quote:

---

> Y'see, the only place I can put a garden patch this size is further up
> the hill from the house. Due to existing buildings and horse-pens, and
> the layout of the property, that's my only option. This is OK (although
> the hike up and down the hill to tend it is going to be "interesting",
> to put it mildly - particularly when toting a couple of five-gallon
> buckets of horse manure each trip to build some usable soil) except for
> one detail: How to get water to it. The existing pump simply WILL NOT
> get water that high - My chosen spot is something like 80 to 100
> vertical feet above the wellhouse, and after some testing, no amount of
> "choking down" the hose/pipe to reduce the amount of head I need seems
> able to get water to it from the nearest hose-bib. Even if it did, the
> pressure would be so low by the time it got there that the sprinklers
> would be more like "dribblers".

quote:

---

> pressure would be so low by the time it got there that the sprinklers
> would be more like "dribblers".

quote:

---

> <snip for brevity - read it in the OP>
>
> JKust a few comments.
>
> 1. A working figure for your sprinkler use is about 30psi. At least
> that has been my experience with rainbirds.

quote:

---

>
> 2. You need 1 foot elevation rise for every .43 psi, thus your
> 'working' reservoir would have to be about another 60-70 ft higher than
> the garden to use gravity feed and sprinklers.

quote:

---

> 3. I think, given your situation etc, I would go with drip irrigation.
> Much better return on produce per gal/water and fewer mechanical items
> in the system.

quote:

---

> 4. Not too clear on your proposed pump location. It sounds like you
> are planning to 'suck' the water up. It is easier with your plan to
> install the pump in the first reservoir and 'push' the water up to the
> second one. Sorry if I misunderstood.

quote:

---

>
> This should be a fun thread trying to come up with a working system.

quote:

---

> In article <1119323309.860139.33130@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harry K" <turnkey4099@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I was thinking more along the lines of one of those el-cheapo
> oscillating units - The ones with the curved pipe that slowly swiveles
> back and forth. Seemed to me right from the outset that a rainbird type
> would be impossible without a lot more pressure than I think I can get.
> Sounds even less possible now.
>
>
> Yikes!
>
>
>
> Sounds like I may be better off using the uppermost tank to feed a
> network of "leaker" hoses, perhaps... Maybe if I buried them alongside
> the rows for the corn, beans, and peas, and ran a "loop" around each of
> the tomato and squash plants... Something for me to keep in mind as this
> project develops.
>
>
> As I picture things, "main" (wellhouse) pump will put water into the
> first reservoir (midway up the hill) via hose and/or PVC pipe, then the
> second pump (the homebrew rig I described) would be sucking (pretty
> close to) directly from there, pushing to the second reservoir at the
> "top", which I was THINKING would likely end up putting it about 20-30
> feet above where the garden is (hopefully...) going in.
>
>
> Could be...
>
> --
> Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
> Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
> subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
> See <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html> for full details.

quote:

---

> In article <wMKte.1430$p%3.11085@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>
> Well, if you really need to water, and water is difficult to get to the
> garden, then drip irrigation (which wants low pressure) is better, by
> far, than spraying water all over the place and wasting most of it.

quote:

---

> Building a pump from two pieces of PVC pipe, unless you happen to have a
> metalworking lathe you have not mentioned, is likely going to be an
> exercise in wasting time and whatever money you put into it. You don't
> have the tolerances to get away with it, and it also is unlikely to hold
> up well over time if you ever got it built.

quote:

---

> Your idea as stated rates an "insane" in the sanity check. Now that's
> taken care of, what's sane...?
>
> The most practical solution to your problem is a high-lift pump
> installed conveniently to your current electric and water supply, not at
> the limit of your present pump and far away from your electricity. Costs
> money.

quote:

---

> If you simply cannot bear not to homebrew the whole thing, you can spend
> a good deal more on tools than it would take to solve it by purchasing
> the correct pump, and then learn to use them, and then find that parts
> and stock cost money, too. But you can use the tools and skills to build
> other things.
>
> YMMV, etc...

quote:

---

> On 6/20/05 9:17 PM, in article wMKte.1430$p%3.11085@typhoon.sonic.net, "Don
> Bruder" <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> Some cut.
>
>
> More cut.
>
> 1 psi will lift water 2.31 feet.

quote:

---

>
> Would anything here be of interest?
>
> http://www.surpluscenter.com/home.a...0050XXXX1382845
>
> They have a lot of pumps, some with DC motors. They probably have some
> surplus DC motors that you could mate with one of the pumps. Some of the
> combined units are under $100.

quote:

