another forum who was thanking _someone else _for posting it. I know ADD is rampant around here, but anyone who grows in soil and considers themselves some kind of professional should read this.



> this is from a discussion on daves garden. i can't find the authors name, but thank you, whoever you are.
> 
> Container Soils - Water Movement and Retention
> 
> ...


Posted by delta9nxs on icmag forums post #49
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=138004&page=4

I am going to be trying the cup and wick experiment as soon as I can. I think this is great information, and good incentive to widen your perspective and join other forums too.

Beanz

BTW that whole thread is amazingly informative


----------



## donnachris (Apr 13, 2011)

please make sure you post your results of your experiment.


----------



## Wolverine97 (Apr 13, 2011)

The experiment will work, it's pretty basic science. The thing that is seriously overlooked in that write up is the fact that if your drainage layer is made up of a highly absorbent material like course diatomaceous earth, it will provide the desired drainage layer and overcome the capillary pull of the soil above it. I will also act as a water reserve because of its capacity to hold water in its pores. It's also a great source of silica for your plants. The basic premise is correct, in general a drainage layer is counter productive, but with a little knowledge it can be overcome and even turned into a great positive.


----------



## Beansly (Apr 14, 2011)

Wolverine97 said:


> The experiment will work, it's pretty basic science. The thing that is seriously overlooked in that write up is the fact that if your drainage layer is made up of a highly absorbent material like course diatomaceous earth, it will provide the desired drainage layer and overcome the capillary pull of the soil above it. I will also act as a water reserve because of its capacity to hold water in its pores. It's also a great source of silica for your plants. The basic premise is correct, in general a drainage layer is counter productive, but with a little knowledge it can be overcome and even turned into a great positive.


I think what I took the most from it was about the perched water table or "PWT" inherent in any soil. I really thought I was doing a good job with drainage, but from now on all my pots and containers are gonna have wicks coming from them and I'm really gonna reevaluate my soil consistencies and mix/building practice.

I found the thread through looking up passive wick/hempy bucket hybrid hydroponic growing setup and it was just talking about how different mediums drain differently. I know it doesn't have much to do with what you just said but it's on topic. Heres the link;
http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/load/cacti/msg1219545027416.html
Check out the drainage rates for the different mediums (for some reason he didn't include coco unfortunately). Specifically informative for hempy bucket and wick system growers. I really thought that there was no way that wicks could possibly feed a plant enough to survive but now I'm actually looking into it.


----------



## Detroit J420 (Apr 14, 2011)

I put fish rocks i buy at the dollar store at the bottom of my pots. After a few weeks into flower they slurp up all whats left on the bottom within hrs i got em in 3 gallon pots, they dont even droop after soaking them down once there a few weeks into bloom. I would really like to try and fill my water with air bubbles with a little pump i got anyone know if its worth the trouble?


----------



## Wolverine97 (Apr 14, 2011)

Detroit J420 said:


> I put fish rocks i buy at the dollar store at the bottom of my pots. After a few weeks into flower they slurp up all whats left on the bottom within hrs i got em in 3 gallon pots, they dont even droop after soaking them down once there a few weeks into bloom. I would really like to try and fill my water with air bubbles with a little pump i got anyone know if its worth the trouble?


That's probably the single worst thing you could use.


----------



## cassinfo (Apr 16, 2011)

Just use big chucks of perlite. They are awesome!!


----------



## Wolverine97 (Apr 16, 2011)

Eh, perlite isn't much better as a drainage layer. As a general soil amendment it's great though...


----------



## Detroit J420 (Apr 16, 2011)

Yah man but my fish rocks are big, and there all uneven not the little small pebbles, like regular stones only glass like


----------



## Wolverine97 (Apr 17, 2011)

Detroit J420 said:


> Yah man but my fish rocks are big, and there all uneven not the little small pebbles, like regular stones only glass like


That's not the issue. The issue is how much "pull" they have to draw water out of the medium above, and how much water they can retain after draining. You're actually reducing the amount of usable soil in your containers by using that drainage layer. The only time I use one is when I'm using rigid containers, and then I use coarse diatomaceous earth. There are very few materials that can be used effectively as a "drainage layer", contrary to popular belief.


----------



## Beansly (Apr 21, 2011)

cassinfo said:


> Just use big chucks of perlite. They are awesome!!





Detroit J420 said:


> Yah man but my fish rocks are big, and there all uneven not the little small pebbles, like regular stones only glass like


I know stoners have a short attention span, but read the fucking first post in the thread. The bigger and chunkier the substrate used for a "drainage layer" (i.e. Big chunky perlite or lava rocks) the less effect on actual drainage. Wolverine had it right when he said that drainage layers just take away from th available soil for roots. So no more wasting space with drainage layers. Give your plants soil.


----------



## growinhound (Apr 21, 2011)

how about just to plug the hole alittle. big pots have big holes a rock or two in the hole shouldnt hinder. Most of the time i just use white or black landscape fabric. cut asquare big enough to cover bottom and line corners up with holes , press against pot and fill with soil til nothing gets out soil-wise,roots even poke thru a little. water flow is not hindered too much. oh ya hello everyone....no sun to day bummer


----------



## Luger187 (Apr 21, 2011)

growinhound said:


> how about just to plug the hole alittle. big pots have big holes a rock or two in the hole shouldnt hinder. Most of the time i just use white or black landscape fabric. cut asquare big enough to cover bottom and line corners up with holes , press against pot and fill with soil til nothing gets out soil-wise,roots even poke thru a little. water flow is not hindered too much. oh ya hello everyone....no sun to day bummer


what about a small piece of window screening?


----------



## Wolverine97 (Apr 21, 2011)

Luger187 said:


> what about a small piece of window screening?


But why? What's the purpose?


----------



## Beansly (Apr 22, 2011)

Wolverine97 said:


> But why? What's the purpose?


