Hi All,

Today I connected my 3 x 100l water butts up together using David
Hansens 'coupled tap' method. ;-)

The first two were already full (from the rainwater diverter) and the
third was nearly empty. When I turned on all the taps it took nearly
15 mins for the levels in the 3 butts to equalize, due I guess to the
relatively small diameter of the taps (and bends etc) and
interconnecting hoses.

With the current moderate rain here I'm getting approx 1.2l / min so
if it took 15 mins to level the 2 full 100 l butts with the empty one
then is that 66/15 or ~4.5 l / min (so therefore shouldn't need any
other interconnecting pipes)?

Once I've sorted the guttering on the lean-to (currently white Hunter
Square stuff .. want to use round white down pipe to connect another
rainwater diverter (but need square to round converter to do that),
available but not easy to find round here) then 3rd butt will also be
fed to the same as the other two but from the opposite direction.

The next thing is do is to work out the best way to auto irrigate my
runners / cucumbers / toms (all at a lower level than the butts).

I was using a Hoselock AC1+ (on-off auto timer) pre hose_pipe_ban so
would like to get back to that for just 'background_don't_forget' type
watering at least but not sure if the AC1+ will work when on low
pressure (and my fine perforated hosepipe pipe and drippers)?

So, do I fit a pressure sensing (and float protected) pump in one of
the butts (now they are all interconnected) and just continue with the
existing hardware (if so anyone know a proven vfm device please)?

(with a pumped solution I can also auto water the tumbler toms in my
hanging baskets) ;-)

All the best ..

T i m

T i m wrote:
Hi All,

Today I connected my 3 x 100l water butts up together using David
Hansens 'coupled tap' method. ;-)

The first two were already full (from the rainwater diverter) and the
third was nearly empty. When I turned on all the taps it took nearly
15 mins for the levels in the 3 butts to equalize, due I guess to the
relatively small diameter of the taps (and bends etc) and
interconnecting hoses.

thats slow, though functional. Shortening pipes, using wider ones, or
replacing restrictive valves with full bore ones would all speed it up,
but i It should still work reasonably like that.


Once I've sorted the guttering on the lean-to (currently white Hunter
Square stuff .. want to use round white down pipe to connect another
rainwater diverter (but need square to round converter to do that),
available but not easy to find round here) then 3rd butt will also be
fed to the same as the other two but from the opposite direction.

which will double fill rate roughly. It should all work.


NT

On 13 Aug 2006 07:08:54 -0700, wrote:

T i m wrote:
Hi All,

Today I connected my 3 x 100l water butts up together using David
Hansens 'coupled tap' method. ;-)

The first two were already full (from the rainwater diverter) and the
third was nearly empty. When I turned on all the taps it took nearly
15 mins for the levels in the 3 butts to equalize, due I guess to the
relatively small diameter of the taps (and bends etc) and
interconnecting hoses.

thats slow, though functional.

Indeed .. ;-)

Shortening pipes,

All as short as possible ..

using wider ones,

The 'pipe' is simply hose pipe and is a neat fit on the tap (and that
in turn fits a moulded / threaded hole). The elbows and 'T's' *could *
be a bit bigger and have more gentle radii but I don't think it will
improve matters *that much*?

or
replacing restrictive valves with full bore ones would all speed it up,

Hmm, I could but it would be a big disturbance .. ;-(


but i It should still work reasonably like that.

Yup, it seems to be ok atm. Not sure how well the smaller / lower
diameter taps will cope with any debris that does get in there (gotta
rig some input filters) but it shouldn't be too difficult to clean out
in any case.


Once I've sorted the guttering on the lean-to (currently white Hunter
Square stuff .. want to use round white down pipe to connect another
rainwater diverter (but need square to round converter to do that),
available but not easy to find round here) then 3rd butt will also be
fed to the same as the other two but from the opposite direction.

which will double fill rate roughly. It should all work.

Well feed1 is from the rear pitch, rear extension and further
extension of our Victorian end_of_terrace house. Feed2 is from a semi
sheltered 2x3m lean_to so I doubt it will be anywhere near as much.
However, during the last shower I 'directed' from over 6' away the
lean_to rainwater (stop end + 45deg elbow) into a 2g watering can and
when I just checked it was full! ;-)

All the best ..

T i m

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On 13 Aug 2006 07:08:54 -0700, wrote:

T i m wrote:
Hi All,


but i It should still work reasonably like that.

Yup, it seems to be ok atm. Not sure how well the smaller / lower
diameter taps will cope with any debris that does get in there (gotta
rig some input filters) but it shouldn't be too difficult to clean out
in any case.

A pair of tights make a good filter on the bottom of a drain pipe, they
stretch as they fill with debris - need changing about every 6 months.

Peter

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 16:15:21 GMT, "Peter Andrews"
wrote:


"T i m" wrote in message
.. .
On 13 Aug 2006 07:08:54 -0700, wrote:

T i m wrote:
Hi All,


but i It should still work reasonably like that.

Yup, it seems to be ok atm. Not sure how well the smaller / lower
diameter taps will cope with any debris that does get in there (gotta
rig some input filters) but it shouldn't be too difficult to clean out
in any case.

A pair of tights make a good filter on the bottom of a drain pipe, they
stretch as they fill with debris - need changing about every 6 months.

Hi Peter,

I did that when I installed a water butt at my Mums as she wanted the
down pipe fed straight into the thing (it was only off about 1/3 of
the garage roof).

I'm not sure how can do this with the 'diverter' type of input as
mine has a very 'flush fitting on the inside of the butt (nothing to
'hang' a 'tights' filter from) ;-(

I could possibly fit a short length of stiff pipe up the *inside*
(from the inside of the butt) of the inlet fitting and attach the
'filter' to that, but I don't really want to restrict the input flow
in any way? ;-(

Or, find an alternative 'through bore' fitting that does have some
protrusion into the first butt and do the same shrug.

All the best ..

T i m

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 13:49:22 GMT someone who may be T i m
wrote this:-

Today I connected my 3 x 100l water butts up together using David
Hansens 'coupled tap' method. ;-)

Not quite what I suggested. Connecting them at low level is entirely
sensible, but the pipes that connect them should be suitably sized
to allow reasonable flow.

Assuming the butts don't have tight fitting lids I don't think yours
do allow reasonable flow.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:37:09 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 13:49:22 GMT someone who may be T i m
wrote this:-

Today I connected my 3 x 100l water butts up together using David
Hansens 'coupled tap' method. ;-)

Not quite what I suggested.

Sri David, checking back I note it was Edgar Iredale's idea re the
taps ;-)


Connecting them at low level is entirely
sensible, but the pipes that connect them should be suitably sized
to allow reasonable flow.

Understood, but, the taps that are pretty well part of these butts and
seem to be the limiting factor flow-wise, wether it being drawing
water from the butt or the 'coupling' of thereof?

So, my thoughts (ignoring low long I might have to stand there to fill
a watering can from a single std but or the coupled ones) is as long
as the water can flow between the butts faster than the rain can fill
No1 then there should be no problems?

Assuming the butts don't have tight fitting lids I don't think yours
do allow reasonable flow.

Well *if* the level in the first butt reaches the brim then I have a
high level cross feed between butts 1 and 2 (and the gear to do the
same on 2-3) and no, I don't think the lids are tight enough to affect
flow in this case.

All the best ..

T i m

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:30:05 GMT someone who may be T i m
wrote this:-

Understood, but, the taps that are pretty well part of these butts and
seem to be the limiting factor flow-wise, wether it being drawing
water from the butt or the 'coupling' of thereof?

Taps are usually a separate item, screwed into a suitable hole. They
can be unscrewed and replaced with a tank connector and unimpeded
pipe. Two of this sort of tap mechanisms will restrict flow
considerably.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:22:39 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:30:05 GMT someone who may be T i m
wrote this:-

Understood, but, the taps that are pretty well part of these butts and
seem to be the limiting factor flow-wise, wether it being drawing
water from the butt or the 'coupling' of thereof?

Taps are usually a separate item, screwed into a suitable hole.


These could be those, thread moulded into the butt (not sure *what*
thread though, but should be some sort of 'standard' ?

They
can be unscrewed and replaced with a tank connector and unimpeded
pipe.

Hmm, that sounds interesting .. get the diameter up without making any
more holes ... ?

Two of this sort of tap mechanisms will restrict flow
considerably.

Well, I don't think the combined output of all 3 butts is actually
slower than just one but a better flow would be better for say
watering can filling?

I don't think I'd need much more rate for an irrigation system (or I'd
drain the lot in 10 seconds!) ;-(

I'll see what fittings I can find would be suitable .. they would need
to be slightly 'flexible' to allow movement as butts fill etc?

All the best ..

T i m