• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cocky
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Drunk
  • Embarrased
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Godly
  • Happy
  • Hateful
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678
    Results 141 to 157 of 157

    Thread: Low-Profile Shower Filter

    1. #141
      icu2's Avatar
      icu2 is online now Administrator ~ WWKC Treasurer
      is usually here but if not I'm
      probably off flying
       
      Feeling:
      Piratey
       
      Join Date
      Feb 2007
      Location
      Poulsbo, WA
      Posts
      26,009
      Quote Originally Posted by kimini View Post
      Understood. Until I find the card (probably stuck to the outlet screen in the MB filter), I'll monitor ammonia via the API kit. Regardless how it measures ammonia, the purpose is for differential testing only, meaning it's just to make sure that ammonia levels don't rise as I gradually remove MB media. As of today, probably 2/3 of it has been scooped out. If ammonia stays low, the big switch over will likely occur this weekend
      Just me personally I think it'll be more relevant with the API kit. Most hobbyists are using those to measure ammonia
      unless they have a specific problem and have added Prime/Safe... that's when I think they get an Alert card to try and
      monitor NH3 specifically. I think most will be able to relate better to regular drip kit.
      --Steve
      Find more about Weather in Poulsbo, WA

      "It is far better to be alone, than to be in bad company." --George Washington

    2. #142
      GoldieGirl's Avatar
      GoldieGirl is online now Senior Member
      is good
       
      Feeling:
      Friendly
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2006
      Location
      Nanaimo, BC Canada
      Posts
      1,990
      Quote Originally Posted by icu2 View Post
      The Alert card is only measuring NH3 (harmful) ammonia. The API liquid tests are measuring total ammonia nitrogen(TAN)
      which is NH3 AND NH4 (ionized and non ionized ammonia). The two won't measure the same if the water has more of one
      than the other or when you've added Prime or Safe which ionizes ammonia.
      So I took a cup of water and I added about 2-3 tbls of bottled ammonia. My API kit read off the charts and the Alert card read zero (lightest color). What am I missing? Wouldn’t the bottled ammonia be harmful Nh3?
      Doesn’t this indicate that the card was faulty?
      ________________________________________
      Cheers,
      Ci


    3. #143
      icu2's Avatar
      icu2 is online now Administrator ~ WWKC Treasurer
      is usually here but if not I'm
      probably off flying
       
      Feeling:
      Piratey
       
      Join Date
      Feb 2007
      Location
      Poulsbo, WA
      Posts
      26,009
      Quote Originally Posted by GoldieGirl View Post
      So I took a cup of water and I added about 2-3 tbls of bottled ammonia. My API kit read off the charts and the Alert card read zero (lightest color). What am I missing? Wouldn’t the bottled ammonia be harmful Nh3?
      Doesn’t this indicate that the card was faulty?
      We need someone smarter than me but I'd think it was faulty...
      I've never bought an Alert card but I have a Seneye meter that just measures NH3 like the card and I think
      I've put ammonium chloride in a solution to see the reaction on it and it tests positive so I'd think it was the
      same.
      --Steve
      Find more about Weather in Poulsbo, WA

      "It is far better to be alone, than to be in bad company." --George Washington

    4. #144
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      I got excited, wanting to see the shower working on its own, so it was switched over today.

      The rest of the MB media was scooped out of the IBC, then drained. The FF Pro was moved over to the outlet of the RDF, resulting in much simpler plumbing, changing from six 4" elbows to two, and the overall length of the pipe reduced from maybe 20 feet to about 5 feet.

      Before shutting off the aeration on the MB, its power consumption was measured again, 88W. Interestingly, VA was about 130, but the power factor of 0.7 or so lowered the effective power. I'll have to check and see if home power meters measure power in watts or VA—I suspect the former. Anyway, with the MB still in the circuit, total power was 75 W for the FF Pro + 88W for the MB aeration, or 163W. After converting to operating solely on the shower filter, total power has decreased, though the flow is a bit of a mystery.

      I've been working with the FF Pro pump curves, so who knows how accurate they are. I set pump rpm at some value, see what power it consumes, then use the curves to see what kind of flow and dynamic head results. The findings were... interesting. I triple-checked the values to make sure I got them right; given the results, I suspect the 1200 rpm curve may be wrong:

      1000 rpm:
      90W, 6600 gph; 0.33 meters dynamic head

      1100 rpm:
      106W, 8450 gph; 0.35 meters dynamic head


      1200 rpm:
      130W, 7400 gph; 0.48 meters dynamic head


      1300 rpm:
      155W, 8700 gph; 0.57 meters dynamic head

      1400 rpm:
      185W, 9500 gph; 0.67 meters dynamic head

      The red entries are suspicious because watching the flow, it is moving more water as rpm increases, as one would expect, yet the graphs say otherwise; wish I had a proper flow meter, though it's more for curiosity sake than anything else. What is interesting is how little improvement in flow there is going from 1100 to 1300 rpm; flow increases only 250 gph, yet power consumption increases by roughly 50 watts (again, it's unknown how accurate the curves are).

