# Opinions on pressurised filters



## Viv (14 Mar 2012)

I've currently got a Green 2 Clean filter but want to change to a pressurised for two reasons. 1 my current filter can't take the full flow from my pump so I have to have it set on half so water doesn't leak out of the filter, and 2 I really like the sound of back flush facility on the pressurised filters. Before I spend the money though I thought I'd see what experiences people have had with pressurised filters, what pros and cons they've come across. Thanks.

Viv


----------



## foxfish (14 Mar 2012)

Can you link to the filter you have in mind?


----------



## Viv (14 Mar 2012)

I've been looking at this one: http://www.cmcaquatics.co.uk/fish-m....html?osCsid=773b284188997880888f0cc921ec5170

I'm open to suggestions if this one isn't any good though 

Viv


----------



## Ady34 (14 Mar 2012)

Hi Viv,
im running a laguna pressurised filter with inbuilt uv steriliser and have found it to be very good.
Its a convenient way of filtering due to the versatility it gives regards to location, especially if your trying to hide it! The gravity fed systems are limited in this respect.
I must admit though with regards to my pond, ive stocked lightly and rarely attend to the filter, i think i only cleaned it twice last year!   Anyway ive managed to keep crystal clear water so the filter must be doing its job as my pond isnt heavily planted, its more formal on the decking and receives a reasonable amount of sunlight.
Cheerio,
Ady.


----------



## Viv (14 Mar 2012)

Thanks Ady, I was looking at the lagunas but this ones cheaper (on this site at least) and sounds like it does the same job. Being able to hide the filter away is another thing I like about the pressurised ones. My pond is built up above ground a bit and atm I have to have the filter box raised up beside it - and its very ugly!

Viv


----------



## Ady34 (14 Mar 2012)

Hi Viv,


			
				Viv said:
			
		

> Thanks Ady, I was looking at the lagunas but this ones cheaper (on this site at least) and sounds like it does the same job.


Yeah, it does look like its basically the same, but if you want a uv included (dont know if you do) the way this reads the Bio model, such as the one your looking at doesnt come with this option?:
"2. UV Light (excludes Bio models)."



			
				Viv said:
			
		

> Being able to hide the filter away is another thing I like about the pressurised ones. My pond is built up above ground a bit and atm I have to have the filter box raised up beside it - and its very ugly!



Yeah mine is raised too and thats also the reason i went pressurised rather than gravity so i could neatly tuck it away out of sight. I built my pond within a wooden frame which i clad with decking to match the decking it was on, and then added a little box design at the side for the filter to sit in so its invisible, yet accessible and covered.
Cheerio,
Ady.


----------



## martin-green (14 Mar 2012)

Pressurised filter have their place, but I feel I should correct you on a few points.  

They do not have a "backwash facility" (sand filters do) 
The one you are looking at has a "rinse option"  All it does is, allow water to flow to waste instead of the pond, the idea being it will clean the filter sponges. It doesn't work very well.

Look at_ this one:_







You see the blue handle (The blue oblong thing behind the blue round thing) well, its a handle that pulls the filter sponges inside up, it compresses them, you do this a couple of times (You turn the blue knob first) and it cleans the sponges much better, then you let it run to waste.

*Things to consider:*

As your pond is raised, where will you put this filter? some rely on the surrounding soil to stop them from bursting.

They also need 3 pipes (flow, return and to waste) will you be able to hide 3 pipes?

Will such a filter be big enough to cope? (I mean the flow rate / pond volume)

A biological filter / uv works better if the flow rate is slow.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If I were in your shoes (and I am not) I would buy a smaller more energy efficient pump than the one you have and build a wall or some thing else decorative* round your current filter. 

Pressure filter do have their place.....................

*Bamboo screening, trellis, brick wall

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
 :?:
What pump do you currently have?

What is your pond volume (or its dimensions)

What is your pond stocked with? (eg,One goldfish, loads of fish, some koi?


