Coral Tank from Canada (1350gal Display Tank)

[glparr]

Baldwin,
I'm guessing that the professor is Ken Feldman of Penn State Univ. He gave a presentation at MACNA about his research involving skimmers, carbon, and organics. Here's what I wrote in my Reef Threads article about his presentation:

"Ken Feldman's discussion of dissolved/total organic carbon was next on the agenda. In terms of understanding aquariums and providing the best possible conditions for our animals, this presentation was the highlight of the weekend. Some of the veterans said it was a repeat of last year's presentation, but it's my understanding that Ken did much additional research in the past year to support his findings. Regardless, I'm glad I attended this one. Here are some highlights of an information-laden presentation.

--In Ken's reef, after one year, his total organic carbon level (TOC) was 0.8 to 1.1 ppm. Without changing anything, after two years, the TOC level dropped to 0.4 to 0.6. I was so glad to hear this because it supports my belief that our tanks don't begin to stabilize until they're a year old and are not really established until they are two years old. In other words, most never have a tank reach full stability/maturity because the tank no longer exists at the two year mark.
--Skimmers, no matter the design or cost, only remove 20% to 35% of TOC from our tanks.
--Granular activated carbon (GAC) removes the vast majority of the TOC that the skimmer doesn't get and ROX carbon is the best medium for TOC removal.
--GAC works best if used in a reactor with a flow rate of at least 50 gph
--"œTall, skinny" reactors are much more effective than short, fat reactors."

Hope this helps,
Gary

 

[Rybren]

Here are the links to his articles on skimmers in Advanced Aquarist.

Jan 2009 http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2

and Jan 2010 http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature

 

[swissgaurd]

mr wilson
might be a good idea to contact andreas,hes in burlington and puts togethor quite an impressive LED setup,he showed me a comparison with 250 watt MH,LED blew the MH away, i think it was a 180 gallon,he may be able to mix and match
contact me for his # if your interested

vic

 

[scubasteve06]

Mr. Wilson and Peter use 400 watt MH with The Big Lumen-Max reflectors. Supplement with T5. Use 14k bulbs, and use a combo of ati blue plus for actinics on the T5's. I think that you and him will both be pleased with the cost effectiveness, not savings or efficiency just what grows corals the best, gives the best look, and has the best overall appeal. Not to mention ease of installation and ease of finding replacement bulbs parts etc. instead of dealing with heat sinks, fancy circuit boards and real long term untested technology. If Peter's tank was built 5 years from now I'm sure it would be lit with LED's or Plasma, but not today MH's and T5's rule. The two together own all and everyone with a right minded head on their shoulders knows this on a big deep wide reef tank. If they think otherwise then I'd have to see another tank of peter's size and depth set-up with their preferred method before I'd disagree with my MH and T5 statement.

BTW that water movement is looking awesome Peter. Mr Wilson really out did himself on this one. If that is only 50% and 70% I can't wait to see what more looks like!!!

I think using the Plasma's on the Mangrove and Chaeto/Refuge areas in the equipment room is the smartest use of your resources. Many studies have shown that chaetomorpha and calupera grow best at 5500-6100k which the Plasma emits perfectly. The LED's could be used on your shallow frag tanks and mars bars systems or other quarantine tanks. Ok enough of my talking get to answering!!!

 

[Baldwin]

I think to dismiss a skimmer or its effectiveness at nutrient export is not something i would dismiss, thousands of members on this forum can attest to its importance. on the flip side ive yet to see a well running reef with a stable fish load without a skimmer, more biology yes, but for now until someone else re invents the wheel its the best form of nutrient export we have, try running a tank with no carbon and you probably not see any difference. try and run the same tank with no skimmer? im sure you will see a downward spiral, what truly is being collected in the skimmer collection cup is of yet to be determined fully.

While I am not willing to try to run my system without my skimmer at this point, and do to the fact I have no corals to help clean up nutrients, I have to disagree with your post. I have seen absolutely thriving reef tanks that did not use carbon or skimmers or even sumps. I am talking about HUGE corals in these systems. That was 5 or so years ago.

 

[swissgaurd]

heres how the portuguese do it with plasma
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17666876#post17666876

 

[mr.wilson]

Thanks! This is definitely something I'd like to try on my next tank for increased flow in the upper areas of the tank and increased surface agitation.

