Welcome to Koi Forum. Is this your first visit? Register
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31
  1. #21
    Junior Member Rank = Fry Rays Pond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    18
    Thanks / Likes
    21
    Wow.. Thank you taking your time to write this and the great explanation of the pros and cons of various media and all the links... I think I read this about 5 times.

    My first idea was to use a sieve first to remove large particals then to hit the static K1. Reason I did not state the sieve was that my filter is quite large taller than the pond at roughly 115CM high and I always though the sieve must be higher than the filter so it drains. My system is pump fed.

    This is what it would look like. Which is not ideal because of the height of the sieve. Also a lot strain on the pump to feed it that high or do you think this will be fine. I will be using a 10,000 litre pump or maybe even 2 pumps to feed the sieve.


  2. #22

  3. #23
    Can I ask what your rationale is for placing the K1 moving bed chamber last in the filtration sequence?


    MankySanke is our resident expert on water chemistry and other pond system technicalities, so his knowledge overrides mine, in the event that I perhaps say something in error, about water chemistry, but, as I understand it, the natural ammonia cycle in a pond system is generally considered to be:

    Ammonia > Nitrite > Nitrate > and [(optional but beneficial) de-nitrification (or, to put it another way, nitrate-reduction)]

    As I alluded to previously, the first 2 stages of conversion (the end result of which is Nitrate) function particularly well in an oxygen-rich environment - for the purposes of our discussion, that points most significantly to a moving bed chamber, since its very nature is to move the media using pumped air.

    Highly porous medias tend to have rather limited (not necessarily zero, but limited) amounts of oxygen present within the pores, and this is a more suitable environment for bacterial conversion of nitrate to nitrogen gas (incidentally, that is one of many reasons Bakki showers intentionally use high flow rates, so as to smash the water into thin films, so as to maximise gaseous exchange with the atmosphere, one facet of which is that some nitrogen gas may be released from the water, after the bacteria within the porous ceramic media in the Bakki shower has converted some of the nitrate to nitrogen gas).
    To a limited degree, one can promote denitrification in a simple filter chamber, even if it doesn't contain highly-porous media (remember, there can, potentially, be clogging issues with continually-submerged highly-porous media), by choosing to provide it with little or no oxygenation (of course, the water itself will have some degree of oxygen saturation, so we're not talking in absolutes, here).

    Therefore, you can see why, after solid particles have been removed from the pond water, one would generally tend to put a highly-aerated bio-filter stage before a relatively low-oxygen bio-filter stage, so as to give the filter the best chance of first converting ammonia to nitrite and then nitrate, and subsequently some degree of nitrate 'removal' (conversion to nitrogen gas).




    EDIT: just found a nitrogen cycle pic. Please note that although it's a pic by a commercial filter media supplier, my posting it here is not with any intention of promoting that product; I'm posting it purely as a convenient diagram of the nitrogen cycle I was trying to describe, yesterday.


    Cermedia nitrogen cycle diagram.jpg
    Last edited by MustBeSomethingInTheWater; 06-11-2019 at 10:38 PM. Reason: added nitrogen cycle pic

  4. Thanks Ajm, Rays Pond, Maddog1, freddyboy, RS2OOO Thanked / Liked this Post
  5. #24
    Junior Member Rank = Fry Rays Pond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    18
    Thanks / Likes
    21
    Thank you once again for being so patient, and the great explanations.. I am quite new to all of this so its taking me a while to understand but I think! I have finally got it..

    Do you think this set is good and now that I will be using a Sieve as the first stage what would you recommend in the 1st chamber?



  6. Thanks freddyboy, anne Thanked / Liked this Post
  7. #25
    If it was me with that setup, I would put moving K1 in the first chamber as well. Anything static will clog eventually as the sieve will not take out all of the fines.

  8. Thanks freddyboy, anne Thanked / Liked this Post
  9. #26
    Junior Member Rank = Fry Rays Pond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    18
    Thanks / Likes
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Fishplanetkoi View Post
    If it was me with that setup, I would put moving K1 in the first chamber as well. Anything static will clog eventually as the sieve will not take out all of the fines.
    Thats what I was thinking.

    -K1 static in chamber one. Air stone turned on just when flushing to agitate it.
    -K1 constant moving bed in chamber two
    -Maybe just Japanese matting in chamber three

    Dont really want to use K1 again in chamber 3 as well..

  10. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Rays Pond View Post
    Thank you once again for being so patient, and the great explanations.. I am quite new to all of this so its taking me a while to understand but I think! I have finally got it..

    Do you think this set is good and now that I will be using a Sieve as the first stage what would you recommend in the 1st chamber?




