Home | About Us | Contact Us


Koi Forum - Koi-Bito Magazine straight from Japan
Page 11 of 46 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 458

Thread: Peter Waddington's ERIC - Endless River In Concrete

  1. #101
    Daihonmei MikeM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    11,128
    [QUOTE=waddy;148058]
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeM View Post

    I would also seriously challenge your thoughts on ALL upward-flow boxes - intensely aerated or not. The open aeration simply rises vertically whilst the incoming and outgoing water flow does not.
    This is not accurate in regard to Nexus, at least the ones operated as I operate mine. The aeration in the moving bed chamber produces more upward current than the outflow accomodates, resulting in the water swirling downward and back up. There are also lateral currents from the in-flow. So, altogether, the water in the moving bed chamber is churning in a completely chaotic fashion. A dye placed in the moving bed chamber opposite the outflow will spread throughout the chamber and exit to the pond returns quite quickly. Or, place a handful of black k-1 in the chamber and observe how they spread through the media. The k-1 does not move through the chamber as quickly as a dye due to the bouyancy of the media 'fighting' the downward currents, but move they do... and in a more random manner than horizontal flow water ever would.

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    258
    [QUOTE=MikeM;148084]
    Quote Originally Posted by waddy View Post

    This is not accurate in regard to Nexus, at least the ones operated as I operate mine. The aeration in the moving bed chamber produces more upward current than the outflow accomodates, resulting in the water swirling downward and back up. There are also lateral currents from the in-flow. So, altogether, the water in the moving bed chamber is churning in a completely chaotic fashion. A dye placed in the moving bed chamber opposite the outflow will spread throughout the chamber and exit to the pond returns quite quickly. Or, place a handful of black k-1 in the chamber and observe how they spread through the media. The k-1 does not move through the chamber as quickly as a dye due to the bouyancy of the media 'fighting' the downward currents, but move they do... and in a more random manner than horizontal flow water ever would.
    There are no 'downward currents' at all only semi-buoyant media falling because it is temporarily unsupported by aeration.
    So the water at the far side of the centre box is taken as is the water next to the suction inlet of the pump at the distant opposite side of the centre?
    Please continue to believe this if you wish.
    The water next to the suction inlet is taken into the pump, does a 2" suction inlet on the outer diameter of the box magically sweep the entire surface of the box and select an equal portion of water from all parts of the surface???
    Dyes dissipate.
    Mud is the test and needs operating for an hour minimum.
    As are the beads clumping near the suction inlet.
    Pass this one on to any fluids flow technician.
    Or let's agree to disagree?
    Waddy.

  3. #103
    Sansai MysticKoi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    237
    Hi Peter... hope you are feeling well.

    There are no 'downward currents' at all only semi-buoyant media falling because it is temporarily unsupported by aeration.
    I thought this thread was about "your" filter design? Anyway, I don't understand your sentence. How can semi-buoyant media fall? I'm sure you know, having once used Nexus units at Infiltration, that if you were to turn off the aeration, all the K1 media would float to the top. The aeration thus causes both rising and falling currents within the fluidized area of the Nexus, which carries both the K1 media and the water in this spiral pattern.

    Kind Regards,
    Bill

  4. #104
    Daihonmei
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,642
    Waddy, I'm not trying to pick on you, honestly. But your vision of ammonia removal from water seems to be a visualization on your part as if ammonium ions were the same as say, 'dust' particles. If I was to try and see this the way you apparently do, then I can understand why you are focused on 'all water' moving at the same rate so as to deposit the 'dust evenly and to get all the 'dust' to a point where a mechanical filter ( Nitrifying bacteria) can strain it out. But ammonia is not a physical material. And bacteria has an active way to attract ammonia to it.
    I once tried to point this out to you around the time of the writing of KK2 but it went over your head, I think?
    To helpfully let you feel less defensive, lets talk about DOCs. The D stands for dissolved. So like ammonia and unlike dust , even Organics can be reduced to a form that is actually dissolved in the water. In this case of DOCs they are not evenly distributed within the tonnage of pond water. They tend to congregate, for the most part at the water/atmosphere layer or 'skin' of the water's surface. This is because at this level of identity, molecules have weak and strong electrical charges. And in the case of DOCs, the 'water hating end' ( think of how magnets work here in both attraction and extreme resistance to one another), and the water hating ends of the molecule cause that organic molecule to be highly attracted to the atmosphere.

    In bacteria that use ammonia to convert so as to make a needed energy source for themselves, these same rules of attraction apply. Do a search on ' Van Der Waals forces'. If you find a good source it will explain how different Van Der Waals forces exist and work and 'hand off' . And how they are similar and dissimilar to stronger electrical bonds.
    Bacteria cells and biofilm itself both have the ability to attract ammonia molecules to them. Think of the ammonia molecule and the biofilm as magnets attracting one another. Along with these weak forces you have natural osmosis occuring. OVER time and with repeditive passes, the 'natural' ( natural for the fish load) ambient ammonia level is worn down towards zero. It can never be true zero as the ammonia is leaving the gills of the fish at the level of the gill and dispersing into the surrounding water column. But as water is 'purfied of ammonia' by the many bacteria in the water column, the pipe walls, the pond floor, the drain pot, and ultimately the massively populated filter bays themselves, it becomes less and less concentrated in the water volume in composition.
    As long as water is moving at a reasonable rate to expose all water to an active biofilm surface you will get a zero reading on a color test. ( please reread my explanation of biofouling in one of the posts -- I called it CONTACT- oxidative filtration.

    In the case of Mike M's system, the media moves and that increases the exposure to the Van der Waals effect. Eddies in Jmat will work in a similar way. TTs work best of all as the water must coat the biofilm surface as it runs down the entire length of media. Yet some of the water will run down the sides of my TTs without contact with the media--- no problem, the next pass ( should there be no bacteria on the container, an impossibility actually but just to make the point- the second pass will not have THE SAME water running down the walls as in the previous pass. And so , over time the ambient ammonia level will be read as 'zero'.
    There are systems that show chronic low level ammonia, low level nitrIte. But none of the systems we are discussing are likely to experience that short of a power failure or excess chemical intervention.

    So my advise to you is to break the thinking regarding ammonia as being a physical thing that needs a 'physical pick up' by direct physical contact or it will remain present . In the end there are only a few ingredients needed to remove ammonia from all systems quite easily-

    1) a large bacteria friendly surface for biofilm to multiply on and remain undisturbed by shearing forces
    2) a current that continually delivers ammonia to that surface
    3) a rate of turn over from fish environment to bacterial environment that causes the ambient ammonia to remain at unreadable on a color test.

    Understand? JR

  5. #105
    Daihonmei
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,642
    Actually Bill, although your statements and observations are spot on, even that doesn't really matter. In truth, the Nexus is an evolution of the fundamental fluidized bed that originally used sand. And sand doesn't float!!
    When I designed fluidized sand bed filters for a major importer of marine fish here in the NYC area, we used plain old sand. Fine grade for sure and easily lifted by water current but if the flow went off-- it sank like--- well--- a stone! But when the flow was introduced, an erie cool cloud like a fog ungulated within the clear cylinders. Looked like a cloud of milk floating within a column of water. EACH grain of sand housed a bacteria colony and it would 'yank' ammonia out of passing water like a magnet ( which is actually what the biofilm was doing-- just like a magnet.

    Best Regards by the way! JR

  6. #106
    Daihonmei MikeM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    11,128
    Quote Originally Posted by MysticKoi View Post


    I thought this thread was about "your" filter design? Anyway, I don't understand your sentence. How can semi-buoyant media fall? I'm sure you know, having once used Nexus units at Infiltration, that if you were to turn off the aeration, all the K1 media would float to the top. The aeration thus causes both rising and falling currents within the fluidized area of the Nexus, which carries both the K1 media and the water in this spiral pattern.
    My fault, Bill. I inserted reference to Nexus into this thread. Waddy spoke of moving bed filters in general terms only.

  7. #107
    Tategoi andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    304
    JR..

    Agree with your ammonia explanation. Ammonia dissolved in water is a fluid. Ammonia when released in water becomes part of the "solution" or pond water. Ammonia does not gather in pockets but rather mixes in solution.

    In addition to the three ingredients to remove ammonia; Flow rate (velocity) in which water travels across the bio-film and fish stocking density are also important factors.

    jorge

  8. #108
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    258

    Thanks for your input folks

    Will get back to you soon then we can put this to bed.

    Waddy.

  9. #109
    Oyagoi Lam Nguyen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,671
    Quote Originally Posted by MysticKoi View Post
    Hi Peter... hope you are feeling well.



    I thought this thread was about "your" filter design? Anyway, I don't understand your sentence. How can semi-buoyant media fall? I'm sure you know, having once used Nexus units at Infiltration, that if you were to turn off the aeration, all the K1 media would float to the top. The aeration thus causes both rising and falling currents within the fluidized area of the Nexus, which carries both the K1 media and the water in this spiral pattern.

