PDA

View Full Version : Static media mechanical filtration: Pros/Cons



Harveythekoi
03-08-2005, 10:49 PM
There is always some trend in either mechanical and bio filtration that seems to grab everyones attention. The latest being static K1 or other medias for fines filtration. I'd like to discuss some of the pros and cons to this method.

This idea is not new, it's been used in bead filters for some time now, with excellent results for fines polishing. The results were almost too good. It trapped so much backwashing had to be increased to avoid DOC build-up. The pros of this were easy pressured backwashes, even better with a blower. The Cons were frequency of having to do backwashes and a lot of head added to the system.

Now the trend is to use static media in a similar way. Non-pressurized being a plus as it will fit into most gravity flow systems. But lets look at the similarities to these and beads. The results are almost too good. The amount of fines being trapped are a plus in one way and a minus in another. Plus in that it comes out of the water column, minus in that it needs to be completely removed from the latter.

So what does this lead to? More maintenance! The Catch-22 of ponding. We want better water quality yet strive for ease of maintenance also. So lets look at static K1 in a way to try and achieve both.

Garrett

Harveythekoi
03-08-2005, 10:55 PM
I hear of a lot of people that want to use it as the first form of mechanical filtration. It will work well in this set-up, too well. The amount of solids intoduced to the media will get it filthy very quickly. Now your backwashing the media constantly trying to remove these solids from the water stream. Here's where the non-clogging part of the media becomes a detriment. If water doesn't lose flow most will look at it and say everything is fine. This is not true, with all the trapped waste and water going through it some will start dissolving or breaking down adding to the DOC levels of the pond water. So frequent cleaning is advised.

Another drawback is how the media is cleaned. Most are using a small air pump to generate bubbles to agitate the media. While this works a water stream should still be flowing over the agitated media to rinse this all away. With a heavily soiled media this could take several attempts in various set-ups. Most static K1 designs I've seen lack severely in the cleaning department.

So how can we best use this new design?

Garrett

LouAnn NOrman
03-08-2005, 10:59 PM
I have no experience with this media. I hope to read all your opinions here. It sounds like a good thing to me. Educate me, please!

Akitakoi
03-08-2005, 11:05 PM
It's all in setting up the system with bypass valves. Just like a bead filter, throw the bypass valve, turn on the air, when water runs clear turn off the air, turn back the valve.
Indoors it works great.
If string algea or leaves are a problem I would think some type of strainer would be needed before the static basket.

Akitakoi
03-08-2005, 11:09 PM
I hear of a lot of people that want to use it as the first form of mechanical filtration. It will work well in this set-up, too well. The amount of solids intoduced to the media will get it filthy very quickly. Now your backwashing the media constantly trying to remove these solids from the water stream. Here's where the non-clogging part of the media becomes a detriment. If water doesn't lose flow most will look at it and say everything is fine. This is not true, with all the trapped waste and water going through it some will start dissolving or breaking down adding to the DOC levels of the pond water. So frequent cleaning is advised.

Another drawback is how the media is cleaned. Most are using a small air pump to generate bubbles to agitate the media. While this works a water stream should still be flowing over the agitated media to rinse this all away. With a heavily soiled media this could take several attempts in various set-ups. Most static K1 designs I've seen lack severely in the cleaning department.

So how can we best use this new design?

GarrettFines filtering only, place the static basket in a large settling chamber. Slow enough that the solids(poo)settles before it gets into the biomedia. Let gravity do most of the work.

Harveythekoi
03-08-2005, 11:12 PM
For me, I would like to see these designed into a system of mechanical filtration rather than it be looked at as a stand alone fix. If Steve C. impressed anything upon me it's the system concept. Not only in pond design but filtration design also. He favors the Nexus with Answer because it follows this concept. Unfortunately it lacked in fines filtration. The fix was usually to add a bead filter afterwards for this end. And that was some good thinking because of the ease of cleaning the beads.

