Fish sensitivity to pump vibrations?

It is often said on these NGs that the sound of the pump is small compared
to the sounds in a fishes natural environment. Being an advanced PADI scuba
diver I'm fortunate to have tested this theory out a few times and
personally I'm not convinced that this is true. Although sound underwater
travels a long way, it also decays quickly with distance. So, it is easy to
hear a boat from miles off, but it is relatively quiet until it gets close.
In fact, I'd descibe the underwater world as remarkable peaceful. I compare
this to the noise I heard when I put my ear to the fish tank and even though
the pump is quiet in the air, it sound like a pneumatic drill once my ear is
in contact with the glass and to me much louder than the fishes natural
environment - probably due to the proximity of the pump. In addition, the
sea noises are intermittent and random, unlike the constant buzz of the
pump. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about different tanks /
pumps / fish etc, I'm really thinking generically here...

1. Are the different sound volumes simply a trick of my brain (in the same
way that a room always look much brighter from the inside than the outside
because the brain "compensates")? Indeed, has anyone done any decibel
measurements to quantify this?
2. Is this constant droning harmful / torture to the fish? (I have seen it
written that "they look peaceful", but perhaps a visiting alien would
describe a man in a padded cell wearing a straitjacket as "looks peaceful"!)
I don't know how it would be measured, but again I'm interested in
scientific studies on this.

BTW, I did come across one site that had lots of info on the effects of
particular types of sounds (sonic booms, infrasound etc.) on fish, but it
was all "big scale" stuff and there was nothing on the effect on the
_constant_ buzz produced by a pump on a fish tank.

Cheers (and sorry for the long posting!)
Mark

*Beach Boys*
I'm pickin up pump vibrations, pump, pump, pump, PUMP VIBRATIONS

The actual air pump does not need to be anywhere near the tank, if you're
worried about annoying the fish then put the pump in a cupboard somewhere,
purchase extra long air line tubing and run it to the tank/s. You can run
these along skirting boards (like you would with hi-fi speaker cables).

Air pumps get highly annoying for me, I removed all of mine! Only when you
switch them off and listen to the silence do you realise just how much noise
they actually make. I have internal canister filters that churn the surface
quite well so I don't need to worry about oxygen issues, so apart from air
bubbles being aesthetically pleasing I find them over rated and not really
playing a huge role in 'running the tank'. Unless of course you're using
UGF, then you have a problem ;o Depending on how many tanks you have you
could make a considerable saving on electricity costs aswell!

OT, speaking of how well water can carry sound, I was watching a docie the
other night about whales and their 'singing', God they are such fascinating
creatures. Most whales, depending on who they are singing to will go to
certain depths in the ocean. There are layers of water at certain high
pressure depths that can carry sound right around the world. Kind of like
having their very own cell-phone network, always in touch. It was really
fascinating stuff
--
**So long, and thanks for all the fish!**


"Mark" wrote in message
...
It is often said on these NGs that the sound of the pump is small compared
to the sounds in a fishes natural environment. Being an advanced PADI
scuba
diver I'm fortunate to have tested this theory out a few times and
personally I'm not convinced that this is true. Although sound underwater
travels a long way, it also decays quickly with distance. So, it is easy
to
hear a boat from miles off, but it is relatively quiet until it gets
close.
In fact, I'd descibe the underwater world as remarkable peaceful. I
compare
this to the noise I heard when I put my ear to the fish tank and even
though
the pump is quiet in the air, it sound like a pneumatic drill once my ear
is
in contact with the glass and to me much louder than the fishes natural
environment - probably due to the proximity of the pump. In addition, the
sea noises are intermittent and random, unlike the constant buzz of the
pump. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about different tanks /
pumps / fish etc, I'm really thinking generically here...

1. Are the different sound volumes simply a trick of my brain (in the same
way that a room always look much brighter from the inside than the outside
because the brain "compensates")? Indeed, has anyone done any decibel
measurements to quantify this?
2. Is this constant droning harmful / torture to the fish? (I have seen it
written that "they look peaceful", but perhaps a visiting alien would
describe a man in a padded cell wearing a straitjacket as "looks
peaceful"!)
I don't know how it would be measured, but again I'm interested in
scientific studies on this.

