# Eheim 2215 and 2217 facts and DIY performance mods.



## John7429

Great info. Thanks for the effort!


----------



## imeridian

Great work! 

This bit is probably the most important of all:


> However,my biggest surprise was that the output on both of the filters was the SAME,with the included Eheim filter media,and with empty canisters.


It illustrates the 'high torque' aspect that I had attempted to point out some time earlier. These filters will maintain their flow as they become clogged, whereas some others have flow rate drop significantly just by adding media.

The impeller information is also quite valuable, now we know someone with a smaller 2215 will be able to boost flow rate by simply swapping the impeller.


----------



## dekstr

Great test!

It is great knowing you can boost the flow rate by changing the impeller! I really appreciate this info!


----------



## fshfanatic

It is interesting about the impeller swap. However, these canisters were designed and proven to function exceptionally as designed. 

I personally do not buy that "more flow makes for better filtration".


----------



## lescarpentier

imeridian said:


> Great work!
> 
> This bit is probably the most important of all:
> 
> 
> It illustrates the 'high torque' aspect that I had attempted to point out some time earlier. These filters will maintain their flow as they become clogged, whereas some others have flow rate drop significantly just by adding media.
> 
> The impeller information is also quite valuable, now we know someone with a smaller 2215 will be able to boost flow rate by simply swapping the impeller.


Thanks a lot! All of you guys.
I plan on conducting more tests on these filters in the future,and I want to test the 2217 that is on my tank now after another month of use,and a 2213 currently in use.The 2215 and the 2217 use the same spray bar and from testing I see that they are too restricting,even on the smaller 2215.One of my next tests will be to modify the spray bars by drilling holes to eliminate the restriction so the flow will be the same as without it.

I really suspect that the 2 motors are identical except for the impellers.I am not an engineer,but I think that the larger intake on the 2217 with it's added pressure is responsible for the additional flow rate on the 2217.


----------



## lescarpentier

fshfanatic said:


> It is interesting about the impeller swap. However, these canisters were designed and proven to function exceptionally as designed.
> 
> I personally do not buy that "more flow makes for better filtration".


I agree with you completely,however with more and more people adding accessories,reactors,uvs etc,the flow rate is reduced below what the engineers at Eheim originally intended.By overdriving the 2215 you can approximate original flow rate after accessories are installed.Another point to consider is that by overdriving the 2215 you barely exceed the advertised flow rate.

Like I said,my original intention was to clear up some unanswered questions regarding flow rates,however I took a step or two further.


----------



## fshfanatic

Good point! That didnt occur to me.

If you drill out the spray bar, you will lose considerable pressure and with that you will lose flow. Yes, I have done this and had to purchase new bars.

It wouldnt be the first time Eheim used the same motor assembly on different model filters in the same line. ie the Pro II 2026 and 2028. They are identical and rated at different flow rates. What gets me is one would think that the 2026 with less media, hence less resistance would be rated with more flow, however it isnt.


----------



## lescarpentier

fshfanatic said:


> Good point! That didnt occur to me.
> 
> If you drill out the spray bar, you will lose considerable pressure and with that you will lose flow. Yes, I have done this and had to purchase new bars.


I have to disagree with you,in part,on this one.You will lose a little pressure,but flow will be increased,but perhaps you may lose a little water movement.With the 2217 you lose 27 gph when you use the spray bar.Even after drilling holes you will have more pressure versus an open hose,however my goal is to get the same flow (gph) when using the spray bar.


----------



## digthemlows

Thanks! Invaluable information! I'd love to see other tests on other filters! There's a great one out there on the Big Ones the FX5 Vs. the big eheim......very intersting stuff!


----------



## EdTheEdge

Read this with GREAT interest. Thanks for taking the time and expense. I can't wait to see what else your experiments discover!


----------



## Gatekeeper

lescarpentier said:


> I have to disagree with you,in part,on this one.You will lose a little pressure,but flow will be increased,but perhaps you may lose a little water movement.With the 2217 you lose 27 gph when you use the spray bar.Even after drilling holes you will have more pressure versus an open hose,however my goal is to get the same flow (gph) when using the spray bar.


Very well said. However, to claim you "lose a little pressure" is not really a valid statement. The increase in flow is due to the lose of pressure because the efficiency of the pump is increasing and providing a better operating point along the pump system curve. So, you may be losing more pressure than may be realized. 

However, a "closed loop pump" that is in a canister filter does have some interesting dynamics (perfect example was you raising the canisters and not seeing much change in the performance). This is due to the fact that the free water surface is the same for both the intake and outflow, thus the static head component of the headlosses is pretty much negated (However there is a point where the back pressure of the water against the pump is greater than the ability to pump the water).

Great experiment. Does the 2213 have the same body type and pump as well?


----------



## fshfanatic

gmccreedy said:


> Great experiment. Does the 2213 have the same body type and pump as well?


Yes, it they all look identical, but vary in size as they increase in model number.


----------



## lescarpentier

gmccreedy said:


> Great experiment. Does the 2213 have the same body type and pump as well?


Thanks for the very clear and interesting explanation about the filter dynamics.You must have some education,or at least some experience in this field. 

The 2213 has the same body type,but I doubt that the pump is the same.The impeller well cover is smaller,and looks different.My 2213 is currently in use,but I will be disassembling it soon for testing because I am interested myself.I will post the flow results and comments as soon as the testing is complete.


----------



## fshfanatic

The pumphead is smaller, quite a bit smaller. I want to say that the impeller magnet is also smaller. But I never specifically checked.


----------



## Gatekeeper

lescarpentier said:


> Thanks for the very clear and interesting explanation about the filter dynamics.You must have some education,or at least some experience in this field.


I have dabbled! roud: 

But I will admit, the micro level of the pumps and hydraulics of the systems for aquariums is a bit volatile due to the different types of installations that people use.

Your experiment will certainly provide a "realtime" baseline for comparison.

Would be very interesting if you could develope some operating points with standard reactors sizes and venturies that people use and the losses or gains you encounter.

I read that you are measuring this on a volumetric rate, but how is this being done? Do you have a control container full of a preset volume that you are pumping? There are flow meters available on the market that are relatively inexpensive. Here is one http://www.drsfostersmith.com/product/prod_display.cfm?pcatid=14681


----------



## lescarpentier

gmccreedy said:


> Your experiment will certainly provide a "realtime" baseline for comparison.
> 
> Would be very interesting if you could develope some operating points with standard reactors sizes and venturies that people use and the losses or gains you encounter.
> 
> I read that you are measuring this on a volumetric rate, but how is this being done? Do you have a control container full of a preset volume that you are pumping? There are flow meters available on the market that are relatively inexpensive. Here is one


I have seen these flow meters advertised and some day I want to have one,but I don't have one now.:icon_cry: What I did first was to determine that there are 16 cups to a gallon.I used an actual measuring cup then put 8 measured cups of water into a pitcher,marked it,then put 10 pitchers into a 5 gallon bucket and marked that.The 5 gallon level was very close to the second rib down from the top of the bucket.(A very crude and cumbersome method,I know,but accurate)I wanted my findings to be undisputable,and I felt that the extra effort for accuracy would be appreciated by the readers of this thread.

