Waterfarms are kind of a drip system, grizz. They flow a lot more than a regular drip system, though. I'd say it's a comparison between 1/2 gph and at least 5 or 6 gph.

I didn't specify, but the temp drop at night is really only important for the flowering/fruiting. You can do 18-24 hour lighting with little heat change for vegetative growth and get great results.

The blue bin is a clean bin from Home Depot, never had trash in it. It has all my fresh water. I have 2 of them constantly airing out water from my tap. I do not want to pay for RO. I use black tubing to bring water to my reservoir (it goes behind the tent) So I wait the water 24-48 hours and then PH treat it, and use it in my top reservoir.

Humidity goes about 40-60% depending on how long i leave the door open.

I did the thing with adding the garbage bags overtop the system to stop from dripping/splashing, 100% success! It doesn't impede the water flow, and it keeps the peppers from getting splashed too much. I'll show pics later.

Here's the pics of the plastic bag solution, not the most elegant though, and I dont know if it will survive a cleaning :P but it works.

{{gwi:1008468}}

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I didn't describe it well. I meant the bag goes up to nearly the stem. What you have might work fine, but keep in mind that the solution really needs to get the roots and the plants don't have roots going out several inches. Having the plastic go close to the stem actually helps to redirect the splash toward the rootzone where you want it. I cut a square piece that covers the top. I then slice from the middle of one edge to the center of the plastic square. I then just make the hole a little larger than the stem diameter. With the slit, you can easily remove the plastic for any maintenance, like an occasional top flushing with clean water. I think I got the idea from a Christmas tree skirt a few years ago.

if each WF is full of hydroton, I think you should cut the watering back to about 15 minutes every four hours. That was the cycle I used with EnF outside last year and I never had a problem with the plants (or roots) drying out.
You may be able to stretch the cycle out more than that as the plants get bigger.
Aerating your water, eh. you must be on a municipal tap.

Yeah sure am. I haven't obtained a detailed sheet on my local water from the city, but it is available. Either way, I can't spend the amount of money required to do RO, I think that would be putting things over the top. Mind you, my local hydroponics store says they find more problems WITHOUT chloramine and chlorine in the water, so I dont know... clearly not what people say out there on the forums.

To me, if I can do it with airing my water out like that, i'm ok with it. :P

ITS FREE

I agree with aerating though it isn't free. municipal water is actually quite expensive, you're just not really using that much.

We are on a privately owned water line here in Texas and with a ph close to 9 and ppm over 800 out of tap we go RO for everything. We have pumps to keep RO at peak operating pressure so guess you are lucky to have that "expensive" water, ours will eat glass. The stock has to deal with it.
"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

If a RO system is too expensive, and if your just going use it to grow a few plants I would agree. I was planning on getting a high volume RO system that puts out 700 gallons a day for a commercial growing operation I'm planing. I have found them for as little as $400. But I have decided to go with a series of inline filters (replaceable cartridges). The cartridge housings run $20 each, and the cartridges generally run between $8 and $15 each depending on the kind you get.

Going this way will be cheaper, but the major factor is the fact that RO systems use more water than what they put out. And can waist as much as 2 gallons for every gallon it puts out. So If I needed 1000 gallons, my actual water usage would be closer to 3000 gallons. Or 2000 gallons if the ratio is closer to one and one. But an inline filter system wont waist any water. For a relatively inexpensive setup, you might want to use just a sediment cartridge filter and carbon cartridge filter. Including the 2 housings would cost about $60.

Or for better quality, you might want to use 2 sediment cartridge, one coarse and one fine (with one of them an absolute 1 micron size), and 2 carbon (one straight carbon, and one carbon/ion exchange). Would run about $120. Or any variation would be good, like one sediment (1 micron), and 2 carbon (or carbon/ion exchange) etc.. But for my planed commercial setup I will probably go with 3 sediment cartridge (including 2 of the absolute 1 micron filters), and 2 carbon cartridges, and one ion exchange (or most likely 3 carbon/ion exchange cartridges). Total including housings and cartridges, should run me between $200 and $300. That's still at least $100 less than the high volume RO, and wont waist any water in the process.

But if my Tap water is about 150 ppm and about 7.0ph, I dont see the point in even worrying about making any changes.

I use a bit of PH Down to lower the PH to 5.5-6.0 and then I let the water sit in those containers for a few days before use. I have a total of about 20 gallons in the kit at one time, so it doesn't really use much water. I can store about 50 gallons of water in both those containers. That gives me 2 full sets of fresh water to use for the system when needed.

If i was to go bigger, I realize I would need more. Things have been going well, I'm starting to see some second leaves coming for the peppers that are the largest so far. Which is nice! Growth is good!

I've got quite the array of available seelings growing in my propagation table, I have several strawberries, eggplants, tomatoes, hot peppers, and I have several flowers like daisies and red dragons.

I'm going to have to start some dirt trays with extra lights if I hope to grow all these plants in any capacity, they can't all fit into my hydroponics system since its all full of peppers.

And Canada Post is holding hostage my EcoGrower system, I was 1 day away from receiving it when they locked out employees and shutdown all postal operations. GRRR so mad.