----------



## Viv (15 Mar 2012)

Ady I have a separate uv so having one on the filter isn't essential.
Martin I've looked at sooo many filters and some said back-wash, some said reverse flow, some said something else and it all got mixed up!   Thanks for explaining the difference so I know what I'm looking at  
I've actually looked at the filter you show but couldn't find it when I wanted it - typical! I had 2 or 3 that I was looking at actually but I was short on time and could only find the fish mate one when foxfish asked. I'll limit my final choice to one that can squeeze the sponges now I know though.
My ponds not very big and has 4 koi and 3 shubunkins in it. Its 4500 l (approx 4' wide, 12' long, max 4' deep) and I've got an 8000 lph Blagdon force hybrid pump taking the water to the current filter and a separate uv (can't remember the wattage for sure but I think its 11w). The pumps got a valve on it that I have to have half shut atm but I can't help thinking thats not good for the pump. Didn't realise when I got it that the filter wouldn't be abIe to cope with the flow! I thought that if I got the 15000 l filter it would be more than able to cope with my pond. I also thought it wouldn't matter if the filter was bigger. If I'm wrong though please tell me and I'll get a smaller filter.
Heres a photo of the pond from last summer (you'll see the current filter on the far side):




I thought I could bury the filter at the far side behind the wall and I'm thinking of building some sort of waterfall on that end to hide where the pipes go in and out. It will also create another shady spot for the fish as the pond gets a lot of sunlight. That area isn't a walk way except to the greenhouse so shouldn't be too in the way and I can cover the top of the filter up without any problem anyway. 
One day, if/when we move I might get the chance to plan a pond out from scratch! Now I've seen on here what can be achieved it makes mine seem more and more pathetic. But, its all I've got for the moment so I'll just make it as good as I can  

Viv


----------



## Ed Seeley (17 Mar 2012)

I would avoid these types of filters if you have a decent stocking level and 4 koi will produce a fair bot of waste as they grow.  I can see you're a bit limited for space but I'd look at a larger container filled with K1 media.  I built one from a small waterbutt for a mate on his mixed pond and it's working great.  It's basically an DIY easy type filter.  I think the instructions/details are on the subforum somewhere otherwise google "DIY Easy" and something will come up.  IT'll give you a much better filter that will need regular cleaning but the cleaning simply involves turning off pumps, turning on air and opening and closing valves!


----------



## Viv (17 Mar 2012)

I'll have a look Ed, thanks  Is there any particular reason for avoiding pressurised filters? 

Viv


----------



## martin-green (17 Mar 2012)

Viv said:
			
		

> Its 4500 l (approx 4' wide, 12' long, max 4' deep)


 its not, its  5436 Litres. CLICK ME (ok so that is assuming its full to the brim and symmetrical)

I cautiously suggest you check your uv lamp wattage, if it is 11watt, no problem, but  anything less will struggle to cope with your pond volume.

I have also done some checking on your pump;

Blagdon Force Hybrid 8000 Pond Pump
·	Max flow 7300 Lph 
·	Max head 4.8 Metres 
·	140 Watt power consumption 
·	8mm solids intake 
·	Outlet hose connection: 3/4", 1", 1 1/4", 1 1/2" 

Oase aquamax eco 8500 
·	Max flow 8300 Lph 
·	Max head 3.2 Metres 
·	80 Watt power consumption 
·	8mm solids intake 
·	Outlet hose connection: 1 1/2" 

Which means an Oase pump uses 60 watts *LESS* than your existing pump, and I suspect you could use the eco 550.

(Other low power consumption pumps are available)

My opinion is that the pressurised filter was invented because some one could, so they did. Yes they are ideal if you want to bury them, but as your pond is raised, what is the point of buying a filter you don’t need. Your picture already shows you have “disguised” the pond walls, so why not follow on the “theme” and put some of that screening around your existing filter.


----------



## Ed Seeley (17 Mar 2012)

Viv said:
			
		

> I'll have a look Ed, thanks  Is there any particular reason for avoiding pressurised filters?
> 
> Viv



Yep!  (Well yes in my opinion anyway!)

Like all commercial filters they are hopelessly over-rated for the size of pond - you'd need to double or more the size of the filter for starters.

Secondly they use foam.  Foam is a great media when it's kept clean but it should be cleaned really frequently.  To be honest this is true of all mechanical filtration as each one is simply a strainer through which your water is constantly being pulled.  As that water is flowing through the waste is decaying and breaking down so the sooner you clean the filter the quicker that waste is removed and the decay in your pond stops.  For fish tanks and clean. low stocked ponds this might not be an issue but once a few decent sized koi start digging around in the pond, eating loads of food and producing lots of waste it soon becomes one.
However foam, if not cleaned often enough, can collapse under water pressure when water is being sucked through as happens in these filters (and any other foam cartridge filter - from my own experience here) restricting the flow even more.  Other mechanical filters and medias don't suffer this drawback.

Thirdly these filters are all tucked away and easily forgotten/neglected.  As they are also small, getting access into them to make sure there is no debris will be trickier than a nice sized, simple filter.

All in all they will work but I feel other filters can do a better job for the same or less money.


----------



## Viv (17 Mar 2012)

I _had_ written a long response to Martins post but the damn laptop died on me before I could post and quite frankly I can't be bothered to write it all out again! The long and short of it is this - you've convinced me  I'm going to do a DIY filter when I replace the one I've got. Martin made me realise that the waterfall I'm planning on building to span the far end of the pond will hide a filter from view from the house quite nicely (another der moment) and I came up with an idea for a container that won't interfere too much with access to the greenhouse - assuming it won't matter if the container is taller rather than wide? I've got some very sturdy 50g plastic tubs with air tight lids that I got from a food packing company that I thought might do nicley.
About my ponds volume Martin, the dimensions are misleading as the far end is only 2.5' in depth and it steps down to 4' at the near end. It also has shelving on some of the sides which also reduces the volume. Oh, and I checked the lamp and it is 11w 

Thanks for your input and help guys 

Viv


----------



## Ed Seeley (17 Mar 2012)

Just give me a pm if you want a hand to make it into a static K1 filter so it cleans without you getting your hand wet!  Lovely to be able to clean a filter without getting messy and water the garden at the same time!


----------



## Viv (17 Mar 2012)

Thanks Ed, I will    I'm going to get the waterfall made first though. One final question, do you think I'd need the 50 gallon tub or would the smaller 20 gallon one I have be enough?

Viv


----------



## foxfish (17 Mar 2012)

The thing about filtering ponds is size of filter!
If you make a percentage calculation between the size of the suggested filter for a planted tank & the sort of filter your have been looking at for your pond, then there is an obvious differance  :? 
I can tell you with all certainly, that the bigger the filter the more successful it will be in operation.


----------



## Ed Seeley (18 Mar 2012)

Gotta agree with foxfish - bigger is always better in pond filters!

Find the largest container you can fit and disguise and then make that into your filter.  If you could fit two chambers in then even better - you can make one a static K1 filter and keep the other fluidised to act as a biological filter!

I'd also build the filter along with the waterfall.  If you can I'd incorporate the chamber (last chamber if you have more than one) into the top of the waterfall.  I'd have the screened outlet you need to keep the K1 in feeding straight into the waterfall then you need less pipework and there's less restriction on the flow.  How are you building the waterfall?


----------



## martin-green (18 Mar 2012)

Whilst I do not disagree with what has been said, you could always leave it all alone, since it is working, and either keep the pump turned down, or buy a new more energy efficient pump, after all this post did start off with Viv saying



> I've currently got a Green 2 Clean filter but want to change to a pressurised for two reasons. 1 my current filter can't take the full flow from my pump so I have to have it set on half so water doesn't leak out of the filter, and 2 I really like the sound of back flush facility on the pressurised filters. Before I spend the money though I thought I'd see what experiences people have had with pressurised filters, what pros and cons they've come across. Thanks.



Since it has now been pointed out that a pressure filter would be of no use (in this case) it would seem pointless to continue unless both pump and filter are changed, because the same pump will still be used and unless the outlet size is increased the new filter will also overflow, unless you increase the size of the current filter outlet, but that may make matters worse as it will reduce “dwell time” 

From reading the question again, and again, the culprit seems to be the pump is oversized, everything else is working fine. 