 I guess to keep soil in the pot, I've just never needed anything but soil. Idk.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Apr 22, 2011)

For covering the drainage hole in the bottom center, I've used window screen, piece of shade cloth, rock or a shard from a broken clay pot to retain fine soil. No big deal. I use chunks of foam in the bottom side holes - black commercial pots.

Not buying it (the ICMag drill). Best preventative for a saturated soil/rotting root system is a healthy plant with a lot of foliage. THAT'S your wick - foliage. If you have to use a cloth wick or some other gimmick then you need to relearn the basics of soil culture and what makes a plant tick. A plant wicks off moisture at the root zone via physical properties such as transpiration, turgor pressure, capillary action and such. 

I make it a habit to add silt to my pots to tighten up the soil after a plant is established from an upcan session. A saturated root zone and root rot is the least of my worries, but that's just me. 

Adding a shallow layer of coarse perlite or small gravel to the bottom of the pot first will increase an air exchange at the lower root zone, something your friend may not have mentioned. It's not the amount of water at the root zone that's the issue, it's the exclusion of air. Roots will grow into the gravel and benefit from water and salts that collect there.

It's all in The Balance,
UB


----------



## ClamDigger (Apr 22, 2011)

good argument uncle ben, its all in the lack of air.
what about a layer of Rockwool or Coco Coir on the bottom to wick moisture down/hold lots of air?
i have never liked using rocks because it throws off the weight of the plant, then its harder to tell when to water.


----------



## Nitegazer (Apr 22, 2011)

Uncle Ben said:


> Adding a shallow layer of coarse perlite or small gravel to the bottom of the pot first will increase an air exchange at the lower root zone, something your friend may not have mentioned. It's not the amount of water at the root zone that's the issue, it's the exclusion of air. Roots will grow into the gravel and benefit from water and salts that collect there.
> It's all in The Balance,
> UB


Agreed that it's all in the balance, and a proper soil mix combined with good watering technique precludes many of the issues with accumulating water. However, I don't agree that sitting water is good for the roots, even if there is material below it to provide 'aeration'. A layer of porous material will not be able to oxygenate sitting water at the bottom of the pot. 

For beginners still trying to dial-in soil mix and watering, the wick concept is a great alternative that might save a crop.

+rep for the new information. This is the kind of stuff I love to see on this board and debated.


----------



## ClamDigger (Apr 22, 2011)

another important note is to drill tons of holes in your pots so water is never forced to pool and compact your dirt, kill your roots, fill your air spaces, and float your pearlite


----------



## Jerry Garcia (Apr 22, 2011)

This all seems very unnecessary. Mix soil, put soil in pot, water, let dry, water, let dry, water...

I don't understand the problem.


----------



## Zaehet Strife (Apr 22, 2011)

if your using bags instead of pots, you can gently press the sides to break up the compact dirt


----------



## Uncle Ben (Apr 22, 2011)

Jerry Garcia said:


> This all seems very unnecessary. Mix soil, put soil in pot, water, let dry, water, let dry, water...
> 
> I don't understand the problem.


Ditto. 

There will be no sitting water if you use pots with drain holes and understand the basics.  Sure doesn't belong in Advanced.

UB


----------



## Beansly (Apr 26, 2011)

Uncle Ben said:


> For covering the drainage hole in the bottom center, I've used window screen, piece of shade cloth, rock or a shard from a broken clay pot to retain fine soil. No big deal. I use chunks of foam in the bottom side holes - black commercial pots.
> 
> Not buying it (the ICMag drill). Best preventative for a saturated soil/rotting root system is a healthy plant with a lot of foliage. THAT'S your wick - foliage. If you have to use a cloth wick or some other gimmick then you need to relearn the basics of soil culture and what makes a plant tick. A plant wicks off moisture at the root zone via physical properties such as transpiration, turgor pressure, capillary action and such.
> 
> ...





Uncle Ben said:


> Sure doesn't belong in Advanced.
> UB


I think if your putting anything in your pots beside soil, even chunks of foam or "small layer of perlite," then your wasting space for soil for your roots. Your right that proper soil building and solid fundamentals means you don't have to worry about these problems, but this thread wasn't for pro's to gloat about how good their soil is. It's to help the people who are still having problems figuring it out.

You don't have to believe the ICmag POV (which sounds to me like you have more of a bias against icmag than the idea...just because it's from a site you don't like doesn't mean it's wrong), I've _s_een it with my own eyes. Sometimes when I'd transplant I would notice a _very _saturated layer of soil above the "drainage layer" that if I squeezed, water would pour out, even though the plant wasn't exhibiting signs of salt build up or over-watering
If it was that simple, there would be no replies to this thread, except for insecure people trying to feel better about themselves by being nonconstructive and mean to people that know less than they do.

And tbf, this is kind of advanced for _this _site.

Besides, a lot of people are still using a drainage layer and I wanted everyone to know that it's not necessary. How that a waste?


----------



## deprave (Apr 27, 2011)

exactly Jerry, if you are adding 'drainage' layer at the bottom then you are trying to fix the wrong problem, adding a drainage layer imho is very silly, get better dirt and your problem will go away. I have only seen amateurs and/or people whos methods are not based in science advocate for a drainage layer(I.E. Jorge Cervantes) while the real scientist, the botanist and horticulture professionals preach against it. It is important to keep an open mind and understand everyone's opinion on a given issue but I think on this topic the coffin is nearly nailed shut. 

So while it may seem to the above poster that the veterans like UB are being arrogant on this topic, I think the reality of this topic is that its a closed case here and its not arrogance but frustration that this myth is still being perpetuated when its been debated time and time again and the conclusion is always that 'drainage layers' or 'rocks' at the bottom of your pot does more harm then good.


