If Reeftec and Tunze had a baby - Page 3

vic8361 · #51 11/30/2002, 09:19 AM

Thanks Mustang I am going to give it a shot. When I have every thing I need to get started I will be asking manny more questions I bet.

ReefVan · #52 11/30/2002, 09:51 AM

Mustang:

What do think of this design? Same as yours except stacked vertically. Also taken care of the wobbly shaft syndrome with a strut support at prop side of shaft.

Will maybe build one next week and throw it in the test bin with the Sea-Squirrel.

See attached...

ReefVan · #53 11/30/2002, 10:29 AM

O.K, after 5 times of trying to outsmart that BBS server that didn't post the image the 1st time, try this link to the image on my site.

http://pages.infinit.net/lambertv/im...ftunze_van.jpg

ReefVan · #54 11/30/2002, 10:59 AM

For those of you wanting to know which stainless steel would be the best for your DIY ReefTunze follow this link to this compatibility table.

http://www.eaa1000.av.org/technicl/c...n/galvanic.htm

Mustang · #55 11/30/2002, 11:29 AM

Reefvan, I think yours would work fine. The only problem you may have is it may suck air from the surface

I know mine is 6" down and every so often it will grab some air fron the surface

So you may find you have to put it farther down.

BTW I really like you DIY Sea-Squirrel great job
If you ever have any extra time and want to build a couple extras......... LOL

mgk65 · #56 11/30/2002, 11:45 AM

Reefvan:

Here's your picture:

mgk

DeathWish302 · #57 11/30/2002, 12:10 PM

Can anybody besides Mustang, give their experience with a Reeftec in a 55 or similar sized box? I was really pumped about this and the sea-squirrel, but looks like now only the furry, fun-loving, squirrel (uh.... I always forget that silent emphasis) is in my future.
Anyway, any input for someone looking to use one of these on a SMALL tank would be appreciated. What do you think the cut-off would be for tank volume?

TIA,
DW302

ReefVan · #58 11/30/2002, 01:00 PM

Thanks for the good tips and input Mustang

As for DW302, I believe if you go with a design similar to what I posted, and that mgk65 graciously re-posted so we all could see it properly, that you could put whatever type of motor you wished.

Probably a stepper motor would be the best solution, you could use a speed control that way or soft-start if you wished. That way you could set the flow to match the tank size and not the reverse by using a speed control. Do as Mustang stated, move the intake grill down lower to avoid sucking air, resulting in a awesome DIY ReefTunze. Modify as required and re-post your results.

Also hobby shops have smaller props so you could try that as well to reduce the excessflow. In any case I believe that someone here on Reef Central can refine this design and come up with a better mousetrap, I'm sure they can!

From what I've seen in the past few weeks in DIY, the brains are really cooking out there and some great ideas are being put forward on this forum. Keep up the good work everyone!

Fredfish · #59 11/30/2002, 01:23 PM

Re: smaller squirrel for a smaller tank

Anybody know what RPM the PE1 and PE2 run at?

This would give us folks with smaller tanks a base to start from. I could then go to my local surplus store and pick out motors by RPM.

Fred

mgk65 · #60 11/30/2002, 01:57 PM

Another suggestion for altering the force of the pump is to put the pump on a fan control. There's some posts here and on the www.reeftec.com site about fishpoo successfully using one to slow down the pump.

I'm going to try that out. I have a ReefTec coming, hopefully this week.

From fishpoo:
it's Lutron Fan Control-Fully variable. Part No. FS-5FH-IV. Bottom left of package states Fan- 5 AMP maximum. Sells for $6 at HD. Look in the department with ceiling fans and controls.

mgk

barebottoms · #61 11/30/2002, 03:56 PM

ReefVan turned me to this thread. It seems that you guys are looking for a means of speed control? You can have the holy grail with pulse with modulation. Pick a DC coil type motor to drive your pro/im-pellor, set your pulse width to approx. the full start delay of the motor, put in your delay and repeat the cycle.

Not only will you be controlling the speed this way, you'll also get the added benefit of a wave like pulse propagating through your tank.

barebottoms · #62 11/30/2002, 04:03 PM

Reading backwards here

As for the shaft, how about carbon fiber. Its linearly strong, and flexible.

They use them in RC heli's and planes a lot.

http://www.microrc.com/WMotors.htm

nematode · #63 12/01/2002, 10:30 AM

putting a prop in front of an elbow will already reduce the flow substantially. Any back pressure at all on these things greatly reduces output.

you might consider making a DIY reeftec and putting and elbow in front of it and seeing what happens.

Sanjay
the info on the cal200 comes from the reeftec website where JC stated that he has been testing this pump. I am pretty sure it is direct drive.

H20ENG · #64 12/01/2002, 02:41 PM

Hi all,
You guys have been in my head and I didn't feel a thing!
Good designs, here. I was thinking of using a sweep 90- less flow resistance, and having the suction at the bottom of the 90 to avoid air entrainment.
Fredfish, I think the sweep 90 may have about the same friction loss as a 45. I don't have the tables in front of me. 45 would be smaller, but harder to build, I think.
I like the idea of the smaller props. I think reliability and efficiency would be lost by the gear train, I was thinking direct drive with a shaft. Probably just nylon rod. Carbon fiber would be sweet, but maybe unnecessary. Definately need a bushing for the shaft at the end.
Nematode, How much does an elbow reduce the flow?
A "real" propeller pumps' prop looks more like a jet ski impeller than these model props. Very close wall tolerances in some models. Maybe we should look for model jet drives. Do these exist? Could probably get higher head this way, too.
Van, Thanks for the galvanic corrsion link, and the drawing.
I love being part of the RC Think Tank!
We'll get this thing licked, yet.
Chris

H20ENG · #65 12/01/2002, 03:14 PM

OK, just did a search for RC jet drives, and what a bunch of nice machines! Check out the crazies at shark-racing.com!
I emailed these guys for some info on jet impellers. Hope they respond.
I read a couple of threads saying props were much more efficient for boats .
More info, more info.
Chris

BOTR · #66 12/01/2002, 05:52 PM

Found a site with boat props, and it says they can custom make them to your specs. Not sure what matieral they use but it may be worth a shot.
Props Here!

ReefVan · #67 12/01/2002, 08:22 PM

Quote:

jet drives are incredibly inefficient as compared to propellers. They require horsepower and fuel too no end to match propeller efficiency...

I think we all might find this thread interesting...
http://www.rcuniverse.com/rcarchive/43/2002/05/4/30535

Mmmm, food for thought.

nematode · #68 12/02/2002, 09:53 AM

Its really difficult to measure the flow of the devices, cause if you put anything in front to constrictand capture the flow ( and hence cause backpressure, the flow seems to reduce substantially).
So I don't really know. But even a 6 inch chuck of 2.5 inch tubing Two 2" couplers taped together, seems to lower flow to my eye ( though this is purely from my impression, not from any quantitative measurements. I'd certainly use a sweep rather than a sharp elbow to try this.

H20ENG · #69 12/02/2002, 06:25 PM

Nem, Thanks for the update.
I used to work at a large water treatment plant, and am trying to get in touch with some old buddies to check out the real deals parts.

ReefVan · #70 12/03/2002, 12:23 PM

For those of you who are interested, here is a table with Saltwater compatible materials and their ratings.

Sea Water

Approximate Specific Gravity at 100% Concentration

Thermoplastics
PVC A
CPVC A
Polypropylene (PP) A
Polyvinylidene Fluoride (PVDF) A
Polyethylene (PE) B
Polyethylene Cross-Linked (XLPE)
Teflon A
ABS A

Gaskets
SBR A
Viton A
EPDM A
Neoprene B
Buna N (Nitrile) A
Hypalon

Alloys
316 Stainless Steel C
304 Stainless Steel A
Titanium A
Hastelloy C

A = Excellent, No Effect B = Good, Minor Effect
C = Fair, Data Not Conclusive, Testing Recommended
D = Not Recommended

mikefish · #71 12/04/2002, 09:00 AM

Van
Any chance that the compatibility for 304 and 316 are reversed? I have read a couple of places that 316 is the standard for marine use.

Either way I will likely find out. I have ordered the cal pumps, props, and 304 shafts to try the vertical config shown above. I ordered the shafts before I had read about the compatibility.

I also ordered some smaller props as well as the 1250's. My 135 reef is only 4' long so I'm concerned about blowing my sand back to the ocean. Perhaps the elbow will reduce flow enough to be able to use the 1250's without a speed reducer. We shall see.

Anyone else had a chance to actually try one of the proposed variations yet? Or are we all waiting on parts and construction?
Mike

ReefVan · #72 12/04/2002, 09:09 AM

mikefish:

Table is correct, check previous post of Nov 30, the link to mil-stds page explains why. 316 is active in sea-water whereas 304 is passive. Check the other link...

mikefish · #73 12/04/2002, 09:43 AM

Excellent! Hopefully one less thing I have to worry about.
Mike

Sanjay · #74 12/04/2002, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mikefish
Van

Either way I will likely find out. I have ordered the cal pumps, props, and 304 shafts to try the vertical config shown above. I ordered the shafts before I had read about the compatibility.

I also ordered some smaller props as well as the 1250's. My 135 reef is only 4' long so I'm concerned about blowing my sand back to the ocean. Perhaps the elbow will reduce flow enough to be able to use the 1250's without a speed reducer. We shall see.

Anyone else had a chance to actually try one of the proposed variations yet? Or are we all waiting on parts and construction?
Mike

Are the CAL pumps suitable for external use.? I know the PE-1 is not recommended for use as an external pump.

sanjay.

Jon_Hewett_85 · #75 12/04/2002, 02:38 PM

Where did you get the stuff for the shaft?