# Grams per Day



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 10, 2012)

*To calculate is Grams Per Day (GPD). Subtract the planting date from the  start date to find the total number of days grown. Then take the weight  of harvest, and divide by the number of days grown, to find out how much  was produced each day. Calculating the GPD for each harvest will allow a  comparison of the success of different grows even if the number of days  for each is different.*


----------



## ozzydiodude (Aug 10, 2012)

Kinda a worthless number I would say. since a plant don't truly start putting on weight til the buds start developing 

:welcome: To MP:48:


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 10, 2012)

Not a worthless number at all, can use it to find out how effiecent your garden is, and whether a change has a positive or negative effect on harvest.


----------



## ozzydiodude (Aug 10, 2012)

MJ plants put on most of their weight during flowering, so your numbers would not be the same in the the first weeks of growth as the last weeks of flowering. You can't use mathematics to grow there are too many variables


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 11, 2012)

The numbers are calculated after harvest, to rate the efficiency of the grow, which can then be compared to other grows meaningfully.


----------



## ShOrTbUs (Aug 11, 2012)

in a business setting efficiency is rule #1. i could see how this info could be useful for some of us. if you have to make a quota in a given set period of time, then this calculation would be very useful when revising your technique. for those of us that aren't in it for the money. its not so much about how much weight we can pump out in a given amount of time, and more about growing the dankest of the dank. regardless of the overall weight


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 11, 2012)

If I am considering a new technique or product, I want to know if I'm actually getting something out of using it. This is one way to find out. Or if I want to compare the yield of one plant vs another.

If the quality of smoke is the same between two plants, pick the one that did better for breeding. There are more than just commercial applications for the calculation.


----------



## pcduck (Aug 11, 2012)

ozzydiodude said:
			
		

> MJ plants put on most of their weight during flowering, so your numbers would not be the same in the the first weeks of growth as the last weeks of flowering. You can't use mathematics to grow there are too many variables



:yeahthat:

Just to many variables, from container size to temps. Some you have control over, some you do not.


----------



## BackWoodsDrifter (Aug 11, 2012)

I just grows it kills it drys it jams it in me pipe and smokes it

grows+kills+drys+jams=:fly: 
Math comp[lete 

BWD


----------



## Roddy (Aug 11, 2012)

Doesn't seem to be a thing I'm worrying about and as duck said, there's way too many variables.


----------



## Old_SSSC_Guy (Aug 11, 2012)

And what factor adjusts the term of growth against the strain and its maturity curve?  Your 'GPD' would be unnaturally skewed for indica and auto strains and has no relationship to the quality or to the true value.

Other factors would also skew the result.  Quality of trim of final product, any derivatives (like bubble hash), height vs required surface area, etc.

A 'GPD' would offer only a tiny hobby yardstick and would not offer any sort of comparable basis in reality.  A pound of crap hemp grown in 60 days would appear to be gold compared to a pound of 180-day sativa.


----------



## Ruffy (Aug 11, 2012)

also some people grow under t5's or l.e.d or just enough hps per room & some use tripple hps what others use. 1 issue in the grow will effect the #s or weight.  also some veg with 1000w mh compared to led/t5 that will effect the grow#'s


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 12, 2012)

Opinions respectfully noted, so if you don't track production rate, how do you know if a new additive or change has improved or hurt your garden over your last grow? Say a 16 plant 120 day grow vs a 23 plant 90 day grow.


----------



## BackWoodsDrifter (Aug 12, 2012)

I dont worry bout it at all pilgrem. As long as I keep growin, my skills and me end product only gets better and thats all that matters. Learnin from mistakes only improves my smoke and like I saisd before I only grows me needs and thats all I need. Good luck yur trails walkin friend hope they take you to places looked for.

BWD


----------



## pcduck (Aug 12, 2012)

Leonardo De Garden said:
			
		

> Opinions respectfully noted, so if you don't track production rate, how do you know if a new additive or change has improved or hurt your garden over your last grow? Say a 16 plant 120 day grow vs a 23 plant 90 day grow.



Most do it by finished grams per watt:hubba:


----------



## Roddy (Aug 12, 2012)

Leonardo De Garden said:
			
		

> Opinions respectfully noted, so if you don't track production rate, how do you know if a new additive or change has improved or hurt your garden over your last grow? Say a 16 plant 120 day grow vs a 23 plant 90 day grow.



How do you know the light issue you had a week into budding didn't drop your GDP? how do you know your running out of nutes and letting the gals wait a few days for feeding didn't lessen the numbers? How about a heat wave, cold wave, fan broke? Soooo many things can go into a grow, figuring out what helped and what didn't would be very hard....unless you have a 100% dialed in and stabilized room that has proven it's production several times over.....AND you're running the same strain from the same mother?

this, of course, is MHO and I will add that, if you are worried about gram count, you're probably either not producing enough or are in it for the money? I stopped counting grams long ago, I guesstimate from time to time for fun, but actual numbers mean little besides the number of jars filled. It also appears you're judging different strains and grow times and thinking your numbers will show something....I can't figure what except it will say different strains produce different amounts? Comparing those numbers would only confuse things imho....but I've gone straight from bed to a wake-n-bake, so I could be :confused2:  not uncommon....lol


----------



## Dan K. Liberty (Aug 12, 2012)

This idea might have some value for comparing factors such as vegging time for a given strain . . . i.e. . . is that extra 2 or 3 weeks of veg time paying off in a proportionally larger yield, or would you do better fitting 2 smaller, shorter veg plants into the spot of the larger, longer veg one ??


----------



## Growdude (Aug 12, 2012)

Leonardo De Garden said:
			
		

> Opinions respectfully noted, so if you don't track production rate, how do you know if a new additive or change has improved or hurt your garden over your last grow? Say a 16 plant 120 day grow vs a 23 plant 90 day grow.


 
I use grams per square foot, Ive only got so big of an area, no matter the plant count.
So whatever produces more in the same or shorter time is always most efficient.


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 12, 2012)

BackWoodsDrifter said:
			
		

> I dont worry bout it at all pilgrem. As long as I keep growin, my skills and me end product only gets better and thats all that matters. Learnin from mistakes only improves my smoke and like I saisd before I only grows me needs and thats all I need. Good luck yur trails walkin friend hope they take you to places looked for.
> 
> BWD



Fair enough Backwoods, as long as people are learning and getting better, no way to argue with that. Much like my namesake might, I tend to garden on the scientific side, but regardless of the method, I agree, at the end of the day the smoke in your bowl is all that counts.


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 12, 2012)

pcduck said:
			
		

> Most do it by finished grams per watt:hubba:



Ha, this all started over a discussion about why grams per day (GPD) is better than grams per watt as a measure of efficiency. From the amount produced each day you can then calculate how many watts per day you are spending, but grams per watt without a time frame isn't a useful comparision. 

I in no way mean to suggest it should be the only gauge used, but it is a much more mathematically sound method than the more common if vague grams per watt.


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 12, 2012)

Roddy said:
			
		

> How do you know the light issue you had a week into budding didn't drop your GDP?....
> 
> this, of course, is MHO and I will add that, if you are worried about gram count, you're probably either not producing enough or are in it for the money? I stopped counting grams long ago, I guesstimate from time to time for fun, but actual numbers mean little besides the number of jars filled. It also appears you're judging different strains and grow times and thinking your numbers will show something....I can't figure what except it will say different strains produce different amounts? Comparing those numbers would only confuse things imho....but I've gone straight from bed to a wake-n-bake, so I could be :confused2:  not uncommon....lol



Because that's the point of tracking GDP, to tell if the overall success increases or decreases, kind of like a grade earned for the effort. Did this one or that one actually produce more for what you put into it.

Yes, one of the goals is to find out which strains actually grow which amounts, or which nutrient lines, or light intensities or whatever. If I try a more expensive nutrient line against a cheaper one with a pair of clones, not only do I want to know if it's better, but is it enough better? At to my tracking the harvested grams, I track several other factors and traits as well. 

To address some of the previous comments as to quality, the simple answer is to not grow crappy weed. I only hobby garden myself, but I'm pretty picky about what I put in.