These 2 filters are going to remain test vehicles until I can not think of any more tests to do.I want to test the flow through a reactor,and I want to determine the flow loss,if any,when using 90 degree elbows.At this time I do not have a reactor to test,but plan on acquiring one of the Rex style to test in the near future.I have a Hydor inline heater that I will test,however I do not anticipate any flow loss from it.


----------



## Gatekeeper

So, the filters draw from the one container then discharge to another container? Is the water surface at the same elevation?

Keep in mind that my statements regarding the close loop system are out the window here because you have variable elevations changes between the draw container and the fill container. So, there is some variability to the results, but close enough for an average, but as long as the two water surfaces are very close to the same.


----------



## lescarpentier

gmccreedy said:


> So, the filters draw from the one container then discharge to another container? Is the water surface at the same elevation?
> 
> Keep in mind that my statements regarding the close loop system are out the window here because you have variable elevations changes between the draw container and the fill container. So, there is some variability to the results, but close enough for an average, but as long as the two water surfaces are very close to the same.


Good point! This variable never occurred to me,and I hope that this is not a serious flaw in my tests.

The buckets were both placed at the same height,but the discharge bucket started out empty.However I did keep the level full on the bucket that I was drawing from,adding water as it was being pumped out.The elevation of the water was different,about 14 inches in the beginning,gradually being reduced to about 3 inches in the end.


----------



## Gatekeeper

If its a few inches, then I can't see too much flaw here.

However, a good way to do this would be to fill your draw bucket to the 10 gallon mark. Place this in an almost filled aquarium. As you suck from the draw bucket and discharge into the aquarium, the draw bucket will begin to float up maintaining constant water surface between the two bodies.

This is a bit overboard I think and I don't think you will see much difference in your results since you are rounding a bit anyway. But food for thought at least and a valid disclaimer!! 

Another option would be to use very flat containers that have minimal drawdown (like a big tuberware bin)


----------



## lescarpentier

gmccreedy said:


> If its a few inches, then I can't see too much flaw here.
> 
> However, a good way to do this would be to fill your draw bucket to the 10 gallon mark. Place this in an almost filled aquarium. As you suck from the draw bucket and discharge into the aquarium, the draw bucket will begin to float up maintaining constant water surface between the two bodies.
> 
> This is a bit overboard I think and I don't think you will see much difference in your results since you are rounding a bit anyway. But food for thought at least and a valid disclaimer!!
> 
> Another option would be to use very flat containers that have minimal drawdown (like a big tuberware bin)


Very good suggestions! However at this time I do not have the resources to implement these suggestions,and my tank contains too many plants.What I can do at this time is to elevate the discharge bucket 6 or 7 inches to minimize this variable.I will most certainly keep your suggestions in mind for the future.

Thanks for the input,and for the help with perfecting my future testing!


----------



## Gatekeeper

Keep us posted on these tests. Excellent research and I applaud your taking the initiative!


----------



## deeda

I had contacted Eheim regarding their posted flow rates on April 5, 2008 & this is the response I received. 

Thank you very much for contacting us regarding our products. All of your comments and questions are valuable. We use your feedback to create the most effective line of aquarium and pond products available. 

*Our filter’s flow rates are determined without filter media in place, as they are considered to be the maximum flow rate one could obtain from each of the units.*

If you have any other questions or wish to discuss this further, please email back or give us a call at 1-800-847-0659. 

Best Regards, 

Brian Bridgwater 
Technical Service and Research 
MARS Fishcare, North America
Phone: 1-800-847-0659 
Email: [email protected]

Also, pump flow rates are determined with zero feet of head & no reduction at the inlet or outlet of the pump.

The testing you are doing is still very interesting & I'm looking forward to the results when you add other potential reduction equipment into the mix.

See post #31 for my correction to this post. Sorry about the wrong mfg.


----------



## lescarpentier

deeda said:


> *Our filter’s flow rates are determined without filter media in place, as they are considered to be the maximum flow rate one could obtain from each of the units.*
> 
> Email: [email protected]
> 
> Also, pump flow rates are determined with zero feet of head & no reduction at the inlet or outlet of the pump.


Thanks for researching this info.
This is very revealing,and it is always nice to hear what the manufacturer has to say.Maybe some units do achieve their advertised flow rates,while others don't due to manufacturing tolerances.I want to check the flow on the 2217 that is now on my tank to see if the results are different.The e-mail address is puzzling though.Could Eheim be somehow affiliated with Aquarium Pharmaceuticals now?? It sounds suspicious.  When I tried to contact Eheim it was "Eheim North American",but that web page is no longer available.

How were you able to contact them?


----------



## jgb77

I thought that MARS fishcare was the company that makes Rena filters, not Eheims. Are you sure you didn't contact them about Rena filters?


----------



## lescarpentier

jgb77 said:


> I thought that MARS fishcare was the company that makes Rena filters, not Eheims. Are you sure you didn't contact them about Rena filters?


Apparently this is the case.I called them and only got a recording,but I listened to the message and there was no mention of Eheim.


----------



## tslata214

Great info. Thanks for the effort!


----------



## John7429

tslata214 said:


> Great info. Thanks for the effort!


Whoa... echo...


----------



## Craigthor

great info. thanks for your time and effort.


----------



## lescarpentier

Hey,
you're welcome guys,all of you.
I'm ordering parts for my 2213 for testing and I will post a thread on that filter in 2 or 3 weeks.It will involve some more invasive modifications,which should,and ought to be fun.


----------



## deeda

Sorry about that, I pasted the wrong email. The 1st one was regarding the Rena canister filters. I emailed a couple manufacturers. 

The following is my email to Eheim.

Hi,
I would like to know whether the flow rates for your canister filters are determined with or without the recommended media for that model filter. Thank you for your assistance.

This is the response I received regarding Eheim canisters.

The maximum flow rate of the unit is determined without filter media at zero head pressure. You might loose 10-15% of flow once the filter is full of filter media at a distance of 4ft. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require further assistance. 

Yours truly,

Ernesto Cedeno

Technical Support

[email protected] 

http://www.eheim.com/ 

EHEIM North America Reg.


----------



## lescarpentier

deeda said:


> The maximum flow rate of the unit is determined without filter media at zero head pressure. You might loose 10-15% of flow once the filter is full of filter media at a distance of 4ft.
> 
> Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require further assistance.


Well that was an anticlimactic and evasive answer.What do they mean by "might"? Which filter model?"Might" sounds a bit unprofessional to me.It would be nice to talk to somebody higher up on the food chain.

I have to hand it to you though deeda.They have never answered any of my e-mails,but then again,I was asking for more than you were....Much more.


----------



## deeda

Well I do know that the 2028 is rated for 277GPH but with recommended media it is 198GPH (written on the original box). 
The 2217 is 264GPH but with recommended media is 112GPH (not sure if this is on the box or was stated on another forum).

I've been putting together an Excel spreadsheet to list different filter specifications so I can offer correct answers that people post on different forums. A lot of this info is not shown on the package the filter comes in or on their websites so I have been contacting manufacturers to get more info. I also update my 'list' when reading other posts in regards to tubing sizes, delivery head max., installation height, etc. My hope is to be able to post this info so its readily available for everyone to look at. Obviously I have way too much time on my hands.:icon_mrgr


----------



## lescarpentier

deeda said:


> Well I do know that the 2028 is rated for 277GPH but with recommended media it is 198GPH (written on the original box).
> The 2217 is 264GPH but with recommended media is 112GPH (not sure if this is on the box or was stated on another forum).


