Home | About Us | Contact Us


Koi Forum - Koi-Bito Magazine straight from Japan
Page 11 of 31 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 302

Thread: ERIC OWNERS and only the OWNERS

  1. #101
    Daihonmei PapaBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Davenport, Oklahoma
    Posts
    6,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Andydon View Post
    lol @ outrage and blasphemy.

    Again, I will accept your statement ONCE you can show me one example of how the ERIC was in use in 1970, exact dimensions, the same filter mat and diffusers and build materials - regardless of polyprop if you want.

    Cheers

    Andy
    That is some of the most intellectually vacant nonsense I think I've ever read here or anywhere else for that matter. You presume that if a bioreactor is not absolutely identical in every possible minute detail of form that it is somehow inferior in function? What a pathetic waste of perfectly empty brain cells...

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by PapaBear View Post
    That is some of the most intellectually vacant nonsense I think I've ever read here or anywhere else for that matter. You presume that if a bioreactor is not absolutely identical in every possible minute detail of form that it is somehow inferior in function? What a pathetic waste of perfectly empty brain cells...
    Insults are the resort of the person who has no valid arguments to bring to a discussion. I see that even without Luke this remains true here.

  3. #103
    Nisai
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by JasPR View Post
    What you are suggesting is that IF I arranged my brushing on a frame in the diangle and put zig zag cuts in the transfer walls and then rolled my Jmat into a roll but put spacers in each wrapped length so that water passed thru it on the horizontal that I just invented a NEW kind of filter??
    Yup, finally you get it, if thats how you want to design a filter and release it to the market, it will be a 'new' filter.

    Quote Originally Posted by PapaBear View Post
    That is some of the most intellectually vacant nonsense I think I've ever read here or anywhere else for that matter. You presume that if a bioreactor is not absolutely identical in every possible minute detail of form that it is somehow inferior in function? What a pathetic waste of perfectly empty brain cells...
    Dear Papabear

    I did not for a second 'presume' that everything has to be identical, however what you and JasPR are both saying that there is nothing new in the ERIC, yet repeatedly both me and suzy keep trying to point out the differences - yet you and JasPR just want to say - "well, it's a raceway, it's a raceway" and "all it does is convert amonia" etc etc

    Lets go back to the car analogy, because it's probably the best example.

    I bought a new car, because I wanted a new car.

    I could've bought a 1970 Ford 'x', why didn't I, because my new car performs better, but it still goes on the basic principles of the 1970 cars, as in I stick petrol in, it makes it go forward. The 1970 car will be inferior to my 2010 car. Yes, you can even build your own cars, yet they still rely up on the same principles.

    The same could be said about mobile phones, why buy a new one when the one from 8 years ago makes calls as well, but newer ones are smaller, better looking and well you guessed it, 'new'

    Lets move back to the filter.

    The 1970 Raceway that JasPR so kindly posted shows a raceway that covers the right and lower part of the pond, nevermind the dimensions that this thing was, and yes, I am sure there has been thousand of varients of 'new' types of raceways and each had the relevant 'newness' at the time.

    At the end of the day, you are either a DIY enthusiast or you are a off-the-shelf type of person, I am the latter, can I find another commercially available filter that goes on the principles of the ERIC - no - I can't.

    Now I am sure you and JasPR will kindly pick holes in my above statement, which is obviously fine - but we are getting no-where anytime soon, so we all might have to agree to disagree on certain subjects.

    I look forward to other threads regarding claims with other manufacturers regarding 'new'.

    Cheers

    Andy

    p.s. Suzy, no worries, he summed me up in a sentence, its fine!

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    349

    General comments

    This thread is rapidly deteriorating into an insult fest towards anyone who has purchased an ERIC filter.

    The logical answer to someone who has bought a new filter would be "Hey, I hope it works out for you. Where can I find out more about it? Please tell me all about the results when it's working." And many on this thread have done just that, and have done further research.

    Others, alas, content themselves with saying that ERIC is not new,( which is an incredible load of B.S.) and that "newbies" are being "fleeced."

    What does one make of the increasing numbers of experienced Koi keepers who have chosen and purchased ERIC? Are they all imbeciles as well????

    What it all comes down to is this: A very few are doing their (best?) to discredit a person who is the major reference in Koi, ponds and Koi keeping,
    WORLDWIDE.

    Shame on them. Cowardly tactics. And potentially dangerous ones. These could discourage many a"Koikichi" from continuing in the hobby. (Not my case, as I know what's happening here!)