We are adding 1" penductors to all 16 closed loop outputs. They will be here in the middle of next week so we will report the results. We are really impressed with the ones at the surface (sump return) and expect the same results for the CL. Typically penductors are too restrictive for volume pumps, but these DC pumps have lots of pressure. They just need a little flare and diffusion.

I normally use standard flare nozzles, but they create uniform, fake looking water spread at the surface that only lasts for a few feet. The penductors look variable and natural. Having a surge every 15 minutes really drives it home. Once the other 4 pumps are running on a surge pattern it will be "surf's up".

 

[mr.wilson]

heres how the portuguese do it with plasma
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17666876#post17666876

I Knew I could count on you to give the Portuguese take on reef lighting Vic

I don't get the picture though? It looks like T5 lighting with a plasma light mounted above that appears to be turned off???

 

[mr.wilson]

Mr. Wilson and Peter use 400 watt MH with The Big Lumen-Max reflectors. Supplement with T5. Use 14k bulbs, and use a combo of ati blue plus for actinics on the T5's. I think that you and him will both be pleased with the cost effectiveness, not savings or efficiency just what grows corals the best, gives the best look, and has the best overall appeal. Not to mention ease of installation and ease of finding replacement bulbs parts etc. instead of dealing with heat sinks, fancy circuit boards and real long term untested technology. If Peter's tank was built 5 years from now I'm sure it would be lit with LED's or Plasma, but not today MH's and T5's rule. The two together own all and everyone with a right minded head on their shoulders knows this on a big deep wide reef tank. If they think otherwise then I'd have to see another tank of peter's size and depth set-up with their preferred method before I'd disagree with my MH and T5 statement.

BTW that water movement is looking awesome Peter. Mr Wilson really out did himself on this one. If that is only 50% and 70% I can't wait to see what more looks like!!!

I think using the Plasma's on the Mangrove and Chaeto/Refuge areas in the equipment room is the smartest use of your resources. Many studies have shown that chaetomorpha and calupera grow best at 5500-6100k which the Plasma emits perfectly. The LED's could be used on your shallow frag tanks and mars bars systems or other quarantine tanks. Ok enough of my talking get to answering!!!

One point that gets lost in the hype of new lighting technology is that it is just as likely for a new advance to come from the MHL side of the debate as it is from the "new" technology. Lighting companies pour money into R&D when they come across competition. These days MHL engineers have a choice of putting their resources into improving upon their product line or switching to these new technologies. Osram made a leap forward with their HCI Power Ball MHL, but they never developed a high kelvin or high wattage model. They are efficient and compact, they just need enough demand to warrant the lab time. Time will tell.

 

[sltloser]

I've been following this therad here and there, and i have to say that i applaud you for your knowledge Mr. Wilson. Unlike many you've looked at all aspects of the reef aquarium, and know quite a bit about it. As far as the skimmer debate goes i've started a skimmerless 180 gallon tank which as been doing great (if you're interested it's on reef central here and is called 180 gallon skimmerless upgrade). Also here is a thread i think many will find interesting, it's a look at skimmate that Eric Borneman did on the marine depot forums. Although a conclusion hasn't been drawn i think that what has been found is enough. http://forum.marinedepot.com/Topic52254-9-1.aspx?Highlight=skimmate

 

[mr.wilson]

Baldwin,
I'm guessing that the professor is Ken Feldman of Penn State Univ. He gave a presentation at MACNA about his research involving skimmers, carbon, and organics. Here's what I wrote in my Reef Threads article about his presentation:

"Ken Feldman's discussion of dissolved/total organic carbon was next on the agenda. In terms of understanding aquariums and providing the best possible conditions for our animals, this presentation was the highlight of the weekend. Some of the veterans said it was a repeat of last year's presentation, but it's my understanding that Ken did much additional research in the past year to support his findings. Regardless, I'm glad I attended this one. Here are some highlights of an information-laden presentation.

