Have you ever measured real water pump output flow rate?

I made a little experiment this morning in my bathroom...
I hooked up two pumps to my future sump to compare their
performance in pumping water into InstantOcean 6 1/2 g
bucket positioned in the bathtub with the upper edge
about 4 feet above the pump and my findings quite
disappointed me: neither pump showed their expected
efficiency in pumping water... How can we explain this?

Let me give you some details:

1st pump was Little Giant 3-MDQ-SC ($115) with the theoretic
maximum flow of 700gph and the flow at 4' in the range of 630.

2nd one was QuietOne 3000 ($39) with the flow a little bit weaker.

Both pumps had different fittings so I used necessary couplings
and both were pumping water through 10 feet long 3/4" ID hose
to the bucket. I have measured the time with my clock 5 times
for each pump and skiping the one value which did not match
the rest ones the most the average value was calculated.

It took average 52 seconds to fill the bucket for the Little
Giant pump and on average 69 seconds for the same task for
Quiet One pump. Taken from the measurments calculated flows
were respectively 451gph and 339gph. Why are they so low?
Can it be the lenght of the hose or couple of PCV fittings
reduced the flow so dramaticaly or the manufacturer data is
misleading in that matter?

BTW - I used my wattmeter to measure the enregy consumption
in this setup for both pumps and the Little Giant was taking
in the range of 79-82W but QuietOne only 27-31W to do almost
the same job.

QuietOne is 1/3 the price of Little Giant and consumes less
than half of the electricity to do similar job... But is has
the design of regular powerhead with resin filled electrical
engine and the magnetic rotor inside the pump. Little Giant
has this "real inline pump" design with a separate motor
and magnetic driven impeller in the separate housing.

BTW - the little giant and quiet one are very similar with
the level of noise when compared with naked ear - I do not
have any decibele meter but they seem to be same loud with
the exception that QuietOne starts in a hard way with loud
click/sound while Little Giant starts in a very soft way
accelerating rpm during first second from turning it on.

So I would have two questions to the group:
1. what could be the reason for so small flow rate measured?
(550-600gph expected, 339-451 measured)
2. which pump would you recommend for the return pump for 30g reef?

Pszemol,

Cool experiment. I have a flow chart for the Little giant 3MDQ-SC
and the GPH at 12' is 425 GPH with PSI 7.8. I don't know what size tubing
they used, but I would imagine if the fitting is for 3/4" they would test it
with 3/4". The 451 GPH you got sounds about right for 10'. They also make a
3MDQX-SC which is a circulating pump. You would get more GPH 450 @ 12', but
less PSI 6.1. The electrical consumption is .8 amps (80wts) for the 3MDQ-SC
and .9 (100wts) 3MDQX-SC.
I don't have a chart for Quiet One because I don't use them much. I
wouldn't be surprised that the power consumption for the Quiet One is less.
With a 30 gal. aquarium either pump will give you more than enough
circulation to turn the tank over 10 times. You will need a large return
hole to accommodate the water. 1" bulkhead fitting will only remove 400 GPH.
More than that and it will make an annoying sucking sound. You are only
limited by the drain.

Good Luck,
Aquacare


--
Aquatic-Care aquarium services
Freshwater/Sal****er
Since 1993
www.aquatic-care.com


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 1/8/2004

I tried an experiment with a pump I have, the rating was 46litres a minute,
but when I used it to fill a 20 litre container it take 2 minutes and 14
seconds. That was through 10 meters of 19mm clear acrylic tube. Next test
was to hold onto the pump just below the water line and let the pump blow
the water out of the container. It emptied the container in 24 seconds.

So I guess the industry standard for measuring is without any restriction.
IE: No Hose, No Connections.


"Pszemol" wrote in message
...
I made a little experiment this morning in my bathroom...
I hooked up two pumps to my future sump to compare their
performance in pumping water into InstantOcean 6 1/2 g
bucket positioned in the bathtub with the upper edge
about 4 feet above the pump and my findings quite
disappointed me: neither pump showed their expected
efficiency in pumping water... How can we explain this?

