Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

Stu,

I am going to run my GBs CFto give the rocks and bacteria the most amount of "wet" time to do their thing. Plus no worrying about siphons. At a future time I could always drop a bell on. The drains lines were shaped to be able to use siphons. Traditional L. As to why not do away with the RFF totally. I do not have enough GB to sustain proper filtration for any lenght of time. And for the reason that I was going to go mostly DWC. I figured and I could be wrong on this but If I placed a RFF or Seive filter inline between the FT and GB I could reduce the load on the GBs. And send the rest to a MT. In which I am learning how to use off from Cookie and Swede. I also want to put a RFF or seive filter inline between my top drain and my DWCs to collect the stuff that was still suspended in the FT, basically a polisher. With its waste going to the MT as well. As my FT is basically built as a giant swirl filter.

Cookie,

Yes I agree that the screen filters use enegry to spin the screen. I figured that I could pretty easliy DIY one to get around the large investment portion. The moving parts I could only reduce so much. So when I ran into a seive screen the idea was just to replace the moving screen filter with a ss seive screen. No more moving parts, no energy to move them, and no parts to break. Plus I believe the stainless would outlast the screen material. Since I would need less of it the cost would be about the same. Then good old Swede as he always seems to do. Just so happened to have a video of what was in my head. Except my barrel was going to be cut in half sideways. I am not trying to make the system overly complex. Maybe simplifying complex corperate type machinery for our use. As I work in a factory and I know their designs are about one thing. Efficency, and not just efficency, cost efficeint also. I think of them as my first line research and development. Because frankly, I don'tn have as much money to throw at getting out the kinks as they do. Any almost anything they can build a DIYer can build cheaper. Maybe not as pretty or exactly as efficient but close. I am just triyng to get the system the farthest up the design trail as I can get it on the first go aroud. Because we both know redesigning just means money wasted the first time.

Swede,

I don't know how you do it. I think you are hard wired into the net. Not once have I seen a question asked that you do not immediatly have a link for. That was almost exactly what I had in my head. The latest design (out of many) this week Only I though of running it in a half barrel sideways to get more surface area so that I could run a smaller micron screen. Now I have a hundred questions for you. Like what flow rate are you able to put through it. Have you seen any negatives to this over a RFF? I love the fiter sock Idea. Would yo do it the same if hooked to an AP system? More to come

This is the contradictory opinion that has and is leading to AP system becoming more and more complicated. It is an opinion that in my opinion is based upon intuition and apparent common sense and GBs clogging in systems where they have been undersized. It is not an opinion based upon the evidence that we have from systems that have been designed and operated according to the 2:1 guideline first promoted by Tom Sp. and then by Joel here at BYAP.

Now I'll admit we don't know how long GBs can keep processing solids for but we have systems on this forum that are not showing any signs of clogging coming up to 10 years of continuous operation. Given that they are not showing any signs of clogging we could easily conservatively expect them to run for 50% longer trouble free.

Using RAS style filters in AP can and does have a place for certain applications, people and situations but those legitimate reasons for using RAS style filters do not include the reason that GBS are doomed to clog.

If you where going to say that you shouldn't use GBS because it's possible to overload them and clog them then why wouldn't you use the same logic to say that you shouldn't use any other filter? All filters indeed all components can have this argument used against them because they are all possible to overload.

What GBS need to do their thing is more oxygen than water. Yes the media needs to stay wet but almost all the media will stay wet when you run the flood and drain cycle with the ranges that you commonly see employed on the forum. It is my belief that the reason my constant flood bed is not performing well is because the waste is being depleted of oxygen about 3m down its 1m length. I believe that other people have not seen a decrease in performance of their constantly flooded beds relative to their flood and drain beds because they arev small enough to not get this effect.


Yes siphons can cause problems but so can filters
. Everything had its pros and cons.

Somthing like this gravity fed fro FT

You get better separation with a curved screen rather than a straight one. I don't know whether you care or not
in RAS you would care because it reduces water loss.

Just to make sure I understand 2:1 refers to volume of growbed:ft and entirely based on the GB acting as a biofilter. And in a simple system without DWC, towers, nutrient film etc that change the basic requirements. Also 2:1 is the minimum meaning that 3:1 or better would only mean additional filtration and more plants until at some point the nutrients are saturated. My guess is that point of saturation is well past 6:1 or maybe even higher depending on the requirements of the plants grown.

A lot of this is important to mention because simplicity is important for a "new to AP guy" like myself to first establish a working system before I get too radical about reinventing the wheel.


Would a CF system (or maybe even a DWC) have entirely different microbial communities then a media bed that is "dry" for half the day? From what I understand each of us may have entirely different microbes and also that they are pretty volatile to temperature aeration etc?

Or am I wrong to assume the dry time is for the microbes to break down solids. But instead its for the plants to uptake nutrients?

Floridafishin,
I have not built one yet. The link added "my pond filter" making it sound like it was my filter. It is not. [WINKING FACE]
I have pondered making one like that but for now I have changed direction towards dual outflow from fish tank with RFF in the side loop with lower flow.
I am working on this currently and think it will be the best solution for me.
Once I have it functioning 100% I can let you know how I like it.
Did a flow test this morning without gluing anything, leaked all over the place lol.
Fyi don't look at my mineralization thread as anything else but experimentation. I am not a pro and don't want to come across that way either. The thread was simply a way for me to share my experience and learn with the help of others contributing to the thread. I am also redoing my MT setup to hopefully work better. Will post about that as well once it's done.

Keep tinkering and share your filter builds here. Cheers!

Stu,

I am currently way under the 2:1 ratio. And it will be a long time before I could afford enough rock to get me to that point. That is why I was looking for alternatives. Currently 1400gal FT to 200gal GB. It does not seem like a fight my GBs could win. And I do care ( about the curve) as all information that I can gleam of people that actually know. The less wasted time, money, and energy there will be. Thank you for your help.

Merry Christmas everybody!

Swede,

The banter between you and Cookie on your experiments have put you 2 in a class of your own in the MT regard. No one else is getting the results you guys are at the moment. Unless I missed something else on the net today.

Lol.. Thanks

tja jag tror tyskarna e betre ingenjorer men svea e pa andra plats

Haha..stämmer nog rätt bra. [WINKING FACE]