Real world Hi-Pressure Aeroponics

A

Atomizer

Well-Known Member
PetFlora said:


Some of the 'T'-HPA growers are growing trees, but to be TRUE to TAG, a 6ft tree requires at least a 6ft deep pod: roots grow as long as the plant is tall.Your room would need to be ~ 18ft tall and you would need stilts (or scaffolding) to take care of it. And what about light penetration? To compensate for not having pods deep enough to let the roots hang freely (TAG), they install false-bottom silk screens onto which the roots collect. Although they say this does not change the definition of TAG, I disagree. If you are growing a 6 ft tree in a 3 ft pod, the pod will quickly look like a very large pot of spaghetti, and is likely to be several ft thick. How can such a mass absorb nutes as efficiently as when they hang correctly in free space? And further, especially due to the short atomized mist cycles, how much of the nutrients will actually reach into the root mass underneath the top layer, and what happens to the roots not getting fed properly...do they rot, dry out...? To me this compromise far outweighs mine.

hth
Click to expand...
Sounds like you`re still stuck in that rut of LP aero thinking. ;)
You shouldn`t get spaghetti roots and you shouldnt get a dense root mat on the floor of the chamber. The nutrients reach all the roots because its in the form of very fine mist that penetrates everywhere and because the roots are not compacted into a solid block by gallons of nutes. Even though you are doing much better than you were, you are still delivering 2.5x more mist per cycle than you need to for the chamber size. The excess will undoubtably end up on the floor of your chamber, leading to the very issues in your post.
One of these days you`ll weaken and buy an accumulator.. it`ll be interesting to see if your views are the same after you`ve done a couple of runs with one :)
 
PetFlora

PetFlora

Well-Known Member
If you are growing a 6 ft tree in a 3 ft deep pod you will wind up with 6 ft of roots that have no place to go but pile up in the pod. If I wasn't crystal clear, once you start piling up roots, most of the benefits of HPA are moot. Now if one is growing small plants in a pod sufficiently deep to accommodate the roots, then fine.
 
A

Atomizer

Well-Known Member
The roots fill the chamber volume but that doesn`t automatically mean that they are dense and impenetrable. The space inside a vertically orientated aero root mass is no different to horizontal, if you soak vertical roots they will still end up looking like a wet mop. You need to adjust your perception of space/gaps between roots down to a micron level not just what you can see with your eyes
 
PetFlora

PetFlora

Well-Known Member
Atomizer: First , I am confident that people using the silk screen compromise are still growing some amazing trees. I am seeing the best results with the input you have been so generous with: future grows will be even better. But seriously, if we are talking a couple inches of roots piling up in a ~ 20" diameter cylinder, no problem, there are still plenty of air gaps in between, but the thickness of roots from a 5-6ft tree, well...

If hanging in space, as in TAG, then the entire circumference gets misted; penetration into the layers below is assured, especially when using an accumulator to blast the nutes under True High Pressure, but the falling mist is reduced to a much smaller (and thicker) surface area. I have dealt with hammocking roots, and saw how wet the hammock stayed. Fast forward to mid-flowering, when the runoff pH and ppms begins to skyrocket, it has to drain through the pile of roots. I cannot get my mind around there being no discernible difference.

Personally, I could care less how anyone grows. Each should follow their Muse, but compromised or not, and this is hypothetical, but wouldn't a SOG of 15" (non lollipoped) girls on a 4 X 8 table yield as much or more due in part to greater light penetration, plus be easier to manage, manicure, harvest...?

IMHO, trees just don't seem to maximize indoor efficiency. Isn't that what HPA is about- efficiency?

hth
 
MediMary

MediMary

Well-Known Member
if you ever have a run it with cops, tell them you grow a lot of plants simply for efficiency ;)

a lot of folks who grow trees do it to keep their plant numbers down, and also like the challenge of growing large plants...

If you got 16 plants with one ounce on each of them,
or one plant with 16 ounces...
same amount of herb,

Huge difference in mandatory jail time, At least in my state
 
Mike Young

Mike Young

Well-Known Member
MediMary said:
if you ever have a run it with cops, tell them you grow a lot of plants simply for efficiency ;)

a lot of folks who grow trees do it to keep their plant numbers down, and also like the challenge of growing large plants...

If you got 16 plants with one ounce on each of them,
or one plant with 16 ounces...
same amount of herb,

Huge difference in mandatory jail time, At least in my state
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. I'm in that boat. And I think my 2 plants are alot easier to care for than 15 smaller plants.
 
PetFlora

PetFlora

Well-Known Member
MikeY: I went back a week, but did not see your pics.

I feel I need to clear something up about wet/dry cycles. I mentioned earlier that my plants were doing GREAT with 30 second wet cycle. I neglected to clarify that it was one plant, a female in early flower that I had to move to my starter system; same pump/mist heads but an IGE timer (30 second min ON time). She budded out great and under a UFO 90 LED, to boot. I kept a watchful eye on the roots, they did not grow any longer, though they did fill in to support bud development: As you can imagine there were no root hairs, but tons of tiny lateral roots. Would this plant have yielded better using a shorter cycle timer? She did everything her gentics allowed- Lowryder#2 X Bubblegum weighed in at 100gms with 3" of main stem. Curing now.

IMG_0797 (533x800).jpgIMG_0799 (533x800).jpg
 
stacatto99

stacatto99

Well-Known Member
deeweromekoms said:
The accumulator tank is rated up to 100 psi, but my system is maintained at ~45 psi by the on-demand pump.

Yaaaaaah..... relief valve........ figured w. that kinda pressure dont really need one. But that's just me. Or maybe I forgot, and I am just talking out of my ass.....;-)
If you want to be up to code (hahahaha) one should put it in.
Click to expand...
Ive got a question. I am trying a similar setup but higher pressure. I've got a 160psi pump and am wondering is the accumulator tank necessary? Is there a way around it?
 
dbkick

dbkick

Well-Known Member
old thread and I think I remember someone saying the accumulator was there so the pump didn't have to run as much. Not real clear to me . Plus the pump takes a moment or two to reach 160 psi without the accumulator it may not even reach that per cycle.
Only guessing here myself since I've done nothing hp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top