Many now are looking at saving the money and just using the static media to do the same job. On the Nexus there are several pluses and minuses to doing this.

Exit chamber K1. The better solution in my mind. This is where the static media will work best. The vortex potion with answer (Nexus shouldn't be sold without one) have taken care of the heavy mechanical filtration and the bio portion has aerated the water again. Now when it goes through the static media portion the media has less work to do mechanically and the heavily aerated water aides in growing the bacteria that eat away at the waste.

Another plus is that with a diverter valve at the pump you could keep water flowing over the media during backwash and just pump the watse out. A much more efficient solution for cleaning the media.

The downside is that the chamber is very small. It requires a dam to keep the water flowing over the top of the media and if for some reason the water level dropped some from the Answer clogging (not likely, but could happen) the pump could run dry till the water level caught up.

The EAzy or similar set ups. This goes back to the primary mechanical part I don't like. In an indoor pond environment this may work well. For and outdoor set up I don't like it. I just dont see a way to backwash the media thoroughly enough by agitating it and draining the water at the same time. On a Nexus at least the water entry is at the top and could somewhat run through the media but the 1½" drain just wont take the water out fast enough to do much good.

Garrett

Akitakoi
03-08-2005, 11:20 PM
I have a Nexus, the center chamber is just too small for much settling. Most of the settling happins in the pipe feeding the first chamber.

A big settling tank at the same depth as the bottom drain is the only way to really gravity feed a mechanical filter.

Harveythekoi
03-08-2005, 11:24 PM
But how to do this? In a system designed for this a good set-up would be vortex settlement first then to a screen of some sort, or even a loose matting or brushes and then to the fines filtration.

I do like the thought of aerated water going through the fines filter. Maybe someone more knowledgable in the bio bug end will chime in whether this is truly a benefit or not. I lean towards the "it can't hurt theory".

So using the Nexus again as an example the best would be a larger exit chamber to hold more media and a way to allow for some draw down in the system.

In a non-Nexus set up how would we best build something for this use?

Lets say the heavy mechanical was already taken care of and we were concentrating on fines filtration only.

Backwashing is a priority. Not only in how thorough it cleans the media but the ease with which it can be done.

Ensuring all the water passes the media would be another consideration.

I'll shut up now and let others chime in.

Garrett

Mitch
03-09-2005, 02:43 AM
But I would like to better understand K1 media. Is K1 intended or designed to act primarily as a mech filtration media, or as a bio media?

I assume it works as well for both functions?

Mitch

Gene
03-09-2005, 04:58 AM
Kaldnes media has been used in the fish farming industry for many years before Evolution Aqua introduced it to the hobby via the Nexus. The moving bed filtration is not new. EA just used it in a combination unit that does mechanical filtration and has the moving bed biological filtration with Kaldnes.

The primary use has been for biological filtration.

paulw
03-09-2005, 07:32 AM
Have alook at this study/test that maurice did on static k1, taken from maurices website that has alot of usefull information for people to read.

http://www.koi-uk.co.uk/mechanical_filtration_capable_of.htm

redhotkoi
03-09-2005, 08:00 AM
Their is two reason to do static kaldness.
1. Mechanical Filtration
2. Fine/Polish

The reason I want to use the static kaldness in the center section of the Nexus is for mechanical filtration. Since Kaldness work too well is their another media that is floating and larger it won't trap as much crud?

The Answer is a expansive device and it cost alot to run. Just like everything in life with every positive their is a negative or the saying no pain no gain. The question is are you willing to cleaning your filter twice a week? To save $20-$30 a month on electrical and the $1600 to buy the answer? The easy will cost $500-$600 to buy or DIY $100-$200.

Harvey or anyone else;
Does a 40 or 80 liter air pump have enough power to clean the media?
How about using a 1 hp or larger blower to clean the media through a difusser of some sort.