    Kind Regards,
    Bill
    Bill, I agree with you that it is the spiral force of the water in the biological stage of the Nexus caused by the aerated rings that causes the K1 and biochips to rotate in a spiraling action. This moving effect increases the amount of exposure between ammonia-rich pond water that enters the biological stage from the mechanical Easy stage and the K1. The aeration also provides ample oxygenation for the aerobic biomass to function at an efficient level. If we define efficiency as the amount of biological media that is exposed to ammonia-rich pond water, then IMO the fluidized bed is 100% efficient.

  10. #110
    Oyagoi Lam Nguyen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,671
    Quote Originally Posted by JasPR View Post
    .....In bacteria that use ammonia to convert so as to make a needed energy source for themselves, these same rules of attraction apply. Do a search on ' Van Der Waals forces '. If you find a good source it will explain how different Van Der Waals forces exist and work and 'hand off' . And how they are similar and dissimilar to stronger electrical bonds.
    Bacteria cells and biofilm itself both have the ability to attract ammonia molecules to them. Think of the ammonia molecule and the biofilm as magnets attracting one another. Along with these weak forces you have natural osmosis occuring. OVER time and with repeditive passes, the 'natural' ( natural for the fish load) ambient ammonia level is worn down towards zero. It can never be true zero as the ammonia is leaving the gills of the fish at the level of the gill and dispersing into the surrounding water column. But as water is 'purfied of ammonia' by the many bacteria in the water column, the pipe walls, the pond floor, the drain pot, and ultimately the massively populated filter bays themselves, it becomes less and less concentrated in the water volume in composition.
    In the case of Mike M's system, the media moves and that increases the exposure to the Van der Waals effect. Eddies in Jmat will work in a similar way. TTs work best of all as the water must coat the biofilm surface as it runs down the entire length of media. Yet some of the water will run down the sides of my TTs without contact with the media--- no problem, the next pass ( should there be no bacteria on the container, an impossibility actually but just to make the point- the second pass will not have THE SAME water running down the walls as in the previous pass. And so , over time the ambient ammonia level will be read as 'zero'.
    Thanks JR. I remember reading one of your previous posts about how bacterial cells/biomass and ammonia are attracted to each other by weak Van Der Waals forces and how Jmats are effective in creating eddies and random water flow due to its random intertwining structure. This is the kind of explanation that I was looking for. This further solidifies my knowledge that Jmats and the longthrow types of filtration do work as biological filtration. We have to keep in mind that the worth of any biological system is dependent on conversion efficiency and ease of use. So what have I learned?

    1. Aeration is a vital component of any biological system. In ERIC's case, aeration is provided by airstones placed between mat cartridges. This aeration also causes water to move in a random manner thereby exposing more media to ammonia-rich water. However, water will still take the path of least resistance regardless of how much aeration is provided between the cartridges or whether it's horizontal, vertical, or diagonal flow. IMO, in ERIC's case, the percentage efficiency is higher than other conventional longthrow types of filtration because ERIC's cartridges are much smaller than most other longthrow types of filtration.

    2. Similar to others' experience w/ Jbrushes, I have used Jbrushes for my biological filtration (yes biological and not mechanical) and they are a pain in the rear to clean. There is also harmless sludge/detritus that settles to the bottom of the Jbrush chambers that require daily flushing and monthly washing. This can be a boring daily maintenance chore esp. when I think about the maintenance-free fluidized bed. Needless to say, these Jbrushes will find good home soon.

    There is one more thing that I would like to ask, and that is, is there anything about Japanese mats that may affect fish health, growth, and or skin shine/luster? IMO biological filtration is biological filtration and different media type should not have any effect on the above-stated properties. Am I correct in my statement?

Page 11 of 46 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Need help with endless river pond
    By chang26k in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-28-2014, 10:13 AM
  2. Ask Peter Waddington your KoiQuestion
    By KQ's Jeroen van Gaalen in forum Outside
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 10-14-2012, 11:46 AM
  3. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 05-16-2012, 07:55 PM
  4. Peter Waddington Article
    By kakattekoi in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-14-2008, 12:48 PM
  5. Peter Waddington's new book Koi Kichi 2....
    By aquitori in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-30-2004, 02:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Articles - Sitemap - FAQs and Rules

KB Footer Graphic
Straight from Japan... For the serious hobbyist!
All content and images copyright of: Koi-bito.com