I don't know why there would be a difference. The venture works by creating a restriction in the flow, which causes high velocity. This higher velocity, entering an area with more diameter, slower flow, creates a low pressure, ie vacuum. The first does this by forcing the water around the air inlet pipe, making for a very restricted area followed by a larger cross-section. The second accomplishes the restriction through the reducing nipple.
The amount of change in area determines the amount of vacuum, so there is no way from the pictures to actually determine which would put in the most air.
Zone 7 A/B
Keep your words sweet. You never know when you may have to eat them.
Richard
huh these seem kinda cool I have delt with these on boats but they work the oter way around let air out and keep water out but they seem cool and I think i will try my luck at making one.
Well I messed that one up
BULKHEAD Y U NO WORK
Music Makes Life Kenny Chesney Zac Brow Skrilex Enimem
The first design is easy to do, requires no special parts, and works well. I recently did something very similar to that on my QT tank, and it worked very well.
One thing to note is that nothing comes for free. You get air but at the expense backpressure and less water flow. If you have plenty of water flow this is not a problem. An dual outlet aquarium air pump with two 12 inch air stones such as a Fusion 700 for less than $19 dollars will put out a lot more air into the water. I do this in my basement QT tank at 36 inches water.
I have been playing with eductors [power siphon ] both to move water and dirt/mud out
and air in to the water on refilling from ground water
I think the side in pipe should be bigger esp for air
I use a 3'' in [reduced by a funnel ] and out main line and a 2'' side suction side
with air the direction 90 vs 45 doesnot matter but size does