Pond design program

[Rich L]

I had a great brain fart this AM. I was going to make up an Excell sheet with pond construction component blanks and flow blanks for designers to input.

After it was inputted, up would pop the proper pump selection for that system.

Danzcool dropped by to pick up a water meter. Seems he plans put water all over the ground where his newly finished pond is.

He said he already has one, picked it up on the net. There I go doing it again. ( came up with a neat thing I called a wash rag and my wife gave me a tour of the house. Shoulda seen all the stuff she has.)

Does anyone know the site where that design program is?

[UnkleTim]

I guess that no one knows huh Rich? Unk

[Rich L]

I'm not surprised. A friend had developed the best part of one, but he died and I have no way of seeing what he had developed.

The SFBAKC has some computer guys (Danzcool) and one new comer is an associate professor in the UC Berkley Computer Science division.

If it can be done, we have the resources.

[keokoi]

Rich, do you mean something like this... http://enkoi.com/calc2.php?c=15

[Rich L]

That's in the right direction but we can develop one that will do a much better job of selecting the right pump.

The system should be designed as it will be installed and the pump selected from the requirements the system calls for.

In a proper design, the pump design curve should cross the system curve at the pumps most efficient point. The hobby is rampant with people selecting the pump without knowing the total head first. That's not the way to design a pump circuit.

A good program would accept inputs for all the branches of the plumbing including length #, of fittings flow, whether it's a pressurized or gravity flow, etc. The outcome would be the proper size pipe for each circuit and the total system head for any flow. The program could propose the pumps in it's data base that would most efficiently serve that system. Those pumps can be used or someone preferring to look further would have the head and flow to match the most efficient point of the pump.

There was a time people were paralleling a bottom drain and a skimmer to one sump and then a pump. Back then, 2'000 gallons was considered a good size and the bottom drains and the skimmer were 2" lines. Now we use a 4" bottom drain and still install a 2" skimmer line. It's so imballanced the BD valve has to be shut donw to a point that's very inefficient. To resolve that problem, Most ponds install a skimmer circuit on a separate pump.

[Russell Peters]

I really like the idea of having redundant systems in a Koi pond. If you set up a filtration system for the bottom drains and one for the skimmers, you can have any part of one system fail and not lose all of your filtration.

[junglegeorge12]

You mean CAD? Sure ya got 5 grand?

[Rich L]

I hadn’t thought of it as CAD. The computations in a filter design are simple and can be done by hand but not many folks understand the process. We have the resources to do this without a cash investment. It depends on the team’s goal. If it want’s to sell the product, it will take an investment, but I hope it will show up on these boards as a freebee for others to use to advantage or profit.

Once a spread sheet program is developed, the DIY crowd can take it much further.

Redundancy is a main component of reliability and versatility but it should have specific targets if its value is to be maximized. Targeting specific needs is first. A sump or bead filter isn’t a particularly unreliable component so redundancy there isn’t worth much cash and can even add to the overall energy consumption with no value added.

On the other hand, the separate skimmer circuit is more restrictive than a single system with two (smaller) pumps in parallel. The added versatility can allow for one pump and the water fall to be turned off for the winter for a considerable savings and the Spring startup won’t endanger the pond if stagnant water is not purged.

I’m not presenting this as a proposal, just pointing out that there are other alternatives to good pond design that may have considerable value, but aren’t considered due to the cookie cutter approach presently leading the options.

[junglegeorge12]

there is no cookie cutter approach Rich, one guy presents himself as an experienced expert and pushes one way to think and do things. It has some merit. The people find flaws in that logic and present other ideas. I do not think a computer program can cure the human ego and idol/new guru issue.

There are also different climates to take into account. Different fish loads. Different filtration preferences. I prefer home made large vortexes and DIY EZ's, gravity fed and pumped over showers. I prefer valves and adjusting water flow to seperate skimmer circuits, with bypasses around individual parts of the system and the shower, and adjustable flow thru the skimmer/bottom drains. That way you can get your skimmer adjusted to just where it needs to keep the surface clean, and use the remaining energy to keep the bottom clean and effect the best bio filtration. Thare are dozens of accaptabel ways to see all the issues. I am not sure a computer program can incorporate all those elements, and will invariably wind up discriminating against someone's valid products and thoughts.

It would also take weeks or intensive labor to work in all the details and options. CAD would be easier, more accurate and reliable, and quicker.

[Rich L]

Jungle,

I’m not saying there is one way. The point I was trying to make is there are different ways and many of them are not considered by the majority of people building ponds. I tried to clearly point out that the one alternative I presented wasn’t a proposal. It was just being used as an example of one alternative thought that had merit.

And this hobby is full of cookie cutter designs but my main goal isn’t to narrow down designs. My own goal is to develop a tool that will make efficient use of the power we consume. Presently, the vast majority of professional pond builders can’t even care what the power consumption is. A bigger pump makes more money and can ‘fix’ many poorly designed systems.

As diverse as this hobby is I fully expect improved designs that none of us would be able to come up with now. There is a string on this board or on KoiPhen about air lifts that is an excellent example. The most prolific people on that string clearly don’t have a good understanding of hydraulics, particularly airlifts, but while they were kicking unworkable ideas around, they came up with some intriguing concepts that are well worth pursuing. They didn’t have helping hands explaining ‘proper’ hydraulic concepts nor did they have Nay Sayers attempting to show them the impossibility of their visions.

Designing the hydraulics for a filter system is very straight forward and so simple that a spread sheet program won’t be an impossible undertaking for the diversity of hobbyists available. I’m not close to talking about what I would refer to as an actual CAD.