Turtle pond design

Updated June 4th, 2010
May 11th, 2010

I’m close to getting a backyard which is one step closer to my three red ear sliders’ dream house, … a turtle pond, or what I like to call a turtle oasis!  How close they come to realizing their dream living condition depends greatly on my craftsmanship.  To get a rough idea of what I want my turtle pond to look like, I loaded up Google sketchup and viola!…

Turtle pond design

Components

My first design had used a lot more cinder blocks around the pond as walls but my wife was not too happy about that.  Considering how often she bumps into furniture, she had a valid concern.  So this is actually my second design which has a lot more wood than the first.  The frame is now entirely wood with cinder blocks only being used as the underlying foundation for the pool and dirt.  The dimensions for the pond are based around the size of the kiddie pool in the middle (which I already bought!).  The empty space around the pool will be filled with dirt and plants.

  • 2 x 10 wood board
  • 2 x 2 wood beams
  • 54″ diameter kiddie pool
  • chicken wire
  • cinder blocks
  • plexi-glass
  • dirt
  • plants (imagine foerster feather grass swaying in the breeze!  awesome!)

Turtle pond design apart

Features

Pond drain…

One thing I have learned in my years of experience with fish and now turtles, is that a easy way to change the water is absolutely essential.  A good filter will take you a long way but eventually the water will need to be changed either in part or in full.  Years before, I figured out that I can replace one side of my 10 gallon fish tank with plexi-glass.  This allowed me to cut a hole at the bottom and plug it with a valve (I chose an opening of a 2 liter plastic soda bottle).  It greatly increased the speed that I was able to replace the water.  Now, I hope I can apply the same concept to my pool.  I plan on cutting a hole at the bottom of the pool and attaching a valve and hose to let the water out.  The pool will be slightly raised on a layer of cinder block and gravity allow the water to be drained.

Protective fencing…

I heard that turtles can be attacked by common animals such as cats, squirrels, and birds.  Considering my turtles have always lived indoors and are most likely extremely domesticated, I doubt they have the instinct to hide if approached.  To protect them, I will need to wrap the entire pond in a protective fence, chicken wire (not pictured).

Heated pool…

This is the tricky one and will be the biggest hurdle.  I am not sure how feasible it will be to maintain my pond at a livable temperature.  If I cannot heat the pond at a reasonable cost, I may have to give up on the dream oasis completely!  Oh no!  The kiddie pool is roughly 100 gallons and I know they sell aquarium heaters that can easily handle that indoors.  It will be much colder outdoors so I am not sure if they will work.  Hopefully I can find a cost effective way to keep them warm.  Everyone has to live within their means, even my turtles.  In the worst case, I keep them in the house with a larger tank now that there is more space.  I am keeping my fingers crossed!

Sun-roof…

Well, this one is still under debate.  Does my pond really need a roof?  I think my turtles will do just fine with a bit of rain but keeping rain out will probably make heating easier.  If I do make a roof, then it would have to be glass or plexi-glass for sure.  Turtles need uv light and heat so I have to allow as much sun in as possible.

Giant Doors…

Remember the fencing?  I have to have access to the pond of course!  So the top frame of the turtle enclosure will have a set of doors bigger than my house doors!  Ok, that was an exaggeration but they will be pretty darn big.

Convertible…

So I got doors, but why stop there!  That’s right, I’m sparing no expenses** on this turtle resort.  For even more access in cases of major landscaping or pond cleaning, the entire top frame will be detachable as shown in the picture.  This will give completely 360 degree access to anything in my pond.

** Actually not true.  I will most likely be on the strictest of budgets.  Approved and audited closely by my CFO (a.k.a. my wife).

Filter…

To help conserve water, a filter is a must.  100 gallons of water is a decent amount of water so it’s important to use it for as long as possible.  I am hoping that a good filter can keep the pond clean for a couple months before a partial water change.

Cost?

I have not done a cost calculation yet but it looks like this project is going to be a few hundred bucks at the minimum.  The cost may delay this project but since I already have the kiddie pool, it’s no longer a matter of ”if” but just a matter ”when”.

BTW… Google sketchup… you rock!  The nice design images above were done in sketchup.

Ideal home network

Updated June 4th, 2010
May 18th, 2010

I’ve been thinking about home networking a lot lately.  Specifically a network attached storage (NAS), or basically a shared hard drive on the network.

Why…

No, it’s not because I love technology or gadgets or because I’m geeky like that.  Actually, it’s mostly because I’m not living by myself anymore.  All problems associated with computer files (e.g. backup, drive crash, computer crash, blue screens, no screen, defrag, crash without saving, power fail without saving, backup, out of space, too slow, too messy, security, mobility, restore, backup, sync, transfers, sharing, duplication, backup) that I normally have is now multiplied by two.  And this translates to bad things happening twice as often.