Let me give you some details:

1st pump was Little Giant 3-MDQ-SC ($115) with the theoretic
maximum flow of 700gph and the flow at 4' in the range of 630.

2nd one was QuietOne 3000 ($39) with the flow a little bit weaker.

Both pumps had different fittings so I used necessary couplings
and both were pumping water through 10 feet long 3/4" ID hose
to the bucket. I have measured the time with my clock 5 times
for each pump and skiping the one value which did not match
the rest ones the most the average value was calculated.

It took average 52 seconds to fill the bucket for the Little
Giant pump and on average 69 seconds for the same task for
Quiet One pump. Taken from the measurments calculated flows
were respectively 451gph and 339gph. Why are they so low?
Can it be the lenght of the hose or couple of PCV fittings
reduced the flow so dramaticaly or the manufacturer data is
misleading in that matter?

BTW - I used my wattmeter to measure the enregy consumption
in this setup for both pumps and the Little Giant was taking
in the range of 79-82W but QuietOne only 27-31W to do almost
the same job.

QuietOne is 1/3 the price of Little Giant and consumes less
than half of the electricity to do similar job... But is has
the design of regular powerhead with resin filled electrical
engine and the magnetic rotor inside the pump. Little Giant
has this "real inline pump" design with a separate motor
and magnetic driven impeller in the separate housing.

BTW - the little giant and quiet one are very similar with
the level of noise when compared with naked ear - I do not
have any decibele meter but they seem to be same loud with
the exception that QuietOne starts in a hard way with loud
click/sound while Little Giant starts in a very soft way
accelerating rpm during first second from turning it on.

So I would have two questions to the group:
1. what could be the reason for so small flow rate measured?
(550-600gph expected, 339-451 measured)
2. which pump would you recommend for the return pump for 30g reef?

"Pszemol" verbositized:

I made a little experiment this morning in my bathroom...
I hooked up two pumps to my future sump to compare their
performance in pumping water into InstantOcean 6 1/2 g
bucket positioned in the bathtub with the upper edge
about 4 feet above the pump and my findings quite
disappointed me: neither pump showed their expected
efficiency in pumping water... How can we explain this?

Let me give you some details:

1st pump was Little Giant 3-MDQ-SC ($115) with the theoretic
maximum flow of 700gph and the flow at 4' in the range of 630.

2nd one was QuietOne 3000 ($39) with the flow a little bit weaker.

Both pumps had different fittings so I used necessary couplings
and both were pumping water through 10 feet long 3/4" ID hose
to the bucket. I have measured the time with my clock 5 times
for each pump and skiping the one value which did not match
the rest ones the most the average value was calculated.

It took average 52 seconds to fill the bucket for the Little
Giant pump and on average 69 seconds for the same task for
Quiet One pump. Taken from the measurments calculated flows
were respectively 451gph and 339gph. Why are they so low?
Can it be the lenght of the hose or couple of PCV fittings
reduced the flow so dramaticaly or the manufacturer data is
misleading in that matter?

BTW - I used my wattmeter to measure the enregy consumption
in this setup for both pumps and the Little Giant was taking
in the range of 79-82W but QuietOne only 27-31W to do almost
the same job.

QuietOne is 1/3 the price of Little Giant and consumes less
than half of the electricity to do similar job... But is has
the design of regular powerhead with resin filled electrical
engine and the magnetic rotor inside the pump. Little Giant
has this "real inline pump" design with a separate motor
and magnetic driven impeller in the separate housing.

BTW - the little giant and quiet one are very similar with
the level of noise when compared with naked ear - I do not
have any decibele meter but they seem to be same loud with
the exception that QuietOne starts in a hard way with loud
click/sound while Little Giant starts in a very soft way
accelerating rpm during first second from turning it on.

