Need feedback on pond design

[PoconoRobin]

I will be putting in a 10X15X4 goldfish pond this spring. My plans are at:

http://powlusr.tripod.com/Pond/Pond.htm

I would love feedback, comments, suggestions....

--
Robin
The Poconos, PA

[Koi-lo]

"PoconoRobin" <powlusr at ptd dot net> wrote in message
...
>I will be putting in a 10X15X4 goldfish pond this spring. My plans are at:
>
> http://powlusr.tripod.com/Pond/Pond.htm
>
> I would love feedback, comments, suggestions....
==================================
It looks OK to me but I put my ponds in 10 years ago. Everything was bought
individually and we have the 60 mil Tetra liners. They show no signs of
wear or deterioration.
--

Koi-Lo.... frugal ponding since 1995...
Aquariums since 1952
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>

[~ jan jjspond]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 19:59:12 -0500, "PoconoRobin" <powlusr at ptd dot net>
wrote:

>I will be putting in a 10X15X4 goldfish pond this spring. My plans are at:
>
> http://powlusr.tripod.com/Pond/Pond.htm
>
>I would love feedback, comments, suggestions....

Hi Robin,

What kind of goldfish are you considering? Some of the fancies don't do
well in a pond deeper than 2 feet.

I applaud your research. Seeing how you are close to my age (and we're not
getting any younger, dang it) did you consider vortex filters at all? The
reason I ask is they are SO much easier to keep clean. Your filter choice
is going to be similar to what I put up with on my homemade job, pulling
out heavy filter material. I know they're more expensive then your current
set-up, but so are doctors and drugs to fix back problems. Not to mention
the pain and suffering. ;) ~ jan

----------------
See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
www.jjspond.us

~Keep 'em Defrosted~
Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
To e-mail see website

[~ jan jjspond]

>I got acquainted with a maddox when I had to dig clay. The wider
>blade worked better for me than a pick.
>Hal

I must have missed that, so Robin is digging in clay? That would be a good
reason to nix vortex, as one has to go deep.

Robin, you mentioned the black foam. All the rocks around my pond and in
the waterfall, etc. are dry stacked. No foam or mortar. This has given me
the freedom of changing things easily. So before you do anything permanent,
dry stack and run first, imo. ~ jan

---------------
~Power to the Porg, Flow On!~

[PoconoRobin]

"~ jan jjspond" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 19:59:12 -0500, "PoconoRobin" <powlusr at ptd dot net>
> wrote:
>
>>I will be putting in a 10X15X4 goldfish pond this spring. My plans are
>>at:
>>
>> http://powlusr.tripod.com/Pond/Pond.htm
>>
>>I would love feedback, comments, suggestions....
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> What kind of goldfish are you considering? Some of the fancies don't do
> well in a pond deeper than 2 feet.
>
> I applaud your research. Seeing how you are close to my age (and we're not
> getting any younger, dang it) did you consider vortex filters at all? The
> reason I ask is they are SO much easier to keep clean. Your filter choice
> is going to be similar to what I put up with on my homemade job, pulling
> out heavy filter material. I know they're more expensive then your current
> set-up, but so are doctors and drugs to fix back problems. Not to mention
> the pain and suffering. ;) ~ jan
>
> ----------------
> See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
> www.jjspond.us
>
> ~Keep 'em Defrosted~
> Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
> To e-mail see website

Thanks for your input. I haven't started researching goldfish yet. I may
add an additional filter in the future if it seems necessary, but I have no
extra money right now.

--
Robin
The Poconos, PA

[Derek]

Hal wrote:

> I got acquainted with a maddox when I had to dig clay. The wider
> blade worked better for me than a pick.