OK,we do know what Eheim claims,but we can not really trust their fugures.I don't know where you got the w/media flow figure for the 2217,but I can tell you with absolute certainty that it is wrong.Look at the first post in this thread and you will see the "real time" figures for the 2215 and 2217 classic.

The advertised ratings for the 2028 are 277gph and 198gph w/media,and the 2026 is 251gph and 172gph w/media.With a little research you will find that both of these filters have the exact same pump head.Do you see what I am driving at? The 2026 has 1/3 less media,and yet they expect me to believe their figures.Unless the geniuses at Eheim have discovered a way to manipulate physics there is something definitely wrong with this picture.This is one of the things that made me throw all of the advertised figures out the window.I wanted to know the truth.


----------



## steven

lescarpentier said:


> Well that was an anticlimactic and evasive answer.What do they mean by "might"? Which filter model?"Might" sounds a bit unprofessional to me.It would be nice to talk to somebody higher up on the food chain.


I think their response was pretty good. I think they'd say "might" because there are so many variables. Someone might use a little more or less media, or a different kind. Since they said 10-15%, I think they were basically saying it won't have much impact. Do you think your testing method would notice a change of 10%? Emptying the 5 gallon bucket would take about 90 seconds if flowing at 200 gph, and a 10% drop (180 gph) would take about 100 seconds. Are you getting consistant enough results to see that difference?

Oh, you mentioned that you plan to test whether the Hydor inline heater has much impact. Any idea when you'll be doing that? I'd be very interested in the results.

Thanks for posting this thread. It is very interesting! I wish magazines would do really good reviews that include information like this. For you to personally test these takes a signifcant investment in equipment and time. Whenever magazines do reviews, they are so subjective. Thanks for providing us with some objective data.


----------



## lescarpentier

steven said:


> I think their response was pretty good. I think they'd say "might" because there are so many variables. Someone might use a little more or less media, or a different kind. Since they said 10-15%, I think they were basically saying it won't have much impact.


I still think that he gave an evasive answer,and I know that either he lied,or is ignorant about filters.The advertised ratings for the 2028 are 277gph and 198gph w/media,and the 2026 is 251gph and 172gph w/media.That is more like 30 percent,not 10-15.And this information is printed on the boxes!In my testing of the classics there was 0% difference in the flow with,or without media.What people don't seem to understand is that a canister filter is not a suction pump,it is a circulation pump.If the impeller chamber is not full of water it will not pump,but will cavitate and make noise.Therefore,(at least with the classics),if the media is plugged to such an extent that the flow is impeded,then the pump will cavitate.



steven said:


> Do you think your testing method would notice a change of 10%? Emptying the 5 gallon bucket would take about 90 seconds if flowing at 200 gph, and a 10% drop (180 gph) would take about 100 seconds. Are you getting consistant enough results to see that difference?


I wanted my tests to be as accurate as possible,and indisputable.There are 16 cups per gallon.I put 8 cups into a pitcher and marked it.I then put 10 of those marked pitchers into a 5 gallon bucket,and marked that.I turned on the filter at the same time that I started a stop watch,and I kept adding water to the bucket that was being emptied so the siphon would stay the same.As soon as the filter filled the bucket to the mark I turned it off and measured the seconds.I divided the number of seconds by 3600,and then multiplied this figure by 5.This is a tedious method,but extremely accurate.



steven said:


> Oh, you mentioned that you plan to test whether the Hydor inline heater has much impact. Any idea when you'll be doing that? I'd be very interested in the results.


I am not sure when I will be testing again,but I studied this heater carefully before I installed it,and judging by the construction I doubt that the reduction,if any,would be measurable.


----------



## Gatekeeper

Their comment was a "liability answer". They can't say definitively what is what because if you prove otherwise, their product could be discredited. This is not a bad thing, EHEIM is a proven filtration system and we all know that (whether your an EHEIM PIMP OR NOT...lol)

So, let your testing speak for itself. Its impressed me! I do think your methods are outstanding, but they are disputable a bit with the varying head factor I had pointed out to you a while back. But this should be minor with regards to the low volume testing sample you have selected.

You are really driving me to follow suit with you here and set up my own case study in my basement. Damn you for peaking my interest!!! LOL.

Keep up the good work brother!


----------



## ron521

One reason the tested filters pumped the SAME flow rate with and without media is that neither the flow rate or the pressure is all that high to begin with for a motor drawing that many watts. 
Rather than move the water rapidly through a small volume of media many times per hour, Eheim chooses to use slow flow and a large volume of media, so the media isn't particularly tightly packed and doesn't impede flow much (or at all apparantly). Slow flow and a whole lot of media allows a long time for the water to be in contact with the media, so the biological process takes place effectively.
However, if the same test were repeated over intervals as the media became dirty, the measured flow rate will be observed to decrease, as it must in a system with no bypass. If the only path the water can take is through the media, then clogged media will result in slower flow.


----------



## lescarpentier

ron521 said:


> Rather than move the water rapidly through a small volume of media many times per hour, Eheim chooses to use slow flow and a large volume of media, so the media isn't particularly tightly packed and doesn't impede flow much (or at all apparantly). Slow flow and a whole lot of media allows a long time for the water to be in contact with the media, so the biological process takes place effectively.


Slow flow? I wouldn't call 229 gph slow.Compare it to other filters,and not the high figures that are in the advertisements,but the filter circulation numbers printed on the boxes.A lower flow rate means longer contact with the media,but boosting the flow means the water passes through the media more times per hour making up for the loss of contact times.




ron521 said:


> However, if the same test were repeated over intervals as the media became dirty, the measured flow rate will be observed to decrease, as it must in a system with no bypass. If the only path the water can take is through the media, then clogged media will result in slower flow.


This is what almost everybody thinks,however this is not at all applicable to the filters in question.Most people think that all filters are suction pumps,but in reality they are circulation pumps.If the impeller chamber is not full of water the pump will cavitate,making noise and pumping little or no water.So the theory of flow rate dropping off gradually as the media gets dirty is wrong.The filter will pump consistently until the point is reached when there is not enough water to keep the impeller chamber full and then the cavitation begins immediately.I have in fact tested a filter that ran for nearly 4 months and the flow rate was exactly the same as with clean media.Read this thread.
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/equipment/66141-eheim-2213-flow-rates-diy-flow.html


----------



## ron521

"Slow flow? I wouldn't call 229 gph slow."

If my Emperor flowed so little, I'd think it was broken or the media badly clogged. Marineland flow rates are certified by independent labs, so the numbers printed on the box can be trusted. As everyone who reads this forum knows, and as your own independent tests have confirmed, Eheims claimed flow rates cannot be trusted.

"I have in fact tested a filter that ran for nearly 4 months and the flow rate was exactly the same as with clean media."

That may be the case, however this only means that your media was not sufficiently dirty. Had you extended the test for a longer time, you WOULD have seen a reduction in flow rate. If there is no path for the water except THROUGH the media, and the media becomes sufficiently clogged, then the water HAS to slow down. 

Eheims are primarily circulation pumps, in that the only thing keeping the canister full of water is the siphon. The pump itself is just pushing the water in the canister back uphill into the tank.