---

> Here's my situation:
> I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down" than flat. When
> you get right down to it, I'm basically hanging off the side of a
> mountain. I want a small vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my
> planning now. (Already too late in the season around here to do anything
> this year - I've basically got to build it from scratch)
>
> I'm wanting to put in about five or six 20 foot rows of sweet corn, a
> couple rows each of peas and beans, half a dozen tomato plants, half a
> dozen bell pepper plants, and maybe 10 hills of mixed squash and cukes -
> I figure my plans will need about a 20 by 30 foot plot.
>
> That part is fairly easy. The "fun" starts when I try to water it. (And
> I'll definitely have to do that due to the climate here in the foothills
> of northern California)
>
> Y'see, the only place I can put a garden patch this size is further up
> the hill from the house. Due to existing buildings and horse-pens, and
> the layout of the property, that's my only option. This is OK (although
> the hike up and down the hill to tend it is going to be "interesting",
> to put it mildly - particularly when toting a couple of five-gallon
> buckets of horse manure each trip to build some usable soil) except for
> one detail: How to get water to it. The existing pump simply WILL NOT
> get water that high - My chosen spot is something like 80 to 100
> vertical feet above the wellhouse, and after some testing, no amount of
> "choking down" the hose/pipe to reduce the amount of head I need seems
> able to get water to it from the nearest hose-bib. Even if it did, the
> pressure would be so low by the time it got there that the sprinklers
> would be more like "dribblers".
>
> So I've hit on what *MAY* be a solution: I can get water to within about
> 30-40 vertical feet of the planned garden patch using plain old garden
> hose or PVC pipe "Tee"-ed off the line that feeds the closest horse
> trough, so I'm figuring that I can put a reservoir of some sort (right
> now, the working idea is a plastic 55 gallon drum, maybe a couple of
> them, gotten as "They're garbage to us - Haul 'em away if you want 'em!"
> from a local packing plant that gets their syrup for making fruit salad
> in them) at the limit of what the existing pump can lift to, let it fill
> the tank(s), and then run some sort of pump from the reservoir up the
> rest of the hill. Trouble is, commercially available pumps for such a
> task are pretty pricey, and I'm doing this on a budget that, by
> neccessity, has to stay real close to zero. If I can do it using
> "salvage" or "surplus" stuff, so much the better.
>
> Right now, my working plan for the pump consists of two nested pieces of
> PVC pipe - The larger diameter piece would be fixed, with a "caged ball"
> style check valve at the bottom, allowing water to flow in, but not flow
> out, with the smaller piece having the same arrangement, only in reverse
> (out, not in) at the opposite end. The smaller piece would then fit
> inside the larger, allowing a telescoping motion. (Some kind of
> gasket/O-ring type seal would probably be mandatory - That's one of
> those nitpicky details I'll worry about as things progress - right now,
> I just want a sanity check on the basic concept)
>
> If things work as planned, the cycle would go something like this:
> Starting from "fully collapsed" (minimum overall length), the smaller
> section of pipe would be pulled out of the larger, causing the "output"
> check valve in the end of it to close, either due to suction, or the
> pressure from any water currently in the output plumbing. As the smaller
> section is pulled farther out, suction would develop in the expanding
> chamber the two pieces form, opening the intake valve at the bottom of
> the large section, and drawing water (or perhaps air if it isn't already
> "primed" - I'd expect such a design would be intrinsically self-priming
> if fed with reasonably rigid plumbing?) into the expanding chamber. At
> the end of the "out" stroke/beginning of the "in" stroke, the lower
> check valve closes, trapping some volume of water (or, again, air if not
> primed) inside the chamber. At this point, continuing to collapse the
> smaller tube into the larger would reduce the volume inside the chamber,
> increasing pressure, and opening the upper check valve, allowing the
> water (or air) to escape inot the outlet-side plumbing. As the
> "collapse" of the chamber continues, the water inside would be forced
> into the output plumbing, pushing water through the system to the top of
> the hill. Then the cycle repeats.
>
> Anybody see any bugs in the system so far?
>
> Obviously, it's going to have to be fairly low flow. I figure on getting
> around that by placing a second reservoir further up the slope from
> where the garden will be, then letting gravity supply enough head to run
> the sprinklers - Basically, ending up with what amounts to a physically
> large two-stage pump - "Regular" pump in the wellhouse, to first
> reservoir, second pump at reservoir lifting to a second, even higher,
> reservoir, then gravity driving the water from the second reservoir
> through the sprinklers and onto the garden.
>
> Sane? Insane? Somewhere in between?
>
> Next concept is trying to power the secondary pump - "Grid" electricity
> is pretty much out due to the distance from the nearest source - Better
> than 300 feet. It'd be pretty pricey to make it happen, not to mention
> being at least worrisome to me in terms of potential fire danger. (A
> *VERY* serious concern in these parts - A spark from a bulldozer blade
> hitting a rock got a multi-thousand acre, umpty-bazillion dollar fire
> going last year - In the "Isn't it ironic?" department: the operator was
> in the process of cutting a firebreak)
>
> Gas engine is less than desirable due to aesthetic concerns - I live out
> here "in the backside of beyond" at least partly because I want as
> little as possible to do with engine noise, and running a gas engine
> would rather soundly defeat that concept. However, I'm realist enough to
> understand that it may end up being my only viable option. (never mind
> the fact that the price of gas is going to eat into my savings from not
> having to buy my produce at the store...)
>
> I'd be tickled pink if I could manage to run this thing from a windmill
> (not likely due to location, but maybe...) or solar (Got a few PV panels
> hanging around, although I don't know the ratings on them), if I could
> figure out how much "oomph" I need to do the job. Obviously, that's
> going to be a function of how large my sections of pipe for the
> secondary pump are. Anybody got any numbers for me to tinker with on
> that front?
>
> As far as actual power transmission, I'm thinking some sort of cam or
> perhaps crankshaft type mechanism to turn rotary motion into linear.
> Obviously, it's going to need to be "long throw" - unless I settle for
> only refilling the "working" reservoir over the course of days...
>
> Details of the linkages and such are just that: details - They can be
> worried about later, assuming I don't get shot down in flames because
> the basic idea has more holes in it than a screen door.
>
> So... What say you, folks? Is my concept at least workable, or should I
> look in another direction?
>