BTW, I did come across one site that had lots of info on the effects of
particular types of sounds (sonic booms, infrasound etc.) on fish, but it
was all "big scale" stuff and there was nothing on the effect on the
_constant_ buzz produced by a pump on a fish tank.

Cheers (and sorry for the long posting!)
Mark

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 08:57:19 -0000, "Mark"
wrote:

It is often said on these NGs that the sound of the pump is small compared
to the sounds in a fishes natural environment. Being an advanced PADI scuba
diver I'm fortunate to have tested this theory out a few times and
personally I'm not convinced that this is true. Although sound underwater
travels a long way, it also decays quickly with distance. So, it is easy to
hear a boat from miles off, but it is relatively quiet until it gets close.
In fact, I'd descibe the underwater world as remarkable peaceful. I compare
this to the noise I heard when I put my ear to the fish tank and even though
the pump is quiet in the air, it sound like a pneumatic drill once my ear is
in contact with the glass and to me much louder than the fishes natural
environment - probably due to the proximity of the pump. In addition, the
sea noises are intermittent and random, unlike the constant buzz of the
pump. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about different tanks /
pumps / fish etc, I'm really thinking generically here...

1. Are the different sound volumes simply a trick of my brain (in the same
way that a room always look much brighter from the inside than the outside
because the brain "compensates")? Indeed, has anyone done any decibel
measurements to quantify this?
2. Is this constant droning harmful / torture to the fish? (I have seen it
written that "they look peaceful", but perhaps a visiting alien would
describe a man in a padded cell wearing a straitjacket as "looks peaceful"!)
I don't know how it would be measured, but again I'm interested in
scientific studies on this.

BTW, I did come across one site that had lots of info on the effects of
particular types of sounds (sonic booms, infrasound etc.) on fish, but it
was all "big scale" stuff and there was nothing on the effect on the
_constant_ buzz produced by a pump on a fish tank.

Cheers (and sorry for the long posting!)
Mark




Having grown up in SouthEast asia, I was fortunate enough to learn to
skin dive there. My first lessons was in local streams and rivers,
and later out in the ocean.

I concur with you, once you get away from the actual beach head, the
sound drops to near minimal, yes you can hear the waves hitting the
beach, the boats passing... but it is so peaceful and serene.

The rives are a little louder, but the enviroment is more closed, but
it is still sooo peaceful. At times I wish I could go back and just
float about 10 feet under the surface.

I don't really worry about it too much. I don't hang the air pump off
the tank or stand, it sits on the carpeted floor. My two HOB
Bio-Wheel's will be removed when finances allow me to get a canister,
other than that, the rooms where the tanks are located remain on the
quiter side, the nursery/childs room, and the master bedroom.

I haven't placed my ear IN the tank, but I don't hear or feel any
noise/vibrations that seem out of whack when I place my ear to the
glass.

Just my $.02.


--Tony

"Mark" wrote in message
...
It is often said on these NGs that the sound of the pump is small
compared
to the sounds in a fishes natural environment. Being an advanced PADI
scuba
diver I'm fortunate to have tested this theory out a few times and
personally I'm not convinced that this is true. Although sound
underwater
travels a long way, it also decays quickly with distance. So, it is
easy to
hear a boat from miles off, but it is relatively quiet until it gets
close.
In fact, I'd descibe the underwater world as remarkable peaceful. I
compare
this to the noise I heard when I put my ear to the fish tank and even
though
the pump is quiet in the air, it sound like a pneumatic drill once my
ear is
in contact with the glass and to me much louder than the fishes natural
environment - probably due to the proximity of the pump. In addition,
the
sea noises are intermittent and random, unlike the constant buzz of the
pump. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about different tanks /
pumps / fish etc, I'm really thinking generically here...

Finally, someone who agrees with me. Aquariums are far noisier
environments than they should be. Much of the pneumatic hammering is
from your airstone and may have very little in common with the audio
volume from your airpump. Multi-diaphram pumps would be better if they
operated in sequence, but they operate in tandem, in opposite directions
(to reduce pump vibration) which probably worsens the effect inside the
tank. Whatever air pump you choose to use a damping chamber would
probably help, but it hasn't been invented yet (sealed 300cc container
with airline connections on either end and loose baffling material
inside).