----------



## Beansly (Apr 27, 2011)

deprave said:


> exactly Jerry, if you are adding 'drainage' layer at the bottom then you are trying to fix the wrong problem, adding a drainage layer imho is very silly, get better dirt and your problem will go away. I have only seen amateurs and/or people whos methods are not based in science advocate for a drainage layer(I.E. Jorge Cervantes) while the real scientist, the botanist and horticulture professionals preach against it. It is important to keep an open mind and understand everyone's opinion on a given issue but I think on this topic the coffin is nearly nailed shut.
> 
> So while it may seem to the above poster that the veterans like UB are being arrogant on this topic, I think the reality of this topic is that its a closed case here and its not arrogance but frustration that this myth is still being perpetuated when its been debated time and time again and the conclusion is always that 'drainage layers' or 'rocks' at the bottom of your pot does more harm then good.


Topics on forums are brought up over and over again. It's an inherent trait of online boards. If that disturbing or new to you, maybe you shouldn't be on one.
And if it was a closed case, it wouldn't have been debated again.
there are ways to tell someone they should have known something with tact. Sayings things like "gimmick", and "that's just me" give off a know-it-all attitude. I like UB and I think he's smart, but I'm just tired of the rudeness and arrogance on-line. You shoulda seen the response by collective gardener (in 20000 watt grow blah blah blah thread) to a troll who burst in after reading only the first page (of like 90 or something) and assumed he knew it. Completely wrong and totally rude about it. True dumbass. Nobody would have been mad at collective gardener for going off on this guy, but instead he apologized to the troll for being inaccurate, and gave him a clear-headed response. It inspired me to stop being rude to people that knew lee than me even if they attack me. Snide quips, and clever remarks are nonconstructive and don't help anyone. 
It's different when your trying to be funny. I'm not suggesting that nobody joke ever. It's just stupid to dismiss a topic and everyone talking about it because you already know. If anything you should be giving an unbiased argument as to why you disagree.
Impassioned, fact-based, unbiased arguments do more to sway peoples opinions than off the cuff thoughts.
Idk, I'm ranting now. See what you bastards do to me? lol


----------



## growinhound (Apr 27, 2011)

hey beansly just curious,does your avatar represent you some how? partyin ol dude. dont get pizzed .keep up the good work


----------



## Beansly (Apr 27, 2011)

growinhound said:


> hey beansly just curious,does your avatar represent you some how? partyin ol dude. dont get pizzed .keep up the good work


I'm just trying to help people grow better pot man. I hate negative people.

Yeah in a way my avatar does represent me. I'm like that tho. I wouldn't have picked it if it didn't.
I'm only 28 but I've got an "old soul" as they say. 
I like to keep things old school, and I don't like new trends, idk,
but yeah just a hard partying, stumblin' OG (old guy).

Thanks for good words man, I appreciate it.
Beanz


----------



## Uncle Ben (Apr 27, 2011)

Beansly said:


> I think if your putting anything in your pots beside soil, even chunks of foam or "small layer of perlite," then your wasting space for soil for your roots.


You obviously haven't put down a layer of gravel at the bottom of a pot and then inspected the root zone after all is said and done. Roots will spin out in that medium, which is filled with organics and other particulates from above.



> Your right that proper soil building and solid fundamentals means you don't have to worry about these problems, but this thread wasn't for pro's to gloat about how good their soil is. It's to help the people who are still having problems figuring it out.


Has little to do with "how good the soil is". Has to do with basic plant culture.



> You don't have to believe the ICmag POV (which sounds to me like you have more of a bias against icmag than the idea...just because it's from a site you don't like doesn't mean it's wrong), I've _s_een it with my own eyes. Sometimes when I'd transplant I would notice a _very _saturated layer of soil above the "drainage layer" that if I squeezed, water would pour out, even though the plant wasn't exhibiting signs of salt build up or over-watering


Then you done screwed up having very poor root health and root tissue bulk.



> If it was that simple, there would be no replies to this thread, except for insecure people trying to feel better about themselves by being nonconstructive and mean to people that know less than they do.
> 
> And tbf, this is kind of advanced for _this _site.
> 
> Besides, a lot of people are still using a drainage layer and I wanted everyone to know that it's not necessary. How that a waste?


No, a drainage layer is not necessary. In fact, it's a bit silly. Doesn't mean it will do the plant any harm however.

IC Mag is full of noobs who have not yet figured it out. Commercial growers do not put any kind of crap in the bottom of their pots as they know that a well grown plant will wick off excess moisture, water. If that's what this person who seems to have rediscovered the wheel is espousing, then all I have to say is "duh". 

Like I said....... for the sake of convenience, I use chunks of foam to plug the 6 drain holes found in commercial black pots which is all I use. It has nothing to do with drainage layers.

UB


----------



## Jerry Garcia (Apr 28, 2011)

I still don't understand what causes this problem. How does water come to just sit at the bottom layer of a pot?

You're trying to compensate for excess moisture (because you overwatered) rather than just watering properly.

And frankly your soil and containers should be porous enough that once it has absorbed all it can the rest will drain out the bottom. A "perched water table" should never happen in a container with quality soil and amendments. Why do you think runoff exists?


----------



## cowboylogic (Apr 28, 2011)

Uncle Ben said:


> Ditto.
> 
> There will be no sitting water if you use pots with drain holes and understand the basics. Sure doesn't belong in Advanced.
> 
> UB


Ya advanced would be growing without drain holes altogether...........


----------



## Wolverine97 (Apr 28, 2011)

Jerry Garcia said:


> I still don't understand what causes this problem. How does water come to just sit at the bottom layer of a pot?
> 
> You're trying to compensate for excess moisture (because you overwatered) rather than just watering properly.
> 
> And frankly your soil and containers should be porous enough that once it has absorbed all it can the rest will drain out the bottom. A "perched water table" should never happen in a container with quality soil and amendments. Why do you think runoff exists?


