Lots of questions on pond design.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Be patient with me please, I want to ask lots of questions. I have researched the topic but I am getting confused a bit with so many different views.
    I have just finished the filtration of my old pond. I am not posting pictures because U will laugh at me. But it is better than nothing.
    I want to make a better home for my babies.
    So this are questions to help me design the pond. After I design it U will have to advise if I am making mistakes.
    I am counting on your help.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    I have a old pond badly built 1120cmx740cmx120cm deep rectangular concrete. I found this pond here when I bought the plot. I plan to build a new pond inside this one , reinforced and raise it above ground to 160cm. Now this pond is just too big. It will be hard to filter. I thought of subdividing it and putting the filtration inside the pond (partition). I have done some drawings, but it is just an idea. Nothing fixed...
    Want to use half of the pond as koi home and another half as a water garden. No koi in the water garden. Plants grown bare rooted floating. No soil what so ever.
    Simply to reduce on the filtration needed. The two ponds to be interconnected with a water fall, but each to have its own filtration and to be able to isolate them if need me for medication. The pond will be concrete.
    For now my question is:
    Should I divide the pond?
    What are the pros and cons of having this pond so large. Would U advise please?
    Just remember every thing will be DIY and I can not buy here any thing for Koi....
    The filter pits are on the right, and they are 3 per pond.
    Top koi
    bottom water garden.
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4576/aquaponic_plants.jpg
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4577/New%20pond11.PNG
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-10-20 01:18:50 am
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Both pond will be roughly 8m x 3,40m x 1,6m deep.
    Each pond will be 43.5K
    What would U do if U were me?
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-10-20 01:29:56 am
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    No sifus here today?
  • ChengAunChengAun October 2011
    Posts: 925
    hey :D
    I see you have an interest in aquaponics :) I used to have a system :P

    anyways, on filtration, I see you intend to have a circular water flow. Well, this is not recommended :) (I'll leave that to the sifu's to explain :P ). The bigger the pond, the better in terms of water volume (and no need to worry about overstocking) but in terms of cost and maintenance it is indeed a burden. Subdividing it is possible, but not recommended to share the same filter. Also, the pond can be shallower , maybe about 1.0m-1.2m.
    Be updated in the world of koi. Jangankan seperti "Koi di bawah bottom drain"
    Post edited by ChengAun at 2011-10-20 09:36:02 pm
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Thanks!
    I am only interested in aquaponics as a way of planting some flowers to make it look nice, not vegetables...
    What flow would U recommend? Onishi stream flow?? Does it not need lots of pump power and a very long slopping floor pond?
    Each pond will have its own filter, in case I want to turn it into another pond later.. if need be.
    My biggest worry is medication...
    The only connection is via the water fall, which can be switched off, and they become 2 independent ponds. I will need to make a provision for a skimmer in koi pond in case that happens.
    But id I want to medicate I can medicate the Koi pond only.
    Last night I kept on drawing and drawing and this is what I came up with:
    This is what I have come up with up to now:
    Two ponds: one Koi one water garden
    Size (both) 24' x11 X koi pond 5,5' deep, water garden 4' deep.
    Water overflows from KP (koi pond) to WG (water garden), via water fall, with a skimmer basket in it and plastic shavings inside for mechanical filtration.
    2BD x 4" aerated DIY in each pond 2 TPR in each pond.(red arrows) and one GPR(brown arrow)
    One skimmer each:
    KP waterfall 2000GPH, WG skimmer to pump 500GPG
    2 pumps, 6000 GPH each.(or bigger)
    Pumps will be above grownd, pond level for priming. Have not decided on model yet.
    P1 pumps at the end of bio filter pumps 500GPH from skimmer, and the rest from end of filter after bio. Gate valves on Skimmer before pump for regulating flow.
    Discharges: 1000G 2 TPR each in WG and the rest to bakki over KP. Exit of bakki from a 4 inch pipe to act as TPR ????????
    Gate valves to regulate flow on each.
    P2: pumps from end of bio in filter to:
    1GPR 2000 GPH,
    2 TPR 1000G each, and
    Bakki 2000GPH.
    Filters will be similar to Eric (Raceway filter).
    That is what I have planned so far , but I am sure I am making lots of mistakes.
    That is the general design.Plumbing, sumps,waste, next. Still thinking about it.
    I hope U will correct me and advise.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Design:

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4584/new pond 2 pumps.PNG
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4585/skimmer2.PNG
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Wanted to put a window, and at present the pond is ground level, so I will need to go 60cm up for that. or maybe 50cm.
  • ChengAunChengAun October 2011
    Posts: 925
    On water flow and whether the length is too long, ask Ultimate Sifu, @DAVIDSOON :)
    Be updated in the world of koi. Jangankan seperti "Koi di bawah bottom drain"
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    I have sent him a PM, but not sure if he will have the time for one more headache...mine will be a big headache.
    I dont want to do stream flow/ raceway, but 2 cell mixed raceway system. Form what I found on the net onishi type of design needs much more pump power to effectively sweep the floor.
    This is what I was reading of late: http://upcommons.upc.edu/e-prints/bitstream/2117/730/1/Oca-Masal%C3%B306.pdf
  • DAVIDSOONDAVIDSOON October 2011
    Posts: 262
    Apology Sizter Neli ,

    I have yet to study and go into aquaponic to really learn the balance of aquaponic and a fish pond . Perhaps this video link would help .



    David
    The Best is Yet to Come .
    Post edited by DAVIDSOON at 2011-10-25 06:50:29 am
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Thanks David for thinking of me!.
    I dont plan to do aquaponics like that.
    I want to do a proper formal koi pond, the same type as yours. The only reason I am talking about aquaponics is because I want to reduce the area of filtration on the pond a bit.
    I know that plants planted in soil can cause hydrogen production, and its compounds, which are poisonous for Koi. I would like to subdivide the pond in 2 parts: The bigger part for Koi and the lower part for a water garden. The only way I can have benefit from plants (nitrogen removal and beauty) is if I plant them in the principle of aquaponics. Soil less not even in expanded clay like on the video, but just floating like in the picture bellow.
    Why do we put returns in a pond and try to create circulation?
    -to pass the water through the filters for cleaning
    _to create rotational or laminar flow in order to sweep the sediment towards the BD.
    -mix the dead spots/water within the pond...
    -oxygenate the water ( aerated BD)
    - maybe create current to exercise the Koi.
    If I divide the pond I will have few options:
    Fill t he other half... break it....or use it for something that will not require too many additional pumping...
    So I thought if I divide it, put plants in one part only and koi in the other part. I can connect the two ponds in such a manner that my circulation /filtration be efficient with less pumps used.
    I think as long as I fulfill the above requirements I can get away with it?????
    But maybe there are other things to consider????
    I want to build the 2 ponds: WG and KP, in such a manner that they compliment each other. They can work together as one, and at the same time being able to separate them in case of medication required.
    I thought if I put only one pump (25000L) in the water garden, and let it have its own separate filtration with only a part of the returns being pumped over the bakki, I can have that extra water returning to the WG over the water fall skimmer, and if I close that small portion going to the bakki, they will be totally independent.
    The bakki will have 2 pumps pumping over (bakki needs lots of water)it so the media will not die....
    Then I can perhaps get away with 1 or two pumps only in the KP....?????
    I have been reading like crazy...16 hrs a day, trying to design it and understand it all, but I think 2 heads are better that one...specially when one head is experienced.
    I would try to do it...by my self, and I will post all my ideas here, but I would like U to keep an eye on me and see if I am not making mistakes... I would not like to inconvenience U too much.
    If U have some better ideas, any one , they will be greatly appreciated.
    I would like to design some kind of a floating ring, 20-30 cm diameter and plant inside individually the plants, floating like this:
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    BTW brother David I have been following your Koi and they are heavenly!
    Can someone tell me why conventional rotating cell mixed race way pond is not so good any more?
    I have seen of late people constructing the stream/river/onishi types of ponds????
    What is better????
    Pro's and cons????
    I have been trying to understand this :
    http://elmu.umm.ac.id/file.php/1/jurnal/A/Aquacultural%20Engineering/Vol24.Issue1.Dec2000/1159.pdf
    and I have seen many comparison studies on stream and circular flow.
    The most efficient design for sweeping the debris towards the BD is a circular pond and there for energy efficient and easy to maintain.
    The next best thing is rectangular pond, divided into squares (cells) with a ratio of with to length of max 1.45:1 for each cell.
    I have found research that says that stream/river flow design needs much more turnover rate than the above...in order to keep it efficiently swept..???
    What design is better than this?
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-10-25 10:10:07 pm
  • ChengAunChengAun October 2011
    Posts: 925
    Sis Neli, are you @Yamato ?
    Be updated in the world of koi. Jangankan seperti "Koi di bawah bottom drain"
  • weihanweihan October 2011
    Posts: 318
    Hi Neli, according to your design which wanted the water from fish pond flow into your aquaponic pond, I dint think that it is recommended as the oil from your pond will stuck in your aquaponic. It is better for water from filter to flow into your aquaponic, then into the fish pond.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Yes Darling I am Yamato, but I managed to log in with Neli too??? I dont know how????
    I forgot my pass word so I just tried and I logged in.... and it shows that I registered in June, so I thought all was OK, until U told me... Then I looked for my old posts and thought U deleted them since I did not post for some time...
    So for short confusion has set in...
    BTW Darling I finished my old pond's filtration a week ago some how...DIY and very primitive but hope is better than nothing. Want to do a proper pond now. I am posting for U what I did just promise me not to laugh.Had not much help.....
    Weihan bro,
    That is a good idea, and it makes sense.... My only problem is that I want to make the Koi pond 80cm higher and it will be hard since the WG will be only 120cm deep.
    Dont U think the plants will enjoy the nutrient rich water and use some of the nutrients in it?
    I will need all the pump discharge in the WG to create some circulation for self cleaning and it will have a separate filter...
    Do U see any way around it?.

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4672/SAM_0813.jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4673/SAM_1912 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4674/SAM_2116 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4675/SAM_2430 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4676/SAM_2426 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4677/SAM_2418 (640x480).jpg
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-10-26 06:52:29 am
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Some more for entertainment....
    I cut the pipe to use as media.... nothing here to buy.....
    The sucks are full of plastic shavings...
    Made holes in the gray pipe and put it on the bottom connected to the new pump in a circle with 2 inlets to the pump and is cleaning the bottom very well.
    My garden while I was doing my filtration....
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4678/SAM_2519 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4679/SAM_2520 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4680/SAM_2402 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4681/SAM_2073 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4682/SAM_2125 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4683/SAM_2095 (640x480) (2).jpg
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Had to dig out my garden and put pipes all around.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4684/SAM_2281 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4685/SAM_2320 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4686/SAM_2375 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4687/SAM_2378 (640x480).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4688/SAM_1393 (640x480).jpg
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    Hi Neli,
    Am not into aquaponic but I do incorporate some money plant into the pond system over the past 1-2 years. Due to the risk of plants bringing in parasite problems, I have most of the the plants position above the pergola roof with its roots dangling into the pond water as shown in the following pics. The koi love to nibble and clean the roots. Hopefully the plants will helps to get rid of some of the nitrate in the water as well.

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4689/DSC_5245.JPG

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4690/DSC_5242.JPG

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4691/DSC_5239.JPG

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4692/DSC_5241.JPG
    Post edited by ThiamHwa at 2011-10-26 07:32:42 am
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Waw! Darling. It looks so romantic!
    I have one growing 50 cm away from the pond next to the TPR and the big palm. I am going to put one brunch around the edge above the water. What a good idea.
    BTW your Koi look very good! Soooooo big! Mine are still midgets!
    And some fantastic Koi there!
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    Yup! Hopefully, the koi will find it romantic too. There is this particular Okawa Shiro koi constantly nudging and obviously feeling very comfortable among the roots of the plant. Will try to capture it on pic. for sharing soon. Thank you.
    Post edited by ThiamHwa at 2011-10-26 08:14:15 am
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Waiham,
    I forgot to mention that part of the water in the water garden after passing through the filters goes over the bakki in the KP, and that is the water that is returned by the skimmer from KP to WG.
  • ashfaqashfaq October 2011
    Posts: 799
    Bro Thiamwa, your pond just look wow and pretty unique from other bros.
    Different concept of rising kois
    Thanks,
    Ashfaq from India-Chennai
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Ashfaq,
    no luck yet?
  • ChengAunChengAun October 2011
    Posts: 925
    Uncle Thiam Hwa,
    Please show more pics of your wonderful koi's and pond :)
    Be updated in the world of koi. Jangankan seperti "Koi di bawah bottom drain"
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    Hi Ashfaq,
    'Happy Deepavali' and Thanks for the compliment.

    Tategoi CA,
    So Sorry. I only kept general grade koi in a small pond. Hence, not much to show and share.

    Hi Neli,
    As promised, here are a couple of pics. of the Okawa Shiro nibbling away on the roots of the money plant.

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4693/DSC_5252.JPG

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4694/DSC_5255.JPG
  • ashfaqashfaq October 2011
    Posts: 799
    Welcome Brother Thiamwa.

    Neli,
    No luck yet :(
    Thanks,
    Ashfaq from India-Chennai
  • ChengAunChengAun October 2011
    Posts: 925
    Uncle TH,
    Still nice :) Mine are lower quality in a tiny 3ton pond :P
    Be updated in the world of koi. Jangankan seperti "Koi di bawah bottom drain"
    Post edited by ChengAun at 2011-10-27 02:47:24 am
  • farikfarik October 2011
    Posts: 317
    Bro thiamwa,
    ah, your secret to great bodied kois....moneyplant roots....very nice setup bro...must get some moneyplants fast.... thanks for sharing the photos.
  • pslongpslong October 2011
    Posts: 288
    Nice setup!
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    Thanks Bros. Sorry to Neli for side tracking on your pond design thread.
    Just wanted to add a few more abstract pics. for entertainment. Thank you.

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4698/DSC_5248.JPG

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4699/DSC_5255.JPG

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4700/DSC_5256.JPG
    Post edited by ThiamHwa at 2011-10-27 05:36:21 am
  • farikfarik October 2011
    Posts: 317
    wow....very nice abstract pics....if you can get one of the famous painters to paint it will fetch a very good price $$$$$$
  • ashfaqashfaq October 2011
    Posts: 799
    Ya bro Farik, i too agree :)
    Thanks,
    Ashfaq from India-Chennai
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Darling I dont mind. I enjoyed your pictures... And they are soo good and artistic. It looks as if your Koi are also using them for entertainment...
    But I am going to put U on punishment:...
    And the punishment is:
    Tell me what camera are U using? Or advise me what camera to buy for taking pictures of my Koi.
    I dont know if I am a lousy photographer (thats for sure) or my camera is crappy.
    My daughter is travelling to Hong Kong next week, want her to buy me one.
    But not more than USD600.
    Best value for money...
    U see now! (he he he!)
    U made me deviate also from my topic...
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Forgot to say: Love your Koi!
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    Sis. Neli,

    Am using a Nikon D300 digital single-lens reflex camera which was bought a few years ago for about USD2,500 i.e. camera body plus a zoom VR len.

    For a budget of USD600, you may want to consider purchasing the latest new mirrorless digital camera system launched by Nikon, Sony etc. with interchangeable lens. If I am not mistaken, I think the mirrorless Nikon J1 with interchangeable lens cost slightly more than USD600. Get your daughter to shop around for the best price while in Hong Kong. Goodluck.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Thanks! Do U know the make of that camera (i mean model)
    I am scared of those cameras with too much setting. What is the point of having a camera like ( with so many settings) that when I only know how to press 2 buttons:on /off and shoot.
    Unless it can be operated like that????? ...on auto????
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-10-27 11:06:50 pm
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    Neli,
    The Nikon J1 is a compact and easy to use camera with autofocus etc, etc. Just do a search for 'Nikon J1' in the website to find out more about this camera plus other cameras before making the purchase.

    Like any new toy, one will eventually become familiar with the working of the camera.
    'Patience' to learn is most important in any hobby.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Darling my problem is also that I am short sighted and can not see/read without glaces, and small details I dont see well. That is another big reason why I need a reliable autofocus.
    I had a nice Sony before and I bought for it a tripod, with remote controls of zoom and other functions on the handle of the tripod. I lent it to someone and it never come back, but I still have the tripod.
    So I have found meanwhile some Sony models with good recomendations from Cnet...up to USD650. (mirorless...)
    Thanks for the advise.
    This is what I found:

    Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX100V
    Like competing superzoom cameras, the HX100V offers a combination of manual, semimanual, and automatic exposure controls. The camera distinguishes itself from the pack with a few extras: built-in GPS, 3D snapshot and panorama features, excellent video quality, and a blazingly fast 10 frames-per-second continuous shooting speed. A full user guide is also built into the camera for quick reference, and there’s even a search option for it.
    Pros
    30X stabilized zoom with 810mm telephoto
    10-fps burst mode at full resolution
    Excellent built-in user guide
    Tiltable LCD
    Good blend of manual and automated controls
    Cons
    Stabilization struggles at full telephoto
    Minimal range of fine-tune adjustments
    No RAW shooting
    Soft images or lack of detail at high ISO
    Bottom Line
    Manual focus is available at the flip of a switch on the lens barrel and through use of the lens focus/zoom ring. Once you press the focus button atop the grip, the camera enlarges the image up to 7X, so you can fine-tune the focus more easily. Frankly, autofocus seems to work better (and faster), but tweaking the focus manually in macro mode is a helpful touch. By using the same ring, you can manually operate the zoom in conjunction with autofocus.
    I can not see properly at close range so it has a good fast autofocus ans burst shot at 10 frames per second....
    However, the HX100V delivered (mostly) accurate exposures and pleasing colors.
    In PCWorld Labs’ subjective evaluations for image quality, the Sony Cyber-shot HX100V was a solid performer three measures: sharpness (Very Good), lack of distortion (Superior), and color accuracy (Very Good). However, exposure quality exhibited some automated white-balance issues and a bit of underexposure in our test images, and the camera earned a score of just Fair for exposure quality.
    The 30X-optical-zoom HX100V may not have the zoom range or fine-tuning options of some competing cameras, but it compensates with futuristic extras, good video quality, and solid images.
    It takes a lot to stabilize a 30X lens with a reach of 810mm; and though the camera’s Optical SteadyShot system is effective at wide-range-to-midrange focal lengths, you'll benefit from using a tripod or monopod when shooting at full telephoto. A tripod becomes all the more important when there’s not enough light to permit use of a super-fast shutter speed
    I think this one is best for me since I have the tripod for it too....with remote zoom and operation built into the tripod handle, original Sony.
    I had a nice Sony camera that I lent to someone who never brought it back. Only the tripod remained at home.
    USD 450=
    Or one of this 2 cameras:
    Sony Alpha NEX-C3 Black Mirrorless Digital Camera Kit w/ 18-55 mm Lens USD 580
    Sony Alpha SLT-A35 Black SLR Digital Camera Kit w/ 18 mm - 55 mm Lens (16.2 MP, SDXC Slot)USD 650
  • ThiamHwaThiamHwa October 2011
    Posts: 260
    You may also want to check out the Digital Photography Review or DP Review website for informations and comments on the latest camera models which are available in the market. Comparison between the cameras are also analyzed for your easy selection.
    I think the Alpha Nex-3 from Sony and Nikon 1 range from Nikon are the mirrorless and interchangeable lens camera selection. There are also write-up reviews on this as well by
    DP Review.
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Thanks a lot. Will check them up!
  • NeliNeli October 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Can some one tell me how to make a vortex from concrete? Dimensions???
  • st8800st8800 November 2011
    Posts: 103
    Hi Neli

    I see that u have taken my my suggestion to u some time back to build a proper rectangular koi pond. Didn't know u already have an existing one. I think ur idea may work but probably need a lot of tweaking. Worst case u can turn merge the 2 into one single koi pond. Good luck.
    Best
    Spencer
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Darling,
    I am yamato... Got confused when logging in and logged as Neli... and it accepted my log in.And I forgot ...My user name was Yamato... New laptop! So U know my pond!
    The pond was not mine a couple of month ago... I just bought the plot, and the pond was inside the new plot. Single Koi pond will be hard to medicate... so I decided to divide it..
    I need to rebuild it too. I have been designing the filter yesterday.... but just preliminary design.Still needs lots of things to consider...and polish it.
    This is what I have come up with so far: (just a rough design and very primitive equipment)
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4732/filter1.PNG
    Attachments
    filter1.PNG 95K
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Bro David ,
    I see U were advising some one on Koi Bito about his new pond construction:
    I quote U:
    The number of pumps has to be in line with the number and size of the bottom drains . Bearing in mind under normal water displacement or gravity fed , the 4 inches drainage can receive about 20 tonnes or 5,000 gallons of water an hour . If you have only 50 tonnes output , then you might either have to consider smaller drainage size or fewer drainage if you want to use the 4 inches pipes

    I am very worried about draw down in my pond. This is a picture of a barrel connected to 3' (1m) 4" pipe, pumping 4000GPH. the draw down is 12"
    Is that not too much draw down for a filter? And that is for 1m pipe only, if I add bends and length of 6m pipe, the draw down will be even more..
    How can I avoid that in my design?
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4733/icu2.jpg
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-01 11:22:47 pm
    Attachments
    icu2.jpg 69K
  • DAVIDSOONDAVIDSOON November 2011
    Posts: 262
    Forgive me Sizter Neli ,

    This looks like a surface drawn-in ?? I have a feeling , that with the right configuration and external barrel placed closer to the pond floor , it will definitely be a huge design improvement for those ponders without bottom drain . It can help draw the debris or even fine waste ,from the bottom of the floor to the settlement chambers through displacement theory . This looks like a clever DIY surface -bottom drain .

    Now , the pace and amount of water being drawn in , would very much depend on the output as well . As in any bottom drains or skimmers incorporated in any design , the output of water has to balanced out with the right amount and size of opening to determine the efficiencies of all receiving drains or skimmers . You should be able to see some turbulence in the 1st chamber , but trust me ... no matter how great the turbulence level it can register in the 1st chamber , there will still be place enough for settlement and sieve work , and getting rid of the settlement would be another issue you would have to consider ...
    you can probably incorporate flushing drainage in every chamber ... and direct all these waste water to another water well for gardening probably ??



    David

    p.s - Apology Sizter Neli , if I misunderstood your photo ? Are you asking about headloss for your working pump ??
    The Best is Yet to Come .
    Post edited by DAVIDSOON at 2011-11-02 03:09:11 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    This is a Onishi stream flow pond, just built. He draws his water from mid water return, since he removes the water by air lift from some holes/sumps ???? at the end of the pond.
    Almost the same as your pond...if principle.
    The water is fed in by gravity through 4" pipe...and the drum is 1m away... which is very near to the pond.
    Most pond constructors, give the optimal flow through a 4 inch pipe as 2500GPH, not that it can not flow more... but that is best.
    I believe due to Reinold's number increase turbulence is created which results in excessive friction and much greater draw down, in flows above this....
    I have been busy trying to calculate head loss with Hazen-William's formula considering all the friction coefficients for the bends., and is giving me big headaches.... so I have decided to do it in reverse= make provision for head loss in such a way that I dont blander.
    Imagine my vortex outlet ends up above water due to draw down....
    But I am slowly getting there...still calculating and thinking ... trying to consider all factors.. but I am sure I will forget something.
    My biggest problem is that I can not find even simple things U consider for granted....so I really have to do with the little I can find here and improve it later...