1. Are the different sound volumes simply a trick of my brain (in the
same
way that a room always look much brighter from the inside than the
outside
because the brain "compensates")? Indeed, has anyone done any decibel
measurements to quantify this?

Excellent question. I'm sure the glass's harmonic frequency is
attentuating and amplifyng different frequencies. I don't have anything
capable of measuring dbAs underwater.

2. Is this constant droning harmful / torture to the fish? (I have seen
it
written that "they look peaceful", but perhaps a visiting alien would
describe a man in a padded cell wearing a straitjacket as "looks
peaceful"!)
I don't know how it would be measured, but again I'm interested in
scientific studies on this.

Because fish use 2 systems (lateral line and inner ears), it's hazordous
to extrapolate too much from our own senses's experiences. A steady
vibration of any significant amplitude will damped their ability to
communicate with movement. This is easily seen with cichlids schooling
fry. The lower the artificial vibrations, the tigher they can maintain
control on sometimes 100s of fry. Add an airstone, and the fry go off in
every direction, with exhausted parents chasing them down.

There is a lot of other communication through vibration used by fish, and
they are essentially being deafened in 'loud' tanks. Another example is
any fish which is a nocturnal hunter would be significantly handicapped
by the 'noise'.

Another example occurs when you drop an airstone into a mbuna tank. You
would normally observe a significantly higher level of activity and
appetite. I suspect that this occurs because they can no longer 'hear'
potential attackers coming, so they compensate with vision, by keeping in
more constant motion (and the greater appetite is to support the higher
energy output).

In regards to the potential for harm with constant droning, I suspect
that besides the dampening effect it has on their own perceptions, that
the drone gets accepted, much like we don't hear white noise. This is
illustrated by their 'deer in the headlights' reaction when you turn off
all sources of vibrational noise. They are momentarily deafened by the
silence.

To minimize the effect, use quieter filters (ie: canisters, submerged
water return, etc), sound dampening materials (plants, wood, rockwork),
larger tanks, low fish-loads and avoid fish which are particulary
susceptible to noise (ie: ID sharks).

NetMax

BTW, I did come across one site that had lots of info on the effects of
particular types of sounds (sonic booms, infrasound etc.) on fish, but
it
was all "big scale" stuff and there was nothing on the effect on the
_constant_ buzz produced by a pump on a fish tank.

Cheers (and sorry for the long posting!)
Mark

The sense I'm starting to get from the group is that airstones aren't all
that popular. I have a few in my 75gal, and like them, but if they aren't
a good idea I suppose that I could just remove them. I recently buried
all of them under polished river stones to slow down the flow a bit, do
you think that makes any noticeable difference to the noise level in the
tank?

I know this is a huge can of worms I'm opening, but the other "sense of
the group" I get is that most people think that canister filters are much
better than hang on the back power filters, like the AquaClear I use. Is
there a simple reason why canisters are so superior?

--chris



On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, NetMax wrote:

Finally, someone who agrees with me. Aquariums are far noisier
environments than they should be. Much of the pneumatic hammering is
from your airstone and may have very little in common with the audio
volume from your airpump. Multi-diaphram pumps would be better if they
operated in sequence, but they operate in tandem, in opposite directions
(to reduce pump vibration) which probably worsens the effect inside the
tank. Whatever air pump you choose to use a damping chamber would
probably help, but it hasn't been invented yet (sealed 300cc container
with airline connections on either end and loose baffling material
inside).


NB: This email address is dead. If you would like to email me directly,
please use: cpalmaATSYMBOLastro.psu.edu

Chris Palma wrote in message ...

The sense I'm starting to get from the group is that airstones aren't all
that popular. I have a few in my 75gal, and like them, but if they aren't
a good idea I suppose that I could just remove them. I recently buried
all of them under polished river stones to slow down the flow a bit, do
you think that makes any noticeable difference to the noise level in the
tank?

I know this is a huge can of worms I'm opening, but the other "sense of
the group" I get is that most people think that canister filters are much
better than hang on the back power filters, like the AquaClear I use. Is
there a simple reason why canisters are so superior?

--chris



On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, NetMax wrote:

Finally, someone who agrees with me. Aquariums are far noisier
environments than they should be. Much of the pneumatic hammering is
from your airstone and may have very little in common with the audio
volume from your airpump. Multi-diaphram pumps would be better if they
operated in sequence, but they operate in tandem, in opposite directions
(to reduce pump vibration) which probably worsens the effect inside the
tank. Whatever air pump you choose to use a damping chamber would
probably help, but it hasn't been invented yet (sealed 300cc container
with airline connections on either end and loose baffling material
inside).


NB: This email address is dead. If you would like to email me directly,
please use: cpalmaATSYMBOLastro.psu.edu


really, the best solution seems to be to get the filtration/air out of the
tank altogether and use a sump system. It seems to me to be the way to go if
you are serious. the other advantage is that I am filtering around $250
gallons of water for the cost of a large container and a water pump that
cost me around $100 Australian, total cost around $160. cheaper and better!

"Chris Palma" wrote in message
...

The sense I'm starting to get from the group is that airstones aren't
all
that popular. I have a few in my 75gal, and like them, but if they
aren't
a good idea I suppose that I could just remove them. I recently buried
all of them under polished river stones to slow down the flow a bit, do
you think that makes any noticeable difference to the noise level in
the
tank?

All these components have their pros & cons, and airstones might be noise
generators. Put your ear to the tank and listen to the difference
between off and on. If your pump is quiet and/or the tank is large, then
there might be little difference. There are many benefits to airstones,
so I wouldn't want to discourage their use without pointing out pros &
cons. They do boost the O2 level, though it's less than originally
thought. The help with circulation, especially in areas which might be
hard to reach with an outside filter. They break up the surface protein
layer and help re-oxygenation at the surface. They can be almost
essential in high fish-load tanks. The biggest drawback to them is that
somewhere you need an airpump, which can be noisy for you. Being noisy
for fish is not a frequently discussed topic, as posts tend to gravitate
around water problems, diseases and compatability.

I know this is a huge can of worms I'm opening, but the other "sense of
the group" I get is that most people think that canister filters are
much
better than hang on the back power filters, like the AquaClear I use.
Is
there a simple reason why canisters are so superior?

Again, all these components have their pros & cons. It's not about
canister vs powerfilter, as there are many filter technologies like FBs,
UGFs, RUGFs, wet/dry etc. Generally, the greater the surface area of
filtration media, the less servicing you need to do. The further the
filter is away from the tank, the more flexibility you will have (tank
right against the wall, hoses direct flow, motor noise can be isolated
etc). The bigger (or more compartmented) the filter is, the more options
you have for massaging the water parameters. The slower the flow rate,
the better the biological & chemical filtration.

Is a canister filter better than a powerfilter (Penquin, AquaClear etc)?
In most applications, yes, especially in efficiency, but - it depends on
how you define 'which is better'. The canister is more expensive and it
provides features or capabilities which you may not need. Most people
with multiple tanks have an arsenal of filters, including both types. If
you were to compare the value of a powerfilter to a canister, (and by
value, I'm taking the (extra efficiency + features you will use) and
dividing by the purchase cost), then the best value would be (imo), an
AquaClear filter. As soon as you need a feature provided by a canister
(ie: another compartment for sintered glass, putting the tank flat
against the wall, longer servicing interval etc), then you swallow hard,
pay more money and know that the overall efficiency will be better which
is good for you and for the fish. If you don't need a feature not
provided by your powerfilter, and your tank is well balanced, not
underfiltered, your maintenance routine is long established, then why
would you change?

All this talk about filters, remember, it's mostly all opinions ;~)
NetMax

--chris
snip

They do boost the O2 level, though it's less than originally
thought. The help with circulation, especially in areas which might be
hard to reach with an outside filter. They break up the surface
protein layer and help re-oxygenation at the surface.

