# Fluid Mechanics - The basics



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

OK this is a bit of a book, but I found fluid mechanics to be one of my favorite courses while I was in engineering school. Contrary to much of the scientific world, the behavior of fluids is not at all intuitive. Once you learn it, you possess "secret knowledge" which is kind of fun.  I'll try to clarify a couple of ideas here that have common aquarium applications - first, the flow of fluid through a pipe, and second, the behavior of a pump.

*Concept #1 - Flow of water through a pipe*

If you know anything about electricity you know that flow (amps) equals the pressure (volts) divided by the resistance (ohms). Water in a pipe acts the same way. If you want more water you either increase the pressure or decrease the resistance.

The flow of water through a pipe is described by this equation. Don't freak out!!! The math is actually pretty simple.

_Q_ = (pD_Pr_4)/(8h_L_)

Q is the flow (pick your favorite unit - liters per minute, gallons per hour, etc.) Flow is what we pay for, and what we hope our pumps deliver.
p = 3.14159.......
P = Pressure (psi, meters of H2O, mm of mercury, or whatever)
r = radius of the pipe
h = the viscosity of the fluid - in our case water
L = the length of the pipe

We can't do anything about the viscosity of water or pi, so ignore those. From the equation you can see that flow is proportional to length of the pipe. A 100' garden hose will put out half as much water as a 50' garden hose. Check it out sometime. Fifteen extra feet of tubing will decrease your flow by quite a bit.

The pressure, for our purposes, is produced by the pump of interest. More on this later. Suffice it to say that if you double the pressure, you double the flow. Remember that canister filters are really nothing more than a pump attached to a media container.

Now, the grand-daddy of them all. The one that really matters. Flow is proportional to the radius of the pipe, raised to the fourth power. In english, this means that if you double the radius of your pipe, then you'll increase the flow rate by 16 times!!. Even small differences in diameter will make a large difference in flow rates. You'll get 2.1 times more flow from 3/4" tubing than you will from 5/8" tubing.

The reason that the radius is so important is that it affects the velocity of fluid in the pipe. Areas of high velocity are turbulent, which means the water molecules are crashing around randomly, wasting energy instead of flowing nicely along toward the destination like we want them to. Think of turbulent flow like friction. Even the very large turbines in the power plant at the bottom of Hoover dam are more efficient when velocities are low. This is why the intake and outlet pipes are so big.

Try to wrap your head around this idea too: The flow rate is the same everywhere in the system. If you use 1" intake tubing and 1/2" return tubing, the water simply moves 4 times faster (and has more turbulence) in the 1/2" return line.

Every fitting you put in the line also acts to add resistance. An single elbow will produce as much resistance as several inches of straight pipe. A partially closed ball-valve will act like many feet of extra pipe - dropping flow considerably (duh, that's what a valve is for). Even a completely open valve will introduce a small amount of turbulence in the line, robbing you of energy, and decreasing flow. Add 20 feet of extra tubing, an in-line heater, a UV sterilizer, and a CO2 reactor to a little Eheim 2213 and you'll see that flow rates go to almost nothing.

Why don't the filter manufacturers use huge tubing for everything? Economics. Big tubing is expensive, and isn't easy to work with. They compromise, and we're stuck with whatever they decide to produce. For the most part, the compromise is reasonable.

*Concept number 2 - how a pump works:*

The flow going into a pump is exactly equal to the flow coming out of a pump (conservation of mass). So what, exactly, does the pump do? It raises the pressure of water in the output line. The pumps that we use are really horrible at developing suction on the intake line. They require a constant supply of fluid, and if it comes in already under a bit of pressure, so much the better. This is why Eheim recommends that their filters be located below the tank. The water column in the intake line acts to "preload" the pump. If you place the filter above or level with the tank, the pressure inside the canister is negative. This will lead to impeller cavitation (noisy and shortens impeller life), and gasses will come out of solution (we'd like the O2 and CO2 to remain dissolved).