    I want to put after vortex and izeki a little invention??? or better said adaptation of a filter I saw on the net by Kent Wallis, using plastic shavings...
    Since they say that vortex can only remove larger /visible particles, in the next chamber after the vortexes, I am putting Izeki which is capable of removing very fine particles.
    After the izeki I will put plastic shavings/strappings in the principle Kent Wallis uses them but in an easier (for me) way.
    I will stitch a bag rectangular, smaller than the chamber it is into and put perforated pipe in the middle. Water will enter from all around the bag, and enter the perforated pipe.
    The floor of the container will be slopping around the BD.
    The bag will have a hole on the bottom, so that it can just be lifted, washed and reinstated back over the pipe.
    If need be I might put inside a frame made out of plastic pipes to support it.
    So that is what I thought about the first 4 chambers of the filter.
    Any better ideas?
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4739/bio%20pl%20shavings.PNG
    This is the one I imitated:
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4740/DSC02382 960X720.jpg
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-02 03:28:31 pm
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    I have my own adaptation of izeki in my current pond, that had no filtration until recently, and I just finished the filtration.
    Now time to do a proper pond.
    Here is my improvised SC with izeki. U can see how clean the water is... then U can imagine the pond.
    Inside is my latest airlift experiment, so if there was dirt on the bottom the airlift was going to steer it.
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4741/DSC00629%20(800x450).jpg
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-02 03:39:54 pm
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Bro David,
    I have copied your post here so it is easier for me to answer.
    Sizter Neli ,

    It's either you are not reading replies , or I'm missing what you're asking , or probably my reply is not in line with what you have in mind or what you had widely read ?
    U have many friends here , and it does surprised me to hear that none , including myself , is not telling you what is wrong with your design or what you have in mind to built . I had seen a few replying to your aquaponic intent and some even advised against that , but I guess their reply is not favourable to what you had decided or doesn;t justify what you have ??

    U had at least 10 links to justify your 2400 gph for a 4inch bd , but
    I can only recommend an effective range of 5,000 gph or more to maintain a clean bd , but I can't recommend or provide a minimum effective range, neither do I know how to work out the quantum as I had replied you earlier . Probably a professional pond builder can ?

    I visited many ponds that were fitted with ineffective surface skimmers over the years , and the easiest solution is either to shut down or reduce the number of BD or increase the water output .

    Till now , I can only guess what you're trying to draw or asked , and replied with as much imagination as you have , but no matter how I look at what you last draw on your filter design, i still can't make out what you are asking till now or the quantum you're looking for . I have made my recommendation on effective flow rate for BD , ... or probably I will leave it to anyone who could understand and reply on what you asked ??

    The rest is up to you .
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Bro David,
    I quote:
    It's either you are not reading replies , or I'm missing what you're asking , or probably my reply is not in line with what you have in mind or what you had widely read ?

    Your reply is just fine. I know that is the best way to build a pond. I was just trying to be economical....???? that is why I was asking what is the minimum discharge I can get away with.
    Any one here uses less discharge through their BD line and is happy with it?

    Quote:
    I visited many ponds that were fitted with ineffective surface skimmers over the years , and the easiest solution is either to shut down or reduce the number of BD or increase the water output .

    I am not sure I understood this well? But what I gather from it is, that is that it is very important to have efficient skimmers, with enough flow, and if the flow is not enough, to shut down a BD, or increase the turn over rate.Am I correct?
    I have a question for U:
    I can not find skimmers here. I planned to use over flows in the pond, into the filter and into the Water garden pond.Will that work, if there is sufficient flow?
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Continuation:
    Quote:
    Till now , I can only guess what you're trying to draw or asked , and replied with as much imagination as you have , but no matter how I look at what you last draw on your filter design, i still can't make out what you are asking till now or the quantum you're looking for . I have made my recommendation on effective flow rate for BD , ... or probably I will leave it to anyone who could understand and reply on what you asked ??

    He he he! There U are right! I have lots of imagination!
    This are my questions:
    -Are 2 BD enough, provided I have enough turn over. ( I wanted to go economical with ones every 2 hours turn over for starters, but make provision for more later) If I follow your advise (which I will re: 5000lph for each BD) That means my turn over will me ones per hour.
    If I put 5000 GPH from each BD (that is 50 000L per hour / turn over ones an hour...) and the rest ( ??????? how much I need ?) through the skimmer... will that be OK?
    - Can I reduce the flow through the BD a bit and add it to the skimmers?
    -How does the flow in a pond work out through a skimmer? I am a bit confused here.
    Is there a possibility that the BD's will suck all the water and there will be nothing left for the over spills. I dont have stop valves for 4" pipes here... so I will not be able to reduce the flow through the BD. Is there a possibility that there will be not enough water for the skimmers/overflow if I have 2 pumps by 25 000l/hr each? And how can I avoid this?
    If the water level in the pond is higher than the over spill, will that not be OK?
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    continuation:
    Quote:
    U have many friends here , and it does surprised me to hear that none , including myself , is not telling you what is wrong with your design or what you have in mind to built . I had seen a few replying to your aquaponic intent and some even advised against that , but I guess their reply is not favourable to what you had decided or doesn;t justify what you have ??

    I listen to every one here and take note, the problem I think is understanding, both ways...
    I will post here now all the advise I got so far and what I think/consider of it, since I fear my friends here might think I am big headed (which I am, he he he!), and dont listen to advise:

    ThiamHwa October 27 Permalink Quote
    Posts: 163
    Sis. Neli,

    Am using a Nikon D300 digital single-lens reflex camera which was bought a few years ago for about USD2,500 i.e. camera body plus a zoom VR len.

    I have ordered a new camera is coming today or tomorrow from Hong Kong.

    ThiamHwa October 26 Permalink Quote
    Posts: 163

    Hi Neli,
    As promised, here are a couple of pics. of the Okawa Shiro nibbling away on the roots of the money plant.

    I have directed a money plant into the pond's edge.Hope it will grow faster...

    weihan October 25 Permalink Quote
    Posts: 100
    Hi Neli, according to your design which wanted the water from fish pond flow into your aquaponic pond, I dint think that it is recommended as the oil from your pond will stuck in your aquaponic. It is better for water from filter to flow into your aquaponic, then into the fish pond.
    The aquaponics part is not important to me. It is just for decoration and use the space for something (better than nothing). The Koi part is.
    If the plants remove some nitrates as a bonus... better for it.
    The Koi pond will be higher that the garden part, so I can not feed water from filter into it from the Koi pond, but the water garden will have the same filtration system as the Koi pond but with less turn over rate. So since it will have its own returns the water will be filtered.
    As a result of your advise I put an additional filter on the overspill from the koi pond(KP) into the WG.
    Again I have a question here. Dont I need a foam fractioner to remove the oil???? Can a filter remove it too?

    ChengAun October 20 Permalink Quote
    Posts: 496
    hey
    I see you have an interest in aquaponics I used to have a system

    anyways, on filtration, I see you intend to have a circular water flow. Well, this is not recommended (I'll leave that to the sifu's to explain ). The bigger the pond, the better in terms of water volume (and no need to worry about overstocking) but in terms of cost and maintenance it is indeed a burden. Subdividing it is possible, but not recommended to share the same filter. Also, the pond can be shallower , maybe about 1.0m-1.2m.

    I dont want a very big pond. Already have one big pond. I want a smaller pond easier to maintain with a very good filtration. I am dividing it into 2 ponds with one operational for now as a Koi pond. I would make provisions so that if I change my mind, I can easily add a pump only (for more turn over rate) and I will have 2 Koi ponds. But for now I want only one.
    Each pond will have independent of each other filter: Note taken!

    Question: What other type of flow would U recommend. U are telling me is not good but U are not recommending alternatives... What type of flow is better?

    DAVIDSOON October 24 Permalink Quote
    Posts: 156
    Apology Sizter Neli ,

    I have yet to study and go into aquaponic to really learn the balance of aquaponic and a fish pond . Perhaps this video link would help .

    I am not interested in that kind of aquaponics. Just some water lilies and few floating plants for decoration.
    Plants like : water hyacinth, duch weed ( contained), and experiment with few flowers and see if they will grow soil less, floating for fun.
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Neli

    You asked:
    (A) Is that not too much draw down for a filter?
    Yes, Too much drawdown.

    (B) How can I avoid that in my design?

    1) 1st rule....to remember water will seek its own level.

    2) In order to minimize your draw down for the chosen 4" pipe, you need to know that you are not pulling the water through the system. It is gravity & water that will want to seek its own level and is actually "pushing" the water from the pond to barrel to replenish the water in the barrel. Not pull.

    3) Frictional loss is the main loss in stopping water to seek its own level.

    4) Your pumping rate is 4000GPH, From your description, you have 1m connection between pond wall & barrel, 1m vertical pipe & I assume 3m from middle of pond to exit point of the pond wall. All 4" PVC. I assume you do not have valve in between.

    Estimated friction loss
    (a) 2nos 90deg elbow = equivalent to approx 25D of equivalent straight pipe length= 25x4"=100"=8.3ft =2.5m
    (b) 4" pipe = 1+1+3=5m

    Total equivalent pipe length for friction loss calculation = 7.5m.

    Go to here http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/hazen-williams-water-d_797.html
    and input your values for the unit you like to work on or alternatively you can use the Excel sheet I have attached to calculate.

    You will find....For 4000GPH pumping rate your friction head loss in piping is around 22.31mm or 0.22kPa. Flow velocity is 0.53 m/s

    The other major losses are as follows:

    Entrance loss at pipe inlet= 0.5v2/2g &
    Exit loss loss at pipe exit into barrel = v2/2g
    Exit loss at the weir of the pipe (1m vertical pipe edge) = 0.5v2/2g

    where v is the velocity of the flow and g is the gravitation acceleration = 9.81m/s2

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 2v2/2g = v2/g = power of 2(0.53)/9.81= 0.0286 = 28.6mm

    Therefore Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 22.31mm + 28.6mm =50.91. say 51mm.

    Now this is the elevation head difference between surface water level in the pond and the surface water level in the barrel required to overcome all the losses.

    However, this will still not push the water to the require flow you want. i.e 4000GPH.

    4000GPH = 15.14m3/hr. From above the flow velocity is already determine as 0.53m/s.

    In order to push the water from pond to barrel you need what a velocity head. The equation for Velocity head is v2/2g.

    Thus the velocity head or the push head required = power of 2(0.53)/(2*9.81) = 0.0143m = 14.3mm say 15mm.

    Therefore to overcome the draw down, you need to have an elevation height of your pond surface water level higher relative to the surface water level in the barrel by 51mm + 15mm = 66mm.

    Say allow for other factors, you allow for 70mm should be OK to minimize the draw down to a noticeable level.

    Answering your question 2, this is how you can avoid:

    1) Ensure the surface water level in the pond is higher than the surface water level of the barrel.

    2) Change your 4" pipe size to a bigger pipe diameter. Bigger diameter pipe will lower the flow velocity. The continuity equation for flow (assume there is no losses) is Q1=Q2.

    Q=Flowrate, Q=VA (V=velocity and A = the cross sectional area of the pipe)


    You have also raised concerns as to what is a good flow rate for self cleansing of the BD.

    In order to have self cleansing properties, generally we need about 0.75m/s velocity in the flow.

    A good velocity in the flow of 0.8 m/s to 1.2m/s is recommended at the time of maximum flow and preferably during the average flow periods also.

    You need to be careful to ensure that at the time of maximum flow, the velocity generated does not exceed the scouring value of 3m/s in general.

    Hope this is of some help to you.
    Post edited by harryyew at 2011-11-06 09:42:00 pm
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    To answer your question on what is a preferred flow rate for the BD....

    A good velocity of flow is generally accepted as 0.8m/s.
    Using this velocity value on the 4" pipe. The flow rate will be Q=vA= 0.8*(0.05*0.05*3.14) =0.00628m3/s = 22.6m3/hr = 5970 US gallon/hr.
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Now if you have 2 BD.....your flow rate will be directly proportional divided and your velocity of flow in the pipe is half.

    This will be smaller than the minimum self cleansing velocity recommended. We are back to square one. hehehe......

    In practice...IMO it is not practical to provide a continuous self cleansing flow rate. There are others consideration of the design that need to have or to balance. Such as laminar flow......

    To clean the piping network of water delivery networks...we flush as frequent as is practical. Flushing will breaks loose accumulated bioslimes and purges sediments and deposits.

    Your pond depth is at and around 1.5m. Let's assume you have a control purge pipe outlet at this depth. When you open up this outlet, you basically have a 5m/s flushing velocity. Ok we minus again some energy losses....you should easily still get around 4m/s flush speed which IMO is a good velocity to clean.

  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    From page 1 of this thread of your preliminary conceptualized design of the ponds......

    IMHO.....you have not taken the advantages of the available size that you have founded.

    My comments are as follows:

    1) Your current design provision is rigid and too formal. They represent fish farming type of environment.

    2) You will experience too many energy losses that you need to address. It will be challenging to work out every single parts of the losses. You will most probably end up installing bigger pumps capacity and thus higher continuous operational cost.

    3) I don't think you need to address your non suspended and suspended solid wastes treatment by introducing quite a complicated system.

    4) You should take advantage of the given pond size and design the area where you wish to have flowers and plants to be your sedimentation tank. From a cursory observation you have a good length to treat the suspended and non suspended solid waste and at the same time providing nutrients for the plants and flowers that you have in mind.

    5) I cannot see how in your conceptualized design you can promote those circular flows around the inlets of your BD.

    6) Within the koi pond itself, you are going to experience a lot of suspended solids laying on the bed of the pond.

    7) To enable the solids at the base of the pond to be able to be self directed to the inlet of the BD, the bed slope need to be quite steep. IMO it is not practical to construct. For me I would plan for multiple small 25mm dia piping outlets space at 2m apart along the wall to push the settle solids towards the BD inlets. At each of the discharge outlets... elbow it down 90 degree, so that the spread of the flow spread covered a wider radial.

    8) If you are going to route your piping network across the land, make sure it has a minimal slope of 1:150 and if the piping network has to go over humps....remember to install a purge valve to bleed entrapped air.

    9)You need to have a good velocity to minimize the change of developing a build-up of microbial slime which will eventually degrade system performance.

    10) I find you have not look at the risk management aspect of the pond as a whole. Such as electrical power failure, supply of air.

    Now.....on the reinforcement or weldmesh that you wish to lay on top of the existing concrete floor. If the surround soil at 1m below the surface is firm and the existing concrete floor of the pond has no tell tales sign of crack lines....then I would say a layer of weldmesh size 8mm diameter should be enough. If you wish to have the new layer skin of concrete lined that is designed to the specification of a water retaining structure and don't want to worry about ground condition in great detail......then install 10mm diameter bars spaced at 125mm c/c both ways.

    Cheers
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Waw! Thanks a million!
    I can see someone here knows what he is talking about.
    I take my hat off to U (he he he! I dont have one now, but promise I will put on one so I can take it off for U)
    I used already the hazen williams formula...from the same sight, but was not too sure if I was right. I used the friction coefficients from this graphs...but it confused me a lot, so I could not trust my calculations... I think a clever man is needed for that.
    This are some of the formulas I tried and got crazy results, but then what do U expect from a crazy person....
    http://www.flowmeterdirectory.com/flowcalculator.php
    http://www.pumpfundamentals.com/images/tutorial/friction%20loss-fitting.pdf
    http://www.pumpfundamentals.com/submergence/Submergence.html
    http://www.pumpfundamentals.com/mass_flow_rate/Solids_flowrate.html
    http://www.pumpfundamentals.com/pressure_anywhere/Pressure_anywhere.html
    http://www.pumpfundamentals.com/head_to_press/Head_to_press.html
    http://www.pumpfundamentals.com/help16.html

    This are some of the publications I used for deciding on the pond flow design:
    This is the main one:
    http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=aquaculture%20tank%20design%3B%20rotating%20flow%20cells%3B%20baffles%3B%20length%2Fwidth%20ratio&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fupcommons.upc.edu%2Fe-prints%2Fbitstream%2F2117%2F730%2F1%2FOca-Masal%25C3%25B306.pdf&ei=0Ve2TpOKFdHB8QOAqeTsBA&usg=AFQjCNGPr9Vpg36DsKhE3VoCGBJpJzAngw

    http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=hydrodinamic%20characterisation%20aquaculture&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftdx.cat%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F10803%2F7056%2F01Imll01de01.pdf%3Fsequence%3D1&ei=vFi2TrjvLISwhAfaro2oBA&usg=AFQjCNEviQsLFLyusfPucWixBY9E-hdRhw


    http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=oca-et-&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fupcommons.upc.edu%2Fe-prints%2Fbitstream%2F2117%2F731%2F1%2FOca-et-al04.pdf&ei=HVW2Tt_5M4j48QOsqeiEBQ&usg=AFQjCNFApnfkaP77mBpP2DKLYmMDgbgzLQ
    http://www.ncrac.org/NR/rdonlyres/E4216F9B-2961-4145-A136-850BD8E8A9D9/0/Chapter11.pdf
    This is what I have been reading in my quest to design a better pond ...
    Now I am going to try and digest all the things U posted, and it might take me some time...so what I dont get I will ask..
    Ones again thanks, and apologize for all the headaches I gave U.
    But U are one hell of a kind guy!
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    As I digest it I need to ask this (I did not understand it):
    Quote:
    or alternatively you can use the Excel sheet I have attached to calculate.
    I dont see the exl sheet...

    Q:Say allow for other factors, you allow for 70mm should be OK to minimize the draw down to a noticeable level.
    If I think in reverse, and my pond and filter are the same level, does that mean I will have 70mm head loss(draw down), or perhaps a bit more since I plan to use 25000l/h pump...????
    and 6m pipe... But now I can calculate the head loss (maybe...hopefully) by my self.
    Is that the conclusion I should make?

    quote:

    Answering your question 2, this is how you can avoid:

    1) Ensure the surface water level in the pond is higher than the surface water level of the barrel.
    Will my filter not overflow if the electricity stops, since it is gravity fed?

    Q:In order to have self cleansing properties, generally we need about 0.75m/s velocity in the flow.
    If the flow in my BD pipes is less, and I use the sump to flush them (which will not give me a peace of mind), how long it will take for them to be blocked? I know it depends on fish load, how much less the flow is and....many other factors... but with velocity of 0.75m/s I am getting flow of 25000L/h=almost 5000g/h (I calculated it my self so I hope I am correct)
    Why I am asking this because the 2 pumps I wanted to use are 25 000l/h and I will have very little head loss on the pump side, and I would need to leave some of the flow for a skimmer????
    How much can I leave for the skimmer, in this situation, so that the skimmer is efficient and the BD dont suffer by blockage? I saw some references that a skimmer needs min 1000gph
    better 1500gph, to be efficient.
    What do I do in this case?

    Q: You need to be careful to ensure that at the time of maximum flow, the velocity generated does not exceed the scouring value of 3m/s in general.

    U mean consider rainold's coefficient for turbulent flow? I will not reach it for sure, since I am trying to get away with the most (minimum) efficient flow. He he he!

    Q: Using this velocity value on the 4" pipe. The flow rate will be Q=vA= 0.8*(0.05*0.05*3.14) =0.00628m3/s = 22.6m3/hr = 5970 US gallon/hr.
    Honestly, I did not see this before I calculated the flow.....I did convert it by my self, and I am happy I am not wrong. (I am more confident now)He he he!

    Q: Now if you have 2 BD.....your flow rate will be directly proportional divided and your velocity of flow in the pipe is half.

    This will be smaller than the minimum self cleansing velocity recommended. We are back to square one. hehehe......

    Do I get U right? I need a flow of 6000gph in each BD pipe?
    I plan to use 2x 25000l/h pumps? The volume of the pond will be 48000l, so I will have more than ones volume per hour flow...
    But then I will need more flow for bakki and skimmer...????? So what happened to the ones per hour turnover as being good, rule..????
    That means I will need more turn over , more pumps...more bills...more headaches....
    What do I do??????Another pump?
    Can I get away with 2 pumps only? some how??

    Q:In practice...IMO it is not practical to provide a continuous self cleansing flow rate. There are others consideration of the design that need to have or to balance. Such as laminar flow......

    To clean the piping network of water delivery networks...we flush as frequent as is practical. Flushing will breaks loose accumulated bioslimes and purges sediments and deposits.

    Your pond depth is at and around 1.5m. Let's assume you have a control purge pipe outlet at this depth. When you open up this outlet, you basically have a 5m/s flushing velocity. Ok we minus again some energy losses....you should easily still get around 4m/s flush speed which IMO is a good velocity to clean.
    I think this answers my question above.... Thanks! I can flush the drains... no problem!

    Now I need to consider the flow within the pond, so it is able to sweep the floor well:
    Here they say:
    http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=aquaculture%20tank%20design%3B%20rotating%20flow%20cells%3B%20baffles%3B%20length%2Fwidth%20ratio&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fupcommons.upc.edu%2Fe-prints%2Fbitstream%2F2117%2F730%2F1%2FOca-Masal%25C3%25B306.pdf&ei=0Ve2TpOKFdHB8QOAqeTsBA&usg=AFQjCNGPr9Vpg36DsKhE3VoCGBJpJzAngw

    This shows that for a specific tank, a specific discharge
    device and a specific water depth, average water velocities
    will be roughly proportional to water inlet velocities.
    As an example, let us consider a tank 16 m long,
    3 m wide and 1 m deep, with four rotating cells (area:
    4 m  3 m) and a discharge jet orifice with a diameter
    of 40 mm. If the required Ct were 0.08, the water
    discharge velocity needed to obtain an average velocity
    of 15 cm/s would be 378 cm/s, which corresponds to a
    flow rate of 19 L/s and 1.43 water exchanges per hour.
    Relatively high, easily regulated average velocities
    with low energy consumption are usually obtained only
    with circular tanks. The tank configurations analyzed
    here would provide similar advantages in a rectangular
    tank.

    I plan to use baffles (one) since it increases the velocity towards the BD.
    Now I need to calculate what velocities I will get through my 2" returns with this pump rate by gravity, so I know how many TPR to use, in order to obtain a speed of 15cm/s or more through the TPR of 2 ".

    Q:
    IMHO.....you have not taken the advantages of the available size that you have founded.

    My comments are as follows:

    1) Your current design provision is rigid and too formal. They represent fish farming type of environment.
    I wanted a formal pond. Have U seen my other pond? Toooooo informal.
    It is somewhere here...under Yamato... since I accidentally changed my user name.
    Do U mean the shape of the pond (beauty?) or the flows inside is too formal and rigid???
    Or U mean the functionality of the pond?
    If it is the functionality of the pond... then I dont know any better. Maybe U can advise... I have done it all by my self and I dont know much.

    Q:2) You will experience too many energy losses that you need to address. It will be challenging to work out every single parts of the losses. You will most probably end up installing bigger pumps capacity and thus higher continuous operational cost.
    This one I dont understand.... Maybe U can explain better...what do I do?

    Q3) I don't think you need to address your non suspended and suspended solid wastes treatment by introducing quite a complicated system.
    Izeki for suspended is very cheap and DIY for me... I have it in the other filter. Very simple, and easy to clean for me. I am trying to avoid brushes in vortex which I can not get here, and are harder to clean.But I have very good results from izeki so far...
    What do U suggest?

    Q4) You should take advantage of the given pond size and design the area where you wish to have flowers and plants to be your sedimentation tank. From a cursory observation you have a good length to treat the suspended and non suspended solid waste and at the same time providing nutrients for the plants and flowers that you have in mind.

    I might want to use the water garden as a separate pond in the future, if I get some babies... I would like to grow few of them there (very few). But if I managed to build a second pond in one year, I dont thrust my self.....might find it is not enough, in future... so that is the reason I wanted to construct it in such a way, that just by adding another pump it into a pond (which at the moment I dont want) Just making a provision for going crazier in the future.

    Q:5) I cannot see how in your conceptualized design you can promote those circular flows around the inlets of your BD.

    I got it from here :
    the same PDF I posted above: http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=aquaculture%20tank%20design%3B%20rotating%20flow%20cells%3B%20baffles%3B%20length%2Fwidth%20ratio&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fupcommons.upc.edu%2Fe-prints%2Fbitstream%2F2117%2F730%2F1%2FOca-Masal%25C3%25B306.pdf&ei=0Ve2TpOKFdHB8QOAqeTsBA&usg=AFQjCNGPr9Vpg36DsKhE3VoCGBJpJzAngw

    This is the pond I am using as guide lines. I like how formal it is, it is the same shape /size/volume as mine....
    http://www.koiphen.com/forums/showthread.php?110489-Tom-10-000-gal-pond-build/page3
    I will build decorative wall in front of the filters, so they will not be seen.

    Q:6) Within the koi pond itself, you are going to experience a lot of suspended solids laying on the bed of the pond.
    Why? and how to prevent it? Did U see the pond for Kent Wallis? Is using the same flows.
    Peter Waddington uses exactly the same flows on his ponds every where... So I dont know what U see wrong. Maybe I dont understand U?
    Maybe U mean with lower flows?

    7) To enable the solids at the base of the pond to be able to be self directed to the inlet of the BD, the bed slope need to be quite steep. IMO it is not practical to construct. For me I would plan for multiple small 25mm dia piping outlets space at 2m apart along the wall to push the settle solids towards the BD inlets. At each of the discharge outlets... elbow it down 90 degree, so that the spread of the flow spread covered a wider radial.
    U mean I put them in the opposite wall too?
    Or U are talking of stream flow.
    My design creates circular flow around the drain. Maybe if U read the PDF U can understand how it works...because I dont understand how the opposing flows will sweep towards the BD.they will meet at the BD area and raise all the sediment that is away from the BD upwards>> IMHO...
    q:
    8) If you are going to route your piping network across the land, make sure it has a minimal slope of 1:150 and if the piping network has to go over humps....remember to install a purge valve to bleed entrapped air.
    What angle is this slop? 1:150 ??? and which way do I slop the pipes, towards the TPR (higher)? I will have no obstructions. BD Pipes will be horizontal, and towards the TPR they will slope from 0 at the bottom towards the height of the TPR.. Is that going to be OK?

    Q: 9)You need to have a good velocity to minimize the change of developing a build-up of microbial slime which will eventually degrade system performance.
    In which place??? I dont get this...

    Q: 10) I find you have not look at the risk management aspect of the pond as a whole. Such as electrical power failure, supply of air.
    I have not reached that stage yet in the design. Wanted to do pond size first, then TPR and the filter system is just an idea... not finalized yet. Still working on it.
    Any advise on the issue? What risks are there so I consider them??? Never thought about that....

    Q: Now.....on the reinforcement or weldmesh that you wish to lay on top of the existing concrete floor. If the surround soil at 1m below the surface is firm and the existing concrete floor of the pond has no tell tales sign of crack lines....then I would say a layer of weldmesh size 8mm diameter should be enough. If you wish to have the new layer skin of concrete lined that is designed to the specification of a water retaining structure and don't want to worry about ground condition in great detail......then install 10mm diameter bars spaced at 125mm c/c both ways.
    Thanks for this advise... Do I go with it up to the top of the pond? or just the bottom?
    Thanks for your invaluable help. I would not have managed it on my own...
    One think I dont get is why U think my sediments will not move????
    From Peter Waddington the same design: http://koikichi.com/a-perfect-larger-pond-design-in-2009/
    Similar configuration except that he is using one large circular flow around the 2 BD.
    I am using mixed cell raceway system.
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Neli

    Good day to you and sorry for replying late.

    No(1)
    The Hazen-Williams equation is in the attachment, the 1st post to all your questions I have posted. 6th post before this post…..directly above this one. Please try again to see you can download it from the attachment. If cannot, you give your email, I will forward it to you.

    There are 3 popular equations, one used to analyze the fluid hydraulics of a pipe or simply term “FLOW”. They are as follows:

    1) Darcy Weisbach
    2) Manning’s equation
    3) Hazen Williams equation.

    Technically speaking….Hazen-Williams equations are NOT really for gravity flow but for pressure flow. It is more frequent used for the design of large diameter pipes. It is quite accurate if the operation of the pipe is located at the transition or the smooth turbulent flow regimes.

    You may want to know a more accurate equation to use then. In theory…I repeat in theory…the most accurate equation is the Darcy-Weisbach equation since it is the only equation that relates its roughness value (f) to the diameter of the pipe, and also accounts for the varying regimes of flow.

    Now…most of the piping encountered during hydraulic analysis is experiencing turbulent behaviour (Reynolds No>2000). It is a popular equation to use because it is simple and give reasonably accurate results.

    The “S” in the equation is actually the hydraulic grade line and NOT the slope of the pipe. When using this equation, you need to be careful to use the correct units for diameter. If you are getting the equation from the internet…watch out as the equations are sometimes written using inches and sometime written using feet. Then…there is imperial and SI units version. This I believe has leads to much confusion and many errors in its use.

    So….I have in the attachment provided the formula in the respective units and to show you the values I have entered based on the information you have provided…so that you will be on the same page as I am. The hydraulic diameter is 2r where r=internal radius of the pipe. Hehehe……

    If I have confused you here….don’t worry just continue to use the Hazen-Williams equation. It is good enough for us to estimate the friction loss in our pond piping delivery network. Remember…hydraulics is never an exact science.

    No 2
    No….that should not be the conclusion you should make.
    Your drawdown value will be different if you used a different flow. You need to calculate again the friction loss (actually the correct term should be energy losses) for 25,000l/hr flow.

    For 25,000l/hr…..you will have a head loss 94.52mm and your flow velocity (m/s) =0.88

    I re-attach the Excel worksheet as another attachment to show you the values I have entered to get the above values.

    Now your other major losses are as follows:

    Entrance loss at pipe inlet= 0.5v2/2g &
    Exit loss at pipe exit into barrel = v2/2g
    Exit loss at the weir of the pipe (1m vertical pipe edge) = 0.5v2/2g

    where v is the velocity of the flow and g is the gravitation acceleration = 9.81m/s2

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 2v2/2g = v2/g = power of 2(0.88)/9.81= 0.0789 = 78.93mm

    Therefore Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 94.52mm + 78.93mm =173.45. say 175mm.

    Now this is the elevation head difference between free surface water level in the pond and the free surface water level in the barrel required to overcome all the losses. That is if you free surface water of the pond is higher than the barrel free water surface level by 173.45mm. NO FLOW!!!. It is in equilibrium. At this difference in levels between the two free water surfaces….your return flow (which will be the velocity head) is resisted by the friction forces created in the flow. Thus NO FLOW.

    Side note:
    Your return piping from the barrel to the pond has not captured in the calculation so far as I don’t know how you want to pipe return to pond and its length and how many bends.

    Now in order to push the volume of water to the flow rate (25m3/hr) you have in consideration, you need to develop a velocity head to drive that volume of water. Again the velocity head is v2/2g.

    v2 is the velocity of the flow to the power of 2 and g =9.81m/s2.

    Thus the velocity head or the push head required = power of 2(0.88)/(2*9.81) = 0.0395m = 39.5 mm say 40mm.

    Therefore to overcome the draw down, you need to have an elevation height of your pond free surface water level higher relative to the free surface water level in the barrel by 175mm + 40mm = 220mm.

    Say you allowed for other minor energy losses, you allow for 225mm should be ok. If creating this difference in levels is not a problem…have it at 300mm. You have more flexibility in your system.

    No 3
    Will my filter not overflow if the electricity stops, since it is gravity fed?

    If electricity stops……your pumps stop…..No more FLOW. Therefore, how can it overflow? However, it will normalize eventually to the same level. Ok everybody don’t laugh….she is right. If the pond volume is BIG relative to the barrel …it will overflow if the top of the barrel rim is lower than the free water surface level of the pond.

    Of course in a detail design you will design for a small percentage of “free board”.

    To help you understand this a bit more, I re-typed here what I have written in my post previously.

    When the pump is not running, the main pond water level and the filter chambers water level will be at the same level.

    When we pump water into the main pond, the water level will rise if the main pond outlet is shut off. However, we have bottom drain to drain water into the 1st chamber. The water will equalize to the same level as the main pond if the 1st chamber is not stuff with material to create flow resistance.

    Now…in the 1st chamber we install something that can removed the solid waste and depending on how we actually installed, it will comes to a point the natural flow will be disrupted. The water upward flow will be reduced. That is the velocity of water traveling upward is reduced.

    Bernoulli’s principle described that when the velocity of a fluid decreases, the pressure exerted by that fluid increases. In other words, Pressure + (kinetic energy/volume) = constant. By the conservation of energy theory, the total energy line (TEL) is the same at the main pond and the 1st chamber and in fact to all the chambers. This is constant. Any change in the velocity of the water as it flows through the chambers will result in a difference in pressure head to balance the energy level back to the total energy line.

    This pressure increase exert on the water surface level causing it to drop below the original water surface level.

    If we deduct all the energy losses (i.e. for eg frictional losses, entrance and exit loss etc) from the TEL….we gets the Hydraulic Grade Line of the system flow. My scanner has not yet been repaired…so I cannot attach a diagram to illustrate this. Hope my description is of some help here.


    No 4
    You next question is actually quite interesting.

    How long it will take for them to be blocked?
    I don’t have a mathematical calculation to that yet. Technically it is unlikely to happen unless it is human waste. Hehehe….

    Joke aside…… Assuming the probability of that blockage happening is real. Assuming…Over the years you did not flush your system….. As the waste turned to sludge occupying a proportion of the pipe cross sectional area as it accumulates, the overall cross sectional area of the pipe will get smaller. When the pipe cross sectional area get smaller and smaller, you will find from the continuity equation (Q1=Q2, where Q = Flowrate and Q=VA, where V = velocity and A is the cross sectional area) the velocity will increase to maintain continuity in the flow rate. You will eventually have a cleansing velocity to dislodge the sludge. There is a reason to install a bigger diameter pipe for BD.

    Now…. your calculation on the flow rate…with a velocity of 0.75m/s to a 4” pipe and assuming no energy losses, it should read 21,1950L/hr not 25,000 L/hr.

    Based on what I read your conceptualized plan, I don’t think your pump capacity will be adequate simply because your head loss in your system piping network will be very BIG. Serious, it will be very BIG.

    May I know what make you come to the conclusion that you will have very little head loss on the pump side? Your pumps need to take care of many things….for example the suction head, the discharge head and all the frictional losses in the system piping network and all the entrances and exits losses and other minor losses. You should not size your pumps based on the volume of your pond and its filtration components volumes. I noticed many of my friends did it that way and eventually they don’t have the water volume turnover rate as after deducting all the losses and what not….very little remain. Your biggest killer will be your bakki shower. Any you working in a confined space that warrant and justify for the bakki shower to take priority? The science to it is interesting though.

    My view on how a skimmer should be designed depend a lot on how we want to control and direct the surface water flow in relation to the water body circulation. It is part of the surface water management design. For time being….IMHO I think we should concentrate on the water system design 1st and remodel your pond overall system is a better approach to have an optimum design based on the given constraints you are working on.

    No 5
    Do I get U right? I need a flow of 6000gph in each BD pipe?
    That is right if you want a self cleansing velocity to be attained in the BD. As I said before….it is not practical. By default we FLUSH our system thus we can generate higher velocity to clean the BD.

    On the 1hr turnover rate, hehehe…..yes, it is mind bogging to me to how that magic figure comes about?

    This is my view and the knowledge that I have with regards to an appropriate turnover rate:
    The appropriate design turnover rate is a function of the chosen filtration system that one is designing towards. It is the detention time for a given volume of water to be detained in the mechanical and biological filtration system to allow proper waste treatment. This will bring us to the microbiology world. I am not a microbiologist so I don’t know how to calculate the time required for microscopic organism activities to treat the components waste and to substantiate an appropriate time. From my previous general readings, I recall a detention time of around 15mins is a good consideration. May be someone well verse in this area can elaborate further.

    I have not gone into the detail of your design considerations but IMO, definitely the 2 number of pumps you are considering will not be sufficient to drive your water system flow.

    Reading your depicted pictures, I don’t see you have space constraint. 1st is to throw away the Bakki shower thing. It need a strong pump will a lot of head to pump to the designed height. Do you know the engineering of it to produce a good design of it? It is horrible and an eye sore. It is noisy too. It is like a cooling tower sitting in an open area. It is imposing and IMO it will not blend well into your environment…..but I like the science that goes with it. hehehe….

    No 6
    Hmmm… on the rotating cells in rectangular tank, don’t take what has been experimented in absolute to be suitable for koi pond.

    1st is with a Reynolds number of approximately 6000……we already into the turbulent flow regime. It is in an unsteady state flow but then in the hydrodynamic analysis…..assume steady state conditions. The formulas used are all empirical in nature to the specific size under experimenting. Do you know what your tank Ct value will be? Do you know what the fish swim speed he taken into account? He has not thrown a single fish into it and tells us how the shits will obediently swim to the inlet of the BD. His experiment tank is relatively swallowed. The fluid dynamic in deep water tank is different from a swallow water tank. You will need a lot of energy to drive into a vortex condition. Those baffles plates that you are thinking of introducing IMO will be too challenging to determine a proper size and the fluid mechanic to it is not so simple as you think it will be.

    Basically there are two types of fluid flow; they are laminar flow and turbulent flow. In laminar flow the particles in the fluid follow streamlines, and the motion of particles in the fluid is predictable. If the flow rate is very large, or if objects obstruct the flow, the fluid starts to swirl in an erratic motion. No longer can one predict the exact path a particle on the fluid will follow. This region of constantly changing flow lines is said to consist of turbulent flow. When the flow is turbulent is it in an unsteady state it generates eddy under current within it.

    What we want is a laminar flow….in a laminar flow the motion of particles of fluid is very orderly with all particles moving in straight lines parallel to the pipe wall or the direction of flow.

    Steady flow means that the discharge is constant with time. Uniform flow means that the slope of the water surface and cross-sectional flow area are also constant in the length of the flow. We want this type flow not the turbulent type.

  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    No 7
    When I comment on your pond layout…The architecture context of your arrangement is rigid and too formal. It is like fish farming arrangement where they regime it that way. The spatial relationship of your pond with respect to the planting does not correlate. It does not draw visual interest and I don’t think it will blend in well with your given environment. With the bakki tower boldly on one half of the overall pond….it is not balance.

    Try to imagine converting this pond with the foreground a koi pond with an infinity outfall via a weir discharging into a long gutter or a collection system way and a lower pond in the distant harmonizing with all the planting that you wish to incorporate. You can even have both sides to be guttered as part of the water return flowing back into your koi pond with specific points of discharge to promote some drama in your pond. Some water planting can in here too. Timber deck part of the pond with a sitting area and walkway to be nearer to your kois and plants and for maintenance of the pond in the middle.

    Design for a “plug flow” in your pond. If only I have the space that you have, I would have designed it so.

    I will throw away the bakki shower thing but if you like it so much….perhaps you can create a waterfall structure to shield it.

    On the energy losses, go and download your prefer pump performance chart. You will see on the Y axis it represent head and the horizontal axis the flow or discharge. Estimate the total length of all your piping works and for each bend or elbow you add 25D(where D is the diameter of the pipe) to the calculated straight run of your piping and for any T-tee you used, you add 60D to be the piping length again. For the ball valve and gate valve use full bore type. …so no need to allow for energy losses. Use the Hazen Williams formula to determine the head loss. Lastly add the pump suction head and the bakki shower height as head into it. Check and see how big the head loss is.

    I don’t think you need to use vortex. Go and read a bit on sedimentation tank design or a primary sedimentation clarifier. They are not out dated. You can incorporate this type of sediments treatment into part of your pond…..as you are planning to subdivide it. Can you show me what Izeki looks like?

    What is TPR?

    On the risk management, I will share with you in later posts.

    On the reinforcement you go all the way up to the top of the pond. If you are planning to use reinforcement bars then…you allow for 400mm lapping between bar.

    This mixed cell raceway system if not carefully design for and make provisions for adjustable discharge flow will create too much mixed flow and energy losses within the water body. In a large rectangular tank I don’t think it is efficient. The “plug flow “system is a much better choice. It can be easily design, controlled and managed.


    Cheers
  • ashfaqashfaq November 2011
    Posts: 799
    Brother Harry, you are technically stuffed person :) (rock)
    Thanks,
    Ashfaq from India-Chennai
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    First of all U made my head buzz. He he he! (i have a toothache since saturday, now the pain has doubled) Too much to digest, and I am not sure I will manage. Going to read it all over again, few times so I get it in small doses some how, maybe I will manage to chew it
    I think we need to do it again in English for dummies... he he he!
    Let me try...
    1. Thanks for the excel doc. I will try to be brave and use it, but U will have to check me up.
    But I find your explanation very comprehensive... so I will try.
    I have some graphs for the different friction coefficients for different fittings, at different pipe diameter. Do U use any of this or not.?
    I see U add all the energy losses to get the total loss....so I need to add to that just the losses due to additional fittings.... U have done most of the job.

    Quote:
    Now this is the elevation head difference between free surface water level in the pond and the free surface water level in the barrel required to overcome all the losses. That is if you free surface water of the pond is higher than the barrel free water surface level by 173.45mm. NO FLOW!!!. It is in equilibrium. At this difference in levels between the two free water surfaces….your return flow (which will be the velocity head) is resisted by the friction forces created in the flow. Thus NO FLOW.

    This I dont get! Did not manage to digest it. This is what I think but then I am sure I am wrong....:or dont understand what U mean...
    Is the head not the difference between the pond level and filter level????? Is it not that when the pond level is higher, the head is higher, and the water has higher potential energy...there for the flow will be higher???? Be patient with me, I have just been learning this things in a panic mode so I dont mess up....
    Do U mean that the pond level has to be higher than 173.45 for flow to occur????
    question: (stupid one) : since my pond level and the filter level will be the same height, the 173cm will be the dynamic (???) head loss that I will get in the filter?

    Quote:
    Side note:
    Your return piping from the barrel to the pond has not captured in the calculation so far as I don’t know how you want to pipe return to pond and its length and how many bends.

    I would use gravity for all returns... Have not calculated yet how many inch pipe to use...so I get a flow velocity through the returns, minimum of 378 cm/s, which corresponds to a
    flow rate of 19 L/s for each TPR, that will also determine the number of TPR I will use too.
    So I will have to see what I can get available from the pump for the TPR minus the skimmer...

    Quote:Therefore to overcome the draw down, you need to have an elevation height of your pond free surface water level higher relative to the free surface water level in the barrel by 175mm + 40mm = 220mm.

    That is not very good news... 22cm draw down????? And that is exactly what I was trying to caution my friend about on the other thread, but I was not taken seriously.....
    Now since I can not afford a draw down of 22cm in my vortex...I will need to find a different solutions.
    So Since some values are constants and some I would not like to change, the only way I see to reduce the draw down is by:
    -reducing the flow through the BD pipes,
    -or connecting 2x4" pipes to each BD (we dont have bigger size pipes here) (again no win with this for I will reduce the self cleaning ability of the pipes.

    Quote:
    When we pump water into the main pond, the water level will rise if the main pond outlet is shut off. However, we have bottom drain to drain water into the 1st chamber. The water will equalize to the same level as the main pond if the 1st chamber is not stuff with material to create flow resistance.

    Now this one has confused me again...how will the water in the first chamber equalize to the level of the pond???? Is there not going to be head loss??? (lower level in the filter)
    22cm in my case???? What am I not digesting here????

    Quote:
    Bernoulli’s principle described that when the velocity of a fluid decreases, the pressure exerted by that fluid increases. In other words, Pressure + (kinetic energy/volume) = constant. By the conservation of energy theory, the total energy line (TEL) is the same at the main pond and the 1st chamber and in fact to all the chambers. This is constant. Any change in the velocity of the water as it flows through the chambers will result in a difference in pressure head to balance the energy level back to the total energy line.

    So in English for dummies (like me) What U are saying that there will be additional friction losses from chamber to chamber, which will result in head being highest in the last chamber???? And it still needs to be calculated..and to be considered..

    quote:
    Assuming the probability of that blockage happening is real. Assuming…Over the years you did not flush your system….. As the waste turned to sludge occupying a proportion of the pipe cross sectional area as it accumulates, the overall cross sectional area of the pipe will get smaller. When the pipe cross sectional area get smaller and smaller, you will find from the continuity equation (Q1=Q2, where Q = Flowrate and Q=VA, where V = velocity and A is the cross sectional area) the velocity will increase to maintain continuity in the flow rate. You will eventually have a cleansing velocity to dislodge the sludge. There is a reason to install a bigger diameter pipe for BD.

    Not in my situation... That will not happen...I will have a skimmer=water fall=overflow.
    so since the cross section A will be reduced, I might get lower/reduced flow rate, since my pond water level will raise and increase the discharge of the skimmer (which can easily compensate 2 BD flow), and I will never know I have a blocked BD since the flow through the skimmer will compensate for the missing flow through the BD...For short: I can block both BD and I will still have the same flow through the filter.

    Quote:
    Now…. your calculation on the flow rate…with a velocity of 0.75m/s to a 4” pipe and assuming no energy losses, it should read 21,1950L/hr not 25,000 L/hr.
    I was doing the calculations in my head and for simplicity multiplied /converted the gallons 1g=5l.
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205

    Quote:
    Based on what I read your conceptualized plan, I don’t think your pump capacity will be adequate simply because your head loss in your system piping network will be very BIG. Serious, it will be very BIG.
    Now here I am lost and scared....and more confused:
    The bigger the pump discharge, the bigger my draw down in the filter will be... (is this a correct assumption?)
    Why do U say that? I plan to feed TPR by gravity...,build a higher chamber (than the pond) to create head for the TPR, how high? ( thats where U come in: Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelp!)
    I will need to calculate how much discharge I will get eventually from the pumps, minus bakki, and see /calculate for how many TPR this flow will be enough for my desired velocity through each TPR.

    Quote:May I know what make you come to the conclusion that you will have very little head loss on the pump side? Your pumps need to take care of many things….for example the suction head, the discharge head and all the frictional losses in the system piping network and all the entrances and exits losses and other minor losses.

    My submersible pumps will pump over a distance of 20-30cm max through a 4" pipe. That is why I said it will have minimal losses. It is not like I will pump through the TPR pipes with the pump.I know I will have to reduce for the head loss due to the height of the chamber where my water will pump too, but it is hard to get less losses than this.

    Quote:
    You should not size your pumps based on the volume of your pond and its filtration components volumes. I noticed many of my friends did it that way and eventually they don’t have the water volume turnover rate as after deducting all the losses and what not….very little remain. Your biggest killer will be your bakki shower. Any you working in a confined space that warrant and justify for the bakki shower to take priority? The science to it is interesting though.

    I agree with U. But there are other things to consider too. Economics! I am trying to see what is the most economical way to turn over the water in the pond without compromising the sweeping capacity of the pond, ease of maintenance and performance of filtration... So I am trying to work in reverse some how. I dont believe that pump power is the main thing affecting the performance of a pond. Pond design, filtration, and piping, type of flows/velocities... plays major role too.

    Quote:
    My view on how a skimmer should be designed depend a lot on how we want to control and direct the surface water flow in relation to the water body circulation. It is part of the surface water management design. For time being….IMHO I think we should concentrate on the water system design 1st and remodel your pond overall system is a better approach to have an optimum design based on the given constraints you are working on.