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 12, 2012)

Just to be clear, I mean that it is most useful when comparing your own grows and plants against each other than for bragging rights of some sort.


----------



## pcduck (Aug 12, 2012)

Well being that you are discussing just the efficiency between your own grow to check on improvement. This is just a much easier way to tell for me, with less variables.


----------



## ozzydiodude (Aug 12, 2012)

bragging right for me is when I smoke a joint with some one then got to wake then up and give then a paper towel  to wipe the drool off the chin


----------



## Dan K. Liberty (Aug 12, 2012)

LOL ozzy . . . I smoked 2 grams in five minutes . . . damn efficient !! :rofl:


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 13, 2012)

ozzydiodude said:
			
		

> bragging right for me is when I smoke a joint with some one then got to wake then up and give then a paper towel  to wipe the drool off the chin



Always a good sign.


----------



## canon (Aug 13, 2012)

LDG... I hear you loud and clear. Perhaps too clear. :hubba: 
A lot of folks measure by Grams / per watt and all sorts of ways.
Think I'm on the same bus as you. 
I run a perpetual set up. Lighting cost are pretty much constant.
I gravitated towards measuring time / by grams awhile ago. Feel it's the best measure of efficiency *in a sliding rule*  sort of evaluation. I say that because I also figure in how many hits per gram (quality), taste, smell, trimming, resistance atributes, and such.

I find it very worth while when comparing either strains/ techniques / or cost per (whatever). In the end, is it _most _enjoyment per day of growing (was it worth it).

Much of it is pure subjective because I may like something particular than is above average cost to run. But since I enjoy it to a point,, some sacrifices are durable.
I think your post is a strong deciding factor in deciding a strain's / technique's worth... from a personal standpoint. Not everyone likes the same thing and this does help in deciding amoung favorites at times. :icon_smile:


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 14, 2012)

canon said:
			
		

> LDG... I hear you loud and clear. Perhaps too clear. :hubba:
> A lot of folks measure by Grams / per watt and all sorts of ways.
> Think I'm on the same bus as you.
> I run a perpetual set up. Lighting cost are pretty much constant.
> ...



In another thread I'm running 2 clones side by side, one in organic, and one in chem. Obviously one thing I'm interested in is how much each produces, so I'll calculate the GPD for each. I also want to know if there is a difference in flavor, so I'll do a blind taste test for that. Different tools for different situations. Since I grow for personal use, obviously flavor is going to count for more than size, but I'm not going to ignore valuable growth data just because it isn't the most important factor.
What if the flavors are equal?

That growing has too many variables to use science with is nonsense. It's applied science, not witchcraft, and the basics aren't that hard to learn if people try just a little.


----------



## ross (Aug 18, 2012)

I think the op meant average grams per day, not that you could literally know how much weight each plant put on each day.


----------



## Dan K. Liberty (Aug 18, 2012)

:stoned:I thought he meant how many days from seed to chop and how many grams that many days produced in final weight


----------



## SensiStarFan (Aug 20, 2012)

I calculate the GPD as well but I do not necessarily go with what it says is the highest yielding plants.  If I have a plant that takes 10 weeks to finish and after 70 days produces 84 grams giving me 1.08 GPD, and I am comparing that to a plant that finishes in 56 days and produces 59 grams giving me 1.05 GPD, I will lean towards the 8 week strain assuming the smoke quality is equal.  Over the course of 1 year the 8 week strain would yield 384.6 grams versus 438 grams a year for the 10 week strain, meaning I am giving up 53.4 grams per year by going with the shorter growing strain.  However, I gain some advantages in the grow room.  First my plants are turned over faster leading to the possibility for more variety.  Second, if a mistake is made in the growing not as much time is lost in the process.  If I ruin a cycle the amount of lost time is greater if growing longer flowering strains.  The same thing goes for pests.  If I wake up tomorrow and find that mites have taken over my flowering plants, I can restart and finish a new crop faster with the shorter flowering strains.
  I consider both GPD and GPW.  The GPW tells me about the total efficiency of my garden as a whole while the GPD tells me about the efficiency of a certain strain/pheno.  Both are very usefull but alone are not the determining factors in what I grow.  I would take an ounce of dank over a QP of mids any day of the week.    