I really just mentioned it as an alternative to buying an expensive RO system, but still being able to achieve similar water quality (depending on what cartridges you use). Some people can get away with using their local tap, and some cant. But the way I see it I don't really care what a PPM meter reads, because it dosen't tell me PPM of what? Even if it did I couldn't adjust my pre manufactured nutrients according to what is in the water supply. So I want to start with the best water quality I can to eliminate as many problems as I can from the start. But if you get good results with just using tap, that's fine.

If the meter reads 150 PPM, it's telling me there's some elements in the water, but not what they are. And a city report is a good start, but only tells you what was in the water on that specific day, and in that specific sample. As far as I know it costs about $75 to have your water tested, and again only tells you what was in the water on that specific day. Also as far as I know they don't test for pathogens or spores either. That's why I want the "absolute" 1 micron filter (or smaller). If it just says 1 micron, it could be bigger and some spores and pathogens can still pass through. But an "absolute" 1 micron filter is basically guaranteed no bigger than 1 micron. I don't want to have to guess if there's a problem in my water supply if I have a problem with my plants, and using filtered water simply gives me that piece of mind.

I say your lucky and should go with the water you have. Some of us have to go RO.
"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

The issue with chloramine and chlorine is mostly a pH thing. If you can maintain pH, I don't think it's a problem. Chlorine gasses off. Chloramine, not so much. 7 is a good starting pH.

The big problem with tap here in Indiana is the high EC level due to all the limestone. It's .8 here on a good day. The minerals in the water cause problems that lead to fall-out/lock-out/push-out (whatever you want to call precipitation). If my municipal water was at .2, I'd definitely use it. I mainly use rainwater, but I may invest in a greenhouse RO system later for droughts.

My PH is really being difficult.

I've been running the system for less than 14 days, and I can't get the PH below 6.5. If I get my control reservoir to 5.5, as it cycles and mixes, it goes back to up 6.5 within a day.

I tried to lower each bucket a little bit, and the controller to 5.5 and it stayed lower for about 12 more hours, but ended back up to 6.5

It doesn't usually go much higher than 6.5

Should I keep putting that PH down everyday? The PPM goes up a tiny bit each time....

Draek

@Draek

There is a variety of factors that can cause your pH to go up. I will go ahead and rule out the possibility that the plants are taking up nutrients, which can change the pH, mostly during extreme vegetative and flowering periods though. Heres an important question regarding what could be your problem:

Did you pre-soak the rockwool in pH balanced water for 30 minutes to 24 hours?

If you didn't then that is for sure your problem. The rockwool has a high pH and as water drips from it into the buckets, it will slowly raise your pH.

BUT, to be honest..... your problem is more than likely one that we all experience with younger plants to some degree. You see, during this stage the plants use an extremely small amount of nutrients as you are sure to know. The great thing about nutrients is that most quality lines have pH buffers added to the mix so that you really don't have to add much pH up or down to correct. So since you are using little to no nutrients at this point, the pH is almost invariably going to fluctuate because tap water doesn't have much of a buffer in it.... or at least this is what I have found in my experience with Missouri tap water.

This is nothing to worry about, I know it probably seems like way more pH adjusting than you had expected though! Just know that once you start pumping those buckets with nutrients, you will barely have to worry about the pH because of the innate buffers found in them. Again, this all depends on the line you are using though.

Keep up the good work Draek!! Please update with pictures, I love to see how gardens progress : D

You didn't seem interested in our system that maybe I invented. Haven't seen it anywhere else so it could be.
Perhaps you didn't read about our pH problem and why we invented this system. We have been told that RO will injure our meters so we don't check before adding nutes. It is more important to let the "mixture" set and stabilize. Here a 25 gal mixture of flowering nutes mix gets 15 cc of pH down and several hr. rest before we even stick a meter in it. 1 to 3 cc of down are added daily for maybe 3 days when the mix will stabilize nicely for remainder of its cycle. We are thinking of adding a continuos meter to the control bucket. We know our water and nutes so well it would become a snap to just squirt some pH down in the barrel when needed. We buy it by the large container and consider it mandatory. There is a ppm meter here somewhere but not sure where.
"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

Thanks for all the feedback. I guess what I'm going through isn't out of the ordinary. And I guess not presoaking my rockwool must be doing it. The only thing I found odd, is when I did soak the new rockwool for about 30 minutes, the PH of the water did NOT rise from 5.5 (the initial I made the water for pre-soaking). So it must need that really really long pre-soaking.

I do add a little PH Down (about 10-15cc) to get the water from 7.0 to 5.5-6.0PH and then I mix all the nutrients into the water.

Everyone seems to do it the other way, where they mix nutes first, then PH down. I've not noticed anything and I've always let me reservoir sit for over 24 hours before each time I use it. PH never changed after mixing nutes.

I'm only doing 400-500 PPM of nutes right now, for my wee seedlings.

No matter, I'm not going to be using rockwool anymore anyway. I've switched to Rapid Rooter tree bark plugs.

Always adjust pH after you add the nutrients. What if the nutrients buffer the water to the desired pH without any need for the pH down?

Always:

1. Add fresh water to your system
2. Use desired amount of nutrients
3. check pH
4. adjust pH accordingly to step 3 (skip this step if the pH is in acceptable range in step 3)

in that order, no other.

Like I said though, I have similar troubles from seedlings almost invariably, so just switching your medium may not help (but who knows).
Never used the tree bark plugs, I would like to see how those go!

There is nothing wrong with adjusting pH before you add your nutrients. In fact that's the best thing to do (even though I don't). If the water is already pH balanced the first then the buffers in the nutrients don't need to adjust it further, and tend to last longer. Also By pre-adjusting the pH you reduce chance of precipitation. But I wouldn't wait 24 hrs before checking and/or readjusting the pH after I added the nuts if necessary. I would just wait until it had cycled through the system sufficiently (about 20-30 min). But if your used to never needing to adjust after adding nuts because you pre-adjust first, I can see why you might not bother checking sooner.

Homehydro;

I can see what you mean by the chance of f certain elements precipitating upon placing the nutrients in high pH-ed water. Thus far though, I have not had this happen to me. Again, it seems more cost effective to make sure I need to even add pH down before doing so. Then again, I do use those silly EC meters you envy, which cost me extra.

Well, I just did a week's flush. Drained it completely, got a new nutrient solution mix 5.8 PH, 400 PPM, 0.6 EC. Put it through the system for overnight. This morning the PH is at 6.5 again :P

It doesn't even take 8 hours, and the PH is back up to 6.5 all because of 7 little 1 inch rockwool cubes affecting 50 Litres of water?!

In addition to your nutrients having buffer, so does your pH down Draek. Your pH down has probably either phosphoric acid or sulfuric acid, but also buffer. If you didn't have any buffer in the pH down, your pH would consistently keep dropping over time, because the acid would keep reacting. With the buffer, the pH stays at a reasonably stable pH.... but..... After so many hours, the buffer becomes "broken" because all of the conjugate acid of the buffer is completely consumed. You don't have much nutrient buffer in the solution from your nutrients (because at this point you are using weak strength nutrients) as a back-up to the buffer in your pH down, and as a result you have to add the pH down again. This is fundamental chemistry, and is what hydroponics is all about.

AGAIN, once you start using stronger nutrients you wont have to worry as much about the pH up/down. I rarely use it after about 4 weeks, or from the second nutrient change forward.

That being said YES, the tiny rockwool cubes are changing the pH as well. Think about how much volume the pH down you have used, and how much that changes your pH. Now think about how much more volume that those rockwool cubes take up, and you can see that it makes perfect sense that those cubes can change pH to the degree we are talking (1 or 2 pH over 24 hours).

Well, it makes sense I appreciate your knowledge.

I'll just keep trucking along because the peppers seem to be. Here's what they look like now since I posted, they have come a ways further:

{{gwi:1008469}}

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I've also created a new propagation station that is a piece of furniture that can hold all my crap now. It took me a couple hundred bucks in materials but it is pretty nice in the end:

{{gwi:1008471}}

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

If you are using a weak nutrient solution, it is true there is not much buffering action available. But I don't agree that the rockwool cubes are for sure a problem. I have used those rockwool cubes myself to start seedlings, and I have never experienced pH changes like that. Though maybe I just bought a good brand of rockwool cubes, I don't know. But that has never been an issue with mine, and using as little as 4 gallons of water for 8 plants (thus 8 cubes), and 1/2 strength nutrient solution when they were small plants. That my experience anyway. Just saying that in my experience, I haven't ran across pH problems using rock-wool cubes, and I have never pre-flush them.

ethnobotany
Me either. I use RO water in my systems, and have no need to check EC of the water prier to adding nutrients. But on that same note even though elements in the water do affect pH, there is no direct correlation between EC and pH. That is you cant tell pH with a EC meter. And though I don't check pH before adding nutrients (even though it would be best), I only need to adjust pH after I add nutrients on occasion. Even then only 1.0 or less.

And your right I do have envy, although you have misinterpreted my envy. I envy having the money to spend on things I don't need. If the meters could tell me the concentrations of each ""individual"" element in the water, then I would have a need for one. However I still wouldn't have the money for one at this point. But it would go from my list of toys I want, to the list of tools I want (even though for me there's a fine line between the two different lists).

"But on that same note even though elements in the water do affect pH, there is no direct correlation between EC and pH"

- This is almost true. I tried to point out for him that not all brands have buffers in their nutrients, and that some like FoxFarm and General Hydroponics certainly do. So with those brands that do have buffers included in their mix, indeed the EC does correlate with the pH, however not necessarily directly. It could be either inversely or directly, depending on whether the pH goes up or down, right? In his case, if he has FoxFarm or GH nutrients, or a similar brand with buffers, his pH would actually lower upon adding the nutes to his alkaline water. Meaning that when his EC goes up, his pH goes down, an inverse relationship.

I just skimmed through some posts, but I just want to throw some things out there that I saw above that are I believe to be incorrect. I may be repeating what others say, so sorry if that is the case.

A) Your pH won't remain affected for so long by rockwool. You have too much liquid for it to affect pH that much for that long.

B) You should adjust pH prior to adding nutrients. That's not just a matter of preference. It's a matter of chemistry. The pH buffer in nutrients is to maintain, not change pH. That's why it's called a buffer. Also, buffer effectiveness is based on adding nutrients to 6.5-7 pH water. It is also based on pure water. Nearly every manufacturer of nutrients out there recommends using RO water, but some actually make different formulas specifically for hard tap. GH is one. Adding nutes to 7.5 pH water, for example, is one reason for iron deficiency.

