impur Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Yah thats probably where the ends of the acrylic came together when they heat and bend it. Its probably easier/cheaper to do it that way than have the cone be one solid piece with no joint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriz2fer Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Cone skimmer are no better then the straight body's skimmers. There have been some intensive studies of the effects of cone skimmers vs straight body skimmers and there was not a real big advantage. If I can fin the Link I'll post it. I use come skimmers also but not cause I think the design is more efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impur Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I'd like to read that link if you can find it. It seems to me that with cone skimmers, since there is less water volume in the actual skimmer body due to the cone shape, there would be less back pressure on the pump, thus needing a less powerful pump to produce the same result as a typical bodied skimmer. That alone tells me their shape is more efficient, ie producing the same results with less power consumption and heat production. Now I most certainly could be wrong (laugh) Also I think it costs a lot more and is more difficult to make a cone skimmer body than it does a regular bodied skimmer. If they weren't at least a little more efficient, I don't think most skimmer manufacturers would be moving toward the cone body. Of course the price of cone skimmers is more, so maybe they just make/sell what the hot item is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burningbaal Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 shape shouldn't affect back pressure because that's just dependant on the height of the water column, not how much water is there. i.e., it's just as easy to pump water up to the bottom of a 6ft deep pool that's 100ft long as one taht 6ft deep and 1 foot long... the difference I've heard is that bubbles are supposed to get into the neck easier on cone skimmers which theoretically makes them rise better and skim better. seems contrary though since the amount of time the bubbles spend with water is supposed to be as long as possible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impur Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 I donno, I think you have more water pushing back against the incoming water, offering more resistance. A normal bodied skimmer is typically taller and wider than a cone skimmer rated for the same production. So it not only has a taller water column, its also wider and heavier. A better analogy would be having an inflatable pool floating on the 6ft deep pool and using a pump sitting on the bottom trying to push water up into it versus doing the same thru a 3ft deep pool. I guarantee the pump in the 3ft deep pool would push more water into the the inflatable pool. It has less resistance to get thru, less water pushing down on it. I guess that kinda goes with what you are saying. Or even a pump in your tank, if you put it on one end then put your hand at the other end to feel the flow. Now if you could extend your tank another foot, the flow would be less on your hand. Thats because there is more water to push to your hand, more resistance. At any rate I am interesting in reading if he can find the link I'm sure air comes into play here somewhere I just don't know how it effects the flow rates. But they should be similar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burningbaal Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burningbaal Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 column height does have everything to do with it...that's what I said. a 6ft deep pool and a 3ft deep pool are very different. but the diameter of the water column doesn't make a difference. if you are making a column tank that's 1sqft by 6ft tall, it's the same pressure on the bottom as a 60sqft by 6ft tall tank, and a lot more than a 6sqft by 1ft tall tank... point is that if a cone skimmer is the same height as a straight one, the back pressure on the pump is the same (assuming the res of everything like outlet size is the same) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impur Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 haha i think we are on the same page just I am thinking of skimmers with similar ratings in which the typical bodied skimmers are a bit larger than cone bodies with the same rating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burningbaal Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 final point of hijacking: that same issue is the cause of most of the arguments I've ever gotten in with my wife...at the end, we realize we were actually trying to say the same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omarortiz Posted April 20, 2012 Author Share Posted April 20, 2012 I do love a good hijack. I think there will continue to be cone versus cylinder skimmer controversy. But, from what I have read, bubbles in cone skimmers have less turbulent/smoother transitions up the cone and that makes them more efficient than tube skimmers. It seems to be true just based on observation. Of course, there are several other variables that need to be factored into it, so there will be people who disagree on there being any value to a cone for the foreseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.