A take on BB methodology.

[reefsociety101]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=5469345#post5469345 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SCARYBO
As I posted earlier, I am having the same problem with nitrates. I feel BB is a great system. There are some critical steps in my opinion that need to be followed. It would be great to have a forum focused on BB. It is much more to the system then just pulling the sand out and happy reefing. IMO you dont have a huge margin for error. Sand beds suck up nutrients until they are saturated. That gives you a safety belt for husbandry errors. Now I agree that belt has the potential to break sometime in the future, but it works at least temporarily. With BB, if you do not get the nutrients out immediately it can cause problems very fast.

"Sand beds suck up nutrients until they are saturated. " Would changing out 25 percent of the sand bed say every 3 months alleviate this problem? It appears people have suggested to vaccum sands beds but what about replacing 25 - 50 percent of it every 3-6 months? I apologize if this is a newbie like question. Trying to learn as much as I can here.

 

[wrassie86]

Bomber

Why are you against using GAC?

 

[grimmjohn]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=5579472#post5579472 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by NorthernCF
Why do we need LR in our BB system at all?

If you plan on growing acropora you don't need LR, go to the prop forum and check out some set-ups, many are just a bare tank with lights and a skimmer. Calfo has discussed, and I posted a thread about it, but it's called suspension propagation...you tie the acros to a string, suspend them in the water, and you can grow more frags much faster than by attaching to LR. Also, many "japanese tanks" have little to no LR either...just colonies growing straight off the bottom glass..pretty awesome looking if you ask me.

Cheers,

grimmjohn

 

[Kreeger1]

Holy cow, took me all night to read this thread.
Great debates.
This is the perfect time for me to read such information as Im closing in on tank move day soon.

Battling with bryopsis right now in my 180 with a dsb. I believe my sand is headed for the trash soon
Erik

 

[goby1]

Mojo, sweet air pump skimmer. Curious, what is the air pump, or any thread on your skimmer? Others, what do you think of the benefits of l.r. in a bb system? How much effect do you think l.r. has in terms of the "uncertainties" of sandbeds? L.r. is full of pores... stagnant, diffusion transport zones, just like sand beds. The nitrogen cycle depends on solid surfaces for bac. to adhere to, right? One benefit of sb's and lr is the surface area... apparently, from viewing many good-looking bb tanks here, there is enough surface area from bb and lr to support feedings for average fish loads.

According to Bomb-man's idea, it seems to me that l.r. does incorporate many of the same nutrient issues that dsb or ssbs do. B-man, wouldn't it make sense to use non-porous mounting for corals, assuming there was enough surface area in the overall tank?

Along the same lines, it makes sense that the more surface area, the more places for zooplankton to establish and grow. Many dissenters to the bb idea have, in my mind, a valid stance that the flow required to keep detritus in suspension might be too much for pods to hang on to, well, whatever it is they hang on to. Does it make sense that there is a sweet spot between flow that knocks plankton off and the flow that is insufficient to keep detritus in suspension? I think that it would be important to have enough flow to catch a few off guard once in a while, as potential coral/mandarin fodder, but not too much that a few can't hang around for enough time to ^$%%#$ and make more.

Of course there is the beneficial algae/plankton/bacteria introducing component of l.r., but geometrically, isn't it bad for the tank in terms of b-man's philosophy? I've seen people say that l.r. sheds but dsb's don't. Intuitively, I can see why dsb's don't. I don't understand why lr doesn't (or at least not as much) harbor the same problems as sb's do. Why does lr shed, with explaining at the same time how that argument doesn't apply to a dsb?

From experience I know you can't have sugar fine and keep detritus in suspension - not even close.

Couldn't you have enough flow with bb to never have to vacuum? If one was interested in providing the largest amount of live, 1-1000micron sized plankton to a coral, fish, and other invert display, how should they accomplish this while a the same time adhering to good flow/bb/heavy skimming principles?

Lot of q's here, hope there is some good answers from many. I'm in the works of planning an excessive flow, bb tank with a huge skimmer and c-reactor. I'm trying to figure out potential biological issues before I build it. Thanks,

G1

 

[NorthernCF]

I have one temp system up, all SPS ~ 120-150g of water. The "display " is a 75. I started with very little rock in there. The colors faded away on many of the corals. Others RTN. I added lots of rock to the display and sump (pre-cooked of course). I also added one 4-5" blue tang. Within a few days the polys were all out and the colors were comming back strong.
I have read others having this experience as well.

I think as we get crazy with the skimmer only - no fish - low nutrient tanks, the corals need food too

 

[SeanT]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6313216#post6313216 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by wrassie86
Bomber

Why are you against using GAC?

