Best Skimmer for my reef tank

skliaroff is right (mostly), the most powerful per watt skimmer, as in most efficient at making tiny bubbles, and then implimenting them in the most turbulence-free manner, is the Bubbleking. If anything though, the ATI bubblemaster is a clone of a bubbleking though... ATI copied their design from the Fauna-Marins which were designed for them by a guy with direction from Klaus of Royal Exclusiv... and Klaus's first bubbleplate skimmers were in the mid-80's. They are expensive, but very well made, and in the long run, you will never wish for another skimmer... they are that good.

Your tank is about 280 gallons... so I would say the ReefFlo is a great skimmer for the buck... but I am not sure if they have a 220v version yet.

I would not consider the ASM, Euroreef, or DAS on that tank though unless very lightly stocked.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10825961#post10825961 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
skliaroff is right (mostly), the most powerful per watt skimmer, as in most efficient at making tiny bubbles, and then implimenting them in the most turbulence-free manner, is the Bubbleking.
Click to expand...

Hope you don't mind a quick thread hijack: Hahn do you think this is true of the BK mini's as well? Thanks.
 
You are trying to get me in trouble now...

No, not exactly. I think they are a great option for those who have a limited footprint or height to work with, but if you have the space to run something larger, there are better out there. Their lph per watt isnt 'the best', but they are very efficient pumps for what they do.

Technically, based on RMS wattage, the Sicce PSK 2500s that ATI uses on their BM's are the most efficient... something about 900-1000lph for under 30 watts. No aquabee, eheim, or Red Dragon so far can touch that. The thing is, that is based on RMS wattage, and so as far as concern for your electric meter money goes, thats all that matters. As far as real power, then the Sicce isnt as attractive a pump. It runs at a pretty low power factor, so it is using a good amount of power... more like 60-70 some watts (cant remember off the top of my head). That means that it will run hot (and believe me, running them underwater helps keep them cooler, but its still a good 30-some watts of heat going into the tank. From the 'true' rating... they arent the most efficient. Wear and tear on the pumps due to heat, friction, and lime buildup will have a larger impact with these pumps than say, an eheim or Askoll pump. Due to the wiring in the Askoll motors for Red Dragons, they maintain a higher power factor... much higher. They are self adjusting (as much as can be expected) with their torque and slip speed so that they are more efficient. The tradeoff is a slightly higher RMS wattage, but a much lower real power. As a consequence, they run cooler... ALOT cooler (Ive never seen a Red Dragon/Laguna pump running as a threadwheel/needlewheel with less than a .65 power factor, which is great for the application). Sure, you may pay a slight bit more, but they are actually a more efficient pump.

The ultimate pump for a needlewheel is a DC pump though. Controllable speed with no power loss like an AC pump with PWM and speeds that will shame any AC pump, wider torque (no sputter at startup and ability to use a larger wheel with less wattage), power factor is eliminated all together (RMS wattage is real wattage), lower wattage in general, only will spin in one direction, etc. Klaus's move to the Red Dragon 2 is a good one not just for flow control, but skimmer pumps as well. I really am shocked that their arent more DC pumps out there on the market. It makes the whole 110v/220v 50/60hz transition a non-issue as well... its just the AC/DC adapter that changes.

So pump wise, its debatable depending on how you look at it.
Body-wise, the short distance from the bubble plate to the cup is part of why I dont consider the BK minis the most efficient. I would consider 18" from the plate to the cup to be a bare minimum. Better than a Tunze, hands down, or an ATI Bubblemaster... but put a mini 200 up against a deluxe 200, and the mini will have its butt handed to it. But hey, if you dont have the room to put the pump to the side like that, the minis are the next best thing.

Otherwise, as an alternative to everything out there, the most efficient setup is to force feed a needlewheel with a linear air pump... even a small setup. A linear pump will provide more air for less watts than anything... thousands of liters of air per hour for 30-60 watts. Adding one to a decent sized needlewheel will minimize the back pressure that airstones have on a needlewheel, and lower the wattage of the pump as well (air is easier to move than water). You can get thousands of liters per hour of air on a tall skimmer for under 100 watts.
 