      Regarding the sound of the shower, it's like frying bacon a neighbor's lawn sprinklers. I realize this shower isn't like the traditional types, but figured that someone would ask.

      Ignoring the curves and instead adjusting the pump to create the same (visual) flow as before resulted in total power consumption being around 120W, so switching from the MB to the low-profile shower has resulted in a power savings of roughly 43 watts, so that goal has been achieved. If I want to increase the flow, the weir on the shower is going to have to be enlarged. It's currently 20" wide and 1" tall, and at anything over about 1300 rpm, it's pretty much maxed out.

      So now the waiting and monitoring begins, keeping a close eye on water quality to make sure the shower has picked up the load. If water quality is wonderful, the decision will have to be made: should flow be reduced to further cut energy usage. We shall see.

      PS: Still haven't found the alert card. It wasn't in the MB, so I'm thinking it sank to the bottom of the RDF, under the drum where I can't see it. I need to get it out of there so that it doesn't end up going through the FF Pro impeller...
      Last edited by kimini; 1 Week Ago at 10:06 PM.

    5. #145
      Grumpy's Avatar
      Grumpy is online now Senior Member
      is Retired with SO much yet to
      learn
       
      Feeling:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Apr 2016
      Location
      Central Oregon Coast
      Posts
      247
      Weirs are used to measure water flow. Below is a website calculator that I haven't previously used. As always with flow calculations there are several variables, so it may not represent your situation, but a 20 inch wide 1 inch flow results in 60 gpm in this calculator. There are probably others to use on-line.

      http://irrigation.wsu.edu/Content/Ca...acted-Weir.php

    6. #146
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      I don't know where the disconnect is; either the FF Pro tables or the weir equation is off by more than a factor of 2. Guess I'll measure actual flow by timing how long it takes to fill a trash can.

    7. #147
      Zac Penn's Avatar
      Zac Penn is offline Supporting Member
      is the owner of Deepwater Koi
      Innovations
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      4,959
      Quote Originally Posted by kimini View Post
      I don't know where the disconnect is; either the FF Pro tables or the weir equation is off by more than a factor of 2. Guess I'll measure actual flow by timing how long it takes to fill a trash can.
      Do you have access to any old 55 gal drums? They have measurement marks on them so you can accurately measure where the gallon line is. A 30 gallon trashcan could be 33 gallon to the very top or it could be 30 gallons to the top. Not a huge difference but seconds do count in measurements like this.
      Zac Penn.... Please sign-up for our MAILING LIST HERE
      904-288-6199
      Zac@DeepwaterKoi.com
      www.DeepwaterKoi.com


    8. #148
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      I do have a container used to collect rain water which has markings, that could work.

      Another approach is to place a large trash bag on the surface of the pond, with the open end under the weir. Time how long it takes to fill to near full, then float it over to the edge of the pond, where a syphon hose is used to repeatedly fill a 5-gallon bucket. Between the time taken to fill it and how many buckets were filled, presto.

    9. #149
      Grumpy's Avatar
      Grumpy is online now Senior Member
      is Retired with SO much yet to
      learn
       
      Feeling:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Apr 2016
      Location
      Central Oregon Coast
      Posts
      247
      From my experience, weirs are usually used for field measurement of stream flows to get a good idea of what the stream is handling (that experience is over 50 years ago so it is very vague ...). But more recently I have seen the weir calculation used to estimate the total width of flows you can expect for pond waterfalls. Your case, you could expect to have a total of 20" of waterfall flows (20 each 1" wide, 10 each 2" wide ...), and each flow would be 1" deep.

      From today's research I see the measurement of depth of water over the weir is supposed to be taken 2.5 times the depth behind the weir face (in your case 1" depth at the weir x 2.5 = or at least 2.5" upstream of the weir face); but usually that is not a big difference with smaller volume of flows like we have (think of the slope of the water surface - and its increased velocity - just before it drops over a major river waterfall).

      A much bigger impact to the accuracy of measuring flow with a weir is if it isn't open channel flow above the weir. If the water was being pushed by pressure (like in a pipe), instead of being pulled by gravity as in a mountain stream, than the flow measured by the weir would be incorrect, and not be an accurate measurement (imagine your thumb over the end of a garden hose). If your bottom reservoir does not have open channel flow, than you are probably moving more water than your weir shows. The water would be spraying out further than if only gravity was pulling it down into the pond.

      Looking forward to test results if you can come up with a measurement method.

    10. #150
      Zac Penn's Avatar
      Zac Penn is offline Supporting Member
      is the owner of Deepwater Koi
      Innovations
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      4,959
      Quote Originally Posted by kimini View Post
      I do have a container used to collect rain water which has markings, that could work.

      Another approach is to place a large trash bag on the surface of the pond, with the open end under the weir. Time how long it takes to fill to near full, then float it over to the edge of the pond, where a syphon hose is used to repeatedly fill a 5-gallon bucket. Between the time taken to fill it and how many buckets were filled, presto.

