Coral Tank from Canada (1350gal Display Tank)

[nineball]

More from MACNA...........

More from MACNA...........

SaraB, what can I say that hasn't been said about SaraB. It was a real pleasure to finally meet Sara and I can say that she is a terrific person. Passionate, committed and far more knowledgeable than she gives herself credit for, I will always have an invitation for Sara to visit the fish room..........especially if she brings Lisa.

For those that have not had the pleasure, Lisa knows everything.......about everything! She reminds me of TinkerBell on steroids. She has a quick wit and knows a ton about this discipline and is fun to boot. I think I am in love with these two women but thats the stuff of another thread, I think. I can honestly say that this hobby needs more women because they do bring a balanced view to most issues and they make conversations about coral and fish real interesting. Besides, I think they know absolutely everyone who has ever kept coral in saltwater!!!!

Sara and Lisa, lets not wait till the next MACNA to get together.......it sure was great meeting you at this MACNA. Thank you for coming to dinner, it was great fun for me.

Peter

PS. Yes Sara, you rate, in fact you folks RULE!!!!!

 

[dantimdad]

Mr. Wilson,

Please start a thread on your sumpless idea and alternative methods. I am running sumpless right now on my 46 bow and was just about to tear it down, drill it and add a sump.

I too hate having prop pumps in my display and was going to drill for a closed loop while I had it down.

Thanks,
Steven

 

[SaraB]

Thanks Peter, you made me blush and made my day! Hope we can all get together as you said before the next MACNA as the company and conversation was great! Thanks again for the wonderful wines!

 

[mr.wilson]

Mr. Wilson,

Please start a thread on your sumpless idea and alternative methods. I am running sumpless right now on my 46 bow and was just about to tear it down, drill it and add a sump.

I too hate having prop pumps in my display and was going to drill for a closed loop while I had it down.

Thanks,
Steven

I wish I had the time to start new threads. When I do, I will set up an experimental tank to use as a model. Too often we get sucked into doing things a certain way simply because "that's how it's done".

Having said that, there is usually a reason why people do it that way Just make sure your reasons apply.

As much as I don't like pumps and parts in the tank, I also don't like the liability and cost of making a swiss cheese tank with holes in every panel. You can knock $1000 off of the cost of a tank by eliminating most of the holes (no need for tempering and thicker glass etc.). Losing a few bulkheads and valves by going up over the top trim has its benefits, as long as you can get creative to hide them.

Closed loop pumps do not need to be located below the tank, and they do not need to have any bulkheads. You can easily prime the system with a powerhead and never have to do it again. Everything starts up automatically when you switch the pump on and off. Spray foam, epoxy, and cement can make any internal plumbing invisible.

Remember to reinvest the savings in other areas or you will have a false economy. I'm also a big fan of adding extra system volume with 55 gallon drums. You can run these under pressure or as header tanks, or daisy chained to a sump. They can be used for water volume or as sand beds, live rock or eggcrate benthic/cryptic zones, or as chemical media filters.

 

[dainiusiva]

Mr. Wilson,

Your thoughts on sumpless/skimmerless approach to filtration and tank setup are really interesting. Could you please elaborate on that more? I believe that you are most suited and qualified to deliver this information to average hobyists in understandable fashion.

Could you shed more light on your preferences for skimmer and sump replacement when designing a new tank? What do you think would work best for that and still retain eye pleasing look?

 

[sunfish11]

SaraB, what can I say that hasn't been said about SaraB. It was a real pleasure to finally meet Sara and I can say that she is a terrific person. Passionate, committed and far more knowledgeable than she gives herself credit for, I will always have an invitation for Sara to visit the fish room..........especially if she brings Lisa.

For those that have not had the pleasure, Lisa knows everything.......about everything! She reminds me of TinkerBell on steroids. She has a quick wit and knows a ton about this discipline and is fun to boot. I think I am in love with these two women but thats the stuff of another thread, I think. I can honestly say that this hobby needs more women because they do bring a balanced view to most issues and they make conversations about coral and fish real interesting. Besides, I think they know absolutely everyone who has ever kept coral in saltwater!!!!