His answer will be acid washed carbon releases P and the coal based releases Iron.

Trust me,
Sean

 

[Travis]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6315809#post6315809 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SeanT
His answer will be acid washed carbon releases P and the coal based releases Iron.

Trust me,
Sean

And also that any type of mechanical/chemical filtration will trap detritus.

 

[wrassie86]

So without the use of GAC-UV or ozone (carbon needed)What are more choices for keeping water clear.I have a ozone unit not in use,but use carbon to keep the water clear for now.
I have noticed that carbon does leech iron,i keep grape algea in my sump, always after a carbon change it turns super green.

 

[SeanT]

Rob,
Why not use ozone or UV?
Sean

 

[wrassie86]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6321021#post6321021 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SeanT
Rob,
Why not use ozone or UV?
Sean

Well no reason really,The ozone unit i have is abit to much for the tank (enaly)i did have it on a timer(no controller),But it seems Only running it for a few hrs aday would really impead my skimmer(ASM G3) after the unit was shut off.And only running it for 3hrs seemed to not make the water any clearer than carbon.I am looking into another red sea 50 mg unit or UV, just cant decide.Do UV's really add alot of heat to the water?I have 2 returns,a chiller on 1 side and thought a uv could go on the other side.

 

[Mahlhavoc]

Well, I have skimmed though many of these posts and have seen BB vs. DSB.

What seems funny to me is they both take a bit of care, the big deal on DSB seems to be the fact someone must do a syphon.

Correct me if I am wrong, leaching phosphates is the only other problem. . if anyone has this problem that I have never seen in my system, though I have a plenum system not a DSB.

I haven't seen a post on a Jobert style plenum system. Not quite a DSB system and surely no BB system.

Only problem I could have that I can see, is the emense population of bactiera dying, but then again a crash is a crash right? If you have a temp probe go bad you could fry your fish, alot could go wrong anywhere.

I run a plenum and find it works nicely, especially since I have never had a hugely stocked aquarium with SPS. . yet, I have not had to do more than a few Kalk additions because my ca levels stayed high. Could i have gotten away with the same in a BB? What about the animals in the sandbed? They reproduce and feed my corals, can I get that same source from a BB? or would I have to add it myself?

I am asking questions, not passing judgement one way or the other, plenty of people in here know more about this subject than me certainly.

Question? what about plenum systems? What about the huge denitrifying system that are incorporated into these plenums? Are they Bad? Things can happen in any tank, but for the couple years I had a plenum I never saw a spike in anything other than the first cycle, no phosphate probs.

What about reproduction in the sand beds? Does this not add deversity and a natural food supply? Do BB all encorporate Refuges for this purpose?

I post here for some answers on questions I am trying to figure out. I don't get BB systems besides the fact you wont have to syphon detritus, can't have a phosphate problem from the substrate leach, and they look very unatural. These systems would also regulate some fishes that would require sand beds to thrive or at least be more natural wouldn't they?

If I am wrong somewhere please correct me. All I care about is that I wake up tomorrow and everything is happy and thriving, but I would hate to not have a sand bed, I enjoy it. . besides it lights up my tank

 

[MiddletonMark]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6321680#post6321680 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Mahlhavoc
What about reproduction in the sand beds? Does this not add deversity and a natural food supply? Do BB all encorporate Refuges for this purpose?

Actually, a fair amount of BB tanks are run without a refugium.
[I know I don't]

While I don't want to discount the critters in the sandbed [they're on rock, too] ... how much does this really feed your tank?
With a large refuge, do you need to add food? Is there a point past which you wouldn't have to feed - as the refuge is feeding the tank?

I've never heard of that ... so while I'm sure some food is produced ... is it a significant amount? I've never heard of folks with sandbeds feeding radically less ... so, provided roughly the same food inputs ... how is the tank being fed more by the sandbed?

For certain creatures [mandarin comes to mind], it might be handy. Certainly, for things like certain wrasses that sleep in the sand, one needs sand to keep them.

But ... I've heard many a claim about how the DSB feeds the tank ... yet they're still tossing in food daily. What gives?

 

[NorthernCF]

I had a 75 w/ 100g sump loaded with LR. It was origionally a SSB. I moved homes At that point I swiched it to a BB. Other than a BCB it was fishless (after the move). There was a representation of just about every kind of coral. I didn't feed the tank for 8-9 months without ill effects.
Of course if the food chain is imbalanced I doubt this would work.

 

[gjuarez3]

pretty good thread

pretty good thread

Cool Thread. BUMP

 

[goby1]

I forgot I even posted to this thread until I saw it on the last page. It's like a time capsule!

It seems to me that a high-flow fuge sans SB wouldn't be detrimental to a BB tank, as per the advice of the bb experts/advocates here. It would just be somewhere for pods to reproduce without getting chowed by other display fish.

G1

 

[elephen]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6321680#post6321680 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Mahlhavoc
If I am wrong somewhere please correct me. All I care about is that I wake up tomorrow and everything is happy and thriving, but I would hate to not have a sand bed, I enjoy it. . besides it lights up my tank

Its nice to see locals on RC.

In regards to your post, I would say that the whole BB/SSB/DSB is more or less a personal preference.

I run a 120 BB because I love the way they look - I like that very clean look. I enjoy being able to have control over ever aspect of my tank, I can run it as clean or as dirty as I want. Of course I don't have and don't want any sand dwelling creatures, been there done that and I was ready for a change. This new tank is going to be SPS only with maybe 1 LPS and from what I have found SPS and BB systems do well together, of course SPS and DSB's, SSB's and whatever else have been proven to do well.

It is all upto you, what you want, what you like and the maintenance effort you want to put forwarth.

 

[elephen]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6683901#post6683901 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by goby1
I forgot I even posted to this thread until I saw it on the last page. It's like a time capsule!

It seems to me that a high-flow fuge sans SB wouldn't be detrimental to a BB tank, as per the advice of the bb experts/advocates here. It would just be somewhere for pods to reproduce without getting chowed by other display fish.

G1

Well if you have any macro in your fuge though that can also act as a detrius trap thus elevating your nutrients in the tank.

Are you talking about a sandbed in a fuge also, I didn't understand your post where you say "high-flow fuge sans SB."

 

[luvtolean]

Guys, here is my info on my BB tank. I do not post this as an argument to do it my way, as it's not nearly as scientific as others. It is still only a short term tank, I've been BB just over a year.

But according to several here I did it wrong. We'll see how that works out for me in the future.

Caveat emptor, and if you follow my lead, don't blame me if your tank burns down.

So without further adieu...


I decided to go barebottom because I thought cleaning the sand sucked. I was also tired of expensive coral frags getting knocked over by my clean up crew, (blue legged hermits and snails) and perishing during the night in the sand.

So during every water change, I siphoned off sand. I'd also take a scoop or two out of the fuge every time. It probably took about a month before I was BB. No rocks were cooked in the making of this BB.

I have a 75 Gal with roughly 600GPH from the returns, and a Tunze stream. Not low flow, but not the outrageous flow of others. I have a ER ES5-2+ skimmer, and a MRC CA reactor.

I did not do this due to any type of problem with nitrate/phosphate. I had no algae issues, and no mortality issues. When I did this, the rocks were older LR from my previous systems and extra "new" cured rock from various LFSs. I was so fed up with "cleaners" I didn't replace them as they died or were killed. I basically had no clean up crew, and honestly, didn't notice a difference. I do blow off my rocks with a baster pretty much daily.

After about 8 months of great coral growth, high fish load, and total happiness I moved to SoCal. My rock experienced enough die off to cycle the tank hard, and I lost the majority of my livestock. A few SPS, and all of the polyps/shrooms made it. A couple of fish did as well.

The tank was setup in my new home, but I was so depressed about the enormous loss of life (the day we moved was also the start of a 5 day power outage, thankfully I have a generator or I would've lost it all), it basically sat ignored for about 6 months. All I did was add top off DI and feed. The tank never crashed. Detritus did build up and actually harden on the bottom. Slowly macroalgaes began to grow in it. But no nuisance algae to speak of really. The glass takes 3-4 days to get dirty. No carbon was run during this period.

I recently got motivated again, and did a couple of 5 gallon water changes. I tested the water and found everything to be right on, nitrates undetectable with a Salifert kit, and Ca/Alk/Mg all within norms for NSW. This tank is dead stable.

I have 3 fish. A black tang, which has been with us a couple of weeks. A mystery wrasse just over 1 year. And a pygmy angel probably closer to 2 years. There is a brittle star, and a couple of the blue legged hermits lived through the dry rock move, and are still in there. This is it, no other clean up crew! Prior to the zebrasoma, we had a small Vlamingii tang, but it died while we were on vacation last month.

The detritus on the bottom was easily siphoned off, and other than that, the tank seems no worse for wear.

 

[elephen]

Thats the kind of stories that need to get out, to show how tough and resiliant BB systems truly are.