      Ohhhh, but no so fast grasshopper!!!!! 5 gallon buckets are not the same. I have some that are 6.25 gallons to the rim and some that are 5 gallons to the rim. You really need to make sure you know what sized vessel you are measuring from, in order to get accurate results.

      I would use your large rain barrel with markings and average the times over 5 or so fill ups.
      Zac Penn.... Please sign-up for our MAILING LIST HERE
      904-288-6199
      Zac@DeepwaterKoi.com
      www.DeepwaterKoi.com


    11. #151
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      Of course I'd calibrate the bucket first, sheez!

    12. #152
      Zac Penn's Avatar
      Zac Penn is offline Supporting Member
      is the owner of Deepwater Koi
      Innovations
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      4,959
      Lol
      Zac Penn.... Please sign-up for our MAILING LIST HERE
      904-288-6199
      Zac@DeepwaterKoi.com
      www.DeepwaterKoi.com


    13. #153
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      Well that was interesting.

      Calibrated a bucket (10.0 liters, interestingly), floated an empty trash bag up to the shower outlet, and started the clock... it works out to 6,914 gph. The FF Pro tables say that at 1150 rpm and 117 watts... well it depends. 1150 rpm is above the range of one chart and below the range of the next chart. Eyeballing both gives quite different answers, one saying ~6,900 gph and the other, about 9,250 gph. The back-calculated dynamic head changes as well, with one claiming 11" and the other about 16".

      I'd forgotten that the weir is 18.5" wide and 1.5" tall, and for that size, the weir calculator says just over 6000 gph, so that's in the ballpark, and the 11" dynamic head is believable as well. The question now becomes, do I bother increasing the flow? Ammonia remains at zero, so the shower's doing its job, and since the point was to minimize power usage, I think I'll wait and see what happens in the spring when feeding ramps up.

      Somewhat related, before the shower was added, water dumped back into the pond through a pipe with sufficient flow and direction that it induced a slow spin which avoided dead spots. With the weir, there is no circulation with it dropping in nearly vertical. I'm considering modifying the weir, making it wider, a bit taller, and having it stick out a bit more, with 4" pipe fittings below it. 90-degree bends could be added to once again add some circulating force to the pond. The catch is that however it's modified, it can't involve plastic welding in-place since my welder needs compressed air and the hose isn't long enough. Might make it bolt-on. No rush.

      Lastly, where the water's splashing into the media is slowly turning a very slight tan. I expect that trend to continue, and there's no sign of any plugging thanks in great part to the RDF.
      Attached Images Attached Images  
      Last edited by kimini; 3 Days Ago at 10:27 PM.

    14. #154
      Zac Penn's Avatar
      Zac Penn is offline Supporting Member
      is the owner of Deepwater Koi
      Innovations
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      Jacksonville, Fl
      Posts
      4,959
      I forget...How many gallons is your pond?

      I am pretty impressed that at the beginning you estimated 7,100 GPH and ended up so close after measuring with a known amount of water.
      Zac Penn.... Please sign-up for our MAILING LIST HERE
      904-288-6199
      Zac@DeepwaterKoi.com
      www.DeepwaterKoi.com


    15. #155
      Grumpy's Avatar
      Grumpy is online now Senior Member
      is Retired with SO much yet to
      learn
       
      Feeling:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Apr 2016
      Location
      Central Oregon Coast
      Posts
      247
      It looks like a successful test, thanks for posting the results. Because of the enclosed weir, when you approach the maximum flow of the weir "nozzle" you may not have open top flow that the weir calculator assumes, and your actual flow is likely greater.
      Your low head shower using one of the DC plastic pumps looks like a "keeper". I guess your extended "test drive" will show any weakness, but it seems you have reduced your immediate cost of electric consumption while maintaining equal bio. Now the long term cost of ownership with the plastic pump is still an outstanding question, but that equation varies based on cost of electricity in your area, and how clean the water is coming to the pump. Thanks!

    16. #156
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
      ...Your low head shower using one of the DC plastic pumps looks like a "keeper"
      Unfortunately it's the other end of the spectrum, a Flowfriend Pro with its crazy 316 stainless housing and insane price. I gave up waiting for a plastic version, and as said before, as insanely expensive as it is, it pays for itself in just over 4 years.
      Last edited by kimini; 3 Days Ago at 10:31 PM.

    17. #157
      kimini is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,298
      Quote Originally Posted by Zac Penn View Post
      I forget...How many gallons is your pond?

      I am pretty impressed that at the beginning you estimated 7,100 GPH and ended up so close after measuring with a known amount of water.
      6000 gallons. If I want to increase the flow appreciably, I'm going to have to add some drip bars inside the covers. As it is, cranking up the flow causes the water to hit the covers, which are curved, so the splashing runs downhill to the front and back edges, then drips outside the unit. That was fixed today.
      Last edited by kimini; 2 Days Ago at 08:45 PM.

    Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •