1g per watt question

[That 5hit]

Oh snap! Those look like 600's to me, maybe a 2.5'-3'W x 2.5'-3'L closet with a 6' high ceiling leaving..37.5-54 ft of growing area. cut the diff and say 42 feet. I am thinking squared since it is really three flat surfaces (maybe four for the viewers wall but lets assume there is not one) (2*600) 1200 /42 = 29 watts per sq/ft.. this is where fatman is suggesting you have a slower grow time, since they are getting 20watts a sqaure and we were all taught that 40 a square is best.. hmmmmm.. still fascinates the shit out of me and I can't get around the cleverness.

I think Fatman has a point on the kWH hours used rather than the wattage on the bulb, but everyone keeps talking about the veg like it will take time from the flowering which I don't understand.. 2 rooms right?

i think that fatman is just over computing everthing, sure he's right, but also he's wrong he compute it so that he is right but then he closes his mind off to seeing anyone elses point, its like he's just waiting for his turn to speck- even you and i can see his point but he makes no effort to seeing anyone else point thats his down side and that going to lead him to many of arguements he's the type of guy that argues the opposite view just because there is one not because it right or wrong - if everyone is going right he'll say we can get there if we go left - now ive prove my point left and right with actual facts and veiwable evedence
but he only writes big brain math. theres a lot more factors that goes in to a grow then math, yeah he's smart and the shit he talks sounds gr8, very impressive. but talk is cheap
test it
2 grows: start with the same bulb wattage and type, same strain, same grow system (soil or hydro) and start from clones - one grow is hor. with the foot print full - the other is vert with every surrounding area full,,, now grow this way tell this same date next year - its guaranteed that the vert will out proform the hor. each time
WHY,,,, simple, because you can fit more plants in a vert then under a hor- and i dont need to post crazy no. to see that

3455%465^^$33/$$***33(567)= bullshit
more (plants) = more ($$$$)

 

[resinraider]

it doesnt make sense to me with the grams per watt ratio, if you take 2 of the same plants with the same veg and flower wattage. But you veg one plant a month longer than the other then the plant vegged longer should be the superior yeilder right? So really it depends on how long you veg for with the wattage

well most ppl fill there room.. no point growing 2 plants under a 1000 when u could fit 10 more in... 1g per wat is what u want to achive by maximizing ur grow room... ur nor jus gonna grow 1gram/wt.. u gotta make it happen

 

[guitarjon]

Yea I think the 1g/watt is what professional growers get. If ur aiming at this target at the beginning of your grow you will be really disappointed. Aim low, especially if you're a beginning grower so when u harvest u wont be so disappointed.

 

[WhateverOne]

really 1 gram a watt is long forgotten... If u get that much your doing great (just like me i get about +-900 of 2 hps 400w lamps but the one harvest is not the other)
but everything changed since nasa researched theyr LED lams... Before the really pros would get about 2G a watt but those are people who have major grow facilities..
Now with the right LED lamp u can have the effect of an 400w hps with only about 100w of current... the lumes also don't count on led lamps because with white light (produced from HPS for instance) the white light is not as effectively taken up by the plants, in fact white spectrum of light is the slowest one to be taken... This we all knew before-> the red and blue spectrum are the best absorbed light spectrum's for not only marijuana plants but practically all plants around the world (tough the best % of blue and red varies from different plants) So this means by using half the number of Watts U can get a bigger and better harvest...
I dont have these LED lamps yet but 2 of my fellow friend growers have an their results are quite nice, can't give any numbers yet (1 in veggie status and 1 currently blooming but looking verry nice!) This achieved with less than half the wattage used by me.. really nice!! Also nasa is researching some kind of magnetron lamp with is more comparable with HPS light... Both the LED's and magnetron lamps got a verrrrrry long life duration compared to hps.. To be efficient HPS lamps should be replaced the next year if constantly used... And we all know the life duration of LED's!! verry interesting material..
But anywayz 1 or even 2 grams/w is no more the goal... We all can do better with the right technology, And technology doesn't sit still!!
Further more the G/W is based upon flowering lamps since one plant can be aether in the flower room nor bloom room at the same time and in most cases the blooming room has the highest amount of Watts
Also having your plants bloom longer than required will not produce significant more harvest an the quality will diminish more the longer you wait to harvest when about 90% of the THC threads (the white threads will become brown) has turned to brown...
This is because the plant then begins to use thc stored in the buds to produce another chemical.. but I forgot the name...
So overdoing your bloom duration will only cost you extra electricity and lesser buds...

Read above and think again...

 

[That 5hit]

more then one light verts
[youtube]GPslDuuA_5o[/youtube][youtube]EBDgWYKGUjo[/youtube]

 

[homegrown2009]

you should be able to pull a little over 2 pounds per 1000 watt hps light the only thing is you have to have evertying in check to the tee co2 nute temp humdi water schedule how close the lights can be to the canpoy it takes alot of time and prtacie but is very possibale i have ghetto riddged ebb and flow system 10 to 12 palnts and i am pulling over a pound crispy dry easy its really all come down to exprince and trail and error

 

[fatman7574]

you should be able to pull a little over 2 pounds per 1000 watt hps light the only thing is you have to have evertying in check to the tee co2 nute temp humdi water schedule how close the lights can be to the canpoy it takes alot of time and prtacie but is very possibale i have ghetto riddged ebb and flow system 10 to 12 palnts and i am pulling over a pound crispy dry easy its really all come down to exprince and trail and error

As 2 pounds is less than 1000 grams that would appear an obvious assumption. The trick though is did it take less than 1000 kWh of lighting power over the entire grow. It is power over the accumalted growing time not power used at specific instant. Otherwise your going to have growers who grow non auto strains that veg for monts and bud for months under a 1000 watt light and say they got 4 grams per watt. When really they just got 1 gram per kWh stretched out over a longer period of time. 4 times the bud at 4 times the kWh's used is still the same yield not 4 times the yield per watt which is meaningless.

 

[svchop889]

the sun is still free, wind is free, rain is free, cow shit and compost can be free, so space limitations outside you can top and lst to your hearts desire and not run out of space.

 

[RickWhite]

A standard 13 week grow with 2 weeks X 18 hours @ 400W and 8 weeks X 12 hours @ 1000W would consume 772 KWH. At 1g/KWH would = 27.3oz / KWH

I don't see any reason one couldn't grow 27, 1oz plants under a 1000W light using a light mover. Using 2 600W or 3 400W lights with light movers could probably produce twice that amount.

Perhaps what we are seeing with this trend is that there is a huge benefit in spreading light over a greater distance regardless of how it is accomplished. I was recently looking at a standard SOG using a light mover and I was envisioning what the setup would look like if the tubs were arranged into a vert setup instead of a horizontal. It looked like the same number of plants would recieve half as much light for twice as long. In other words, it would essentialy be the same.

The difference would be the vert system picks up maybe 5% otherwise lost by the reflector. The flat system produced less shading. Based on the massive shading I have seen from vert growing, I'll take the 5% loss.

 

[greenyield]

the market standard is 1 gram per watt. the kwh consumed is irrelevant because the aim is to hit 1 gram per watt.
i use close to 1 kwh with normal day to day electricity plus 1 600 watter which could make a 2week 18/6 and 8 week 12/12 cost in the region of 924kwh and that would need me to hit 1.92 grams per watt.

like i said, the growing community use the 1 gram per watt as a standard achievable target.

 

[fatman7574]

the market standard is 1 gram per watt. the kwh consumed is irrelevant because the aim is to hit 1 gram per watt.
i use close to 1 kwh with normal day to day electricity plus 1 600 watter which could make a 2week 18/6 and 8 week 12/12 cost in the region of 924kwh and that would need me to hit 1.92 grams per watt.

like i said, the growing community use the 1 gram per watt as a standard achievable target.

Just because the growing community has used an inadequate and quite illrelevant method for a long time to judge an achieveable yield target does not mean it should still be used or beconsidered the best method when it is so meaning less as a basis to judge a grows adequacy or performance based upon other grows. A comparison should be a comparison of apples verus apples not apples versus oranges. kWh puts the basis on an even level direct comparison of apples versus apples. The amount of lighting electrical power used (kWh's) by all lighting set ups should be based upon efficiency of total power used not just the wattage of the lights used during budding. A kWh comparison allow one to compare CFC sytems to halides or to T-5's or too different combinations of wahtever lighting anyone uses. That is a clear fair comparison. If a person can get 1 gram per kwh hour out of a CFC grow I will be impressed. But a grow of 1 gram per 2 kwh would not be impressive if the grow was done with HID 1000 watt lights.

Lets say two different grows produce 1000 grams each and they both used 1000 watt lights for budding. They s used different hours of light and diffferent size lights for vegging. Example #1: (2 weeks* 7 days/week* 16 hours/day * 400 watts /1000 W/kWh)+(6 weeks* 7 days/week* 12 hours/day * 1000 watts /1000 W/kWh) =593 kWh. Grow #2: (3 weeks* 7 days/week* 16 hours/day * 1000 watts /1000 W/kWh)+(10 weeks* 7 days/week* 12 hours/day * 1000 watts /1000 W/kWh)= 974 kwh. Grow #1 produced the same anmount but used only 593 kWh, while Grow #2 used 974 kWh to produce thre same yield.

Your trying to say it should be entirely based upon the light sized used for budding. Well both used 1000 watt lights for budding and both produced 1000 grams. By your standards they are equal grows as they both produced 1 gram per watt. There is the huge diffference in that Grow #1 only used 593 kWh while grow #2 used 974 kWh for the same yield. Now how is that a sign of equal yields, equal performance or equal costs? (593/974)*100=60.88%. That means grow #2 got 60.88% of the yield as grow #1 for the same 1000 watts used for budding. I really think gram per kWh is a much better way to judge a grow.

 

[That 5hit]

Just because the growing community used an inadquate and quite illrelevant method for a long time does to judge an achieveable yield target does not mean it should still be used when it is so meaning less as a basis to judge a grows adequacy or performance based upon other grows. A comaparison should be a comparison of apples verus apples not apples versus oranges. kWh puts the basis on an even level direct comparison level of apples versus apples. The amount of lighting electrical power used all lighting set ups absed upon efficiency of use not size of lights. A kWh comparison allow s one to compare CFC sytems to halides or to T-5's or too different combinations. That is a clear fair comparison. If a person can get 1 gram per kwh hour out of a CFC grow I will be impressed. But a grow of 1 gram per 2 kwh would not be impressive if the grow was done with HID 1000 watt lights.

Lets say two different grows produce 1000 grams each and they both used 1000 watt lights for budding. They s used different hours of light and diffferent size lights for vegging. Example #1: (2 weeks* 7 days/week* 16 hours/day * 400 watts /1000 W/kWh)+(6 weeks* 7 days/week* 12 hours/day * 1000 watts /1000 W/kWh) =593 kWh. Grow #2: (3 weeks* 7 days/week* 16 hours/day * 1000 watts /1000 W/kWh)+(10 weeks* 7 days/week* 12 hours/day * 1000 watts /1000 W/kWh)= 974 kwh. Grow #1 produced the same anmount but used only 593 kWh, while Grow #2 used 974 kWh to produce thre same yield.

Your trying to say it should be entirely based upon the light sized used for budding. Well both used 1000 watt lights for budding and both produced 1000 grams. By your standrads they are equal grows as they both produced 1 gram per watt. There is the huge diffference in that Grow #1 only used 593 kWh while grow #2 used 974 kWh for the same yield. Now how is that a sign of equal yields., equal performance or equal costs? (593/974)*100=60.88%. That means grow #2 got 60.88% of the yield as grow #2 for the same. I really think gram per kWh is a much better way to judge a grow.

your not going to change anything
everyones kwh price our diff. so it is ezer to say gpw then gpkwh
type of equipment also effects kwh and voltage
if your aguement mad any sence
someone could argue the fact the sence the price of bud in my area is more then yours
then that means i have a more better grow then yours
if weed cost 10 a gram there and you grow 100g
but weed cost 20 a gram here and all i have to grow is 50g to = your grow
and if i grow 100g then i have a beter grow then you even though we grew the same amount

 

[fatman7574]

your not going to change anything
everyones kwh price our diff. so it is ezer to say gpw then gpkwh
type of equipment also effects kwh and voltage
if your aguement mad any sence
someone could argue the fact the sence the price of bud in my area is more then yours
then that means i have a more better grow then yours
if weed cost 10 a gram there and you grow 100g
but weed cost 20 a gram here and all i have to grow is 50g to = your grow
and if i grow 100g then i have a beter grow then you even though we grew the same amount

You are a strange thinker. The amount of kWh is a way of basing your efficiency in realtion to the most expensive port of a grow under lights. KWh of electricity used for lighting during the entire cycle. The local cost for electrical power per kWh only dictates the cost of the power you use it says nothing about the efficiency of the sytem your growing your pot in. However, the yield per kWh is a true way of calculating the lighting efficiency of your grow period. What you are selling the pot for has nothing to do with the efficiency of your grow operation only the cost. You can not change the cost your electrical provider charges you but you can cahnge the efiiciency of how that opwer uis used. that is why a grow should be based upon grams per kwh. Now I remember why I put you on ignore. Your now going right back on it.

 

[RickWhite]

Guys, all of this is off base.

What matters for most of us (with plant number restrictions) is how much yield you get per plant based on the shortest feasible growing time and least possible floor space since a light of a given size is limited to a given floor space.

First, we all need to agree that the shorter you keep the plants the more overall yield you will get. The reasons are most harvests in shortest time, no wasted growth & light distance. People who grow bigger plants simply aren't interested in maximizing production or just don't get it.

Once everyone is on the same page with that, we can discuss which arrangement has which benefits. Now I think if we were to plot a graph of plant size (area covered) and yield, the maximum point would be under 2' tall and around 1oz per plant. Smaller might be even more efficient but then you are dealing with high plant numbers. I think about 18" X 18" of floor space or less, maybe even 1' square and 1oz per plant is ideal.

Now, the question is what are the benefits of a vertical vs a horizontal setup. 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. A light mover can expand a horizontal to 10' X 4' about 80% of the vertical. So the vert does have an edge when it comes to area. The vert also has a slight edge in what is lost by a reflector in the horizontal.

The benefits of the horizontal are first obviously the hassle free setup. The hor also has the benefit of lighting from the top which maximizes the light exposure of each plant as it receives light on all sides. The hor with a light mover also allows the light to be much closer to the plants and to be adjusted according to growth.

In the end, my intuition tells me that while the vert has some advantages, there is no escaping the physics of light. While the vert picks up some growing area, the same could be achieved by simply raising the light in the hor to cover more area. Unfortunately, light diminishes with the square of the distance. So increased area probably just translates into less lumens per sq foot. The fact that the light is further away only makes this worse. Also, lighting the plant from the side produces more shaded plant area than from the top. I don't know how much is lost here but I suspect it is significant.

I do find the concept of the vertical grow intriguing, but until more people do it I think I will stick with a regular SOG.

 

[ledgrowing]

yo i dont get this threas r u guys really pulling a gram per watt in flower room? eg 1000watt hps =1000grams? wow i use 1000watt lights for flowering i have never only harvested 1000g if i did i wouldnt grow i use lst and topping methods my last crop dried weight under one 1000watt hps dual spectrum yeilded 1991grams dry so what the f@*k are you guys doing so different from me to get such tiny yeilds as far as effeincy is concerned sorry about the spelling

 

[cerberus]

yo i dont get this threas r u guys really pulling a gram per watt in flower room? eg 1000watt hps =1000grams? wow i use 1000watt lights for flowering i have never only harvested 1000g if i did i wouldnt grow i use lst and topping methods my last crop dried weight under one 1000watt hps dual spectrum yeilded 1991grams dry so what the f@*k are you guys doing so different from me to get such tiny yeilds as far as effeincy is concerned sorry about the spelling

I am sorry I don't buy it, seriously I don't mean to offend but your claiming a 71oz yield or a 4.44 lbs yield from a 1000 watter under a standard SOG?

lets figure your getting 35 watts per sq foot (which is not ideal, 40 would be ideal) 1000/35 = 28.5 sq feet. 1991/28.5 = 69.8 grams per square foot. now lets say your doing 4 plans per square, 69.8/4 = 17.4 grams per plant... (3 is more typical which comes to 23 grams per plant!)