    I've also participated on the former ERIC threads in which the accusations concerning ERIC's author were so blatant that I had a hard time believing I had actually read them.

    Just in case anyone wishes to know everything about ERIC, just go on the
    Koikichi website and read the Ericpondfilter site attached.Fantastic information, free for all. After having read this, everyone is free to choose the filter that one has decided to PURCHASE.

  5. #105
    Daihonmei
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,642
    Suzy, cowardly tactics? I've asked the fabricator/marketeer of this unit to explain how this unit works-- how it is different from all the other bay and chamber filters that use brushes and Jmat-- and what do I get? INSULTS and cowardly responses wrapped in egotistical bravado! On the old NI which the Fabricator and Markteer has insulted three times now, we would NOT let a bold incorrect statement stand without being challenged. And Waddy was a part of that group at the time and in with all of us. Now it is time to defend outrageous marketing statements- NI style. The restof our group have moved on from koi or gone into hiding -- but not me.
    So once again I will ask-- why does anyone think this is a 'new' filter? Even a creative one? Andy has provided his perspective of what makes a filter different-- so my UNCLE filter is born, I guess? But if I manufacture my design I will not profess to being a gift to koi or a legend in my own mind. why? Because being cursed with a view of the big picture, I understand that filters are divided into approaches to the basic biological function of nitrification.

    The known filter types are ;

    1) in-pond undergravel filters

    2) outside bay and chamber filters

    3) rotating disc filters

    4) trickle towers

    5) wet dry filters

    6) fluidized bed filters

    7) Canaster filters ( almost forgot this one!) closed container pressurized designs that gather organics and inorganics in one space. Bubble beads dominate this approach in 2010.

    Each of these filter types is distinctly different from the others and attempts to do nitrification using distinctly different methods. Some being more efficient than others.

    So brand names mean nothing against this recognized separation of methods.

    These are the facts.

    And to you Andy, I have to ask-- IF I make my UNCLE filter by changing a detail or two, is my filter considered a 'copy' and possible infrigement on the design? If your definition of a 'new filter' were correct my filter represents a completely different design of filtration. Why then don't a few of the guys over here in the US or in Asia, who already work in polypropylene just do a better knock off? Certainly they can from a practical standpoint and also avoid the shipping expense which require a higher selling price? The reason they can't be legally blocked is not because this is some patent infringement, it is because it is a GENERIC basic concept of bay/chamber design.
    JR

  6. #106
    Daihonmei
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,642
    So lets begin a study of the types of filtration and the idea of variables within each group--

    First statement-- I think we can all agree that these filters ALL are made to and accomplish the goal of -- removing ammonia and converting it to nitrIte and immediately onto nitrAte. Agreed? Good!


    The first and now considered the most primitive of pond filters ( above the 'sponge' of course ) is the inpond, UNDERGRAVEL filter.

    The UG filter can come in several versions!

    1) a subfloor made from wood or piping, covered with plastic screen and then backfilled with mixed stone sizes and gravels. The water is then moved from below the structure with a water pump or aeration.

    2) in a variation of this design, no wood is used and the entire area is a series of snap in plates with slits cut into them. In one end is a sump that has a motor with a sponge sleeve over the intake. this is an improvement as it allows the space below the gravel to be accessed. It also allows for a prefilter at the point of recirculation. This is good as mulm builds below the gravel over time.

    3) a third variable is to remove the plate and just used a grid of PVC piping. The entire unit is hooked to a pump and the pump either pumps water INTO the grid ( up flow) or pulls water from the grid ( creating a down flow bias) This will work to remove ammonia -- for a while-- eventually it leads to channeling, an event caused by packing of sections of the stone/gravel so that these area become impassable and 'dead' with decay. This requires intervention! Sturring of gravel, tools that suck up dead material and in extreme cases, annual removal of the stone base and replacement with new

    4) because of the realities of channeling and clogging and the associated needed intervention, many of these UG designs were reduces to cover just one section of the pond floor-- a section in a shallow area that could be serviced more easily. This unfortunately is done when the fish are present in the pond! Dangerous gases are released during the sturring of the gravel so this type of filtration in general is mostly only still used in water garden or goldfish ponds.

