Bow big does your Refugium have to be?

[asonitez]

How big does your refugium have to be for effective nutrient export? I have a pretty stocked tank and I was looking for some more nutrient export in addition to my Carbon and Phosphate Reactors.

I Thought about converting parts of my sump into a refugium but that would mean draining it glueing baffles and leaving the tank sumpless for 24 hours or more while the glue sticks. And even then I don't think it will be big enough to effitively remove anything.


I thought about a HOB refugium that I could hang on the Sump Itself.

It measures 24"L x 4"W x 13.5"H
I think thats like 8 Gallons? Chocked full of Microalgae that would work well right?

 

[Gdevine]

IMO as big as you can go! I have a 65g DT with a 35g fuge!

 

[asonitez]

That would not work well for me. I have limited space. I have a 20 Gallon breeder That I thought about making into a Display Fuge but No place to put it.

 

[ACBlinky]

IMO any fuge is better than no fuge. 8g is small, but it looks like you could fill the majority of that space with chaeto -- that's a pretty big ball of macro and it should make a difference in your water parameters.

I have a 30g sump/fuge that runs 2/3-3/4 full. It's divided into thirds lengthwise, and the back 2/3 is divided into thirds widthwise -- the entire front section is set aside for frags, macro, sand and LR. 2/3 of the back is dedicated to chaeto -- it looks large, but if I break it down into gallons, it's probably about 7-8g of space; just about what you're looking at adding.

 

[chujai]

yeah my fuge area is only about 8" x 12" x 10" deep. not big at all


its a part of my 70 gal system and i see so many pods growing in there, only thing is i run out of space for the macro algae fast so i gotta prune a little more often than id like

 

[kyelr]

I agree -any fuge is better than no fuge... Make the best out of the space you have - You could consider a little acrylic work to make a little larger refugium...

 

[asonitez]

I'm Limited by the Space under my tank or else I would have built a huge fuge by now. Right now my goal is for a stable system parameters complemented by mechanical ( reactors) and biological, LR- Fuge- Micro Algae/Fauna to create a stress free system. All of my fish are currently in qurantine with water changes every 2 days.

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12304790#post12304790 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Gdevine
IMO as big as you can go! I have a 65g DT with a 35g fuge!

Hehe
I think i love my sumps more then my DT
i just put in 200$$ for the glass to build the sump and i payed about $65 for the tank it self =D
its pretty cool, i'll have to post some pictures of my L shaped sump once its done =D

 

[sk8ergolie31]

i have a 10g with a aquaclear 50 fuge

pics:
<a href="http://imageshack.us"><img src="http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3830/tank002lr9.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/></a><br/>
<a href="http://imageshack.us"><img src="http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/7463/tank003ng0.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/></a><br/>


"how big does your refugium have to be?"
for my tank not big at all:lol:

talking about refugiums, heres a link about them. some good reading and pics!
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1349443

 

[meschaefer]

People are going to flame me, but I don't agree that a small fuge is better than no fuge.

I believe that small fuges just trap detritus, preventing it from being exported by a skimmer (try shaking out a ball of cheato). The detrius breaks down fouling the water, faster than a small amount of macro algae is going to export it.

I had a small fuge (about 10 gallons) on a 65, and was having all sorts of algae problems until I took it off line. I know many others that have had the same experience. After talking with lots of people, people who have had success and those that have not, the defining characteristic is a fuge that is at least 1/3 the overall tank volume.

 

[Untamed12]

I had a serious hair algae problem in my 400 gallon system with no 'fuge. I had not designed the system for a 'fuge, so it became a matter of trying to squeeze on in somewhere.

I put a 10 gallon 'fuge in place and it cured my algae problem completely. My 'fuge is disgusting, overgrown hair algae farm...while the display tank is absolutely clean of hair algae.

So...my 'fuge is very small in relation to my tank, but very effective. I would also call my 'fuge more of a turf scrubber than a regular 'fuge. I'm considering adding multiple acrylic plates to provide more surface area for algae to grow.

 

[Tswifty]

I will take the side of "any fuge is better than no fuge" for the very fact that it will increase your overall capacity.

Matt, I wouldn't attribute the algae to the refugium. I would guess that the fuge wasn't working properly, or large enough, and your algae problem could was probably attributed to something else. The primary function of macro is the removal of phosphates and nitrates. That being said you must continually trim and prune the macro to get the phosphate and nitrates out of the tank.

I will say this though. I would not put any sand in a smaller refugium. just some LR rubble and cheato with good flow moving through it for nitrate and phosphate removal.

The LR rubble along with the cheato ball itself will give the pods places to host, and hideout.

 

[meschaefer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12306476#post12306476 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tswifty8
I will take the side of "any fuge is better than no fuge" for the very fact that it will increase your overall capacity.

Matt, I wouldn't attribute the algae to the refugium. I would guess that the fuge wasn't working properly, or large enough, and your algae problem could was probably attributed to something else. The primary function of macro is the removal of phosphates and nitrates. That being said you must continually trim and prune the macro to get the phosphate and nitrates out of the tank.

I will say this though. I would not put any sand in a smaller refugium. just some LR rubble and cheato with good flow moving through it for nitrate and phosphate removal.

The LR rubble along with the cheato ball itself will give the pods places to host, and hideout.

I absolutely would attribute the algae problem to the refugium.

You state that "I would guess that the fuge wasn't working properly, or large enough," which is exactly my point, and ultimately the point of this thread.

I kept a very clean tank. An over sized skimmer (DAS Ex-2), a good amount of in tank flow (about 60x), nitrates less than five (Salifert) and phosphates averaging between .03 and .05 (Hanna colorimeter). Yet I still had an algae problem, did some objective investigation, and was convinced to remove the "refugium" and ..... problem solved. This was after I had tried a host of other fixes, including but not limited to, reduced feedings, reduced lighting cycles, upgrade skimmer, GFO, snake oil... etc. etc.

Another poster indicates that his refugium works more as an algae scrubber. This is an excellent point, to make. The purpose of a refugium is to provide an area without predation to allow beneficial organisms to reproduce and seed/feed the main display tank. Somehow over the last few years the purpose of refugium has been perverted to the use of nitrate/phosphate removal. If the purpose is nitrate/phosphate removal then it is more akin to an algae scrubber, where surface area (i.e. the poster who wants to add acrylic plates to increase surface area) becomes just as, if not more important then volume.

Which gets me to the point, size matters. Whether it be surface area or water volume. It is hard to deny that cheato and other macro's trap a significant amount of detritus. There is a tipping point where it is trapping more detritus in the system along with its component nitrates and phosphates, than it is exporting. This problem is overcome when dealing with larger volumes.

 

[meschaefer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12306371#post12306371 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Untamed12
I had a serious hair algae problem in my 400 gallon system with no 'fuge. I had not designed the system for a 'fuge, so it became a matter of trying to squeeze on in somewhere.

I put a 10 gallon 'fuge in place and it cured my algae problem completely. My 'fuge is disgusting, overgrown hair algae farm...while the display tank is absolutely clean of hair algae.

So...my 'fuge is very small in relation to my tank, but very effective. I would also call my 'fuge more of a turf scrubber than a regular 'fuge. I'm considering adding multiple acrylic plates to provide more surface area for algae to grow.

Just looking at your signature line, it appears that your tank is just a year old now. I am a firm believer that tanks go through a cycle of algae as the tank matures lasting on average about six months. While I am not totally discounting your experience, I would need to know a lot more about your experience before I would take it as evidence against my belief about refugiums as nutrient export.

Also see my point about algae scrubbers in my previous pose.

 

[Tswifty]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12306860#post12306860 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by meschaefer
I absolutely would attribute the algae problem to the refugium.

You state that "I would guess that the fuge wasn't working properly, or large enough," which is exactly my point, and ultimately the point of this thread.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12306910#post12306910 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by meschaefer
While I am not totally discounting your experience, I would need to know a lot more about your experience before I would take it as evidence against my belief about refugiums as nutrient export.

Also see my point about algae scrubbers in my previous pose.

#1 Calm down

#2 I still will contest your refugium was not working properly. How often were you trimming your macro. What type of flow did you have through the fuge? What type of lighting? My first thought is that you were not feeding your macro properly. There are many elements that contribute to the success of a refugium.

You stated in your first post that you were going to get "flamed" then turn around and do it to others who are only offering advice and opinions.

Do not take a side against refugiums... from my research I have seen much less anti-refugiests (or whatever term is proper) than adamant supporters for them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
asonitez:
If you want to learn about how a fuge functions, and the various sizes and types I suggest you take a look and browse through this thread:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1349443

sadly opinions are like... well you know.

 

[asonitez]

I understand everyone Side.. I recognize the befits of a fuge. Although I'm not looking to make the fuge the absolute ONLY form of filtration to remove excess nutrients I do want it to function as a big part of my nutrient removal. I'm convinced that the Large fuge I mentione in my OP will help my 90 Gallon tank just because not only is it a fuge but it also helps by skimming to keep detrius out of the fuge. That was a big concern for me because I feed heavily sometimes which is my fault and I don't have a great clean up crew yet. As such Its my fault that I'm experiencing this crazy swing in nutrients. I think Purchasing the fuge would be a good idea. I'll research a bit more and listen to the discussions here before making a final decision though.

 

[Tswifty]

Also... it will be a great place to cultivate copods, which are a beneficial source of food for livestock in your DT

 

[aastretch64]

I have a 90 gallon SPS tank with a 20 gallon sump, 8 gallons of which is a refuge with a 5" dsb. I have no detectable phosphates, and nitrates under 5. I don't think having a smaller fuge is a problem IMO.

Alex

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12306910#post12306910 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by meschaefer
Just looking at your signature line, it appears that your tank is just a year old now. I am a firm believer that tanks go through a cycle of algae as the tank matures lasting on average about six months. While I am not totally discounting your experience, I would need to know a lot more about your experience before I would take it as evidence against my belief about refugiums as nutrient export.

Also see my point about algae scrubbers in my previous pose.

perhaps you would like to discuss your point of view with the members on this thread---some of them with over 30 years of experience:smokin:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1349443

 

[meschaefer]

ARGH... I sit at work and type out responses in between phone calls and interruptions. I typed out a fairly detailed response on exactly how I was running my fuge then obviously didn't hit reply.

I am not flamming anyone, I disagree with a proposition and gave a reasoned explanation why.

No where have I said that I am anti-refugium. I take issue only with the idea that a small refugium is better than no refugium.

My refugium was lit by the lamp recommended by Melev. I played with the flow over the year it was set up, and it varied from a slow turn over to a very rapid turnover as I experimented with it. Water flow was directed so that it caused the Cheato to tumble in a ball, exposing all sides to the light. It was harvested slightly less than once every two weeks, sometimes once a week. I had a small amount of live rock rubble on the bottom, no sand. Ocassionaly I dosed iron, but not often.