--In Ken's reef, after one year, his total organic carbon level (TOC) was 0.8 to 1.1 ppm. Without changing anything, after two years, the TOC level dropped to 0.4 to 0.6. I was so glad to hear this because it supports my belief that our tanks don't begin to stabilize until they're a year old and are not really established until they are two years old. In other words, most never have a tank reach full stability/maturity because the tank no longer exists at the two year mark.
--Skimmers, no matter the design or cost, only remove 20% to 35% of TOC from our tanks.
--Granular activated carbon (GAC) removes the vast majority of the TOC that the skimmer doesn't get and ROX carbon is the best medium for TOC removal.
--GAC works best if used in a reactor with a flow rate of at least 50 gph
--"œTall, skinny" reactors are much more effective than short, fat reactors."

Hope this helps,
Gary

I agree, Ken Feldman's talk was the highlight of the speakers. It was a rehash of his previous articles but it's a point that needs to hammered until we soak it all in. Putting the skimmer and carbon studies together really drove the point home. he quoted the same old results of Sanjays various tanks, but once again, it's information that you need to hear a few times to really appreciate.

It was a very technical talk, but it was delivered in a manner that made it easy to follow. He is passionate about his work and he has no hidden agenda. Most well read aquarists know a lot of this stuff, but it's hard to get around to doing something about it. Everyone is still talking about skimmer selection and carbon reactor and brand threads are few and far between.

If there was a protein skimmer manufacturer out there who truly believed in their product they would surely offer it up for testing, but it's pretty quiet out their, save the articles about a new needle wheel or higher LPH air intake.

The work of P.R. Escobal over ten years ago proved that less is more when it comes to air injection and flow through. No one ever presented evidence that his formulas where flawed, but there were a lot of "this skimmer is awesome" threads. Ken Feldman's coffee ground and brown sugar display was very effective at showing how foolish we have been.

I've been taking heat for using the Aqua-Medic Twin Turbo skimmer on my installs. It certainly isn't anything new, as it was the first needle wheel skimmer on he market, but it has two closed loop bubble generator (NW) pumps, it has a separate feed input which can be plumbed right into the display drain, it's 6.5' high, and 8" in diameter, and it costs 1/3 of the other German skimmers 1/4 of its size. For anyone who likes mods, it's a great platform... as long as you don't need to fit it under the tank

I was looking up ROX carbon and could only find it available in the aquarium trade through Bulk Reef Supply. It goes to show that the people in the industry don't know or don't care. Something that can outperform protein skimmers 4 to 1 at a fraction of the cost, that's easy to source and implement. It makes you wonder about the rest of our practices

The confirmation of carbon's ability to reduce TOC makes small tanks and even bowls a viable option. ROX carbon, and water changes and you don't even need to buffer water with a small system. You can take all the money you save on equipment and build a top notch holding tank and exchange system for water changes. The problem I always had with water changes is they only add enough elements for the water that is being replaced. In other words, a 10% water change only assures that 10% of the water is "correct". A better system would allow for bigger (25%+) water changes and would include higher concentrations of calcium, magnesium & carbonates to bring the total system volume up to sea level.

 

[mr.wilson]

I've been following this therad here and there, and i have to say that i applaud you for your knowledge Mr. Wilson. Unlike many you've looked at all aspects of the reef aquarium, and know quite a bit about it. As far as the skimmer debate goes i've started a skimmerless 180 gallon tank which as been doing great (if you're interested it's on reef central here and is called 180 gallon skimmerless upgrade). Also here is a thread i think many will find interesting, it's a look at skimmate that Eric Borneman did on the marine depot forums. Although a conclusion hasn't been drawn i think that what has been found is enough. http://forum.marinedepot.com/Topic52254-9-1.aspx?Highlight=skimmate

Thanks for the kind words. It's hard to decide on any "right way" to do things, as so many factors come into play. If someone follows just one idea, they will miss out on others. If they follow everything I say, it's called a cult and I find growing a beard to be too itchy :artist:, so let's just stick to talking about what we are doing and why we are doing it

As I stated earlier, I have tried a few skimmerless reefs and they didn't work out. They had nuisance algae problems, or the corals didn't do well, or they looked yellow.

The learning curve is slow in the reef hobby. It takes years to figure out what you did wrong and what you did right, if anything Success is very hard to measure, quantify and qualify. The skimmerless tanks I did failed because the carbon and refugium use was passive and mechanical filtration was non-existent. I may change my tune in a few weeks, months or years, but for now my words of advice for young people is as follows...