    I am open to suggestions, and I think U have the capability, brains, intelligence, and knowledge...to be able to do just that (quote:remodel your pond overall system is a better approach to have an optimum design based on the given constraints you are working on.)

    quote:
    Do I get U right? I need a flow of 6000gph in each BD pipe?
    That is right if you want a self cleansing velocity to be attained in the BD. As I said before….it is not practical. By default we FLUSH our system thus we can generate higher velocity to clean the BD.

    This is what I wanted to hear, and was about to suggest on the end... which I am still going to do...I was just giving small hints above when I said that I will need to reduce the flow through the BD's but did not wanted to sound too big headed (which I am) and as if I dont want to listen to some one who knows what he is talking about.
    I believe the biggest challenge is to design a pond that is:
    -economical to construct and maintain
    -not to the detriment / balance of easy maintenance.. health of Koi...
    -.....and so many other things
    It is very easy to blast lots of water in a pond...but the best for me is to find the balance between all factors, without serious compromises.

  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    quote:
    On the 1hr turnover rate, hehehe…..yes, it is mind bogging to me to how that magic figure comes about?

    BTW that is not a magic figure for me...I was even planning on ones every 2 hours, and dont see much wrong with it.

    quote:
    I recall a detention time of around 15mins is a good consideration. May be someone well verse in this area can elaborate further.

    I have those figures somewhere, but need to look for them. It is 02 (after mid night now) But I am enjoying your post so much that I can not stop.

    Quote:
    Reading your depicted pictures, I don’t see you have space constraint. 1st is to throw away the Bakki shower thing. It need a strong pump will a lot of head to pump to the designed height. Do you know the engineering of it to produce a good design of it? It is horrible and an eye sore. It is noisy too. It is like a cooling tower sitting in an open area. It is imposing and IMO it will not blend well into your environment…..but I like the science that goes with it. hehehe….

    I just did a bakki, huge... 3m long...U can not hear it...(I put muffler on top). I am not too sure how well I know the engineering of it....but not too bad..I think I posted here so U can check it up.
    I have a good plan to hide it...
    Now do U remember where I am? AFRICA! = HOT!= cooling tower....no????
    high temperatures= low oxygen saturation level and bakki= oxygenation...
    That is my main consideration.Not talking about nitrate removal which is under debate.. But for the rest as usual U are right.

    Qute and answer:
    1st is with a Reynolds number of approximately 6000……we already into the turbulent flow regime. It is in an unsteady state flow but then in the hydrodynamic analysis…..assume steady state conditions. The formulas used are all empirical in nature to the specific size under experimenting.
    Agreed...but it i a comparison study...
    Do you know what your tank Ct value will be?

    As u know reinolds number affects Ct value (the lower the better), but I would expect values of 0.09-0.1 max for this type of pond flow.
    Remember : The tank resistance coefficient (Ct) has been demonstrated only
    as a useful tool for the evaluation of tank
    configurations in both rectangular tanks with rotating
    cells and in circular tanks. Ct values are very useful for
    adjusting the desired average velocity in the tank.

    Do you know what the fish swim speed he taken into account? He has not thrown a single fish into it and tells us how the shits will obediently swim to the inlet of the BD.

    That is even better since the swiming action of the fish contributes to the movement of the waste towards the BD. Remember it is comparison study, and if U look at his references U will find that there are many other studies done on it on larger deeper pond. I looked at all of them...Did U see the pond for which I gave U a link? The one that is almost the same...

    His experiment tank is relatively swallowed. The fluid dynamic in deep water tank is different from a swallow water tank.

    Agreed. But but but ... he he he! comparison study????

    You will need a lot of energy to drive into a vortex condition. Those baffles plates that you are thinking of introducing IMO will be too challenging to determine a proper size and the fluid mechanic to it is not so simple as you think it will be.
    The principle is think of the baffle is not too hard, as long as it is in the correct place. There is a diagram there how to construct it. If U look at the link of the pond for Kent... he has something looking like a baffler in the pond...not mentioned as one though.
    In my case a baffle will help me hide my piping...
    Look at his reference links. There are many similar studies done, and I suspect Kent is influenced by it too.
    Google this. If I remember well this a study done on larger deeper pond: Burrows and Chenoweth, 1970; Tvinnereim, 1988;
    Timmons and Youngs, 1991).
    Quote:
    What we want is a laminar flow….in a laminar flow the motion of particles of fluid is very orderly with all particles moving in straight lines parallel to the pipe wall or the direction of flow.

    Steady flow means that the discharge is constant with time. Uniform flow means that the slope of the water surface and cross-sectional flow area are also constant in the length of the flow. We want this type flow not the turbulent type.

    I agree with this 1000%.... that is where I want to find a solution for in order to get best value for money.... And I know where U are going with that... and I like the direction U are taking...
    I like also the way U are thinking...U let me drawn in my own s....t just to come and fish me out, and show me the right way.... he he he!
    It is 03 here now. Time to dudu. I am not going to post my conclusions, for I fear I will spoil your fun and mine too. But I dont like great minds, I LOVE them.
    And I enjoyed each word u posted, and learned a lot.
    THANKS! I got my new camera today from Hong Kong....and it came with a hat...So now I will take a nice hat (addidas) off to U.
    Dont think I am too argumentative....It is asking, not arguing...

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4767/2011-11-07 003 (800x450).jpg
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    There I go again, Brother Harry! I have just seen that I have one more page to enjoy...starting with No7.
    Well!!!??? it happens... I will not sleep tonight...in the name of a good cause, I can not leave it for tomorrow. It is too good , to leave for tomorrow..

    quote:
    When I comment on your pond layout…The architecture context of your arrangement is rigid and too formal. It is like fish farming arrangement where they regime it that way. The spatial relationship of your pond with respect to the planting does not correlate. It does not draw visual interest and I don’t think it will blend in well with your given environment. With the bakki tower boldly on one half of the overall pond….it is not balance.

    The pond is in a totally empty plot...For me making it beautiful is the easiest part of the pond construction.... the hardest is making it efficient. I just made(last year) a beautiful pond (IMHO) that is totally inefficient.This one is for my babies: what is best for them!
    The Koi part is larger than the water garden. There will be a wall infront of the bakki, and the filtration part with bakki will be in the end of the old plot.
    To be honest I left the beauty part last, in order to design it around the filtration, and as I said (not boasting) the beauty part will be the easiest for me. (or I hope so)
    But I am open to suggestions, since I believe 2 heads are better than one...
    This is my current pond:
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4768/07092010032 (640x480).jpg
    Maybe if U see it U will know why I want a formal pond now.
    This are some ideas I like:

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4769/dragon_park_guell.jpg

    This is some thing I toyed with but not sure...
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4770/299002_2209071539396_1025686991_32551844_2879364_n.jpg
    But this is the kent W pond I was talking about.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4771/035 (640x480).jpg
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Continued:
    Quote:
    Try to imagine converting this pond with the foreground a koi pond with an infinity outfall via a weir discharging into a long gutter or a collection system way and a lower pond in the distant harmonizing with all the planting that you wish to incorporate.

    I dont understand this....

    You can even have both sides to be guttered as part of the water return flowing back into your koi pond with specific points of discharge to promote some drama in your pond. Some water planting can in here too. Timber deck part of the pond with a sitting area and walkway to be nearer to your kois and plants and for maintenance of the pond in the middle.
    What is guttered? I dont know this word.
    I plan to have a infinity water fall in the middle of the wall but in some unusual design...not horizontal... but I am leaving that for last, since priority No1 is efficiency. Ones I have done that I will move to the beauty part...

    Design for a “plug flow” in your pond. If only I have the space that you have, I would have designed it so.

    What is plug flow?

    I will throw away the bakki shower thing but if you like it so much….perhaps you can create a waterfall structure to shield it.
    Yes! That is goooood!

    Quote:
    On the energy losses, go and download your prefer pump performance chart. You will see on the Y axis it represent head and the horizontal axis the flow or discharge. Estimate the total length of all your piping works and for each bend or elbow you add 25D(where D is the diameter of the pipe) to the calculated straight run of your piping and for any T-tee you used, you add 60D to be the piping length again. For the ball valve and gate valve use full bore type. …so no need to allow for energy losses. Use the Hazen Williams formula to determine the head loss. Lastly add the pump suction head and the bakki shower height as head into it. Check and see how big the head loss is.
    OK this good... very good... what units will I get for example: 25D= 25* 110= 2750 mm?
    Pump suction head (submersible pump) = level in last filter calculated (????) after head loss (or estimated) - level of chamber feeding by gravity the returns *-1..Is that correct?

    Quote:
    I don’t think you need to use vortex. Go and read a bit on sedimentation tank design or a primary sedimentation clarifier. They are not out dated. You can incorporate this type of sediments treatment into part of your pond…..as you are planning to subdivide it. Can you show me what Izeki looks like?

    I like that too... very much... Does it not need to be very large, and does it not need to much water for flushing??? I dont know... Just imagining. But it will be much easier for me to construct than a vortex. Need to research it... Did not think of it... U have a point here.
    Will do that tomorrow, and report back.
    TPR is tangential pond return. ( at an angle)
    What is lapping?
    And what is this:
    The “plug flow “system is a much better choice. It can be easily design, controlled and managed.
    I dont know "plug flow"???? Maybe we know it by different names?
    Remember : i can not buy any related Koi products here.
    This is izeki:
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4772/SAM_0815.jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4773/DSC00629 (800x450) (800x450).jpgwww.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4774/SAM_1133 (640x480).jpg
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    This is my settlement chamber (or at list that is what I call it) Water from the bottom goes inside, through pipes on the bottom with holes on them... but it keeps my bottom clean. I built my pond with no BD... new nothing, had no internet, and no one to ask.. Can U see how clean it is? My pond is the same... Most of it done DIY, my own inventions..... due to desperation.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4775/2010-02-28 026 (640x360).jpg
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-08 05:52:08 pm
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Good day to you Neli

    Lol…You will manage for sure.

    Quote:
    ……. I will try to be brave and use it, but U will have to check me up.
    I have some graphs for the different friction coefficients for different fittings, at different pipe diameter. Do U use any of this or not.? I see U add all the energy losses to get the total loss....so I need to add to that just the losses due to additional fittings.... U have done most of the job.

    Ok. Will check for you. Are you referring to the Moody chart? No need to use that. For your system piping delivery network, you use Hazen William Formula is good enough. It is simple to use. You need to obtain the friction factor values of C. If you are using PVC, then C value =150. Yes, determine the balance energy losses in your piping delivery network and fittings.

    Quote:
    This I dont get! Did not manage to digest it. This is what I think but then I am sure I am wrong....:or dont understand what U mean...
    Is the head not the difference between the pond level and filter level????? Is it not that when the pond level is higher, the head is higher, and the water has higher potential energy...there for the flow will be higher???? Be patient with me, I have just been learning this things in a panic mode so I dont mess up....
    Do U mean that the pond level has to be higher than 173.45 for flow to occur????
    question: (stupid one) : since my pond level and the filter level will be the same height, the 173cm will be the dynamic (???) head loss that I will get in the filter?

    Sorry for the confusion. I can see how my explanation is confusing. Let me try to put forward this explanation for your understanding.

    Yes, the head is the difference between the pond level and the filter level. Yes, when the pond level is higher, the head is higher, and the water has higher potential energy…. therefore the flow will be higher. This static head of 173mm is actually the pressure head required to overcome all the energy losses at the suction end of the pump.

    Yes, since your pond level and the filter level will be the same height, the 173mm will be the dynamic head loss that you will get in the filter if you do not have any further pressure head to drive the body of water to higher elevation in the filter. You have graduated. Hehehe….

    Bernoulli’s equation states that at any point in an open channel or piping works with open ended condition of a flowing fluid the following relationship holds.

    P + mgh + ½ mv2 = constant

    P is the pressure, h is the height, v is the velocity, and m is the density at any point in the flow.

    Now if the elevation of the water is to remains constant and let say the there is a slight different in elevation of the pond and the barrel small enough not to change the gravitation potential energy of the water much, you just ignore it and you have this equation to look at.

    P + ½ mv2 = constant
    If I divide the above equation by mg (m=density, g =gravitation acceleration) throughout the above equation, I get

    P/mg + v2/2g = constant.

    Now this p/mg is the head measured from the free surface water to the point of each of the rim of the inlet and outlet.
    Now….let us have a datum level reference from a level below the BD inlet level to the rim of BD inlet level as “z”

    We then have Harry’s equation = z + P/mg + v2/2g = constant. Hehehe…. See attachment

    http://www.koianswers.com/uploads/FileUpload/scratch/fresh-30bd9de492d16f505246117d13f8e137-1320799912.1719.jpg
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:
    I would use gravity for all returns... Have not calculated yet how many inch pipe to use...so I get a flow velocity through the returns, minimum of 378 cm/s, which corresponds to a flow rate of 19 L/s for each TPR, that will also determine the number of TPR I will use too. So I will have to see what I can get available from the pump for the TPR minus the skimmer...

    If you are using gravity for all returns…. Then use Manning’s formula to calculate your average velocity. The roughness coefficient takes 0.009.

    Note: Are you refereeing to 378 cm/s (i.e. 3.78m/s) or it should read 378mm/s(i.e. 0.378m/s). If you are actually planning for 387cm/s then scouring will occur, if 378mm/s then no self cleansing of the piping works. Using at least 0.8m/s.

    Quote:
    That is not very good news... 22cm draw down????? And that is exactly what I was trying to caution my friend about on the other thread, but I was not taken seriously.....
    Now since I can not afford a draw down of 22cm in my vortex...I will need to find a different solutions.
    So Since some values are constants and some I would not like to change, the only way I see to reduce the draw down is by:
    -reducing the flow through the BD pipes,
    -or connecting 2x4" pipes to each BD (we dont have bigger size pipes here) (again no win with this for I will reduce the self cleaning ability of the pipes.

    May be he has sufficient big pumps to overcome the losses. Not efficient though.
    You can lower the vertical up-stand pipe by the calculated amount. Hehehe….

    When I read your replies and notice you are think of the hydraulic in term of energy conservation law…..you are on the right path. Energy equation always holds truw, provided proper allowance is made for energy losses.

    Quote:
    Now this one has confused me again...how will the water in the first chamber equalize to the level of the pond???? Is there not going to be head loss??? (lower level in the filter)
    22cm in my case???? What am I not digesting here????

    When there is no energy loss…..everything will be equal. Look at Bernoulli’s equation or alternatively you can refer to Harry’s formula and the diagram. All Potential energy is transferred to Kinetic Energy and then back to Potential Energy!!! Got it?

    Quote:
    So in English for dummies (like me) What U are saying that there will be additional friction losses from chamber to chamber, which will result in head being highest in the last chamber???? And it still needs to be calculated..and to be considered..

    Yes….Your have obtained your Master degree!!! Congratulation.
    This part of the engineering is more towards hydrology. Here you don’t use Hazen-Williams formula ok. Use Manning’s formula to get the velocity and then use Harry’s formula to determine the respective drawdown. Continuity equation Q=VA still holds.

    Quote:
    Not in my situation... That will not happen...I will have a skimmer=water fall=overflow.
    so since the cross section A will be reduced, I might get lower/reduced flow rate, since my pond water level will raise and increase the discharge of the skimmer (which can easily compensate 2 BD flow), and I will never know I have a blocked BD since the flow through the skimmer will compensate for the missing flow through the BD...For short: I can block both BD and I will still have the same flow through the filter.

    Not exactly…unless you have a dedicated pumping rate that is near to the main pond pumping rate. When the pipe overall internal diameter get smaller the velocity will increase to maintain continuity flow. The equation of continuity is the law of conservation of mass in fluid dynamics…..Q1=Q2 or velocity(1)*Area(1)=velocity(2)*Area2. Now this is true if it is a laminar flow and the fluid is incompressible.

    I will discuss on the skimmer thing when the opportunity arises. For time being consider it as a bonus to your system. It is not as simple as placing a box and have a pump and pump it to the water fall. The rate of your pumping, the placement of your air supply will influence the effectiveness of the skimmer performance. Coastal engineering design will come into play. Waves equation……Hehehe……

    Quote:
    Why do U say that? I plan to feed TPR by gravity...,build a higher chamber (than the pond) to create head for the TPR, how high? ( thats where U come in: Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelp!)
    I will need to calculate how much discharge I will get eventually from the pumps, minus bakki, and see /calculate for how many TPR this flow will be enough for my desired velocity through each TPR.

    Hahaha…..before I can come in…you are creating so many energy losses that there is very little remain for you and me to use. hehehe
    There will be losses again (frictional is the main one) when you discharge via TPR or any piping return to the pump. This time it is pure gravity flow there is no back pressure to keep a positive head to push forward. Whereas in a pump you can have that. The water level in the temporary holding tank will fluctuate as it drains, you will also experience fluctuating velocity. The higher you go….the more pumping head is required. When the pumping head increases, you will have lower flow. Can you see how inefficient the use of energy we have drained the energy away as we transport the water from one location to another.
    Please download a pump performance chart and have a look at it. You will then understand what I am trying to tell you…..What brands of pump are available there?

    Quote:
    My submersible pumps will pump over a distance of 20-30cm max through a 4" pipe. That is why I said it will have minimal losses. It is not like I will pump through the TPR pipes with the pump.I know I will have to reduce for the head loss due to the height of the chamber where my water will pump too, but it is hard to get less losses than this.

    How are you going to get water up high to the bakki shower and the waterfall and a holding tank with return via TPR right? Do you use the same pump or another dedicated pump? Think of the elevation head loss you need to overcome.

    Quote:
    I agree with U. But there are other things to consider too. Economics! I am trying to see what is the most economical way to turn over the water in the pond without compromising the sweeping capacity of the pond, ease of maintenance and performance of filtration... So I am trying to work in reverse some how. I dont believe that pump power is the main thing affecting the performance of a pond. Pond design, filtration, and piping, type of flows/velocities... plays major role too.

    The traditional way is the most economical design.
    Let assume you get everything rights except the pumps and the strategic number you should have including its placement……the pumps is the HEART of the system. If the heart cannot pump proper and affect your system wide networks of functionality. Your pond is myocardial infarction already. Then “THE END”….finish story, sunset and actors and actresses all bye bye already.
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:
    I believe the biggest challenge is to design a pond that is:
    -economical to construct and maintain
    -not to the detriment / balance of easy maintenance.. health of Koi...
    -.....and so many other things
    It is very easy to blast lots of water in a pond...but the best for me is to find the balance between all factors, without serious compromises.
    Agreed. A solution must be close to optimum to start with, as retrospective fixes are never wholly satisfactory.

    Quote:
    BTW that is not a magic figure for me...I was even planning on ones every 2 hours, and dont see much wrong with it.

    Your rationale on this.

    May I know what is your estimated detention time you have calculated for your pond?

    Quote:
    I just did a bakki, huge... 3m long...U can not hear it...(I put muffler on top). I am not too sure how well I know the engineering of it....but not too bad..I think I posted here so U can check it up.
    I have a good plan to hide it...
    Now do U remember where I am? AFRICA! = HOT!= cooling tower....no????
    high temperatures= low oxygen saturation level and bakki= oxygenation...
    That is my main consideration.Not talking about nitrate removal which is under debate.. But for the rest as usual U are right.

    Please show me some pictures of it.

    Ok. Now I know. Hehehe….May I know which part of Arifca.
    How hot is there and what is the usual humidity you are having there. Do you know the wet-buld temperature there. If it is humid there, do you experience a feeling of cooling effect when wind glow over your skin? What is the water temperature there in the open.
    OK we are now going into the thermodynamic.
    I am very sure the bakki tower or the shower as a cooling tower will not work. In fact I think it will work against your assumption.

    Quote:
    Agreed...but it is a comparison study...

    Hmm….to me the comparison is not representative at all. The model simulation again cannot be exploded to represent the actual behaviour of a fish pond. If he has used the fish waste and show us how the wastes are directed to the centre and the rate of it, I would have given further consideration.

    If all this circular rotating raceway is so good for a rectangular, I would expect the farming industry across the world implementing it. I did not read the author’s links to other people work but from his report I read he is quoting everybody all over the report. To me this is an indication of his experiment is not conclusive and definite as to what he want to proof. He needs to rely on others people report to substantiate and justify his recorded observations.

    Quote:
    Did U see the pond for which I gave U a link? The one that is almost the same...

    I have read all that you have provided a link but I might have missed. Can you please provide me to the specific link you are referring? Would like to read.

    Quote:
    Dont think I am too argumentative....It is asking, not arguing...

    No…not at all. Nice hat.
    Your current pond pic…..I must said….Not bad photography skills and your landscaping is nice. How deep is this pond? May I know what are the things you find this pond inefficient?
    Is the river marking on the pic is where you will provide a river to your proposed new pond?

    Quote:
    I dont understand this....
    Can you take a few pictures of the empty plot of land where your new pond will be. Please indicate where is north in the picture.
    I just finish drafting 3 affidavits in replies to the defendants.
    When this is free off the way, I will try to draft something for your further consideration.

    Quote:
    I plan to have a infinity water fall in the middle of the wall but in some unusual design...not horizontal... but I am leaving that for last, since priority No1 is efficiency. Ones I have done that I will move to the beauty part...

    Ok, but remember as a rule of thumb, a good sheet waterfall you need around 100 to 150GPH per inch of the waterfall. Hmm…I will wait to see the non horizontal arrangement. I am interested to learn this.

    Quote:
    What is plug flow?
    Plug flow is a simple model of the velocity profile of a fluid flowing in a pipe where the velocity of the fluid is assumed to be constant across any cross section of the pipe perpendicular to the axis of the pipe. You can design your pond to have this type of flow.

    Quote:
    OK this good... very good... what units will I get for example: 25D= 25* 110= 2750 mm?
    Pump suction head (submersible pump) = level in last filter calculated (????) after head loss (or estimated) - level of chamber feeding by gravity the returns *-1..Is that correct?

    Yes. 25d-25*110mm=2750mm
    Suction head and discharge head = Total static head. Since the submersible pump is immersed in the chamber. Your static head is = Discharge head – suction head. Suction head is measured from the free water surface level in the pump chamber to its suction inlet. Discharge head = the vertical height from the pump inlet to where you are discharging it out.
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:
    What is lapping?
    Where the reinforcement bar over lapped each other. Concrete cannot take tension…so we introduce reinforcement bars to address the tensile stress. The minimum lap is to ensure the bonding stress between the reinforcement bar and the concrete surface can be developed accordingly.

    Quote:
    The “plug flow “system is a much better choice. It can be easily design, controlled and managed.
    I dont know "plug flow"???? Maybe we know it by different names?
    Remember : i can not buy any related Koi products here.

    Now…. I name it plug flow….when it is implemented (of course after we can proof it will work and again we can do a small tank for comparison before full scale implementation. It will thereafter name as “Neli flow”. It like the flow in an open channel but the streamline flow-lines are evenly distributed across the cross sectional of the flow. We go into hydrology to design this. No need special koi products.

    Thanks for showing me the izeki. Will have to examine it in closer detail.

    Cheers
  • ashfaqashfaq November 2011
    Posts: 799
    Neli, trust me, its lots of lots of Questions :-D
    Thanks,
    Ashfaq from India-Chennai
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Ashfaq, U know how I messed up the first time... Dont want a repeat... Better measure twice and cut ones. 8-> (fubar) (sweat) :/
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Ashfaq….

    before she questions this time….I take the opportunity to answer first…..after all we are in the KoiAnswers forum. lol

    Neli


    I notice that you have not actually gone into the details as to how you will eventually achieve good water quality. IMHO this needs to be prioritized over other matters before going into the hydraulic.