You know, for a Buckeye you're not so bad...


----------



## Uncle Ben (Apr 28, 2011)

"Runoffs"....term for being smart enough for not getting your ass kicked by some pissed off Hereford bull on a rampage!


----------



## farmboss (Apr 28, 2011)

Uncle Ben said:


> A saturated root zone and root rot... worries... me.
> 
> Adding a shallow layer of coarse perlite or small gravel to the bottom of the pot first will increase an air exchange at the lower root zone, something your friend may not have mentioned. It's not the amount of water at the root zone that's the issue, it's the exclusion of air. Roots will grow into the gravel and benefit from water and salts that collect there.
> 
> ...


its called "mudding up" and can occur in hydro or soil. i use hydroton at the bottom and get FAT healthy white roots, in soil.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Apr 29, 2011)

farmboss said:


> its called "mudding up" and can occur in hydro or soil. i use hydroton at the bottom and get FAT healthy white roots, in soil.


Hydroton is fine. I just potted up an avocado tree yesterday received by FedX. "My secret" potting technique was using a homemade, very rich, composty soil with alfalfa, local horse manure compost, perlite, sand, peat, etc. and at least a 1" layer of perlite in the bottom of the pot. Oh yes, and the 5 gal. pot was scrubbed well and then coated with Griffin's Spin-out paint to further increase root efficiency.

UB


----------



## farmboss (Apr 30, 2011)

i had problem with SEVERAL types of plants, tomatoes, peppers, strawberries, okra, berries, etc..

all drainage and watering problems were fixed with something at the bottom.

perlite, hydroton, all works the same. rocks would even work.

naturally in the EARTH it is not just dirt 100 feet down....


----------



## Uncle Ben (May 1, 2011)

farmboss said:


> i had problem with SEVERAL types of plants, tomatoes, peppers, strawberries, okra, berries, etc..
> 
> all drainage and watering problems were fixed with something at the bottom.
> 
> ...


Okra in pots? Wow, that's a first. FWIW, it likes heat and not much water.


----------



## fatality (May 1, 2011)

Nitegazer said:


> Agreed that it's all in the balance, and a proper soil mix combined with good watering technique precludes many of the issues with accumulating water. However, I don't agree that sitting water is good for the roots, even if there is material below it to provide 'aeration'. A layer of porous material will not be able to oxygenate sitting water at the bottom of the pot.
> 
> For beginners still trying to dial-in soil mix and watering, the wick concept is a great alternative that might save a crop.
> 
> +rep for the new information. This is the kind of stuff I love to see on this board and debated.


i concur , my buddy told me to use rocks at the bottom of my buckets, but something inside me wasn't allowing it, i guess it could have been god now that i think of it because he didnt want want me to hinder his creations as my atheist friend was doing...


----------



## jjfoo (May 27, 2011)

beanz,

good luck convincing people... From some of the responses here you can see that people have beliefs that they will hold on to no matter what.

Just because someone has healthy plants doesn't mean there is no room for improvement. Yet many will site there great growth as proof that there argument is right. You are dealing with true believers not scientists...


----------



## krok (May 28, 2011)

@Beansly, that was an interesting read, thank you.
Ignore the noise (sadly, not only from the ignorant).

I've seen the PWT myself, and it did worry me (but my plants did not seem to mind it).

I use tall pots wich are narrower at the bottom, I wonder how that affects the PWT. After reading this, I decided to drill a lot of tiny holes in my pots - why not, can't hurt.


----------



## DrFever (May 28, 2011)

krok said:


> @Beansly, that was an interesting read, thank you.
> Ignore the noise (sadly, not only from the ignorant).
> 
> I've seen the PWT myself, and it did worry me (but my plants did not seem to mind it).
> ...


one would think having narrower pots on bottom will only heighten your chances of having root problems if you like tall pots why not go to 20 litre pails and drill holes on bottom


----------



## Beansly (May 28, 2011)

krok said:


> @Beansly, that was an interesting read, thank you.
> Ignore the noise (sadly, not only from the ignorant).
> 
> I've seen the PWT myself, and it did worry me (but my plants did not seem to mind it).
> ...


I really appreciate your open-mindedness krok. To me a simple sign of intelligence is whether someone can "agree to disagree" and be civil about it. 
UB, your one talk. Didn't you write a thread on the exotic technique of topping...OOOOOhhhhhh tell me more! You wanna talk about threads that are pointless...
You and me write threads like this for one reason; to fill our humongous egos.
But I think it's deeper than that. UB put his name on "topping" like he was the first one who ever thought of the idea. I assume he's upset nobody's talking about him... and his "drainage technique."



Jerry Garcia said:


> I still don't understand what causes this problem. How does water come to just sit at the bottom layer of a pot?
> 
> You're trying to compensate for excess moisture (because you overwatered) rather than just watering properly.
> 
> And frankly your soil and containers should be porous enough that once it has absorbed all it can the rest will drain out the bottom. A "perched water table" should never happen in a container with quality soil and amendments. Why do you think runoff exists?


I don't believe your really wanna know the answer to that, cause if you did, you would have read the first post which explains why. Or you would have taken the link to the original thread and read that. I think you wanna just stir the shit. Try again when you have something intelligent to contribute.



Uncle Ben said:


> Then you done screwed up having very poor root health and root tissue bulk.
> 
> UB


Maybe,
but your a poop face.
What I'm trying to is help other's learn from my mistake.


----------



## kevin murphy (May 28, 2011)

excellent thread beansly lad very interesting and informative....as usual...


Beansly said:


> I really appreciate your open-mindedness krok. To me a simple sign of intelligence is whether someone can "agree to disagree" and be civil about it.
> UB, your one talk. Didn't you write a thread on the exotic technique of topping...OOOOOhhhhhh tell me more! You wanna talk about threads that are pointless...
> You and me write threads like this for one reason; to fill our humongous egos.
> But I think it's deeper than that. UB put his name on "topping" like he was the first one who ever thought of the idea. I assume he's upset nobody's talking about him... and his "drainage technique."
> ...


----------



## Jerry Garcia (May 29, 2011)

"There will be a naturally occurring "perched water table" (PWT) in containers when soil particulate size is under about .125 (1/8 inch).. This is water that occupies a layer of soil that is always *saturated* & will not drain from the portion of the pot it occupies. It can evaporate or *be used by the plant*, but physical forces will not allow it to drain."

Why would you want to get rid of this? Sounds to me like additional water that will allow my plant to go longer between waterings. A healthy root system SHOULD provide all the wick you need, and if you aren't overwatering your plant in the first place this will help you, especially if growing large plants in small containers.

And aren't we really just talking about water retention and saturation here...but calling it a Perched Water Table?









Beansly said:


> And tbf, this is kind of advanced for _this _site.


Then why are you here. Clearly you are too advanced for _this_ site.


----------



## Shadeslay (May 29, 2011)

I kept running into issues with my plants using rocks on the bottom. They tended to be over watered or under watered more often.


----------



## Beansly (May 29, 2011)

Shadeslay said:


> I kept running into issues with my plants using rocks on the bottom. They tended to be over watered or under watered more often.


 I think the only ones upset about my innocent thread are the ones who didn't think of taking an old idea and sticking their name on it.
Stay tune for when I reveal Beansly's ScroG technique. I invented a way of growing that maximized space and lighting all by using simple chicken wire!


----------



## Jerry Garcia (May 30, 2011)

Beansly said:


> I think the only ones upset about my innocent thread are the ones who didn't think of taking an old idea and sticking their name on it.
> Stay tune for when I reveal Beansly's ScroG technique. I invented a way of growing that maximized space and lighting all by using simple chicken wire!


So you are admitting to contributing nothing of value then...you just stuck your name on something you read elsewhere on the internet, claiming it will change the way we think.

Why didn't you acknowledge my comments above? Didn't _feel_ like addressing those?

Eventually, if you don't water, the suspended water within the medium will get used or evaporated, like it's supposed to. As long as you don't overwater, this isn't a problem. Right?

Right?

I shouldn't expect a response though, as clearly I'm not smart enough or have the desire to understand the point of this thread


----------



## krok (May 30, 2011)

Jerry Garcia said:


> So you are admitting to contributing nothing of value then...you just stuck your name on something you read elsewhere on the internet, claiming it will change the way we think.
> 
> Why didn't you acknowledge my comments above? Didn't _feel_ like addressing those?
> 
> ...


Why are you making such a big deal over this? I learned something, never heard of the PWT before. That's all this thread was for me, and I don't see your point? That a healthy plant will suck the water out of the pot? That is knowlegde even the most stupid knows! Of course the PWT is not a problem per se - for a healthy plant.

When I find new information related to growing I'm happy, after all 99% of the posts on forums are useless in this regard. This post was not (for me).
Just because this post was old news to you, there is no need to be a dick.
Just because your plants have no water uptake problems, you cannot assume it applies to all growers. (No, I'm not saying it's BECAUSE OF the PWT).
Just because you don't find this information useful, a lot of people might.


----------



## Jerry Garcia (May 31, 2011)

krok said:


> Why are you making such a big deal over this? I learned something, never heard of the PWT before. That's all this thread was for me, and I don't see your point? That a healthy plant will suck the water out of the pot? That is knowlegde even the most stupid knows! Of course the PWT is not a problem per se - for a healthy plant.
> 
> When I find new information related to growing I'm happy, after all 99% of the posts on forums are useless in this regard. This post was not (for me).
> Just because this post was old news to you, there is no need to be a dick.
> ...


My point is that the PWT isn't CAUSING PROBLEMS, like Beansly seems to indicate it does. I had never heard of a PWT before this thread, so I learned something as well, but In my opinion, and it's just the opinion of a dick who apparently knows nothing at all, the PWT is beneficial to indoor container plants. Without it soil would dry out much faster--I have a Sour D plant in a 3.5 gallon pot that requires water every other day...without suspending water in the medium it would probably need water a few times a day.

Which is why I said we are really just discussing water retention and saturation, not drainage. For the vast majority of people growing in containers indoors, a wick to absorb excess water is just plain silly. Growing 101: DON'T OVERWATER--this means don't water TOO OFTEN. If you wait the appropriate time between waterings, the roots wick up all moisture...even the PWT. There is really no situation where doing anything to the PWT is necessary.

The Perched Water Table is not some mysterious layer of water that no matter what will remain in your pot, requiring additional measures to remove. A plant will use it as it does the rest of the moisture trapped within the soil matrix.

If you or anyone else is having water uptake problems, you need to re-evaluate your understanding of plant culture, because wicking off excess moisture is certainly NOT going to make the plant uptake water any faster...it will just make less water available for the uptaking.

And if your plant isn't growing right indoors it is because the controlled environment you provided for it isn't acceptable--too hot, too cold, too much water, too much/little nutrients, not enough air circulation--NOT BECAUSE OF THE FUCKING PERCHED WATER TABLE.

The reason I'm being a dick about this is because people will read this thread and say "my plant is messed up because my Perched Water Table is too big, I should use a wick" which in the end doesn't help the person overcome their problems...if anything they exacerbate them.


----------



## xXOnyxXx (May 31, 2011)

*shit i dunno, i have used hydroton in the bottoms of my pots for drainage. it didn't help much at all, i found that if my roots are in good shape and healthy i don't have that wet layer "pwt" issue. i prefer to just use all soil and let my plants do the talking when it comes to what they want.

