chimera Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostface Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 suphew the korallin reactors use ther same pump to circulate and draw water in, does it not make sense that if its trying to force more in than comes out then pressure is created inside the chamber? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 seems logical to me too ghostface,... however to be fair water dynamics are one of those weird arse sciences where things dont always make sense. im basing my arguments on what you just said as well as watching mine work more than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Posted March 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Ah...Ok, yeah, if it's being force fed by a pump with the outlet restricted it would be pressurized a little bit. Still only be a couple PSI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetskisteve Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Its not being force fed/ one drop a second is hardly force? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Its not being force fed/ one drop a second is hardly force? 1 drip per second is the output. the lph being sucked in by the pump is whatever a eheim 1048 can suck through a slightly bigger than airline tube but yeah ira, a very low pressure but some form of pressure nonetheless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 The motion of the water is the cause of the pressure. I had this problem when I was designing my single chamber reactors. Turn the pump off and you should notice a slight drop in the drip rate. I now use a two chamber as I found the drip rate could be controlled more easilly because the second chamber was only on the drip cycle on the way out. This also help to use up any left over Co2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 The motion of the water is the cause of the pressure yup, agreed. this is definately a form of pressure too. Turn the pump off and you should notice a slight drop in the drip rate but then is that because of pump creating water motion or the pump drawing in the water,... or both. i would suggest both. i actually noticed last night, when fine tuning the reactor (and incidentally breaking the piece of plumbing) that water squirted about 6" in the air when it broke. a little more pressure than i had anticipated. incidentally the super glued piece broke again too :evil: dremeling it out and adding a new piece in looks to be my only option Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Quote: The motion of the water is the cause of the pressure yup, agreed. this is definately a form of pressure too. This is way I have given up trying to explain things, not because you guys are right. Motion and pressure are two completely different things, there are no "forms of pressure" in this context. The amount of force acting (pushing) on a unit of area. Usually expressed in pounds per square inch (psi). www.wmwd.com/terminology.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 :roll: you're starting to sound like wasps best friend suphew, stay on topic, this has nothing to do with our original discussion. if you want to be pedantic about it, you cant have pressure without motion (and if you are going to argue that further, then at a minimum motion at a molecular level) one persons terminology maybe different than anothers so its the point that comes across thats important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Thats all very well but you are not taking into consideration the physical changes that the water goes through when the impeller chews the hell out of it. It expands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Surely not... "Fluid pressure can be in an enclosed container or due to gravity or motion." http://www.school-for-champions.com/science/fluidpressure.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 How can I be off topic I was responding to your post directly before mine, I even quoted it??? I stopped responding ages ago because it was getting off topic and was pointless because you were making up crazy idea's with no base in fact to try and make yourself correct, but I just couldn't let that last one go, my mistake I guess. pressure has nothing to do with motion (unless your talking at a molecular level which we aren't). Take a spray can, I think you would agree that inside it is under pressure?? So where is all this motion you are talking about?? Is there only pressure in there when you move the can?? Maybe the pressure magically arrives when the motion of your finger pushes open the valve?? What about your car tyre is there only pressure in there when the wheels are turning?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 are we talking about air pressure now? or are we staying on liquids? have you taken the water out of your tank? should i bother quoting some more from the site above? "The weight of a fluid can exert a pressure on anything underneath it. Also, the relative movement of a liquid or gas can apply a pressure" i give up. we are starting to sound like layton and wasp and other than that, this discussion has been done to death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Again you have tried to change things to make yourself correct. This posting was about turning a fluid reactor into a cal reactor, you stated that it might not work because the container would be under pressure and therefore leak, now you are talking about the water moving over the media, this is quite true if you are looking at a single point on the media, and on the other side of peice of media will be a low pressure because as I'm sure you know "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" so this isn't actually very relivent to the out come anyway, again because it is a balanced closed loop. But this has nothing to do with putting the container under pressure which is WHAT THIS POST IS ABOUT. The reason for talking about gases was to make a single point in terms you could understand, i.e. that movement is not a requirement of and has nothing to do with movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Posted March 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Both of you shut up and get back to thinking of things I could do with my reactors! :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 you stated that it might not work because the container would be under pressure and therefore leak really? oh please find where i said that and quote me. i really want to know where i said that. But this has nothing to do with putting the container under pressure which is WHAT THIS POST IS ABOUT no, in fact the post is about turning a fluid reactor into a cal reactor, not sure why you have just contradicted yourself. makes me wonder who is confused here. anyways, this is my last post on the subject. i dont mind the discussions, but buggered if im going to be misquoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Chim calcium reactors work better under pressure i believe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 you stated that i said it might not work because the container would be under pressure and therefore leak 1. i did not say it would not work, i said "calcium reactors work better under pressure i believe" 2. i did not say it would leak, where did that come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 you implied it and when IRA made the following statement you made no comment. I give up now, you have reduced this to trying to pick little holes that are not relevent. "I'd thought of the calcium reactor idea. They're pretty well sealed, Chim. I'm not sure they'd handle massive amounts of pressure, but I think they should probably hold maybe 10 PSI." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 I give up now, you have reduced this to trying to pick little holes that are not relevent stop trying to make excuses. LAME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Im not even going to lower myself to your level, any one who reads this post wil be able to decide for themselves who is being lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 :lol: quite clearly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Hey, Both of you, out of my thread! :bounce: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.