    You will eventually operating an open aquatic system. It can be a circular mixed raceway, stream-flow or plug flow. I like the approach consideration to have an appropriate design that meets the needs of your pond and as a good pond-keeper that don’t need those high tech wonder products that requires having a crew of people for maintenance.

    I find from the many discussions here and elsewhere, many pond-keepers have actually become a permanent enslaved filter keeper….hehehe….

    When you put forward your proposal for comments, I was telling myself…..this is the type of pond system I would love to have ….simply because it address the 2 basic types of ponds in one goes…..namely garden pond and fish displayed pond. The introduction of an appropriate size of this water garden pond into the overall pond mimics nature in many ways. To me…. I don’t have that large piece of land…. else I would have designed and built my pond very similar to what you have put up for discussions.

    If we examine and ponder what is a pond life….My view is that it is the plants and not the FISH. The fishes are just inhabitants.

    To me there is no such thing as a perfect or ideal pond that can be used universally across the continents and the many constraints we have in the pursuit to achieve an appropriate designed pond. Many of us are actually building a fish display pond. No plant to very little are incorporated. I believe this come about because not many people has been given an informed choice and those that love fishes don’t like planting or rather have little knowledge on plants and flowers.

    The heart of the system has been discussed and I think you need to identify your prefer life support system…….i.e. Filtration system. Can you provide me a link to Eric (raceway filter)?

    With your wide readings and the experiences gained from your previous pond design, I don’t see you have meticulously checked like you did for the fluid hydraulic so that you can minimize your risk exposure of not achieving your primary objective.

    There are so many solids to take care whether it is introduced externally or internally into the pond. I know….I know….many pond-keepers will say…..all this rubbish have to go…..hehehe…we all want crystal clear water with good water quality parameter to go with it. To achieve crystal clear water is easy. Good water quality part is difficult. Take my newly constructed pond as an example. I have super crystal clear water….but after all the testing….my alkalinity reading is not within range. Hehehe…

    In your chosen system (i.e. fish display pond + water garden) they will works on a very different set of ecological rules. A fish display pond equates to be like an indoor aquarium in reality. They are generally overstocked…..naturally their line of thinking will be to remove all the shits (ammonia concentration, low DO, disease & etc) ASAP and become priority NO 1. For those more serious pond-keepers they will want super clear view and I see so many inventions have been tried on to achieve this goal.

    On the other extreme of a garden pond….the solids (big or small) are integral part of the ecology system. Decaying materials are allowed to float and eventually sink to the bottom of the pond. The water column is usually tinted greenish cast and turbid. Well this is not dirty but represent the pond is alive, hahaha…..it is filled with bacterial and planktonic activities. Other wildlife…will also take up residence in this type of pond.

    Today, commercial mechanical filtrations are aplenty to choose from. IMHO, I would bravely conclude many of these filtrations work for rather a short time and not suitable in the long term…low maintenance operation outdoors consideration.

    When you have done some research on sedimentation tanking system or clarifier….you will find they address solids removal by 3 basic methods. They are as follows:

    1) manually removing it
    2) coarse screening it
    3) allowing settling

    The 1st method requires no mathematical calculation as merely physical removal and common sense is required. The 2nd method can be experimented by trial and error or alternatively there is a mathematical calculation to estimate its appropriateness.

    Side note:
    I notice many pond-keepers have become obsessed with the notion of screening to the point where they start introducing super fine screens…..and naturally become enslave on a daily maintenance routine. Hehehe… OK. As long as they enjoy it…there is nothing to complain.

    Now the 3rd method is the most challenging task for many fish display pond to achieve its goal. They do not have the space and the volume that you have. As you see…we are actually introducing a recirculation system….many pond-keepers do not know how to take advantage of Mother Nature. Many just leave it to their contractor or pond builder.

    In a laminar flow, you will find solids denser than water leave suspension and drift to the side and bottom of the pond. The forces of gravity and friction cause this to happen. Your system can allow for an “In-pond settling” and it is very effective. You can actually plant dense rows of emergent plants near water inlet and outlet…which can be viewed as a vegetative screen. This vegetative screen reduces turbulence, enhance settling fine particles. As long as you provide basic aeration to the settle materials….it should not have deleterious effects.

    Now…”In-pond settling” in a fish display pond is not effective simply because this pond is always turbid as there is continuous level of fish activity that never allow settling to occur and worst…the appropriate flow rate was not allowed for or should I say….designed for.

    OK. Ok…I know, I know…by now many have more questions than you….hehehe…for example…..what is the appropriate size to have then for a given pond volume. The rule of thumbs is that to have around 15min water moving through the settling basin and this is estimated for a recirculation rate of at least once every 2 hours. Thus the size of this settling basin should be 1/8 of the total pond volume.

    Ok. There will be some hardcore pond-keepers here which will want to have an example. Say, your pond volume is 48m3, then your settling basin volume should be 1/8*48= 6m3.

    Reaching this point….some may have by now confused…as they want to know what happen if the turnover rate is 1 hour. The answer to that is the volume should be 12m3. Gosh!!! That is as big as my main pond. Yes, that is for a 48m3 pond with a 1hr recirculation rate.

    Effectiveness of a settling basin can be improved by introducing incline baffler plates, incline tube settlers and the least efficient brushes. This basically will remove solid and to a large extent finer suspended solid by promoting fine particles to collide with each other to form a bigger lump ….thus settling by its own weight.

    The challenging part will be removing the super fine suspended solid and currently, I believe the sand filtering method is the most practical and economical to have in the system. Many have reported the sand filtering will get blockage over times. I believe this is because in a gravity feed system, it is quite difficult to allow for a minimum of 1 bar (equal 10m of head) of water pressure for back washing. Therefore…deciding the numbers and size of the pump is very important.

    In your overall system….you will have the width and length to allow better settling design…. You can have this basin such that the side where the water enters, incorporate a baffle (if your flow is not laminar) to produces laminar flow and have the floor slopes upwards toward the end where the water exits. Install a purge valve at the deep end for flushing of accumulated material. You can refer to my 1st thread, page 6, where I have shown how I did the estimation.

    May I ask….are you riding on the fact that plants take up ammonia as their primary food source?

    You need to watch out on the rate of vegetative filtration together with nitrifying bacteria in the pond. Plants (depending on the amount you introduce) can take up all the available ammonia especially if your fish stock is low. Ultimately…. you may need to fertilize your pond. Hehehe….


    Cheers
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Hi Harry,
    If U just new how eagerly I wait for your posts. I was sick yesterday... Think I have malaria plus toothache. Could not go near the computer...terrible headache...
    I think Your info is so educational to many people...or at list I am glad I am learning so many things that I find important.
    Back to answering U:


    Quote:
    If you are using PVC, then C value =150. Yes, determine the balance energy losses in your piping delivery network and fittings.

    That is the one I was using....140 if I am not mistaken is for steel pipes.

    Quote:
    You have graduated. Hehehe….

    I am a proud student ! He he he!
    Quote:
    Bernoulli’s equation states that at any point in an open channel or piping works with open ended condition of a flowing fluid the following relationship holds.

    P + mgh + ½ mv2 = constant

    P is the pressure, h is the height, v is the velocity, and m is the density at any point in the flow.

    Now if the elevation of the water is to remains constant and let say the there is a slight different in elevation of the pond and the barrel small enough not to change the gravitation potential energy of the water much, you just ignore it and you have this equation to look at.

    P + ½ mv2 = constant
    If I divide the above equation by mg (m=density, g =gravitation acceleration) throughout the above equation, I get

    P/mg + v2/2g = constant.

    Now this p/mg is the head measured from the free surface water to the point of each of the rim of the inlet and outlet.
    Now….let us have a datum level reference from a level below the BD inlet level to the rim of BD inlet level as “z”

    We then have Harry’s equation = z + P/mg + v2/2g = constant. Hehehe…. See attachment

    Now now now???? Tell me if I am "concludaring" correctly:
    Z1=Z2 P1/mg=P2/mg (we ignore head difference)
    Then I will have: (Z=25cm) 25cm + 170cm+2540(2)/2*9.81m/s2=??????
    (at Q=3000gph, V=77f/s=2540cm/s)
    I dont know the name of that coefficient... and I am sure U dont want me to calculate it but to note that it is a constant and make conclusions:
    Change the depth of the pond, and your velocity 2 will reduce by 2g times your depth difference...????? in order to have it constant.
    I just want U to see the links in 3 folders in my favorites that I have been battling with.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4780/l2.JPG
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4781/l3.JPG
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4782/links1.JPG
    And please post for me pictures of your new pond with diagrams...I am so eager to see it...
    It must be "state of the art" he he he!
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-10 03:15:32 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Quote:
    I would use gravity for all returns... Have not calculated yet how many inch pipe to use...so I get a flow velocity through the returns, minimum of 378 cm/s, which corresponds to a flow rate of 19 L/s for each TPR, that will also determine the number of TPR I will use too. So I will have to see what I can get available from the pump for the TPR minus the skimmer...

    If you are using gravity for all returns…. Then use Manning’s formula to calculate your average velocity. The roughness coefficient takes 0.009.

    Note: Are you refereeing to 378 cm/s (i.e. 3.78m/s) or it should read 378mm/s(i.e. 0.378m/s). If you are actually planning for 387cm/s then scouring will occur, if 378mm/s then no self cleansing of the piping works. Using at least 0.8m/s.

    I am referring to 378 cm/s,velocity discharge needed from a TPR to rotate the water in a cell,3x4m, in order for the dirt on the flow to be swept efficiently towards the BD .

    Here U go:
    Control of velocities
    By calculating a Ct value for the tank, it is easy to
    obtain the desired average velocities by adjusting the
    injected water flow rate (Q) and the water inlet velocity
    (V2). From Eq. (5) we can write:
    V1 ={(2Q(V2 - V1)/ACt}* 1/2
    (dont know how to write the formulas with the key board and english problem (1/2 is like squared))
    When the value of V2 is much greater than that of V1,
    this can be approximated as:
    V1 ={2QV2/ ACt 1=2}*1/2(squared) Eq. (8)

    Q can be related to V2 if the total area of inlet openings
    (A0) are known:
    Q = V2A0
    Eq. (8) can be re-written as follows:
    V1 =(2A0/ACt)*1/2 . V2
    (10)
    This shows that for a specific tank, a specific discharge
    device and a specific water depth, average water velocities
    will be roughly proportional to water inlet velocities.
    As an example, let us consider a tank 16 m long,
    3 m wide and 1 m deep, with four rotating cells (area:
    4 m  3 m) and a discharge jet orifice with a diameter
    of 40 mm. If the required Ct were 0.08, the water
    discharge velocity needed to obtain an average velocity
    42 J. Oca, I. Masalo´ / Aquacultural Engineering 36 (2007) 36–44
    Table 2
    Resistance coefficient (Ct) obtained for each tank configuration
    L/W Ct
    No
    baffles
    One side
    baffles
    Two side
    baffles
    Rectangular tank 0.95 0.14 0.09 0.08
    1.43 0.13 0.09 0.09
    1.91 0.18 0.17 –
    Circular tank – 0.08 – –

    Look at the different Ct values for a round tank and square tunk.... they are all the same, but I dont inow how to post the table. Let me try with a snip:
    already.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4783/ct values.JPG

    of 15 cm/s would be 378 cm/s, which corresponds to a
    flow rate of 19 L/s and 1.43 water exchanges per hour.
    Relatively high, easily regulated average velocities
    with low energy consumption are usually obtained only
    with circular tanks. The tank configurations analyzed
    here would provide similar advantages in a rectangular
    tank.
    The water velocity must be high enough to make the
    tank self-cleaning, but not greater than the desired fish
    swimming speed. The velocities required for selfcleaning
    have been estimated by various authors
    (Burrows and Chenoweth, 1970; Tvinnereim, 1988;
    Timmons and Youngs, 1991). The recommended
    velocities vary greatly according to faeces characteristics
    (Brinker et al., 2005) and range between 4 and
    30 cm/s. These studies only considered the effect of
    water flow in the tank, disregarding the possible effect
    of turbulence generated by the fish, although this has
    been analyzed by other researchers (Burley and Klapsis,
    1985, 1988; Watten et al., 2000; Rasmussen et al.,
    2005).

    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-10 03:57:41 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Hi Harry I have just seen your post. Be carefull your posts will bring more questions from me, and I can be like AK47 and have no shame but ask when I dont get something... He he he!
    I was working on the last part of your post but will ignore it and answer this one...first.
    But let me tell U I like the observations U made....except...that ....u will see just now:
    First note that my first research was on: what shape and flow within pond needs the most economical pump input for the debris on the floor to be swept?
    And trust me I did lots of research on it. Look at the Ct values in the table I gave U.
    For a stream flow design they become much higher, which makes a stream flow pond to need 30-35% more pump input....
    And a lots of research and calculations are done on the matter... and U have to trust me on this one...for a given pump power and volume of pod, the most effective is circular, then square, then a pond with L?W ratio of less than 1.5, and last is raceway or stream flow pond... with highest input energy needed to keep the floor clean....
    Now I am going to answer your new post and then the old one:
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Very good observations...

    Quote and answer all in one:

    I notice that you have not actually gone into the details as to how you will eventually achieve good water quality. IMHO this needs to be prioritized over other matters before going into the hydraulic.
    A
    For me good water quality goes hand in hand with effective and timely removal of solids from the pond and that is No1 consideration...due to many factors... deterioration of waste that results in rapid growth of unwanted bacteria...
    second is efficient filtration that will remove all forms of N.
    third is energy efficiency
    4 beauty
    5 and last ease of maintenance ( I have 5 gardeners)
    So every one has to have his own priorities....but some a common to all...
    Q
    You will eventually operating an open aquatic system. It can be a circular mixed raceway, stream-flow or plug flow. I like the approach consideration to have an appropriate design that meets the needs of your pond and as a good pond-keeper that don’t need those high tech wonder products that requires having a crew of people for maintenance.
    A
    Agreed 100%
    Q
    I find from the many discussions here and elsewhere, many pond-keepers have actually become a permanent enslaved filter keeper….hehehe….
    A
    I have put one guy in charge of the pond full time... he he he! (I am a knotty girl)
    Q
    When you put forward your proposal for comments, I was telling myself…..this is the type of pond system I would love to have ….simply because it address the 2 basic types of ponds in one goes…..namely garden pond and fish displayed pond. The introduction of an appropriate size of this water garden pond into the overall pond mimics nature in many ways. To me…. I don’t have that large piece of land…. else I would have designed and built my pond very similar to what you have put up for discussions.

    If we examine and ponder what is a pond life….My view is that it is the plants and not the FISH. The fishes are just inhabitants.
    A
    Pond life is nature in harmony...hard to imitate.. in a recirculating system...
    Q
    To me there is no such thing as a perfect or ideal pond that can be used universally across the continents and the many constraints we have in the pursuit to achieve an appropriate designed pond. Many of us are actually building a fish display pond. No plant to very little are incorporated. I believe this come about because not many people has been given an informed choice and those that love fishes don’t like planting or rather have little knowledge on plants and flowers.
    A
    There are lots of misconceptions regarding plants...Plants = waste products if not properly maintained..
    Plants= sediment trappers.......if not all sediments utilised
    Plants=Hydrogen sulphate production =poison to fish
    Plants = anaerobic conditions=anaerobic bacteria.... harmful to fish.
    Now if U manage to overcome the above negatives... then:
    Plants = beauty
    Plants = nitrate removal
    Plants = oxygenation...
    Q
    The heart of the system has been discussed and I think you need to identify your prefer life support system…….i.e. Filtration system. Can you provide me a link to Eric (raceway filter)?
    Now I am going to give U several links to eric: bad and good.
    A
    U must remember that Peter Waddington is a fantastic Koi keeper...good sales man....is in it for money.....and is not liked much due to the fact that he does not mince his words... (banned from koibito, koiphen and....other forums...)
    http://www.koiphen.com/forums/showthread.php?114750-Eric-filter......is-it-really-progress...
    http://www.ericpondfilters.com/waddy%e2%80%99s-blog/
    http://www.themtherekoyas.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1489
    http://www.koi-bito.com/forum/main-forum/11048-peter-waddingtons-eric-endless-river-concrete-3.html
    I read a lot but dont post much....exception here....
    Q
    With your wide readings and the experiences gained from your previous pond design, I don’t see you have meticulously checked like you did for the fluid hydraulic so that you can minimize your risk exposure of not achieving your primary objective.
    A
    Here I have to tell U some thing U dont know...about my plans....Last...
    Q
    There are so many solids to take care whether it is introduced externally or internally into the pond. I know….I know….many pond-keepers will say…..all this rubbish have to go…..hehehe…we all want crystal clear water with good water quality parameter to go with it. To achieve crystal clear water is easy. Good water quality part is difficult. Take my newly constructed pond as an example. I have super crystal clear water….but after all the testing….my alkalinity reading is not within range. Hehehe…

    A
    I have my pond PH at 9+ for the past 1 year... My source water has very high PH...I have no problems due to that....maybe in the long run????? but I would like U to check your KH to buffer your pond...U need high KH in order to avoid PH crush... and high KH help with high PH. I would not advise u to artificially regulate your PH. It is not easy...and U will never stop...
    Is it because of the concrete in the new pond or source water???? There are solutions for that...Let me know. (I think I am an expert on high PH by now.... what do U expect with PH of 9+)
    Q
    In your chosen system (i.e. fish display pond + water garden) they will works on a very different set of ecological rules. A fish display pond equates to be like an indoor aquarium in reality. They are generally overstocked…..naturally their line of thinking will be to remove all the shits (ammonia concentration, low DO, disease & etc) ASAP and become priority NO 1. For those more serious pond-keepers they will want super clear view and I see so many inventions have been tried on to achieve this goal.

    On the other extreme of a garden pond….the solids (big or small) are integral part of the ecology system. Decaying materials are allowed to float and eventually sink to the bottom of the pond. The water column is usually tinted greenish cast and turbid. Well this is not dirty but represent the pond is alive, hahaha…..it is filled with bacterial and planktonic activities. Other wildlife…will also take up residence in this type of pond.

    A
    Yes green water is not bad in certain situations...except that it removes oxygen at night releases CO2 (good for U), and again the reverse during the day.....In low KH situation can cause PH crush....
    Heterotrophic Bacteria, plankton...worms... are a good additive to any filter... they help process the waste...
    U must remember that the increase of heterotrophic bacteria suppresses grouth of nitrozomas... and they need to be in balance. A filter goes through different stages of development until that balance is achieved, that is if u clean your filters regularly...
    Q
    Today, commercial mechanical filtrations are aplenty to choose from. IMHO, I would bravely conclude many of these filtrations work for rather a short time and not suitable in the long term…low maintenance operation outdoors consideration.

    Side note:
    I notice many pond-keepers have become obsessed with the notion of screening to the point where they start introducing super fine screens…..and naturally become enslave on a daily maintenance routine. Hehehe… OK. As long as they enjoy it…there is nothing to complain.

    A
    My izeki works like RDF...easy to clean and very cheap (low percentage shade cloth)
    Q
    Now the 3rd method is the most challenging task for many fish display pond to achieve its goal. They do not have the space and the volume that you have. As you see…we are actually introducing a recirculation system….many pond-keepers do not know how to take advantage of Mother Nature. Many just leave it to their contractor or pond builder.
    A
    Yes U are right...But I have seen proffesional koi keepers keep plants (barerooted) in their ponds for nitrate removal the "natural way"
    Q
    In a laminar flow, you will find solids denser than water leave suspension and drift to the side and bottom of the pond. The forces of gravity and friction cause this to happen. Your system can allow for an “In-pond settling” and it is very effective. You can actually plant dense rows of emergent plants near water inlet and outlet…which can be viewed as a vegetative screen. This vegetative screen reduces turbulence, enhance settling fine particles. As long as you provide basic aeration to the settle materials….it should not have deleterious effects.
    A
    Good in theory... but in practice plants are hard to maintain, they add to the polution in the pond... and hard to prevent anaerobic conditions... In short U are talking of veggy filter.. Media (planting) is very important.
    Q
    OK. Ok…I know, I know…by now many have more questions than you….hehehe…for example…..what is the appropriate size to have then for a given pond volume. The rule of thumbs is that to have around 15min water moving through the settling basin and this is estimated for a recirculation rate of at least once every 2 hours. Thus the size of this settling basin should be 1/8 of the total pond volume.
    A
    Ok. There will be some hardcore pond-keepers here which will want to have an example. Say, your pond volume is 48m3, then your settling basin volume should be 1/8*48= 6m3.
    Q
    Effectiveness of a settling basin can be improved by introducing incline baffler plates, incline tube settlers and the least efficient brushes. This basically will remove solid and to a large extent finer suspended solid by promoting fine particles to collide with each other to form a bigger lump ….thus settling by its own weight.
    A
    Baffler plates,TPR are normally introduced to increase the velocity of in pond flow...
    Q
    The challenging part will be removing the super fine suspended solid and currently, I believe the sand filtering method is the most practical and economical to have in the system. Many have reported the sand filtering will get blockage over times. I believe this is because in a gravity feed system, it is quite difficult to allow for a minimum of 1 bar (equal 10m of head) of water pressure for back washing. Therefore…deciding the numbers and size of the pump is very important.
    A
    I use both sand filter (special for Koi with swimming pool pump) and izeki on each pump...For the sand filter U need high pressure pump...maintenance not to hard since U attach a compressor to it...a small gadget to bring air into the manifold on the bottom and your SF is crystal clear in no time...
    But I still like my izeki better and get the same results...
    Q
    In your overall system….you will have the width and length to allow better settling design…. You can have this basin such that the side where the water enters, incorporate a baffle (if your flow is not laminar) to produces laminar flow and have the floor slopes upwards toward the end where the water exits. Install a purge valve at the deep end for flushing of accumulated material. You can refer to my 1st thread, page 6, where I have shown how I did the estimation.
    A
    Are U talking about onishi stream flow????? There is a better solution there...install air lifts on a timer and .... no waste in the system for too long...
    The floor normally slopes downwards in this design...not upwards towards the collection point...
    If I install collection point at the deep end where the water enters....????? where it will be the most turbulent flow....And how is the sediment going to travel against the current, towards the deep end where the water enters?????
    I am sure U made a expression mistake...the deep end is where the water exits and sediment collects...
    baffler will collect sediment....at a place where it is hard to clean...

    Check here I have googled it for U.http://www.google.co.za/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8&ion=1&nord=1#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&nord=1&site=webhp&source=hp&q=onishi%20stream%20flow&pbx=1&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4755da3e8d93f9c3&ion=1&biw=1366&bih=643&ion=1&pf=p&pdl=300
    Q
    May I ask….are you riding on the fact that plants take up ammonia as their primary food source?
    A
    Yes I do... and nitrates too...
    Now what U did not know and I mentioned above is this:
    Notice I want to be able to run them independently....
    notice the water gatden is the same size as koi pond....
    notice I am not talking/asking about filtration in the water garden....
    I want to conduct an experiment first, for the benefit of every one...me too...objective, independent opinion....properly conducted...and decide ones and for all if anoxic filtration works....
    If it does not work the filter is designed in such a way that....I can revert to normal filtration in no time.... But I want to know!
    And I want every one to know... for I dont like people spitting on something they have never tried , and some of them brainwashing us for commercial reasons...
    Can U imagine what a benefit that will be to every one????
    Minimal filter maintenance...
    100 fold reduced filter cost....
    and many more benefits...
    That I think can bring us to the nearest to natural filtration in a recirculating system...

    Q
    You need to watch out on the rate of vegetative filtration together with nitrifying bacteria in the pond. Plants (depending on the amount you introduce) can take up all the available ammonia especially if your fish stock is low. Ultimately…. you may need to fertilize your pond. Hehehe…
    A.
    U should look at aquaponics..... I did....
    I am posting a design for a pond...I think that is what U are talking about????
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4797/streamflowalluringkoi2.GIF
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-10 05:50:30 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Now can some one tell me the advantages of stream vs circular flow... since I dont get it.
    For me it is energy inefficient....
    The only advantage I see is That some people fear circular flow will bend their larger slower moving Koi... but I find that illogical..
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Neli

    Oh!!! That is not good new. You need to go and see a doctor.

    Ok….now back to see where I can be of help.

    There are 3 basic equations you need to have. They are as follows:

    Hazen Williams Formula….. use the excel sheet I have posted.
    Good to know you have use C=150. You use this formula to calculate all the frictional losses (straight pipe length and the equivalent length of bend(25D) to the total straight pipe length that you have) in the piping works under a given flow.

    other major losses are as follows:

    Entrance loss at pipe inlet= 0.5v2/2g &
    Exit loss at pipe exit into barrel = v2/2g
    Exit loss at the weir of the pipe (1m vertical pipe edge) = 0.5v2/2g

    You total up all the energy losses.

    Continuity Equation … Q=VA
    This equation you use to calculate whenever there is a change in cross section area along the piping works to get your change in velocity. The Q (i.e Discharge along the pipe remain the same)

    Bernoulli’s equation: (P1) + mg(h1) + ½ m(v1)2 = (P2) + mg(h2) + ½ m(v2)2

    If there is only a slight different in elevation between the pond and the barrel small enough not to change the gravitation potential energy of the water much, you just ignore it. Many people get confuse what this P is. The pressure P is the pressure exerted in the fluid to cause the drawdown in your case.

    When a velocity is decrease as it flows from one point to another point, say water column v2 is now smaller than water column v1 (because of energy losses) and in order for Bernoulli’s equation to remain constant, P2 has to increase correspondingly to equal the left hand side of the equation. Now the drawdown effect is caused by P2 exerting onto the free water surface of the barrel to make the equation remain constant.

    In this explanation I have ignored the potential energy (mgh) considering there is a slight difference in elevation. When you reach the waterfall area…this (mgh) need to be calculated as the water pushed up to the height of the waterfall discharge.

    When a pump discharges a certain amount of water (flow) into the pond, it is exerting a pressure into it. This pressure we find hard to relate. It is as though it is coming from nowhere. In fact this pressure is from the flow discharging into the pond (kinetic energy) which goes into the BD. Some people when explaining name this as push head or propulsion head to drive the column of water from point A to point B.

    Hmm…..may be this simplification will be easier to understand:
    Consider the left side of the equation is for the pond side and the right side for the barrel side.

    Harry’s Equation: (z1) + (P1)/mg + (v1)2/2g = (z2) + (P2)/mg + (v2)2/2g

    This formula is still Bernoulli equation. I divide the Bernoulli’s equation throughout with a denominator (mg) to present with a diagram. Did you see the diagram in my earlier post?

    Oops…. I know where I have confused you. P/mg should be written as “y” and everything will fall into place as you only have elevation and velocity to take care in the equation. So sorry for my boo boo in my explanation.

    Thus New Harry’s equation:

    (z1) + (y1) + (v1)2/2g = (z2) + (y2) + (v2)2/2g

    This is the equation format you should be using to visualize and calculate the changes of the respective heads as you move from chamber to chamber and when you come to the waterfall or when there is a change in cross sectional area in the piping works.

    I re-attach here again a diagram to depict how the alphabetical values of the Harry’s equation are represented.

    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4798/harry%20formula%20diagram.jpg


    Quote:
    Now now now???? Tell me if I am "concludaring" correctly:
    Z1=Z2 P1/mg=P2/mg (we ignore head difference)
    Then I will have: (Z=25cm) 25cm + 170cm+2540(2)/2*9.81m/s2=??????
    (at Q=3000gph, V=77f/s=2540cm/s)

    Read the above and redo. Hehehe……..

    Quote:
    I just want U to see the links in 3 folders in my favorites that I have been battling with.

    They are useful and can be used to calculate.

    This one is confusing http://www.calctool.org/CALC/eng/civil/hazen-williams_g
    The computerize calculation for discharge and velocity work out has been modified to allow for situation where the pipe is slope to fall.

    Use the Hazen-Williams Excel sheet I have posted. It is easier to input the parameters to get our head loss and velocity in the piping works.

    Now… when you want to work out the discharge, velocity from the elevated chamber return via gravity flow.. then use Manning’s formula to calculate your average velocity. The roughness coefficient takes 0.009.

    These 5 equations should be enough to workout the hydraulic.

    Before I express further views on the other subject matters... I need to resolve my KH matter. Please share with me on this

    My pH reading is 7.9 and my KH value is 44.5ppm. Hydroxide alkalinity = 0, Carbonate alkalinity = 0, Bicarbonate alkalinity = 44.5ppm.
    To me this is not a god value to have. I was hoping for a value of around 120ppm. Is this a reasonable good value to have w.r.t the pH reading of 7.9?

    No, it is not because of the concrete in the new pond or water source. My pond is epoxy resin coated from main pond to all the filtering chambers.

    How many kg of oyster shells & coral I need to add for a 14m3 pond? What other solutions I should consider to bring the KH value up.


    Cheers
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Hi Harry,
    Just came back from the doctor...
    There are 3 basic equations you need to have. They are as follows:

    Hazen Williams Formula….. use the excel sheet I have posted.
    Good to know you have use C=150. You use this formula to calculate all the frictional losses (straight pipe length and the equivalent length of bend(25D) to the total straight pipe length that you have) in the piping works under a given flow.

    other major losses are as follows:

    Entrance loss at pipe inlet= 0.5v2/2g &
    Exit loss at pipe exit into barrel = v2/2g
    Exit loss at the weir of the pipe (1m vertical pipe edge) = 0.5v2/2g

    You total up all the energy losses.

    Continuity Equation … Q=VA
    This equation you use to calculate whenever there is a change in cross section area along the piping works to get your change in velocity. The Q (i.e Discharge along the pipe remain the same)

    Bernoulli’s equation: (P1) + mg(h1) + ½ m(v1)2 = (P2) + mg(h2) + ½ m(v2)2

    If there is only a slight different in elevation between the pond and the barrel small enough not to change the gravitation potential energy of the water much, you just ignore it. Many people get confuse what this P is. The pressure P is the pressure exerted in the fluid to cause the drawdown in your case.

    When a velocity is decrease as it flows from one point to another point, say water column v2 is now smaller than water column v1 (because of energy losses) and in order for Bernoulli’s equation to remain constant, P2 has to increase correspondingly to equal the left hand side of the equation. Now the drawdown effect is caused by P2 exerting onto the free water surface of the barrel to make the equation remain constant.

    In this explanation I have ignored the potential energy (mgh) considering there is a slight difference in elevation. When you reach the waterfall area…this (mgh) need to be calculated as the water pushed up to the height of the waterfall discharge.

    When a pump discharges a certain amount of water (flow) into the pond, it is exerting a pressure into it. This pressure we find hard to relate. It is as though it is coming from nowhere. In fact this pressure is from the flow discharging into the pond (kinetic energy) which goes into the BD. Some people when explaining name this as push head or propulsion head to drive the column of water from point A to point B.

    Hmm…..may be this simplification will be easier to understand:
    Consider the left side of the equation is for the pond side and the right side for the barrel side.

    Harry’s Equation: (z1) + (P1)/mg + (v1)2/2g = (z2) + (P2)/mg + (v2)2/2g

    This formula is still Bernoulli equation. I divide the Bernoulli’s equation throughout with a denominator (mg) to present with a diagram. Did you see the diagram in my earlier post?

    Oops…. I know where I have confused you. P/mg should be written as “y” and everything will fall into place as you only have elevation and velocity to take care in the equation. So sorry for my boo boo in my explanation.

    Thus New Harry’s equation:

    (z1) + (y1) + (v1)2/2g = (z2) + (y2) + (v2)2/2g

    This is the equation format you should be using to visualize and calculate the changes of the respective heads as you move from chamber to chamber and when you come to the waterfall or when there is a change in cross sectional area in the piping works.

    I re-attach here again a diagram to depict how the alphabetical values of the Harry’s equation are represented.




    Quote:
    Now now now???? Tell me if I am "concludaring" correctly:
    Z1=Z2 P1/mg=P2/mg (we ignore head difference)
    Then I will have: (Z=25cm) 25cm + 170cm+2540(2)/2*9.81m/s2=??????
    (at Q=3000gph, V=77f/s=2540cm/s)

    Read the above and redo. Hehehe……..

    A
    Sorry Harry I made a diagram and I forgot to post it... Maybe U will understand better what I mean...My head is still buzzing. (I think it is not malaria.. I think it is from Harry's formula. He he he!)

    I understood it. But maybe I did not . this is the diagram I was supposed to post with my calculations:

    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4799/Harry's%20formula.JPG
    Tell me if I am still wrong...????
    My z1 =z2 They will be the same level....Just e bend at each end...
    I said P1/mg =P2 /mg only if we ignore the head difference between pond and vortex.
    So my Z1=Zs+25cm
    P1/mg= 170cm (no?)
    V=2540 cm/sec (that is the flow velocity I want to have...???? (theoretical/hypothetical)
    Where did I go wrong????
    I understood U well. And that is the left side of the equation...I can only have differences in this case if I account for the head loss (no?) that is when I will get my P2/mg.
    But I understood the principle of it...
    Q
    Use the Hazen-Williams Excel sheet I have posted. It is easier to input the parameters to get our head loss and velocity in the piping works.
    A
    That one is the best for me and I thank U.I have some other calculators not very exact but gives a good approximation.

    Now… when you want to work out the discharge, velocity from the elevated chamber return via gravity flow.. then use Manning’s formula to calculate your average velocity. The roughness coefficient takes 0.009.

    A: I will need to work in reverse here...
    Q
    Before I express further views on the other subject matters... I need to resolve my KH matter. Please share with me on this

    My pH reading is 7.9 and my KH value is 44.5ppm. Hydroxide alkalinity = 0, Carbonate alkalinity = 0, Bicarbonate alkalinity = 44.5ppm.
    To me this is not a god value to have. I was hoping for a value of around 120ppm. Is this a reasonable good value to have w.r.t the pH reading of 7.9?
    PH reading of 7.9 is not high at all, ( PH up to 8 is best, up to 8.5 is not a problem at all)but your KH value is too low. U are right U need at list KH of 120 PPM to avoid the danger of PH crush... Some people give even a value of KH to be 200 ppm as best...????. All U have to do is put some shells in your filter or even bakki (he he he!) and U will be all right in the long run.. Not immediately.for short therm measure U will need to add some bicarbonate of soda...
    Or U can make a PH pill....very easy, and drop it in the filter.A friend of mine in SA makes them and sales them...
    I am sure U know that ammonia becomes more toxic in higher PH...
    The danger with pH is when rapid changes in pH occur, resulting in stress to your fish and, on many occasions, death. U should not allow changes in PH more than 0.3 within 24 hrs...
    Less is better.
    Remember if U have algae bloom U will have PH fluctuations during night and day... some time dangerous...
    Quote:
    I recommend that the pond pH be kept between 6.8 and 8.0. The lower limit (6.8) should be an early morning low, and the upper limit (8.0) should be a late afternoon high. But do not get too obsessive about this. If natural water conditions yield a pH of 6.5 to 8.3, leave it alone. Fooling with pH puts your fish in danger.
    Natural biological processes in the pond will tend to drive the pH down over time.
    LinK:http://www.fishchannel.com/setups/ponds/pond-water-quality.aspx

    Quote:

    Stability of Ph:
    Test the Ph of your tap or well water. Test the Ph of your pond. Make comparisons over a few days to establish what Ph your pond water should be on average. Pond Ph may be 7.0 to 9.0 but should be stable in a range of .3. If your pond tests at 7.5 it should maintain that level or similar to a low of 7.2 and a high of 7.8 over 24 to 48 hours. Ph crashes are generally caused by a low level of carbonate hardness. Carbonate hardness or Kh levels above 100 will prevent such Ph crashes and protect the health of your fish. Kh levels of 200 are required for bead filters.

    Stability of carbonate hardness (Kh):
    Carbonate Hardness = Total Alkalinity. Test the Kh of the tap or well water. Test the Kh of the pond. Make comparisons over a few days to establish your Kh average. Kh is the buffering ability of your water to hold the Ph at a safe level. Kh should test no less that 100. In the event of low Kh readings baking soda works exceedingly well to maintain proper levels, and can be added without fear of harming the fish. In addition crushed oyster shells or crushed coral can be bagged and placed in filters or in water current areas to buffer the water on a long term basis.

    One further note: If you have a bead filter in your filtration system, the Kh must be kept at 200 ppm or more for it to function properly.

    Baking soda: 2 to 3lbs per 1000 gallons will raise and stabilize Kh levels and keep the Ph at 8.3 to 8.4. Raise your Ph/Kh slowly over several days. Use maintenance doses of baking soda to keep them at a desired level.
    Link:http://www.simikoi.com/article7.html

    Quote:Koi can tolerate a higher pH far better than a low pH.
    I consulted Chris Nieves ( international expert) Who is a personal friend of mine (went to visit his house) And he advised me not to add any think in order to reduce My PH....9???? he just askedme about my KH....which is naturally high here. I have a borehole and lime deposits under...

    Q
    No, it is not because of the concrete in the new pond or water source. My pond is epoxy resin coated from main pond to all the filtering chambers.

    A
    source water????
    Q
    How many kg of oyster shells & coral I need to add for a 14m3 pond? What other solutions I should consider to bring the KH value up.
    Quote:+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The next chemicals you may need to add to your pond are bicarbonate of soda and calcium carbonate. First, you must test your water for general hardness and for carbonate hardness. If these factors are not high enough, your pool may experience wide swings in PH (relative acidity to alkalinity) between day and night, due to the action of photosynthesis in your plants. Wide swings in PH can kill your fish. Thus, everything you do that can cause a change in your pond's PH must be done very slowly, if fish are already in it.
    Carbonate hardness should be above 90 parts per million. Increase carbonate hardness by adding sodium bicarbonate (Bicarbonate of soda) at the rate of 1 cup per 500 gallons daily until the desired carbonate hardness is achieved. General hardness should be above 150 parts per million. Increase general hardness by adding calcium carbonate or by making "PH Pills" out of Paris, mixed with water and allowed to harden in plastic tubs {like small cool whip containers} and placing them in your biofilter. (See Dr Johnsons "PH PILL" at
    http://www.koivet.com/a_phpill.html
    I have some very good publications but I have so many links that I can not find them now.
    I am looking...
    Quote:
    As the oyster shells top up the KH, they will begin to dissolve. Obviously when this happens, they’ll need to be replaced.
    So if U want it quicker dissolved U might want to crush it..then U will have better results from smaller quantities of oyster shell, and quicker...
    I dont know a dose for oyster shells...dissolution is a continuous process... so it will depend on many factors...size of particles for one...
    I was told to put it in the last chamber of the filter .
    Remember when your biological activity starts your bacteria consumes Ca, so your KH will be reduced further...
    I hope I was of some help....
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-10 11:19:03 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Forgot to tell u the reason why oyster shell is put at the end of the filter...Did U figure it?
    Oyster Shells can only disolve in the presence of acid (carbonic acid resulting from filter activity): calcium carbonate is really difficult to dissovle without the presence of acid in the water.

    I did not answer this from before yesterday...
    Quote:

    May be he has sufficient big pumps to overcome the losses. Not efficient though.
    You can lower the vertical up-stand pipe by the calculated amount. Hehehe….
    A
    Which one is vertical up stand pipe?????

    Quote:

    I will discuss on the skimmer thing when the opportunity arises. For time being consider it as a bonus to your system. It is not as simple as placing a box and have a pump and pump it to the water fall. The rate of your pumping, the placement of your air supply will influence the effectiveness of the skimmer performance. Coastal engineering design will come into play. Waves equation……Hehehe……
    A
    I have this question:
    I will have 2 pups KP (koi pond) and 1 pump WG (water garden) Part of the water from the WG will be pumped through the bakki to KP and exit via overspill/water fall into WG.
    Want to put another over flow from KP to KP filter.

    What I could not figure out is if I use 2 overflows how to do it, since I would like to be able to by pass the water garden in case of medication=(I will just divert the flow to the bakki.), so I would like the skimmer to the filters to the KP to work but no water to go ever the water fall to the WG.
    This is what I thought but I am not sure if it will work.:
    The flow through a water fall depends on the width and depth of the water in it.So I know how to calculate that...
    If I see how much flow I want through the skimmer, when the WG bypass is on...(no water going to the WG from KP), and I make it lower than the WG overspill by that amount....
    My only problem is that I want different amouns at different times/situation through the skimmers...
    Let me think????
    pump (KP) is off....lets say level is bellow skimmer in pond to filter...
    pump KP is on,water comes in pond via TPR, level rises...I add water until desired level...I suspect above overspill to filter will reduce my head loss in filter...(my head loss in vortex will be 22cm if I run BD at max 6000GPR(I am reducing that so I need to calculate the head at lower velocity).... so now the difference in head.....(head loss will be reduced) (P/mg Harry.s formula)?
    OK lets say the water will not reach the skimmer level to filter...I keep adding water to the pond untill I have certain depth of flow in the over spills to filter (OSF)...at that point water garden overflow is not operational, since it is higher than the OSF..by Xcm
    Now I put pump from water garden on and water starts coming over the bakki into KP.
    Water level will only raise to OSWG (over spill water garden) only if the incoming flow is greater than the discharge capacity of OSF by that depth difference between the two overspills...for a short amount of time until equilibrium is reached between pond and filter...AM I correct here?
    At this point the water will start raising in the pond and will flow through the OSWG (over spill to water garden) But the level in the pond will raise and so will the level of water in the OSF (overspill to filter) by the same Xcm....which means my discharge through the OSF will increase. That water I suspect will be taken from the BD discharge....(reduced by that amount)
    Now if I am correct ???? how to avoid that?
    I see3 solutions... some how I manage to adjust the flow through the OSF (maybe put some flap on it that raises as the water raises or How????)
    second option is to put 2 rails on each skimmer and I can close them alterable with a plate... (use one or the other)
    3 maybe put a rigid plate (that can be removed when I dont want the OSWG to be on and lower the level in OSF) ....after I stop the WG pump...and put it in when I want both to operate, there for reducing the height of the water in FOS by Xcm and its discharge..Will that work???
    Or how?????


    Quote:

    Hahaha…..before I can come in…you are creating so many energy losses that there is very little remain for you and me to use. hehehe
    There will be losses again (frictional is the main one) when you discharge via TPR or any piping return to the pump. This time it is pure gravity flow there is no back pressure to keep a positive head to push forward. Whereas in a pump you can have that. The water level in the temporary holding tank will fluctuate as it drains, you will also experience fluctuating velocity. The higher you go….the more pumping head is required. When the pumping head increases, you will have lower flow. Can you see how inefficient the use of energy we have drained the energy away as we transport the water from one location to another.
    Please download a pump performance chart and have a look at it. You will then understand what I am trying to tell you…..What brands of pump are available there?
    A
    I will probably need to get it from JBG SA after I calculate all my head.... But I will consult before I do that... I was thinking of PC 18000 or 36 000..
    Link:http://www.aquariumwholesaleshop.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=311
    http://aquakoindonesia.itrademarket.com/2262006/pompa-resun-resun-pump-pc-18000-pc-36000-water-pump-pc.htm
    I dont know if it is the same one... I just know the name but suspect it might be. I have very good reviews for it. (performance and energy efficient with low head) best about it uses very low KW...and my friends like it a lot...good reviews, if it is used for what it is meant= low head.

    Quote:

    How are you going to get water up high to the bakki shower and the waterfall and a holding tank with return via TPR right? Do you use the same pump or another dedicated pump? Think of the elevation head loss you need to overcome.
    If I use PC 18 or 36 000, I will need another pump or use the pump from the WG...with high head.



    Quote:
    BTW that is not a magic figure for me...I was even planning on ones every 2 hours, and dont see much wrong with it.

    Your rationale on this.
    A
    Rational???? maybe more of a challenge...of a perfect pond design...
    I know many people who have done it...
    It is easy with lots of pump power... it is a challenge with less pump power... but it is not impossible...maybe 1.5 it is easier...
    Q
    May I know what is your estimated detention time you have calculated for your pond?
    I dont know how to do that...

    Quote:
    I just did a bakki, huge... 3m long..

    Please show me some pictures of it.
    I will show U but promise not to laugh...
    Here page 2 of this thread: http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/908/lots-of-questions-on-pond-design./p2
    Q
    Ok. Now I know. Hehehe….May I know which part of Arifca.
    How hot is there and what is the usual humidity you are having there. Do you know the wet-buld temperature there. If it is humid there, do you experience a feeling of cooling effect when wind glow over your skin? What is the water temperature there in the open.
    OK we are now going into the thermodynamic.
    I am very sure the bakki tower or the shower as a cooling tower will not work. In fact I think it will work against your assumption.

    A
    Lusaka Zambia
    65*F average temperature....This is our hottest month (October T 35* C)
    Dry no humidity ( high above sea level 1700m)
    Definitely I feel cooled by wind...
    Water temperature... not to sure. The last I measure was 26*C 2 month ago...
    Bakki is considered a must! Misconception???? I dont know... I like it a lot.

    Quote:

    If all this circular rotating raceway is so good for a rectangular, I would expect the farming industry across the world implementing it. I did not read the author’s links to other people work but from his report I read he is quoting everybody all over the report. To me this is an indication of his experiment is not conclusive and definite as to what he want to proof. He needs to rely on others people report to substantiate and justify his recorded observations.
    A
    Farming industry across the world is implementing it...

    Quote:
    Did U see the pond for which I gave U a link? The one that is almost the same...

    I have read all that you have provided a link but I might have missed. Can you please provide me to the specific link you are referring? Would like to read.
    A
    http://www.koiphen.com/forums/showthread.php?110489-Tom-10-000-gal-pond-build/page2

    Q
    Your current pond pic…..I must said….Not bad photography skills and your landscaping is nice. How deep is this pond? May I know what are the things you find this pond inefficient?
    Is the river marking on the pic is where you will provide a river to your proposed new pond?
    A
    No river in the new pond...
    How is my pond inefficient? No BD, hard to create flow patterns inside,lots of ups and downs on the bottom, sloping sides, lots of shallow places, unsealed concrete...I am sure they are more...
    Most is shallow, only one deep pool in it 160cm.

    Quote:
    Can you take a few pictures of the empty plot of land where your new pond will be. Please indicate where is north in the picture.
    I just finish drafting 3 affidavits in replies to the defendants.
    When this is free off the way, I will try to draft something for your further consideration.
    A:
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4800/SAM_0548.jpg
    This is the part of the pond in the new plot. North is to the right where the wall fence is pointing.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4801/SAM_0575.jpg
    This is the part of it in the old plot...Used for a compost hip to collect all organic waste and compost it .
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4802/SAM_0568.jpg
    front view...
    It was an empty plot I bought with big difficulty, prime area of Lusaka...expensive...
    It was a large plot that was subdivided and sold. There were 4 mud dams in it...which I buried.Did not know how to water proof them.
    My old plot I bought 2 years ago, built a house, made a garden and pond last year....
    This year I made some filtration for it...had none before...and now that I am finished... starting a proper pond for my babies.. Just the best for them.
    this plot I bought a couple of month ago...Built a wall fence, gate , leveled it and filled all the dams, removed hundreds of shrubs.. it was bush. It belongs to a guy who lives abroad..neglected , bought as an investment.
    this is how it looked after I removed all the bush.
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4803/SAM_0565.jpg

    Thanks for showing me the izeki. Will have to examine it in closer detail.
    I have nothing better... but in USA they are following in my footsteps already...and are modifying their filters to use izeki, and they like it. A veteran Koi keeper said first time he had clear wtaer in few days..
    Do U want a link?

    Cheers
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-10 10:20:23 pm
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Hi Neli

    Sorry for the late reply.

    Thank you for the notes on the KH. I put about 5kg oyster shell and 5kg of coral. That is not enough for sure. Ok will add sodium bicarbonate slowly over the next few days.

    Back your questions:


    Quote:
    My z1 =z2 They will be the same level....Just e bend at each end...
    I said P1/mg =P2 /mg only if we ignore the head difference between pond and vortex.
    So my Z1=Zs+25cm
    P1/mg= 170cm (no?)
    V=2540 cm/sec (that is the flow velocity I want to have...???? (theoretical/hypothetical)
    Where did I go wrong????
    I understood U well. And that is the left side of the equation...I can only have differences in this case if I account for the head loss (no?) that is when I will get my P2/mg.
    But I understood the principle of it...

    Answer
    Z1 = z2 = 250mm (This is the depth of the top of the BD rim to an arbitrary datum below it.
    P1/mg = 170cm=1.7m (This is depth of your main pond free surface water to the top rim of the BD)

    The v=2540cm/s = 2.540m/s (This is the flow velocity you want to have) I cannot figured out how you get this figure. Anyway….. Let’s do this again.

    _____________________________________________________________________________
    Step 1 (Determine your filtration retention time)

    From your earlier posts, I gather these information. KP and WP approximately about equal size. WG will be slightly lower.
    Your KP pond size is approximately 7.3m (L) x 3.3m(W) and 1.65m(H) or 24ft(L) x 11ft(W) x 5.5ft(H)

    From the drawing you have posted in 1st page, I estimated your filtration size is at and around 27% of the main pond.

    Volume of main pond = 7.3m x3.3m x 1.65m=39.75m3
    Filtration volume = 27% x 39.75m3 = 9.94m3

    I study roughly what you might put in and make a guesstimate…after deducting your filtering material, you will have a net volume of around say 22% of the pond volume.
    Net Filtration volume = 22% x 39.75m3 = 8.745m3
    _____________________________________________________________________________
    You want a turnover rate of 2hr. Therefore…
    Discharge rate required = Pond Volume/turnover rate = 39.75/2 = 19.875m3/hr

    19.875m3/hr = 5250 US gallon/hr (This is the discharge your pump must have after deducting all the energy losses at the point of discharge into the main pond.)

    Filtration retention time = Filtration volume/Discharge rate into pond
    Filtration retention time = (8.745/19.875) *60min = 26.4 minutes
    ______________________________________________________________________________
    IF…You want a turnover rate of 1.5hr. Therefore…
    Discharge rate required = Pond Volume/turnover rate = 39.75/1.5 = 26.5m3/hr

    26.5m3/hr = 7,000 US gallon/hr (This is the discharge your pump must have after deducting all the energy losses at the point of discharge into the main pond.)

    Filtration retention time = Filtration volume/Discharge rate into pond
    Filtration retention time = (8.745/26.5) *60min = 19.8 minutes
    _______________________________________________________________________________
    IF…You want a turnover rate of 1hr. Therefore…
    Discharge rate required = Pond Volume/turnover rate = 39.75/1 = 39.75m3/hr

    39.75m3/hr = 10,500 US gallon/hr (This is the discharge your pump must have after deducting all the energy losses at the point of discharge into the main pond.)

    Filtration retention time = Filtration volume/Discharge rate into pond
    Filtration retention time = (8.745/39.75) *60min = 13.2 minutes
    To me…I think a retention time of 13.2min, is a good consideration to have. Finally after deducting properly your net volume of your final filtration, I would expect a retention time of 15min.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    I think you are planning to have 2 vortexes as a solid separator. Each of this vortex will be bottomed drain feed into it from main pond. The BD length will be different in this case. You need to allow for the appropriate length and the elbows.

    Assume the BD length is 4m and the pipe size is 4”.
    IF… you take the 1 hours turnover rate with a retention time of filtration 15min as acceptable. Your pipe discharge volume at the entry to the main pond is 39.75m3/hr = 10,500 US gallon/hr

    Using the Hazen-Williams formula to calculate frictional loss based on the flow rate of 39.75/hr

    Estimated friction loss
    (a) 2nos 90deg elbow = equivalent to approx 25D of equivalent straight pipe length
    = 2(25 x 0.1m) = 5m
    (b) 4" pipe = 0.25m + 4m + 0.2m = 4.45m

    Total equivalent pipe length for friction loss calculation = 9.45m.

    Hazen-Williams Excel to calculate.

    You will find....For 39.75m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 168.36mm or 1.65kPa. Flow velocity is 1.41 m/s

    The other major losses are as follows:

    Entrance loss at pipe inlet= 0.5v2/2g
    Exit loss at pipe exit into barrel = v2/2g

    where v is the velocity of the flow and g is the gravitation acceleration = 9.81m/s2

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(1.41)]/2*9.81= 0.152m = 152mm

    Therefore Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 168.36mm + 152mm =320.36mm. say 325mm.

    Now this is for single BD pipe. You have 2 nos of BD.
    ________________________________________________________________________________
    Assume the discharge is equally divided. Therefore Q=39.75/2 = 19.875m3/hr
    For 19.875m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 46.64mm or 0.46Pa. Flow velocity is 0.7 m/s

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.7)]/2*9.81= 0.01835m = 18.3mm
    Therefore, Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 46.64mm + 18.35 =65mm.

    To me this drawdown amount is still no good.
    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Say you allow 3 nos of BD drains.

    Assume the discharge is divided to the 3 BD. Therefore Q=39.75/3 = 13.25m3/hr
    For 13.25m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 22.01mm or 0.22Pa. Flow velocity is 0.47 m/s

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.47)]/2*9.81= 0.01688m = 16.89mm
    Therefore, Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 22.01mm + 16.89 = 38.9mm.


    Still not not good.
    _________________________________________________________________________________
    Say you allow 4 nos of BD drains.

    Assume the discharge is divided to the 4 BD. Therefore Q=39.75/4 = 9.94 m3/hr
    For 9.94m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 12.92mm or 0.13Pa. Flow velocity is 0.35 m/s

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.35)]/2*9.81= 0.00936m = 9.37mm
    Therefore, Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 12.92mm + 9.37mm = 22.29mm. say 25mm

    Drawdown = 25mm. Good value to start 1st point of drawdown calculation

    ___________________________________________________________________________________

    If we use Harry’s Formula (c/o Bernoulli’s Equation)

    (z1) + (y1) + (v1)power of2/2g = (z2) + (y2) + (v2)power of 2/2g

    Z(1) = 1m [measure from a datum below to the BD pipe to the top of the BD rim].
    Y(1) = The height from the top of BD rim to the free water surface level.
    (v1)2/2g = The velocity of the water column traveling down to the inlet of BD pipe.

    Z(2) = 1m [measure from a datum below to the BD pipe to the top of the BD rim].
    Y(2) = The height from the top of BD rim to the free water surface level.
    (v2)power of 2/2g = The velocity of the water column at the exit of BD pipe into the vortex.

    Z(1) = 1m (This is an arbitrary value I use only, in case you have drainage sump discharging into outside boundary common drain
    Y(1) is your pond depth that you would like the water to maintain. In this case is 1.65m
    (v1)power of 2/2g = The velocity of the discharge water column thru the return pipe traveling down to the inlet of BD pipe. The velocity is too small to contribute as a velocity head in the flow downward as the surface area of the pond is big. We ignore this value.
    _______________________________________________________________________________
    For academic only.
    Q= 39.75m3/hr. Your pond surface area = 7.3m x 3.3m = 24.09m2

    Therefore velocity = 39.75/24.09 = 1.65m/hr = 0.000458m/s

    Put this velocity into (v1)2/2g = 0.00000001069m = 0.00001069mm (Too small)
    ______________________________________________________________________________

    Z(2) = 0.95m (This is an arbitrary value I use only, as the vortex entry pipe should be lower by say 50mm so that you can drain the main pond dry is required by introducing a purge valve to have drainage sump discharging into outside boundary common drain
    Y(1) is your vortex depth you want to find out. In this case unknown and to be determined.
    (v2)2/2g = The velocity of the discharge water column at the exit of the BD pipe into the vortex. This has been calculated from the Hazen-Williams formula for 0.35m/s.

    Input all this values into Harry’s formula

    1 + 1.65 + 0 = 0.95 + y(2) + power of 2(0.35)/2g

    2.65 = 0.95 + Y(2) + 0.0.00624 == y(2) = 1.694m

    Now, the total head at the pond measuring from the datum =

    1m + 1.65m = 2.65m (This the depth of water level you want to maintain in the main pond)

    The total head at the vortex measuring from the datum =

    0.95m + 1.694m = 2.644m

    The difference in height between main pond and vortex =
    2.65m – 2.644m = 0.006m = 6mm


    This value of 6mm calculated using Bernoulli’s equation has not taken into account of the inlet and exit losses.

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.35)]/2*9.81= 0.00936m = 9.37mm

    The inlet and exit losses is estimated from above = 9.37mm

    So using Bernoulli’s energy equation, the estimated drawdown = 6mm + 9.37m = 15.37mm say 16mm.

    If you now make comparison with the flow calculated with 4BD, you will find the head loss is 25mm whereas using the energy equation (Bernoulli’s equation) is 16mm.

    There is a difference of 25mm – 16mm = 9mm.

    As I said before…fluid hydraulics is not an exact science. Hazen-Williams formula is easy to use to estimate the frictional loss. It is an empirical formula and more for turbulent flow under pressure condition. Energy equation is always true as long as we have allowed or make proper provisions for energy losses. The velocity of 0.35m/s is actually a laminar flow. The reason why we want laminar flow has been explained in the earlier posts.

    Therefore…………………..To me a realistic value to consider is take the average of (25mm + 16mm)/2 = 20.5mm say 21mm

    Why I do that….you may want to know. All those equations and formulas are for an ideal condition under a given testing environment. When we install the BD pipe elbows and laid it on the bed, there are imperfection in the connection and the placement.

    If you want to be conservative, then just use the Hazen-Williams formula and all for the inlet and exit losses as I have done.

    Note: In this eq for inlet and exit losses, I have compute it as 1.5v power of 2/2g instead of v power of 2/2g earlier as I have made an error in noting the actual exit of your piping works into the vortex.

    I have a more detail look at your filtration compartments arrangement, when you calculate the head loss across chamber to chamber…..my recommendation is to use the Harry’s Formula (Bernoulli’s equation) together with the continuity equation (Q=VA) to determine the head loss from chamber to chamber.

    From the vortex chamber outlet you discharged into the Izeki filtration chamber. It depends how you will stuff the Izeki, you flow will be affected. Actually reduced significantly. There is a formula to calculate this type of flow reduction but as this Izeki does not have the empirical data to support that equation. I will skip this and would use a simplified method for your ease of computation which I believe would not be very far of.

    In the Izeki chamber, you calculate the cross section area of the surface of the Izeki laid perpendicular to the chamber in the direction of flow. (Let name this A2) Calculate the Izeki chamber cross section area perpendicular to the direction of flow. (Let name this A1)

    Net cross sectional area for flow to free flow = A1- A2.
    If Q1 is the discharge from vortex into Izeki chamber, you can get v1 and A1, you can estimate the velocity immediately after the Izeki filtering material as V2= Q1/(A1-A2).

    You can then use the Harry’s Formula to determine the head loss again and add the entry and exit losses. For simplification just consider there is entry and exit loss going thru the IZeki of say
    4 times v2 power of 2/g

    When you move from chamber to chamber within the filtration chambers, you used Harry’s formula is good enough to estimate the head loss.

    When you reach the pump, you are introducing an external power source to provide back the energy to the flow system. Harry’s Formula then become:

    (z1) + (y1) + (v1)power of2/2g + Ep = (z2) + (y2) + (v2)power of 2/2g + hm + hf

    Where Ep = is the energy of the pump (i.e. to available head for a given discharge, this can be extracted from the pump performance chart)

    Hm and hf = minor and frictional head losses respectively.


    To be continued......

    Post edited by harryyew at 2011-11-12 04:30:05 am
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:

    I have this question:
    I will have 2 pups KP (koi pond) and 1 pump WG (water garden) Part of the water from the WG will be pumped through the bakki to KP and exit via overspill/water fall into WG.
    Want to put another over flow from KP to KP filter.

    What I could not figure out is if I use 2 overflows how to do it, since I would like to be able to by pass the water garden in case of medication=(I will just divert the flow to the bakki.), so I would like the skimmer to the filters to the KP to work but no water to go ever the water fall to the WG.

    Answer
    Try see attachment whether it meets your conditions/requirements

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4831/flow control schematic diagram.jpg

    Cheers
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:

    I will probably need to get it from JBG SA after I calculate all my head.... But I will consult before I do that... I was thinking of PC 18000 or 36 000..
    Link:http://www.aquariumwholesaleshop.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=311
    http://aquakoindonesia.itrademarket.com/2262006/pompa-resun-resun-pump-pc-18000-pc-36000-water-pump-pc.htm
    I dont know if it is the same one... I just know the name but suspect it might be. I have very good reviews for it. (performance and energy efficient with low head) best about it uses very low KW...and my friends like it a lot...good reviews, if it is used for what it is meant= low head.
    These 2 pumps are hopeless to meet your head loss and provide your final discharge flow amount as per design discussions so far. Their available head is way too low especially when bakki thing is introduced.

    Don’t get me wrong…..there will be flow coming out of it….but they are like urinating only.

    Are you planning for an electrical 3 phase power supply pump or single phase electrical power supply pump. For large volume of flow and high head required, 3 phase electrical pump is much much more efficient.

    The other thing you need to note, is that in a multiple return supply, it is advisable to have multiple pumps to address each flow route individually. It also makes the hyraulic easier to determine. In the event of a pump failure, you will still have water circulation back to your pond.

    Quote:
    Please show me some pictures of it.
    I will show U but promise not to laugh...
    Here page 2 of this thread: http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/908/lots-of-questions-on-pond-design./p2

    Lusaka Zambia
    65*F average temperature....This is our hottest month (October T 35* C)
    Dry no humidity ( high above sea level 1700m)
    Definitely I feel cooled by wind...
    Water temperature... not to sure. The last I measure was 26*C 2 month ago...
    Bakki is considered a must! Misconception???? I dont know... I like it a lot.

    Ok. I don’t laugh…it reminds me of my dad beer bottle cartons stacked at his warehouse. This type of improvising is not effective to mimic the actual bakki filtering science. You need a very effective filtration media to start with and a higher flow rate for water distribution along the length of discharge pipe then merely sprinklerling method. As water is allowed to gravitate fall, the media will provide resistance to the vertical free fall and a lot of energy is lost here and also energy to lift the water to the sprinkler height.

    Ok. We shall now go into THERMODYNAMICS….hehehe…
    Since…you have brought the subject of heat exchange, I would like to share this with you with the hope you will understand the implications that associate with it.

    1. Heat is a form of energy; in fact, it can be considered the lowest form of energy because all forms eventually revert to heat.

    2. 1st law of thermodynamic states: Enenrgy cannot be created or destroyed. Ok…some smart alex has just discovered that from atomic fission reaction…additional energy can be obtained. However, in our normal field of thermal environment such consideration is treated as irrelevant.

    While energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can be transformed from one form to another. Heat can be produced by transformation that are…mechanical (such as friction), chemical (combustion), electrical or physical.

    3. 2nd law states: Heat will only flow from higher temperature to lower.

    Again this law IMO has been broken when refrigerator was invented. But….such head pumps still work in strict conformity to the laws.

    Ok…I will not go into the 3rd laws…..we have enough of laws…hahaha..

    Average temperature is 65F or 18C. In the hottest month around 35C. Water temperature is at and around 26C. Now…you tell me according to thermodynamic 2nd laws…..you are actually introducing heat into your water system.

    Since your environment is humid. Thus your wet bulb temperature should be near to your dry bulb temperature. There is very little contribution you can achieved even at night as the wet bulb temperature is close to the dry bulb temperature.

    I think many people has a psychological belief that having this monstrous structure will do wonder to their water system. Having said this….if the correct science and if we actually know the empirical parameters that need to go with it from the originator of this matter…..this system is an advancement.
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Waw! U have calculated every thing for me... I will have a good look just now...Came back to the forum to post this link for U:
    Very good and easy spreadsheets (I was looking for easier way to calculate weir discharge and found them)
    Have a look on page 1 too...
    Link:http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/civil/media.aspx?PageIndex=3
    I am coming back to answer as soon as i download the spreadsheets...
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:

    How is my pond inefficient? No BD, hard to create flow patterns inside,lots of ups and downs on the bottom, sloping sides, lots of shallow places, unsealed concrete...I am sure they are more...
    Most is shallow, only one deep pool in it 160cm.


    Answer
    The main problem with your current pond is that you do not have the required flow (return discharge in the water stream) to drive the hydrology of your irregular open channel system. Pipe Return Flow rate is the main culprit and the excessive energy losses along the route of your delivery piping network.

    When you eventually understand all that have been discussed here….. you will realise and have an appropriate engineering solutions to overcome it. In an open channel system (yours is just a smaller version) you need to appreciate the hydrology that goes with it along the water stream.


  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    This is what you can do to verify yourself on site.

    1) Take a pail of a known volume capacity.

    2) Connect a short hose to it. Handheld is fine.

    3) Get a stopwatch and get the time it requires to fill to the marked volume.

    There you can determine the flow return. Sum it up for all your return discharged points. You have your total discharge back to your stream.


    I see a lot of people proudly said..... I have how many flowrate return....and blah blah and 90% of the time, they don't. How many actually installed flowmeter to actually confirmed their monitoring.

    I have a flowmeter installed at one part of the critical return system to monitor and confirm my design parameters. hehehe.....
    Post edited by harryyew at 2011-11-12 12:28:49 am
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote:
    A veteran Koi keeper said first time he had clear wtaer in few days..
    Do U want a link?

    Yes....please. I like to see the actual being put into operation. I might learn a few new things along the way.

    Cheers
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Hi Harry,
    I made a mistake , U are right! Z1 is not equal to Z2. My head is still paining me (tooth ache, scared to go to the dentist) Used my fish medicine for pain alleviation...Clover oil and any other sedative U use to put the fish to sleep, is very good for tooth ache...Put a drop in the tooth hole or on a small cotton wool ball, and push it inside the tooth cavity.stops the pain within seconds...
    I was confused. Z1=Z2 only if I connect my pipe in the bottom of the vortex...where the sump is supposed to be...Z2 should be 75cm-80cm just above the cone of the vortex is the entrance...Confusion had set in...
    Thanks for the calculations...Very helpful...

    Q
    Step 1 (Determine your filtration retention time)

    From your earlier posts, I gather this information. KP and WP approximately about equal size. WG will be slightly lower.
    Your KP pond size is approximately 7.3m (L) x 3.3m(W) and 1.65m(H) or 24ft(L) x 11ft(W) x 5.5ft(H)
    A
    Large pond is 11mx7mx1.2mdeep to be raised to 1.8m depth...I planned on KP=4x8x1.8m deep....=54m3 WG=3x8x1.2m=29m3
    Filter KP=3x4x1.8...1.7m (if not filled to the top)=20m3=37% of Koi pond..(lets use 19m3 vortex)
    filter WG=11m3

    From the drawing you have posted in 1st page, I estimated your filtration size is at and around 27% of the main pond.
    A filtration size is 37%

    Volume of main pond = 7.3m x3.3m x 1.65m=39.75m3 (54m3)
    Filtration volume = 27% x 39.75m3 = 9.94m3 (19m3)
    I study roughly what you might put in and we make a guesstimate…after deducting your filtering material, you will have a net volume of around say 23% of the pond volume.
    Net Filtration volume = 22% x 39.75m3 = 8.745m3 (17m3)
    _____________________________________________________________________________
    You want a turnover rate of 2hr. Therefore…
    Discharge rate required = Pond Volume/turnover rate = 39.75/2 = 19.875m3/hr
    A:27m3/hr

    Filtration retention time = Filtration volume/Discharge rate into pond
    Filtration retention time = (8.745/19.875) *60min = 26.4 minutes
    A:=38 min(17/27.60)

    ______________________________________________________________________________
    IF…You want a turnover rate of 1.5hr. Therefore…
    Discharge rate required = Pond Volume/turnover rate = 39.75/1.5 = 26.5m3/hr
    54/1.5=36m3

    Filtration retention time = Filtration volume/Discharge rate into pond
    Filtration retention time = (8.745/26.5) *60min = 19.8 minutes
    17/36.60=28min...
    _______________________________________________________________________________
    IF…You want a turnover rate of 1hr. Therefore…
    Discharge rate required = Pond Volume/turnover rate = 39.75/1 = 39.75m3/hr

    Filtration retention time = Filtration volume/Discharge rate into pond
    Filtration retention time = (8.745/39.75) *60min = 13.2 minutes
    17/54.60=18min.....So U advise to go with ones an hour??? I will do just that. Thanks...
    To me…I think a retention time of 13.2min, is a good consideration to have. Finally after deducting properly your net volume of your final filtration, I would expect a retention time of 15min.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    I think you are planning to have 2 vortexes as a solid separator. Each of this vortex will be bottomed drain feed into it from main pond. The BD length will be different in this case. You need to allow for the appropriate length and the elbows.

    Assume the BD length is 4m and the pipe size is 4”.
    IF… you take the 1 hours turnover rate with a retention time of filtration 15min as acceptable. Your pipe discharge volume at the entry to the main pond is 39.75m3/hr = 10,500 US gallon/hr

    Using the Hazen-Williams formula to calculate frictional loss based on the flow rate of 39.75/hr

    Estimated friction loss
    (a) 2nos 90deg elbow = equivalent to approx 25D of equivalent straight pipe length
    = 2(25 x 0.1m) = 5m
    (b) 4" pipe = 0.25m + 4m + 0.2m = 4.45m
    I forgot one more bend:3(0.25m)=7.5m My longest pipe will be 6.5m
    0.75m+6.5m+0.2m (????)=7.45m

    Total equivalent pipe length for friction loss calculation = 9.45m.
    (mine comes to "14.95.....15m)

    Hazen-Williams Excel to calculate.

    You will find....For 39.75m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 168.36mm or 1.65kPa. Flow velocity is 1.41 m/s
    This is what I got:54m3 discharge=0.75l/s (those are the units in the excel sheet)
    And I presumed the flow will be half through one BD=27m3 (Needs to be adjusted)(27m3/hr=7.5l/s)
    for friction length of pipe 15m at 100mm diameter pipe...
    I get 130mm head loss (is that correct teacher?) and velocity= 0.95m/s+1m/s (for easy calculation)

    The other major losses are as follows:

    Entrance loss at pipe inlet= 0.5v2/2g
    Exit loss at pipe exit into barrel = v2/2g

    where v is the velocity of the flow and g is the gravitation acceleration = 9.81m/s2

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(1.41)]/2*9.81= 0.152m = 152mm
    At velocity of 1m/s (what I got)total e/e losses=0.07m=70mm (???)

    Therefore Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 168.36mm + 152mm =320.36mm. say 325mm.
    So mine will be:130mm+70mm=200mm

    Now this is for single BD pipe. You have 2 nos of BD.
    ________________________________________________________________________________
    Assume the discharge is equally divided. Therefore Q=39.75/2 = 19.875m3/hr
    For 19.875m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 46.64mm or 0.46Pa. Flow velocity is 0.7 m/s

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.7)]/2*9.81= 0.01835m = 18.3mm
    Therefore, Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 46.64mm + 18.35 =65mm.

    To me this is drawdown amount is still no good. Say you allow 3 nos of BD drains.
    I did that already before I saw this....have I done all right?????
    Would U suggest I put 3BD?????
    _________________________________________________________________________________
    Assume the discharge is divided to the 3 BD. Therefore Q=39.75/3 = 13.25m3/hr
    For 13.25m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 22.01mm or 0.22Pa. Flow velocity is 0.47 m/s

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.47)]/2*9.81= 0.01688m = 16.89mm
    Therefore, Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 22.01mm + 16.89 = 38.9mm.
    For 3 BD I get: (for the longest BD) I will have 16m friction length ,just the discharge will be 1/3 Q=5l/s Then I get head loss of 65.74mm and V=0.64m/s
    1.5*0.64*0.64/2*9.8=0.032m=32mm E&E loss+65mm=97mm total loss (correct)
    I hope I am correct so I can pronounce U as a very good teacher...he he he!
    _________________________________________________________________________________
    Assume the discharge is divided to the 4 BD. Therefore Q=39.75/4 = 9.94 m3/hr
    For 9.94m3/hr discharge rate at the pond, your friction head loss in piping is around 12.92mm or 0.13Pa. Flow velocity is 0.35 m/s

    Total Entrance & Exit losses = 1.5v2/2g = 1.5*[power of 2(0.35)]/2*9.81= 0.00936m = 9.37mm
    Therefore, Piping Friction loss + Entrance & Exit losses = 12.92mm + 9.37mm = 22.29mm. say 25mm

    Drawdown = 25mm. Good value to start 1st point of drawdown calculation
    No 4 BD for me(economics)...even 3 is too much....(can I get away with 2????) My filter is very deep=1.8m, so I will not mind 200mm draw down in one vortex.I just wanted to know...if it will not be more than that...and it will improve on my velocity...at BD

    I have a more detail look at your filtration compartments arrangement, when you calculate the head loss across chamber to chamber…..my recommendation is to use the Harry’s Formula (Bernoulli’s equation) together with the continuity equation (Q=VA) to determine the head loss from chamber to chamber.
    A
    I will put 3 x4" Pipes between the chambers, so I reduce the head loss

    From the vortex chamber outlet you discharged into the Izeki filtration chamber. It depends how you will stuff the Izeki, you flow will be affected. Actually reduced significantly. There is a formula to calculate this type of flow reduction but as this Izeki does not have the empirical data to support that equation. I will skip this and would use a simplified method for your ease of computation which I believe would not be very far of.

    In the Izeki chamber, you calculate the cross section area of the surface of the Izeki laid perpendicular to the chamber in the direction of flow. (Let name this A2) Calculate the Izeki chamber cross section area perpendicular to the direction of flow. (Let name this A1)
    A
    Net cross sectional area for flow to free flow = A1- A2 I suspect Izeky is specified as 25% shade so A2=A1/4, but since it is gathered....3 times/per unit distance...then A2=3A1/4
    So if cross section is 1.5m2 then flow(A1-A2) will be through o.375m2

    If Q1 is the discharge from vortex into Izeki chamber, you can get v1 and A1, you can estimate the velocity immediately after the Izeki filtering material as V2= Q1/(A1-A2).
    A
    V2=54/0.375=144?????? (for ones an hour turn over)

    You can then use the Harry’s Formula to determine the head loss again and add the entry and exit losses. For simplification just consider there is entry and exit loss going thru the IZeki of say
    4 times v2 power of 2/g

    When you move from chamber to chamber within the filtration chambers, you used the Harry’s formula is good enough to estimate the head loss.

    When you reach the pump, you are introducing an external power source to provide back the energy to the flow system. Harry’s Formula then become:

    (z1) + (y1) + (v1)power of2/2g + Ep = (z2) + (y2) + (v2)power of 2/2g + hm + hf

    Where Ep = is the energy of the pump (i.e. to available head for a given discharge, this can be extracted from the pump performance chart)

    Hm and hf = minor and frictional head losses respectively.
    Thanks! I am OK now.....I think???? If I have done the above calculations well.....
    Now I need to calculate the height of the chamber I need to build to feed my TPR by gravity, so I see how many TPR I can Put, if I want certain velocity out of them....
    I am going to try and do it my self....and I want U to check me up....if I have learned well or I am just a stupid blond. He he he!


  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Harry I am still a blond!
    I dont understand your diagram.....so I will post mine for U to tell me if what I think/plan is
    OK
    KP= koi pond
    WG =water garden
    OS =over spill
    F =filter
    This is what I have imagined can happen:
    Situation 1
    I would know how much water I want to pass through the FOS, so that my BD have sufficient flow.
    I can calculate the width and height (H) of the weir, so it passes that amount of water only... Right????(can I do that?)
    Link:http://www.lmnoeng.com/Weirs/RectangularWeir.htm
    My discharge in the weir will depend on: Size of my pond,area of weir discharge(L.H),and the discharge of my 2 pumps from KPF to KP.
    I can have a automatic top up (toilet cistern gadget He he he!)(but there are some for water tanks here too.)
    I can have a over spill to sump too.(rain) for when the WGOS is on, and I can put one in the WG too.
    Water in pond is Higher than FOS by H (height needed for my specific discharge)
    Will this work?
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4832/NP1.JPG
    Situation 2
    WGPump is on too.
    Water level in KP raises, until the flow through WGOS = flow added by WGPump (adjustable)
    If that is also H (A=H) the length of the WGOS (weir) can be calculated so that only the flow I require passes through it...???? then it can be adjusted through a valve from the WGPump, to the height I want (H), so at this point the discharge through the FOS will be proportional to 2H..
    That extra H height of water in the FOS will take water from the BD (reduce the BD discharge???) when the level in the pond is reached where WGOS starts discharging a constant amount of water. Not too sure about this????

    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4833/NP2.JPG
    This is where I add the plate:
    Situation 3
    Plate added, (black on FOS) all pumps working,both OS discharging, amounts (calculated) proportional to H of the weir...???
    Plate H cm high inserted into FOS to reduce height/discharge of FOS.
    Will I now have a situation where:
    I have the amount of water I want going through FOS (calculated and proportional to H)
    And I have the amount of water I want going through WGOS (calculated and proportional to H and WGP discharge)
    Can this work?
    Maybe I am not thinking properly?
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4834/NP3.JPG
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-12 07:55:22 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Harry,
    one more thing:
    I will have one overspill/skimmer into the pond filter from KP. We did not deduct its flow from the BD pipe flow...So I can do that, and it will reduce my draw down..???? a bit...No?
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    About the pump: I said it is good for what it is meant to be: low head. For the bakki I want to get another pump and use it in the water garden, and bakki....
    or just get another pump for the bakki....
    Every one is now using the PC 18000 in SA because of the price of electricity.
    Q
    These 2 pumps are hopeless to meet your head loss and provide your final discharge flow amount as per design discussions so far. Their available head is way too low especially when bakki thing is introduced.
    A: do U think one 36000 and one 18000 will be OK for the KP? (bakki not included)
    36000 has 5m head and 18000 has 3m head...

    Q
    Are you planning for an electrical 3 phase power supply pump or single phase electrical power supply pump. For large volume of flow and high head required, 3 phase electrical pump is much much more efficient.
    A
    I dont have 3 phase here...
    Q
    The other thing you need to note, is that in a multiple return supply, it is advisable to have multiple pumps to address each flow route individually. It also makes the hyraulic easier to determine. In the event of a pump failure, you will still have water circulation back to your pond.
    A
    will those 2 pumps solve my problem?

    Q
    Ok. I don’t laugh…it reminds me of my dad beer bottle cartons stacked at his warehouse.
    A
    My flow over the bakki is 25000l/h. dont have good media yet. will buy later better one.

    Q
    Average temperature is 65F or 18C. In the hottest month around 35C. Water temperature is at and around 26C. Now…you tell me according to thermodynamic 2nd laws…..you are actually introducing heat into your water system.
    A
    how does wind cool your face then, when it is wet? Evaporation?
    Q
    Since your environment is humid.
    A
    dry not humid. very dry...
    Q
    I think many people has a psychological belief that having this monstrous structure will do wonder to their water system.
    A
    I think where I got confused is from every one in Europe talking about , switching off their bakki in winter...cooling...
    Do U think just like that , without bakki , my filter, with very inefficient media will be enough...
    But I must say bakki is a must for me....has some advantages....
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Now my darling,
    Qute:
    I don’t think you need to use vortex. Go and read a bit on sedimentation tank design or a primary sedimentation clarifier. They are not out dated. You can incorporate this type of sediments treatment into part of your pond…..as you are planning to subdivide it. Can you show me what Izeki looks like?
    A
    Can U please advise on this... What worries me with SC is that it needs lots of water to flush it...Do U have any design that can solve this problem... I wanted to put an airlift in the stand pipe in the sump of the vortex, put it on timer and have it flushed few times a day...so waste stays in the system minimum time...and with a vortex, I will have most of the solids concentrated on the bottom of the cone... so it will not take much to flush them...


    Now,
    that I have decided on ones per hour turn over rate I need to calculate how high should I build my chamber which will house my TPR..(it needs to be higher than the pond and filter to create the necessary head, so I have velocity of at list 380cm/s (Q=19l/s) in each of my TPR....)
    Need to figure it out...
    I am going to try and make an excel sheet my self... (Bernolly's formula right????)
    U just make sure I dont mess up....
    First I determine The friction length of my pipes.....
    I found out what plug flow it is. It is a quality/type of flow that can exist in a ny pond and is measured by Q /WL.
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-13 07:03:59 am
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Neli.

    Before I answers on the various configurations you have considered to address your 2 overflows situation and share further my point of views on the various issues and constraints you are facing. I notice you are planing for a system that can introduce a certain amount of flow into the KP which will naturally altered many factors that goes with it.

    Can you please advise on this FOS (Filter over spilled) thing? Are you expecting there is more water height in the filter resulting in an over spilled from filter chamber to KP?

    Or from KP over spilled into the the filtration chamber you are refering?

    hehehe......do you like the plug flow as compared to the circular flow motion?

    Cheers
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    I mean from KP to KP filter... It can not be the other way around... Remember they are the same height and I will have head loss in the filter , which will allow me to have water going from KP to KPFilter and then the flow through the BDs will be reduced by that amount... which now thanks to U I know how to recalculate....It will be the same....minus the overspill discharge...No?
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Darling there is plug flow even in my type of ponds....
    Plug flow is not a type of pond only, it is a characteristic of a pond...or a condition created by the ratio...
    But I found some references of the best two flows for ponds are plug flow and mixed...like mine... But still every where it is stated that my design is more energy efficient, and has less dead zones than the plug flow...and needs less velocities within the pond to keep it clean...
    Post edited by Neli at 2011-11-13 10:41:24 am
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    U are right. Velocity through a jet of 380cm/sec is just too much...I found a formula on how to calculate what velocity will the TPR 's velocity produce in the pond...and it is a simple one...but I can not find any where what is the minimum velocity needed to keep the pond floor clean....I will ignore that, since I have settled on turn over of ones per hour... Rule of thumb that should be enough...now I dont know how high I should build the chamber for the gravity fed TPR>>>???
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Hi Neli


    Quote

    Situation 1
    I would know how much water I want to pass through the FOS, so that my BD have sufficient flow.
    I can calculate the width and height (H) of the weir, so it passes that amount of water only... Right????(can I do that?)
    Link:http://www.lmnoeng.com/Weirs/RectangularWeir.htm
    My discharge in the weir will depend on: Size of my pond,area of weir discharge(L.H),and the discharge of my 2 pumps from KPF to KP.
    I can have a automatic top up (toilet cistern gadget He he he!)(but there are some for water tanks here too.)
    I can have a over spill to sump too.(rain) for when the WGOS is on, and I can put one in the WG too.
    Water in pond is Higher than FOS by H (height needed for my specific discharge)
    Will this work?

    Answer
    Yes…you can calculate how much water goes from KP to KPF….The head difference between the KP and the 1st chamber is relatively small…thus the flow is small. You need to appreciate you are basically short circuiting the flow in your arrangement. Not appropriate.

    Yes, you can calculate the discharge or the height of the water spilling over a given weir length with many formulas. However, I noticed the link you provided where you intent to use the formula need to pay money.
    A popular formula is Francis formula for the discharge of a sharp-crested rectangular weir having a length b greater than 3h is
    Q=3.33*(b -nh)/10*[(h+h0)(3/2)-h0(3/2)]

    where
    Q= discharge over weir, ft3/s (m3/s)
    b= length of weir, ft (m)
    h= vertical distance from level of crest of weir to water surface at point unaffected by weir drawdown (head on weir), ft (m)
    n= number of end contractions (0, 1, or 2)
    h0= head of velocity of approach
    If the sides of the weir are coincident with the sides of the approach channel, the weir is considered to be suppressed, and n=0. If both sides of the weir are far enough removed from the sides of the approach channel to permit free lateral approach of water, the weir is considered to be contracted, and n= 2. If one side is suppressed and one is contracted, n=1.

    Or use the easy one….Horizontal, sharp edged weirs (Bazins formula)
    Q = 0.66 x cB x (2g)0.66 x H1.5
    where;
    Q = water flow rate, m3/sec
    B = width of the weir, metres*
    c = discharge coefficient, average 0.62
    g = gravitational constant, 9.81
    H = Height of the water over the weir, measured behind the weir edge, m
    Here you can do the calculations

    http://easycalculation.com/physics/fluid-mechanics/bazins-weir-flow.php


    Yes….your discharge in the weir will depend on: Size of your pond (the difference in head between KP pond free surface water level and the drop of the weir crest free fall surface water level),area of weir discharge(L.H),and the discharge of your 2 pumps from KPF to KP.

    Yes, you can have automatic top up (preferably the water tanking ball float system) and depend on your city incoming water pressure it will takes ages for the water to build up Hehehe….

    Why you need a dedicated filter over spilled piping? If you have the filtration compartments relative height worked out proper with respect to the draw downs you will be expecting, the last partition height relative to the dry chamber will be your over flow in the system.

    Referring to your diagram for situation 1….If your water level between KP and the KPF is the same (assuming you can hypothetically top it up somehow)…there will be no flow.

    There will always be a differential in heights among all the compartments. What I think happen is that when you reached to this part of the equation…. You are thinking in static…..in reality everything is still dynamic.

    By adjusting each outflow and inflow to a specific height, you have introduced a non-flexible control in your system. What happen for example if there is a significant evaporation?

    Let me try again to explain on the flow control schematic diagram which I believe will be able to meet your need.

    I reattach here again a plan and a sectional view of the proposal for your consideration:

    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4842/flow%20control%20schematic%20diagram%20plan.jpg

    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4843/section%20view%20valve%20control.jpg

    Ball valve B1 is not required if you purely just want to use a skimmer box to collect water from the KP and direct it to the WG box to allow overflow via a weir into your WGP. If Ball Valve B1 is not required, then ball valve B2 is not required. Sometimes…we want to increase the flow into the WGP by force feeding it…then Ball valve B1 and Ball valve B2 would be there for you to regulate at will.

    Water from KP is flowing into the skimmer box and then water is regulated via ball valve B4 into the WG tray or box. When I said tray…..I was thinking you want to have a sheer sheet effect of the water outfall discharging into the WGP. Now if Ball valve B3 is closed. No water flow back to KPF. If you open ball valve B3, water will flow to KPF by the amount you desire.

    In the event you do not want water to flow to WGP. You shut of Ball valve No 4. Water will flow via the red line piping in the diagram and pass thru ball valve No 3 and water is rehulated back to the KPF. Water will not be able to flow back into the WG tray/box via this route because you have physically introduced a check valve (Non return valve) to prevent backflow.

    All this valves (except ball valve No 4) need not be physically install at the at the waterfall area. You can have it at the point where it suit you best for regulating.
    Quote
    I will have one overspill/skimmer into the pond filter from KP. We did not deduct its flow from the BD pipe flow...So I can do that, and it will reduce my draw down..???? a bit...No?

    Answer
    Unless you are introducing a pump at the skimmer box to draw water back into KPF…..the volume that it is drawing after deducting energy losses will be small. For simplication in your initial design to balance all the priority parameters, you ignore it 1st.

    If the return or overspill is return by gravity…you will not reduce your drawdown. When there is a return via this route…..your BD flow will reduce, the velocity of the flow is reduced but the total driving head remain the same for the fixed return discharge into the pond.


    to be continued....
    Post edited by harryyew at 2011-11-14 05:11:07 am
  • harryyewharryyew November 2011
    Posts: 396
    Quote
    do U think one 36000 and one 18000 will be OK for the KP? (bakki not included)
    36000 has 5m head and 18000 has 3m head...

    Answer
    No. Definitely not ok. At those head of 5m and 3m…they are urinating. At zero head, they will give you that discharge. I try to search for their performance chart…but cannot get. I would not even be surprise to see their performance in head in relation to discharge is exponentially plot. Say for the 36000, at a head of 2m, I would expect only half of the flow is coming out. If you take into account of the energy loss along the piping work and the height of water it has to lift from the pump chamber, you have very little remains to flow.

    Quote
    will those 2 pumps solve my problem?

    Answer
    Unlikely.

    Quote
    My flow over the bakki is 25000l/h. dont have good media yet. will buy later better one.

    Answer
    May I know what pump are you using and the height of your bakki?



    Quote
    Can U please advise on this... What worries me with SC is that it needs lots of water to flush it...Do U have any design that can solve this problem... I wanted to put an airlift in the stand pipe in the sump of the vortex, put it on timer and have it flushed few times a day...so waste stays in the system minimum time...and with a vortex, I will have most of the solids concentrated on the bottom of the cone... so it will not take much to flush them...

    It all depends how big the Sc needs to be. There is always an engineering solution to it. We are only treating one source of shit here unlike in a waste treatment plant. Hehehe…

    In SC, the key to successful settlement is velocity. We use gravity and slow velocity to allow fine particles to pure settlement.

    In vortex, it just has a smaller footprint to slow down the velocity of the flow. It is using centrifugal forces to draw the water to the center which has a smaller velocity and of course a larger surface area at its circumference to slow down the fine particles movement by frictional forces and brings the debris down to the bottom. That is the gist of it. Do you have reference as to how to size the vortex for a design flow?

    Quote:
    But I found some references of the best two flows for ponds are plug flow and mixed...like mine... But still every where it is stated that my design is more energy efficient, and has less dead zones than the plug flow...and needs less velocities within the pond to keep it clean...

    Answer
    If the tank is circular to start with…I would agreed.
    But for a rectangular tank and introducing a circular flow within it to be more effcient….I will revert to you shortly after I have all quantitative elements in hands. Hehehe……

    The minimum velocity to keep the pond floor clean is 0.75m/s.

    Quote

    …….. now I dont know how high I should build the chamber for the gravity fed TPR>>>???

    Answer:
    This one puzzle me a bit as what has influence you to think along this line.
    May I know…..Why do you want to have an elevated chamber for your TPR? Why can’t it be piped return from the pumps?

    Cheers
  • NeliNeli November 2011
    Posts: 1,205
    Hi Harry,
    I hope I am not bothering U too much... But I feel this thread will help lots of people and I have not seen a thread that explains head loses on any forum... I wish this forum had stickies, so it is kept as a future reference and advise for other people...
    I personally file away every thing U say... for future references too, since ones I understand it all, I might need to advise future pond builders here, since I am the chair lady of Koi and pond club Zambia...a very new club with 6 Zambian members and 100+ internationally...
    Q:
    The head difference between the KP and the 1st chamber is relatively small…thus the flow is small. You need to appreciate you are basically short circuiting the flow in your arrangement. Not appropriate.
    A
    What do U mean short circuiting...????
    This is what I want to do.
    http://www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4844/hK12%20(668x389).jpg
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4844/hK12 (668x389).jpg
    The reason I wanted to put the weir/OS in second chamber where the izeki is, is because I wanted to use vortex chambers as 1st chamber and the vortex's pickup is high so it could have sucked in the debris from the skimmer. But now I am leaning towards SC, since U advised... Just need to find/design one that can have debris concentrated in a smaller area, since I want continuous ( several times a day) air lift on timer, removal of waste from SC . The air lift will be in the sump, in the stand pipes....but I will be able to remove them to flush the BD too...
    Q
    Why you need a dedicated filter over spilled piping? If you have the filtration compartments relative height worked out proper with respect to the draw downs you will be expecting, the last partition height relative to the dry chamber will be your over flow in the system.
    A
    I would prefer not to have piping in the OSF...I would like it like the one on the picture above.
    Harry if I make the OSF deeper???? the water that goes through it, will be taken out of the BD circuit, No? I dont get this one...
    Q
    Yes, you can have automatic top up (preferably the water tanking ball float system) and depend on your city incoming water pressure it will takes ages for the water to build up Hehehe….
    A
    I have borehole...and a huge overhead tank with 2 " pipe for top up...
    Q
    By adjusting each outflow and inflow to a specific height, you have introduced a non-flexible control in your system. What happen for example if there is a significant evaporation?
    A
    What about the automatic top up???That is the reason I put it there...The height of the OS can easily be adjusted by the height of the plate in it...until I get it right.I can have a second plate that blocks the OS totally during flushing time...

    Now i get your diagram...
    Q
    Ball valve B1 is not required if you purely just want to use a skimmer box to collect water from the KP and direct it to the WG box to allow overflow via a weir into your WGP. If Ball Valve B1 is not required, then ball valve B2 is not required. Sometimes…we want to increase the flow into the WGP by force feeding it…then Ball valve B1 and Ball valve B2 would be there for you to regulate at will.

    A
    Is the water going over the WGOS not going to depend on the discharge into the KP of the WG pump...I will have a gate valve on that line...so I can adjust the flow...to the KP.
    This is how I wanted to make the WGOS:
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4846/sof.JPG
    The function of it will be to keep KP surface clean, connect the 2 ponds when that is wanted,and act as A GPR (ground pond return) to assist with circulation in the WGP.

    Q
    Now if Ball valve B3 is closed. No water flow back to KPF. If you open ball valve B3, water will flow to KPF by the amount you desire.
    A
    WHP is 60cm lower than KP.... I think U did not understand me...I want 2 OS...at different locations, one from KP to KPF and one from KP to WG...
    I am not explaining it too well... Look again at the top view in the diagrams...situation1,2,3..

    Q
    No. Definitely not ok. At those head of 5m and 3m…they are urinating. At zero head, they will give you that discharge. I try to search for their performance chart…but cannot get. I would not even be surprise to see their performance in head in relation to discharge is exponentially plot. Say for the 36000, at a head of 2m, I would expect only half of the flow is coming out. If you take into account of the energy loss along the piping work and the height of water it has to lift from the pump chamber, you have very little remains to flow.
    A
    If U look at the picture of the pond I posted... he is using 2 of those pumps...
    In the same manner I want to use them...
    Like this:
    www.koianswers.com/discussion/download/4847/Pump chamber.JPG
    His pump is pumping only over a distance of 30cm max, through a 4" pipe, that is why I said head loss is minimal... only we have to consider the height of the chamber into which the pump pumps, Where the gravity return set up is...
    His set up is:
    Pond>(BD and OS)>SC>filter>pump> TPR chamber>pond. Minimal loses... No?
    Q
    May I know what pump are you using and the height of your bakki?
    A
    Swimming pool pump...

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership