vertical growing

DaveTheNewbie

DaveTheNewbie

Well-Known Member
actually children rick white is right in that it is a colosseum. so saying WRONG is wrong :)
i really wish you children would stop fighting over silly little things tho.
by your definition those great expensive spinning things with the light in the middle wouldnt be vert because the globe is horizontal, even tho the globe is in the plants and the plants surround the globe.

ps you dont utilise the light at the end of the globe, not much light comes out of there. so you put a reflector on and now your not vert your horizontal with a reflector : thats a hybrid of the 2 using both concepts. its not wrong, but its not pure vert either :)
 
DaveTheNewbie

DaveTheNewbie

Well-Known Member
cerberus said:
3 600's, and you grabbed 2 elbows?! thats not to shabby at all! Have you dont horizontal grows? (it sounds like it) and the vert went the best for ya?

what strain?

nice grow my friend, nice grow
Click to expand...


my understanding is that you should be pulling well over 1 pound per 600 watter.

i pulled just 1 pound last grow because i had all sorts of issues. I wont go into the details.

i know people pulling 24 ounces from a single 600 watter (no Co2, just a small cab and a reflective hood) in coco with drippers, very simple setup.
 
bigtomatofarmer

bigtomatofarmer

Well-Known Member
DaveTheNewbie said:
my understanding is that you should be pulling well over 1 pound per 600 watter.

i pulled just 1 pound last grow because i had all sorts of issues. I wont go into the details.

i know people pulling 24 ounces from a single 600 watter (no Co2, just a small cab and a reflective hood) in coco with drippers, very simple setup.
Click to expand...

Got pictures of anything you have growing?
 
johnny961

johnny961

Well-Known Member
I wish i knew 1/2 of what FDD knew. I think 1lb on a 600 is pretty far fetched unless you are a master of sorts. Not sayin it cant be done.
 
That 5hit

That 5hit

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
thank you all for letting me know just how much i really suck.
Click to expand...
fdd2blk said:
go back and read the last 3 pages. :dunce:

then maybe YOU could try some caffinated. :lol:
Click to expand...
fuck the haters
people re forgeting that you arae an outdorr grower and you said this was your first time using this setup and system
now you have learned a gr8 deal and can inprove on the next time
first time + 3 600w + yeilding 2lb's = real good (not gr8 but reall good)
 
Dystopia

Dystopia

Active Member
RickWhite said:
A 4'X4" horizontal setup has 16 sq feet of growing area. A 4' diameter vertical setup with 4' of height gives 50.24 sq feet which is 3 times growing area. However, when you spread the light over a greater distance, you reduce its lumens by the same ratio.
Click to expand...

The information you give is true; however, I believe you are misapplying it. Let’s say you are using a 600-watt HPS at 80,000 lumens to light your 4’ x 4’ area. With a horizontally-hung light and a good hood – and let’s even assume there is no light loss in the reflection – your 16 square foot area will provide 5,000 lumens/square foot (80,000/16). With a vertically-hung light - using your assumption that it is illuminating 50 square feet – the average drops to 1600 lumens/square foot.

So, on the face you might say that any gains in area for a vertically-hung lamp would be compensated for by losses in growth rate and density of the buds. 5,000 lumens of light is thought to be marijuana’s saturation point – the point at which additional light does not result in more growth – and somewhere around 1,000 lumens is thought to be marijuana’s compensation point – the point at which there isn’t enough light to produce growth.

These numbers define the “flower box” that I talk about extensively in my vertical grow journal. The upper-boundary of the box is defined by the lumens felt at the top of the canopy - up to 9,000 lumens depending on how close you hang the light; even though the plant doesn’t use any of the lumens above 5,000, higher lumens at the top means deeper penetration. The lower part of the box is defined by the lowest level of lumens necessary to sustain growth – approximately 1,000 lumens:




The problem (I believe) with your analysis is that you are looking at it 2-dimensionally, or in the square feet a particular light will support. I believe a better way is to look at it is 3-dimensionally, or the volume in cubic feet that a particular light will support. In my example above, a 600-watt light that is hung horizontally 18” from the canopy will support a 4’ x 4’ x 1.5’ box, or about 24 cubic feet.

When you hang the light vertically, you take the box and wrap it around the light:



The problem with your calculations is that you calculated the square feet of the back wall (Area = Diameter * pi * Height; Area = 4’ * 3.14 * 4’ = 50.24 square feet). This is the point where the least amount of light is felt – the BOTTOM of the “flower box”. If you want to compare apples to apples, then compare the top of a horizontal box to the top of a vertical box – the point closest to the light. If we use the above formula on the INSIDE cylinder we get Area = 2’ * 3.14 * 3’ = 18.84 square feet, much closer to your 16 square feet for your horizontally hung bulb. Notice that I am decreasing the distance of the bulb to the canopy to 1 foot – I can do this because when hung vertically the light is not as intense nor is the bulb as hot, because there is no hood reflecting light and heat. Since the bulb is closer to the plants, I won’t get as large a footprint, so I decreased the inner cylinder height to 3’.

But a better measurement would be to calculate the volume of the cylinder. If I take the volume of the entire cylinder and subtract the volume of the inner cylinder, I should get the volume of my “flower box”.

Volume = pi * radius squared * height
Volume 1 = 3.14 * 2^2 * 4 = 50.24 cubic feet

Volume 2 = 3.14 * 1^2 * 4 = 12.56 cubic feet

Total volume light supports = 50.24 – 12.56 = 37.68 cubic feet

Compare your horizontally hung flower box volume of 24 cubic feet to 38 cubic feet for a vertical flower box, and you can see a potential increase of 58% in the yield. And if you place a “hood” over the top and bottom of the light and around the back of the plants you increase the potential even more. You can see how Heath Robinson can pull close to 3 lbs from ONE 600-watt light vertical grow. Much better utilization of the light, even over a “stadium” grow.


RickWhite said:
there is no escaping the physics of light.
Click to expand...
Apparently there is when you apply it ;-)
 
B

bigboy973

Member
Dystopia said:
The information you give is true; however, I believe you are misapplying it. Let’s say you are using a 600-watt HPS at 80,000 lumens to light your 4’ x 4’ area. With a horizontally-hung light and a good hood – and let’s even assume there is no light loss in the reflection – your 16 square foot area will provide 5,000 lumens/square foot (80,000/16). With a vertically-hung light - using your assumption that it is illuminating 50 square feet – the average drops to 1600 lumens/square foot.

So, on the face you might say that any gains in area for a vertically-hung lamp would be compensated for by losses in growth rate and density of the buds. 5,000 lumens of light is thought to be marijuana’s saturation point – the point at which additional light does not result in more growth – and somewhere around 1,000 lumens is thought to be marijuana’s compensation point – the point at which there isn’t enough light to produce growth.

These numbers define the “flower box” that I talk about extensively in my vertical grow journal. The upper-boundary of the box is defined by the lumens felt at the top of the canopy - up to 9,000 lumens depending on how close you hang the light; even though the plant doesn’t use any of the lumens above 5,000, higher lumens at the top means deeper penetration. The lower part of the box is defined by the lowest level of lumens necessary to sustain growth – approximately 1,000 lumens:




The problem (I believe) with your analysis is that you are looking at it 2-dimensionally, or in the square feet a particular light will support. I believe a better way is to look at it is 3-dimensionally, or the volume in cubic feet that a particular light will support. In my example above, a 600-watt light that is hung horizontally 18” from the canopy will support a 4’ x 4’ x 1.5’ box, or about 24 cubic feet.

When you hang the light vertically, you take the box and wrap it around the light:



The problem with your calculations is that you calculated the square feet of the back wall (Area = Diameter * pi * Height; Area = 4’ * 3.14 * 4’ = 50.24 square feet). This is the point where the least amount of light is felt – the BOTTOM of the “flower box”. If you want to compare apples to apples, then compare the top of a horizontal box to the top of a vertical box – the point closest to the light. If we use the above formula on the INSIDE cylinder we get Area = 2’ * 3.14 * 3’ = 18.84 square feet, much closer to your 16 square feet for your horizontally hung bulb. Notice that I am decreasing the distance of the bulb to the canopy to 1 foot – I can do this because when hung vertically the light is not as intense nor is the bulb as hot, because there is no hood reflecting light and heat. Since the bulb is closer to the plants, I won’t get as large a footprint, so I decreased the inner cylinder height to 3’.

But a better measurement would be to calculate the volume of the cylinder. If I take the volume of the entire cylinder and subtract the volume of the inner cylinder, I should get the volume of my “flower box”.

Volume = pi * radius squared * height
Volume 1 = 3.14 * 2^2 * 4 = 50.24 cubic feet

Volume 2 = 3.14 * 1^2 * 4 = 12.56 cubic feet

Total volume light supports = 50.24 – 12.56 = 37.68 cubic feet

Compare your horizontally hung flower box volume of 24 cubic feet to 38 cubic feet for a vertical flower box, and you can see a potential increase of 58% in the yield. And if you place a “hood” over the top and bottom of the light and around the back of the plants you increase the potential even more. You can see how Heath Robinson can pull close to 3 lbs from ONE 600-watt light vertical grow. Much better utilization of the light, even over a “stadium” grow.




Apparently there is when you apply it ;-)
Click to expand...

WHO IS Heath Robinson? i need a link for him please!
 
cerberus

cerberus

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
thank you all for letting me know just how much i really suck.
Click to expand...
yeah.. this is the place where I go to see what my self worth is real worth.. :wall:

I thought your journal and grow where pretty smart. Whether its a vert or a horz, I guess is a matter of oppinion BUT it gave me some idea to look at.

Do be sweat'n the haters! Brush your shoulders off, pimp!bongsmilie
 
jigfresh

jigfresh

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
i guess i should have put a smiley, for all the DUMB people. :bigjoint: :dunce:
Click to expand...
Are you serious? I'm not dumb, and I didn't know you were being sarcastic.

You act like all of US are the drama queens.

It's like you are courting our sympathy by degrading yourself... then when it is given you bash the people that gave it as idiots.

So basically everyone on RIU is DUMB (except you of course becuase you were just kidding). Nice how that works out.

C'mon man.

People were calling out RickWhite by name and he didn't get this upset, and here we are trying to say your grow was pretty awesome. Take a page from the Ricker... let it roll off your back.

Life must be fucking hard being like that. :wall:

EDIT: Now comes the part where you reference what you said and what everyone else said to point out just how wrong everything I am saying is. Save youself the time. Ignore me if you think I'm so wrong. Or go ahead and prove how right you are. Just quit insulting us and our (lack of) intelligence.

EDIT EDIT: Has ANYONE seen a thread where fdd2blk has posted that HASN"T turned into a big ordeal? I never have. Makes you think. Always turns into the fdd show. Case in point, the last 3 pages. The power of positive (or negative) thinking.

fdd2blk said:
*unsubscribed.
Click to expand...
Just a bit too late. You've already killed everything. Thanks.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
jigfresh said:
Are you serious? I'm not dumb, and I didn't know you were being sarcastic.

You act like all of US are the drama queens.

It's like you are courting our sympathy by degrading yourself... then when it is given you bash the people that gave it as idiots.

So basically everyone on RIU is DUMB (except you of course becuase you were just kidding). Nice how that works out.

C'mon man.

People were calling out RickWhite by name and he didn't get this upset, and here we are trying to say your grow was pretty awesome. Take a page from the Ricker... let it roll off your back.

Life must be fucking hard being like that. :wall:
Click to expand...

see your first mistake is, I'm not upset. :bigjoint:



i posted a pic but didn't want to discuss it because you all were on the drama before i even came in. then i CLEARLY stated "i suck". then people went on to tell me how i suck. i found it all rather FUNNY.

i have no idea why you feel i'm upset. i'm rather amused.


the LAST thing i need is your sympathy. :roll: i really do suck indoors and i have the ego to admit it.
 
cerberus

cerberus

Well-Known Member
.. . but seriusly, how about those verticle grows? Those things seem like an interesting topic, maybe we could go away from all the drama queen bullshit and disscuss how the extra found space requires more light, or how do you guys find watering these systems? (fdd's system looked like a bitch to water!)


simma down now people!


p.s. this is not directed at anyone, I am not a mod, I just don't care to much for flaming each other. If I want to get in a fight with someone, well I'm Irish and I know a good number of bars within walking distance to accomodate me.. not here please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top