Not flaming spelling, but it could be hard for someone to find a maddox -
it's a "mattock". In Nova Scotia, it's a grub hoe. You can dig in
anything with this tool.
--
derek

[Paul in Redland]

Robin,
The only thing I would reconsider is the pump. The one you've selected is an
electricity hog. Payback in less electricity used vs higher initial cost of
a more efficient pump could be LESS than one year. After that, it's just
money saved. In general, submersible pumps are less efficient and have a
shorter lifespan than non-submersible ones and will NEVER leak oil into the
pond. Sequence pumps made by MDM, (
http://www.mdminc.com/Sequence_Standard.htm ) are one of several brands of
very efficient pumps. I have a MDM pump that has run for 8 years non-stop,
except for when I clean the leaf trap out.
Just my $0.02, and of course, all the usual disclaimers apply.
Have fun with your new hobby,
Paul


"PoconoRobin" <powlusr at ptd dot net> wrote in message
...
>I will be putting in a 10X15X4 goldfish pond this spring. My plans are at:
>
> http://powlusr.tripod.com/Pond/Pond.htm
>
> I would love feedback, comments, suggestions....
>
> --
> Robin
> The Poconos, PA
>

[PoconoRobin]

I'm a little concerned about the noise from the pump, since it will be right
next to my quiet patio. I know our above ground pool pump is extremely
noisy and can be heard inside the house with all the windows shut. Will the
sound of a small waterfall cover up the noise from this pump?
--
Robin
The Poconos, PA


"Paul in Redland" > wrote in message
...
> Robin,
> The only thing I would reconsider is the pump. The one you've selected is
> an
> electricity hog. Payback in less electricity used vs higher initial cost
> of
> a more efficient pump could be LESS than one year. After that, it's just
> money saved. In general, submersible pumps are less efficient and have a
> shorter lifespan than non-submersible ones and will NEVER leak oil into
> the
> pond. Sequence pumps made by MDM, (
> http://www.mdminc.com/Sequence_Standard.htm ) are one of several brands of
> very efficient pumps. I have a MDM pump that has run for 8 years
> non-stop,
> except for when I clean the leaf trap out.
> Just my $0.02, and of course, all the usual disclaimers apply.
> Have fun with your new hobby,
> Paul
>

[Paul in Redland]

Robin,
My best answer is .......probably. Depends on how big the pump is and how
small ( and how quiet ) the waterfall is. These pumps are , for the most
part, pretty quiet. The pump I have, a Sequence, is in a pump pit directly
under a ground level deck. The sound of the waterfall all but covers up the
sound of the pump, although if I am on the deck and specifically listen for
it, I can hear the pump making a soft humming sound, not at all obnoxious
though. Hope this helps.
Paul




"PoconoRobin" <powlusr at ptd dot net> wrote in message
...
> I'm a little concerned about the noise from the pump, since it will be
> right next to my quiet patio. I know our above ground pool pump is
> extremely noisy and can be heard inside the house with all the windows
> shut. Will the sound of a small waterfall cover up the noise from this
> pump?
> --
> Robin
> The Poconos, PA
>
>
> "Paul in Redland" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Robin,
>> The only thing I would reconsider is the pump. The one you've selected is
>> an
>> electricity hog. Payback in less electricity used vs higher initial cost
>> of
>> a more efficient pump could be LESS than one year. After that, it's just
>> money saved. In general, submersible pumps are less efficient and have a
>> shorter lifespan than non-submersible ones and will NEVER leak oil into
>> the
>> pond. Sequence pumps made by MDM, (
>> http://www.mdminc.com/Sequence_Standard.htm ) are one of several brands
>> of
>> very efficient pumps. I have a MDM pump that has run for 8 years
>> non-stop,
>> except for when I clean the leaf trap out.
>> Just my $0.02, and of course, all the usual disclaimers apply.
>> Have fun with your new hobby,
>> Paul
>>
>
>

[Derek]

"PoconoRobin" <powlusr at ptd dot net> wrote:

> I'm a little concerned about the noise from the pump, since it will be
> right
> next to my quiet patio. I know our above ground pool pump is extremely
> noisy and can be heard inside the house with all the windows shut. Will
> the sound of a small waterfall cover up the noise from this pump?

