Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

I have been puzzling for months how to have a grid free system. Using pumps in a large system requires a LOT of electricity and that can lead to pretty expensive PV or wind solutions. If the only electric requirement were air ('nother GREAT idea just hit me!!... watch this...) then the solar/wind/storage requirement goes down considerably...

BUT, what if the whole system could be run w/o electricity??

No drawing yet, but would love input from the many 'out of the box' thinkers on this forum!

Here's the problem: The larger the system, the higher the volume of water that has to be moved from ST to FT and back... solution to this point: electric pumps.

What if we could move the water without a pump, but either, purely mechanically, and no, not buckets, or with a small motor and mechanical advantage??

The brainstorm I had a while ago that I want critiqued: What if the FT and ST were on a seesaw with the GBs at the height of the fulcrum?? Effectively, BOTH FT and ST could be FTs with a lower stocking density (and a depth great enough that only half rises above the GBs) and the seesaw simply shifted once per hour to run the water from one end to the other through the GBs??

A large system would require some heavy steel and a serious concrete pier to mount it on, but the balance could be moved with a serious set of gears and a small high torque motor or a hand crank... A lever on the seesaw, or a massive steel/concrete weight on a ball screw could provide mechanical advantage to move the heavy FT seesaw from one side to the other...

Am I nuts? Please, all thoughts, ideas, improvements, etc...


OH!! The air idea... A bladder/bellows under each end of the seesaw with a one way valve could also force air into a tank that feeds stones in each FT...

Okay, fire away!!

CB

even a much smaller electric pump using water as the counter weight... Hmmm...

Provided a pump is close to 100 percent efficient there is no advantage to be gained from lifting the water any other way if you are going to it with electricity. A watt is the measure of doing the work of (in this case) lifting a weight of water a certain height in a certain time - it does not matter how it is done it requires the same power.
In this case you are also lifting the tank and framing etc. so it should be less efficient.
There is no free lunch here
John

Hmmm...

Okay, I see what you are saying, but I'm not convinced it applies...

If the tanks and beam they are on are equal weight on each side, then their net effect should be zero. I'm no engineer, but it seems if they balance, the tanks and substructure are then negligible.

Additionally, where a pump lifts from the ST to the FT (in my CHIFT PIST system) with no mechanical advantage, wouldn't the lever arm of the seesaw/teeter totter offer mechanical advantage that is significant? Seems in a really tough situation a hand operated hydraulic jack could do the job... Just have to do it multiple times a day...

Time to download sketchup and try a drawing to better show what I am thinking...

CB

Ya - your nuts!

But arn't we all?

But seriously - in my mind I have had similar thoughts, but mine were more based on water displacement. When a bladder in a body of water is inflated it will raise the level of the water (think CHIFT). Or even if a mass is lowered into the water it would also cause overflow.

Now - if that same body of water is under pressure in a sealed tank and the only outlet happens to be a 1 inch pipe headed backup to the FT, then perhaps there is a no pumps solution. I have not thought about it much more then that though. As mentioned earlier, a watt is just a measure of work and everything I have considered still needed electrical input.

Personally I think solar is the best bet for grid-free.

Mark

Johnh is right you still have to lift the water the same distance and therefore use the same watts. In your seesaw idea the tank that needs to be lifted would be heavier than the counter balance tank as it has more water and unlike just pumping the water in a normal system you also have to lift the weight of the tank and fish therefore decreasing the efficency of the system.

The idea in general is pure genius, but is only more efficent when no electricity is used. I like the idea of using geared wheels on a hand crank to mechanically elevate the tanks alternatively every hour this would be very efficient but unlikely to be a realistic solution in this day and age.

How about a wind mill to turn the geared crank, if you get a period with no wind you could take over and do it by hand.

I love the way you think, if nobody thought outside the box and questioned the establishment we would never advance as a society.

Keep up the good work.

Definitely, the same work is required to lift the water by see-saw or by pump.
There is no free lunch ANYWHERE.
However, that said - Your idea could work if it changed the job suitably such that a non - electric source could power it.

Take a small solar pump for example. Low pressure, ok flow - rather unimpressive. Or a windmill, decent flow, ok pressure intermittant flow.
However, running 100% of the time, pumping to a tank on your roof, you'd have a fair amount fo potential energy up there. This can then be used (independant of the FT water if you like) with an expesive automated valve to weight down one side of your see-saw every hour.

there are other ways of creating potential too... thermosiphons, pressure change etc...
If your system was small enough, it could be wind up. Jump on an excercise bike for an hour every morning, and that'll do it. Heaps of options. You don't necessarily have to be there once every hour to operate it by hand.

hmmm - what if the seesaw idea was combined with water displacement??? Paint drawing is crude but gets the idea accross.

Very little power would be needed to toggle.

Time to buy a donkey?? LOL!! (overkill actually, but is an example of finding a non-electric means of making the system work for a third-world or very remote type of application.)

DV... that is a terrific idea. Draining the GB might be a trick, but that is interesting.

Keep the ideas coming and let's think! The goal is minimal or no electric input.

CB

Just so you know, I believe I've seen most of these Ideas on here somewhere already. Seems to come up about every year or so.

I seem to recall suggesting a big header tank at the top of a hill and a rope windmill pump to move the water from sump up to the top.

Other ideas. If you are by a river, you would use a paddle wheel to turn a spiral pump to move the water from the sump up to the header tank.

The above is very similar to Stuart Chignel's system. although he uses a pump, he has the GBs on the same level as the FT, and lifts a hose in and out of the ft to equalise into the GB. then it drains to a sump and is pumped back.

DV - redraw your pick so that the grey box is the GB.
then you just dunk the GB once an hour, and allow it to drain.
then you just need to be able to stop it half way for the non watering periods and voilla.
Putting a FT in the middle would help not squash the fishies.

CB - Donkey's require food, they're as bad as electricity (excepting electricity doesn't grow on trees )

Donkeys grow on trees??? I need a donkey tree!

perhaps it should read:
CB - Donkey's require food, and food's as bad as electricity (excepting electricity doesn't grow on trees )

LOL! Donkeys and electricity!

KP, first thing I thought when I saw the drawing was replacing the displacement weights with the GBs... solves the GB draining problem, however the weight with water v. drained would be a significant difference. I like the idea of the FT in the middle..

If the Egyptians could build pyramids, surely we can figure this out...

CB

Yep, the Egyptians built pyramids, they used lots of labor to do it.

You can have an AP system without electricity but then you need labor to run it.

I doubt you are going to make an automated Aquaponics system that will run without electricity.