1) Use a mechanical filter and clean it frequently.
2) Use a fluidized bed for carbon so it doesn't channel or clog. Run the fluidized bed slowly so it doesn't grind the carbon too much. Use ROX carbon and change it frequently.
3) Encourage the growth of cryptic/benthic invertebrates for greater biodiversity, water polishing, and a broad food chain.

You will notice that these three points are not centered around commercial products that are advertised or talked about much on forums. It's just good old fashioned reef husbandry.

 

[Elliott]

We are adding 1" penductors to all 16 closed loop outputs. They will be here in the middle of next week so we will report the results. We are really impressed with the ones at the surface (sump return) and expect the same results for the CL. Typically penductors are too restrictive for volume pumps, but these DC pumps have lots of pressure. They just need a little flare and diffusion.

I normally use standard flare nozzles, but they create uniform, fake looking water spread at the surface that only lasts for a few feet. The penductors look variable and natural. Having a surge every 15 minutes really drives it home. Once the other 4 pumps are running on a surge pattern it will be "surf's up".

16 eductors, wow, you will have a reef jacuzzi :thumbsup:

 

[mr.wilson]

you mentioned an aiptasia farm as a possible nutrient export mechanism. i am not encouraging this method but i am using it without really trying to set it up. this is the overflow in the tank. many, many aiptasia. only a few in the DT that the Copperband seems to ignore. but they are not spreading in the tank so maybe he is eating some.

I don't have a problem with a few stray "pest" anemones. BTW we got a fish & invert order in today and got a file fish who eats anemones.

I have had a few tanks where I encouraged aiptasia or xenia to grow in the overflow boxes. BTW we got some green & blue Cespitularia in with the order that would work well in the overflow boxes (on top of the DSB).

It's a "natural" place for the anemones to flourish, as food bypasses the tank. They work as a mechanical & biological filter, catching and assimilating excess organics (food/detritus). When we harvest the Cespitularia, it will be nutrient export and might even generate a few dollars

 

[mr.wilson]

16 eductors, wow, you will have a reef jacuzzi :thumbsup:

Our hopes are to dial down the pumps to conserve energy and fire them one by one at full blast to blow the bikinis off

 

[mr.wilson]

I think to dismiss a skimmer or its effectiveness at nutrient export is not something i would dismiss, thousands of members on this forum can attest to its importance. on the flip side ive yet to see a well running reef with a stable fish load without a skimmer, more biology yes, but for now until someone else re invents the wheel its the best form of nutrient export we have, try running a tank with no carbon and you probably not see any difference. try and run the same tank with no skimmer? im sure you will see a downward spiral, what truly is being collected in the skimmer collection cup is of yet to be determined fully. what is the function of carbon? doc removal? i believe the true test of a reef is long term, show me a reef over 10 years old? not that many around, the few ive seen employ very basic husbandry but water changes seem to be a common denominator of all of them, is the water changes for the main benefit of heavy metal extraction? maybe so. sure some have not done a water change for 3 years but show me the tank after 4 years. yes correct you dont need to run all top end equipment, i myself dont believe in may of the "gadgets", most of the equipment costs more simply because it works better and your getting a better built product, flow is mentioned, we just did an 8ft tank with dual closed loops, i see no better flow than using eco tec units on this tank. i dont see barrel effects and "flow dynamics" come into play, i thought we were looking to replicate what happens in nature, which is sporadic flow, not in any direction but all and not constant. my 3 cents and not to hijack your thread Peter as the tank is coming along well and much improvement from the beginning.

Some people are very happy with prop pumps, fluorescent lighting, and other practices I don't use. I don't expect everyone to add a mechanical filter or a benthic zone.

We really can't define "natural reefs" because they vary greatly. In general, they have laminar flow that changes direction and is subject to wave action. I think we have this covered.

Our implementation of a barrel role effect is due to the closed system. Detritus must be kept in suspension and the wave has to stop and go somewhere when it hits the end of the tank. We will report how it all works out and any mods we see necessary. We may even drop in a powerhead just to see what it does.