*


----------



## krok (May 31, 2011)

Jerry Garcia said:


> My point is that the PWT isn't CAUSING PROBLEMS, like Beansly seems to indicate it does. I had never heard of a PWT before this thread, so I learned something as well, but In my opinion, and it's just the opinion of a dick who apparently knows nothing at all, the PWT is beneficial to indoor container plants. Without it soil would dry out much faster--I have a Sour D plant in a 3.5 gallon pot that requires water every other day...without suspending water in the medium it would probably need water a few times a day.
> 
> Which is why I said we are really just discussing water retention and saturation, not drainage. For the vast majority of people growing in containers indoors, a wick to absorb excess water is just plain silly. Growing 101: DON'T OVERWATER--this means don't water TOO OFTEN. If you wait the appropriate time between waterings, the roots wick up all moisture...even the PWT. There is really no situation where doing anything to the PWT is necessary.
> 
> ...


OK, I understand. Your discussion with Beansly went above my head, I wasn't paying attention.
I was trigger happy because this forum, in general, is getting so noisy - a lot of people seem to NEED being correct all the time - at all costs, even enjoying it when they find some statements they can attack.

I've had water uptake problems in the past (newbie mistakes), I used towels under my pots to force air/water through pot. It worked for wicking out some moisture. 

These days I don't have water-uptake issues, but I'm still REALLY paranoid about drowning my roots. So this thread was useful to me.


----------



## delta9nxs (Jun 11, 2011)

these links are about media and container mechanics. the term "saturated layer" means the same as "perched water table".


http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/1000/1251.html

http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/n...g-physical.pdf

"slowness is thoroughness" 
__________________
Passive Plant Killer

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=138004


i just want to add that the old saw about letting your medium dry down between waterings evolved as a means of dealing with the pwt. and using too fine of a medium.

drying concentrates salts and brings you dangerously close to xylem embolism.


you may be one of those "natural" gardeners, with a "green thumb", and grow beautiful plants using a drainage layer. you could probably grow a plant in a glass bowl with no holes in it using glass marbles as a medium. that's great!

but if you:

do away with the drainage layer

use a medium with approx 30% air porosity

deal with the perched water table by using a device to move it out of the root zone

keep your medium moist at all times. remember the assimilation of nutrients is dependent upon water

you will grow a higher yielding plant.

i just harvested a plant using these principles that yielded over 22 oz's of dry bud in a 3.5 gallon container of coco. this is with a cut i've been running for 8 years. i used to get around 10-12 zips per plant with the same cut.

hi, JJ!

delta9nxs


----------



## doser (Jun 11, 2011)

ya what he said
Ive seen it..........didnt know the mechanics of how it occurred
now I do
right on bro


----------



## doser (Jun 11, 2011)

and to the 28 year old "OG"...............???? WTF


----------



## Wolverine97 (Jun 12, 2011)

delta9nxs said:


> these links are about media and container mechanics. the term "saturated layer" means the same as "perched water table".
> 
> 
> http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/1000/1251.html
> ...


I'd like to see pics of this 22 oz plant grown in a 3.5 gallon container...


----------



## delta9nxs (Jun 12, 2011)

here are a few. my first time uploading pics here. i got them out of order but from left to right:

1,2,3. pics of harvested bud.
4,6,7. the plant in question
5. a different plant in veg showing the stacked 3.5 gal buckets. bottom is a reservoir and top is the grow container.

the 2 bud shots showing my arms are on different sides of the plant, about 5.5 feet apart. i weigh about 195 and wear large gloves for reference.

the system was designed to deal with the hydraulic and mechanical problems inherent in most container growing schemes. 

the perched water table is moved out of the grow container and into a 1.5" tube which both drains and sub-irrigates. the top of the medium is kept at the right level of moisture by a pulsed top irrigation system. the medium is never allowed to dry. but also is never saturated.

the overall effect is that the device keeps the interface between air, water, nutrients, and roots at maximum efficiency.

this plant is the largest i've grown yet but i'm averaging over a lb per plant with sweet tooth #4.

it was grown using ro water, jack's hydroponic special and calcium nitrate at ec 1.2 or 600 ppm on a .5 meter. this is for all phases. from clone to harvest. no ph adjusters, no pk boosters, no magic potions. just the right environment and a straightforward, honest, nutrient program.

hi, beansly! thank you for reading my thread. i'll do a condensed version here soon. sorry for the hijacking but this thread needed the references. i've got many more on the same subjects from universities all over the world.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Oct 20, 2011)

Thought I'd look this up again. Found the link on soil container issues while searching. Gotta eat some crow on this one Beansly! (spits out feathers)



Beansly said:


> You don't have to believe the ICmag PO


It's not the ICMag POV. It was lifted from Gardenweb. A real guru by the name of Al wrote it and has hundreds of followup posts. I've been touting the merits of it at several sites having ignored it until just recently. http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/contain/msg0316064615891.html?14

Probably the most important concept is the perched water table concept. He does clarify that the wicking thingie when a pot is full of roots top to bottom.


----------



## delta9nxs (Oct 22, 2011)

at last! four months! hi, uncle ben! could you please explain what you mean by "a real guru". and this sentence, "* He does clarify that the wicking thingie when a pot is full of roots top to bottom." i'm a little confused by your terminology. al tapla is one of my references in my thread but he only deals with the perched water table and media characteristics.

the passive plant killer is about much more than just controlling the perched water table. it is a coordinated device that integrates many design concepts into one unit. if you've read my complete thread you know that i don't claim invention. i did not "invent" any single design element. however i know i'm the first to put these design elements together in one device. i have provided links to research to back up all claims and statements. by the way, it grows the hell out of weed at high speed with no symptoms or displays of any deficiencies, antagonisms, or stimulations. it controls ec and ph with no changeouts. it is so totally reliable that no one, in the first 2 years since we began working on it, has ever lost a plant in one due to system failure. belts and suspenders. it is designed to grow large plants which most legal medical growers who have plant count limits must do to produce the quantities they need. but at the same time people with smaller areas have built variations to fit their spaces and are reporting success. it is designed to eliminate continuous heavy maintenance. and the stress that normally accompanies new growers. and drain to waste. experienced growers, after growing their favorite strain for a while, try it in this device and invariably make comments like, "i am stunned" at the yield increases. or, "the plant outgrew my space", or my favorite, "the fuggin' colas are huge!" it is designed to be easy to build, maintain, and operate.

