Best skimmer to skim wet?

[secrest]

Im going to be setting up a new 125 gallon bb tank soon and I'm wondering what the best skimmer out there is to skim wet??

 

[XeniaMania]

You ask an interesting question. Why have you chosen to go wet versus dry? Whether you go wet or dry should depend on what skimmer you choose, and it's usually a underpowered skimmer which would make you want to skim wet. When you skim wet, it's a lower quality skimmate with more stuff removed besides just organics. Wet is typically done in emergency situations when you keep stuff skimmed out ASAP, and generally not very beneficial in the long run. Technically any skimmer can produce wet skimmate, it's all in the setup.

 

[secrest]

Well from what i've read, skimming wet is an essential part of barebottom. If I'm not mistaken the main goal is to have enough flow that detrius doesn't have time to settle. Thats where the wet skimming comes in. Getting out all of the crud as fast as possible.

Maybe I'm wrong?

 

[poknsnok]

from what I have read a beckett style is the consensus better wetter skimmer. I have a Deltec and wouldnt trade it for the world

 

[XeniaMania]

Unless you had something like a downdraft skimmer, I doubt any skimmer is going to be powerful enough to skim out the heavier bits of detritus. Skimmate is produced by charged particles of air bubbles and dissolved organics attaching to each other. I run barebottom, and what I do is use a micron sock to catch all the particles, and set my skimmer to skim quality skimmate

 

[MiddletonMark]

I'd suggest a beckett if you want to skim wet.

IME, something about the volume of water + beckett means that when set `just right' and wet - I get more particulate in my skimmate than I would have expected or have gotten with other skimmers I've used. [haven't used them all]

Becketts in general require attention and cleaning a little more that other skimmers IMO/IME - not as simple perhaps, but for some folks they work out ideal, others not.
Pay attention to the pump on it, don't get anything that's not pressure rated IMO, ask and look around at what others are having success with on their becketts. I was sold a Mag with mine ... IMO not a good choice.

I find wet skimming to be a useful tool, that when trying to actively reduce nutrients it helped quite a bit IMO. While requiring attention to salinity, I'd argue it removed more than I could have if run drier ... or so my experience says. [I run it drier now, as I'm letting a little more nutrient stay in the tank]

 

[Johnsteph10]

I'm not sure where some of this information about wet skimming is coming from but...

Wet skimming removes particulates before they have a chance to start to degrade and is particularly useful in BB tanks where you concentrate on removing detritus and etc. before it has a chance to break down. Sure, you get more volume of skimmate but you get a massive amount of particulate matter out of the tank quickly. Couple wet skimming with water directly from the overflow...and you cannot beat it.

I fully agree with Mark - Becketts excel at wet skimming. NW skimmers and do both by changing the water level in the skimmer.

 

[Froggy]

I have never used a Beckett skimmer so I cannot comment on those but I have read that they are very good skimming wet when matched with an appropriately sized pressure rated pump. I do use a Euroreef needle wheel skimmer and do skim on the wetter side. This has seemed to be more effective for me in keeping nutrients lower even though I do not run a BB system. I agree with Mark and Johnsteph10 with their view. I also found it interesting when I read a study that wetter tea colored skimmate actually had a higher amount of dissolved organics in it as opposed to a darker drier foam. (I do not have the reference on hand ).
Mark, did you start skimming a little less wet in your BB system to slightly increase nutrients due to a SPS lightening color issue? Has it been working for you and how long has the experiment been going if that was your intention?

 

[TA]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7288206#post7288206 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by MiddletonMark
I'd suggest a beckett if you want to skim wet.

Becketts in general require attention and cleaning a little more that other skimmers IMO/IME

While requiring attention to salinity, I'd argue it removed more than I could have if run drier

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7288584#post7288584 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Johnsteph10
...you get more volume of skimmate but you get a massive amount of particulate matter out of the tank quickly.

Couple wet skimming with water directly from the overflow...and you cannot beat it.

I fully agree with Mark - Becketts excel at wet skimming.

What these guys said.

Only three comments...to maximize efficiency, keep the skimmer riser clean; don't let too much build up accumulate there. And as for "water directly from the overflow", if you can, definately....only wish I could set it up this way. Finally, without enough flow, its very difficult to get the larger particulates suspended in the water column where they can ultimately be brought to the skimmer.