Every pump has a pump curve associated with it. The shape of the particular curve is dictated by the design of the pump (rpm, impeller shape, intake & outlet geometry, etc). Eheim is kind enough to publish theirs. For an example, I'll reference the 1260 hobby pump (orange line), which I'm using in my new setup.










You can see from the graph that the two variables are H and Q. We already know that Q is flow. H stands for head. Head is basically a measure of resistance but it's a little hard to explain. Let me try.

Eheim will tell you that the rating for the 1260 pump is 40 liters per minute, or 635 gallons per hour. This is true for a zero-head condition. Zero-head means no resistance - no attached tubing, no valves, no strainers, etc. Nothing. Squirting out into thin air. By the way, the flow ratings for canister filters are given for zero-head conditions too - no media, no tubing, no bends, and no strainers. Actual observed flow rates are much lower due to the resistance of all the stuff we hook up to the pump.

We whine and complain that our 1260 pump only produces 20 liters per minute of flow. From the graph we can see that we have about 2.0 meters of head. This is how much flow you'd see if the pump were delivering water to a location 2 meters higher than itself (like pumping up out of a sump). If you try to use this pump to deliver water up three flights of stairs - forget it. Once you get up to 4 meters, the flow rate goes to zero. We call this the shutoff head. This maximum pressure that this pump can deliver is equal to 4 meters of water or about 5.7 psi.

Here is the cool part. The entire resistance of your system (tubing, filter media, elbows, strainers, spraybars, gunk in the lines, etc.) can be represented by a single value for H. If your 1260 pump is only putting out 20 liters per minute, the resistance (friction) in your system is equivalent to pumping water straight up a 2 meter pipe. You can decrease H (and therefore increase Q) by using fewer fittings, shorter sections of pipe, cleaning the filter media, or most importantly, by using larger tubing.

One last thing to remember. Don't forget that for a canister filter, or an in-line pump, the water in the intake tube will help to preload the pump. Think of this example. If the level of the water in your tank is 2 meters above the pump, the pressure on the intake side is already equal to 2 meters of H2O (about 2.8 psi). The pump will add up to another 4 meters of H2O (5.7 psi), for a total of 6 meters (8.5 psi). No matter where it is located (within reason), this particular pump will be able lift water up to 4 meters above the level of your tank.


----------



## cwlodarczyk (Sep 18, 2005)

:faint: 


My head just asploded. You owe me a new one.


----------



## frozenoak (Jul 30, 2005)

Thanks for that lengthy explanation. You hit on just about every question I have had about making my nano canister filter. Now I need to find all the parts and put them to geather with out a leak. ;-)


----------



## Moo (Apr 27, 2006)

that's really cool. 
I've always found the more you know about how something works the better you are at using it.

It makes sense now why the hose on my new eheiem is bigger on the intake side than the exhaust side.

I do have one question though what about the shape of the hose, does that make a difference.
I mean the fluval ribbed hose and the eheim smooth round hose.


----------



## turbomkt (Mar 31, 2004)

Moo said:


> I do have one question though what about the shape of the hose, does that make a difference.
> I mean the fluval ribbed hose and the eheim smooth round hose.


I believe the shape of the hose will make a difference. For the fluval hoses, I think the ribbing is to keep it from kinking. At the same time, that's really gotta put some turbulence in the fluid flow as well as providing a place for stuff to get stuck and clog the hose.


----------



## redstrat (Apr 3, 2006)

sweet!! I personally find this post to be very interesting I'll probably be taking a similar class this year as a prerequisite for my engineering degree. Nice little preview, thanks guaiac_boy.


----------



## gnatster (Mar 6, 2004)

A decent book on the subject is Aquatic Systems Engineering: Devices and How They Function by Pedro Ramon Escobal 

An internally ribbed hose will flow less then a smooth one. Internal ribs increase turbulence and have a greater surface area. Fluid molecules touching the surface of a hose flow slower then those in the center due to surface tension. Thats very simplified but it gives you the idea.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

Ribbed tubing does increase the turbulence, but not by as much as you might think. Like gnaster said, in a long section of straight pipe the water molecules don't all move at the same velocity. The molecules at the center of the pipe move very quickly while the ones right up against the wall don't move much at all. Think of a big river. The flow is much faster right in the center.

