Ebb and Flow Vs Passive Subirrigation

I've read the E&F system keeps the medium more completely saturated with nutes and oxygen, but how significant are the benefits over a passive reservoir-like system.

I'm looking for answers from those who have actually have had some practical first/second-hand experience with both methods. Are there any trade-offs worth mentioning? I assume the passive system is somewhat less expensive and possibly easier to implement and maintain. Or is the E&F system so vastly superior to warrant any extra investments?

This is all very new to me BTW, so please excuse any confusion or ignorance on my part.

Thank you. :)

I think passive is totally underrated. I believe it is better and more fool proof than ebb and flow. In passive the roots uptake more oxygen because they never get drowned.

You mean passive systems like wick or Hempy buckets, right?

I would say this depends on how many plants and how much space and what style of grow as much as anything. I started with an ebb & flow system. At first, it used plastic flood trays, but this quickly became limiting as the plants grew.... quickly. A few tinkerings later and I had a multi-flow system connected together with 1/2" tubing so that I could position and move plants anywhere in the room and quickly add or remove plants from the setup.

That system was great for a large room with probably 10 to 40 plants... as long as you do a good job in construction and don't wind up with leaks.... many an annoying prototype on that system before I got it all worked out. Use home depot 2 1/2 qt paint mixing buckets and plastic T-fittings, 1/2 inch. Drill through the side of the container as low as you can with a 3/8" drill bit. Press the T-fitting through, the plastic of the container will stretch and almost make a water tight seal... but not quite. Seal the connection up from both sides with a hot glue gun. Now you're in business :)

That was fun, but I don't have any such cool space or any such cool grow going on any more.

Now, I've got a microscopic grow that I want to get the most efficiency from. It's a tiny closet just big enough to support my hobby. I only have 3.75 sqft to play with (3.75 for veg down below, and 3.75 for bloom above), but I've got a $h!t-ton of light on it so I plan to switch back to hydro so that I can allow for fast enough growth and nutrient uptake to really use all those lumens. I don't want the noise of pumps, or bubblers, and I don't really have space to locate tanks. I don't want to use flood trays because my light position is fixed and I want to be able independently raise or lower plants to provide an even canopy. I'll only be growing a few plants, so individually attending to them won't be much of a problem. For all of those reasons, I am planning on doing Hempy Buckets when I switch over from dirt. I think it's about the perfect match for my new space.

I'm planning on doing mini-hempys in Styrofoam coffee cups, then transfer into the same 2 1/2 qt containers that I used to use for ebb & flow for late veg and bloom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IAmKowalski

You mean passive systems like wick or Hempy buckets, right?

---

Yes, a wick type system. I just became aware of hempy buckets, thanks. :thumbsup:

What medium works best with hempy buckets? I see perlite/vermiculite mentioned.
Would hydroton work with this setup? Does hydroton "wick" well (enough) in general?

For clarification, will hydroton draw nutes and oxygen UP against the force of gravity and deliver them sufficiently, and/or what would be the most effective medium in this regard?

If you choose Hempy buckets, follow the instructions precisely. Interstitial space volume in the media must be correct; hydroton has a much greater volume and lower total surface area.
Hydroton was designed for ebb n flow. It does not wick; only pebbles touching water will absorb moisture.