2 replies to this topic

[nc0gnet0]

I was about to post this to another thread then thought it best to open another thread for discussion and possibly a little debate (non-heated please).

There exist a notion that it takes X amount of time for the water to remain in the filter in order for the ammonia level to be effectively erradicated. Too much flow and the bio-filter losses its effiency. While I can see where in cases of extremes too much flow would be bad, and likewise too little flow would be even worse, I think they maybe a little more wiggle room on the high end than most here would suggest.

For instance if you double your flow rate and the result is a 50% reduction in ammonia removal, you have double your flow rate with a net result that would be equal in terms of total ammonia removed per hour..........

I will stop here and let others comment.

[DrDave]

The math, to me is sound. Twice the time vrs half the flow. In my case it would remove more solids to flow twice as much.

What I know is the 1150 GPH does fine with 1500 gallon pond through my 55 gallon Doc filter. Water is clear, nitrates and nitrites at zero.

Edited by DrDave, 03 November 2009 - 02:12 AM.

[nc0gnet0]

I guess that is what I was alluding to, twice the flow would give you more mechanical filtration and the same ammonia/nitrate removal. Furthermore, the good bacteria does not only exist within the bio-filter but exist pretty much on every surface of the pond....plants/rocks/pots etc.