If the media is sufficiently clogged, then the pump is trying to push water out of the canister faster than it can be replaced by the siphon action. This effectively creates a negative pressure (I don't want to use the term "vacuum" because it is still full of water, even if at a lower pressure) inside the canister. This is the same as increasing the head against which the pump has to work, and slows the water leaving the canister. You can judge the strength of this negative pressure by removing the intake strainer on your filter, and putting your thumb over the bare end of the intake tube. If you do so, you may then possibly begin to consider an Eheim as a "suction pump".

I have personally observed the flow in my 2213 to slow to a trickle as a result of dirty media. Opening the filter and cleaning the media (and doing NOTHING else) restored flow. Next time this happens, I'll measure the flow and post the results on this forum. 

I've never experienced cavitation in my 2213 or for that matter, any of my other filters as a result of clogged media. 
I will concede that, if a seal is leaking on a canister, the negative pressure resulting from clogged media could draw in air from outside and result in cavitation, even though this has never happened to me.


----------



## lescarpentier

ron521 said:


> If my Emperor flowed so little, I'd think it was broken or the media badly clogged. Marineland flow rates are certified by independent labs, so the numbers printed on the box can be trusted.


You are comparing apples and oranges.Statements like these are irrelevant,and do nothing to strengthen your case.Maybe you trust these independent labs financed by Marineland,but I sure don't.Please furnish link to verify this. 



ron521 said:


> As everyone who reads this forum knows, and as your own independent tests have confirmed, Eheims claimed flow rates cannot be trusted.


Nor can any manufacturers flow rates be trusted,but the Eheim figures are some of the closest,if not the closest to "real time" figures.Filters are tested differently in the labs,without hoses or anything that can hinder the flow.



ron521 said:


> Had you extended the test for a longer time, you WOULD have seen a reduction in flow rate. If there is no path for the water except THROUGH the media, and the media becomes sufficiently clogged, then the water HAS to slow down.


Sure,as I said,it will slow down ,or even stop,once the pump begins to cavitate. 



ron521 said:


> You can judge the strength of this negative pressure by removing the intake strainer on your filter, and putting your thumb over the bare end of the intake tube. If you do so, you may then possibly begin to consider an Eheim as a "suction pump".


Here you are getting mixed up.You feel the siphon which is providing the working filter with water.If what you said was true we could put the filter on a shelf above the tank.No,it doesn't work like that.The Classics are in fact a circulation pump,not a suction pump.




ron521 said:


> I have personally observed the flow in my 2213 to slow to a trickle as a result of dirty media. Opening the filter and cleaning the media (and doing NOTHING else) restored flow. Next time this happens, I'll measure the flow and post the results on this forum.


You did not clean the cooling channel?Or the impeller,and well? Perhaps you had a kinked hose and didn't notice it and when you reassembled your filter you removed the kink.



ron521 said:


> I've never experienced cavitation in my 2213 or for that matter, any of my other filters as a result of clogged media.
> I will concede that, if a seal is leaking on a canister, the negative pressure resulting from clogged media could draw in air from outside and result in cavitation, even though this has never happened to me.


When the media is so plugged as to reduce flow,it must cavitate.
The filters pump only what is available, so if the filter needs to draw fluids that are not there it begins to cavitate .This is the noise that you hear. It is not air, it is cavitating on Vapor, because the water column is beginning to separate and a void is being created.This is called Net Positive Suction Head,or NPSH.


----------



## ron521

Here is what Eheim themselves say with regard to flow and dirty media:

www.eheim.com/base/eheim/inhalte/index2747.html?key=detailantwort_18309_ehen
*Why does the filter performance deteriorate? classic 2213, 2215, 2217 *

"Deteriorating filter performance is generally caused 

1.	by dirty filter medium
2.	by wrong combination of filter media 
3.	by the hose installation 
4.	by dirty hoses or pump chamber
5.	by incorrect start-up 

For optimum, trouble-free running of the filter we recommend the following measures: 

1.	Clean filter media. 

2.	Check combination of filter media layer"

Layer filtration Diagram 2213 / 2215 / 2217:

Fill approx. 5 cm / 2" of coarse filter medium EHFIMECH on the bottom mesh and top with the filter cushion or a filter sponge pad. Fill in a large quantity of the biological filter medium EHFISUBSTRAT. Finally add a thin layer (max. 2 cm / 0,8") of filter membrane EHFISYNTH which retains minute dirt particles that have passed through the previous filtration layers. Never fill long-term filter media in net bags or nylon stockings. This leads to extreme deterioration in pump performance within a very short period of time. Remove filter media from their container for cleaning and rinse.





http://www.eheim.com/base/eheim/inhalte/index08dc.html?id=24883&typ=faq&bereich=produkte
*03. How often should a filter be cleaned?*

"There is no general rule because the necessary cleaning frequency depends on many factors such as size of the aquarium, population, vegetation, type and amount of feed. Therefore we recommend cleaning the filter only when the pump performance deteriorates noticeably."

To sum up, Eheim themselves confirm that dirty media reduce the flow through the filter, and say nothing whatsoever of cavitation. My own experience confirms this. If you think your experience differs, perhaps this is because you don't clearly understand what is actually happening inside your filter.
The idea that dirty media can only slow flow by inducing cavitation is simply incorrect.

Learn if you can, or refuse to learn if you will, but don't prevent others from learning. 

End of discussion.


----------



## lescarpentier

ron521 said:


> Here is what Eheim themselves say with regard to flow and dirty media: "Deteriorating filter performance is generally caused
> 
> 1. by dirty filter medium
> 2. by wrong combination of filter media
> 3. by the hose installation
> 4. by dirty hoses or pump chamber
> 5. by incorrect start-up


Where is flow mentioned? Deteriorating filter performance could be a number of things,and flow is only one of them.A cavitating pump is another,and is also considered "deteriorating performance".




ron521 said:


> To sum up, Eheim themselves confirm that dirty media reduce the flow through the filter, and say nothing whatsoever of cavitation.


Again,where is flow mentioned?Cavitation is not mentioned because few people would understand what it means,and technical terms are unnecesary for this guide.This users guide that you provided is in no way,shape, or form,a technical manual for engineers.It is a laymans guide,and that is all.




ron521 said:


> My own experience confirms this. If you think your experience differs, perhaps this is because you don't clearly understand what is actually happening inside your filter.


What experience?If you were experienced with canisters why are you a proponent of Penguin back filters?Your hypothesis should be shaped to the evidence,not vice versa.One should be aware of the dangers of being overly attached to an idea.Nevertheless,your assumptions should not put a damper on your openness to alternatives.



ron521 said:


> The idea that dirty media can only slow flow by inducing cavitation is simply incorrect.


It is correct.If the flow slows enough cavitation will occur.Facts do not contradict each other.Theories are the source of contradictions.


----------



## ron521

Everyone reading this thread, kindly respond to the following questions:

Have you observed a reduction in flow through your personal filters as a result of dirty media? 


If you did, was cavitation occurring?