So I would have two questions to the group:
1. what could be the reason for so small flow rate measured?
(550-600gph expected, 339-451 measured)
2. which pump would you recommend for the return pump for 30g reef?

Manufacturers ratings are based on an unrestricted flow with little to
no resistance from the piping.
In other words, they use very large pipes for the size of the pump
outlet. Normally more than double the size of the pump outlet!

I have had longer life and better results using the low end price
range potted pumps, than I have with the more expensive separate motor
pumps.

We also now use these little potted pumps in commercial hi-viscosity
pumping situations. The majority being Maxi-Jet 1000's. They consume
less electricity, last longer, and we can buy 5 of them for the price
of one standard line pump of the same output rating.
On really heavy liquids, we run two pumps back to back, one feeding
the other to keep the flowrate up where we need it for our commercial
purposes, and they still draw less electricity and last longer than
the original pump designed for the purpose.

In our case, the end bearings decompose from the fluids we are
pumping, but a gross of these bearings only cost about 18 bucks. So
we replace them once a month during cleaning, whether we need to or
not. The O-rings don't seem to be affected.

TTUL
Gary

"Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr." wrote in message ...
Manufacturers ratings are based on an unrestricted flow with little to
no resistance from the piping.
In other words, they use very large pipes for the size of the pump
outlet. Normally more than double the size of the pump outlet!

This is kind of misleading for the custommer, who usually
expect the pump rating at 4' match the plumbing system he
has at his fish tank.

I have had longer life and better results using the low end price
range potted pumps, than I have with the more expensive separate
motor pumps.

That is what I am confused with... People are running very
expensive pumps but in my comparison QuietOne was just as
good as LittleGiant for the 1/3 price. Less space taken in
the cabinet, less electricity used to do the job, less heat
generated overall... And on top of this you say you have
better experience with this kind of pumps than with real
inline ones...

We also now use these little potted pumps in commercial hi-viscosity
pumping situations. The majority being Maxi-Jet 1000's. They consume
less electricity, last longer, and we can buy 5 of them for the price
of one standard line pump of the same output rating.
On really heavy liquids, we run two pumps back to back, one feeding
the other to keep the flowrate up where we need it for our commercial
purposes, and they still draw less electricity and last longer than
the original pump designed for the purpose.

In our case, the end bearings decompose from the fluids we are
pumping, but a gross of these bearings only cost about 18 bucks. So
we replace them once a month during cleaning, whether we need to or
not. The O-rings don't seem to be affected.

MaxiJet 1000? Did not know they make it... We have MJ900 and MJ1200
available for the fish hobby. Is the MJ1000 somewhere in the middle?
What is its electricity consumption? I find MJ900 much more efficient
than MJ1200 comparing watts used to flow in gph. So for free powerheads
it is much better to have water moving with three MJ900 than two MJ1200.
I have listed my findings about powerheads efficiency in November last
year on this group:
In this comparison MJ900 is almost twice more efficient than MJ1200
hawing index Flow/Watts 27 when MJ1200 has it only 14.75...

"Pszemol" verbositized:

This is kind of misleading for the custommer, who usually
expect the pump rating at 4' match the plumbing system he
has at his fish tank.

Amen! But all companies do whatever it takes to get their ratings the
highest, anyway they possibly can. It's akin to the labels on food
products! Who on this planet eats what they call a "serving"?


That is what I am confused with... People are running very
expensive pumps but in my comparison QuietOne was just as
good as LittleGiant for the 1/3 price. Less space taken in
the cabinet, less electricity used to do the job, less heat
generated overall... And on top of this you say you have
better experience with this kind of pumps than with real
inline ones...

I have used everything from Little Giant and Hydrothruster II, to Mag
Drive and Generic. With Little Giant we have had problems with
burnout, oil leaks, housing corrosion, etc.
With many other externals (separate pump and motor combinations), we
have had problems with bearings and seals and on occasion winding
corrosion and failure.