C) pH and EC aren't necessarily directly related in terms of what the meters measure, but a little common sense coupled with a basic knowledge of how certain elements affect pH when dissolved allows you to understand that an EC reading of .8 coupled with a pH of 7.5 or more means you likely have a ton of calcium in your water. At least, let's hope that's it.

D) 1 micron filters don't remove things like calcium ions. They remove particles. We're doing hydro here, so we don't really care about particle removal if the solutes are still there, right? EC will tell you what your 1 micron missed, which is pretty much all the stuff that affects EC and pH. Be down on EC meters all you want. That doesn't change the fact that they are highly useful and give you plenty of info. You just have to know how to interpret it to make it useful. Hopefully, most of you see the sense in getting an EC meter.

E) This isn't a correction, but a suggestion. You might reduce the size of your pics before posting them.

Joe, I have never had trouble with adding my nutrients to non-adjusted pH 8.5 water. Period. Also, when I use strong nutrients, my pH goes from 8.5 to 5.5.... coincidence? NO.

Tell me, is it different to add acid to a buffer, than it is to add buffer to an acid? NO, not really. Either way, the buffer will either be broken or remain sufficient to keep the pH at the desired level. Correct me if I am wrong, but the buffers in good nutrient lines like FF and GH are made to sustain a pH of 5.5 to 6.0, right? So why is it wrong to add them directly to the water? Most brands that I know of actually don't recommend RO water because it lacks the magnesium and calcium that the lines don't provide enough of.

Sorry Joe, I disagree with much of what you said there.

Here is a source from Flairform Hydroponics, their founder Bob Taylor was the principal chemist of the Water resources section at Western Australias State Government Chemistry Centere.

"A high pH buffering capacity is an advantage because it ensures minimal initial and ongoing pH maintenence-esepecially where high alkalinity make-up water is used. This feature is extremely beneficial because lack of pH control is a common cause of nutrient failure. As a rule-of-thumb, ****a high quality 'bloom' formulation should require virtually no initial pH adjustment, even when used with high alkalinity/hard water i.e. after dilution with a range of make-up waters, the pH should always fall well within the range of 4.5 to 6.5"

Flairform Hydroponics. Flairform: Leaders in Hydroponics Catalogue & Growers Guide. July 2008. Print. (5).

I thought I mentioned that the mineral elements will affect pH? My statement said nothing about comparing EC, and a real pH reading to guess what elements were in the water. Without knowing which elements are in the water, as well as in what quantities each are in (again the meters cant do), you cant tell pH from a EC reading (even for a chemist). But some people seem to think you can.

So OK, answer this if you can
1. what is the pH of plain water with a EC of 1.2.
2. And in an unrelated scenario, what is the pH of the nutrient solution with a EC reading of 2.0 (both with, and without buffers).

If I want to know pH, I do a pH test, rather than try and guess what elements are in the water supply by a EC reading. Of coarse the 1 micron filter is for catching particles (and not dissolved mineral salts). Last time I checked spores and pathogens were considers particles, as well as un-dissolved minerals. Just because we are doing hydro, does not automatically mean everybody's water source is free from particles.

"EC will tell you what your 1 micron missed"

Again the point of a 1 micron filter is not to catch dissolved minerals, it's to catch tiny particles. But if you can tell what is in the water supply using a EC meter. Then OK,

1. Tell me exactly (not a guess) what's in the water supply if the EC is 1.0? If you want to add a pH reading, do so. But tell me exactly (not a guess) what's in the water of a 1.0 EC.

2. And explain how you know exactly what quantity it's in.

3. Then explain why it's not possible for any other elements that could affect pH to possibly be in the water supply too.

4. Also explain why it's not possible for other elements that don't affect pH to be in the water supply as well.

5. Lastly explain why there cant possibly be any other elements in the supply that would affect the EC reading either.

Ethno,

It's not an issue of ethics, so there is no right or wrong about this. It's a matter of doing that which will lead to the most satisfactory results. You quoted a chemist that obviously doesn't understand the process of precipitation, particularly of iron. Let me explain. . .

Let's say you are using a liquid nutrient. You add a teaspoon of it per gallon. Surely you are aware that the pH change is not instantaneous due to the buffers? Don't you have to stir it well? You're even supposed to let it sit awhile, actually, before checking pH and EC. During that adjustment period, are you telling me that those elements aren't exposed to the elements or alkaline qualities of the tap you are using? Once iron locks out, for example, it stays that way. The buffer won't reverse that. So, in the initial addition, you need to make sure the water won't cause fall out before the buffer has a chance to make the water pH stable. I think you misunderstood what I said. I didn't say buffer won't change pH. I said that is not what it is for. It will change pH, no doubt. It just won't do it before you lose some nutrients to precipitation.

Sometimes, people don't notice a deficiency using your way because they are using small reservoirs that need frequent topping off. They add more nutrient in a short time to what is now an adjusted solution. Not all of us do that. For example, the person that started this thread. I use a 100 gallon reservoir filled half way for one of my systems with 12 fast growing plants (tomatoes and eggplant). I don't top by adding nutrients for a week. If I used your method with my water (.8 EC, 7.5 pH), I would show and have shown signs of deficiency. It's one reason I looked into this issue so much, including calling General Hydroponics (I use their nutes). Following their advice, then learning more in Chem 105 about the science of precipitation, I learned how to prevent those deficiencies.