----------



## Craigthor

Cavitation is defined as the phenomenon of formation of vapour bubbles of a flowing liquid in a region where the pressure of the liquid falls below its vapour pressure.Cavitation is usually divided into two classes of behavior: inertial (or transient) cavitation and non-inertial cavitation. _Inertial cavitation is the process where a void or bubble in a liquid rapidly collapses, producing a shock wave. _*Such cavitation often occurs in pumps, propellers, impellers, and in the vascular tissues of plants.* _Non-inertial cavitation is the process where a bubble in a fluid is forced to oscillate in size or shape due to some form of energy input, such as an acoustic field._ *Such cavitation is often employed in ultrasonic cleaning baths and can also be observed in pumps, propellers etc.*

Just for your information yes Cavitation does happen with canisters, as well as HOB also!


----------



## ron521

To clarify, the question is not what cavitation is, or whether cavitation is possible in an aquarium filter, but rather:

"Have you personally observed a reduction in flow in your own filter as a result of clogged media?" and "If you observed reduced flow, did you also observe cavitation."

My own answer to that question would be "In 8 years and multiple tanks, clogged media has often reduced flow, but has not resulted in cavitation at ANY time with Eheim, Emperor or Whisper filters."


----------



## Gatekeeper

listen, you are both right and wrong here.

ron521, I have only witnessed a reduction in flow when my filter was really really gunked up. But, I can tell you that about a month ago, I had packed my fluval 405 with some fine media and had some serious issues. The pump WAS cavitating. You could here it (not see it), since the cavitation would occur at the impeller. I removed the media, and the noise went away.

So, my experience proved you both correct (and wrong). Available water was restricted, cavitation had occured as a result. Another good sign of cavitation is heat.

Is this to say that the minute you have restricted flow the pump will cavitate, NO. But it is the start of it for sure.

And lets just settle this now. All manufacturers "printed labels" are under strict conditions as stipulated in some kind of disclaimer. Usually there is also a little note somewhere that says, "results may vary..." or something...

I am ringing the bell, the two of you go back to your corners and drink some water. You both have made your points. 

No need to get to heated over aquarium filters.


----------



## filipem

Quick question Les,

Have you tried this with the 2213 yet?


----------



## Squawkbert

<2215 owner

Flow does drop off quite a bit as things get excessively dirty, no cavitation seen.


----------



## Buc_Nasty

lescarpentier said:


> Dispelling a myth.
> However,my biggest surprise was that the output on both of the filters was the SAME,with the included Eheim filter media,and with empty canisters.
> 
> Advertised flow rates are 164 gph for the 2215,and 264 gph 2217.
> 
> Results
> 
> {2215} ---------------w/2217 impeller
> 
> 
> 141.5 gph open tube ---171.5 open tube
> 
> 136 gph w/spray bar -----152.5 w/spray bar
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> {2217} --------------------w/2215 impeller
> 
> 229 gph open tube--------- 195.5 gph open tube
> 
> 202 gph w/spray bar ---------171 gph w/spray bar



*Just to 100% clarify, WITH MEDIA and a spray bar the 2217 got 202gph correct??*

I was going to buy two 2217's based on your tests, but then I found this thread which at the very least was interesting....

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/equipment/120979-eheim-flow-2215-2217-tested-terrible.html

This guy only got *134gph on his 2217*, which is drastically different than your results. Judging simply by your posts, attention to detail, and descriptions of testing methods I would trust your results more but these are huge differences....


----------



## lescarpentier

Buc_Nasty said:


> *Just to 100% clarify, WITH MEDIA and a spray bar the 2217 got 202gph correct??*
> 
> I was going to buy two 2217's based on your tests, but then I found this thread which at the very least was interesting....
> 
> http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/equipment/120979-eheim-flow-2215-2217-tested-terrible.html
> 
> This guy only got *134gph on his 2217*, which is drastically different than your results. Judging simply by your posts, attention to detail, and descriptions of testing methods I would trust your results more but these are huge differences....


All of these tests were with the supplied and recommended filter media and there are figures with or without the spray bar.I spent too many hours,time after time,and duplicating my tests which were consistent within about 5 gph.The guy who posted that thread is doing his math wrong,or his valves are partially shut.
I continue to stand behind my flow figures.


----------



## Buc_Nasty

lescarpentier said:


> All of these tests were with the supplied and recommended filter media and there are figures with or without the spray bar.I spent too many hours,time after time,and duplicating my tests which were consistent within about 5 gph.The guy who posted that thread is doing his math wrong,or his valves are partially shut.
> I continue to stand behind my flow figures.


I've found your test results in forums on several different sites. I've also done extensive testing of the 2217 after reading your posts and buying two 2217's for my 125g tank. I posted an overly detailed account of the tests on your older thread here: 

http://www.aquascapingworld.com/forum/equipment/526-eheim-2215-2217-facts-diy-performance-mods.html

but long story short, you tested on buckets. I tested on the actual tank with an actual setup of all brand new stock media, parts, hose length, and optimal positioning of all tubing, the canister, and water. Also with TWO different brand new 2217's. The highest I got was 150gph w/o a spray bar, brand new media. You said you got 229gph. Another thread a guy made said he got 134gph.
Posting this 230gph measurement all over all these forums is extremely misleading...from all my testing its not even close to true. I will retract that statement if you can tell me the difference between our tests that caused *a difference of 80gph from the exact same filter* (I really want you to be right and me to be wrong so my 2217's will get that high of flow!!!!)


----------



## Rudy

*Off Topic*

Sorry to get off topic , but does any one know if test like this were done on a Eheim Pro 3 ULTRA G160 (2075)? 
Thanks


----------



## ktownhero

I came in here hoping to find some cool DIY mods for Ehiem canisters, I ended up finding a bunch of pointless bickering.

Come on guys... These things have been around forever. Either use them or don't, but there's pretty much no value to this back and forth. 99.9% of successful aquarists never think about any of this crap... they just hook the filter up and forget about it.


----------



## JamesHockey

Can I put a 2215 impeller in a 2213?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## bsmith

JamesHockey said:


> Can I put a 2215 impeller in a 2213?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


Nope, the 2215 impeller is about 2x's the size of the 2213's.


----------



## bsmith

lescarpentier said:


> All of these tests were with the supplied and recommended filter media and there are figures with or without the spray bar.I spent too many hours,time after time,and duplicating my tests which were consistent within about 5 gph.The guy who posted that thread is doing his math wrong,or his valves are partially shut.
> I continue to stand behind my flow figures.


I just wanted to say hi, and that i believe you.


----------



## Buc_Nasty

bsmith said:


> I just wanted to say hi, and that i believe you.


I believed him too and bought 2 of them and figured I might as well test, and got results FAR (35%) lower. I'm not trying to be an ass...I'm trying to get to the bottom of this huge discrepancy. If he is right, I want to know what's wrong with my setup that's making it so much less powerful....I spent money on these filters and want them working at their full potential.

I could have just kept it to myself and let everyone continue being misled on multiple forums where he posted all this. Sounds like some of you would have preferred that.


----------



## bsmith

Ill still take comfort in knowing that of all the filters advertised flow rates, the Eheim is the closest to what is claimed. I personally own 9 Eheim filters and have been satisfied with every single one of them. 

I like Les, I have no idea who you are except that you have a Chappelles show screen name and are being pretty aggressive in your attempt to gain the public audience on this matter. So for me its not that I would prefer to be kept in the dark I just dont feel like listening to you.