Things that interrupt the flow of the high velocity stream are the ones that really add lots of resistance. Think of a partially closed ball valve or an abrupt turn. In the fluval tubing the water velocity in the region near the ribs is quite low, producing a modest amount of turbulence, but not so much that it defeats the pump. The net result is some wasted energy, but much less than you'd get from a kinked tube.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

Moo said:


> It makes sense now why the hose on my new eheiem is bigger on the intake side than the exhaust side.


Well, yes, and no........

The reason the intake hose is large is to ensure that negative pressure isn't developed somewhere on the inlet side. In and of itself, this is a good thing. What bothers me is that they get cheap on the outlet side. You don't really _need_ outlet tubing that is as large as the inlet side, but you would get better flow trough the system.

Incidentally, Eheim's overall concept of the canister filter is that flow velocity should be modest to allow for good contact time with the filter media. This design allows bacteria a chance to do their thing. The flow rates for most of their canisters are pretty modest compared to some of the others. One benefit of lower flows is that very little nose is produced, which has always been one of their biggest selling points. For a planted tank, mechanical filtration is probably more important to us than biological filtration, since the plants take care of much of this. We're also concerned with an even distribution of nutrients (CO2) around the tank, which often requires supplemental flow.

I'd really prefer bigger tubing on their systems since it would result in a large improvement in flow rates, but then maybe the biological properties of the filter would be degraded and the thing might make a bit more noise.


----------



## DataGuru (Mar 11, 2005)

Very nice! Thanks for taking the time to summarize that! 

It explains why the pump in my plant filter is cranky sometimes with starting back up after I'd had it unplugged. Not enough water pressure on the inlet side. I really should plug the holes where the bulkheads are, set it lower and convert it into a sump.

I also have a couple of 100' denitrification coils (using drip irrigation tubing) set up that are being run by a powerhead. I have heard clattering from the impellor on that one and it's a fairly new powerhead. Perhaps cuz the outflow is so restricted? There's also a couple of foot of head on it.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

I LOVE IT!!

By the way, any fun analogies using arteries and veins with healthy human blood and the flow dynamics after eating McDonold's or Dunkin Donuts versus some apples or something healthy? 
Or before and after a good work out and drinking Gatorade? 
:happy: :bounce: op2:  :bump2: :tongue1: :rofl: 

Sorry, but this guy is really smart and his writing style is really easy for me to understand.......

And I like to tap into his brain with his occupational experience.....

And I have gotten hooked on CSI....

And my humor is at times whacked.......

So how would Men's Health Magazine spin this.......?

Any takers?


----------



## snowy (Jun 6, 2006)

Excellent thread, this explains why using pipe cleaners has such a dramatic effect.



guaiac_boy said:


> I'd really prefer bigger tubing on their systems since it would result in a large improvement in flow rates, but then maybe the biological properties of the filter would be degraded and the thing might make a bit more noise.


Would not increasing the radius on the outflow pipes result in a lower 'head' for the pump? Or rather, would larger pipe result in a more noticeable drop in flow when the head is increased, and that the line on the graph would be a lot 'flatter'?

I also thought one of the reasons that Eheim use smaller hoses on the return side was to maintain a stronger current (as opposed to flow) out of the return pipe / spray bar and into the tank. A larger pipe may flow more water in, but the strength of the current would be less. Or am I missing something? (sorry I did not study any of this at school).


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

The pump curve is determined by the physical characteristics of the pump, ie impeller speed, voltage, blade size, casing geometry, etc. Changing the attached tubing will take you to a different point along the curve, but it will not alter the basic curve in any way.

"Current" is the same as flow. You will get a higher velocity stream with a narrow tube (or by using a small outlet nozzle) but using a tube of smaller diameter will not in any way create more current or flow.


----------



## JERP (Feb 4, 2003)

One big reason the outlet hose is smaller is that water is heavy. Reducing the hose diameter just a little bit relieves the pump of a lot of work. Having a larger input hose ensures that water is always feeding the pump at least as fast the the pump can push it out. If your pump can't push the water as high as you like, just reduce the diameter of the hose. I simplified it a bit, but it's close enough. 

I only point this out becuase the discussion has been entirely about resistance, which is caused by the plumbing. Gravity is a factor too and must not neglected.

Gravity is one place that the "fluids is like electricity" analogy does not work.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

JERP said:


> One big reason the outlet hose is smaller is that water is heavy. Reducing the hose diameter just a little bit relieves the pump of a lot of work. Having a larger input hose ensures that water is always feeding the pump at least as fast the the pump can push it out. If your pump can't push the water as high as you like, just reduce the diameter of the hose. I simplified it a bit, but it's close enough.
> 
> I only point this out becuase the discussion has been entirely about resistance, which is caused by the plumbing. Gravity is a factor too and must not neglected.
> 
> Gravity is one place that the "fluids is like electricity" analogy does not work.


At first glance, your logic seems correct, but in fact, your statements are in error.

You've fallen into a common trap that fools a lot of people. Assume that you have a two tubes that are each 10 feet high. One is 100" in diameter and the other is 1" in diameter. The water pressure at the bottom of the tubes is exactly the same in both. The height of the water column in the tube is important, but the diameter of the tube makes no difference in a static condition. Assuming that the pump is at the bottom, given enough time, the Eheim 1260 pump has sufficient power to fill up a million gallon reservoir to a depth of 4 meters (its shutoff head).

Now, if you take the more common application of an aquarium return line, we want the water to be in motion. The pump has to overcome two forces to be able to move water. The first is the height of the water column. If you want to pump water 2 meters uphill (out of a sump for instance), the pump will do no better than the outflow shown on the pump curve for a 2 meter head. The second force to be overcome is caused by the resistance to flow. Resistance to flow picks up dramatically with narrow diameter tubing because high fluid velocities create turbulence, which robs the pump's energy. This produces additional head that is additive to the first. For a given condition this might create a total of 3 meters of head, dropping the Eheim 1260's output to roughly 10 liters/minute (from the graph). Exact numbers depend, of course, on the particular setup.

Most canister filters don't have to pump uphill since the intake and return come from the same body of water. The height of the water column in the intake line is exactly the same as the height of the water column in the return line. The only force to be overcome is the resistance created by the filter media, tubing, connectors, strainers, and such. The most important variable, by far, in the flow equation is the radius of the water conduit, since the resistance is proportional to the velocity squared, and the velocity is proportional to the radius squared.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

guaiac_boy said:


> ...
> 
> Most canister filters don't have to pump uphill since the intake and return come from the same body of water. The height of the water column in the intake line is exactly the same as the height of the water column in the return line. The only force to be overcome is the resistance created by the filter media, tubing, connectors, strainers, and such. The most important variable, by far, in the flow equation is the radius of the water conduit, since the resistance is proportional to the velocity squared, and the velocity is proportional to the radius squared.


I'm reviving this thread because it has a direct application to a new tank that I'm setting up. The tank will be a 1024l (270g) tank. The "filter room" will be about 5 meters away (same floor) with piping running under the floor to and from the aquarium. The current plan is to use piping that has a diameter of 32mm (1/8"). Questions:

1. Given the statement quoted above, does this mean that I don't need to take into account the 5 meter (16.4') distance when deciding on the pump (if I use a sump) or cannister?

2. What will the effect be of having two outlets from the tank, merging into the 32mm piping and then splitting again in the filter room to let's say two cannisters. The output of the cannisters would then merge in one 32mm return pipe under the floor and then split again into two returns into the tank?

And no, I'm not complicating my life because I want to  ; the location of the tank is the problem. It will be sitting on a base that's only about 20cm (7.9") high. The water depth will be 75cm (29.5") so the water level will be 95cm (about 37.4") from the floor. The only place to put filtration is as described.

And secondly, what would you guys recommend: a sump or a couple of cannisters (I was actually considered 2x Eheim 2128 and a 2080 but this seems really complicated, especially as the 2080 has two inlet tubes and one outlet). It is not yet decided whether the tank will be an African Cichlid tank or a planted tank...