I will have two of some thing on my pond and i'm sure their is someone that will have more. 2 Answer is $40 - $60 a month plus $3200 to but it. The cost adds up really quick.

Ryan S.
03-09-2005, 08:47 AM
Garrett,

This is an interesting topic, I have been dueing some experiments overwinter on my pond setup. I was trying to hold off on comments until I had longer range results. If you remember back to the DIY aerated moving bed I was running, I have been using that in static mode as a mechanical filter. I removed all other filtration, no UVs or anything. Running this in static mode takes like a minute to setup, cut off air, turn inlet down, and turn the outlet 90degrees force the water through more K1. I the testing I just stired it by hand and drained the tank. I do I have an easier way to due things that I will be using this season, one is a manafold, similar to the air manafold I use, except no stones, just drilled 1/2" PVC. Reasoning for this is that you don't want to leave the air stones in there without air or they will clog. They are on a union so easy to switch out. The other thing is a 2" bulkhead I put into the tank that will have a piece of 2" PVC with drilled holes (similar to the outlet), I have a 2hp blower I can hook up to this to clean. This is not pictured in the diagram.

At first with the other filtration, it was hardly catching anything, when I cut off everything else and waited for it to clog it never happened. After about 6 weeks I gave up and did another clean, I really don't like waste in the system that long. It did catch a lot after this time, but not acceptible for me. As a mechanical filter is fair at best IMHO, there is just a lot of void space in the K1 compared to microscreens and "real" bead filters. The good thing is that a simple cheap static K1 filter probably works as good or better than one of the bead filter types that uses tubular media, like a Ultima. The bad thing is that it nowhere close to a "real" bead filter.

I will have this on a separte circuit this season to do more testing with, feed from a mid level intake.

luke-gr
03-09-2005, 09:50 AM
Following what C5 just said, I think that is why Kent Wallace has so much faith in the WLim EZRs. The sand has much less void space than the tubular medias. In his Charles Pond redo thread he showed two DIY gravel/sand filters. I would be curious to tinker with one of those. Sand is cheaper than K1 and seems like it would have to work better because of the smaller voids. :thinking: Kaldnes was engineered as a bio media from what I understand.

Harveythekoi
03-09-2005, 10:32 AM
I agree on the cost of the Answer, up front and running. That's why I'm experimenting with the wedge wire screens. I do not agree that screens will do as fine a job a the static media filters or beads. To have that fine a mesh would clog instantly. Nicco has a 75 micron screen running on one of his filters to a shower. Algae has got through this and hangs from the holes of the distribution pipe.

Redhot, I personally wouldn't use this for pure mechanical unless you had a good way to clean. In the center section of the Nexus with the small drain I just dojn't see it happening. I like it in the exit port, just not large enough.

C5, I'm not sure what you mean with your comparison to bead filters. Ease of cleaning, backwash ability or??

A blower would probably be a good way to clean one of these, the same as with bead filters. The hard part is designing a non-pressurized one that will flow water across the beads while they are being agaitated. I feel that is one of the most important things to a thorough flush.

As for fines filtration the ultra bio media is much smaller and would probably do a better job. It's a sinking media so the filter would have to be built with this in mind. To tell the truth this may be a better way to build one of these. With the water being downflow over the media it may aid in backwash and rinse. A very large drain to take dirty water out quickly would be good too.

I wish I would have given more though to this before I buried all my filters in the pit. Now I'm thinking I may want to change a few things. Go figure.

Garrett

Ryan S.
03-09-2005, 10:54 AM
Garrett,

The point of the comparison to "tubular media" bead filters is that this is pretty much what a static K1 filter is, just a gravity flow (unpressurized)version of those. Some have media smaller than K1, others have media larger than K1 (like the ones that use bee cell). I think a static version of these is in some ways better, however neither is really that great of a mechanical filter. My dirty k1 would still churn BTW after it was agitated a little by hand first, and this was only filtration for 6 weeks. I'm thinking the blower will break it up fine, then leave the blower on as you drain the tank or use air pump then to churn the media. Like many ponders, I already have an air pump and blower for other filters that can be routed to this filter when needed.