----------



## Buc_Nasty

bsmith said:


> Ill still take comfort in knowing that of all the filters advertised flow rates, the Eheim is the closest to what is claimed. I personally own 9 Eheim filters and have been satisfied with every single one of them.
> 
> I like Les, I have no idea who you are except that you have a Chappelles show screen name and are being pretty aggressive in your attempt to gain the public audience on this matter. So for me its not that I would prefer to be kept in the dark I just dont feel like listening to you.


I'm satisfied with mine too, even with only 150gph flow.
I don't care if anyone but Les reads it b/c he's the only one that can tell me how he got such high flow, which is all I want to know.


----------



## Buc_Nasty

Buc_Nasty said:


> I've found your test results in forums on several different sites. I've also done extensive testing of the 2217 after reading your posts and buying two 2217's for my 125g tank. I posted an overly detailed account of the tests on your older thread here:
> 
> http://www.aquascapingworld.com/forum/equipment/526-eheim-2215-2217-facts-diy-performance-mods.html
> 
> but long story short, you tested on buckets. I tested on the actual tank with an actual setup of all brand new stock media, parts, hose length, and optimal positioning of all tubing, the canister, and water. Also with TWO different brand new 2217's. The highest I got was 150gph w/o a spray bar, brand new media. You said you got 229gph. Another thread a guy made said he got 134gph.
> Posting this 230gph measurement all over all these forums is extremely misleading...from all my testing its not even close to true. I will retract that statement if you can tell me the difference between our tests that caused *a difference of 80gph from the exact same filter* (I really want you to be right and me to be wrong so my 2217's will get that high of flow!!!!)


Well I found the discrepency...

*Home depot "5 gallon" buckets filled to the brim hold almost 5.75 gallons of water!!!!*

Sorry to doubt your tests Lescarpentier. I hope you understand though, I sat there for an hour testing all this stuff myself and coming nowhere near what you got, trying to think of every possibility. I paid so much attention to detail with the physics of the filter/tubing, two brand new 2217's, many tests for different factors, tested on the actual tank, but all the while my measuring device was 3/4 of a gallon bigger than I thought it was. Stupid mistake I guess I should have checked that. 

I just tested the same 2217 I used before, although now having run on a heavily stocked 125g for the past month or so, not cleaned out, and with an extra layer of filter floss and an extra 30ppi piece of foam, minus some of the stock ehfi substrat. No spray bar I got *202gph*. I don't think my measuring cups are exactly accurate either, so I would not be surprised at all if the 2217 got 229gph actual flow with no spray bar. I'm very glad because it was really bothering me that the 2 filters I bought weren't what I was expecting, but they absolutely are. 

I have to say this is an unbelievable filter. 200-229 actual of 264 advertised gph and only 20 watts of power. Unbelievable bio, comes packed with the best media, and I got mine for $121 each shipped. Best investment I've made involving aquariums. 

For everyone thinking of testing flow rate....home depot orange 5 gallon buckets actually hold around 5.75 gallons!!!!!!!!


----------



## bsmith

I knew it had to be something but I wasnt about to execute the tests myself. Good of you to post what the mistake was, sometimes its not easy to do.


----------



## 150EH

I have had 2 Eheim 2215's on a 150 gallon tall tank for eight years, do to lack of cash and a lack of interest until lately I had let my canisters go without cleaning for 18 to 22 months. We I did finally clean them despite the fact that they were full of mud and weighed about 25 pound each they continued to function producing clear water. I did notice that the output had slowed by almost half according to memory during water changes thw spray bars would throw water a little more than halfway across the tank. Even after the cleanings the flow seems to remain slowed although the impellers show no sign of wear what so ever I would guess the magnets have lost some of their potentcy. They did still pump good enough to clear debris from the exhast side tubing and threw bits for a couple of days but other than that the tubing look fairly clear with no algea build up or anything of the sort. I am considering replacing the impellers but at $32 bucks each I am afraid that I will end up with the same results thinking that it could be some other mechinism that has made the flow slower, but if I were to put the 2217 impeller assembly in my 2215's I shoud see a better result unless it could hurt the motor head in some way. Give me your thoughts please.


----------



## torsp

I am not thinking very clearly right now because I have not slept in 48hrs but Buc_Nasty go ahead and read the following statement by lescarpentier. That clarifies the 5/5.75g HD bucket discrepancy no? If I am wrong here than I apologize and need to get some sleep. So if that part of the equation has been eliminated than the only other possible explanation in your differing test results would be the use of magic.



lescarpentier said:


> *I have seen these flow meters advertised and some day I want to have one,but I don't have one now.:icon_cry: What I did first was to determine that there are 16 cups to a gallon.I used an actual measuring cup then put 8 measured cups of water into a pitcher,marked it,then put 10 pitchers into a 5 gallon bucket and marked that.The 5 gallon level was very close to the second rib down from the top of the bucket.(A very crude and cumbersome method,I know,but accurate)I wanted my findings to be undisputable,and I felt that the extra effort for accuracy would be appreciated by the readers of this thread.*





Buc_Nasty said:


> Well I found the discrepency...
> 
> *Home depot "5 gallon" buckets filled to the brim hold almost 5.75 gallons of water!!!!*
> 
> For everyone thinking of testing flow rate....home depot orange 5 gallon buckets actually hold around 5.75 gallons!!!!!!!!


----------



## Buc_Nasty

torsp said:


> I am not thinking very clearly right now because I have not slept in 48hrs but Buc_Nasty go ahead and read the following statement by lescarpentier. That clarifies the 5/5.75g HD bucket discrepancy no? If I am wrong here than I apologize and need to get some sleep. So if that part of the equation has been eliminated than the only other possible explanation in your differing test results would be the use of magic.


Agh it sure does. I didnt see that before


----------



## torsp

So you know what that means.......magic.....dark magic.



Buc_Nasty said:


> Agh it sure does. I didnt see that before


----------



## SeahorseDeb

*2215 water clarity issue*

Friends, I am new to this forum. It is the most extensive one I have found so far that deals with the flow rates of the Eheim 2215 vs. The 2217. I went back to 2008 and read all your posts, but didnt really feel satisfied that i could reason that my flow rate is my problem. I have a 90 gallon cichlid tank (it isn't planted...sorry) and just replaced my two Emperor 400's with a 2215. Of course, now I can hear myself think, but my water clarity isn't satisfactory. I washed out all the mediums with tank water, and carefully assembled it. I double checked my assembly and I know for certain it is correct. Today I added one more layer of fine white medium to it, near the top, but the clarity did not improve, however I also didn't notice a reduction in the flow output. I am at a loss as to what to do. I sure don't want to replace it, just figure out why the water isn't crystal clear like the Emperors maintained it. I have the input mounted towards the center back of the tank and the output flow bar mounted horizontally up near the top of the tank, slightly off center. Mounting it up near the top oxygenated the water, thus the location. I did not modify the intake length either. 

I did pick up on an earlier post to drill a small hole in the intake....great idea. 

Today I checked my ph, alkalinity, nitrate etc...levels after a 15 gallon change, all is well. 

Any suggestions, other than buy a impeller for the 2217 and change it out?? I dont really think that is going to make enough of a difference based on the members earlier postings. 

Thank you very kindly!!!
Deb


----------



## deeda

A 2215 is not sufficient for a 90G tank, especially if it is now the only filter, in my opinion.

What kind of fish are you keeping and how many of them are there?

BTW, Welcome to the Forum!!!