After using several brands in aquaria, including reefs, and for
commercial use, we have had the lowest failure rate using Maxi-Jet
pumps. As long as they do not have a manufacturers defect, and every
so often a whole batch of them or some near the end of a lot will have
potting defects.
So I might suggest if you buy Maxi-Jet pumps, that you pop the back
cover off and make sure there is not exposed rubber band and that the
potting material completely covers the unit.
Of those we had that failed, every single one had a rubber band
exposed that was not covered by the potting material. As such, the
rubber band would quickly decay, allowing sal****er to get to the
winding and pretty soon, poof.
The rubber band is used to hold the thermal sensor against the winding
so it doesn't drift away from it while it is filled with potting
material.

MaxiJet 1000? Did not know they make it... We have MJ900 and MJ1200
available for the fish hobby. Is the MJ1000 somewhere in the middle?

And here I didn't know they made anything above the Maxi-Jet 1000!
Of course, it's been a long time since we have had to buy any new
ones, the last case was purchased around 1995/96. The ones we have
just keep going like the Energizer Bunny.
We also have several of the larger size Mag-Drive pumps also, but as
they go belly up, we replace them with two Maxi-Jet's back to back.

If you don't have a lot of head pressure to have to deal with, you
can't beat those little Maxi-Jet's for moving liquid from one place to
another. If you need head pressure, the Mag-Drive pumps are a good
alternative.

What is its electricity consumption? I find MJ900 much more efficient
than MJ1200 comparing watts used to flow in gph. So for free powerheads
it is much better to have water moving with three MJ900 than two MJ1200.
I have listed my findings about powerheads efficiency in November last
year on this group:
In this comparison MJ900 is almost twice more efficient than MJ1200
hawing index Flow/Watts 27 when MJ1200 has it only 14.75...

I will agree that some other pumps move water at a lower power
consumption than the Maxi-Jet 1000 which eats more electricity than
normal, but it also has a much higher head pressure than all the rest
too, which must also be considered.

M-J gph watts
250 78 5
500 153 7.5
750 217 8.5
1000 265 20

For example: Two 500's at 153 gph each should be able to pump 306
gph.
Now, lets raise the viscosity of the fluid being pumped and move the
head up to 4 feet.
The 500's won't cut it, not even three of them back to back.
But the 1000 doesn't even grunt at the harder work!

I was using mainly 750's in my reef aquaria as they added much less
heat to the system than the 1000's do, which is a consideration in
that application.

But if you switch to hydroponic applications and/or high viscosity
liquids where temp is not a concern or even a benefit, the flowrate of
the 750's drop considerably. Whereas the 1000's will drop only a
small amount, sometimes not even negligible.

So, if it takes 3 750's to move the same amount of heavy liquid, your
better off with the 1000 where one will do the trick at lower energy
consumption.

But you are wise to consider the wattage each pump consumes as wattage
used converts directly to heat.

Maxi-Jet's shut off, rather than burn up, if they run dry! Which is
also another consideration, if they are used in unattended pumping
situations.

We have had several Rio 800's, 211 gph, 12 watt running back to back
in order to move some of our heavier liquids. They are a good little
pump too! But they are more on a par with the M-J 750 pump which
pumps 217 and only uses 8.5 watts.

I don't know what Maxi-Jet's cost for sure these days, I have seen
them from $29.95 all the way up to over $45.00, but we only paid like
$14.98 each for them through an aquatic retailer, by the case, in
1995/96. I think by the each, they were something like $24.95 at
retail back then.

For most of our purposes, the 1000's are almost too powerful, and on
some fluids, the tubing must be constricted to slow them down a bit,
but the 750's don't have the necessary ooomph to get the heavy fluids
moving, and adding more of them seems to defeat the purpose entirely.

TTUL
Gary

Gary,

Manufacturers ratings are based on an unrestricted flow with little to
no resistance from the piping.
In other words, they use very large pipes for the size of the pump
outlet. Normally more than double the size of the pump outlet!