    You're welcome. Most of us on this forum like to help others.

    Quite obviously, there's more than one way to achieve what you want to achieve, but if you're asking for an opinion, then mine would be that, unless you're going to use a parabolic type of sieve, the benefit of an immersed sieve panel might be outweighed by the hassle of frequent manual cleaning. However, as I have mentioned, this could be mitigated to some degree by situating the sieve panel at the top of an up-flowing settlement chamber. It's quite a dated methodology, but workable, for people on a budget, with the caveat that although it may marginally reduce the frequency of cleaning necessary for the seive panel (still at least once per day, if you care about your fish health), it does additionally require the settlement chamber to be flushed at least once daily - not the entire volume of water, but just enough to purge the accumulated waste.

    There are some sub-points I'd like to make, in relation to the scenario outlined in the above paragraph:

    i) in the described scenario, no loss of head would be necessary in order for the settlement chamber+seive to function correctly, so it could be mounted at approximately the same height as the other 3 chambers.

    ii) given that you already have your 3 chambers purchased, it is reasonable to question why you'd need to bother with a sieve chamber at all, since you could easily have an air-agitatable static K1 bed in chamber 1, which, as I described yesterday, could handle solid waste with less frequent clogging, and less impedance of water flow than a sieve (again, I'm not referring to a parabolic type, here). You could have a sieve chamber and then also static K1 in chamber 1, but that's going to unnecessarily increase your maintenance workload.
    Ultimately, it's up to you.






    In your situation, without the budget for a parabolic sieve or for an RDF, I would personally be inclined to not bother with the sieve chamber, and instead just go with the scenario you latterly arrived at:


    Quote Originally Posted by Rays Pond View Post

    -K1 static in chamber one. Air stone turned on just when flushing to agitate it.
    -K1 constant moving bed in chamber two
    -Maybe just Japanese matting in chamber three

    Dont really want to use K1 again in chamber 3 as well..

    Japanese matting in chamber 3 is fine, so long as you bear in mind that it will need to be removed and hose-flushed, periodically, just to keep everything hygienic, to avoid any hidden buildup of mulm or other gunk that could, potentially become a breeding ground for harmful microorganisms. It's easy to be lazy/complacent about this, but it's wise to make the effort.
    If, however, you were to build chamber 3 like chamber 1, with static K1 and a manually-operated air pump, then (as long as it wasn't too tightly packed wth K1) you could strongly agitate the K1 in chamber 3 a couple of times per month, just by switching on the aeration, without the hassle of having to physically remove the media from the chamber. Obviously, you can employ the same air pump you're using for chamber 1 and 2, by connecting all chambers to it with a simple multiple-tap manifold.

    I can see that your commercially-made chambers already have 'snorkel'-type water inflows, in order for incoming water to begin at the bottom of each chamber, and flow upwards. It wouldn't be a total deal-breaker if that wasn't the case, but I personally do like that approach, especially for chambers 1 and 3, as it will encourage any incoming particles to congregate at the bottom of the K1 media, thus making it easier to flush away (at cleaning time, I would be inclined to FIRST flush a couple of litres to the drain/sewer, then close the valve, then agitate the media with the air pump, and then flush a few more litres to sewer - I hope that makes logical sense).
    Last edited by MustBeSomethingInTheWater; 06-11-2019 at 07:09 PM.

  11. Thanks Ajm, RS2OOO, freddyboy Thanked / Liked this Post
  12. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by MustBeSomethingInTheWater View Post




    EDIT: just found a nitrogen cycle pic. Please note that although it's a pic by a commercial filter media supplier, my posting it here is not with any intention of promoting that product; I'm posting it purely as a convenient diagram of the nitrogen cycle I was trying to describe, yesterday.


    Cermedia nitrogen cycle diagram.jpg

    I know MBSITW was not suggesting you should do but dont use Cermedia, especially in a shower. It works well in the bottom of plant pots though.

  13. #29
    I got around to locating a relevant article on MankySanke's website, regarding nitrate reduction, so I'll post a link here, as a means of more fully explaining my reasons for suggesting to at least try to reduce nitrate using chamber 3:

    Reducing Nitrate



    My thanks to Syd for taking the time to write the aricle




  14. Thanks freddyboy Thanked / Liked this Post
  15. #30
    Junior Member Rank = Fry Rays Pond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    18
    Thanks / Likes
    21
    Hi, Thank you once again for the great explanations and ideas..