----------



## Buc_Nasty

I agree with Deeda. You won't get enough turnover or circulation with one 2215. I Have TWO 2217's on my 90g. It stays so clear you can't even tell there's water in it...I could get away with less filtration but the ridiculous clarity is definitely worth it IMO. Try running one or both of the emperor 400's as well that'd probly keep it clear. If I were you I'd add a 2217 if you can spend the extra $$...overall better...will keep the tank ultra crystal clear and easier to clean and like you said you can hear yourself think.

If you end up getting another canister filter, put one filter on each end so there's an intake and output on either end of the tank. Use the spray bars and point one downwards at a 45 degree angle and the other straight across the surface of the water. I messed around with all types of setups of the intakes and outputs, spraybars and no spraybars, both intakes at one end with both outputs at the other, etc etc and the way I said above is by far the best. People will say spraybars restrict flow but I tested mine the way its set up with spraybar vs non spray bar. Spray bar took 1 min 50 seconds to fill a home depot bucket to 5 gallon mark, non spray bar took 1 minute 44 seconds...negligible difference and the circulation the spraybar provides is well worth it...no debris accumulates anywhere on the bottom of the tank so I don't even have to gravel vac ever.


----------



## SeahorseDeb

Thank you two both of you. Dumb me, I was going on the amount of gallons contained in the tank it was rated for. I have 4 adult cichlids and about 16 juveniles ranging in dive from 3/4 inch to 1 inch. I have had them successfully for 2 years, but lost several adults a month ago. I also had one 5" female blue crayfish, but shr didn't survive her last molt so I have a 2" male in my hospital tank now.....he doesn't like his quarantine at all but I like to ensure good health before putting into the home tank. 

Ok, so I am under filtered. Makes sense. I understand the configuration you are suggesting so I will order another Eheim. I save about $80 purchasing online over LFS. 

Thank you!!


----------



## Vancat2

deb a Hydor Koralia or 2 might help, too


----------



## Gatekeeper

Why not put the Emporer 400's back on. That will certainly help you get back into a good filtration. Maybe reduce a little bit of the media in the 2215 also to get a bit more punch of flow through it.



SeahorseDeb said:


> Thank you two both of you. Dumb me, I was going on the amount of gallons contained in the tank it was rated for. I have 4 adult cichlids and about 16 juveniles ranging in dive from 3/4 inch to 1 inch. I have had them successfully for 2 years, but lost several adults a month ago. I also had one 5" female blue crayfish, but shr didn't survive her last molt so I have a 2" male in my hospital tank now.....he doesn't like his quarantine at all but I like to ensure good health before putting into the home tank.
> 
> Ok, so I am under filtered. Makes sense. I understand the configuration you are suggesting so I will order another Eheim. I save about $80 purchasing online over LFS.
> 
> Thank you!!


----------



## SeahorseDeb

I moved the Emperor 400's to a 55 gal tank which will winter over a few koi and goldfish we have in a 200 gallon pond outside. Last year we left them in, lost a couple, but I prefer to bring them in. Also, if the LFS gets some nice donated Koi, I can adopt them and have a place to winter them. Of course once these guys grow out of the 55 gal, I am not upsizing that tank. The 2215 has a lot of punch, but I will reduce some of the media until I can get another one which won't be for at least 7 days. I will put the Emperor back on, the goldfish and koi are still outside, I have just been cycling the 55 tank and waiting.


----------



## 150EH

SeahorseDeb said:


> Friends, I am new to this forum. It is the most extensive one I have found so far that deals with the flow rates of the Eheim 2215 vs. The 2217. I went back to 2008 and read all your posts, but didnt really feel satisfied that i could reason that my flow rate is my problem. I have a 90 gallon cichlid tank (it isn't planted...sorry) and just replaced my two Emperor 400's with a 2215. Of course, now I can hear myself think, but my water clarity isn't satisfactory. I washed out all the mediums with tank water, and carefully assembled it. I double checked my assembly and I know for certain it is correct. Today I added one more layer of fine white medium to it, near the top, but the clarity did not improve, however I also didn't notice a reduction in the flow output. I am at a loss as to what to do. I sure don't want to replace it, just figure out why the water isn't crystal clear like the Emperors maintained it. I have the input mounted towards the center back of the tank and the output flow bar mounted horizontally up near the top of the tank, slightly off center. Mounting it up near the top oxygenated the water, thus the location. I did not modify the intake length either.
> 
> I did pick up on an earlier post to drill a small hole in the intake....great idea.
> 
> Today I checked my ph, alkalinity, nitrate etc...levels after a 15 gallon change, all is well.
> 
> Any suggestions, other than buy a impeller for the 2217 and change it out?? I dont really think that is going to make enough of a difference based on the members earlier postings.
> 
> Thank you very kindly!!!
> Deb


Another 2215 will do the trick on a 90 gallon tank, it's not over 4' long right? But adding an extra fine pad will reduce flow so don't do that and keep your tubing clean too it can realy make difference on a 2215. I used to cut one hole off of my spraybars with the 2215 just make the flow a little faster another thing is to double check all you connections and make sure they are tight and every year or so you should cut off a inch or so of tubing at each connection, the streched tubing gets hard and can let just a little air into the system, even 2 years may be ok.

I think one of the biggest thins is how often you clean a filter, fine pads could be cleaned every month and by this time they are brown and nasty, then every other month I think the blue pad should be rinsed well and sqeezed out until it spotless and the same goes for the ceramic rings, the bio media or coccoa puffs should only be dipped in a bucket of aquarium water to remove any larger debris or brown slime and then put back into the filter, this is the media you want to be careful with as it holds all your nitrifying bacteria and other goodies.

Once you get past the 2217 in size and are using the 5 gallon bucket filters like the 2250, 2260, or 2262 you can strech your cleaning schedule if you dare but I starting to think it wise to stay on top of this type of cleaning schedule if you have a lot of plants & fish and are dosing fetilizers. I used to clean less frquently thinking dirty was better but there has been a shift in my thinking.

Also in my opinion there is not much difference in the 2211, 2215, & 2215 other than media volume, the 2217 has a lot more flow and just a tad more media, and then the big boys that have lots of flow and lots of media, the 2250, 2260, & 2262.

edit; you could sell the 2215 and use a single 2217 but 2 x 2215's gives you a back up filter and allows an alternating cleaning schedule.


----------



## SeahorseDeb

I ordered another 2215 today. I am rather neurotic about keeping my filters clean so I will have to take anti-anxiety Rx to make it one month without cleaning! The alternative cleaning is a great suggestion too. No, there isn't more than 4' of tubing on either connector. I was very careful to research as much as possible using YouTube and a couple other websites to assemble it since for newbies the assembly instructions are so lacking. I don't have a planted tank, I just found that this was the most extensive thread about the flow rate and function of the 2215 and 2217. I have cichlids and a electric blue crayfish, so they would decimate the plants. Heck, even the crayfish likes to play "snip-snip" at night with the plastic flowers. I will eventually post a picture of the tank. Luckily I had put extra ceramic rings in one of the media baskets in my Emperor so I had some good icky bacteria to start the 2215 with!! 

