|
Forums36
Topics40,964
Posts558,008
Members18,506
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
9 members (Shorthose, Sunil, anthropic, Boondoggle, canyoncreek, Dave Davidson1, esshup, bmicek, Don Kennedy),
1,096
guests, and
169
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,151 Likes: 491
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Lunker
|
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Lunker
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,151 Likes: 491 |
Vertex has their way of doing the membrane spacing. They more than any other Aeration company except maybe Aquatic Ecosystems Pentair have done fairly extensive underwater diffuser testing. Vertex after testing probably decided that two separate rising water columns that merge together at a opportune time (depth) results in optimum flow. My concern is how much does water depth variable affect all this standard spacing rationale?
Evidently Vertex concluded the wider separation of disks suits their sales philosophy. I do it the way my knowledge and common sense about the whole aeration concept suggests. The difference between the two concepts may not end up being a mathematically significant difference. I have never heard a good reason from anyone why wider spacing of diffusers is most beneficial to achieve the most efficient upwelling flow. Too little published good underwater testing has been done for the topic. I have yet to figure out an easy way to accurately measure the upwelling flow of a diffuser assembly. Although I have done dye testing with diffusers.
Watch some aeration underwater bubble patterns and plumes of various membrane disk arrangements. Then you decide for yourself.
Last edited by Bill Cody; 01/10/20 07:35 PM.
aka Pond Doctor & Dr. Perca Read Pond Boss Magazine - America's Journal of Pond Management
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|
|