I would have guessed wrong. I thought that the pump would be tested with the
same size hose that the connection called for. This is misleading..!! Makes
it tough to choose a pump properly. I will stow this tid-bit of information
for my next installation.

aquacare





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 1/8/2004

"Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr." wrote in message ...
"Pszemol" verbositized:

This is kind of misleading for the custommer, who usually
expect the pump rating at 4' match the plumbing system he
has at his fish tank.

Amen! But all companies do whatever it takes to get their ratings the
highest, anyway they possibly can. It's akin to the labels on food
products! Who on this planet eats what they call a "serving"?

:-))

I have used everything from Little Giant and Hydrothruster II, to Mag
Drive and Generic. With Little Giant we have had problems with
burnout, oil leaks, housing corrosion, etc.
With many other externals (separate pump and motor combinations), we
have had problems with bearings and seals and on occasion winding
corrosion and failure.

I sent my LittleGiant pump back to the store today.
I hope I will not regret my decision to use QuietOne 3000 instead.
From what I hear from you and what I have read til now I think I won't.

And here I didn't know they made anything above the Maxi-Jet 1000!
[..]
I will agree that some other pumps move water at a lower power
consumption than the Maxi-Jet 1000 which eats more electricity than
normal, but it also has a much higher head pressure than all the rest
too, which must also be considered.

M-J gph watts
250 78 5
500 153 7.5
750 217 8.5
1000 265 20

From the list above I would guess that they change numbering and we
have model numbers 900 and 1200 consuming the same as old 750 and 1000.
So we can expect they did some improvements to the wet side of the
pump but the motor stayed the same with its max power consumption...
For what you are saying about 1000 all seems to apply to todays 1200
and whatever you say about 750 seems to apply to 900. Keep it in mind
when you be ready to order the next box of pumps for you :-))

I don't know what Maxi-Jet's cost for sure these days, I have seen
them from $29.95 all the way up to over $45.00, but we only paid like
$14.98 each for them through an aquatic retailer, by the case, in
1995/96. I think by the each, they were something like $24.95 at
retail back then.

They go "on sale" from time to time and this is te time I try to order
them, but regular price at www.petsolutions.com is $18.99 for model 900
and $20.99 for each for model 1200 - www.drsfostersmith.com is even cheaper:
$15.99 for the smaller one and $18.69 for 1200. This is pretty cheap considering
you payed price 'by the case'. Hard competition benefits the custommer :-)

For most of our purposes, the 1000's are almost too powerful, and on
some fluids, the tubing must be constricted to slow them down a bit,
but the 750's don't have the necessary ooomph to get the heavy fluids
moving, and adding more of them seems to defeat the purpose entirely.

Running in reef as a powerhead we do not need big pressure like
is needed for high head applications. So for powerhead is it better
to use 2 model 900 with little less flow but less than 1/2 the wattage
than one model 1200 with little more flow but twice the wattage.

"Pszemol" verbositized:

I sent my LittleGiant pump back to the store today.
I hope I will not regret my decision to use QuietOne 3000 instead.
From what I hear from you and what I have read til now I think I won't.

I shouldn't say this, but in my fathers business they sold Little
Giant pumps for decades, for fountain use.
A proper (to code) hard installation of the pump voids the warranty.
He sold enough of these pumps over the years that he could demand
refunds for defective pumps, in a roundabout way, honoring the
warranty on a personal level that Little Giant would not honor
themselves via the customer.

I don't have any paperwork handy to look up the models that gave him
the most grief, but it was a good percentage of them.

In the field of hydroponics, we use Maxi-Jets more than any other
brand and have the least amount of problems.

If you are familiar with our AZ-NO3 product, Maxi-Jet 1000s are used
to feed the product from the cooled steam kettles to the packaging
machine reservoir, and twin Maxi-Jet 1000s running back to back feed
the bottle filling injector heads, which are roughly 4 feet above the
reservoir tanks low level point. The viscosity of the AZ-NO3 product
is as high as it can get without the product turning into solid
crystals. We have had only one Maxi-Jet 1000 quit functioning in
roughly 3 years used for these applications.