One other thing I learned on another site was to purchase a water sensing alarm. They are made by "Zircon" and I found them on a popular website. They sense the most minute amount of water so if I did have a small leak, I could hear that alarm a block away.( I do have the canister in a 6" deep plastic container for extra protection.) It was about $34 for a pack of three. I resisted the thought to use plumbers white tape to double ensure the tightness of all the joints. I am not sure if anyone has discussed it, I didn't see it when I read this thread back to 2008. Thanks for all the advice!!!!


----------



## deeda

There is no need to use plumbers (Teflon) tape on the Eheim joints because there is an o-ring at the base of the threads that seals the fitting to the canister body/pump head.

A plastic tote or kitty litter box does come in handy to catch slow leaks or dripping connectors when performing maintenance. Proper filter maintenance is really the key with avoiding leaks.

I do NOT drill a small hole in any of my canister filter intake pipes. I see a few people recommend doing this JUST IN CASE of a filter/hose malfunction. I personally have not experienced this being an issue, even when I was working 12 hrs a day/ 7 days a week. I know that accidents will happen but I don't see this as being a commonplace event. If it makes you feel better, than by all means do it. 

Regarding the cleaning intervals on any filter, that is a variable depending on the amount of waste produced by the fish and any other living things in the tank. I would wait at least a couple months before checking the filter for dirtiness. You can also note the output flow of a new/clean filter and visibly check the flow after a month of service. If you see a noticeable decrease in flow, it may well be time for a filter cleaning. A quick rinse/flush of the 'hard' media in a bucket of aquarium water should be sufficient to clean it. The blue coarse pads can also be cleaned in this manner by swishing them vigorously in a bucket of tank water. The white fine pads or polishing media I always replace at filter cleaning time as they do not hold their shape well after cleaning and still retain a large amount of fine debris.

Hope this helps answer any concerns.


----------



## 150EH

I use the teflon tap just to have double protection but the oring does a good job.

I also don't worry about leaks, 9 years without one and I just make sure it's put together correctly. 

I'm also with Deeda on the vacuum hole, there is no need for all these safety nets and this not needed with Eheim classics IMO.

We are going to differ on the cleaning and I just bought my first bag of poly fill so I can use it to replace the Eheim fine pads, I don't see any reason no to change these monthly they will be dirty but over doing it can be a problem and you can lose all your nitrifying bateria which could lead to green water, algae outbreaks or worse.

I think your tank will be clear now with 2 x 2215's but one is just too little for a 90 gallon, now you will have a little more than 3.5 times turnover of the tank volume per hour and a marked difference should occur, let us know how it works out.


----------



## bigpow

DId you check for their power consumptions?
That'd the first thing I'd look if I want to compare motors.


----------



## SeahorseDeb

Thank you again for more tips! Dee, I was thinking of putting the plumbers tape where green 12mm flexible tubing meets those funky little gray washers(?), I am not even sure what to call those gray things, they just tighten up against the green flexible tubing. When I was assembling it, my question was how in heck the seal could be tight, but it it is! 

I have been watching the white filter material with a flashlight to take a look at the color and be able to get a visual idea of how much debris the filter material is catching at the top. When I wash those I rub them in a bucket of water that comes out when I do my exchanges. One reason I chose the Eheim was the extensive filtering the water was subjected to before returning it back to the tank. Users also rated them high, and by the testimonials so many of u have posted in this thread, they are very durable. 

I will keep u posted, but I don't expect to get the new filter until late next week. Til then, my best regards to all of you and thanks as well!!!


----------



## zenche

the 75g i am getting tomorrow will come with an eheim 2213...guessing that's not enough? what should i supplement with?

this talk of leaks is kinda making me paranoid...considering that i live on the 6th floor of a building, a failure could result in lots of water damage i'd have to pay, potentially scaling beyond just my unit!


----------



## mott

zenche said:


> the 75g i am getting tomorrow will come with an eheim 2213...guessing that's not enough? what should i supplement with?
> 
> this talk of leaks is kinda making me paranoid...considering that i live on the 6th floor of a building, a failure could result in lots of water damage i'd have to pay, potentially scaling beyond just my unit!


A 2213 will be severely under powered for a 75, you should get another filter to go along with it. You should be aiming for 5-10x the turnover rate in your tank.

All canisters have the potential to leak, you just have to make sure all the fittings are tight and o rings are lubed and you shouldn't have any problems.


----------



## 150EH

zenche said:


> the 75g i am getting tomorrow will come with an eheim 2213...guessing that's not enough? what should i supplement with?


In theory you could get away with a second 2213 giving you 232 gph turnover or just over 3 x the tank volume every hour, but I would go with atleast a 2215 with the prices being so close, looks at Ken's fish they have good deals on canisters.

Another thing to consider, if you are going to be adding inline UV, CO2 reactors, etc get more power to operate all these items without losing all your flow, so a 2217 may be needed.


----------



## bsmith

150EH said:


> I use the teflon tap just to have double protection but the oring does a good job.
> 
> I also don't worry about leaks, 9 years without one and I just make sure it's put together correctly.
> 
> I'm also with Deeda on the vacuum hole, there is no need for all these safety nets and this not needed with Eheim classics IMO.
> 
> We are going to differ on the cleaning and I just bought my first bag of poly fill so I can use it to replace the Eheim fine pads, I don't see any reason no to change these monthly they will be dirty but over doing it can be a problem and you can lose all your nitrifying bateria which could lead to green water, algae outbreaks or worse.
> 
> I think your tank will be clear now with 2 x 2215's but one is just too little for a 90 gallon, now you will have a little more than 3.5 times turnover of the tank volume per hour and a marked difference should occur, let us know how it works out.


Did you get the real polyfil pads which do chemical filtration as welll or are you just talking about pillow stuffing?


----------



## zenche

thanks guys. yea. was wondering if a second 2213 would be enough, but that will be the min i shoot for. will probably get something with more power.

the guy with my tank is stuck in traffic...25 mins late already. sigh.

just got the setup....gonna need some elbow grease to clean up the tank...might repaint the stand (probably too lazy)...but the good news? eheim 2215  will probably still get a 2nd cannister nonetheless.


----------



## deeda

Deb, I think you are talking about the gray nuts that secure the green tubing to the fitting. They are not meant to tighten all the way down over the threads, just enough so the tubing can't rotate on the barbed end of the fitting.

150EH, I don't use filter wool or fiberfill as the final layer in the Classic filters mostly because I want to avoid any stray fibers from getting sucked into the impeller. I have used the sheet batting cut to fit because the fibers aren't as 'stringy'.

Regarding the statement about nitrifying bacteria being lost when replacing the fine media pads or whichever media you are using for fine filtration, that media volume is usually only a small percentage of the total canister media so it really shouldn't impact the good bacteria.


----------



## plamski

I have Eheims -4x2213,3x2215 and 4x2217.No one never leak for last 3 years.
Probably for 75Gal is good to be 2217.You can clean it not that often how you will clean 2213.


----------



## milesm

going back to the OP, flow rates will be actually higher than was reported. i would imagine that in planted aquaria, most canister users are running it in a closed loop. the methodology used produces reliable flow rates, but not necessarily valid flow rates.


----------



## SeahorseDeb

I finally got the second 2215 up and running. The water is sparkling clear now! I set the spray bars just slightly below the surface so there is plenty of glorious bubble action, but I can hear myself think now. Sure did like the filtration of my Emperor 400's on the 55 gal, but love the quiet now!! Thanks everyone for helping me with this topic!


----------