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

An interesting series of questions. If you use large enough tubing, the length is _almost_ negligible, within reason. 5 meters isn't too far provided that the velocities in the tubing are low. You frightened me for a minute when I read 1/8" tubing. I assume that 32mm is correct which would be 1.25" tubing, a much better choice. That size should be plenty large for a 270g tank.

My Eheim 1260 pump has an effective flow rate of about 300 gallons/hour. In my closed-loop I use 3/4" (19mm) PVC pipe which gives a flow velocity of about 3.8 feet/second (1.2 m/s). Even though it doesn't seem like it, my loop actually uses about 20 feet (6 meters) of pipe and passes through a myriad of tees, elbows, and valves, each of which adds resistance. Even with all this, if anything, the flow is perhaps a bit excessive.

In your application, the Eheim 2080 has a rated flow of 1,700 liters/hour and the Eheim 2128s are rated at 1,050 liters/hour each. Combined into a single inlet or outlet, the total is 3,800 liters/hour. In actual practice, with strainers, media, tubing, valves, etc. the the true flow will be much less - I'lll assume 2,000 liters/hour to be generous. From the equation Velocity = flow / cross-sectional area, expected velocity in the tubing will be 0.7 m/s. I *think* (gut feeling) that this will be low enough that you should be just fine.

Second question - what is the effect of using a single inlet & outlet in a manifold-type setup? This one worries me a little because the pump curves for the two different canister filters are different. Using a single tube for the pump intake side should be fine. The height of the water column in the full tank _should_ be high enough to avoid a negative-pressure situation. Combining the pump discharges worries me because the delivery head of the 2128s is 2.0 meters while the 2080 has a delivery head of 2.6 meters. What this means is that the 2080 can develop more pressure than the 2128's. If the pressure in the return line is greater than 2.0 meters of water, the flow out of the 2128s will be zero, or they might even flow backwards, having been overpowered by the more powerful 2080. In actual practice I'd guess that the pressure in your return line would be much less than this unless you had a valve partially closed or had an obstruction. Still, the Pro-II's (2128s) will be working against the pressure generated by the Pro III (2080), and their flow will be less than you'd see if they had their own return lines.

Is a single 32mm (1.25") intake and three individual 19mm (3/4") return lines an option? Sized like this, velocities in each tube would be roughly equal.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

Great response... thanks!

Yes, 32mm is correct, not sure how I got 1/8" from that!

So if I understand you correctly:

- The 5 meter distance shouldn't have that big of an impact on flow rate.
- Water from the tank to the filter system (two outlets from the tank joining into one 32mm pipe to the filter room and then splitting into several filters, if using cannister filters) should work in this setup.
- The return of the filtered water may be more problematic from multiple cannisters. I'm not sure that three return lines is possible but will check.

Did I get it right?

I think I'll just go with a sump, what does everyone think? In that scenario: dual lines from the tank joining into a 32mm pipe that leads 5 meters directly to the sump. Then a pump (Eheim 1262??) returning the filtered water through a 32mm pipe which then splits into two for two returns into the tank. Should the two lines going from and to the tank be about half the diameter of the 32mm pipe?

And will an Eheim 1262 give me an adequate flowrate in that type of setup? (it's rated at 3400l/hr and a max head of 3.6m).


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

hhhmmm...

I just realized (if I've understood all this stuff correctly) that in the sump configuration, the 5 meter distance back to the tank *does* matter as you won't have the input pressure from the tank... right?

So in this case, would an Eheim 1262 be enough to keep up with the water flow coming into the sump?

I think I need to get a book on this stuff! , But in the meantime... help!


----------



## turbomkt (Mar 31, 2004)

Yes, in a sump the distance will matter a little. But I don't think it's significant at that point. Static head will be the killer here.