quote:

---

> before I get to the site I hope to use. I'd guesstimate at least the
> same distance I've already covered to get there. (Anybody got an easy
> way to figure altitude on an uneven surface?)

quote:

---

>

quote:

---

> Right now, my working plan for the pump consists of two nested pieces of
> PVC pipe - The larger diameter piece would be fixed, with a "caged ball"
> style check valve at the bottom, allowing water to flow in, but not flow
> out, with the smaller piece having the same arrangement, only in reverse
> (out, not in) at the opposite end. The smaller piece would then fit
> inside the larger, allowing a telescoping motion.

quote:

---

> In article <wMKte.1430$p%3.11085@typhoon.sonic.net>, dakidd@sonic.net
> says...
>
> So, do you have lots of water, or are you restricted?
>
> If you have lots of water, you could use a hydraulic ram
> http://www.lifewater.ca/ram_pump.htm
> no engine, no fuel, no transmission, cheap to acquire and free to
> run......
>
> If you do not have a lot of water, don't talk sprinklers, think trickle
> irrigation. Trickle irrigation needs f.a. head, it's dirt cheap to
> install and run (the trickle jets are a few cents each, and the thinwall
> 1/2" pipe is dirt cheap, too). And you use a small fraction of the
> amount of water you'd blow with sprinklers. Which means less pumping
> necessary .....
>
> I used tricklers on my macadamia orchard (5 acres) for the first 3
> summers, until the trees got their roots deep enough not to need it any
> more - it works a treat.
>
> -Peter

quote:

---

> Peter Huebner wrote:
> reading the original post again makes me think that Don is going to be
> spending
> a lot of time carrying mulch, compost and other heavy stuff all the way up
> to
> his garden often enough that he could spend the little money he has on a
> motorised wheelbarrow.

quote:

---

> Trickle irrigation cuts the water demand down to
> probably
> around 15 gallons a day with careful management, a small enough amount that
> pumping is not vitally necessary. At a pinch three trips a day with a back
> pack
> would do the job (he did say he had time on his hands!)

quote:

---

> Don Bruder wrote:
> ...
> ...
>
> Doing a quick Google search on home made water pumps got me these...
>
> PVC pump
> http://www.scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/aero/vacuum/
> http://home.mchsi.com/~tblount/piston.htm
>
> Rope Pumps
> http://www.ieiglobal.org/ESDVol1No2/ropepump.pdf

quote:

---

> http://www.ropepumps.org/

quote:

---

> You might also look at the check valve designs on some of those
> home made ram pumps.
>
> Anthony

quote:

---

>
> Note to those thinking hydraulic ram pump: It was something (one of the
> very first "somethings", in fact) that I considered very briefly, then
> discarded as totally unworkable in this situation. The only water source
> to be had during "garden season" is the wellhouse pump. We've got three
> creeks that run during the winter (rainy season) months and might be
> tapped for such a use, but with the exception of one year out of the 6
> I've been here, all three of them have been dried up memories before the
> time I'd be trying to put them to use, and that one spring when they
> weren't totally dry, they were barely trickles by the second week of
> May. Trying to put in a garden then would be futile, since the "too cold
> to grow anything but grass, and even that slowly" weather is usually
> still hanging on for another several weeks. "So fill the reservoir
> before the rains end!" - Not practical... I'd need to create a small
> lake.

quote:

---

> Here's my situation:
> I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down"
> than flat. When you get right down to it, I'm basically
> hanging off the side of a mountain. I want a small
> vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my planning
> now. (Already too late in the season around here to do
> anything this year - I've basically got to build it from
> scratch)
>
> I'm wanting to put in about five or six 20 foot rows of
> sweet corn, a couple rows each of peas and beans, half a
> dozen tomato plants, half a dozen bell pepper plants, and
> maybe 10 hills of mixed squash and cukes - I figure my
> plans will need about a 20 by 30 foot plot.
>
> That part is fairly easy. The "fun" starts when I try to
> water it. (And I'll definitely have to do that due to the
> climate here in the foothills of northern California)

quote:

---

> Y'see, the only place I can put a garden patch this size is further up
> the hill from the house. Due to existing buildings and horse-pens, and
> the layout of the property, that's my only option. This is OK (although
> the hike up and down the hill to tend it is going to be "interesting",
> to put it mildly - particularly when toting a couple of five-gallon
> buckets of horse manure each trip to build some usable soil) except for
> one detail: How to get water to it. The existing pump simply WILL NOT
> get water that high - My chosen spot is something like 80 to 100
> vertical feet above the wellhouse, and after some testing, no amount of
> "choking down" the hose/pipe to reduce the amount of head I need seems
> able to get water to it from the nearest hose-bib. Even if it did, the
> pressure would be so low by the time it got there that the sprinklers
> would be more like "dribblers".

quote:

---

>I'm doing this on a budget that, by
>neccessity, has to stay real close to zero.

quote:

---

> In article <1119323309.860139.33130@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harry K" <turnkey4099@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Sounds like I may be better off using the uppermost tank to feed a
> network of "leaker" hoses, perhaps... Maybe if I buried them alongside
> the rows for the corn, beans, and peas, and ran a "loop" around each of
> the tomato and squash plants... Something for me to keep in mind as this
> project develops.

quote:

---

> I'm thinking you're being overly pessimistic. The ancients got water up
> hills without machine shops, precision tolerances, or pricey high-tech
> gadgets that didn't exist even in their wildest imaginings.

quote:

---

>
> Here's my situation:
> I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down" than flat. When
> you get right down to it, I'm basically hanging off the side of a
> mountain. I want a small vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my
> planning now. (Already too late in the season around here to do anything
> this year - I've basically got to build it from scratch)
>
> I'm wanting to put in about five or six 20 foot rows of sweet corn, a
> couple rows each of peas and beans, half a dozen tomato plants, half a
> dozen bell pepper plants, and maybe 10 hills of mixed squash and cukes -
> I figure my plans will need about a 20 by 30 foot plot.
>
> That part is fairly easy. The "fun" starts when I try to water it. (And
> I'll definitely have to do that due to the climate here in the foothills
> of northern California)
>
> Y'see, the only place I can put a garden patch this size is further up
> the hill from the house. Due to existing buildings and horse-pens, and
> the layout of the property, that's my only option. This is OK (although
> the hike up and down the hill to tend it is going to be "interesting",
> to put it mildly - particularly when toting a couple of five-gallon
> buckets of horse manure each trip to build some usable soil) except for
> one detail: How to get water to it.

quote:

---

>reading the original post again makes me think that Don is going to be spending
>a lot of time carrying mulch, compost and other heavy stuff all the way up to
>his garden often enough that he could spend the little money he has on a
>motorised wheelbarrow. Trickle irrigation cuts the water demand down to probably
>around 15 gallons a day with careful management, a small enough amount that
>pumping is not vitally necessary. At a pinch three trips a day with a back pack
>would do the job (he did say he had time on his hands!)

quote:

---

>
>Here's my situation:
>I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down" than flat. When
>you get right down to it, I'm basically hanging off the side of a
>mountain. I want a small vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my
>planning now. (Already too late in the season around here to do anything
>this year - I've basically got to build it from scratch)
>

quote:

---

>
>Right now, my working plan for the pump consists of two nested pieces of
>PVC pipe - The larger diameter piece would be fixed, with a "caged ball"
>style check valve at the bottom, allowing water to flow in, but not flow
>out, with the smaller piece having the same arrangement, only in reverse
>(out, not in) at the opposite end. The smaller piece would then fit
>inside the larger, allowing a telescoping motion. (Some kind of
>gasket/O-ring type seal would probably be mandatory - That's one of
>those nitpicky details I'll worry about as things progress - right now,
>I just want a sanity check on the basic concept)

quote:

---

>
>
> A two-valve flapper pump with a black-pipe body
> is probably easier to build. You can see
> a sketch of one at www.goedjn.com/sketch/pump2v.gif

quote:

---

>
> Here's my situation:
> I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down" than flat. When
> you get right down to it, I'm basically hanging off the side of a
> mountain. I want a small vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my
> planning now. (Already too late in the season around here to do anything
> this year - I've basically got to build it from scratch)
>
> I'm wanting to put in about five or six 20 foot rows of sweet corn, a
> couple rows each of peas and beans, half a dozen tomato plants, half a
> dozen bell pepper plants, and maybe 10 hills of mixed squash and cukes -
> I figure my plans will need about a 20 by 30 foot plot.
>
> That part is fairly easy. The "fun" starts when I try to water it. (And
> I'll definitely have to do that due to the climate here in the foothills
> of northern California)
>
> Y'see, the only place I can put a garden patch this size is further up
> the hill from the house. Due to existing buildings and horse-pens, and
> the layout of the property, that's my only option. This is OK (although
> the hike up and down the hill to tend it is going to be "interesting",
> to put it mildly - particularly when toting a couple of five-gallon
> buckets of horse manure each trip to build some usable soil) except for
> one detail: How to get water to it. The existing pump simply WILL NOT
> get water that high - My chosen spot is something like 80 to 100
> vertical feet above the wellhouse, and after some testing, no amount of
> "choking down" the hose/pipe to reduce the amount of head I need seems
> able to get water to it from the nearest hose-bib. Even if it did, the
> pressure would be so low by the time it got there that the sprinklers
> would be more like "dribblers".
>
> So I've hit on what *MAY* be a solution: I can get water to within about
> 30-40 vertical feet of the planned garden patch using plain old garden
> hose or PVC pipe "Tee"-ed off the line that feeds the closest horse
> trough, so I'm figuring that I can put a reservoir of some sort (right
> now, the working idea is a plastic 55 gallon drum, maybe a couple of
> them, gotten as "They're garbage to us - Haul 'em away if you want 'em!"
> from a local packing plant that gets their syrup for making fruit salad
> in them) at the limit of what the existing pump can lift to, let it fill
> the tank(s), and then run some sort of pump from the reservoir up the
> rest of the hill. Trouble is, commercially available pumps for such a
> task are pretty pricey, and I'm doing this on a budget that, by
> neccessity, has to stay real close to zero. If I can do it using
> "salvage" or "surplus" stuff, so much the better.
>
> Right now, my working plan for the pump consists of two nested pieces of
> PVC pipe - The larger diameter piece would be fixed, with a "caged ball"
> style check valve at the bottom, allowing water to flow in, but not flow
> out, with the smaller piece having the same arrangement, only in reverse
> (out, not in) at the opposite end. The smaller piece would then fit
> inside the larger, allowing a telescoping motion. (Some kind of
> gasket/O-ring type seal would probably be mandatory - That's one of
> those nitpicky details I'll worry about as things progress - right now,
> I just want a sanity check on the basic concept)
>
> If things work as planned, the cycle would go something like this:
> Starting from "fully collapsed" (minimum overall length), the smaller
> section of pipe would be pulled out of the larger, causing the "output"
> check valve in the end of it to close, either due to suction, or the
> pressure from any water currently in the output plumbing. As the smaller
> section is pulled farther out, suction would develop in the expanding
> chamber the two pieces form, opening the intake valve at the bottom of
> the large section, and drawing water (or perhaps air if it isn't already
> "primed" - I'd expect such a design would be intrinsically self-priming
> if fed with reasonably rigid plumbing?) into the expanding chamber. At
> the end of the "out" stroke/beginning of the "in" stroke, the lower
> check valve closes, trapping some volume of water (or, again, air if not
> primed) inside the chamber. At this point, continuing to collapse the
> smaller tube into the larger would reduce the volume inside the chamber,
> increasing pressure, and opening the upper check valve, allowing the
> water (or air) to escape inot the outlet-side plumbing. As the
> "collapse" of the chamber continues, the water inside would be forced
> into the output plumbing, pushing water through the system to the top of
> the hill. Then the cycle repeats.
>
> Anybody see any bugs in the system so far?
>
> Obviously, it's going to have to be fairly low flow. I figure on getting
> around that by placing a second reservoir further up the slope from
> where the garden will be, then letting gravity supply enough head to run
> the sprinklers - Basically, ending up with what amounts to a physically
> large two-stage pump - "Regular" pump in the wellhouse, to first
> reservoir, second pump at reservoir lifting to a second, even higher,
> reservoir, then gravity driving the water from the second reservoir
> through the sprinklers and onto the garden.
>
> Sane? Insane? Somewhere in between?
>
> Next concept is trying to power the secondary pump - "Grid" electricity
> is pretty much out due to the distance from the nearest source - Better
> than 300 feet. It'd be pretty pricey to make it happen, not to mention
> being at least worrisome to me in terms of potential fire danger. (A
> *VERY* serious concern in these parts - A spark from a bulldozer blade
> hitting a rock got a multi-thousand acre, umpty-bazillion dollar fire
> going last year - In the "Isn't it ironic?" department: the operator was
> in the process of cutting a firebreak)
>
> Gas engine is less than desirable due to aesthetic concerns - I live out
> here "in the backside of beyond" at least partly because I want as
> little as possible to do with engine noise, and running a gas engine
> would rather soundly defeat that concept. However, I'm realist enough to
> understand that it may end up being my only viable option. (never mind
> the fact that the price of gas is going to eat into my savings from not
> having to buy my produce at the store...)
>
> I'd be tickled pink if I could manage to run this thing from a windmill
> (not likely due to location, but maybe...) or solar (Got a few PV panels
> hanging around, although I don't know the ratings on them), if I could
> figure out how much "oomph" I need to do the job. Obviously, that's
> going to be a function of how large my sections of pipe for the
> secondary pump are. Anybody got any numbers for me to tinker with on
> that front?
>
> As far as actual power transmission, I'm thinking some sort of cam or
> perhaps crankshaft type mechanism to turn rotary motion into linear.
> Obviously, it's going to need to be "long throw" - unless I settle for
> only refilling the "working" reservoir over the course of days...
>
> Details of the linkages and such are just that: details - They can be
> worried about later, assuming I don't get shot down in flames because
> the basic idea has more holes in it than a screen door.
>
> So... What say you, folks? Is my concept at least workable, or should I
> look in another direction?
>
> --
> Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21,