The ideal solution

Put all files on a shared network drive which is fast and backed up.  Then have nothing on the local computer except for applications.  This has a lot of advantages and a couple disadvantages.

Advantages

  • Automatically backed up for anyone on the network.
  • Hard drive space efficiency.  Some people use a lot of space and some people use a little.  Having all All free drive space pooled together allowed it to be shared so in the long run, you probably save money on hard drives.
  • Share files without needing to email or copy them to a flash drive.
  • Centralized maintenance and enhancement.  An improvement on the network share is automatically realized by everyone using it.

Disadvantages

  • If you travel a lot, then synchronizing the files to your mobile drive can be a pain.
  • Potentially slower.  With the same exact hardware, a file loaded from a network drive cannot be faster than a file loaded from the local drive.

Since I do not travel a lot, the only disadvantage for me is the performance.  Which bring me back to how I started… I’ve been thinking about home networking a lot lately, mostly about what kind of speed I can expect from a NAS.

Speed

To get a rough idea of how fast I can transfer a file from a NAS to a computer, I have to understand the performance of all components on the transfer path.   Each person may have a different computer or and different usages so the transfer path will be different for each situation.  The fastest transfer speed will be determined by the slowest component (bottleneck) on the path.  I found numbers that were all normalized to megabytes (MB) per second and plotted them from slowest to fastest.

performance chart

The chart above gives a pretty good idea of what really matters during a file transfer.  For example, if you were trying to copy something to a usb 1.1 device, then it doesn’t matter how fast your network, or network drive is, the usb device is going to be too slow anyways.

Ideally, if I can make my gigabit wired network the slowest component in my transfer path, that would be pretty darn good.  A single hard drive would only acheive roughly 70 MB/s which is not enough to keep up with a 125 MB/s gigabit network.  To get network saturation, it looks like a hard drive in raid 0 or raid 5 configuration may be warranted.

  • 7200 rpm hard drive [~70 MB/s]
  • 7200 rpm hard drives with raid 0 [~140 MB/s]
  • pata UDMA/100 (ide) [~100 MB/s]
  • pata UDMA/133 (ide) [~133 MB/s]
  • 1.5 Gb/s sata connection [~150 MB/s]
  • 3 Gb/s sata connection [~300 MB/s]
  • wired 100 Mb network / 100 Mb switch [~12.5 MB/s]
  • wired gigabit network/ gigabit switch [~125 MB/s]
  • wireless 802.11a [~6.75 MB/s]
  • wireless 802.11b [~1.4 MB/s]
  • wireless 802.11g [~6.75 MB/s]
  • wireless 802.11n [~37.5 MB/s]
  • usb 2.0 [~60 MB/s]
  • usb 3.0 [~625 MB/s]
  • firewire [~98.3 MB/s]
MB = megabyte, mb = megabit, 8 megabit (mb) = 1 megabyte (MB)

Some motherboards and routers support IEEE 802.3ad, also known as link aggregation, dual lan and teaming.  The theory behind this is that two lan ports can be paried up on a single ip to accept connections and therefore handle more throughput than a single ethernet cable.  Think of this like a load balancer for web servers.  It won’t really increase the speed of a single request but can allow the network to handle more requests, thus increasing total throughput.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation

I have read a few forums now and it is still unclear to me whether link aggregation works in practice.   Increased transfer rate  for a single connection seems unlikely unless there is a way to over-come the overhead in dealing with out of order packets.  But even without increase transfer rate for a single connection, load balancing multiple connections should help in a multi-user environment.  For now the only thing that people appear to agree on is that it does provide network redundancy which is something I’m not interested in.

Battlefield Bad Company 2: thoughts

March 9th, 2010

battlefield-bad-company-2

Bad Company 2 has finally been released. Since I passed on Modern Warfare, I hoped that Bad Company 2 would be everything I wanted.  As reviews for the game came out, I realized that at least one aspect of the game did not meet my expectations.  But overall, it appears that the game got good reviews and most importantly it does not have any deal breakers for me.

The Bad

Before the game was released, I had see online reports that Bad Company 2 was going to support up to 40 players on the PC. But unfortunately, it seems like the game only supports 32 players now. Even though this is still better than the measly 18 players for Modern Warfare 2, I am still disappointed that it’s not 40 players.

The Good

Destruction, destruction, destruction.  Can’t really say this enough because almost everything can be destroyed in the game.  No words can do this justice so just go out and find a video where you can see this happen!

Although 32 players are not as good as my expected 40 or 64 from other Battlefield games, I will give this game credit for increasing the number of players for the PC.  The xbox and playstation versions of the game are limited to 24 players which is too bad.  But understanding that the PC can handle more and actually using that power is just a smart move on the developer and should keep the PC gamers, including me, happy.

Conclusion

I will be giving this game a go as soon as soon as I get my new graphics card.  I’ll see you on the battlefield solder!