Well, you can get much more efficient submersibles. I can't remember the
one I used to use (but googling this group would find it and others) but it
used 215W for 5000gph at 3', iirc. More power than I'd ever like to use
now that I live off-grid, but very efficient for a submersible.
--
derek

[Rick Yerke]

Robin: If you want some free Koi and Goldfish in the Spring for your pond
contact me and you can have all you want.I have way too many fish and i will
be giving them away.I live about 20 miles from you in Moscow Pa..Rick



>
>Thanks for your input. I haven't started researching goldfish yet. I may
>add an additional filter in the future if it seems necessary, but I have no
>extra money right now.
>

[PoconoRobin]

Thanks Rick. I would like some goldfish. I'll hang on to your e-mail.
--
Robin
The Poconos, PA

"Rick Yerke" > wrote in message
...
> Robin: If you want some free Koi and Goldfish in the Spring for your pond
> contact me and you can have all you want.I have way too many fish and i
> will
> be giving them away.I live about 20 miles from you in Moscow Pa..Rick
>
>
>
>>
>>Thanks for your input. I haven't started researching goldfish yet. I may
>>add an additional filter in the future if it seems necessary, but I have
>>no
>>extra money right now.
>>

[Richard Tanzer]

Derek > wrote in
:

> Well, you can get much more efficient submersibles. I can't remember
> the one I used to use (but googling this group would find it and
> others) but it used 215W for 5000gph at 3', iirc...

One seasonal advantage of a submerged pump, relative to a pump that sits
outside the pond, is that all the electrical energy that goes into the pump
is dissipated as heat into the water. So in the winter, if your pump is
drawing 100 watts of power, you are adding 100 watts of heat to the pond.

Obviously, depending on your climate and other variables this heat factor
can be a negative in hot weather.

Where I'm located, in central Wisconsin, the pond freezing over in the
winter is a much bigger concern that the water getting too hot in the
summer.

Rich

[Dan]

Richard Tanzer wrote:

> One seasonal advantage of a submerged pump, relative to a pump that sits
> outside the pond, is that all the electrical energy that goes into the pump
> is dissipated as heat into the water. So in the winter, if your pump is
> drawing 100 watts of power, you are adding 100 watts of heat to the pond.

Actually, that would only be true if you had the world's most
inefficient pump, i.e., one that moved no water. :) A certain
amount of energy is 'wasted' as heat, but hopefully only a
small fraction of that consumed by the pump.

[Richard Tanzer]

Dan > wrote in :

> Richard Tanzer wrote:
>
>> One seasonal advantage of a submerged pump, relative to a pump that
>> sits outside the pond, is that all the electrical energy that goes
>> into the pump is dissipated as heat into the water. So in the
>> winter, if your pump is drawing 100 watts of power, you are adding
>> 100 watts of heat to the pond.
>
> Actually, that would only be true if you had the world's most
> inefficient pump, i.e., one that moved no water. :) A certain
> amount of energy is 'wasted' as heat, but hopefully only a
> small fraction of that consumed by the pump.
>

Dan, I believe you are mistaken. Even if I had the world's most
efficient pump, all the energy that goes into moving the water around is
lost to friction, i.e. drag forces. Otherwise the water would keep
accelerating as you continued to add energy.

Because the water very quickly reaches a more-or-less constant velocity,
whatever kinetic energy is imparted to the water by the pump must be
converted to thermal energy in the pond.

Consider two 100 watt electric pumps submerged in a fish pond. The first
motor is highly efficient, 90 watts of energy go into pumping water and
10 watts are lost as heat in the motor. The second motor is far less
efficient, 10 watts of energy go into moving water and 90 watts are lost
as heat in the motor. From the perspective of heating the water, the
motors are equivalent. The only difference is whether the heat is
generated in the motor itself, or in the pond in turbulent friction
(vortices and eddies).

Ahh .. the wonderful world of thermodynamics.

[Derek]

Richard Tanzer wrote:

> Dan > wrote in :
>
>> Richard Tanzer wrote:
>>
>>> One seasonal advantage of a submerged pump, relative to a pump that
>>> sits outside the pond, is that all the electrical energy that goes
>>> into the pump is dissipated as heat into the water. So in the
>>> winter, if your pump is drawing 100 watts of power, you are adding
>>> 100 watts of heat to the pond.
>>
>> Actually, that would only be true if you had the world's most
>> inefficient pump, i.e., one that moved no water. :) A certain
>> amount of energy is 'wasted' as heat, but hopefully only a
>> small fraction of that consumed by the pump.
>>
>
> Dan, I believe you are mistaken. Even if I had the world's most
> efficient pump, all the energy that goes into moving the water around is
> lost to friction, i.e. drag forces. Otherwise the water would keep
> accelerating as you continued to add energy.
>
Yes, the only difference is that the heat from the more efficient pump is
distributed more evenly around the pond, while the heat from the
inefficient pump tends to be conducted directly from the pump. The
inefficient pump will more quickly melt a hole in the ice :-)
--
derek

[Dan]

Richard Tanzer wrote:

> Dan > wrote in :
>
>
>>Richard Tanzer wrote:
>>
>>
>>>One seasonal advantage of a submerged pump, relative to a pump that
>>>sits outside the pond, is that all the electrical energy that goes
>>>into the pump is dissipated as heat into the water. So in the
>>>winter, if your pump is drawing 100 watts of power, you are adding
>>>100 watts of heat to the pond.
>>
>>Actually, that would only be true if you had the world's most
>>inefficient pump, i.e., one that moved no water. :) A certain
>>amount of energy is 'wasted' as heat, but hopefully only a
>>small fraction of that consumed by the pump.
>>
>
>
> Dan, I believe you are mistaken. Even if I had the world's most
> efficient pump, all the energy that goes into moving the water around is
> lost to friction, i.e. drag forces. Otherwise the water would keep
> accelerating as you continued to add energy.
>
> Because the water very quickly reaches a more-or-less constant velocity,
> whatever kinetic energy is imparted to the water by the pump must be
> converted to thermal energy in the pond.
>
> Consider two 100 watt electric pumps submerged in a fish pond. The first
> motor is highly efficient, 90 watts of energy go into pumping water and
> 10 watts are lost as heat in the motor. The second motor is far less
> efficient, 10 watts of energy go into moving water and 90 watts are lost
> as heat in the motor. From the perspective of heating the water, the
> motors are equivalent. The only difference is whether the heat is
> generated in the motor itself, or in the pond in turbulent friction
> (vortices and eddies).
>
> Ahh .. the wonderful world of thermodynamics.

Yup, you're correct. I was merely talking about the heat generated
by the motor itself, not the heat generated by the friction of the
water since that's pretty constant whether the motor is submerged
or not. Say, as in your example, a highly efficient pump only wastes
10% to heat, a 100 watt submerged motor is only adding 10 watts of
heat to the water over an external pump of the same efficiency, right?
In any case, every bit helps (except in the summer that is :) ). BTW,
any idea how efficient 'high efficiency' pumps really are? I haven't
a clue. Is 90% about right?

[[email protected]]

90%-95% is typically considered "high efficiency" for an electric
motor. Of course many manufacturers claim "high efficiency" without
providing data to back up the claim. Also the efficiency of an
electric motor can vary greatly depending on it's load and speed. And
of course the efficiency degrades as the motor or pump gets dirty and
worn.

But back to fish stuff. Do you think that my fish expend any more of
their own energy when in a pond with the pump running than when the
water is quiet? I've noticed that in the winter they congregate in one
end of the pond that has the least circulation.

- Rich

[Koi-lo]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> But back to fish stuff. Do you think that my fish expend any more of
> their own energy when in a pond with the pump running than when the
> water is quiet? I've noticed that in the winter they congregate in one
> end of the pond that has the least circulation.
================================
The have to expend energy to stay upright then the water is moving. Why not
just keep a nice size hole open in the ice and allow them to "rest" as they
would in nature?
--

Koi-Lo.... frugal ponding since 1995...
Aquariums since 1952
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
NEW PAGE: Aquariums:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy/Aquarium-Page4.html
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>

[Richard Tanzer]

"Koi-lo" > wrote in
:

>>
>> But back to fish stuff. Do you think that my fish expend any more of
>> their own energy when in a pond with the pump running than when the
>> water is quiet? I've noticed that in the winter they congregate in
>> one end of the pond that has the least circulation.
> ================================
> The have to expend energy to stay upright then the water is moving.
> Why not just keep a nice size hole open in the ice and allow them to
> "rest" as they would in nature?