So, heavy flow to get, and keep, the detritus in suspension, overflow directly fed into skimmer, and semi-wet skimming (wet vs. dry suggests only two options...in fact, I think there are at least 256 shades of grey ). I skim about 1% total tank volume/day.

This is not an easy task...at least in my experience.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7288176#post7288176 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by XeniaMania
Unless you had something like a downdraft skimmer, I doubt any skimmer is going to be powerful enough to skim out the heavier bits of detritus. Skimmate is produced by charged particles of air bubbles and dissolved organics attaching to each other. I run barebottom, and what I do is use a micron sock to catch all the particles, and set my skimmer to skim quality skimmate

Xenia, if you dont understand processes, please dont give people advice about them.


Even my tiny little turboflotor 1000 with throw particulate all over the place when set correctly.

As to quality skimmate, like the others have said, I'd rather skim a little wet then have the stuff caught in a micron sock degrading.

 

[shelburn61]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7288752#post7288752 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley

Even my tiny little turboflotor 1000 with throw particulate all over the place when set correctly.

Exactly Rich, I don't understand why wet skimming is determined by anything other than water level.

Can someone explain why becketts are "better" at skimming wet? Flowthrough rate?

 

[G-money]

I've used a Beckett for years without the need to even consider changing. If you want to skim wet, Beckett is the best way to do it....IMO.

 

[Johnsteph10]

Becketts skim wet because they handle a massive amount of air and water while sacrificing contact time....in other words, lots of bubbles in lots of water.

 

[G-money]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7289291#post7289291 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Johnsteph10
Becketts skim wet because they handle a massive amount of air and water while sacrificing contact time....in other words, lots of bubbles in lots of water.

Exactly - do it right the first time...

It's real important to get your bubbles small. That's the one thing that a needle-wheel can do more readily than a Beckett.
I actually just built a new intake riser for mine. The riser that it came with was only about 9" tall. I modded it and added a good 12" to that in hopes that I could gain a little more contact time. I haven't noticed much difference, though. Next up is a taller mixing chamber... Not that I'm displeased with what it does, but more so I can tweak to perfection.

 

[XeniaMania]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7288752#post7288752 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Xenia, if you dont understand processes, please dont give people advice about them.


Even my tiny little turboflotor 1000 with throw particulate all over the place when set correctly.

As to quality skimmate, like the others have said, I'd rather skim a little wet then have the stuff caught in a micron sock degrading.

It's all personal opinion. While I don't mind rinsing my micron sock once every few days, you may. You might want to read a few protein skimming articles yourself, the detritus being removed via protein skimming is not what forms the foam, but the byproduct of the sheer force of air and water being constantly forced upwards. You can believe your turboflotor is doing ALL the detritus removal, but I'd rather trust a micron sock to catch most of the detritus than a skimmer that works optimally at 250gph.

 

[REEF-DADDY]

Beckett all the way. When I go away I set my bullet 3 to skim dry just so the bucket does not need to be emptied so much. When I come back I can see the water is not as clear and I have more algea build up on the glass that usual. That is all I need to see.

 

[REEF-DADDY]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7289358#post7289358 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by XeniaMania
It's all personal opinion. While I don't mind rinsing my micron sock once every few days, you may. You might want to read a few protein skimming articles yourself, the detritus being removed via protein skimming is not what forms the foam, but the byproduct of the sheer force of air and water being constantly forced upwards. You can believe your turboflotor is doing ALL the detritus removal, but I'd rather trust a micron sock to catch most of the detritus than a skimmer that works optimally at 250gph.

Have you used a Beckett?

 

[XeniaMania]

No I haven't, nor have I knocked on the Beckett. I did state that it's possible with a downdraft skimmer which a Beckett is similar to. No selective reading please .

 

[REEF-DADDY]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7289418#post7289418 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by XeniaMania
No I haven't, nor have I knocked on the Beckett. I did state that it's possible with a downdraft skimmer which a Beckett is similar to. No selective reading please.

Just a question.........

 

[G-money]

Xenia,

With all due respect, we aren't saying that a Beckett will remove all the detritus. We also aren't saying that foam is composed of detritus.

I think in the end, someone would be happy with just about any of the mid to higher-end skimmers around. At that point, "better" or "best" is kind of moot. Skimming efficiency is something that would be pretty easy to quantitate, but I've never seen anyone go through the trouble of running different types of skimmers on the same system to see which had more dry yield.