I can't agree with you more on breaking up the surface protein layer. I
had a kinda ugly layer before I added the air-wand to my tank. No trace
of it now:-). Also the fishes seem to enjoy swimming through it, and
floating up in it.

Josh

"NetMax" wrote in message
...

"Chris Palma" wrote in message

...

The sense I'm starting to get from the group is that airstones aren't
all
that popular. I have a few in my 75gal, and like them, but if they
aren't
a good idea I suppose that I could just remove them. I recently buried
all of them under polished river stones to slow down the flow a bit, do
you think that makes any noticeable difference to the noise level in
the
tank?

All these components have their pros & cons, and airstones might be noise
generators. Put your ear to the tank and listen to the difference
between off and on. If your pump is quiet and/or the tank is large, then
there might be little difference. There are many benefits to airstones,
so I wouldn't want to discourage their use without pointing out pros &
cons. They do boost the O2 level, though it's less than originally
thought. The help with circulation, especially in areas which might be
hard to reach with an outside filter. They break up the surface protein
layer and help re-oxygenation at the surface. They can be almost
essential in high fish-load tanks. The biggest drawback to them is that
somewhere you need an airpump, which can be noisy for you. Being noisy
for fish is not a frequently discussed topic, as posts tend to gravitate
around water problems, diseases and compatability.

Indeed they do. :-) Are NetMax and I the only ones worried about our fish
being physically fit as a fiddle, but mentally they're being driven up the
wall (or side of fish tank) by the torture of a constant buzzing. I've seen
the film The Ipcress File - I'd hate to be subjecting my fish to that!

So, I'm not really worried about the o2 levels, circulation etc. (Ok - the
truth is: I am - but not for this particular posting!) What I was interested
in is if there's any scientific evidence for the actual volume levels and
the effect of the constant buzzing on the fish. From what I'm reading, the
answer to both questions seems to be "not that we're aware of"? That's OK -
I'll carry on searching as I'm sure there must be something.

The "hot topic", however, seems to be the solution to the problem (if indeed
there is a problem in the first place). Again, the order of the day here is
"quiet" as opposed the GPM, o2, circulation etc etc. I think I'm right in
saying that the consensus is to get an external pump and filter? If so, any
recommendations on good makes, thinks to look out for and so on?

Cheers
Mark


I know this is a huge can of worms I'm opening, but the other "sense of
the group" I get is that most people think that canister filters are
much
better than hang on the back power filters, like the AquaClear I use.
Is
there a simple reason why canisters are so superior?

Again, all these components have their pros & cons. It's not about
canister vs powerfilter, as there are many filter technologies like FBs,
UGFs, RUGFs, wet/dry etc. Generally, the greater the surface area of
filtration media, the less servicing you need to do. The further the
filter is away from the tank, the more flexibility you will have (tank
right against the wall, hoses direct flow, motor noise can be isolated
etc). The bigger (or more compartmented) the filter is, the more options
you have for massaging the water parameters. The slower the flow rate,
the better the biological & chemical filtration.

Is a canister filter better than a powerfilter (Penquin, AquaClear etc)?
In most applications, yes, especially in efficiency, but - it depends on
how you define 'which is better'. The canister is more expensive and it
provides features or capabilities which you may not need. Most people
with multiple tanks have an arsenal of filters, including both types. If
you were to compare the value of a powerfilter to a canister, (and by
value, I'm taking the (extra efficiency + features you will use) and
dividing by the purchase cost), then the best value would be (imo), an
AquaClear filter. As soon as you need a feature provided by a canister
(ie: another compartment for sintered glass, putting the tank flat
against the wall, longer servicing interval etc), then you swallow hard,
pay more money and know that the overall efficiency will be better which
is good for you and for the fish. If you don't need a feature not
provided by your powerfilter, and your tank is well balanced, not
underfiltered, your maintenance routine is long established, then why
would you change?

All this talk about filters, remember, it's mostly all opinions ;~)
NetMax

--chris
snip

"Mark" wrote in message
...

"NetMax" wrote in message
...

"Chris Palma" wrote in message


...