    5) there are many other variations of this concept of UG filtration. In some cases, the media used is not stone or gravel but rather an 'almost lighter than water' artifical media that hovers over the grid work or piping. A very famous breeder uses this in what he calls the ' lower grade koi' environment. Probably the best results from a rather bad filtration design- at least as a long term filter design.

    I will bring up this idea of a LONG term filter design as we review these filter approaches. Please not that a LONG term design refers to the time it takes for efficiency to fall off based on that design.

    Any other variations of an inpond UG filter you have seen? JR

  7. #107
    Daihonmei
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,642
    wow, the silence is deafening- and telling!

    So there are a few other variations on UG filters- mostly around the problems associated with the clogging and channeling issues. After a decade of downflow ( gravity and water evacuation causing a down flow) the trend then when to up flow and lighter media and finally to blowers that would dislodge the caked media and detritus settled in the forst few inches of stone/gravel media.


    From this point, the UG was 'moved out of the pond and to the side--

    This was the era of the remote raceway or chamber design. All submerged designs they used, at first, the same media that was used in the UG filter! That is, stones first and in some cases layers of different types of inert media- stone/pebbles and then gravel.

    after this upflow and down flow ran it's course, a chamber system was devised so as to be able to use less depth of media and still retain the same amount of surface area for bacteria to grow on. It was easier to clean and the issues of channeling were reduced somewhat.

    the next variation in raceway/chamber design was to go to lighter materials than stone and gravel. This lead to the use of haircurlers, plastic pipe, ceramic media and the Jamt. The Japanese simply put the Jmat in one long raceway while the Brits tended to break the raceway up and just lay the mat laterally in cartridges or blocks with spacers.
    Still the build up of mulm and detritus was significant and drains were put in all sections so as to flush away the decaying material. Easier than the UG group and free from the channeling and clogging issues, this method remained the standard throughout the 1980s and early 1990s.

    Eventually the same concept was repackaged into the idea of 'round' over ' rectangle' with the introduction of the vortex sump as a universial shape for all sections of the chamber design. This lead to detailed images of flow , settlement and flushing and suggested as the way to leave issues of aeromonas behind in the koi world.

    Because the bay and the chamber system became so universially accepted and dominated as the recommended koi pond design, it has been truly vetted by the koi communities of the world and still remains to this day as the 'point of departure' into more advanced filtration of the 1990s and 2000s.

    It is important to recognize what these systems represent-- they are advances from the first method of UG and excess trapping and addressed issues of settlement, aeration and room for other filtration functions ( UV, heating, chemical resin treatments etc). They all work the same way in that they channel water past biofilm and allow for settlement at the base. They are open to the atmosphere, shollow and allow for maximum gas exchange- a good thing.
    JR

  8. #108
    Daihonmei PapaBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Davenport, Oklahoma
    Posts
    6,726
    Suzy,
    If you could please point out to me any time I have claimed that the ERIC is somehow an inferior product please do so. If you can point out to me all of the posts where I have called Peter names I would likewise be interested in reading it. If you could do me the kindness of showing me any post where I have stated or even implied that he doesn't know what he is talking about regarding either Koi, ponds, or filters I'd be more than happy to see it.

    You'll be looking in vain for a very long time and I'll not be holding my breath for you to succeed as it simply has not happened, here or anywhere else.

    I called Andy out for employing a thought process devoid of intellect and I stand by that. He attempted to imply that the mere use of Polypropylene for constructing the shell of the filter was somehow a monumental 'leap forward in technology' and that 'precise dimensions' identical in design were somehow of HUGE import to the comparison between an old raceway design and the 'new' raceway design. HE singled those things out as being somehow relevant, not I. I called him out on the intellectual vacancy of his argument and it remains as it was. Empty.

    His vain attempt to say that a "modern" raceway is somehow comparable to a "modern" automobile simply because they both use the same fuel is equally irrelevant. There is nothing about the 'new' raceway that sets it apart from the 'old' raceway that begins to approach the drastic changes in technology from an 'old' engine to a 'new' one. There is nothing about the 'new' raceway that monitors every temperature, pressure, flow rate, O2 saturation, ammonia content, etc... at each step of the way with a computer controlled adjustment to any or all of those elements to maintain them in a more 'perfect balance'. In modern gasoline engines performance and efficiency are enhanced precisely because of those minute controls at each step along the way toward "combustion".

    Irrelevant arguments for the belief that it is somehow 'revolutionary' may sound good while you are typing, but they quickly fall apart when you apply one simple thing.

    Rational thought.