Ryan

dcny
03-09-2005, 11:29 AM
This is a great discussion. I don't have much to contribute personally but I did want to point out one thing in Maurice's article that goes to the heart of what Garrett is talking about.



Word of caution.

In my view this style of trapping the waste is not for the 'occasional' filter cleaner, as with Bubblebead filters this type of filter needs frequent cleaning, every day, less the trapped waste will go anaerobic and encourage gram negative bacteria, this is the type of bacteria we do not want in our systems.

I have found using these trapping filters i can judge the health of my koi from the smell of the waste while agitating the media when cleaning, if the smell is fowl it means the koi have a digestion problem and food needs cutting back, if the smell is sweet, like fresh compost, all is well. Left longer than a day and it will always smell fowl!!

Ryan S.
03-09-2005, 11:59 AM
As with many filter designs this type of filter will increase in efficency as it gets dirtier, that I is why I let it go longer. If you wash them daily you will just be flushing out gin clear water from what I was seeing at first. I had to cut off all other mechanical and bio filtration, cut UVs, and let water go to crap and leave it for a while for it start working good. I'm questioning whether it will be effective enough to do much good at all in an otherwise clean pond with weekly flushings.

Akitakoi
03-09-2005, 12:21 PM
About once a week when I flush my tanks I add in a couple tablespoons of koi clay. It clouds the water for a couple hours but then its gone. In my opinion it captures/bonds to some of the fines were its then captured in the mechanical section of the filter. Maybe what I should be doing is adding the clay a couple hours before flushing the mechanical filter.

Just talking out loud I guess.:thinking:

nicco
03-09-2005, 01:02 PM
Since my name was mentioned… for what it’s worth here are my thoughts on a more general basis.

If you need it to remove fines your water then it seems to be a good way to do it. The fact that you need it is probably bad. My thought is that while static media or any other kind of mechanical filtration used for the purpose of removing fines should not be necessary if you have sufficient settling capacity.

William Lim’s screens, my own 75-micron screen and Garrett’s 250-micron wedge-wire screen (all tried here) are really for the purpose of keeping the larger solids out of the bio filters. The best solution to fines is to have greater settling capacity. In my case I have a chamber on one circuit and will be adding a vortex in the Nexus circuit. There will also be two smaller vortex chambers for each gravity-fed skimmer.

Settlement will get rid of a lot of what we think of as fines. Most pond designs are limited by space, leading to the popularity of filters like the Nexus. However, as good as they are they have no significant settling capacity hence the problem.

First we have to try and realize what fines are and to do so we can start by listing what they are not. They are not leaves, twigs, seedpods and other larger trash that lands in the pond and is collected either by the skimmers or the bottom drain. These are the things that I am trying to stop from getting to my bio filters using the various screens.

I might be wrong but to my mind fines are mostly made of bio matter. It is stuff that comes from the fish and various biological processes in the pond. A significant amount of fines is probably algae, if you use a UV, then a lot of it is a probably dead algae. Some of this stuff may at some point be buoyant or so fine that it seems to float. I suspect that given sufficient chance most of this stuff will settle. Take a glass full of pond water and let it sit awhile. A lot of stuff settles out once you stop shaking it.

The remainder, if it is indeed bio matter as I suspect it is, will out gas during the normal degradation process and eventually loose its buoyancy and settle out too. The degradation process would be what I believe JR refers to as mineralization. So the bio filters will eventually convert the majority of fines that do not settle.

pskorf
03-09-2005, 01:07 PM
What about putting the media in a filter bag then into something like a 15 gallon tall drum (many bags)letting it up flow through this .have a bottom drain on this tank open it and lift media up shake it and wash it with water from a hose(even if city water we are looking for mechanical filtering)
just an idea on the cheaper side.Don't be afraid to blast it or think about it with a different idea.
The inet should be a little off bottom with the media above that packed from side to side to stop channelling.

Akitakoi
03-09-2005, 01:36 PM
Sounds a lot like my first garbage can upflow filter, just loose media not in bags. Worked good, not very hard to clean with a bypass.

Ryan S.
03-09-2005, 01:40 PM
What about putting the media in a filter bag then into something like a 15 gallon tall drum (many bags)letting it up flow through this .have a bottom drain on this tank open it and lift media up shake it and wash it with water from a hose(even if city water we are looking for mechanical filtering)
just an idea on the cheaper side.Don't be afraid to blast it or think about it with a different idea.
The inet should be a little off bottom with the media above that packed from side to side to stop channelling.

It would be to difficult to clean in a bag, K1 is tiny you wouldn't be able to hose off the middle. If you are really cheap you can stir the stuff by hand with a stick or something. The other parts I was talking about using are fairly cheap air anyways, the 2.3cfm linear pump is ~$70, I have 2 of them I use elsewhere on the pond, the blower is part of a bead filter, I hear you can pick up a 1hp through grainger for $69.

luke-gr
03-09-2005, 02:34 PM
About these blowers... Will compressed air work? Might be a bit more labor intensive to hook up a line, but.... :thinking:

Akitakoi
03-09-2005, 02:53 PM
You gotta see this!


http://www.koikit.biz/nexus_eazy.wmv

CarolinaGirl
03-09-2005, 02:57 PM
What a great video! Very impressive! Thanks for the link.

Akitakoi
03-09-2005, 03:00 PM
What a great video! Very impressive! Thanks for the link.
The fish aren't bad either.

Here's a picture of it empty.

Harveythekoi
03-09-2005, 03:26 PM
Notice it's an indoor pond though. That does make a huge difference in what your actually trying to filter out.

I noticed the bio section of that Nexus didn't lose air flow during the backwash. I wonder if they're using a separate air pump for flushing. I know EA would have a 120L pump on theirs to begin with. That may be enough to do both.

Frequency of cleaning being my main concern. If the filter system can be designed to last a week between cleanings with no major effects then I think it would be a good thing. Depending on what was being used on the mechanical side ahead of a fines filter and the size of the fines filter would make the difference in time between cleanings.

Garrett

Akitakoi
03-09-2005, 03:57 PM
Are you thinking leaves and algea would block the outer screen causing the bio chamber to be starved of water?

That happened almost daily with the foam block for me.:mad:

I would like to see what happens if that process was repeated a second time.;)

redhotkoi
03-09-2005, 04:13 PM
What do you think about putting a air ring on the outside like your wedge wire design. What is the latest on that R&D?

Mitch
03-09-2005, 06:59 PM
I have never neen a big fan of the Nexus , but that was impressive.

So if I am to understand this correctly - K1 was designed as a bio-media, however many use for fines mech filtration (is that referred to as "polishing"?)?

In the Nexus - it is used as both?

During that video, there was a backwashing segment. Was the disturbance flow water or air, or a combo of both (looked like water?)?

At one point it looked like the was the K1 media was present in the outer circle (the vortex?), is that correct? Was there an air blower used? Or only the needed (small) air pump?

Thanks,
Mitch

nicco
03-09-2005, 10:35 PM
What do you think about putting a air ring on the outside like your wedge wire design. What is the latest on that R&D?

The wedgewire screen with an air ring is boring. It works without any maintenance. Doesn't need cleaning, adjustment or fiddling of any kind. I think that it's gone three weeks since we cleaned it.

I think that it is bigger than required for the Nexus. Am sure that one half as tall will work. In fact I think that it will work better. This will cut the already low price down significantly.

Harveythekoi
03-09-2005, 10:55 PM
Your obviously not too familiar with the Nexus. The inner system that they show boiling the media clean in the video is a new add on called the EAzy. There's pictures floating around this site somewhere. This installs into the vortex area of the Nexus. This is where and Answer would be mounted if you went that route. The media you see boiling on the outer circle is the bio chamber. You'd be surprised how easy it is to boil this media with even a small air pump.