17.4 grams per plant, using a 4 plant/per square foot @ 35 watts, is pretty fucking good..
so its either
or
kiss-ass

 

[That 5hit]

gpkh vers gpw

someone explain fatboys reasons for wanting everyone to give a kwh reading instead of a gpw reading
i just dont understand him
is he thinking you have to grow longer because the system is vert meaning your useing more power
if this is what he's thinking hes wrong
once you pull the clones from the mother you could put it right into flower in the vert
i dont understand why he think the light bulb works harder in a vert then a hor.
can someone breakdown his reasoning into ezer understandable terms for me -exsplain it to me asif i were 10 year old-

i cant understand why he does not see that a vert yeilds more then a hor
anything you do with a hor you could do with a vert. a hor is limited to one side of the light and the vert uses all sides to me thats my explaination on why a vert yeilds more then a hor. grams pw or grams pkwh

 

[cerberus]

As I understand it, He is saying the kWH becasue it takes into acount the entire grows elect. use. If your counting only the bulb size of your flowering room you are not figureing on your electricity used but you are comparing just to bulb size.

dig; your vegging room takes elec. to grow but this room is not even used in figuriing your wpg ratio. secondly : your flowering time could be different than others (probably is) so a guy that flowered a heavy indica for 7 weeks used less elec than a guy with a heavy sativa burning the light for 10-11 weeks.

Now what I believe he is trying to say in regards to the vert grow is, a plant will mature faster under more light. (ex: strain X will be ready to pick at 10 weeks under 400 watts but under 1000 watts it will only take 8-9 weeks) so the space saved from the vert grow becomes a washout when compared to reg grows when you spread it out over a year (several back to back) grows. This fact I don't know about, do plants grow FASTER under more lights? I know they grow more dence <shrug>

I believe thats his point of view.

I still believe the vert grow is pretty fucking clever and with tweeking (maybe a 1000 watter on some yo-yo style light mover?) it can produce more for less, it just intuitivly seems more efficent.

 

[That 5hit]

As I understand it, He is saying the kWH becasue it takes into acount the entire grows elect. use. If your counting only the bulb size of your flowering room you are not figureing on your electricity used but you are comparing just to bulb size.

dig; your vegging room takes elec. to grow but this room is not even used in figuriing your wpg ratio. secondly : your flowering time could be different than others (probably is) so a guy that flowered a heavy indica for 7 weeks used less elec than a guy with a heavy sativa burning the light for 10-11 weeks.

Now what I believe he is trying to say in regards to the vert grow is, a plant will mature faster under more light. (ex: strain X will be ready to pick at 10 weeks under 400 watts but under 1000 watts it will only take 8-9 weeks) so the space saved from the vert grow becomes a washout when compared to reg grows when you spread it out over a year (several back to back) grows. This fact I don't know about, do plants grow FASTER under more lights? I know they grow more dence <shrug>

I believe thats his point of view.

I still believe the vert grow is pretty fucking clever and with tweeking (maybe a 1000 watter on some yo-yo style light mover?) it can produce more for less, it just intuitivly seems more efficent.

and this is my point as well
i do think that a vert grow out proforms a hor grow
theres no vert rule thats says you hve to veg long, or not use a 1k light, or more then one light or light mover

in my mind a vert grow is just a hoodless hor grow with plants on all sides- if you think of a light as having 4 sides then a hor. light with a hood is only useing 1/4 of its potential, there's three other sides that you could be using to grow buds "efficiency"
so if you growing 9 plants in a hor. grow system a vert could do 9 on all 4 sides of the lights =ing 36 plants
so while fatty is harvesting his 9 plants i will be harveting 36 plants
4x as much bud

 

[cerberus]

in my mind a vert grow is just a hoodless hor grow with plants on all sides- if you think of a light as having 4 sides then a hor. light with a hood is only useing 1/4 of its potential, there's three other sides that you could be using to grow buds "efficiency"
so if you growing 9 plants in a hor. grow system a vert could do 9 on all 4 sides of the lights =ing 36 plants
so while fatty is harvesting his 9 plants i will be harveting 36 plants
4x as much bud

well the light does reflect back down to the plants I don't know about 1/4 effcient, but I do believe you get more sq footage available..

say a 400 watter (400/40=10) gives you 10 square feet (3.3x3.3) for a grow (if your going for a 40watts a sqaure foot) but with a verticle you should have more room. Again I would not say 4 times as much room, becasue there will be limitations on how the light gets spread with out a hood, but lets say 2 times as much available space.. still pretty good.

Its tough for me becasue I am not math wiz and the HOR grow is a flat surface (square) while the vert grow is a diameter surface, I am no wiz at figuring inside a tube surface area.. <shrug>

I studied other things in college.. girls, beer, weed, the inside of holding cells but they are square..