Sara and Lisa, lets not wait till the next MACNA to get together.......it sure was great meeting you at this MACNA. Thank you for coming to dinner, it was great fun for me.

Peter

PS. Yes Sara, you rate, in fact you folks RULE!!!!!

I too find myself blushing. Tinker Bell huh? LOL! Oh, and I only know everything about everything once I have a few drinks in me, hahaha. Usually I just know ALMOST everything.
I made it to about page 30 in the thread so far. I still have a ways to go yet and you guys are making it longer every day:hmm4: Good stuff though! We had a blast with you guys as well and we should definitley do it again before a whole year goes by. I had a great time meeting you and chatting about cars. I want a ride in the one you are thinking about getting! Anyway, I will be following your big reef adventure from now on.

Lisa

 

[mr.wilson]

Mr. Wilson,

Your thoughts on sumpless/skimmerless approach to filtration and tank setup are really interesting. Could you please elaborate on that more? I believe that you are most suited and qualified to deliver this information to average hobyists in understandable fashion.

Could you shed more light on your preferences for skimmer and sump replacement when designing a new tank? What do you think would work best for that and still retain eye pleasing look?

First of all, I don't want to be known as the guy who told you to "just unplug your skimmer" They do remove 20% of the TOC and do so quickly. I would however advise against spending that extra $500 on the $1200 model.

There have been many successful reef tanks that have not had protein skimmers. There are also quite a few successful tanks that have skimmers that barely skim. The idea of abandoning a protein skimmer is enhanced when you can ditch your open system (sump) at the same time.

The caveat (warning) here is that you need to refocus the protein skimmer resources in other areas of TOC removal and nutrient export. If you follow Ron Shimek's work, you will know that there are many ways of exporting nutrients other than protein skimming. Take a look at the charts here... http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php

While many hobbyists have refugiums, few exploit them to their fullest potential. A few compact fluorescent lights will grow macro algae, but with a little fine tuning you can harvest enough algae to keep your local health food store stocked

Header tanks (filter tanks above the display) can raise as many problems as sumps. The weight needs to be managed for one, and the water needs to be drained without adding bubbles to the display. One of the obvious advantages is that live food (plankton) can easily migrate from the refuge of the macro algae to the waiting polyps of the display tank.

Activated carbon (GAC) is another filtration method that is often carried out passively. ROX type carbon should be used and replaced frequently. In most cases the water clarity and colour is enough of an indication. Carbon should be placed in the path of moving water but in a way that limits channeling and clogging. A fluidized bed filter helps with this.

Ozone is another underutilized tool. You don't need a protein skimmer to dose ozone. If you increase the production of your refugium then you need to deal with the secondary metabolites (algae toxins) that are a byproduct. Protein skimmers can remove these, but carbon and ozone are more efficient.

Mechanical filters are also more efficient at removing POC (particulate organic carbon) than protein skimmers. Make sure you don't overlook this important filtration device if you omit a skimmer.

There is no significant gas exchange provided by protein skimming that you can't get with good water flow. Take some of the money you are saving and do your flow dynamics right. The air/water interface at the surface is constantly rolling and changing. This is where the chief oxygenation is occurring.

There is a certain peace of mind one gains by having a closed system without an open sump. You should still use a rubbermaid container or liner to catch drips and direct them to a drain. These systems also run silently.

OceanClear makes a modular canister filter system with biological, chemical, UV sterilizer and mechanical options. The only issue I have with them is the lid is quirky and can be difficult to get a good seal. There is a flaw in the mould that leaves a seam where the "O" ring seats on the top. Pentair has a similar line but they are tall and narrow and subsequently difficult to fit under a display tank.