quote:

---

> Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in

quote:

---

> subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
> See <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html> for full details.

quote:

---

>
>
>
> A two-valve flapper pump with a black-pipe body
> is probably easier to build. You can see
> a sketch of one at www.goedjn.com/sketch/pump2v.gif
>
> The flappers are leather disks, cut slightly smaller
> than the pipe, and fastened on the side away from the
> hole. The piston is two wooden or thick
> metal disks, with a leather gasket slightly LARGER
> than the pipe squeezed between them. When new,
> this will make the pump stiff, as they wear, you
> trade ease-of motion for leaky gasket. The closer
> you can make the metal (wood) disks fit, them better.
>
> If you don't have the ability to weld the retainer
> plate in, you can capture it between two sections
> of threaded pipe connected with a union,
> or bolt it through the upper pipe-cap in
> a manner similar to how the piston is put together.
> Packing material should be available at good
> plumbers-supply, but plain old cotton string
> will work in a pinch.
>
> --Goedjn

quote:

---

>
>404: Not found - The requested URL /sketch/pump2v.gif was not found on
>this server.
>
>Otherwise, sounds like it could be worth looking into.

quote:

---

> I'm hoping/trying to get away with this for under $50, TOTAL cash outlay.

quote:

---

>
> Have you seen this?
>
> http://www.survivalunlimited.com/deepwellpump.htm
>
> It says it has an output pressure of "up to" 100 psi so if your garden is
> 100 feet higher than your well then if I'm not mistaken this gadget should
> get the water up there (100 psi=230 feet?). It ain't cheap though. You
> did
> say you might like a solar option so if you already have some panels then
> that would greatly reduce the cost here. Of course the best option (for
> me
> anyway) would be for some of the very smart people on this newsgroup to
> figure out how to make a homebrew model and post the instructions :-) I
> intend to attempt it someday but not right now (and I'm not sure I'm smart
> enough). I'm thinking a $15 surplus windshield wiper motor might be a
> starting point...
>

quote:

---

>In article <5vsgb1tsdlvcsek21d7u79jo7aijov4d96@4ax.com>,
> Goedjn <prose@mail.uri.edu> wrote:
>
>
>404: Not found - The requested URL /sketch/pump2v.gif was not found on
>this server.
>
>Otherwise, sounds like it could be worth looking into.

quote:

---

>power consumption above what your well pump is doing now. A few
>plastic barrels hooked in series and filled with a RAM pump ought to

quote:

---

>
> That's not exactly true.. The water that you drive the ramp-pump
> with is in turn driven by the well pump. If the system runs 24-7,
> so does the well-pump. This is not going to be cheap...

quote:

---

>I'm hoping/trying to get away with this for under $50, TOTAL cash outlay.

quote:

---

>
> That's not exactly true.. The water that you drive the ramp-pump
> with is in turn driven by the well pump. If the system runs 24-7,
> so does the well-pump. This is not going to be cheap...

quote:

---

>Google Deep Well Solar Pump and you will come up with some companies
>who may have already solved this problem.

quote:

---

>Your problem of lifting a volume of water a great vertical distance is
>very similar to lifting unwanted water from a deep mine shaft. This
>requires either a powerful electric motor of impeller design or a
>piston pump arrangement whereby a piston at the water source is

quote:

---

>
>
>Goedjn wrote:
>
>To say the least. Ram pumps only move a very small fraction of the
>water passing through it. He would have his regular pump running
>constantly for only a small amount delivered on site. If a powered
>pump is going to be used, make it one that delivers all the water
>pumped to the tank.
>
>Harry K

quote:

---

> Yeah, that's it. Crack the water at the bottom, capture the
> hydro, float it to the top in balloons or up a pipe, and run
> it through a fuel-cell to (A) turn it back into water, and
> (B) generate more power to run the cracker at the bottom...

quote:

---

>
>Here's my situation:
>I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down" than flat. When
>you get right down to it, I'm basically hanging off the side of a
>mountain. I want a small vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my
>planning now. (Already too late in the season around here to do anything
>this year - I've basically got to build it from scratch)
>
>I'm wanting to put in about five or six 20 foot rows of sweet corn, a
>couple rows each of peas and beans, half a dozen tomato plants, half a
>dozen bell pepper plants, and maybe 10 hills of mixed squash and cukes -
>I figure my plans will need about a 20 by 30 foot plot.

quote:

---

>
> Here's my situation:
> I live on a piece of property that's more "up and down" than flat. When
> you get right down to it, I'm basically hanging off the side of a
> mountain. I want a small vegetable garden next year, so I'm starting my
> planning now. (Already too late in the season around here to do anything
> this year - I've basically got to build it from scratch)
>
> I'm wanting to put in about five or six 20 foot rows of sweet corn, a
> couple rows each of peas and beans, half a dozen tomato plants, half a
> dozen bell pepper plants, and maybe 10 hills of mixed squash and cukes -
> I figure my plans will need about a 20 by 30 foot plot.
>
> That part is fairly easy. The "fun" starts when I try to water it. (And
> I'll definitely have to do that due to the climate here in the foothills
> of northern California)
>
> Y'see, the only place I can put a garden patch this size is further up
> the hill from the house. Due to existing buildings and horse-pens, and
> the layout of the property, that's my only option. This is OK (although
> the hike up and down the hill to tend it is going to be "interesting",
> to put it mildly - particularly when toting a couple of five-gallon
> buckets of horse manure each trip to build some usable soil) except for
> one detail: How to get water to it. The existing pump simply WILL NOT
> get water that high - My chosen spot is something like 80 to 100
> vertical feet above the wellhouse, and after some testing, no amount of
> "choking down" the hose/pipe to reduce the amount of head I need seems
> able to get water to it from the nearest hose-bib. Even if it did, the
> pressure would be so low by the time it got there that the sprinklers
> would be more like "dribblers".
>
> So I've hit on what *MAY* be a solution: I can get water to within about
> 30-40 vertical feet of the planned garden patch using plain old garden
> hose or PVC pipe "Tee"-ed off the line that feeds the closest horse
> trough, so I'm figuring that I can put a reservoir of some sort (right
> now, the working idea is a plastic 55 gallon drum, maybe a couple of
> them, gotten as "They're garbage to us - Haul 'em away if you want 'em!"
> from a local packing plant that gets their syrup for making fruit salad
> in them) at the limit of what the existing pump can lift to, let it fill
> the tank(s), and then run some sort of pump from the reservoir up the
> rest of the hill. Trouble is, commercially available pumps for such a
> task are pretty pricey, and I'm doing this on a budget that, by
> neccessity, has to stay real close to zero. If I can do it using
> "salvage" or "surplus" stuff, so much the better.
>
> Right now, my working plan for the pump consists of two nested pieces of
> PVC pipe - The larger diameter piece would be fixed, with a "caged ball"
> style check valve at the bottom, allowing water to flow in, but not flow
> out, with the smaller piece having the same arrangement, only in reverse
> (out, not in) at the opposite end. The smaller piece would then fit
> inside the larger, allowing a telescoping motion. (Some kind of
> gasket/O-ring type seal would probably be mandatory - That's one of
> those nitpicky details I'll worry about as things progress - right now,
> I just want a sanity check on the basic concept)
>
> If things work as planned, the cycle would go something like this:
> Starting from "fully collapsed" (minimum overall length), the smaller
> section of pipe would be pulled out of the larger, causing the "output"
> check valve in the end of it to close, either due to suction, or the
> pressure from any water currently in the output plumbing. As the smaller
> section is pulled farther out, suction would develop in the expanding
> chamber the two pieces form, opening the intake valve at the bottom of
> the large section, and drawing water (or perhaps air if it isn't already
> "primed" - I'd expect such a design would be intrinsically self-priming
> if fed with reasonably rigid plumbing?) into the expanding chamber. At
> the end of the "out" stroke/beginning of the "in" stroke, the lower
> check valve closes, trapping some volume of water (or, again, air if not
> primed) inside the chamber. At this point, continuing to collapse the
> smaller tube into the larger would reduce the volume inside the chamber,
> increasing pressure, and opening the upper check valve, allowing the
> water (or air) to escape inot the outlet-side plumbing. As the
> "collapse" of the chamber continues, the water inside would be forced
> into the output plumbing, pushing water through the system to the top of
> the hill. Then the cycle repeats.
>
> Anybody see any bugs in the system so far?
>
> Obviously, it's going to have to be fairly low flow. I figure on getting
> around that by placing a second reservoir further up the slope from
> where the garden will be, then letting gravity supply enough head to run
> the sprinklers - Basically, ending up with what amounts to a physically
> large two-stage pump - "Regular" pump in the wellhouse, to first
> reservoir, second pump at reservoir lifting to a second, even higher,
> reservoir, then gravity driving the water from the second reservoir
> through the sprinklers and onto the garden.
>
> Sane? Insane? Somewhere in between?
>
> Next concept is trying to power the secondary pump - "Grid" electricity
> is pretty much out due to the distance from the nearest source - Better
> than 300 feet. It'd be pretty pricey to make it happen, not to mention
> being at least worrisome to me in terms of potential fire danger. (A
> *VERY* serious concern in these parts - A spark from a bulldozer blade
> hitting a rock got a multi-thousand acre, umpty-bazillion dollar fire
> going last year - In the "Isn't it ironic?" department: the operator was
> in the process of cutting a firebreak)
>
> Gas engine is less than desirable due to aesthetic concerns - I live out
> here "in the backside of beyond" at least partly because I want as
> little as possible to do with engine noise, and running a gas engine
> would rather soundly defeat that concept. However, I'm realist enough to
> understand that it may end up being my only viable option. (never mind
> the fact that the price of gas is going to eat into my savings from not
> having to buy my produce at the store...)
>
> I'd be tickled pink if I could manage to run this thing from a windmill
> (not likely due to location, but maybe...) or solar (Got a few PV panels
> hanging around, although I don't know the ratings on them), if I could
> figure out how much "oomph" I need to do the job. Obviously, that's
> going to be a function of how large my sections of pipe for the
> secondary pump are. Anybody got any numbers for me to tinker with on
> that front?
>
> As far as actual power transmission, I'm thinking some sort of cam or
> perhaps crankshaft type mechanism to turn rotary motion into linear.
> Obviously, it's going to need to be "long throw" - unless I settle for
> only refilling the "working" reservoir over the course of days...
>
> Details of the linkages and such are just that: details - They can be
> worried about later, assuming I don't get shot down in flames because
> the basic idea has more holes in it than a screen door.
>
> So... What say you, folks? Is my concept at least workable, or should I
> look in another direction?
>
> --
> Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21,