I don't think that lph of air versus watts is a good way to measure a skimmer versus another. It's much akin to highest PAR is the best in lighting. I've run ERs, BK minis, and beckett and dowdrafts on the same systems taking turn with the skimmers and over a period of 2months, the becketts and downdraft ran the system on average .14 pH units higher and redox 40-50 mv higher than the ER or BK minis. One system was roughly 200 gallons, SPs dominant l, clams, and decent fish load. It could be that the ER and BK mini were more efficient, but the only thing that had changed were the skimmers, for arguments sake, but the net effect was that the beckett and downdraft were more effective for the system... Before being called a heretic, I know that ORP isn't a perfect measurement. The other part of this is wattage consumed, easily 3x higher with the beckett and downdraft, but after the lighting systems I use its not so much....
 
No, its not the only thing, but if you are looking into needlewheels, the efficiency is most likely at the top of your list.

Im sure there is some reason for the becketts these pH and ORP buffering values... most likely the high turnover. There are needlewheels which are doing this as well though. Heck, my pH rises a good .15 or more just from drawing my air from the outside rather than in the house. I wonder about the whole ORP/pH claims of the becketts though... if its just the turnover (bleeding the oxygenation into the tank rather than keeping it in the skimmer like a needlewheel with a lower turnover), or if there really is a difference between a beckett and a high output skimmer... like an ATI threadwheel.

But to me, the extra wattage of a beckett isnt worth it. If I want more pH or ORP, I can draw air from outside, or run some ozone... much less wattage to do that on a needlewheel than switch to a beckett, and the buffering then is loads more... 40-50mV higher?... thats barely anything to most systems.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10828614#post10828614 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SDguy
rpms too low?
Click to expand...

No, its just that a centrifugal force is needed. A prop wont chop up bubbles well... not unless you add mesh, pins, etc... right? But then its not a propeller anymore, its an impeller.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10829279#post10829279 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
No, its just that a centrifugal force is needed. A prop wont chop up bubbles well... not unless you add mesh, pins, etc... right? But then its not a propeller anymore, its an impeller.
Click to expand...

I wasn't clear to begin with...I was commenting more on the motor of the vortech, not the prop.
 
Oh, well... yeah... its a DC motor. Dont see much point in it going through glass though. If anything, this might be a weak point, since the magnets dont transfer torque as well as conventional pumps. Those piranha bilge pumps look promising though.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10829262#post10829262 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
No, its not the only thing, but if you are looking into needlewheels, the efficiency is most likely at the top of your list.

Im sure there is some reason for the becketts these pH and ORP buffering values... most likely the high turnover. There are needlewheels which are doing this as well though. Heck, my pH rises a good .15 or more just from drawing my air from the outside rather than in the house. I wonder about the whole ORP/pH claims of the becketts though... if its just the turnover (bleeding the oxygenation into the tank rather than keeping it in the skimmer like a needlewheel with a lower turnover), or if there really is a difference between a beckett and a high output skimmer... like an ATI threadwheel.

But to me, the extra wattage of a beckett isnt worth it. If I want more pH or ORP, I can draw air from outside, or run some ozone... much less wattage to do that on a needlewheel than switch to a beckett, and the buffering then is loads more... 40-50mV higher?... thats barely anything to most systems.
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's not perfect.... please keep in mind that those were averages... the diff between the ER (standard impeller and meshmodded) and the beckett and downdraft is much higher difference in ORP 80-85 mv... well, when your system runs avg 420 mv with a beckett or downdraft, and drops to an avg 340mv, there is something of a difference in the system, again, I'm not sure which. I still do not believe that lph versus wattage is any more valuable, less I'd say, due to the fact that due to the large diameter of most BKs versus the ERs, ASMs, etc, The Bk can actually handle those amounts of air... but that is just my opinion....
 