One of the benefits of using any of the palstic media in a moving bed environment is the self cleaning aspect. Aeration being the other. As with almost all static bio filters they gather crap in the form of fines. J-mat, matala, brushes are all good bio-medias but need cleaning.

So when this type of media is used static it actually catches a lot of crap. The good news is it can be easily cleaned by applying air to boil it. No blower neccessary depending on the design of the filter you make with it.

Garrett

Harveythekoi
03-09-2005, 10:57 PM
What do you think about putting a air ring on the outside like your wedge wire design. What is the latest on that R&D?

Nicco forgot to mention that the air pump for the bio section is also running that air ring. So no extra cost involved there.

Garrett

Mitch
03-10-2005, 12:16 AM
I am not familar with the Nexus. I am just beginning to understand it. I appreciate the post, and information. I am still just learning.

As I learn more about it, the more impressed I become. But I am still curious as to the flow vs cost, and the amount of filtration it actually performs.

Thanks for helping me understand it better...

Mitch

Harveythekoi
03-10-2005, 12:38 AM
I'd never buy one either for the exact reason of flow verses cost. I have come to appreciate them though. In the right setting with the proper flow rates it's can be a very nice filter for a confined area. If I was ever to build an indoor pond this is what I would use. Could it use some improvements, sure, what filter couldn't. It's not for lack of trying, the manufacturers are adding all sorts of things to cover all bases. Unfortunately every pond is different and no one bolt on item will work.

So I'll get back to it being a system and fines filtration only being one aspect of that system.

Garrett

Mitch
03-10-2005, 01:08 AM
Wow, I am considering an indoor pond, and that's an excellent point! I'd also probably add something of my own (DIY TT?), just to have something to tinker with...

Good Point...

Thanks,
Mitch

Ryan S.
03-10-2005, 08:29 AM
static K1 & beads

Harveythekoi
03-10-2005, 08:57 AM
They were also part of why they got a bad reputation. While the beads, like sand, do an excellent job of filtering the had/have a tendency to bind together. That was why a blower was a fix for so many units. I think the Ultima's were one of the first to go with tubular media. They still do an excellent job of fines filtering but rarely bind together due to the design of the media. I think that's why you'll find the little ribs on the sides of the tubes.

The other downfall to pressurized filters was oxygen. If being used as your primary bio/mech it relied on oxygen in the water column. Which many times was low and created conditions for anaerobic conditions within the filter.

This is why I think it's also important to have the fines filter after the aerated bio. Highly oxygenated water will aid in the mineralization process.

I started tinkering with a 30 gal bbl last night to see if it's feasible to use for this purpose. I have 6 cu ft of ultra bio media in my barrel bio filter now that could be used for this purpose. The problem is the holes in the drilled PVC sheets I have are to large to hold that media.

Someone mentioned a cheap blower at Grainger. I couldn't find it on-line so a link would be nice.

Garrett

luke-gr
03-10-2005, 09:46 AM
Would the smaller beads not be better for a static application (assuming a blower is used for cleaning)?

Would a compressed air line from the garage work to "boil" media?

Harveythekoi
03-10-2005, 10:27 AM
Because of a gravity flow situation I would guess the beads could clog and block flow. Depending on how the filter is set up this could be a really bad thing. That and the laterals needed to contain something that small could lead to problems also.

I don't think anyone is claiming the tubular media to be better than the small beads or sand for polishing water. It just has certain advantages in how you can set up a non-pressurized filter.

A regular compressor could be used for backwash, seems a pain to drag a hose all that way. Maybe one of the portable tanks you can fill would be enough to do the trick. You'd need a regulator though, I think 120 PSI could do some damage depending on how it was used. The spa blowers deal more with volume than pressure which makes them more suited for what we want.

Garrett

Ryan S.
03-10-2005, 11:22 AM
"Real" bead filters can work good, the bigger problem is that are many subpar designs. In my case I have a Sacramento Koi setup, the head loss is minimal b/c of design of internals, 2HP blower standard, and ability to add a Sac Glass filter behind this which is the ultimate in fines filtration. I haven't installed it yet, but have seen ponds that run them. The tiny beads will roll in a aerated moving bed, you could also run these static in a gravity flow system like the static K1 filtration, would obviously provide superior filtration to a static K1. The downside is more frequent cleanings and a more thoughtfull design to deal with the smaller beads. Outlet would need to PVC well screen pipe that uses in bead filters sized accordingly to the gravity flow that you would need. This pipe is fairly cheap.

Getting back to static K1, I am a little surpised at the good results that some people are claiming. I think as it spreads in use many people will find this way of mechanical filtering to be overrated. It is ok, it can give you level of filtering that many ponders get with brushes or matting with less work to clean, which is always a good thing. Sorry for the bad pic, but you can see it does catch stuff.

Luke, It may work, even though its a high psi its a low volume so think you work around the problems. You would probably want to bury a air hose out there so you didn't have to drag one out each time.

Garrett, its difficult to find b/c of the size of the catalog but they do carry this from what I've heard from other locals. A lot of them use them as replacements on aquadynes, b/c the aquadynes have a ball valve on the blower people forget and burn them up (The Sac koi has a check valve there).

Ryan

Koi-Toys
03-10-2005, 08:54 PM
What if the beads weren't allowed to cake, like this filter claims? Do you think that this design feature of the timed air "burp" would be good?

http://www.aquaticeco.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/product.detail/iid/4707/cid/1322

Harveythekoi
03-10-2005, 09:21 PM
I just wonder how it all settles without going back into the water stream. I smell a gimmick. While timed backwashes are an excellent idea it would get costly automating all the valves neccessary.

Garrett

Koi-Toys
03-10-2005, 10:18 PM
I'm not sure how the other one worked, but I have seen this one work first hand on some of the ponds on-site. I have been standing next to it when it backflushes itself. Pretty cool actually.

http://watergardengems.com/filters/polygeyser.html

Bonnie-IN
02-16-2006, 09:49 PM
Getting back to static K1, I am a little surpised at the good results that some people are claiming. I think as it spreads in use many people will find this way of mechanical filtering to be overrated. It is ok, it can give you level of filtering that many ponders get with brushes or matting with less work to clean, which is always a good thing.

Ryan


Ryan, I'm wondering if you still feel the same about static K1?

Thanks,
Bonnie

Ryan S.
02-17-2006, 08:53 AM
I have not tested them any more, so yes, my opinion is the same. But I think would work at an acceptable level for many ponder's needs and situations. Look at Ultimas and the many other bead-like filters that use some type of static tubular media. Most of these are pressurized applications using a sand filter body. A static K1 filter would provide similar results but in application that causes less head loss for the pump since this is pre-filtration. Since the filtration is before the pump it could provide better filtration. If you look at Ultima (and other similar filter) reviews you find people that love them and people that hate them. I ran 2cuft of static K1 overwinter 04-05' alone as sole filtration and spring of 05' as an additional line. Neither appeared to catch much, even though I was passing the water very slow, 1200gph through them. In the spring I had added a bead filter and microstrainers I guess they filtered down the level there was not much of anything for the K1 filter to catch. This winter I have ran a bead only, water has been gin clear the entire time, I have been backwashing only every 2-4weeks.

I would think that they would make decent prefilters for a Bead line. If you look at the entire pond, say if you had 3 lines, a static K1 filter on each line and a single bead on one of the lines, that would probably provide good results for most people.

Kent Wallace
02-17-2006, 11:01 AM
Hey Bonnie, I personally like the PVC shavings for static filtration best. :yes: