Devon Sinsley said:
Well 500 gph I could see
500 gph is going to give you just above a trickle, especially if there is any rise. The most important thing, however, is to get a pump designed for ponds, not a sump pump, they are wildly different. The pond pump is designed for continuous running, the sump pump for intermittent running. The sump pump won’t last a season. Yes, the pond pump is more expensive, but well worth it.
Steve Featherkile said:
Devon Sinsley said:
Well 500 gph I could see500 gph is going to give you just above a trickle, especially if there is any rise. The most important thing, however, is to get a pump designed for ponds, not a sump pump, they are wildly different. The pond pump is designed for continuous running, the sump pump for intermittent running. The sump pump won’t last a season. Yes, the pond pump is more expensive, but well worth it.
had definitely planned to use a pond pump. The consideration will be how much volume. Now I am not looking to have a pond no a raging river. This will be a scale creek. With that said I have no idea how much water what I am thinking of equates to. Doing a quick calculation my backyard faucet I know puts out 15gpm which is 900 gph. So I can see where five times what a hose puts out would make for a nice stream and from that perspective doesn’t seem as radical as when you first said it. But I also have a pond pump in a water feature in my front yard that runs 800gph and that would be close to adequate for what I am thinking. This wont be a dominate feature as much as a very small accent to a small part of the layout. As far as lift it is going to be lifted appox 30"
Steve, my 535gph pump delivers a nice steam. But I kept my stream narrow, maybe 3 inches wide. If I had made it a foot wide, it would be a trickle, like you said. But then my pump is there more for filtering and aerating then for replicating Niagara falls.