Quotes are no replacement for a basic understanding of chemistry. I don't care who you quote or how famous they are. I could quote the chemists at the GH, but I won't because the important thing is understanding the science so you know for a fact something is true no matter who says otherwise. If the science is solid, it's solid. Don't let what someone in a high position has to say make you stop using your own brain to figure out something you can figure out for yourself when armed with the right knowledge.

HH,

I'm about sick of your constant foolishness. I said nothing about "exact". "Likely a ton" is hardly a statement of precision. I didn't say it's "not possible for other elements that don't affect pH to be in the water supply". If you weren't writing, I'd question your ability to read. I certainly question your reading comprehension.

As far as my saying EC will tell you what your 1 micron (filter) missed. . . That is to say that you wasted your time and money on a 1 micron filter and you can prove it with an EC meter. Sorry I didn't break that down for ya.

@Joe

We will just have to agree to disagree. Chelating agents added to the Ferrous cation, such as EDTA, a common solvent that I am familiar with because I have used in Organic Chemistry courses at my higher learning institution, promote higher availability for Iron in alkaline pH. This, plus other chelating agents such as EDDHA in particular can make the iron 100% available at pH's above 10!

Now, about the dispute regarding the efficacy of RockWool to change nutrient pH: According to the experts at General Hydroponics (the trusted brand of NASA), "There are several causes for incorrect nutrient solution pH... Growing media such as RockWool or construction grade aggregate (pea gravel and shale) can dissolve slowly, greatly affecting the nutrient pH causing it to rise and fall significantly."

General Hydroponics. General Hydroponics pH Control Kit for a balanced nutrient solution. Print.

I believe if General Hydroponics tells us that it is not uncommon for RockWool to drastically change pH, such as what Draek is experiencing, then they are probably right. Not to mention I have been using Grodan RockWool for awhile now, and I generally have troubles with the pH until my nutrient strength is increased for vegetative states.

Joe
I can certainly say the same about you. Either I'm unable to explain myself in a way using the ""perfect"" terms you require them to be in, in order to understand my points. Or you simply don't want to, and/or just haven't even taken the time to try to understand them (I guess because their not in your words). I know the term "likely have a ton" is not an exact measurement. But if you had bothered to try to understand my statement:

"But on that same note even though elements in the water do affect pH, there is no direct correlation between EC and pH. That is you cant tell pH with a EC meter."

Notice the part where I mentioned there are elements that can affect pH? That includes ""calcium,"" but does not LIMIT it to ONLY calcium. Like stating "likely a ton" does by suggesting that it's unlikely there could be anything else that will ever affect pH in your water supply. I know that you know everything about everything, but I doubt you can tell me everything in my water supply, as well as what quantities their in.

You also didn't seem to notice the part where I "SPECIFICALLY" used the word "DIRECT," or at least didn't comprehend the meaning of it in the statement. Should I have used all capital letters to show that was a important word in the statement? I even went a steep farther to make the specific statement "That is you cant tell pH with a EC meter." (that I certainly question your reading comprehension of), that makes the EXACT point plane and simple. I'm not sure how I could have made the point or statement any more clear.

With respect to my statements about why I would use a 1 micron filter, again ""I certainly question your reading comprehension of"" of that as well. Does the statement "like one sediment (1 micron), and 2 carbon (or carbon/ion exchange) etc." not imply the 1 micron filter is for catching particles by the use of the word SEDIMENT" in that statement? Last time I checked sediment would be "UNDISSOLVED PARTIALS" in the water. Thus has nothing to do with "DISSOLVED" ions in the water. Then you make a claim that the EC meter will be able to tell you what particles the 1 micron filter missed. But you still cant explain how you know what spores, and/or pathogens the one micron filter missed (or even just a quantity of them). Much less how you can tell what specific UNDISSOLVED (particles) mineral elements that were smaller than 1 micron, and passed through THAT PARTICULAR filter (specific, not a guess).

Again not my statement:
"That is to say that you wasted your time and money on a 1 micron filter and you can prove it with an EC meter"

Just how do you prove with a EC meter that an "absolute" 1 micron filter didn't catch SPORES, PATHOGENS, and UNDISSOLVED elements in the water supply? Or did you just not COMPREHEND my original statements. Not to mention the fact that there are TWO OTHER FILTER TYPES that I mentioned I plan to use in CONJUNCTION with the inline 1 micron SEDIMENT filter cartridge/s?

Ethno, the growing medium isn't rockwool. They were only used for starting seeds. The medium is hydroton. That statement about rockwool is in reference to it as a medium. That means using the slabs or a bunch of little cubes in place of the hydroton. In other words, the quote is irrelevant.

EDDHA is too expensive, which is why it is used in very small quantities if it's used at all. MANY nutrients don't have this. For example, GH flora series has it and EDTA, but their powders only use either EDTA or DTPA. EDTA and DTPA both need 6.5 or less for optimum uptake. It is one of the biggest nutrient problems in the grape industry (along with zinc deficiency), the greenhouse industry, with annual flowers such as petunias, etc. if the pH is over 7. And nearly all the nutes use chelated iron today. Most use EDTA. Anyway, we can certainly agree to disagree. It's good to have intelligent disagreement. Keeps you honest and searching.

HH, I'm done wasting time on you. Say what you want. As Lucas said (I'm paraphrasing Lucas, now?), you just keep giving yourself more rope to hang yourself the more you speak, only what you're hanging is your credibility.

Joe
Paraphrases anyone you want, it dosen't hurt my feelings or change the facts at all. My feelings can only be hurt by someone I care about. And I have only stated the truth. The only reason you don't answer the questions and just try to go all around it, is because you cant. The reason you cant is because it's not possible (even for someone knows everything about everything like you). Their your statements, all I asked is that you prove, or at least explain what you say. You cant, and that's your problem. Trying to shift the context of ""my"" statements wont work with me. And it isn't up to me to explain your statements. If you weren't so competitive with everything, you wouldn't need to turn simple statements into complicated runarounds.

Ethno and Draek,

I got off on a tangent discussing nutrient iron with Ethno and veered from the actual point. Notice above (when I was on the point) where I mention that in high pH tap you have other elements that the nutrient will react with? Ethno got onto the iron in the nutrient as he was assuming I was talking only about the iron in the nutrient. Then I started discussing the iron in the nutrient because I get off on tangents like that easily. However, you'll notice in my post that I was talking about reaction with elements in the water. Back on point: Iron isn't just in the nutrient. The iron, the copper, the calcium, etc. in the tap will precipitate with the minerals in your nutrient solution. Yes, nutrients are chelated, normally. Yes, EDTA reduces the chances of precipitation. NO, the iron in your tap is not chelated. It will still bond with your phosphorous. Calcium will still bond with either phosphorous and sulfur to precipitate as calcium phosphate and calcium sulfate.

You'll see what I mean when you end up having to clean those drip rings, Draek. I promise you. The scale you end up with is the precipitate that you WILL end up with using tap. As long as you start with a good pH BEFORE adding nutes, you will reduce the amount of precipitate from the beginning and still have plenty for the plants. A little precipitation is a pain, but you generally have plenty of mineral available in commercial nutrients to compensate for small losses if you just follow their recommended procedures (such as start with good pH water rather than rely on the buffers to adjust your pH). Plus, topping off after adjusting pH will also fix any deficiencies in most circumstances.

On a side note: My son is a genius and has to deal with people of lower intellect discriminating against him for being more intelligent. It's common. A few years ago, he was upset over something that happened at school. A whole group of people argued with him about something and he stood his ground. He turned out right. They still turned on him and resorted to calling him a know it all. He was just trying to help them understand something for school, but he didn't realize that people of lower intellect often hate you for being smarter. He's learning. I told him, "You will always be treated like this. People of lower intellect or that are too lazy to look up the right answers always resort to claiming you think you know everything just because you are right more often or just because you look stuff up before jumping to conclusions and being wrong as often as they are. You will be called a know-it-all. Don't ever let it deter you from learning and when you know someone is wrong, don't just acquiesce to go with the crowd. Who cares if fools hate you? Do you really want to be part of their crowd anyway? Also, don't be afraid to admit when you are wrong. That's science. You learn from the mistake, better yourself, and thank the person that corrected your mistake as they contributed to your increase in knowledge."

Exactly Joe, I'm simply not afraid to stand my ground, and I will never just jump on the band wagon because the rest of the crowd does, or just believe something because everyone else does either. There is always plenty of peer pressure to just fallow along because it's easier, but I'm not concerned with, or even care about anyone who pressures you to just go with the crowd. Those type of people are just looser with no brain of their own, and not anyone I would ever want to consider a friend. That's why I simply don't care what others think. The people with a mind of their own are the people I tend to get along with, then wind up being friends with.

I'm not afraid to be wrong, or afraid to admit it when I am either. But I'm not going to unless I am. So when someone makes a claim like you can tell the pH of your water by a EC reading, I'm not going to just fallow the crowd, I'm going to ask for proof. Same goes for claims like being able to tell what's in the water supply by a EC reading, (even if you know what the pH is). Where again I'm not just going to fallow the crowd, I'm going to ask them to explain how. If they can (using creditable information) then great I learned something, and I was wrong. But to this day nobody has ever been able to back up their extraordinary claims, and I'm not going to just agree with ANYBODY so they will like me. Guessing there's a ton of something in the water is quite pointless to me. It's way to generic with real no parameters. Not to mention it's still just a guess that can be off by a ton as well. Simply put that's NOT being able to tell what is in the water, that's just called taking a educated GUESS (and has no parameters).

Joe, the reason I keep referring to you as a person that knows everything about everything, is simply because you constantly remind everybody of how smart you are. Every other one of your post reminds us how you are in collage classes, and how every bit of information on the internet is wrong or not creditable if it dosen't support your conclusions, and how only you know the truth. So I know you want everybody to know how intelligent you are. I'm just helping get the word out. Even the post about how smart your kid is, is nothing more than trying to let everybody know the high intelligence that you have runs in the family. Again nothing but just reminding everybody how smart you are. If you didn't want that title, you wouldn't remind us every other day about it. It's obviously important to you for people to know how intelligent you are, and things like that are meaningless to me (unless I'm applying for a job). I simply just want to help you get the word out, so you can have all the credibility that's so important (except to me).

P.S.
And I'm not in any competition with anyone for best advice, ideas etc. etc. etc.. Honestly I haven't really read the terms of service for this website. But I don't think their are any prizes or trophies for best advice or most creditable person (unless you guys know something I don't), so I simply find the whole competition thing pointless myself. But I do agree with Joe that everybody should use their own common sense, as well as only use forums as a springboard, and then look up their own information. That's exactly what I do, and I simply prefer to look up creditable information before anything else. But I'll also through in, don't be afraid to question the creditability of any information source. Also don't ever be afraid speak your mind.