-SSF


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 21, 2012)

ross said:
			
		

> I think the op meant average grams per day, not that you could literally know how much weight each plant put on each day.



Correct, it's just an overall indication of how well a grow or plant produced. There are a variety of factors that should also be considered, but it is a useful indication of performance.


----------



## pcduck (Aug 21, 2012)

> Correct, it's just an overall indication of how well a grow or plant produced.



After a few grows, the grower should be able to tell if their room is dialed in or not, without all this confusing math.jmo


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 21, 2012)

pcduck said:
			
		

> After a few grows, the grower should be able to tell if their room is dialed in or not, without all this confusing math.jmo



And if you are the sort of gardener that likes to garden by "feel" then that is one way to do it. Plenty of folks garden without any notes or much math at all.

I'm just saying that for those that do want to do the math, GPD-grams per day (amount harvested / number of days in grow) is an easy way to calculate a number that has value, and can be extended to include costs, comparisons, and production ratings. And unlike a lot of the "math" on the Internet forums about such things, it is actually mathematically sound and scientifically useful. 

I'm not claiming that it is something a gardener has to do. Only that those with the desire to garden with a bit more of a scientific bent to things should know how to do at least the base calculation for production rate.


----------



## Roddy (Aug 21, 2012)

Truly, after the first few times growing out the same strain, one can tell (per plant) how well it did compared to past grows, no math needed. Figuring gram to cost ratios seems like would give better info....imho....if one wanted to know such things. I know the stuff I am growing costs FAR less than it would to buy like product...that's all that matters to me

Not knocking your thoughts, just not sure I understand how they can be of much help (to me, at least)...and certainly not something I'm gonna get my mind all burned out over....enough crazy things to figure out without adding that to the mix  I'm sure there are many out there that try to figure every little angle, though...


----------



## Roddy (Aug 21, 2012)

pcduck said:
			
		

> After a few grows, the grower should be able to tell if their room is dialed in or not, without all this confusing math.jmo



I guess we both said the same thing only differently :aok:


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 22, 2012)

Roddy said:
			
		

> ... Figuring gram to cost ratios seems like would give better info....i
> 
> Not knocking your thoughts, just not sure I understand how they can be of much help (to me, at least)...  I'm sure there are many out there that try to figure every little angle, though...



If you take your expenses into account, you can tell exactly how much your garden costs each day to run as well. While I'm sure that many gardeners have no issue at all keeping things in the black, it is possible for someone new to gardening in a legal state where prices have dropped to basement levels to blow enough $$ on overpriced gear and nutes to actually run in the red. 

And when comparing nutes or whatever head to head, every angle you can cover is exactly what you want to look at. So it's not for everyone, but for those that are into the science end of it, it is handy to know.


----------



## Roddy (Aug 22, 2012)

I can't imagine a price where growing my own wouldn't be more cost effective than buying, price of start-up and all, and I know I'm smoking top shelf (this is the thing most important to me). I know the prices around here are pretty low, yet I know many that are truly making a living (some spending upwards of $25k for their set-up....no joke). 

Unless you buy LED.....maybe? :rofl:


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 22, 2012)

Roddy said:
			
		

> I can't imagine a price where growing my own wouldn't be more cost effective than buying, price of start-up and all, and I know I'm smoking top shelf (this is the thing most important to me). I know the prices around here are pretty low, yet I know many that are truly making a living (some spending upwards of $25k for their set-up....no joke).
> 
> Unless you buy LED.....maybe? :rofl:



First, I encourage everyone to grow their own and keep money as far away from your weed as you can. I don't do deals of any kind.

But

Take into account that wholesale in California right now is in the ballpark of 1k-1,200 a pound if you are connected.  Now walk into a hydro store with newbie eyes, and buy the entire line of the most expensive stuff on the market. And sure toss on that LEDs are the way to go, all the sales literature says so. And because of all the hot shot advice from friends, need to have at least 1k watts per plant which makes it easy to hit that tier 3 extra expensive electricity rate from the electric company. 