skimmers

skimmers

Can't resist this topic ! Haven't measured ORP values in comparing skimmers but there are reasons for the beckett/downdraft skimmers being used on many large reef systems - they work very well ! Yes you use more electricity but , so does your powerful halide lighting systems that keep our SPS , and LPS corals alive , not to mention chillers and other equipment- Right !
Pinwheel designs don't have the turnover rates even close to the becketts/downdrafts skimmers and we tend to get carried away on how much air pinwheel skimmers draw on a per watt basis but forget about how little turnover rate they have in comparison.
I don't see much point in a skimmer drawing in a 1500l/hr of air (ATI) and only turning over a good size tanks water volume in one hour . Considering that a beckett draws 1000 -1200l/hr air and can turnover the same tanks water volume at least three to five times an hour . So in effect you are putting approximately anywhere from 3000l/hr to 5000l/hr of air mixtiure into you tanks water on a per hour basis which means better oxygenation and better stripping of DOC's.
bernie lyons
 
Well, high turnover is pretty trivial... and I would hardly call higher water turbulence an advantage. Also Needlewheels CAN have high turnover rates, just like a Beckett, FWIW, and many do. Classic skimmer designs suggest turnovers as low as 1-2x per day!!!

Think about it... lets say you have a 1200gph pump on a beckett to get 1000lph of air. If that pump is in the 120watt range, it will most likely be running at an actual throughput of 800gph, if that. So thats 800gph of water, and 1000lph (264 gallons) of air for 120 watts.

A PSK 2500 pump that ATI uses, although not the best pump IMO, but still a good example, does 1000lph of air for about 23-15 watts, and 1500lph (400gph) of water.

Now, here's what I dont get... what is the point of running so much more water through a skimmer? Its not like its going to do much besides pass right through without even contacting a bubble. When you actually convert the units, a beckett has an air:water ratio in the 1:4 range (1:3 at best), and a needlewheel at best is in the 1:1.5 range.

FWIW, I get more skimmate from running a needlewheel as a recirc anyways (look at all the people who convert their ASM's to recircs for better performance), with a throughput of only 1.5-2x the tank volume per hour. Thats all you need really... otherwise you are just passing more water through with less exposure.

Look at what your skimmer cup makes in a day... what... less than 1% the total volume of the tank in a day, right? And if you condensed that, it would be a fraction of that even. So it stands to reason that you arent really processing more than a fraction of the water that is passing through the skimmer at any given time... so increasing the throughput... what good is that? Most authors believe a lower throughput, with less turbulence is better.
 
Oh, and as for the whole 'we use so much wattage on other things, so who cares?'... that is a careless attitude about energy use. Its like saying 'I spent so much on this car, so who cares about the price of gas?' Because you 'use that much wattage for your lighting', I could just as easily argue why you should care that much more about the energy use of your other components. Saying you already put up with one evil so why not another is not sound logic or ethical. All it says is that you just dont care about the total amount that you use.

'So many other people litter, so why shouldnt I?' is along those same lines.
 
It really does make a huge difference if you think about wattage on every part of you tank.

Having a overflow fed low wattage needlewheel skimmer is one of the main things I incorporated.

I spent a lot of thought on it and it pays off evey month :D

I was jsut talking to a guy with just a little bit alrger tank the other day that has 500 dollar bills to my 150 total, all because wattage was not thought about. It is an awesome setup.. but...
 
Yeah, my 125g only costs about $20-25 a month to run. No joke. Attention to details from step one.

Also, dont even need fans or a chiller... even in the middle of summer. Im running bargain basement wattage for the gallonage Im running. Light mover, as well as picking the most efficient bulbs, reflectors, etc... helps alot. That Sicce PSK 2500, although not my favorite pump, still makes a good 1000lph for minimal wattage (23-26watts). Eheim 1250 return pump, tunze streams, eheim 1048 on the reactor (10 watts?).
 
Hahn, I don't think it's necessary to say someones unethical due to using more electricity... I think anyone who's only getting 1000 lph of air on a beckett (downdraft) isn't running the right pump with it. I put air valves on my becketts, and downdrafts. With the Becketts, I reduce the airflow to roughly 2400lph, because that's the foam consistency that I like. I can get a lot more through there as well. I've not seen any, but may be the biggest BKs, that could process a tanks volume as becketts/downdrafts, I shoot for 5x +. Again, if I can put more water through the skimmer, even as a less efficient level as a NW, the end is more purification of the system due to the throughput.

Unless you're driving a prius, have solar panels on your house, utilize geothermal heating systems, please don't call my careless about my energy consumption :).
 
Your last sentence really epitomizes Hahn's post

Now people can't even talk about trying to conserve unless they are perfect..... That seems to be the current philosophy of many people today.

Not to de-rail this thread, but we will make no progress as a culture with that attitude....

I could easily have at least double the energy footprint if I had not made some specific choices for my tank, and that really is a huge impact. We are not talking just changing standard lightbulbs to CF's around your house here... This is huge amounts of power per month. And considering this is all a luxury to begin with, it makes me just a little more comfortable with it all....

Every little bit helps.... anywhere..
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10839108#post10839108 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by stony_corals
Unless you're driving a prius, have solar panels on your house, utilize geothermal heating systems, please don't call my careless about my energy consumption :).
Click to expand...

So, I can only comment if Im perfect or something? Once again, you are showing the exact same flaw in your logic. I wasnt calling you careless, just your attitude and justification, BTW... you are using one evil to justify another. The whole 'its not that much worse' attitude is why the US is in such a bind for energy, and the rest of the world views us as careless morons. When you consider all it would take is a small bit every day to save us billions and billions in money, oil, etc... it seems rather wreckless to toss concern to the wind. And the whole 'he's not perfect either, so I dont have to listen' is yet again... using one percieved evil to justify another. Even the Dali Llama isnt perfect... does that mean he cant speak on religion? I find your circumstances and qualifications for why you feel you should or shouldnt listen to someone to be unrealistic.

FWIW, when I move into a new home in the next couple years, the 500g reef will be lit with a skylight, solar panels will be present (or a vertical windmill if I can get the permit), the home will be a 'net-zero' energy use home. I wont buy a Prius because my in-law is a CEO in the auto industry, and he says the long term environmental impact is worse with hybrids... so I stick to a 1.8turbo for 40-some miles to the gallon. I am working on bringing over frames for Ariel Atoms so a friend and I can build the rest ourselves, hoping to use the accord diesel engine, or maybe even the electric motor from a tesla. I also await tesla motor's third car, which is supposed to be a long-range compact. I also believe the US should adopt the same energy program that has put Germany at the head of the pack for alternative energy. Not that any of this should qualify me or disqualify me from having an opinion on someone else's logic.

So Im not perfect, so I cant comment...??? Do you see the flaw in that?

'My auto mechanic didnt build the car, so what does he know about fixing it?'

'No other country can advise the US on its policies, because theirs arent perfect either'

'My priest/pastor got a speeding ticket, so he cant tell us sin is wrong'

'He doesnt have all the answers, so what does he know?'

Back on topic... to justify burning more electricity than you need to just because you use alot somewhere else isnt a sound argument. Its like saying 'Ill just buy another Humvee despite the gas it costs me because I already have one.' Its not that far from 'the LFS store uses tons of electricity compared to me, so as long as Im not as bad, I can use as much as I want'. Using lots of lighting on your tank might be something you cant get around, that doesnt enable or justify needlessly burning extra energy on other things. Some people I know do comment about 'how can I be for conservation while running 500watts in lighting over my reef tank?' Well... how can I if thats the king of logic being used...???

Now, for many with becketts, the extra wattage is somewhat justified, in your case perhaps, because there is an actual belief that the beckett/downdraft has some properties that make it better even though its less efficient. Thats why I am not calling YOU in particular careless... but your attitude/logic to support it doesnt stand.

I think becketts vs. needlewheels should be looked at more. If there was some scientific testing done to determine what the real differences are, perhaps becketts would be justified in the end to some extent, or, the beliefs that some have about them would be shown to be myths.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Y
RedSea 50 LED VS AI Prime 16 HD
Replies
5
Views
342
mellotang
mellotang
B
Chemiclean & protein skimmer
Replies
9
Views
195
bcwalz
B
D
Best depth for a shallow reef? 30"X18"X ?????
Replies
4
Views
92
duganderson
D
J
Hydra 64 help
Replies
2
Views
82
griss
griss
C
New Protein Skimmer
Replies
4
Views
112
ironwill723
ironwill723
Back
Top