Then again, your flow into the sump should be directly proportional to the output of the pump. If the pump puts out less water, there's less water to overflow into the sump. This is my theory and someone with more experience on sumps will need to correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

The only worry I have about using a sump is that your tank won't be very high above the ground. As I understand it, the flow from the tank into the sump is entirely gravity-driven. In your setup you'll have very little elevation to play with, especially if the level in the inflow compartment approaches the elevation of the tank. Tubing as large as 32mm will help, but over 5m you might see flow rates a little smaller than you'd like.

The Eheim 1262 pump curve is very similar to the 1260, just with a little more flow at low pressures (and actually less at higher pressures). It really isn't that much different than the 1260. I use the 1260 on my 180g tank in a closed-loop system and it provides pretty good circulation. I don't pump water uphill though. You'll likely be farther up the pump curve if you are returning water to a tank from a lower elevation. I suspect that in this application flow rates might be low to moderate, considering the enormous size of your tank.

If you can situate the sump lower and use a larger return pump I think you'd be ok.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

I hadn't thought of this point. I don't think I can put the sump lower. However, the water level in the main tank will be around 95cm and the water level in the sump won't be any higher than a max of 50cm... Once in the filter room, the pipe would need to go back up from the floor over the top of the sump.

How does one calculate the flow rate in this situation? How would I use the equation posted earlier in this case?


----------



## webcricket (Oct 16, 2006)

Interesting thread...it addresses an issue I have with deciding whether to get an Eheim canister filter.

The tank I want to use it on is only 3.5" above the floor (it's on a lower shelf with another tank above). Would attaching a powerhead to the intake overcome the negative pressure in the canister and effectively preload it? If it would work, for an Eheim 2213 (126 gph output), would a 200 gph rated pump with 4 ft max head be appropriate (or a 138 gph with 2 ft max head)?


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

This should work fine. Flow velocity through the filter will be higher than normal, but that's ok. I would think that the smaller pump (2' head) would be ok for a 2213.


----------



## JeffLL (Oct 20, 2006)

*Are You Ready For This?*

Guaiac,

Please help. I suck at math. However, the concepts underlying the physics of hydrodynamics are easy to grok, and very well explained by your white paper. Now I am smart enough to wonder if my idea will work...

These following parts are available from the Depot. The powerhead, I have. Will the following assembly work? Theoretically, at least. It is a lot of work to go through if it has no chance.

ViaAqua 1300, 370gph @ 0 head, 6' max. head, set in a sump with the impeller approx 8" below nominal low water mark, 3/4" outlet split by wye to (2) 1/2"...

(a) to 'hose bib' for power drain and interior rinsing
(b) 6" run of flex hose to 1/2" FPT inlet 6-way sprinkler hub, thru adj. ball valves for ~0>=20 gph each via 1/4" barb outs directly to 90 deg elbows to point the irrigation hose 'legs' back down toward the powerhead as slack for maintenance, 18" (typ.) looping back up through a 1.5" - 2" radius 180 deg to bring the water a total of 9" max head (from nominal low water mark)...

(i) a leg extended another 54", open ended for far end circulation source
(ii) a leg extended another 48" into an elbow to an arc sprinkler head for 'rain' when desired
(iii) a leg extended another 18" into an elbow to an arc sprinkler head for 'rain' from the diagonal corner from the other rainhead
(iv) an elbow into a leg directlry to a fogger for the mist emanating from the waterwall cove
(v) two legs into open ended elbows as main waterwall flow

Does any of this make sense. Am I (forgive the pun) swimming upstream? How many psi will I have into the hub, and how many by the open end of a hose at max. valve opening?

Thanks in advance for your assistance


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

This sounds like a fun project - a palaudrium I'm guessing?

From what you wrote, I'm still a little unclear about the vertical situation of your components. I'm assuming that there is a main tank and a smaller sump located underneath, similar to the usual reef system. How much higher is the tank than the sump? This makes a big difference. 

My biggest concern is the 1/4" tubing. This is really, really small stuff. It's usually only suitable for drip irrigation, RO units, ice makers, and other applications where required flow rates are very, very small. The outside diameter is 0.25" but the inside diameter is only 0.17". Usually, pipe diameters are given as the inner diameter, but the convention for the 1/4" stuff is to list the outside diameter.