No, it isn't easy to shoot yourself in the foot bad enough to make it not a better and cheaper way to go, unless you totally wipe out and kill everything. But it is possible, and I know that people do it because I've seen them plunk down big bucks for a silica supplement from company A when a more potent version is on the market from company B for less than half the price. If you really want to know which is the better deal, run them side by side for a grow. Calculate the production (GPD) for each, and see for yourself which is the better deal. 

Same goes for nutrients, if company A sells a line for $300, I want to see improvement over company B's $60 line. Okay yes, if either taste like crap, I'm going with the other, but if I can't tell the difference? Why donate $240 to the "because our marketing says it's cool" fund? I don't mind paying top dollar for a distinct improvement, but you aren't going convince me that a $60 bottle is that much better than a $20 bottle without some actual hard data to back that up, and you can't trust squat about what they claim, you practically have to run it yourself to know for sure. 

No not everyone has to run the tests, but if enough people do, and they do it right, and report their findings, then overall the market pressure will improve the products, not just reward the best ad men. So does your regular run of the mill gardener need to do this if they don't really care about the results, of course not, if it isn't your thing, it isn't your thing, but for the geek gardeners, who let's face it don't get a lot of love, they should at least be able to learn how to do it right. Because it's the geek gardeners that grow up to design nutrients with the chemists (yes with organics too, chemistry doesn't differentiate other than if something has carbon in it), and the better educated they are, the less random crap in bottles show up on the market. 

If the math doesn't appeal, skip it, it isn't your bag, if it does, it's only fair you learn how to do it right.


----------



## hottip (Aug 29, 2012)

BackWoodsDrifter said:
			
		

> I just grows it kills it drys it jams it in me pipe and smokes it
> 
> grows+kills+drys+jams=:fly:
> Math comp[lete
> ...


 
Thats the same process that I use too.


----------



## HemperFi (Aug 29, 2012)

Smoke a little more and drop that IQ some -- you think too much lol -- but keep up the good work. You can't measure all the variables, and one slip of the hand can screw up everything, but you keep thinking -- I'm impressed, Leo


peace


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Aug 31, 2012)

HemperFi said:
			
		

> Smoke a little more and drop that IQ some -- you think too much lol -- but keep up the good work. You can't measure all the variables, and one slip of the hand can screw up everything, but you keep thinking -- I'm impressed, Leo
> 
> peace



You aren't kidding there HemperFi, as a lad I once wanted some fireworks (I don't even remember why), and couldn't get any because I was just a kid, so I changed my sights to gunpowder, which I figured I could use to make some (gunpowder was a more common substance to get ahold of in the area anyway). Well of course I couldn't get any of that because again I was a kid and too young for such things.

Now here is where being bright shows the difference in how bad you can screw up, a dim kid would have given up at that point. I did research instead. And I found a loophole in the whole age restriction system. At least as the time, there was no age restriction on the purchase of either sulfur or potassium nitrate, two chemicals often used in gardening and farming. I could get all of that I cared to. They are also (no secret, common knowledge) the two main components of homemade black powder.

So, instead of a kid with a handful of penny firecrackers that I originally was after, I wound up with a good pound of homemade black powder. My IQ has not always been a survival trait for me.


----------



## 7greeneyes (Nov 19, 2012)

So can you still count to 10 on your fingers?:rofl:i,e, homemade explosives:shocked:


----------



## Leonardo De Garden (Nov 19, 2012)

7greeneyes said:
			
		

> So can you still count to 10 on your fingers?:rofl:i,e, homemade explosives:shocked:



Yeah, still have all 10, and luckily matured to the point where just because one can make XXXX or XXXX or XXXX at home, doesn't mean one should or has to. 

Actually, I do pretty well, for one thing I use potassium nitrate for plant food and not for it's other properties these days, and for another, when I'm working, I pay attention. Its' when I'm way mellow and forget the coffee table got moved that I half kill myself when I trip over it.


----------



## 7greeneyes (Nov 19, 2012)

oh dear lord...lol...well good stuff bud.

keeper lit

-7ge


----------

