Review of my Jaebo DC12000 RP- UPdated

Actually, pumps use more power when pushing against head pressure. It should be pumped against head pressure at full power.

 

It's installed on my aquarium. About 4 feet to the outlet. A few 90s.
Not sure what someone would do with this pump running to a grand height of zero feet.

 

Pumps are rated for flow/watts at zero head, and then the better pumps also have a flow chart.
Pumps use LESS Watts as the head height increases, in almost all cases b/c it's moving less water, less rpms, hence less watts.
Someone chime in on here about that please.

Each 90, depending on diameter, is said to be .5- 1 ft head.
The max flow is rated at zero feet, almost always. The better pumps also gives flow charts for head height vs gph/lph, and some watts also.

 

But what you are forgetting is there is more load on the motor with increased head pressure. Think of a cars engine. Full throttle going down a hill vs. full throttle up a hill. Down a hill, there is very little load on the motor, and so you will not use nearly as much fuel as you would going up the hill even though the engine will is spinning at the same RPM and producing the same amount of power in both scenarios.

I deal with pumps everyday at my work and have an engineering degree from a pretty good school Not that I am an expert, but know what I am talking about for the most part. Unless you ask my wife. Then I am always wrong.

 

And I'm sure you do, and I'm sure you know more about it that me....
you can ask my wife, she'll tell ya you do.

But, as you know, it's not a car engine.

I've read time and time again that as you increase head pressure, you decrease the flow and decrease the wattage too.

We're discussing this very thing on my local board also.
More flow- more watts.

Look at the published flow/height/watt charts for The Hammerhead/Barracuda for instance. As the flow goes down, so does the watts.

 

Flow/wattage chart for Barraduda/Hammerhead

Check out how the watts drop and the head increases

This holds true for just about any electrical motor like we use on our systems.

And on those pumps, depending on efficiency of the rotor, it actually goes up some before they go back down in watts.
I'm pretty sure my DC pump would be more linear less watts to less flow.

 

'Full throttle going down a hill vs. full throttle up a hill. Down a hill, there is very little load on the motor, and so you will not use nearly as much fuel as you would going up the hill even though the engine will is spinning at the same RPM and producing the same amount of power in both scenarios.'

I feel this scenario is not valid at all. If it's full throttle in both up and down, this would be a very powerful engine with a very low gear ratio to keep the same rpm in both scenarios. If it's full throttle, and same rpm, where are you getting a difference? May from a computer-driven different fuel injector output?
You said full throttle both scenarios up and down? Same RPM? Same amount of power?
I feel your scenario is not valid.

 

The main point is that flow does not directly correlate to watts. Because of the efficiency of pumps, at completely different TDH and flow you could have the same draw. I doubt the draw on these pumps will change that drastically over the curve.

This is the statement I was trying to correct:

The more head, the less flow. The less flow, the less watts.

But I think we are both on the same page. Pump efficiency changes over the curve. Just not a direct correlation.

 

Load is the difference I am saying full throttle for both scenarios. Then look at individual RPM points. I have graphed load on my cars before. There is a very real difference in the load on the two scenarios. And fuel consumption goes hand in hand.

 

Either way these DC pumps rock. If it was 100W I wouldn't care since it is so quiet. It feels like a lot coming out of the return and only 35W. Plus Some goes off to a "T" to run the fuge and future Reactors.
Just for the record my kill-a-watt is accurate. 60 & 100W bulbs are about that.