    I have seen this design quite a few times with the 3 barrel design on youtube. Only thing most of the time it seems that the last barrel is always a moving bed with K1


  16. Thanks freddyboy Thanked / Liked this Post
  17. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Rays Pond View Post


    I have seen this design quite a few times with the 3 barrel design on youtube. Only thing most of the time it seems that the last barrel is always a moving bed with K1
    Yes, admittedly, it's hardly re-inventing the wheel, but it'll get the job done, on a budget.

    As for similar designs that make chamber 3 a moving bed, well... you can do that if you like, and it'll still do a reasonable job, but I've provided you with the logical rationale for having the aerated moving bed in chamber 2, in order to attempt a bit of denitrifcation in a subsequent static bed (or japmat) in chamber 3, so you are armed with the information you need (about the sequence of the nitrogen cycle) to make your own informed decision. In all honesty, a limited-oxygen static bed in chamber 3 probably isn't going to be as efficient at denitrification as your shower with BHM, but it will make some contribution to that aim, and if you put a moving bed in chamber 3, then what would you do with chamber 2? Another moving bed, or a static bed? If it's the latter, then there would be absolutely no gain, that I can think of (unless you intended to deliberately trap particles in an identical fashion to chamber 1), from having swapped chambers 2 and 3 around, as it would not support the nitrogen cycle as efficiently as having moving bed (nitrification) in chamber 2 and subsequent low-oxygen (denitrification) in chamber 3.

    (please, other forum members, feel free to chip in with your viewpoints, if you feel I'm overlooking something, in this discussion. I don't take conflicting viewpoints personally; I just want to see Ray get the best end result from his filter.)



    I don't know how much of an understanding of the nitrogen cycle the people you mentioned have, who have made chamber 3 a moving bed. You would need to ask them yourself, to find out what their logic was. Some people like to believe that denitrification isn't really that important, and that might be influencing their decision to have the moving bed in chamber 3, or they may not even realise that moving beds are best-suited to dealing with the first 2 stages of the cycle. There is a degree of truth that the most important thing is to get toxic ammonia converted ASAP into nitrate, and to be thankful once that's accomplished, but it's really doing the fish a disservice to not also make some legitimate attempt at denitrification, if the option is available to you, which, with 3 chambers already in your possession, it is.

    Just remember that, with regard to which part of the nitrogen cycle each stage of your filter is attempting to handle, the nitrogen cycle itself operates in a fixed order of progression, so, if you care about the efficiency of your filter, you don't have the luxury of choosing to change the order of that linear sequence.

    To be evenhanded about this, I must acknowledge that (although I didn't notice it in your first photograph, when you started this thread!) I noticed in a different thread that you also run a shower on your pond:

    https://www.koiforum.uk/water-treatm...tml#post311596

    and some plants in the pond, so both of these will be reducing the nitrate in the pond, to some extent.

    Therefore, you have the option to build your 3-chamber filter to focus 'only' upon the first 2 stages of the nitrogen cycle, but I fail to see why you would choose not to make the 3-chamber filter as comprehensively effective as reasonably possible.




    I'm all-ears, in terms of your responses to my thought processes, above, and in terms of what ideas or differences of opinion other forum members reading this thread might have.



    __________________________________________________ ____________



    The following notes don't change what I've said above. They're just to provide more reasoning.


    • If you owned a parabolic sieve or an RDF, I'd probably encourage you to run only 2 chambers (moving bed followed by static bed).



    • If you owned a parabolic sieve or an RDF, and you owned only 1 chamber, I'd encourage you to run it as a moving bed (because converting the toxic ammonia to nitrate is the most important thing to accomplish), and encourage you to leave denitrification to your existing shower and plants (or to build the moving bed and then add a shower, at a later date, if you didn't already own one).

    That is why I mentioned favouring moving-bed instead of static-bed in another thread, a while back, but that was mostly in terms of choosing to build only one or the other, or, in the case of building more than one bed, in terms of static beds potentially harbouring pathogenic bacteria, but that need only be a concern if they are not flushed, periodically, to keep them clean (as I already described during earlier posts about the importance of hygiene for your 3rd chamber). Indeed, in that other thread, you can see that many Germans are more than happy to have static beds following their moving beds.


    • Our whole discussion in our thread, though, has been about having no parabolic sieve or RDF available, and thus striving to get the best filtration result out of 3 chambers that you do already have in your possession (and, up until today, I hadn't realised you already have a shower and plants for your pond).
    Last edited by MustBeSomethingInTheWater; 08-11-2019 at 02:22 AM.

  18. Thanks freddyboy Thanked / Liked this Post
 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:25 AM. Online Koi Mag Forum
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

vBulletin Improved By vBFoster® (Lite Version), © UltimateScheme, Ltd.