Guy's to be honest, I just let that stuff go over my head and read what's important to me. I don't need to have any limit their expressions.

So go on and keep arguing, but you are only making my post more irrelevant by arguing about things that aren't really on the main topic, which is helping me get myself started and make sure I am able to actually produce veggies :P

Thanks again for looking at my post overall, I appreciate all the feedback. Any more and I'm really appreciative.

Regardless of the PH of the water, my plants are doing well. I should have my EcoGrower pots here soon in a few days hopefully and I'll be able to get another 6 plants started. Probably hot peppers.

I tested my 2 individual pots, and they were WAY out of whack. around 1.2EC and PH 7.1 it was bad.

I set that straight with fresh water and running fresh water through it for a while and i'll switch with a new solution....

Those are way harder to monitor, since they dont have a hookup to the trimeter.

Draek
If it were me, I would start a new thread. List all the variables you can, any changes you made, as well as if there were any improvements from those changes. I don't remember if I mentioned this or not, but by your posts you use a digital pH meter. Digital meters can give false results (I'm sure many will disagree), so have you verified the digital pH readings with pH drops. Also I forget if you are using grow rocks as well or not. But if so, that could be the cause of your EC rising. The grow rocks need to be washed real well, the dust from them add elements to the water (that the EC meter can measure). Eventually as more of the dust washes through, and you do nutrient changes. The rising EC from that should slow down.

I'm sure someone will be quick to jump on me for speaking my mind, but even though I have never had this issue, I remember a while back that someone was having a pH issue using grow rocks (used ones). I'm no chemist, but if I member correctly that was most likely because of built up salts, or some kind of physical change from sitting so long. And if I remember correctly soaking them in a acid wash can help. Witch might explain why I don't seem have a pH issue with my grow rocks, I always soak them in a strong vinegar water after use to dissolve the built up salts.

Disclaimer
In a normal forum this wouldn't be necessary, but in a forum where everybody is fighting for the best advice title. I simply need to add this disclaimer. I am not saying anything I have said is what your problem is, I am merely speaking my mind, making suggestions that you might, or might not want to consider.

What a load of crap! This happens every time a thread gets rolling these insecure jerks start slamming us with their brilliance. First thing we all learn is that everyone has an opinion! But not all of us have to have our ego stroked over & over & over.
>>> There are many was to do anything"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

lol!
welcome to the "new and improved" hydro forum soyousee. :D
It seems there are just a few people here who like to bicker and won't go away. I guess we should all place disclaimers at the beginning of our threads stating the bickering is not wanted.

Alright, Grizz. Message received. Take care.

Hey Joe,
I didn't mean to offend you.
Did you get my email.
I sent it to your user name from here at ya hoo?

Grizz, I did get the e-mail and I appreciate you sending it. I'll respond to it directly rather than here.

@Soyousee, you're right that I should have responded to HH in my own thread, but it was initially not a response TO him, but rather to the original poster that I feel is being misled by bad info. Look at the title of the post. I'm fairly certain he didn't want bad info and would prefer if someone recognize he is receiving it, that they speak up. I keep letting the idiot suck me in. That's my fault. I did the same thing with Lucas/Jean Luc (although, admittedly, he is no idiot). You might think I am stroking my ego, but I assure you that isn't the case. The bit about my son being a genius, despite HH's claim, wasn't about IQ and genetics. It was about the advice I gave him and it wouldn't have made any sense if I hadn't pointed out why he was having troubles relating to other students. The thing is, I hate to see people get something wrong after spending so much money because some moron wants to have a pissing contest rather than use real science. That happened to me when I first started and I nearly gave up completely. I'm soooo glad I didn't. Science is science and most of this science is tried and true. It isn't MY way. These aren't my OPINIONS. Just as what Ethno said about EDDHA wasn't an opinion. I'm stating scientific facts concerning chemistry. If you want to run your business on opinions, go ahead. If you wish to use facts that are supported by science in a highly scientific field, you are a lot more likely to succeed. FYI, plants don't care about your opinion or mine. People generally come here for help with plants. Not to feel good about opinions. Maybe I'm mistaken.

The back and forth with Ethno was, in my opinion, constructive and involved info that was useful from both sides. Not the case with HH.

Yes science is science, but nobody has yet to explain any science of how anything about my original statements in this thread were incorrect (that's the problem). The reason, their simply not!!! You can twist my statements into anything, but I will always go back to my original statements. If my original statements were comprehended (without trying to turn them into something their not), I would be happy to learn how (if they were) wrong. But the problem is the statements simply are not being addressed as they were stated. Therefore saying something is wrong without even understanding what you are calling wrong, dosen't make any sense.

That's why I needed to state them over and over so many times, to clarify the exact meaning of the statements first (because they just weren't understood correctly). Then I asked specific questions, that if answered would explain how my statements were incorrect. Those questions were never answered in any way, shape, or form (correctly/sufficiently or not) with all this so called science that there's supposed to be (that way I could learn if I was wrong). So all that has happened is climes that I'm wrong about everything, talk about all this science being science. Yet absolutely no science showing just how my statements were incorrect. Just claims of it being so, and trying to bully me into having a different opinion because that's what somebody else's opinion is.