I know we always like to adjust pond set ups to make it “just a bit better” but the first thing that has to go is the pump, then with that changed to a less powerful one the filter will not overflow, so pointless changing it


----------



## Viv (18 Mar 2012)

Thats true Martin, I did but as with a lot of things its more complicated than that - I was cutting things down for simplicity. I never seem to have much time on here either and was trying to be quick. Unfortunately that means I don't always explain myself very well  I also had/have concerns that as my fish grow (3 of the koi are still very small) that the current filter won't be enough and I can't add any more media to it. I've also wanted to add a waterfall for ages, which means raising the water from the filter above the level of the pond. I gave up on ever finding anything pre-moulded that would be big enough but, with help, have come up with an idea for how to build one up on that end. Its not going to be the sort of thing that I can incorporate a filter into though as its going to built up and over the pond. I want it to span the width of the pond and come in over it by about 18". 

Viv


----------



## martin-green (18 Mar 2012)

Viv said:
			
		

> ............ its going to built up and over the pond. I want it to span the width of the pond and come in over it by about 18".
> 
> Viv



That will be interesting.
A few words of note: 
In order to get a waterfall that is 4 feet wide, you will need an outlet that is also 4 feet wide. This reduces water pressure and distributes the volume evenly. It's how "water blades" work





Above is a water blade





Above is a working water blade

In order for a water blade to work the water has to be sent to a "distribution area"  (Sounds technical, but its the box part just before the blade) this not only reduces the water pressure, it also "spreads the water out" over the whole width. (4 feet required in your case) It also has (as shown in the picture) multiple inlets, it will not work too well without them.
Where as a waterfall is (if you will) Like an upturned letter Y. The water flow starts off narrow and deep but gets wide and thin the longer and wider the fall is. So to get a waterfall that is 4 feet wide at the fall end means that it will have to be several feet long in the first place, room which you do not appear to have. (I believe it was for this reason the water blade was invented)

Mind you, you could do it if you built a new pond filter that is 4 feet wide   

BUT, there is nothing that says you can't have a short waterfall.

I also find it annoying that things have to obey the laws of physics. If I were you, I would just opt for a narrow (but deep sides) waterfall


----------



## idris (27 Mar 2012)

This is a little off topic, bearing in mind where this thread has ended up, but does get back towards the original question ....

I'm considering getting a new preasurised filter _(having considered all the above points I think it is the best option for my pond)_ and was trying to find out what the one Martin posted a picture of (the one with the blue back-flush handles). Am I right in thinking it's an Oase Filtoclear?

I've got a Bermuda and getting spares for it is a ****!!! So I'm thinking of binning it and getting something else. My LFS can get Oase (which they say is best but expensive) or Laguna (which they say is a good compromise).
Any thoughts on the two brands?


----------



## martin-green (29 Mar 2012)

idris said:
			
		

> trying to find out what the one Martin posted a picture of



Only got to ask   

Yes it is an Oase filtoclear.
Oase seem to like to think they are the "Rolls Royce" of all things pond  / fountain, unfortunately there is no one out there that can prove they are NOT.
Yes in general Oase are very good, but as they know they are good they can, and do charge a high price for the products, but you really do get your moneys worth. (No, I don't work for them)


----------



## idris (29 Mar 2012)

Thanks Martin. 
Would you say they are significantly better than Laguna?


----------



## martin-green (29 Mar 2012)

idris said:
			
		

> Thanks Martin.
> Would you say they are significantly better than Laguna?





			
				martin-green said:
			
		

> ....................Oase seem to like to think they are the "Rolls Royce" of all things pond  / fountain, unfortunately there is no one out there that can prove they are NOT.


----------



## idris (29 Mar 2012)

Point taken, but no matter how good a Rolls Royce is, a BMW M5 is still a really good car and a **** load cheaper.
But I take it you'd buy the Roller no matter the premium?


----------



## martin-green (29 Mar 2012)

It doesn't bother me which you buy, but you asked my opinion, and I gave it.


----------



## idris (30 Mar 2012)

I wasn't trying to be argumentative - just clarify whether the difference was worth the extra money or whether the Laguna was a good filter in it's own right. No offence intended.


----------



## Ed Seeley (30 Mar 2012)

I think Martin was just trying to say that he doesn't rate any of them but that Oase generally produce good products.


----------



## idris (30 Mar 2012)

Ah. Now I understand.


----------

