Quick question on my upcoming RDWC build.
- Thread starter TIMtoKILL
- Start date
-
- Tags
- rdwc undercurrent
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
You are very observant!
The change came when I redesigned my waterfalls and didn't chill the water. I noticed growth was, if anything, better than before.
Airwalker16
Well-Known Member
I advise use of a chiller always in Deep Water systems. Just my 2cents.
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
LOL well yes I was keeping up with your setup, refrigeration has been my life. Saving the world 1 btu at a time lol.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
I know. Henry something, or John Henry, right? We all blasted him for the reasons you state. Very similar to Dennis from O2Grow. But the more I think about it, and the incredible rootballs I had with HPA, the more I am intrigued. Alas, the 411 regarding DO in solution is hard to find. There are a number of ~ 10 yo videos from China using large quantities of DO into polluted canals with amazing results, which has reinspired me
Keesje
Well-Known Member
Guys, don't let yourselves be fooled by the whole emitter story.
There aren't any serious papers by the university of Minnesota on this subject.
With serious I mean that you can see how they performed the tests.
For example you can not see the circumstances the plants were growing in. Perhaps they used soil that was not well drained and then of course every mg of oxygen helps.
Some of the professors involved are also connected to commercial companies, and one of those companies procuded the enki machine, a well known hoax.
Think about this, the yield of tomatoes in a greenhouse of 10.000 M2 is about 500.000 kilos of tomatoes per year (depends on the race)
Let's say that they sell them per kilo for a dollar, that means half a million dollar
If you would use a machine that produces super-oxygenated water you could - according to the company - get 100.000 to 200.000 kilos more.
Or 100.000 to 200.000 dollar per year more.
If the machines would work, every commercial greenhouse would have it.
I know zero, none greehouse owners who use it.
I know 1 greenhouse owner who uses a venturi to get more DO in his water before he gives it to his plants in rockwool, and scientists told him it is useless. But he says ''it doesn't hurt to try.'' So far with no higher yields. And for obvious reasons.. there is also more then enough oxygen in well drained rockwool.
These scientists are not from some obscure organisation, but work at the best agricultural university worldwide according to this list.
https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2018/agriculture-forestry.
So, as long as there is no scientific proof, performed under reliable cicumstances and published in a well known scientific magazine, I will say that ''plants benefitting from super-oxygenated water'' is probably a hoax as well.
If there is any system that would give me a 10 to 20 % more yield and would cost me less then a 1000 dollar per year extra, I would buy it immediately.
There aren't any serious papers by the university of Minnesota on this subject.
With serious I mean that you can see how they performed the tests.
For example you can not see the circumstances the plants were growing in. Perhaps they used soil that was not well drained and then of course every mg of oxygen helps.
Some of the professors involved are also connected to commercial companies, and one of those companies procuded the enki machine, a well known hoax.
Think about this, the yield of tomatoes in a greenhouse of 10.000 M2 is about 500.000 kilos of tomatoes per year (depends on the race)
Let's say that they sell them per kilo for a dollar, that means half a million dollar
If you would use a machine that produces super-oxygenated water you could - according to the company - get 100.000 to 200.000 kilos more.
Or 100.000 to 200.000 dollar per year more.
If the machines would work, every commercial greenhouse would have it.
I know zero, none greehouse owners who use it.
I know 1 greenhouse owner who uses a venturi to get more DO in his water before he gives it to his plants in rockwool, and scientists told him it is useless. But he says ''it doesn't hurt to try.'' So far with no higher yields. And for obvious reasons.. there is also more then enough oxygen in well drained rockwool.
These scientists are not from some obscure organisation, but work at the best agricultural university worldwide according to this list.
https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2018/agriculture-forestry.
So, as long as there is no scientific proof, performed under reliable cicumstances and published in a well known scientific magazine, I will say that ''plants benefitting from super-oxygenated water'' is probably a hoax as well.
If there is any system that would give me a 10 to 20 % more yield and would cost me less then a 1000 dollar per year extra, I would buy it immediately.
Last edited:
dstroy
Well-Known Member
You got any links to the source for china using o2grow in canals?
Or did they use some other means? I bet it wasn't a modified livewell o2 generator like o2grow is.
Did you know that supersaturation (of DO) can occur naturally? Do you know under what circumstances supersaturation can occur? (hint: it's a technique that fucking nearly everyone here uses, or has thought about using)
When are you going to get a DO meter and test the water yourself?
I think the more serious problem, is that you accept horseshit marketing at face value like it will substantially increase your current ability to grow.
Why don't you just grow in soil? It's much easier to manage than hydro. Admittedly, all that I grow in soil are vegetables and mom plants.
You are thinking about this impractically, because in practice you do not need an expensive piece of equipment to do what an inexpensive piece of equipment can do adequately.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
search yt for realverbs and subscribe. let me know if you have trouble locating
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
I totally agree, no significant follow up studies comparing grow mediums, etc.
I actually thought to post those questions, but thought to see who's paying attention. .
Last edited:
dstroy
Well-Known Member
I don't see anything about china or dissolved oxygen or canals.
You know that youtube is not a credible source of information right? Anyone can get on there and say pretty much whatever they want about any subject without having to prove anything. Some things on it are useful, but you should just take everything on there with a grain of salt and corroborate it elsewhere.
Keesje
Well-Known Member
HPA is as good as it is, because it gives the maximum amount of water, oxygen and nutrients in extremly small particles.
Oxygen is available in large amounts on roots that are damp.... ideal.
That is why it is this succesfull.
But it is an expensive system with some hi-tech components, and a risk of failing.
That is also the reason it is not widely used in commercial growing.
RDWC is also a proven system, but also with some chances on failures.
Everything with a lot of tubes, pumps, buckets, etc. has this risk.
Another thing with RDWC and DWC is, if there will be enough watermovement so that oxygen rich water can come to the center of the rootball.
dstroy
Well-Known Member
By adjacent towers do you mean PSA? Those are way more expensive than what you originally suggested.
Why are you watching cavitation bubbles? You know you can cause water to cavitate by introducing a waterfall... which supersaturates the water with DO, making o2grow pointless. If you are so inclined, you can figure out what height of waterfall you need to sufficiently supersaturate your volume of water with oxygen. Math is fun...
dstroy
Well-Known Member
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
Watch the first video i linked Dstroy to and see if you still feel the same about HPA and O2.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
but did you find the Japan O2 videos?
Once you do subscribe to his channel which should remove the non-viables
the tower is either on the left or right of the screen- vertically, where you can find similar videos o the one you are watching/watched
Last edited:
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
The molecular size of the waterfall molecules is MUCH larger than venturis, and HPA is the smallest by far, I have been using a waterfall in the Igloo cooler rez, and as of today in my kitty litter rez (more like a 2 stage sprinkler head) that I never gave a second thought to until investigating all this
but I was using a venturi system that did not aggitate the solution like the sprinkler (it came with one of my pumps, probably the one from Harbor Freight) on the same pump.
I am following a progression that I have observed first hand. IMO, it seems the smaller the molecule the greater the bioavailability
dstroy
Well-Known Member
What?The molecular size of the waterfall molecules is MUCH larger than venturis, and HPA is the smallest by far, I have been using a waterfall in the Igloo cooler rez, and as of today in my kitty litter rez (more like a 2 stage sprinkler head) that I never gave a second thought to until investigating all this
but I was using a venturi system that did not aggitate the solution like the sprinkler (it came with one of my pumps, probably the one from Harbor Freight) on the same pump.
I am following a progression that I have observed first hand. IMO, it seems the smaller the molecule the greater the bioavailability
Water molecules do not change mass, and together they make up the compound water.
Did you mean droplet size?
A Venturi injects air which is completely different than absorption from contact and cavitation which is what a waterfall does.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
yes droplet
Keesje
Well-Known Member
The reason why you can not find the videos from The Real Verbs, is because PetFlora Is unable to read well and to reproduce well.
It is a YT channel by the real verbZ. With a Z at the end.
A channel full of nonsense, for example the SEG by well known charlatan John Searl.
Everybody who thinks that perpetual motion is science, is an idiot.
It is a YT channel by the real verbZ. With a Z at the end.
A channel full of nonsense, for example the SEG by well known charlatan John Searl.
Everybody who thinks that perpetual motion is science, is an idiot.