- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 4,684
- Reaction score
- 3,762
- Hardiness Zone
- 5b
- Country
No, I haven't because I don't have much floating debris as what is stirred up by the waterfall and stream and fish. A skimmer isn't going to get that, right? I noticed an increase in my inability to see the bottom as the years have gone by and the fish have gotten larger. And as the bog has clogged. Currently, I can see the bottom again which tells me the bog is at least being semi-productive again. What kind of water pressure numbers do you think there will be on the new drum filter? Is there a way to calculate this? I could then do some research/call and ask if the manufacturer has such tested limits.Head is measured from water surface to highest elevation, so you really only have 3 feet of head. The base flow ratings given for most pumps is for 5 feet of head, so other than friction loss, you should not be losing that much flow.
What you are thinking of doing is workable IF the modified drum filter will handle the pressure generated by your pump.
I guess what I am saying is that by pressurizing this module you are only adding to the total time that you will devote to maintenance (cleaning/backflushing).
Have you considered the idea of retrofitting a skimmer?
And yeah, I know I'll now have an additional pond chore but after cleaning out the gravel in the bog, it doesn't seem so bad to clean a filter anymore. That's why I want to have easy access to the pads. I tried something similar last summer whereby I added another outlet from the waterfall to flow over some cotton batting. I got more debris than I expected and had to clean them, of course. But that is located by the waterfall where access is far from 'easy'. I'm trying to do similar with your prompting re mech filter, but closer to the bog and much easier to maneuver.
Thanks, Meyer.
Michael