    I am not "anti-ERIC". I happen to be an evil American Capitalist who enjoys celebrating the honest success of my fellow man whenever it happens. Marketing "hype" is a reality of nearly all successful endeavors. I'm just pointing out the painfully obvious to those who do not wish to see it for themselves.

    May your 'new' and 'modern' raceway perform beyond your greatest expectations.
    If it does we can both say "I told you so"
    Larry Iles
    Oklahoma

  9. #109
    Nisai
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    99
    Well, i'd like to say thank you to you both, I have learnt the error of my ways today regarding your posts.

    I will never call anything new once again, because in both your eyes, nothing can be new!

    I apologise for my use of the word 'new' if I have caused anyone some extreme anxiety, panic attacks, severe depression then you might be able to see some tried and tested professional help (god forbid, it's some new guy on the block)

    Now, I am going to get my newly installed Sky + HD box with it's new remote and watch a new episode of Eastenders.

    Oh, damn, I need help!

    Cheers

    Andy

    p.s., btw, when I finally finish my pond and everything is setup, how do I go about picking my 'old' koi? (mainly because they can't be new, they've been around for centuries!)

    p.s.s I will also send an email to the Oxford Dictionary chaps, ask them to remove the word 'new'.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by PapaBear View Post
    Suzy,
    If you could please point out to me any time I have claimed that the ERIC is somehow an inferior product please do so. If you can point out to me all of the posts where I have called Peter names I would likewise be interested in reading it. If you could do me the kindness of showing me any post where I have stated or even implied that he doesn't know what he is talking about regarding either Koi, ponds, or filters I'd be more than happy to see it.

    You'll be looking in vain for a very long time and I'll not be holding my breath for you to succeed as it simply has not happened, here or anywhere else.

    I called Andy out for employing a thought process devoid of intellect and I stand by that. He attempted to imply that the mere use of Polypropylene for constructing the shell of the filter was somehow a monumental 'leap forward in technology' and that 'precise dimensions' identical in design were somehow of HUGE import to the comparison between an old raceway design and the 'new' raceway design. HE singled those things out as being somehow relevant, not I. I called him out on the intellectual vacancy of his argument and it remains as it was. Empty.

    His vain attempt to say that a "modern" raceway is somehow comparable to a "modern" automobile simply because they both use the same fuel is equally irrelevant. There is nothing about the 'new' raceway that sets it apart from the 'old' raceway that begins to approach the drastic changes in technology from an 'old' engine to a 'new' one. There is nothing about the 'new' raceway that monitors every temperature, pressure, flow rate, O2 saturation, ammonia content, etc... at each step of the way with a computer controlled adjustment to any or all of those elements to maintain them in a more 'perfect balance'. In modern gasoline engines performance and efficiency are enhanced precisely because of those minute controls at each step along the way toward "combustion".

    Irrelevant arguments for the belief that it is somehow 'revolutionary' may sound good while you are typing, but they quickly fall apart when you apply one simple thing.

    Rational thought.

    I am not "anti-ERIC". I happen to be an evil American Capitalist who enjoys celebrating the honest success of my fellow man whenever it happens. Marketing "hype" is a reality of nearly all successful endeavors. I'm just pointing out the painfully obvious to those who do not wish to see it for themselves.

    May your 'new' and 'modern' raceway perform beyond your greatest expectations.
    If it does we can both say "I told you so"
    Please go back to my last post and reread it very carefully and slowly.
    You may even move your lips while reading if it helps.

    Nextly, go on the ericpondfilter site and read it in this same manner.

    Then come back and argue if you wish.

    You did not "call Andy out." You insulted him.(See my post in reply to this)

    I am not concerned about "I told you so's." All that is important to me is that I have bought a NEW filter system called ERIC and that it's going to be great. I am not the first person to do this, and I will be extremely far from being the last.

    There's a waiting line. If you want an ERIC filter you'll have to be very patient.

Page 11 of 31 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hotaru Sanke Owners
    By 4TEXAS in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-10-2010, 04:50 PM
  2. ERIC Owners
    By luke frisbee in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-01-2010, 03:20 PM
  3. Q for the bead filter owners...
    By moikoi in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-19-2009, 12:31 PM
  4. Any NEXUS owners in Kent UK
    By sharpey999 in forum Pond Construction
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-14-2009, 10:05 PM
  5. Pet owners please look (dog and cat)
    By Brutuscz in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-18-2007, 12:27 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