From the list above I would guess that they change numbering and we
have model numbers 900 and 1200 consuming the same as old 750 and 1000.
So we can expect they did some improvements to the wet side of the
pump but the motor stayed the same with its max power consumption...
For what you are saying about 1000 all seems to apply to todays 1200
and whatever you say about 750 seems to apply to 900. Keep it in mind
when you be ready to order the next box of pumps for you :-))

Thank You, I will!

Now that you mention it, the new impellers for the Maxi-Jet's are
slightly larger than the old ones, so they do have a little less
bypass loss. This is good in one sense, but in another, it adds extra
work to the pumps in our applications. We continually stop the flow
of liquid while the bottles shift under the nozzles.

They go "on sale" from time to time and this is te time I try to order
them, but regular price at www.petsolutions.com is $18.99 for model 900
and $20.99 for each for model 1200 - www.drsfostersmith.com is even cheaper:
$15.99 for the smaller one and $18.69 for 1200. This is pretty cheap considering
you payed price 'by the case'. Hard competition benefits the custommer :-)

We probably could have purchased them at wholesale from one of our
vendors, but we like to support the retailers whenever possible. They
usually give us great quantity breaks on most things, while still
turning a little profit that they may have otherwise not seen.

As far as consumables and raw products, we have to buy those as
cheaply as possible to keep the eventual product cost at the consumer
level as low as possible.

Running in reef as a powerhead we do not need big pressure like
is needed for high head applications. So for powerhead is it better
to use 2 model 900 with little less flow but less than 1/2 the wattage
than one model 1200 with little more flow but twice the wattage.

Agreed, and it's also safer for the aquaria too! If one should fail,
at least the other will usually keep some water flowing, if they are
running back to back.

I had a sump in my basement that fed an aquarium in my living room.
This is where I was originally using the Hydrothruster II. Six
Maxi-Jets now handle this with ease!
But not after we had to deal with a priming issue with the first
attempt and changing the whole lift setup a couple of times to get it
humming the way we wanted it.
Basically meaning, start-up after a short power outage had to be
automatic and without human intervention.
In a sense, the system we used was akin to foot valves to prevent
backdrain of the system during an outage. Except they contain
standpipes in place of foot valves which added to much head pressure.

TTUL
Gary

"Aquatic-Care" verbositized:

Gary,

Manufacturers ratings are based on an unrestricted flow with little to
no resistance from the piping.
In other words, they use very large pipes for the size of the pump
outlet. Normally more than double the size of the pump outlet!

I would have guessed wrong. I thought that the pump would be tested with the
same size hose that the connection called for. This is misleading..!! Makes
it tough to choose a pump properly. I will stow this tid-bit of information
for my next installation.

I would venture to guess that a Maxi-Jet's flow rate at the given
height for their test is done using the Maxi-Jet output feeding
directly into a 1-1/2 inch to 2 inch standpipe.

I used all 1 inch tubing for most of my reef plumbing and it made a
BIG difference, especially on the feed from the sump up to the tank.
A 3/4 inch hose, after about 3 months of use, even with monthly
cleaning, really seems to slow down quite a lot.

If you check in the dishwasher section of your hardware store, you
will find a black neoprene reducer with two hose clamps to bring you
from the output size of the Maxi-Jet up to 1 inch PVC. I have not
found one yet that goes from the output size up to 1-1/4 or I would
have gone that route instead.

Another alternative is a rubber grommet placed into a PVC pipe cap on
the lower end of your vertical lift tube. This would be slid over the
Maxi-Jet's output fitting.

You've probably heard me say this before, but keep the current in your
tank with the natural flow of the water. In north America this is
counterclockwise, down under (Australia) it is clockwise.

TTUL
Gary