This OceanClear canister has been modified with a 1" compression fitting to hold a heater, a clear acrylic lid for light penetration, a totally inadequate Coralife power compact light (it was 7 years ago), and a bag of carbon. The flow is strong enough to keep the Chaetomorpha algae ball spinning for better light exposure and detritus removal. A second OC canister is attached to this one (located in an adjacent cabinet) with 25 micron mechanical and 18 watt Aqua UV sterilizer. The tank is a 55 gallon reef with only one pump on a 2-Way OceansMotions wave maker.

 

[dainiusiva]

First of all, I don't want to be known as the guy who told you to "just unplug your skimmer" They do remove 20% of the TOC and do so quickly. I would however advise against spending that extra $500 on the $1200 model.

There have been many successful reef tanks that have not had protein skimmers. There are also quite a few successful tanks that have skimmers that barely skim. The idea of abandoning a protein skimmer is enhanced when you can ditch your open system (sump) at the same time.

The caveat (warning) here is that you need to refocus the protein skimmer resources in other areas of TOC removal and nutrient export. If you follow Ron Shimek's work, you will know that there are many ways of exporting nutrients other than protein skimming. Take a look at the charts here... http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php

While many hobbyists have refugiums, few exploit them to their fullest potential. A few compact fluorescent lights will grow macro algae, but with a little fine tuning you can harvest enough algae to keep your local health food store stocked

Header tanks (filter tanks above the display) can raise as many problems as sumps. The weight needs to be managed for one, and the water needs to be drained without adding bubbles to the display. One of the obvious advantages is that live food (plankton) can easily migrate from the refuge of the macro algae to the waiting polyps of the display tank.

Activated carbon (GAC) is another filtration method that is often carried out passively. ROX type carbon should be used and replaced frequently. In most cases the water clarity and colour is enough of an indication. Carbon should be placed in the path of moving water but in a way that limits channeling and clogging. A fluidized bed filter helps with this.

Ozone is another underutilized tool. You don't need a protein skimmer to dose ozone. If you increase the production of your refugium then you need to deal with the secondary metabolites (algae toxins) that are a byproduct. Protein skimmers can remove these, but carbon and ozone are more efficient.

Mechanical filters are also more efficient at removing POC (particulate organic carbon) than protein skimmers. Make sure you don't overlook this important filtration device if you omit a skimmer.

There is no significant gas exchange provided by protein skimming that you can't get with good water flow. Take some of the money you are saving and do your flow dynamics right. The air/water interface at the surface is constantly rolling and changing. This is where the chief oxygenation is occurring.

There is a certain peace of mind one gains by having a closed system without an open sump. You should still use a rubbermaid container or liner to catch drips and direct them to a drain. These systems also run silently.

OceanClear makes a modular canister filter system with biological, chemical, UV sterilizer and mechanical options. The only issue I have with them is the lid is quirky and can be difficult to get a good seal. There is a flaw in the mould that leaves a seam where the "O" ring seats on the top. Pentair has a similar line but they are tall and narrow and subsequently difficult to fit under a display tank.

This OceanClear canister has been modified with a 1" compression fitting to hold a heater, a clear acrylic lid for light penetration, a totally inadequate Coralife power compact light (it was 7 years ago), and a bag of carbon. The flow is strong enough to keep the Chaetomorpha algae ball spinning for better light exposure and detritus removal. A second OC canister is attached to this one (located in an adjacent cabinet) with 25 micron mechanical and 18 watt Aqua UV sterilizer. The tank is a 55 gallon reef with only one pump on a 2-Way OceansMotions wave maker.

The OceanClear canister is a great idea. One custom tailored to specific needs could eliminate the need for sump.

Another question is the ease of maintenance: the sump is easy to do maintenance in, it gives you more working space and it is easier to arrange all of your equipment in it, plus it gives some degree of upgrading capability. But... If other means of filtration (GFO, activated carbon, ozone, UV and organic means of nutrient export as Ron Shimek detailed in the article you provided) in conjunction are way more effective than skimmer will ever be and can replace it completely for a fraction of the price, maybe it is worth investing the time required to engineer efficient and also maintenance friendly canister filter that would incorporate all the essential equipment that would otherwise sit in the sump?

To replace and upgrade on the concept of sump, our canister filter would require to fulfill following requirements:
1. It would have to be easy to maintain. That is most important in my eyes - i mean who would ditch the sump with its ease of maintenance for a hard to clean canister filter?
2. It would have to house all essential equipment : mechanical filtration (filter socks), activated carbon, heater, UV and so on.
3. It should be able to hold water pressure and flow (that is actually upgrading on the concept of sump if you have a closed loop system, for it will not drain your tank completely in the event of failure)
4. If its designed for a small system it should also contain refugium.

The canister filter still requires you to have additional reactors for ozone or calcium or whatever else you need that cant be incorporated in the main canister, but thats also the case with the sump.

Another canister would be required to complete the picture : "a benthic/cryptic/sponge canister". Its only requirements would be to let no light penetrate and provide substrate for sponges and inverts to colonise (eggcrate would accomplish this).

So to sum it all up : It can be done with long and careful designing, and it can perform better, look better and make less noise while providing eye-pleasing solution for sump and skimmer replacement.

I would really appreciate to continue discussion and share ideas on this topic with you, mr. wilson :artist: . Please correct me if i made some mistakes while describing my ideal sump/skimmer replacement solution.

 

[kma408]

I'm no grand master but I think this would look great with the other sps islands.

Thanks Mark

wow, very nice, all acans look so healthy and happy.

 

[Crisis64]

Filtration Alternatives

Filtration Alternatives

Hello All! I just wanted to chime in here as I noticed a discussion starting on filtration alternatives, I don't want to hijack this thread but wanted to get some opinions on Turf Algae Scrubbers, from what I have read this is the natural way to filter your water column. I have found numerous threads on almost all the reef forums. There is also a forum dedicated to the subject http://www.algaescrubber.net/forums/
I currently don't have a tank but am planning one, & I was also leaning towards skimmer-less, but not sump-less.

Any thoughts or opinions welcome!

 

[Cougarman]

Hello All! I just wanted to chime in here as I noticed a discussion starting on filtration alternatives, I don't want to hijack this thread but wanted to get some opinions on Turf Algae Scrubbers, from what I have read this is the natural way to filter your water column. I have found numerous threads on almost all the reef forums. There is also a forum dedicated to the subject http://www.algaescrubber.net/forums/
I currently don't have a tank but am planning one, & I was also leaning towards skimmer-less, but not sump-less.

Any thoughts or opinions welcome!

Algae scrubbers work well in my experience. I guess the real question is what will the bioload of the tank be and how much will you be feeding? If you can achieve adequate filtration by alternate means then a skimmer may not be needed. I believe that's the basis of the miracle mud method. On my system I have a huge bioload and I need the extra nutrient export provided by the skimmer in addition to a rdsb and refugium, ozone etc. I have however seen highly successful tanks run only on carbon and few water changes. I remember the inventor of chemipure had a large system filtered only by a large chamber of chemipure. I believe one of his selling points was a skimmer less tank.

 

[Elliott]

There is one advantage of a protein skimmer that should not be overlooked: the rapidity at which it removes waste.

If you have the sudden death of a fish, if you accidentally dump too much food in the water, etc., a protein skimmer will begin to remove waste quickly. An exception is GAC that can bind toxins very quickly and much more efficiently, such as the toxins released from flatworms when treating with flatworm exit.

The point here is that a protein skimmer provides a quick export of waste, albeit not as efficient as other means.

 

[Hookup]

I think an understanding of what all of these devices are doing, nutrient export, is key. The goal is to achieve a balance of nutrient export with import. Without that, failure is almost for sure.

I realize that this is a fundamentally basic statement, yet in my experience it is lost in the hype of products, marketing, fads, etc, etc....

Massive, frequent water changes will all but guarantee success for nutrient export. Say, 25% every day. The issue is cost and time. Everything else is a compromise to those basic conditions.

Nutrient import is a factor of mainly feeding and fish/bio-load. Minimize those and again you have conditions for success.

Further more, understanding that there are different types of nutrients and fundamentally different export systems focused at each, and a clearer understanding of the aquarium is established.

IMHO, other than the lighting, everything we do is focused on determining how to efficiently and effectively export nutrients, of all types, from a given system that matches with a given end-state goal and the hobbyist on personal disposition towards husbandry. Again, a super basic statement, but if this is the motivating factor for decisions, as opposed to trends/fads/chasing what someone else is dioing/marketing etc, we start off on the right foot.

 

[Elliott]

I think an understanding of what all of these devices are doing, nutrient export, is key. The goal is to achieve a balance of nutrient export with import. Without that, failure is almost for sure.

I realize that this is a fundamentally basic statement, yet in my experience it is lost in the hype of products, marketing, fads, etc, etc....

Massive, frequent water changes will all but guarantee success for nutrient export. Say, 25% every day. The issue is cost and time. Everything else is a compromise to those basic conditions.

Nutrient import is a factor of mainly feeding and fish/bio-load. Minimize those and again you have conditions for success.

actually, water changes can increase toxic heavy metals, Ron Shimeck describes it here: http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php

 

[Hookup]

actually, water changes can increase toxic heavy metals, Ron Shimeck describes it here: http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php

Careful on that.

I would have to argue that 100% water change will not increase heavy metals. Quite impossible by nature of the fact that you are starting with a fresh water column.

What about 99% water changes daily... not a completely new water colum, but close..

what about 50% daily... etc.

At what point do we reach a balance? It has been told to me that 12.5% weekly is the plateau point. Not an official reference for sure.

I'll read the link as well.. thanks for posting.

 

[kharmaguru]

Successful tanks that I have observed always were the product of conscientious husbandry. Deliberate nutrient export via water changes, protein skimming, carbon, chaeto, etc. While alternate methodologies are interesting and lead to innovation, let's not get away from what has already proven to work by the meriad of long term successes observed in this forum alone.

I think even suggesting that water changes are somehow a detriment is heading in the wrong direction all together, and I would read the information in that article with nothing more than a passing interest. The author himself admits to too much focus on metal accumulation leaving other measured factors incomplete.

 

[golf nut]

I would have to argue that 100% water change will not increase heavy metals. Quite impossible by nature of the fact that you are starting with a fresh water column.

It could likely increase heavy metals unless you are bare bottom, with no rock.
It really depends on where those nasty heavy metals want to hide.

 

[Hookup]

It could likely increase heavy metals unless you are bare bottom, with no rock.
It really depends on where those nasty heavy metals want to hide.

Not sure I'd use that word "likely".

Theoretically maybe, or possibly



The idea is interesting for sure... But it paints a pretty glum picture... I'll admit the above article is hard to read... i've stop/started a few times... i'll stick at it, it's just dry.. (pun intended)...

One of the problems that I have is how long standing tanks such as public aquariums would be viable given heavy metal buildup issues and the year over year operation. I'm sure it is explained further into the article than I've made it. lol

 

[nineball]

Again, a super basic statement, but if this is the motivating factor for decisions, as opposed to trends/fads/chasing what someone else is dioing/marketing etc, we start off on the right foot.

And that my friend gets you a ticket to the show!!!!!

Well put.

Peter

 

[nineball]

Successful tanks that I have observed always were the product of conscientious husbandry. Deliberate nutrient export via water changes, protein skimming, carbon, chaeto, etc. While alternate methodologies are interesting and lead to innovation, let's not get away from what has already proven to work by the meriad of long term successes observed in this forum alone.

I think even suggesting that water changes are somehow a detriment is heading in the wrong direction all together, and I would read the information in that article with nothing more than a passing interest. The author himself admits to too much focus on metal accumulation leaving other measured factors incomplete.

++1

Peter