I think powerheads are great for huge tanks. Peter's tank is long, but it has the same conditions as a smaller reef, just on a bigger scale. The tank is only 30" deep, and although its 36" wide, it has rock works that almost touches the glass on both sides. the tank may be 24' long, but it hits a 90˚ turn where flow dynamics change.

I would definitely use a prop pump on a 1350 gallon rectangular tank. I don't think I would use a Vortech though.

 

[mr.wilson]

I've been following this therad here and there, and i have to say that i applaud you for your knowledge Mr. Wilson. Unlike many you've looked at all aspects of the reef aquarium, and know quite a bit about it. As far as the skimmer debate goes i've started a skimmerless 180 gallon tank which as been doing great (if you're interested it's on reef central here and is called 180 gallon skimmerless upgrade). Also here is a thread i think many will find interesting, it's a look at skimmate that Eric Borneman did on the marine depot forums. Although a conclusion hasn't been drawn i think that what has been found is enough. http://forum.marinedepot.com/Topic52254-9-1.aspx?Highlight=skimmate

Man! You can't open a link without finding reefski posting in it Someone could post a link to a Lord Howe Island fish collector forum, and there he would be with 2716 posts

These looks at what we are skimming are good too.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/2/aafeature
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php

 

[Baldwin]

You know it's funny, I told Ken that I enjoyed his presentation, and that I thought it was "gutsy" move considering that many vendors who sale skimmers with great claims were in the audience. He told me that at least this year he wasn't attacked after his speech, i began to laugh, and he said "no I am serious, last year I was attacked". Can you imagine that someone would attack a person who is trying to learn and educate others on their findings? It just goes to show that their are a lot of gimmicks and claims out their, but when it comes down to you have to do your research, and rely on your own experiences to see what works for you.

 

[nineball]

Hey guys, I have been following this thread but have participated very little since I haven't had much to contribute. I've had very little success with my reef over the last year and half so by no means do I consider myself an expert.
However with the topic of lighting coming up there is one thing that I was thinking could work well that I don't recall if I've seen it mentioned. The discussion of LED's supposedly not being fully up to par, I don't know myself. I have MH, only lighting I've had and am happy with it.
Peter you mentioned possibly having to compromise somewhat with LED's I was wondering if you guys had thought about running MH and LED. I was thinking go with MH over the center of the tank and LED's on the outside to use essentially as actinic? That way you can get good coloration and use the sunrise/sunset effects and whatnot. Then for the mid hours of the day have the MH's come on to provide with the par the corals will require. That way you get all the benefits of both LED and MH?
This way you can utilize both technologies and when LED's do come up to par in a few years and you decide to upgrade all you have to do is replace those center MH fixtures with the newer LED's and be able to keep the outer LED's for actinics?
Anyway was just wondering if that was something that's been considered? Best of luck to all of you guys and the build, it's been positively riveting. This thread has been a wealth of knowledge rivaled only by the reef aquarium handbooks by Delbeek and Sprung and I think Mr. Wilson may even be able to give them a run for their money.

Thank you very much Lotusstar, you are far too generous with your praise.........To your credit we did discuss the blend of LED's on the outside with MH down the center as you have suggested and we have not ruled out that possibility. This is a very complex issue to resolve for so many reasons. It's not even easy to try and create a logical matrix to frame the analysis because of the mix of principles involved. I'm reasonably comfortable with calculus and even I can't resolve some of the loose ends that always seem to end up with a Gordian knot for a conclusion. Then there is the challenge of separating facts from fiction as well.

For me the foundation is not set and it is very difficult to figure out. Here is a smidgen of the streams of consciousness that fly by.............

LED's don't run cool.

Plasma's are very awkward to hang. Everything about them is heavy and awkward.

Dedicated sole source MH units lack program flexibility without actinics.

The aesthetic appeal of the light colour itself is highly personal and arbitrary.

The general parameters of light frequencies that favour corals are not necessarily the most favourable aesthetically.

The compromise between healthy corals and colourfull corals is extremely difficult to balance out.

All too often hobbyists themselves are not sure of their own preferences when it comes to a choice between growth and colour.

 

[mr.wilson]

LEDs and MHL don't mix well, as the LED shuts down when it gets too hot. This is why you don't see a lot of combo fixtures (LED & MHL) on the market.