The sense I'm starting to get from the group is that airstones
aren't
all
that popular. I have a few in my 75gal, and like them, but if they
aren't
a good idea I suppose that I could just remove them.

snipped for brevity

Being noisy
for fish is not a frequently discussed topic, as posts tend to
gravitate
around water problems, diseases and compatability.

Indeed they do. :-) Are NetMax and I the only ones worried about our
fish
being physically fit as a fiddle, but mentally they're being driven up
the
wall (or side of fish tank) by the torture of a constant buzzing. I've
seen
the film The Ipcress File - I'd hate to be subjecting my fish to that!

Not at all. This is where to come for information on a complete variety
of fish-husbandry topics. Once something is brought to light, I'm sure
many lurkers go back to their aquarium to 'check it out'. Speaking of
being brought to 'light' another peeve of mine is people who turn on the
tank lights in a dark room. Since fish have no eyelids, the sudden light
is quite a shock. I'm not a fish-hugger (that would be tough to do ;~),
but some common sense can go a long way to making the creatures in our
charge more comfortable.

So, I'm not really worried about the o2 levels, circulation etc. (Ok -
the
truth is: I am - but not for this particular posting!) What I was
interested
in is if there's any scientific evidence for the actual volume levels
and
the effect of the constant buzzing on the fish. From what I'm reading,
the
answer to both questions seems to be "not that we're aware of"? That's
OK -
I'll carry on searching as I'm sure there must be something.

Do post back anything interesting you come across. I just go by
observation, but I have no comparative levels to reference.

The "hot topic", however, seems to be the solution to the problem (if
indeed
there is a problem in the first place). Again, the order of the day
here is
"quiet" as opposed the GPM, o2, circulation etc etc. I think I'm right
in
saying that the consensus is to get an external pump and filter? If so,
any
recommendations on good makes, thinks to look out for and so on?

On canister filters, there isn't (imo) any current models which need to
be avoided because of some horrible defect or characteristic. Pick a
unit which will comfortably take care of your fish-load (though the
filters are sized to tank volume). Check what the unit includes as even
identical models can be packaged differently (you can discover that the
one on sale didn't include shut-off valves, filtration media etc, and
actually comes out more expensive). Watch for running costs for
proprietary filtration media which is replaced periodically. On-line
purchasing & LFS sales/liquidations seem to be the best places/times to
buy, with a marginal increase in risk. Used canisters are much more
risky, as there has historically been a few problems and even today
occasionally a unit has a mis-tolerance on the mating parts of the
casings or a fitting, resulting in some type of leak (much less frequent
today though). Otherwise, everyone can chirp up for their favorite
filter ), but that gets very subjective ;~). Objective credibility
suffers when you only own one filter and it's your favorite, and your
basis for dissing another manufacturer is because you know someone who
didn't like it ;~)

On the point of noise, I think all the canisters are an order of
magnitude quieter than an airstone, so the difference between
manufacturers might be of no significance. It is also difficult to
measure. As example, I currently have in my livingroom an Eheim 2213 and
a Fluval 304 running (about 10 feet away from each other). Standing at a
point between them (and concentrating hard), I hear the Eheim more, but
the Eheim's harder plastic case and/or the construction of the cabinet it
is in, makes the actual noise source, the cabinet. Listening a few
inches from the filters, the Fluval is slightly louder. Listening with
my ear on the tank, the Eheim is louder, but again, there are the
variables of tank dimensions etc, and this assumes that a fish's hearing
range was comparable to my own. Suffice to say, canister acoustics might
be a mute point.

An interesting variable for someone with more time & interest than I
have, is that my Fluval uses a corrogated hose, while my Eheim uses a
smooth hose (originally I wasn't keen on using a corrogated hose as I
thought it would create more resistance, but after using them, I think
the extra turbulence inside, and the fact that they are opaque, keeps
them cleaner far longer). On the topic of noise, a corrogated hose would
(I think) create noise as the water flowed over the ridges, however the
motor noise from the filter would be attenuated by these ridges, so
perhaps the noisier hose gives you a quieter tank?!

ps: In an earlier life, I designed sound suppresion equipment, but I'm
having trouble drawing parallels to underwater applications.
NetMax

Cheers
Mark
snip