i felt compelled to state all this here in view of the negative and/or somewhat derogatory remarks made earlier in the thread. i sincerely hope we have gotten past all that and can pursue knowledge with open minds. 

yours truly, delta9nxs



*


----------



## Uncle Ben (Oct 22, 2011)

delta9nxs said:


> at last! four months! hi, uncle ben! could you please explain what you mean by "a real guru". and this sentence,


Read his thread and his replies to hundreds of Gardeweb members and you'll know what I mean. Al is really good.


----------



## delta9nxs (Oct 22, 2011)

Uncle Ben said:


> Read his thread and his replies to hundreds of Gardeweb members and you'll know what I mean. Al is really good.


actually, i've read about everything i could find written by him, i may have missed something. no, it's the term "real guru" that confuses me. do you mean as opposed to an "unreal" guru or perhaps a "fake" guru. gosh, it just occurred to me that, no, that couldn't be true, scratch that!

really, since reading all the crap filled books by supposed "gurus", i don't consider anyone in the cannabis growing community to be a "guru". guru has such mystical connotations and i'm one of those believers in science. there are no magic potions or green thumbs. just people who know something about plants and people who don't.

well, i guess i'll do a grow here in a little while. i'm trying to spread the word about this medical "love machine". maybe you can come by and share your opinions? there is still much to accomplish. we learn everyday.

later, d9


----------



## Afka (Oct 23, 2011)

Perched water table is only relevant to excessively capillary media, media lacking sufficient aeration, or very young plants with little root mass.

Otherwise, it's rather irrelevant. It's just more water for an established plant to take up, and it's not preventing any gas exchanges.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Oct 23, 2011)

Jerry Garcia said:


> "There will be a naturally occurring "perched water table" (PWT) in containers when soil particulate size is under about .125 (1/8 inch).. This is water that occupies a layer of soil that is always *saturated* & will not drain from the portion of the pot it occupies. It can evaporate or *be used by the plant*, but physical forces will not allow it to drain."
> 
> Why would you want to get rid of this? Sounds to me like additional water that will allow my plant to go longer between waterings. A healthy root system SHOULD provide all the wick you need, and if you aren't overwatering your plant in the first place this will help you, especially if growing large plants in small containers.
> 
> ...


Excellent....


----------



## delta9nxs (Oct 24, 2011)

Afka said:


> Perched water table is only relevant to excessively capillary media, media lacking sufficient aeration, or very young plants with little root mass.
> 
> Otherwise, it's rather irrelevant. It's just more water for an established plant to take up, and it's not preventing any gas exchanges.


hi, afka! "Perched water table is only relevant to excessively capillary media," such as coco, perlite, rockwool, peat, pine bark, turface, de, small lava rock, sand, gravel, rice hulls or hydroton. using any of these media the pwt will be relevant. i suppose there are some media choices where it may not be relevant, but for most commonly used media it is.

containers are not the open soil column and create an artificial set of conditions for the plant to cope with. one of these is the pwt. 

most gardeners are forced to use the above mentioned media in various combinations because they, in addition to decent air porosity, must have decent water retention. 

media that has pore spaces too large to support a pwt will have extremely low water retention, requiring more frequent watering events.

a pwt or saturated layer does indeed present a barrier to gas flow while it exists. not to molecular flow, but to gas flow. 

again, the elimination of the pwt from the root chamber is but one of the design elements of the ppk.

traditional gardening using containers and the media listed above works good if you are an experienced gardener and know when to water. most of these new growers have never grown a plant before and all over the internet forums you see posts from folks having plant problems of all sorts.

this device instantly turns these people into successful growers of there own medicine.

let's go back to the basic scenario where the gardener waters the plant by hand. how is this decision made? most use the "lift the pot, you'll get a feel for it" method. when it feels light water it.

what happens during this process? immediately after watering there is formed a pwt. this represents a raising of the water level typically between 1-2" in most media. 

since the last watering "air" type roots have grown down into the area. research has shown that this can occur in as little as 12 hours. these root structures are not designed to sit in standing water as are the "water" roots. so they begin to drown. the only reason they don't drown completely is that the gardener doesn't water too often. you guys all know that smell of rotten eggs. that's evidence of drowning and dying root material. this takes experience to manage. new people are usually not very good at it and suffer the consequences.

here is a little basic math for you. a 5 gal bucket is approx 10.5" in diameter. the typical pwt using most media will average around 1.5". 3.1416 x r2 x (depth in inches) 1.5 = 129.88 / 231 (cubic inches in a gal) = .562 gal. so about a half gal with most conventional media.

now take a 1.5" id tube. same math gets you .011 gal. from al's statement and many research papers we know that the pwt will exist at the same height in any size or shape container regardless of volume. this is due to the media characteristics, not anything to do with the container. this is why traditional plant containers are all taller than they are wide. this is a design effort to reduce the pwt. also tapered pots help.

by using the 1.5" tube passing through an air gap sufficiently sized to contain the pwt we are reducing the volume of the pwt to only 2% of what it would be if we did not. this frees pot space for "air" type roots and prevents "stalls". the effect on the plant is dramatic. 

the idea of controlling and reducing the pwt has been around for a long time. patents and applications are full of attempts to do just this so it has long been recognized as a problem inherent in container growing.

