Algae Scrubber Basics

[Floyd R Turbo]

So, I read nearly everything, especially the big changes parts. It doesn't say how many 1 watt leds you need for a 12 square inch screen. It says one 3 watt on each side for every 12 square inches. So, is the assumption it takes 3 1 watts on each side for every 12 square inches?

Can anyone point me in the direction of a good 1 watt or 3 watt fixture for say a 3 cube screen?

The link below is a fixture with 24x1 watt leds on a 7"x5" mounting plate. Way more light than what I believe is recommended. Can this light be used for an algae scrubber or is there a better one on the market?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/24W-Red-660...211306?hash=item3ab32d91ea:g:5SgAAOSw0HVWEqH7

Post 6884 (also in sig) is updated LED guideline. I can't go back and edit the "basics" post, which is why I keep it updated in my signature per the post.

*** This is current as of 2015-05-15! ***
----------------

Here is my recommendation for LED lighting of a waterfall algae scrubber screen:

This is for a double-sided screen using Philips Luxeon ES 3W Deep Red 660nm LEDs without lenses (120-140 degree) running at 700mA at 2-3" from the screen to LED

Minimum coverage: One LED on each side of every 8 sq in of screen
Maximum coverage: One LED on each side of every 4 sq in of screen

Simple as that. For new screens (bare) if using the "Maximum" level, run at 350mA until mature, or use a diffuser. Might have to do this with the Minimum level also actually, but not typically. The minimum could probably be stretched to a larger area but screen will cure slower and generally have less capacity.

So for a 6x6 screen, which is 36 sq in, /8 = 4.5 per side. Make it 5.
So for a 6x6 screen, which is 36 sq in, /4 = 9 per side.

Supplementing with blue/violet: Always run blues at 350mA, violets can be run higher but should follow the same rule for the maturing stage (350 at first, then increase after maturing). Use one to two at this current level for every 5-6 reds, roughly. Lots of flexibility here, a little blue/violet goes a long way. I've used 440-445nm Royal Blue Luxeon ESs for this, but I know of at least one other that used to use RBs and switched to Deep Violets and almost doubled growth. Steve's LEDs now carries a good Hyper Violet made by SemiLED.

Regarding non DIY-LEDs in general, this is what I have roughed out to help with this.
The issue is that my DIY LED guideline is based on coverage. You can't say "I need 5 3W LEDs which is 15W, so a 15 W fixture is what I need". It doesn't work that way.

That's because a 3W LED does not necessarily consume 3W, and a purchased LED may rate it's intensity based on actual wattage used, or it may add up the LEDs and give a wattage but the actual watt draw is less. You have to watch for this.

A 3W Philips Luxeon ES 660nm LED will typically drop 2.2v across the LED at 700mA. Power = Amps * Volts so 2.2 V * 0.700 A = 1.54W. What? I thought it was a 3W. It is. That is something called MARKETING. LEDs have become more efficient over time as they have been redesigned, so a lower Vdrop and Idrive results in the same output, but instead of calling it a 1.5W and confusing everyone, they call it a 3W still.

So now on to your fixture you are looking at.

Converting the "LED per unit area guideline" to a "wattage" guideline is as simple as doing the math.

Figure out what you need per the "unit area" guideline. In the above example, 6x6 screen, minimum level (low intensity), 5x 3W per side. Each is actually drawing 1.5W, so 5x1.5 = 7.5W. Your light fixture should actually consume, at the wall, a minimum of 7.5W. The electronics built into the fixture will draw power also, meaning that you might want to add a little cushion to the number. So a 10W fixture on a 6x6 screen would be about right for a comparable replacement to an array of 5x 3W LEDs.

Now let's add that factor in and parallel it to screen size. A 6x6 screen = 36 sq in. Make it 40. you need a 10W actual-draw LED fixture on each side of this. So you could say that the rule of thumb for a pre-built LED fixture is that you need 0.25W per square inch of screen. That would get you into the Minimum light arena - or "Minimum Intensity", and you need one of these on each side of the screen.

Doubling that would put you on the higher end. 0.5W per square inch - actual wattage draw of fixture.

What you have to watch for is when they use a multi-chip that has 9 1W LEDs on it and they call that 10W. Not necessarily true. But 1W LEDs are actually more efficient than 3W LEDs when you are talking radiant flux output per unit of energy input into the LED, so it's not horrible, just shoot for the higher light level and you'll be OK usually. At best, you will actually be at the minimum level. At worst, you'll be on the low side but still OK.

 

[Floyd R Turbo]

The other thing you have to watch for is that almost all fixture manufaturers count up the LEDs by rating then say that's the wattage. It's not.

24 x 1W chips does not equate to a 24W actual output, very rare.

A 3W Philips Luxeon ES 660nm LED will typically drop 2.2v across the LED at 700mA. Power = Amps * Volts so 2.2 V * 0.700 A = 1.54W. What? I thought it was a 3W. It is. That is something called MARKETING. LEDs have become more efficient over time as they have been redesigned, so a lower Vdrop and Idrive results in the same output, but instead of calling it a 1.5W and confusing everyone, they call it a 3W still.

1W is probably closer than 3W but IME 1W lacks the "punch", so you have to make sure you use 3x 1W in place of the calc result.

So for a 12 sq in screen, shoot on the high end: 12/4 = 3x 3W (high intensity) per side, x3 = 9x 1W (per side). I wouldn't sat that fixture is way more than you need, it's probably about right actually

 

[Spar]

So it looks as if Steve's LED's has gone out of business, which is the only place I know of for good ATS LED's... or at least they are just taking money from customers and never getting them the product... either way it looks like they are moving toward the prior soon.

anyway, where else can I purchase good LED's for ATS's? even if I have to build it myself.

my screen is 8x8, and want to go with two units that are each 16 Deep Red's + 4 Hyper Violets (3W bulbs).

wherever is recommended, if someone can help me figure out exactly the parts I need to go along with it would be very helpful. I get lost with all the options of drivers, heat sinks, etc, especially with the quantities I need to support the bulbs/wattage.

 

[jason2459]

Build my led

 

[Floyd R Turbo]

http://www.rapidled.com/cree-xp-e-photo-red-660nm-led/

Plenty of places to get 660s, I haven't heard anything super negative about Cree Photo Red, but I have always used Philips

I do know that Steve's is really understaffed and orders have a long lead time right now. I don't think they are going under anytime soon.

 

[jason2459]

http://www.rapidled.com/cree-xp-e-photo-red-660nm-led/

Plenty of places to get 660s, I haven't heard anything super negative about Cree Photo Red, but I have always used Philips

I do know that Steve's is really understaffed and orders have a long lead time right now. I don't think they are going under anytime soon.

shoot, ^ That's the site I was thinking of. Not the build my led.

 

[hkgar]

So, I read nearly everything, especially the big changes parts. It doesn't say how many 1 watt leds you need for a 12 square inch screen. It says one 3 watt on each side for every 12 square inches. So, is the assumption it takes 3 1 watts on each side for every 12 square inches?

Can anyone point me in the direction of a good 1 watt or 3 watt fixture for say a 3 cube screen?

The link below is a fixture with 24x1 watt leds on a 7"x5" mounting plate. Way more light than what I believe is recommended. Can this light be used for an algae scrubber or is there a better one on the market?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/24W-Red-660...211306?hash=item3ab32d91ea:g:5SgAAOSw0HVWEqH7

Here is the answer I got when I asked the seller about a heat sink

Dear friend,
Greetings.
Thank you for your interest in my items. ^_^
This item LED has soldered on heat sink PCB, you only need an additional heat sink on the back of the PCB board.


Please keep in touch, if you have any question, you can contact us at any time, we are very pleased to serve you. Thank you again.

Best wishes to you and all those you love!

Merry Christmas. ^_^


- babaoshop

 

[geekengineer]

this is a newbie dumb question but ATS the same thing as an algae scrubber? IT sounds like it... and if so what does 'ATS' stand for? algae tank scrubber?

 

[mattberrytr]

this is a newbie dumb question but ATS the same thing as an algae scrubber? IT sounds like it... and if so what does 'ATS' stand for? algae tank scrubber?

Yep.
ATS = Algae Turf Scrubber

 

[geekengineer]

Thanks

 

[Floyd R Turbo]

Technically ATS = Algal Turf Scrubber but, meh

 

[Jade5051]

I think I remember reading this somewhere but I can't find it. Is the algae production and nutrient consumption of an UAS slower therefore the filtering capacity is less or different than a waterfall ATS?

 

[mattberrytr]

I think I remember reading this somewhere but I can't find it. Is the algae production and nutrient consumption of an UAS slower therefore the filtering capacity is less or different than a waterfall ATS?

I would say that the vast majority of the time a waterfall scrubber will outperform a upflow scrubber, often by a large margin.
If you have the space, I would without a doubt go with a waterfall scrubber.

 

[Jade5051]

I would say that the vast majority of the time a waterfall scrubber will outperform a upflow scrubber, often by a large margin.
If you have the space, I would without a doubt go with a waterfall scrubber.

I cannot find any empirical evidence of how much more inefficient they are or how much bigger a UAS should be to considered equivalent to a waterfall ATS.

 

[mattberrytr]

I cannot find any empirical evidence of how much more inefficient they are or how much bigger a UAS should be to considered equivalent to a waterfall ATS.

No scientific studies have been done as far as I know, so we can only go off what people have reported. I've seen far more people complain about lack of growth on upflow scrubbers. It's hard to know the spread, but I would estimate that it's around 50/50 as to what people use.

Everyone has different systems, what works well for one person isn't necessarily going to work well for another. I think the significantly lower flow through upflow scrubbers is a definite downside, air is pretty terrible at moving water. I also believe that there is a lot less turbulence on the algae (or growth screen) in upflow scrubbers, which impacts on nutrient exchange, and therefore growth.

It's also important to take into consideration what you expect from the scrubber. Do you want it to be the sole form of filtration in the tank? Or just supplemental to what you already have? Waterfall scrubbers are hands down the clear winner for me. In saying that, there's no denying that upflow scrubbers have some clear advantages over waterfall scrubbers. Regardless - reliable, solid performance is IMO upflow scrubbers achilles heel.

 

[Jlentz]

FWIW I have a drop up flow ATS in one tank that grows like mad and a waterfall in another that's meh. I think it's mostly related to lighting though.

 

[SantaMonica]

how many strings per sq. in.?

No particular number. More strings will handle slime better, but not GHA.

What is the footprint of one for a tank my size?

Use the feeding guidelines, modified with your rock, to determine size.

Any ideas on saving life in the GHA?

Could have a tang grow-out tank and feed it to them.

Can this light be used for an algae scrubber or is there a better one on the market?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/24W-Red-660n...gAAOSw0HVWEqH7

That one seems like a good low cost starting point. They are probably being run at 1/2 watt

each.

ATS the same thing as an algae scrubber?

Yes, ATS is a registered trademark owned by Hydromentia.

Is the algae production and nutrient consumption of an UAS slower therefore the

filtering capacity is less or different than a waterfall ATS?

Theoretically the upflowing bubbles will remove the boundary layers around the algae and allow

faster growth. And they won't mat down, killing the lower layers, like a waterfall will.

Practically for most people, the decision is space, cost, and if you want to dis-assemble

things to harvest.

I cannot find any empirical evidence of how much more inefficient they are or how much

bigger a UAS should be to considered equivalent to a waterfall ATS

There is none. The people with the money to do such studies are working on reef ecology,

biofuels, and wastewater. Not aquariums.

I've seen far more people complain about lack of growth on upflow scrubbers

Because the installed user base of upflows is probably much larger. And, the typical upflow

user wants plug-n-play with no tinkering (and no reading instructions).

I have a drop up flow ATS in one tank that grows like mad and a waterfall in another

that's meh. I think it's mostly related to lighting though.

Could be lighting, flow, bubbles, reflective white surfaces, etc.

What's if any are the downsides to an ATS?

Fish/snails can eat your filter

do they strip the water of too much nutrients

No, they can't. They use the same biological function as the corals, so they are the same

power.

Do they yellow up the water

No, that comes from letting growth get too thick on waterfall scrubbers, which kills the

bottom layers which then turn to hey (yellow). Upflows don't do this because they are always

swishing around in water/bubbles.

do they neg affect the hard corals

No, they let corals live in the same environment as a real reef: more carbs, vitamin c, and

less nutrients. And if you don't mechanical filter, more food particles too.

I'm hoping this will allow me to feed and get the nutrient export. Skimmers dont do

enough.

Skimmers remove the food you are feeding. And they remove the fish poop, which would have been

coral food too. Unfortunatly they don't remove nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, CO2, or ammonia.

Seems like a new-year re-post of the important Marine Biology Basics videos would be good

here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfMaBeLwiO4 - Ocean Productivity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d96F0ak4uY - Photosynthesis part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTBlq3gUv5Y - Food Chains vs. Food Webs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwZDIU6sM_4& - Nutrients and Primary Production
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnlCx7mVcZ4 - Chlorophyll
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtZ75KW2t-U - Zooplankton and Primary Production
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quH4x640Jgs - Bacteria
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdIjMQATQks - Food Webs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bc_fGWjmNeI - Microbial Food Web
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQaE0e0iD3s - Trophic Pyramids

And lastly, the worlds of 3D printing and aquariums have now come together completely; 3D printed screens (see pics)

 

[mattberrytr]

And lastly, the worlds of 3D printing and aquariums have now come together completely; 3D printed screens (see pics)

3D printed screens have been around for a while now. Nothing new.
They do seem to work well, which makes sense. They can also be made into pretty much any shape, which is a big plus.

 

[Jade5051]

Algae Scrubber Basics

Theoretically the upflowing bubbles will remove the boundary layers around the algae and allow faster growth. And they won't mat down, killing the lower layers, like a waterfall will. Practically for most people, the decision is space, cost, and if you want to dis-assemble things to harvest.

This was a hypothesis I had a few days ago and I think you may have confirmed my idea. Does this imply that skimming the effluent of an algae scrubber, similar to biopellets, would be beneficial?

 

[SantaMonica]

You would just be removing pods and microbial life, and maybe some detached growth. I want all that stuff to circle back around to feed the tank.