Pipe size?

Well, my unofficial advice is to just do it. You're going to spend money to
get 1.5" pipe anyway, so spend a bit more and get the most of your
investment. Or do what I do and get the smaller stuff and just upgrade
every other year (and pull out that checkbook). I am the guy with the $350
sequence pump on the side of my house not sure what to do with it now.

"RichToyBox" wrote in message
news:rMSWc.304517$a24.115577@attbi_s03...
Using the performance chart located at www.fancykoioutlet.com with a
static
head of 5 foot and assuming that pipe, valves, elbows, filter head, etc.
is
equivalent to 100 foot of pipe, a 2 inch pipe will give about 80 gallon
per
minute, while the 3 inch will give about 100 gallon per minute. It the
equivalent length of pipe were 50 foot the flow 3" pipe would have almost
no
difference, while the 2 inch pipe would yield a flow of about 95 gallons
per
minute.

As you can see, the pipe diameter, number of fittings, length of pipe,
filter components, and other factors. If your plumbing is mostly straight
runs with a minimum of elbows, valves, tees, based on your schematic and
my
approximation of distances based on the block counts, you may be able to
get
the equivalent length down to about 30 foot, but with many fittings, it
could go as high as 100 foot since each elbow is equivalent to about 4
foot
of pipe and each valve (fully open is equivalaent to about 2 foot of pipe.
--
RichToyBox
http://www.geocities.com/richtoybox/index.html

"Grumpy" wrote in message
news:qFRWc.38848$9d6.21590@attbi_s54...
All I really want to know is, is it worth going to a 3 inch pipe from a
1 1/2 inch port from the filter.

Andy Hill wrote:

Grumpy wrote:

Benign Vanilla wrote:


"gng" wrote in message
...


I have a Sequence 7200 and Aqua Ultima filter. The original guy who
built
this used 1.5 inch, but when you do the math you actually get nearly
twice
the water with 2" pipe. Been told the intake is the most important
place

to


have the larger pipe. Sequence told me to use 3" if I could for
even
more
flow.

snip

I would agree. Never restrict the input to your pump.
BV.


The 3" to the input is no problem. The bottom drain and skimmer are
plumbed for 3". It's the output I have concern for. I want as much
flow
as possible to the falls. Will I be able to do 3" from the Ultima?
Thanks


The pump doesn't give a rip what your pipe diameter is, all it cares
about is
the static and dynamic head. Bigger pipe gives you a smaller
dynamic
head for
a given flow rate. You *might* run into the situation where the
system
is
overdesigned (dynamic head is so low that static head is all the pump
is
pushing
against), but I doubt you'll run into that situation with only 3"
pipe.
If you
want to be sure, figure out the system's dynamic head from the tables
referenced
in Richard's post, and check against the flow curves for your pump.

Grumpy wrote:
All I really want to know is, is it worth going to a 3 inch pipe from a
1 1/2 inch port from the filter.

Almost certainly.

Short answer: Yes.

All I really want to know is, is it worth going to a 3 inch pipe from a
1 1/2 inch port from the filter.


Slightly longer answer: Maybe someday you'll want to enlarge your pond or
pump and will then have a jump on the pipe size. As my SO always says (she's
so cute) bigger is always better.


San Diego Joe
4,000 - 5,000 Gallons.
Goldfish, a RES named Colombo and an Oscar.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

I'm finding out that 3" vs 2" is quite a price jump. I'm planning 3"
from the skimmer and bottom drain. Now I have question about how to
plumb the 3" into the 2" fitting on the pump. What would be the outcome
(pro's con's) of 3" downsized to 2" in the red circle on the diagram at
bottom of page. Thanks
http://home.comcast.net/~grumpy232/pondpage.htm

San Diego Joe wrote:
Short answer: Yes.


All I really want to know is, is it worth going to a 3 inch pipe from a
1 1/2 inch port from the filter.



Slightly longer answer: Maybe someday you'll want to enlarge your pond or
pump and will then have a jump on the pipe size. As my SO always says (she's
so cute) bigger is always better.


San Diego Joe
4,000 - 5,000 Gallons.
Goldfish, a RES named Colombo and an Oscar.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

No problem.
--
RichToyBox
http://www.geocities.com/richtoybox/index.html

"Grumpy" wrote in message
news:if5Xc.44486$9d6.23519@attbi_s54...
I'm finding out that 3" vs 2" is quite a price jump. I'm planning 3"
from the skimmer and bottom drain. Now I have question about how to
plumb the 3" into the 2" fitting on the pump. What would be the outcome
(pro's con's) of 3" downsized to 2" in the red circle on the diagram at
bottom of page. Thanks
http://home.comcast.net/~grumpy232/pondpage.htm

San Diego Joe wrote:
Short answer: Yes.


All I really want to know is, is it worth going to a 3 inch pipe from a
1 1/2 inch port from the filter.



Slightly longer answer: Maybe someday you'll want to enlarge your pond
or
pump and will then have a jump on the pipe size. As my SO always says
(she's
so cute) bigger is always better.


San Diego Joe
4,000 - 5,000 Gallons.
Goldfish, a RES named Colombo and an Oscar.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:34:17 -0700, San Diego Joe
wrote:

Short answer: Yes.

As my SO always says (she's
so cute) bigger is always better.

And on what is she basing this opinion?

--
Crashj

"Crashj" wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:34:17 -0700, San Diego Joe
wrote:

Short answer: Yes.

As my SO always says (she's
so cute) bigger is always better.

And on what is she basing this opinion?

Sorry, that's all I'm allowed to say.

San Diego Joe
4,000 - 5,000 Gallons.
Goldfish, a RES named Colombo and an Oscar.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:14:55 -0700, San Diego Joe
wrote:

"Crashj" wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:34:17 -0700, San Diego Joe
wrote:

Short answer: Yes.

As my SO always says (she's
so cute) bigger is always better.

And on what is she basing this opinion?

Sorry, that's all I'm allowed to say.

So how is she at parallel parking?
--
Crashj

"Crashj" wrote:

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:14:55 -0700, San Diego Joe
wrote:

"Crashj" wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:34:17 -0700, San Diego Joe
wrote:

Short answer: Yes.

As my SO always says (she's
so cute) bigger is always better.

And on what is she basing this opinion?

Sorry, that's all I'm allowed to say.

So how is she at parallel parking?

Sorry, I'm getting in way too deep here.


San Diego Joe
4,000 - 5,000 Gallons.
Goldfish, a RES named Colombo and an Oscar.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----