ok, enough of the pwt and minimizing it. lets look at the other side of the problem. the plant. the "dry your pot down between watering events" evolved to deal with the pwt in containers. if you are fertigating you are constantly running salts through the medium. when you allow the medium to dry you are concentrating salts. this causes buildup. this is another commonly recognized phenomena as evidenced by the use of products like dripclean. watering to a certain amount of run off is another way to control it.

but there is another, more insidious side to this. a side that limits plant growth. that is because plants can't take up nutrients without the presence of water. they also can't assimilate nutrients that are in excessive concentrations.

so why not build a device that eliminates the pwt from the root chamber, thereby eliminating the need to reduce watering to keep from drowning the plant yet at the same time allowing you to provide water and nutrients with mass availability, accelerating growth?

while we are at it let's add a reservoir under the plant so that the plant is "fooled" into behaving as if the container is much larger by providing a hydraulic pathway all the way through it.


there is much more to all this, of course, and i'm sure you are all great gardeners and grow beautiful plants. 

but you will grow larger, higher yielding plants if you deal with these issues.

well, that's all for now. i'm tired.

d9


----------



## delta9nxs (Oct 24, 2011)

Uncle Ben said:


> Excellent....


hi, uncle ben! jerry garcia is right about the terms being interchangable, most container growing professionals and soil scientists know this. but the graphic is out of place in this discussion because it depicts the open soil column. we are not talking about the open soil column, we are talking about growing indoors in containers.

later


----------



## Uncle Ben (Oct 24, 2011)

delta9nxs said:


> hi, uncle ben! jerry garcia is right about the terms being interchangable, most container growing professionals and soil scientists know this. but the graphic is out of place in this discussion because it depicts the open soil column. we are not talking about the open soil column, we are talking about growing indoors in containers.
> 
> later


Good point. The diagram depicts typical farm land, in fact it would be a perfect description of what I have on my farm. I use a subsoiler to fracture the soil. 

Jerry made some excellent points. In a container, the PWT disappears with good root growth. Foliage working with roots are a powerful wick but one must first develop that mechanism.......and as you've seen in cannabis forums some never get there

PWT has never been an issue for me as my plants' roots quickly fill the entire medium. If you use some kind of root tip pruning device, it can be pretty dramatic. For example, I guarantee you that by week 2 (week 3 at the latest) I had a pretty robust root system with roots filling most if not all of the pots shown here --> https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/9114-spin-out-chemical-root-pruning.html Perfect example is the extreme pot bound nature of the one popped out of the untreated pot at week 4.

Take note of the mass and healthy nature of the rootball and the foliage of the destroyed male. That is how you grow good pot fast, by focusing ONLY on the production and maintenance of the root system and foliage. Even at harvest, the plant shown at the end of that journal had retained most of its fan leaves. I'd have to guess that 80% of pot gardeners do the opposite - focus on bud production and use bloom foods resulting in greatly reduced potential yields.

Live and learn,
UB


----------



## Dakota Big Smokin (Oct 27, 2011)

great post, ive never used a drainage layer but i was going to for this grow until reading this!


----------



## Jfizzle2cmu (Jan 12, 2012)

My theory is this (and when I say theory I mean complete high thought):

I want to get to a point where I am flowering in a 10 gallon pot and want my soiless Promix to dry out every day. In my research it seems like soiless growing is nothing more than a hydro/soil combo...all the consistency of hydro without the hassle and problems. Any which way, as long as I'm monitoring and keeping Ppm/ec runoff readings and keeping them at proper levels, what the heck, the more waterings/feedings the better...right? 

So, my thinking is this...I have an oxygen machine sitting around and thought if I fine tune its output to achieve at least one watering a day, wouldn't that help promote maximum root health? Seems like hydro wets and dries roots more than 20 times a day sometimes, so why wouldn't 1-2 waterings/feedings a day be beneficial? Is there any reason other than cost of nutrients and availability of the necessary equipment not to do this, or a flaw in my theory (perhaps kill off microorganisms I need to make nutrients available)? Not sure either on how soil moisture affects nutrient uptake? Do more waterings mean nutrients will be available to the plant quicker or slower and to what extent? Anybody have solid input on that? I think that's my biggest question before I get set back up here in a month...

Plan on going 4-plant vertical scrog around 1000 watt MH, then HPS for flower. Temp controller, co2 bucket, entire Advanced Nutrient line (new formulas), ph water pen, ppm pen, ec pen, soil ph meter...if this helps.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 13, 2012)

Jfizzle2cmu said:


> My theory is this (and when I say theory I mean complete high thought):
> 
> I want to get to a point where I am flowering in a 10 gallon pot and want my soiless Promix to dry out every day. In my research it seems like soiless growing is nothing more than a hydro/soil combo...all the consistency of hydro without the hassle and problems. Any which way, as long as I'm monitoring and keeping Ppm/ec runoff readings and keeping them at proper levels, what the heck, the more waterings/feedings the better...right?
> 
> ...


Put down the bong, give up the feelings and theories and read a couple of books on plant culture. Find out what the commercial nursery industry does and why and stay away from the gimmicktry you find in forums like this.

You're on the road to disaster every step of the way. From the "drying out everyday" to the use of AN products.

Good luck,
UB


----------



## yeps420 (Sep 18, 2013)

Bump bump bump. .

Evolution rock and the PPK has really evolved ...


----------



## dr.tree (Sep 19, 2013)

Man this is all so complicated. UNCLE BEN YOUR MY HERO. I have this great method of just ripping open the bag of roots organic soil and throwing a clone right in the bag and that's it. It has great particle size, no washing pots, no transplant mess. As a added bonus there are little holes already the bag. The mushroom culture goes nuts all the Bennies do great. I don't know if there is any improvement that would be worth the time investment. Just my method. A true dirt bag. I'm just some Joe blow UNCLE BEN's got the good advice. My best advice if you want to be a awesome grower m blaze and uncle Ben are some huge sources of knowledge


----------

