A Closet Grower-Envirolite

sicknasty said:
Part of it too I believe is the shape of that grow box. If someone could come out with one that allowed you to put the main buds at the focal point of an elliptical box with the CFL's at the other point, you could probably greatly increase effeciency. Would this help negate the inverse function of light greatly diminishing with distance? I would like someone with physics background to chime in.

People would probably buy this in a heart beat as it could be made extremely cheap molded plastic. just like rubbermaids. plants might need rotation but it might work.

sorry for hijacking I figure this is the best place though to discuss considering your going to come back.
Click to expand...

Light doesn't diminish over a distance, the same amount of light has to cover a larger surface area the farther it is away from an object perpendicular to the source.

If your light is 1 ft. above the object it will project its light over 1 sq. ft. of area. Math dictates that all of the light will be projected to this 1 sq. ft. of area. If the source is 2 ft. from the object then the same amount of light will be spread over 4 sq. ft. of area. 1/4 of the light per sq. ft. To maintain the same amount of light per sq. ft. you will need 4 times the initial light to cover 4 sq. ft.

E = I/r*r

That is, Illuminance (E) equals Pointance (I) devided by Distance (r) squared. The Illuminance is the light avaible on an object per sq. ft., Pointance is the initial light (source), and Distance (r) is how far (in any measurement; ft., M, ect.) the Pointance (source) is from a perpendicular object.

Note: The sun, on average, produces 10,500 Lumens per square foot on Earth. Mercury recieves 9 times that much light energy per sq. ft. because it is closer.

:blsmoke:

Enigma
 
Dude thanks for the lesson,that lets me know exactly why my shit is doing so damb good[55,000lums and it is all 2" away].

thanks man.
 
Enigma said:
Light doesn't diminish over a distance, the same amount of light has to cover a larger surface area the farther it is away from an object perpendicular to the source.

If your light is 1 ft. above the object it will project its light over 1 sq. ft. of area. Math dictates that all of the light will be projected to this 1 sq. ft. of area. If the source is 2 ft. from the object then the same amount of light will be spread over 4 sq. ft. of area. 1/4 of the light per sq. ft. To maintain the same amount of light per sq. ft. you will need 4 times the initial light to cover 4 sq. ft.

E = I/r*r

That is, Illuminance (E) equals Pointance (I) devided by Distance (r) squared. The Illuminance is the light avaible on an object per sq. ft., Pointance is the initial light (source), and Distance (r) is how far (in any measurement; ft., M, ect.) the Pointance (source) is from a perpendicular object.

Note: The sun, on average, produces 10,500 Lumens per square foot on Earth. Mercury recieves 9 times that much light energy per sq. ft. because it is closer.

:blsmoke:

Enigma
Click to expand...
Yippeee!!!!
 
Enigma said:
Light doesn't diminish over a distance, the same amount of light has to cover a larger surface area the farther it is away from an object perpendicular to the source.

If your light is 1 ft. above the object it will project its light over 1 sq. ft. of area. Math dictates that all of the light will be projected to this 1 sq. ft. of area. If the source is 2 ft. from the object then the same amount of light will be spread over 4 sq. ft. of area. 1/4 of the light per sq. ft. To maintain the same amount of light per sq. ft. you will need 4 times the initial light to cover 4 sq. ft.

E = I/r*r

That is, Illuminance (E) equals Pointance (I) devided by Distance (r) squared. The Illuminance is the light avaible on an object per sq. ft., Pointance is the initial light (source), and Distance (r) is how far (in any measurement; ft., M, ect.) the Pointance (source) is from a perpendicular object.

Note: The sun, on average, produces 10,500 Lumens per square foot on Earth. Mercury recieves 9 times that much light energy per sq. ft. because it is closer.

:blsmoke:

Enigma
Click to expand...

Thanks Enigma, that's the first time I've seen anyone introduce an equation into there post.:mrgreen: I enjoyed reading that, any scientific discussion on my thread is welcome. I think a key thing to remember, is that the sun's light does not suffer the same from the ISL at relative distances, than artificial lights. One, the Sun is obviously a lot more powerful, but it's also a lot further away, so the small distances around your foliage isn't going to make the slightest difference, as the light has already travelled 150 million miles, approx. As garden knowm Say's in his book, there should be a cfl an inch away from every leaf for optimal results.
 
Titania said:
Thanks Enigma, that's the first time I've seen anyone introduce an equation into there post.:mrgreen: I enjoyed reading that, any scientific discussion on my thread is welcome. I think a key thing to remember, is that the sun's light does not suffer the same from the ISL at relative distances, than artificial lights. One, the Sun is obviously a lot more powerful, but it's also a lot further away, so the small distances around your foliage isn't going to make the slightest difference, as the light has already travelled 150 million miles, approx. As garden knowm Say's in his book, there should be a cfl an inch away from every leaf for optimal results.
Click to expand...

Others have - including myself (breaks arm patting own back)
 
Week 3 of flowering here.

I've put the blue enviro horizontally, and lower down to help the lower foliage. I'm pleased at how the new growth is coming along, except on 1 plant, the lowest new leaves are going yellow. Nothing major, but it's not a healthy sign. I certainly haven't been over watering them as I learnt my lesson from that earlier on in the grow, it could be N def? They only effect the older leaves though right?

getting some trichome formation on the top 3 nodes:hump:, but the shitty camera I've got doesn't reveal it.

I've accidentally only given them 8 hours light for the last 2 days, and it's possibly why the pistils have shot out.

They're loving the CO2 in my opinion, noticed faster growth, although that may just be natural. I spray the CO2 on a frozen tea cloth, to form dry ice, the cold tea cloth slows the evaporation. I've been feeling a little light headed lately, but that could just be down to the fact I was ill, hehehe.

That's all folks.:mrgreen::blsmoke::mrgreen:
 
ok here they are...
 

Attachments

  • 100_0777.jpg
    100_0777.jpg
    75.9 KB · Views: 64
  • 100_0776.jpg
    100_0776.jpg
    69.5 KB · Views: 96
  • 100_0775.jpg
    100_0775.jpg
    65.7 KB · Views: 94
  • 100_0774.jpg
    100_0774.jpg
    57.3 KB · Views: 68
email468 said:
Others have - including myself (breaks arm patting own back)
Click to expand...

I've seen your posts.. more information in half of one of them than any of mine put together.

Keep it up!

:blsmoke:

Titania said:
Thanks Enigma, that's the first time I've seen anyone introduce an equation into there post.:mrgreen: I enjoyed reading that, any scientific discussion on my thread is welcome. I think a key thing to remember, is that the sun's light does not suffer the same from the ISL at relative distances, than artificial lights. One, the Sun is obviously a lot more powerful, but it's also a lot further away, so the small distances around your foliage isn't going to make the slightest difference, as the light has already travelled 150 million miles, approx. As garden knowm Say's in his book, there should be a cfl an inch away from every leaf for optimal results.
Click to expand...


The Sun is not exempt from the Inverse Square Law.


Titania said:
Week 3 of flowering here.

I've put the blue enviro horizontally, and lower down to help the lower foliage. I'm pleased at how the new growth is coming along, except on 1 plant, the lowest new leaves are going yellow. Nothing major, but it's not a healthy sign. I certainly haven't been over watering them as I learnt my lesson from that earlier on in the grow, it could be N def? They only effect the older leaves though right?

getting some trichome formation on the top 3 nodes:hump:, but the shitty camera I've got doesn't reveal it.

I've accidentally only given them 8 hours light for the last 2 days, and it's possibly why the pistils have shot out.

They're loving the CO2 in my opinion, noticed faster growth, although that may just be natural. I spray the CO2 on a frozen tea cloth, to form dry ice, the cold tea cloth slows the evaporation. I've been feeling a little light headed lately, but that could just be down to the fact I was ill, hehehe.

That's all folks.:mrgreen::blsmoke::mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Nitrogen deficiencies are common in NEW growth, not old growth. If there is yellowing at the bottom fan leaves consider removing the bottom 1/3 of fan leaves. This will keep the plant from expending energy (carbohydrates) on those leaves attempting to heal them. This will redirect all available energy to the fruits and upper branches.

The yellowing is the lack of chlorophyl due to lack of light, correct me if I'm wrong here.

In my experience, everything from the bottom 1/3 should be removed if flowering one entire plant. This will direct the energy to the top where the light is most concentrated.

For example: if you see leaves or buds forming on the lower 1/3 of the plant, remove them. The light is coming from the top (cola) so the top will generate more fruit if the plant does not expend energy producing near the bottom.

Simply, photosynthesis!

:blsmoke:

Enigma
 
Titania said:
And some more...:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

To support my previous claim.

Look at your second picture.

Do you notice how much shading the top fan leaves are producing?

The lower leave are droopy compared to the top ones. This is because of the position of the light. If you had.. say three of those CFL's positioned: one at top, one on either side. Then you shouldn't have such a problem.

Since you are using just one, consider pruning the lower 1/3. Starting at the bottom up, slowly so you don't stress the plant. Take a few one day, let the plant rest for a few days then take a few more. After the pruning is complete (1/3) you should notice a difference in growth.

:blsmoke:

Enigma
 
It is also nice to trim up the lower part because cleaning all those little buds is kind of a pain if you don't have any help.
 
Quote: Enigma

The Sun is not exempt from the Inverse Square Law.



I didn't say that, I said at distances from the top of a plant to the bottom, the amount of light dilution is negligable, for outdoor plants.
 
Enigma said:
To support my previous claim.

Look at your second picture.

Do you notice how much shading the top fan leaves are producing?

The lower leave are droopy compared to the top ones. This is because of the position of the light. If you had.. say three of those CFL's positioned: one at top, one on either side. Then you shouldn't have such a problem.

Since you are using just one, consider pruning the lower 1/3. Starting at the bottom up, slowly so you don't stress the plant. Take a few one day, let the plant rest for a few days then take a few more. After the pruning is complete (1/3) you should notice a difference in growth.

:blsmoke:

Enigma
Click to expand...


I'm using two cfl's, 1 125w blue spectrum, and 1 200w red. The red's on top, with the blue on the side, you can see it on the pic, it's giving optimal light levels for the lower foliage. I just rotate them every day. I've already trimmed the older leaves that were blocking light, but I'm not after 1 fat cola, I want an evenly developed plant.
my dog helped out on the trimming, when I left the room after I had taken the latest pics, the bastard bit a chunk out of a few leaves!:evil:
 
email468 said:
It is also nice to trim up the lower part because cleaning all those little buds is kind of a pain if you don't have any help.
Click to expand...


That may be the case in with your 16 ounces, but trimming my expected 25g from both will only take 5 min.:mrgreen::blsmoke::mrgreen: How much of that harvest have you still got btw?:joint:
 
lookin sweet mate, im gonna flower mine at a bit higher than yours, but mines in a reflective grow tent so shouldnt need too much movement on the light situation.

this journal is spot on and the comments and arguments are great with a noticeable lack of twats :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top