I'm all for an intelligent conversation, but to do that you simply need to understand my statement/questions correctly in the first place. Otherwise nothing said makes any sense, then how could it be an intelligent conversation? All I can do is my part and try to explain myself as best I can, even if that means trying over and over. But the other person simply needs to meet me half way and try to comprehend what I'm saying in order to be able to intelligently continue the conversation (if they actually want a intelligent conversation). Especially if their saying my statements are wrong, they simply need to understand them first. Otherwise intelligently explaining how/why their wrong is imposable.

I agree that the cubes are not raising the Ph for days on end. Let me just say this without being attacked, please. LOL we also agree with giant pictures making the thread harder to keep up with.
Draek, We don't know as much science as others, but at the same time we use water that comes out of the line at over 9.20. Just for accuracy I stuck my Ph meter in the RO, it comes up 8.75. after adding "Bloom" nutes and Ph down it takes about 2 days before we have a true stable Ph and it stays in range very nicely. We don't care for our delivered water to be below 6.00 Ph for general use and below 6.5 is just fine with us and the Plants.
Oh yes, I believe you have your plastic funnel on the wrong side of the drip ring, you won't need the plastic very long with tomatoes & peppers they grow roots very fast (in our opinion). We don't waste our money on cubes, we use a flood table with small net pots 3" full of Hydrotron and move to Water Farms by just setting them in more Hydrotron. We have had the best results with clones verses seed. A 2 week old cloned seedling is very robust.
We still hate to clean up the Hydrotron after a life cycle but none has had to be replaced, I don't think it is wearing out and we're 3 years into Hydrotron use.
We like to think of our business as being just common thinking and what has worked for us. There is not one Genius on the place.
"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

PS: We are not in jail and believe the Commandments can save our world.

Your RO system isn't working.

joe.jr out of respect for your opinion first thing this morning we checked all 3 of the RO systems and looks like all 3 are not working in the same way. One of them is only 2 months in service with a pressure boost pump the other 2 are 15 years in service with current filter change and no pressure boost pump.
What are you basing that statement on? The Ph should be lower? or what?
"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

Well there goes any respect we had for your opinion. Make a remark like that and then not respond after you put us to work checking out every system on the place even the one in the wife's kitchen. You're just as big a jerk as everyone has said.
"Doing 10 with No Chance of Parole"

Yes. pH. R/O systems are used to remove nearly all mineral content. R/O produces much lower pH when working properly. According to what you wrote, it didn't drop even .5pH. Obviously you are aware of the need for pressure, but this high of pH indicates there are likely a high level of totally dissolved solids in the final product, defeating the purpose of an R/O system in the first place. It means you MAY even have a membrane tear if your pressure is fine, which happens on a lot of systems in a pretty short amount of time with very hard water. If you have over 8pH to start with, you likely have extremely hard water that requires membrane changes on a much more regular basis. One example of pH change (not all will be the same as it depends on a few factors such as prefiltration, pressure, and gasses in the starting solution): My tap measured 8.3pH just moments ago. The RO system it is going into is producing 6.5pH. Or using the drops, which aren't affected by interference, the solution is blue-green to start with. Orange-yellow after RO. EC is .9 (flashing between .8 and 1.0). EC is 0 after RO.

Interesting that you respect my opinion after referring to me as an insecure jerk, an "azzhole", and imply I need to have my ego stroked over and over and over. Also interesting is the fact that I didn't state an opinion anymore than I would be if I said, "your keyboard isn't working" if you press "a" and get "b". You aren't getting the results you should be getting. That isn't an opinion. That is an observed fact based on YOUR observation.

That's funny. When I replied this morning, your latest post wasn't in the thread on my end yet. One reason may be that I opened it at 7:30 but work came first and I didn't finish the reply until later. See, not everyone lives online. I actually work for a living, have 4 kids, and go to school at night. Plus, I also have my own garden to tend to. I hadn't been on this thread to see your post until this morning. Your lack of understanding of your business is not my problem. You should have done your own research. Especially after being a dick to me despite me never being one to you ONCE.

Don't you run a business? Aren't you supposed to be responsible for your own expenditures and therefore studying up on your own investments? Like, for example, what to expect from R/O systems? I mean, what kind of idiot goes and spends a bunch of money on an R/O system (or more than one) without realizing what the end result should be? They aren't cheap. Seriously, just google R/O water and do some research and you will find a ton of info on what pH range R/O water normally falls in. It's not my fault you fail to do your homework. All I did was state a fact. It's not my responsibility to educate your sorry ass on YOUR investments.

A lot more crap. You are not here to help anyone. How stupid are you to go off on these rants. All 3 of our systems are reading the same, all are fresh, and plants are flourishing. We have had RO from 1984 till today and you are an AZZHOLE. My investments are just fine and I don't have to lift a finger.
You can research until doomsday and the proof is still in the pudding.
The water we get here eats the glassware, but we push it through the RO, add nutes, pH down and grow.
You have just shown the world what a stupid, arrogant azzhole you really are.
Proof of your stupidity is = I said we used a meter and meters are wrong when trying to read RO which I said early in this post.
We are done with you and if you reply your talking to someone else or yourself which is most likely.
GFY is that common enough for you jr.?