For this particular application, how deep you place the intake suction hose will have no affect on the energy used. The additional drag of the pipe will lower the pressure of suction side however. It may modestly reduce the amount water that will be pumped (so it takes more energy per unit water pumped ... IOWs it would be a little less efficient). If the pump is above the water surface it will pull a vacuum (relative to ambient air pressure) at the pump suction inlet. The limit is the ambient head of air pressure which is ~33 ft. But say it is 2 ft above the pond's surface ... then the vacuum will be 2ft + the frictional pressure drop from the intake of the suction hose to the intake of the pump. IOWs the gravity below the pond's surface doesn't matter because the gradient exist there under static conditions. Gravity comes into play lifting the water above the ponds surface only.

The energy consumed is proportional to the product of mass flow and the (difference of the head pressure at the outlet and the suction pressure at the inlet). Generally speaking, pumps have very low mass flow rates compared to low head systems like paddlewheels and aeration. IOWs, for a given amount of energy, you can move much more water with aeration or a paddlewheel than you can with a pump. For the purpose of aeration, I do think that volume of the flow is very important. The fountain, for the energy used, will not contribute nearly as much to DO as aeration would. I would definitely try to negotiate with the Mrs. for the aeration.

Last edited by jpsdad; 01/06/24 04:19 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers