Tunze nano mod - Page 12

jacmyoung · #**276** 03/08/2007, 11:10 AM

Don't feel so bad, you did have all the fun didn't you?

This just proved what we were saying, they are the same.

BTW, my bad, how could I forget about this test SKydancer invented that gave us all the meaureable results. May I call it the flow test Method (FTM)

atvdave · #**277** 03/08/2007, 11:27 AM

OK.. I couldn't leave enough alone. I went ahead and cut 3 slits in the bottom of the tube to see if it would help. It did a bit.

It had a average flow of 1253.99 GPH

Still nothing to jump through hoops about.

dhnguyen · #**278** 03/08/2007, 11:29 AM

jacmyoung -

There will always be that clicking noise from the stopper when the prop correct itself. The trick is to use a softer more pliable material as a stopper. There is a reason why I suggested a rubber bolt or weed wacker wire instead

You basically just want something to give a little resistance to the propeller to stop it from spinning.

My current MJ mods are silent and with no damage to the props no matter how often they stop and restart.

jacmyoung · #**279** 03/08/2007, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by atvdave
OK.. I couldn't leave enough alone. I went ahead and cut 3 slits in the bottom of the tube to see if it would help. It did a bit.

It had a average flow of 1253.99 GPH

Still nothing to jump through hoops about.

Just as I suspected earlier, opening up the bottom may do more good in improving the flow since it is an area closest to the prop blades. As my high school science teacher once said water (or pretty much everything in nature) will take the path of the least resistance. Less travel means less resistance.

Your flow measure is higher than that of skydancer probably because you opened up the top too.

Another thing to consider is to buff out any rough edges when you do the basic mod. A smooth surface will reduce friction.

dhnguyen, thanks for that info.

skydancer · #**280** 03/08/2007, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jacmyoung

Yes to your other question, dhnguyen has posted a solution with pictures earlier.

No, I meant to say...
will YOUR stopper work without the WFM?

Probably not, since the stopper will be "too far" away from the prop... right?

mr pink floyd · #**281** 03/08/2007, 03:14 PM

sky, id say it probablty wouldnt work, because the prop would be pulled back into the pump before it makes contact

take dh's advice and put in some weed whacker wire across it

jacmyoung · #**282** 03/08/2007, 03:23 PM

Skydancer, In my case I had to do the WFM before I could do the TSM, because the stopper material was made of the cut off piece from my FBM.

But you were right, if the stopper is too far from the prop the prop may not even reach it then it will not work. The solution is do what dhnguyen suggested, drill a hole near the prop and stick some stopper piece in.

I want to caution everyone though I have not had a chance to try it, but I remember the reason my modded 6025 stopped self-correction was because most the time the prop was spinning in reverse, the prop unit shot out some but not all the way so the magnetic field was never lost, and the prop stayed in the reverse flow. It had nothing to do with the length of the nozzle though, as dhnguyen was trying to explain, because I had nothing in front of the prop to stop it from shooting out more, just that it stoppd on its own. And I had tried to explain why so in a previous post.

My suggestion is DO NOT do the stopper mod unless you have to, because as dhnguyen said, there will always be this clicking noise when the prop hits the stopper.

Without the stopper, the pump still makes a little clicking noise at startup, but not nearly as bad since the noise simply is from the prop unit being pushed into the hole hitting the end of the hole.

And if you must try dhnguyen's MJMOd stopper method, I would do a simple test first. You can use a piece of weed whacker cable and stick it in front of the prop through one of the slots you cut for the FBM, and see if it will do the trick reliably. I only fear there was something to it that Tunze did not do the MJMod type of stopper for 6045.

My stopper is very much the same concept as the Tunze 6045 stopper which is why I was confident enough and went ahead with the mod, of course trying to save you from turning blue was another consideration

keinreis · #**283** 03/08/2007, 07:59 PM

OK I flow tested my stock 6045's and got an average of 1034 after 10 tests. I don't think I will mod my pump though unless I buy a second cover as they are just fine in my tank as they are, but it is sure cool to see people take a design and work with it to make it way outpreform the original! If I do decide to purchase a second cover for testing purposes I will post results for all.

keinreis · #**284** 03/08/2007, 08:04 PM

BTW my test was done a bit differant. I filled the tub, placed pump in took a dry small trash bag, and secured it on the end of the pump so only water entering the bag was thru the pump. then switched it on for 10 sec. then sealed bag with my hand. then measured water. I would have done the bucket test, but with only a single bucket in the house, and I use it for water changes.

skydancer · #**285** 03/08/2007, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jacmyoung
Skydancer, In my case I had to do the WFM before I could do the TSM, because the stopper material was made of the cut off piece from my FBM.

But you were right, if the stopper is too far from the prop the prop may not even reach it then it will not work. The solution is do what dhnguyen suggested, drill a hole near the prop and stick some stopper piece in.

Yep, I agree with you...
I will change all my 6025s to the FBM. You answered my question. It has to do with the proximity of the stopper to the prop. ... and it looks smaller and more compact. I just ordered the Dremel workstation from Amazon, so when I get it I 'll change them all to the FBM + the jacmyoung stopper. You can't beat the thing (6025) putting out 1230 GPH for $60. I'm glad PA took my two 6045s back and exchanged them for the three 6025s.

My tank is 36 inches tall so at the top I have my SPS and I now have 4800GPH of directional flow... So cool...

jacmyoung · #**286** 03/08/2007, 11:59 PM

I just removed my 6025 after testing for 2 days, it was on a wavemaker on a 1 min cycle, no visible wear and tear on the prop, but I am not putting the stopper back on due to the clicking noise at the startup. If you only turn it on and off once or twice during the day or night that is fine, but on very short cycle it will be annoying.

But I clearly have seen the benefit of the pulsing flow. Now that we are a little spoiled, may be only a 6055 with a controller will make us happy.

Now mod a 6055, that takes some real guts.

By all means do the FBM but only do the TSM if your pump can not self-correct after the mod, otherwise you really don't need the stopper.

And BTW if this will be your first time to use the workstation, polish your skills with some disposable PVC pipes, I used those 1" thin wall pipes bought at the Home Depot which closely resembled the 6025 materials.

keinreis · #**287** 03/09/2007, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jacmyoung
I just removed my 6025 after testing for 2 days, it was on a wavemaker on a 1 min cycle, no visible wear and tear on the prop, but I am not putting the stopper back on due to the clicking noise at the startup. If you only turn it on and off once or twice during the day or night that is fine, but on very short cycle it will be annoying.

But I clearly have seen the benefit of the pulsing flow. Now that we are a little spoiled, may be only a 6055 with a controller will make us happy.

Now mod a 6055, that takes some real guts.

By all means do the FBM but only do the TSM if your pump can not self-correct after the mod, otherwise you really don't need the stopper.

And BTW if this will be your first time to use the workstation, polish your skills with some disposable PVC pipes, I used those 1" thin wall pipes bought at the Home Depot which closely resembled the 6025 materials.

a 6055 mod will be some easy stuff. DC motor means you can hack away all you would like, and never have to wory about reverse flow at all!

jacmyoung · #**288** 03/09/2007, 08:36 AM

You are right, no need for a stopper on the 6055. By my calculation using the flow improvement numbers we have, a 6055 with the full blast mod will get a flow from 360gph to 2,000gph. The cost of a 6055 plus a controller is about the same as buying three 6025s and a wavemaker.

If you haven't bought any nanos yet, it is something to consider.

GSMguy · #**289** 03/09/2007, 09:04 AM

i have my preorder in on 6055 but i cant imagine needing more flow from it in a 36inch tank

skydancer · #**290** 03/09/2007, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jacmyoung
You are right, no need for a stopper on the 6055. By my calculation using the flow improvement numbers we have, a 6055 with the full blast mod will get a flow from 360gph to 2,000gph. The cost of a 6055 plus a controller is about the same as buying three 6025s and a wavemaker.

If you haven't bought any nanos yet, it is something to consider.

Quick question on the wavemaker you use. Is it controlling the nanos? I own an ACIII PRO from Neptune and they said they'll have a wavemaker available for the Tunzes also. I'm wondering if it 'll be for AC or DC nanos?

What make and model wavemaker do you use for your 6025s?

jacmyoung · #**291** 03/09/2007, 12:17 PM

This guy: http://www.marinedepot.com/md_viewIt...product=AS4111

Do you have a link to your wavemaker? The Seio controller is used on the hydor pumps and MJMod pumps now, I don't know if the Tunze nanos can work too or not.

rufio173 · #**292** 03/09/2007, 10:28 PM

I just did this mod... although I didn't really cut out the whole inner sheath. I just dremeled out some large holes in the inner sheath and also dremeled out some large slats on the underside of the front cover and I'm highly, highly impressed!

I'm probably getting close to 1,000 gph or more now with this simple mod. It certainly is quite impressive. With the way that I did the mod, I don't think I'll need a prop stop since the inner sheath is still somewhat intact for the purposes of keeping the prop in line so it can spin correctly if it spins in reverse.

Although, I am a little ticked because I broke two of those crappy little tabs that holds the C clamp onto the magnet. Those things are brittle and very weak so be careful with them. To get the thing mounted again, I needed to rubber band the C clamp to the magnet mount.

This mod is definitely worth it if you've got a 6025. I would skip paying Tunze 90 bucks for a 6045 and just do this mod on the 6025 for roughly the same price and same performance.

Cheers,
John

skydancer · #**293** 03/09/2007, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jacmyoung
Do you have a link to your wavemaker?

What I have is a reef computer:
http://neptunesys.com/aquaController3Pro.htm

It has a basic wavemaker function that can turn a pump either ON or OFF for a certain period of time. If you put 2 or 4 pumps facing each other you get the "wave" function. But it can not adjust the speed of the AC motor.

Check out the thread below...
Neptune is getting ready to introduce a wavemaker... I hope it is for the AC nanostream...
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...91#post9440191

jacmyoung · #**294** 03/10/2007, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhnguyen
Octura 1435. You will probabbly need to trim it down to gte the 6025 to spin it reliably though.

It is more aggressively pitched than the stock nano's prop.

Is there any chance you can send one of those props my way or do you plan to try it on a 6025 yourself?

jacmyoung · #**295** 03/10/2007, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhnguyen
Octura 1435. You will probabbly need to trim it down to gte the 6025 to spin it reliably though.

It is more aggressively pitched than the stock nano's prop.

Well silly me I have one Octura 1435 left from the MJ mod, did not even bother to check if it was a 1435 because I compared it to the 6025 prop saw no difference in diameter and pitch, put it on by the feel of my hand no difference in flow. Since you said a 1435 had higher pitch. It isn't.

Which one will be the next up?

jacmyoung · #**296** 03/14/2007, 08:30 AM

I finally solved the problem of not able to self-correct after the mods. I sanded down the back of the prop blades to reduce the weight of the prop, apparently it did not take much weight loss to allow the prop to shoot further out of the socket and complete the corrective action.

The only remaining issue with one of my pumps is I cut the nozzle back too much during the wide flow mod, the prop would hit the screen and stop in its own track so I left this pump on continuously, the other pump will be put on a 30sec cycle since I believe my tank can benefit greatly from the pulsing flow. And I will be able to do the long term endurance test too

The clicking noise from self correction is more tolerable than that from the stopper.

I no longer recommend the wide flow mod as a result, unless you really desire the wide flow pattern, then cut the nozzle back gradually, make sure it is not too short to the point the prop can be stuck in a permanent reverse spin. Of course if you run the pump continuously it will not be an issue.

skydancer · #**297** 03/14/2007, 09:11 AM

So let's recap...

Recommended:
1) The SFM, with the slight sanding down the back of the propeller. Should give us 1111 GPH, and auto self correction.

2) The FBM, with the slight sanding down the back of the propeller. Should give 1230+ GPH, and auto self correction

Not recommended:
The WFM, and the Jacmyoung stopper...

Is it correct?

Also, did the prop sanding down mod correct the spin 100% of the time like the jacmyoung stopper mod?

jacmyoung · #**298** 03/14/2007, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by skydancer
So let's recap...

Recommended:
1) The SFM, with the slight sanding down the back of the propeller. Should give us 1111 GPH, and auto self correction.

2) The FBM, with the slight sanding down the back of the propeller. Should give 1230+ GPH, and auto self correction

Not recommended:
The WFM, and the Jacmyoung stopper...

Is it correct?

Also, did the prop sanding down mod correct the spin 100% of the time like the jacmyoung stopper mod?

All correct except the term "jamcyoung stopper" give people the impression I am out of control

Let's just call it TSM.

Sanding down the back of the blades should be slow, just sand it down enough to achieve the auto correction, don't over do it. Your pump may not even need this mod if it continues to self-correct after all the mods. I guess we can call the latest mod SDM?

jpndave · #**299** 03/14/2007, 12:01 PM

What is the problem with the Jacmyoung stopper? Is it just noise? His post and mod was one of the cleanest I have seen.

jacmyoung · #**300** 03/14/2007, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jpndave
What is the problem with the Jacmyoung stopper? Is it just noise? His post and mod was one of the cleanest I have seen.

Yes after the stopper mod I put my 6025 on a 30sec cycle on/off "endurance test" for two days, it withstood the test without any sign of wear and tear, except that the clicking noise at each startup became very annoying. The noise caused by the stopper is more pronounced than the 6025 self-correction noise. If you don't put the pump on a short cycle timer/wavemaker it should be fine, but the sound at every minute was something else.

Based on our resident MJMod expert, the stopper noise can not be eliminated, it is part of the deal.