quote:

---

> Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in

quote:

---

> subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
> See <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html> for full details.

quote:

---

>
> One I haven't read yet, do you have a air compressor?
> line un water filled barrels airtight and blow the water through a hose.
> More dangerous, do it with steam, better don't use plastic barrels then
>
> Richard
>
>

quote:

---

> In article <xaHue.79820$9A2.34041@edtnps89>,
> "The Bald XXX Prairie Farm" <rosielle@telus<nojunk>planet.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yep, got one that'll do 95 PSI. I'd considered a variant on that idea,
> but haven't decided if it's worth even attempting... sort of like the
> "bubble-pump" that some fish-tank filters use - Container of water,
> submerged pipe with a belled end, air-supply below bell, bubbles go up,
> water goes with 'em.
>
> I'd suspect it would be somewhat less than practical for the amount of
> lift needed, though...
>

quote:

---

> On 22 Jun 2005 22:15:24 -0700, "harry k" <turnkey4099@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Oops, I did not make myself very clear- sorry about that. If one
> wanted to move water in a hurry, you would need to let ~90% of the
> water drain as waste water. However, one can hook a RAM pump into
> ones house water supply. About 10-25% (depending on diameter of the
> pump and pressure in the line) of all water used in the house would
> then be pumped up the hill. If one figures on about 50 gallons of
> water use per person per day with 4 people (200 gallons) this would
> pump between 20 and 50 gallons of water up the hill *per day* with
> only *very* minimal extra energy required. I figure he'll need about
> 50 gallons a week for his garden. One could run a RAM pump off the
> shower and easily achieve that- assuming 4x20 gal showers per day.
>
>
> -Rick

quote:

---

> "Don Bruder" <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:5fHue.1747$p%3.13395@typhoon.sonic.net...
> Nope, just like a spray can, compressed air above water will push the water
> through the hose up the hill, just make sure you have enough water, the hose
> will take a lot over that distance and than you want something to come out
> at the end. Make a one way valve in the hose construction and you wont have
> to fill the hose every time.
>
> Richard

quote:

---

>It all comes down to the energy required to lift it that far and cost
>for infastructure. It is going to cost one way or the other. Either
>do it up front with a dedicated water pump or do it over time by paying
>for energy use above and beyond what a dedicated pump would use. The
>air drive is sorta reasonable but cost to operate the compressor would
>be the killer. Manual piston pumps are feasible but the energy to
>drive them is daunting. 1 man power isn't going to put much water per
>session up that hill.
>
>Harry K
>

quote:

---

>
> Compressed air sounds good, but as the above poster suggests, it takes
> a lot of energy to operate an air compressor (beyond the size of a
> fish tank airrator).
>
> Compressed air is expensive in other ways. It can be dirty, (if oil
> pumps air used). Oil-less compressors do exist but most are not
> designed for continuous or near continuous duty. Heavy duty
> maintenance is often required. Changing bearings, seals, gaskets,
> etc.
>
> In accounting practice, anywhere compressed air is needed generally it
> is considered an "expense" center with a hefty budget.
>
> Beachcomber
>