Keeping a nice size hole open in the ice is a challenge. Here in central
Wisconsin, in January it's not unusual to have morning temperatures of
about -10 deg F, with daytime highs of about 15 deg F.

My pond is only about 3 ½ feet deep at the deepest part. To keep the
pond from freezing solidly during a cold spell I have to heat the pond.
I have a small heater (25 watts?) that is intended to keep a hole open;
and that works just fine when the weather stays above zero F. But in
colder weather I need auxiliary heat. Last winter during cold spells, I
added heat by pouring a few gallons of boiling water into the pond every
morning. I was able to bore a hole in the ice that way. All but one of
my fish survived the winter.

This year I'm leaving the pump running to add some heat and also ensure
gas exchange.

It hadn't occurred to me that the current in the pond would stress the
fish. We've had a few relatively warm days, and the pond is largely ice
free right now. Perhaps I can move the hose to minimize the current;
I'll give it a try.

Well … the days are getting longer, and it's only seven more weeks until
pitchers and catchers report for spring training!


Rich

[[email protected]]

here in southern wisconsin not covering the pond means the fish go without food for 6
months. cover the pond with plastic and it cools down later, heats up sooner,
especially if it is in direct sun (mine isnt). 1600 gallons with 1.5 feed above
ground level, plastic, a 500 watt heater and a bucket filter and I fed my fish all
winter except 1 month. 2 years (knock wood) with no losses... also no meds needed.
this year I screwed up just got my plastic over just 1 week ago, but temp went from
40-49oF in 4 days and the koi are up to the top ... tomorrow I will feed them
lightly. Ingrid

Richard Tanzer > wrote:
>Keeping a nice size hole open in the ice is a challenge. Here in central
>Wisconsin


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/
sign up: http://list.lovemyoldhome.com/web/wa.cgi?REPORT&z=3
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for
any of the recommendations I make.
AND I DID NOT AUTHORIZE ADS AT THE OLD PUREGOLD SITE

[Koi-lo]

"Richard Tanzer" > wrote in message
...
> "Koi-lo" > wrote in
> :
>
>>>
>>> But back to fish stuff. Do you think that my fish expend any more of
>>> their own energy when in a pond with the pump running than when the
>>> water is quiet? I've noticed that in the winter they congregate in
>>> one end of the pond that has the least circulation.
>> ================================
>> The have to expend energy to stay upright then the water is moving.
>> Why not just keep a nice size hole open in the ice and allow them to
>> "rest" as they would in nature?
>
> Keeping a nice size hole open in the ice is a challenge. Here in central
> Wisconsin, in January it's not unusual to have morning temperatures of
> about -10 deg F, with daytime highs of about 15 deg F.
>
> My pond is only about 3 ½ feet deep at the deepest part. To keep the
> pond from freezing solidly during a cold spell I have to heat the pond.
> I have a small heater (25 watts?) that is intended to keep a hole open;
> and that works just fine when the weather stays above zero F. But in
> colder weather I need auxiliary heat. Last winter during cold spells, I
> added heat by pouring a few gallons of boiling water into the pond every
> morning. I was able to bore a hole in the ice that way. All but one of
> my fish survived the winter.
>
> This year I'm leaving the pump running to add some heat and also ensure
> gas exchange.
>
> It hadn't occurred to me that the current in the pond would stress the
> fish. We've had a few relatively warm days, and the pond is largely ice
> free right now. Perhaps I can move the hose to minimize the current;
> I'll give it a try.
>
> Well . the days are getting longer, and it's only seven more weeks until
> pitchers and catchers report for spring training!
=====================]=
Rather than going through that why not just bring them in for the winter?
What about a kiddy pool in your garage for the coldest months of winter?
They hold 150g which will hold at least 10 to 15 goldfish for the winter.
--

Koi-Lo.... frugal ponding since 1995...
Aquariums since 1952
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
NEW PAGE: Aquariums:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy/Aquarium-Page4.html
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/h/shastadaisy
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>