I'll assume you're directing all the flow into six 1/4" tubes. Even if you add up the cross-sectional area of all six, it only totals 0.14 square inches. For comparison the single 1/2" inlet has a cross-sectional area of 0.20 square inches.

To illustrate the issue, randomly assume that the resistance to flow drops the pump output to 50%, or 185 gph. If you try to put 185 gph through a cross-sectional area of 0.14 square inches, the velocity in the pipes would be 7.3 feet per second. My intuition tells me that about 4 or 5 feet/sec is the limit of what you'll actually see because turbulence picks up VERY quickly at high velocities. So, our original assumption was too generous. To get down to 4 or 5 fps you'll have to assume the pump is doing no better than around 30% of its rated zero-head flow. Additoinally, you need to add in the head of pumping uphill out of the sump. Observed flows with this small tubing will be painfully small.

With 6 outlets you would need a very complicated mathematical model to accurately predict actual pressures and flows. Still, I think I can conclusively tell you that your project will work fine if you stick with bigger tubing - 3/8" at a minimum. Personally, I'd go with 1/2" tubing. Your pipe velocities will be almost zero and you'll only be fighting the head needed to get back uphill to the tank.

It would be easy enough to create a little outflow manifold out of 1/2" PVC with a gang-vavle type setup with 6 ball-valves to meter the flow to each component.


----------



## JeffLL (Oct 20, 2006)

*Allow Me To Illustrate*

Hoo boy, and thanks for responding.

The tank's sump is within the tank itself, in the back left corner. The pump is submerged, with the water loop completely inside the tank. At no point do I have to fight more than a foot of head, more like 9". Indeed, I am planning to use drip irrigation goodies, but also with (hopefully) high psi at the manifold inlet also use the micro sprinklers from HD. With sufficient pressure, the hub is supposed to flow 20 gph/outlet at full throttle.

As regards your last point, the entire assembly has to fit within the sump, a 9x9x12 prism 15' deep, of which the bottom 4" is taken up by the pump w/o fittings. otherwise a log manifold to valves would be my choice. I was hoping to overcome tight pipes with the brute force of 370 gph & 6feet of static head.

Looking from the top (I got to get pix).
___________________________________
sump /xxxLECAxxR l
/WATERxxxxxO l
/ FALLxxLECAxxC l
/WaterfallxxLECAxK l
l xxxPOOLxxxxxxxW l
lxxxxxRIVERRRRR A l
lxxLECAxLECAxxxxxL l
lxLECAxxxLECAxxxxL l
--------------------------------------------------

Does this make better sense now?

The pump sits at the bottom of the well and now that I have found alternate parts the setup changed slightly:

The ViaAqua 1300 came with an MPT>5/8" adaptor, with vanturi (capped) for the primary output pointing straight up. I will run 5/8" hose to a barbed T, 5/8" thru to 5/8" out (b) w/ 1/2" barbed side outlet (a).
(a) 1/2" to elbow up to inline valve for 'hose bib'
(b) 5/8" hose to 5/8" barb to 1/2 MPT adaptor into 6-way zero<=20 gph sprinkler manifold w/ 1/4" barb outs
*unless I can find the manifold with the barbs facing down, I will have to fit the 6 outputs with elbows on the 'star'/radial configured unit I found*

As I look at your math, I wonder what the fps of 20 gph thru 1/4" is, forgetting about the power robbing elbows and loose radius u-turns?

Guaiac... Tag.:boxing: You're it. Thanks again for your help.

_______________________________________________

If you don't vote, you can't complain!!!


----------



## JeffLL (Oct 20, 2006)

*A pic of the sump*

Guaiac,

The text editor does not accept the spaces I left in the above post. Here is a pic of the sump within the tank's back left corner









I hope this works for you.

JeffLL
_______________________________________________
A fool and his money becomes a wiser man broke


----------



## trc_pdx (Mar 22, 2004)

guaiac_boy said:


> The Eheim 1262 pump curve is very similar to the 1260, just with a little more flow at low pressures (and actually less at higher pressures). It really isn't that much different than the 1260.


