Vertical Grow
- Thread starter Lobo69
- Start date
Lobo69
Active Member
C'mon...there's got to be some vertical growers viewing this
Anyone?
fatman7574
New Member
A vertical grow such as that in your supplied link is based upon a few different things. 1) The lack of a need for a reflector so there is no loss to a reflectors inefficiencies (absorbance of light as heat). Even very quality reflectors (which few growers use) eat up 5 to 15 percent of the light that shines on them. 2) The fact that a tube sends the majority of its light perpendicular to its length but some out the end of its tube so the vertical height can be greater than the bulbs length. 3) All light will be direct rather than a weaker diffused light (however there will be a hotter band of stronger PAR usually directly perpendicular to the bulbs center due to bulb geometry). 3) All plants are nearly an equal distance from bulb so receiving the same amount of light. 4) A short plant SOG grow such as the link you directed us to needs less than 60 watts per square foot as the light does not have travel the distance needed with a taller plant in a horizontal bed so the intensity need no be as high. The SOG vertical you linked to is only supplying about 16 watts per square foot average to the grow area if the inside diameter of the area is 4 feet. 5) A vertical SOG will experience some terminal tip caused growing changes do to the light not being above the terminal tip not experienced by a common SOG.
Horizontal SOG with short plants also do well with lower watts per square foot than taller plant grown at say 1 per square foot where 50 to 60 watts per square foot is the standard.
You have two things to consider. 1) A vertical grow is dependant on plants being nearly at an equal distance around the bulb. This makes the round grow the most efficient, as his theoretically assures an equal amount of light to all plants on the same horizontal plane. There will always be a difference between the light received in different horizontal planes due to bulb geometry. 2) With a cooled tube using air cooling you will be able to run cooler reservoir temps which is nice also cooler room air temps so CO2 is not needed. However you need not really get the plants closer unless you wat to try to run faster cycles, but in doing this you create a greater need for CO2 and higher levels of DO in your water. 3) IMHO this type system could not take more light without having a problemdo to too little DO in the water, but I have no proof of that just a basic scintific understanding that roots like more CO2 when pressed into faster growth through more lighting and therefore more CO2 and nutrients. 4) the system you linked to just happens to be tuned well in that its needs are met at present light levels. 5) incraesing the light levels in a rectangular grow will not work as well with a single larger bulb as the system is set up for as described a round grow where alldistances are nearly the same distance from the bulb. 6) a rectangular grow with a larger bulb would require that the grow width be larger and it would mean that the ends of the grow would get significantly less light than those in the middle so the growth rates and budding rates woud differ. 7) In essence if you want a system where yu can run it as it is run in the other system but wisg to use a larger bulb you need to increase the diameter so that you are providing the same lighting parameter. This however gets complicated as the decrease in lih ghting in PAR is exponential not linear so you will have a decreasing efficiency as the circle gets larger. If the decrease was linera then it would be simple: (diameter) *(pi)*(height) = ((watts light)/(watts needed per square foot)) therefore Diameter = ((watts light)/(watts needed per square foot))/((pi)*(height)) so (1000/16)/(3.1416*3) = 6.63 feet However this does not account for the drop off in PAR at greater distances so likely you would have to pretty much know what the PAR reading is in the links set up and see what distance from the bulb will supply the same PAR. Even a rectangular grow with two bulbs would not behave the same as providing the same PAR every where would really not be possible without fine tuning particular to the bulbs output with the ballast used to determine the distance between the two bulbs.
All in all the links grow works well due to its balance. Each alteration would require finding the new balance particular to its own parmater needs in relation to the lighting PAR received. IMHO finding the sweet spot for a system that is basically the same but smaller in diameter or larger in diameter would not be that hard as long as it is a low temperature system as is the system in the link. As the temperature is increased everything can change dramatically in an adverse way due to increased needs for a higher DO (not practical), higher CO2 needs and higher PAR to match the higher temps and higher DO needs as said before is impractical so now wr ere changing toan aero or hydro system in a vertical grow which just greatly increases problems with hydro and costs with aero. Then we also get into all the issues such as humidity and such that are not an issue with lightly lit, cooler systems with constant ventilation.
I believe omeone was trashed earlier for bringing up the obvoious potential DO problem with a system such as this. Just because this particular grower g has curcomvented the potentila problem due to having a balnace between all the parameters in a cool runninng system definitely does not mean problem due to low Do wil not obviously beconme a problem at higher temps especialy if those higher temps are also in conjunction with the same system being kicked up a few notches with more intense lighting, a sealed room with CO2, higher temps and higher nutrient needs. IMHO a constantly running water system would fail due ti inadequate DO in my opinion under the tweaked vertical system needed due to incraesed lighting as there would be no balance possible due to low DO water. It would obviously take more than disinfection to handle the problem of inadeqaute DO. Aero systems were developed due to the need for increased oxygen in the root system area needed in fast grow systems induced by utilizing higher temps caused by intense lighting by balancing it with CO2 supplementation, increased water and increased nutrients.
Horizontal SOG with short plants also do well with lower watts per square foot than taller plant grown at say 1 per square foot where 50 to 60 watts per square foot is the standard.
You have two things to consider. 1) A vertical grow is dependant on plants being nearly at an equal distance around the bulb. This makes the round grow the most efficient, as his theoretically assures an equal amount of light to all plants on the same horizontal plane. There will always be a difference between the light received in different horizontal planes due to bulb geometry. 2) With a cooled tube using air cooling you will be able to run cooler reservoir temps which is nice also cooler room air temps so CO2 is not needed. However you need not really get the plants closer unless you wat to try to run faster cycles, but in doing this you create a greater need for CO2 and higher levels of DO in your water. 3) IMHO this type system could not take more light without having a problemdo to too little DO in the water, but I have no proof of that just a basic scintific understanding that roots like more CO2 when pressed into faster growth through more lighting and therefore more CO2 and nutrients. 4) the system you linked to just happens to be tuned well in that its needs are met at present light levels. 5) incraesing the light levels in a rectangular grow will not work as well with a single larger bulb as the system is set up for as described a round grow where alldistances are nearly the same distance from the bulb. 6) a rectangular grow with a larger bulb would require that the grow width be larger and it would mean that the ends of the grow would get significantly less light than those in the middle so the growth rates and budding rates woud differ. 7) In essence if you want a system where yu can run it as it is run in the other system but wisg to use a larger bulb you need to increase the diameter so that you are providing the same lighting parameter. This however gets complicated as the decrease in lih ghting in PAR is exponential not linear so you will have a decreasing efficiency as the circle gets larger. If the decrease was linera then it would be simple: (diameter) *(pi)*(height) = ((watts light)/(watts needed per square foot)) therefore Diameter = ((watts light)/(watts needed per square foot))/((pi)*(height)) so (1000/16)/(3.1416*3) = 6.63 feet However this does not account for the drop off in PAR at greater distances so likely you would have to pretty much know what the PAR reading is in the links set up and see what distance from the bulb will supply the same PAR. Even a rectangular grow with two bulbs would not behave the same as providing the same PAR every where would really not be possible without fine tuning particular to the bulbs output with the ballast used to determine the distance between the two bulbs.
All in all the links grow works well due to its balance. Each alteration would require finding the new balance particular to its own parmater needs in relation to the lighting PAR received. IMHO finding the sweet spot for a system that is basically the same but smaller in diameter or larger in diameter would not be that hard as long as it is a low temperature system as is the system in the link. As the temperature is increased everything can change dramatically in an adverse way due to increased needs for a higher DO (not practical), higher CO2 needs and higher PAR to match the higher temps and higher DO needs as said before is impractical so now wr ere changing toan aero or hydro system in a vertical grow which just greatly increases problems with hydro and costs with aero. Then we also get into all the issues such as humidity and such that are not an issue with lightly lit, cooler systems with constant ventilation.
I believe omeone was trashed earlier for bringing up the obvoious potential DO problem with a system such as this. Just because this particular grower g has curcomvented the potentila problem due to having a balnace between all the parameters in a cool runninng system definitely does not mean problem due to low Do wil not obviously beconme a problem at higher temps especialy if those higher temps are also in conjunction with the same system being kicked up a few notches with more intense lighting, a sealed room with CO2, higher temps and higher nutrient needs. IMHO a constantly running water system would fail due ti inadequate DO in my opinion under the tweaked vertical system needed due to incraesed lighting as there would be no balance possible due to low DO water. It would obviously take more than disinfection to handle the problem of inadeqaute DO. Aero systems were developed due to the need for increased oxygen in the root system area needed in fast grow systems induced by utilizing higher temps caused by intense lighting by balancing it with CO2 supplementation, increased water and increased nutrients.
proheto8008
Well-Known Member
have a look at this thread. This spaace seems to be about the same size as yours is. I think he is using a 4 x 4 space to grow in. The room looks larger however only 4 x 4 is being used.
http://www.verticalgreen.org/showthread.php?t=488
http://www.verticalgreen.org/showthread.php?t=488
mrduke
Well-Known Member
All he's tring to do is find a spot where vertical growers can comunicate with out all the haters jumping in.
fatman7574
New Member
This forum actually has a mod or some mods. Surprises me considering some of the things that get posted.
fatman7574
New Member
All grow types have there good points and bad points. A vertical grow is all right as is any grow that works. Its just that speeds, capital investment costs and such very with every type of system. A vertical grow works fine, and usulally at a low initial investment cost, but they are slow generally grow low temp systems. They tend to be hard to maintain the plants due to access problems, and they are hard to keep clean if using a tube type arrangement with its many spots (every glued joint) that accumalate trash (bacteria, fungi, mold, mildew, sediments and organics <roots>). Trays, pots and aero tubes can be easily cleaned seperately not a glued together circular pipe arrangement, especially with baffle walls in inter-connected levels.