Guaiac_boy: you wouldn't happen to know where I can find pump curves for those two Eheim models, would you?


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

Yep, it's in my first post above.


----------



## trc_pdx (Mar 22, 2004)

guaiac_boy said:


> Yep, it's in my first post above.


Sorry. I missed that. In the meantime I found this one (at Drs. FosterSmith).

Also, I'm finding confliciting info on the Eheim 1262 output side fitting. Eheim web site says 18mm and something about threaded G3/4". Marine Depot says 3/4" hose connection. Drs FosterSmith says 16/22mm. I assume that means 16mm inside, 22mm outside. 16mm is more like 5/8". Some folks on Reef Central say they are removing the G3/4" fitting (Euro standard with parallel threads?) and replacing it with a heavily taped 3/4" MNPT fitting. Any experience with this? How have you adapted your Eheim(s) into your setup?


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

The whole issue with the inlet & outlet sizes on the pumps is indeed very confusing and drove me crazy when trying to plan out a system. The _*1260*_ pump ships with (if I remember correctly) 3/4" FPT threads on both inlet & outlet sides. Supplied with the pump are two FPT-to-barb converters. The barb connectors are not the same size. The inlet side is larger than the outlet - I forget the exact dimensions. It seems that one is 5/8" and the other is 3/4"......... I think. I'm not at all sure about the 1262.

In any case, I tossed the connectors and plumbed the 1260 directly to 3/4" PVC threaded / slip fitting adaptors. If you do this I recommend using lots of teflon tape, since the pump threads don't allow for a tight fit. Also, use unions so that you can work on the thing if it requires servicing. Mine leaked a few drops for about a week or so, then magically healed itself. My inlet side line is a 1" PVC pipe. I recommend this to ensure that negative pressure doesn't develop on this side of the system. I reduce it to 3/4" right before it connects to the pump. Another option (and maybe a better one if you ever plan on servicing the pump) is to use a short section of Eheim tubing corresponding to the supplied connectors, which are designed to form a nice seal at the pump interface. It's easy enough to rig up a connection back to PVC with barb/thread converters.

Hope this helps.


----------



## trc_pdx (Mar 22, 2004)

guaiac_boy said:


> Hope this helps.


Yes, this helps. Thanks. Your observations are similar to others in that the 3/4" threaded fitting on the pump doesn't seem to fit particularly well with NPT threaded adapters. By the way, I believe that the 1260 and 1262 are dimensionally identical and use the same fittings. And the barbed output fitting does appear to be close to 5/8". A goofy size to connect back to 3/4" or 1". But thanks again!


----------



## trc_pdx (Mar 22, 2004)

Just wanted to say that the Eheim 1262 is a SWEET pump. It's replacing a "Quiet (allegedly) One" 4000. These pumps are not even in the same league. I should have ponied up and spent the $ on the Eheim in the first place.


----------



## IUnknown (Feb 24, 2004)




----------



## IUnknown (Feb 24, 2004)

Courses that you can podcast,

UC Berkeley Webcasts | Video and Podcasts: ME 106

Wed 1/17 Introduction 
Fri 1/19 Elementary Fluid Mechanics 
Mon 1/22 Elementary Fluid Mechanics 
Wed 1/24 Elementary Fluid Mechanics 
Fri 1/26 Elementary Fluid Mechanics 
Mon 1/29 Elementary Fluid Mechanics 
Wed 1/31 Fluid Kinematics 
Fri 2/2 Fluid Kinematics 
Mon 2/5 Fluid Kinematics 
Wed 2/7 Fluid Kinematics 
Fri 2/9 Integral Analysis 
Mon 2/12 Integral Analysis 
Wed 2/14 Integral Analysis 
Fri 2/16 Integral Analysis 
Mon 2/19 ME 106 - Lecture 15 - President's Day 
Wed 2/21 Integral Analysis


----------



## boink (Nov 29, 2006)

heh, that was an interesting thread to read through....maybe guaic_boy should teach bernoulli's equation next


----------

