Coral Tank from Canada (1350gal Display Tank)

Status
Not open for further replies.
mr.wilson said:
We are seriously considering this one... http://www.saltysupply.com/Reef-Octopus-Super-Reef-XP-2000-External-p/oc9111.htm

It is a direct substitution for the ATB external I had planned.
Click to expand...

a buddy of mine that owns a LFS has the SRO-3000 external on his 180 SPS and clam dominated tank and it kicks some serious patooty skimmate. I say your dead on with your skimmer pic.


Now that I read through the whole 20 more posts after I read you were searching for a skimmer I see you already found one. That skimz skimmer looks like its going to be a real performer please keep us updated on its production on the coral tank! I already want to do the recirc mod on my ASM G-2 after I do the gate valve mod. No mesh modding for me I have the G-4 pump hehe
 
Last edited:
Mr. Wilson,
what is your definition of Fluidized reactor? (just trying to get on the same page)
is it the ability to tumble media? a recirculation object but with enough flow through it to tumble or move media?



and Dave, it this is the fact, i have heard that if carbon media tumbles, it creates carbon fines (small particles) and this has been said to be harmful to fish. (this is only hear say) it is said to be a cause of lateral line and others..
 
mr.wilson said:
You have no idea what kind of inside information I get through PMs. That's where the book material is coming from :thumbsup:

Yes, the fluidized media reactor (GAC, GFO etc.) is fluidized, but I was talking about making the calcium reactor fluidized. It may already be set up for that, but it doesn't state it anywhere that I read. It has a drilled plate plenum and perhaps a cone at the bottom for this purpose. I won't know if it is doable until I see it in person.

The reason for a fluidized calcium reactor are as follows...

The most common problems with properly set-up ca reactors is...

- small media has greater surface area and thus dissolves faster
- constant grinding will aid in dissolving the calcium media
- no channeling
- no clogging
- no caking/melting
- no biofilms (bacteria)
- no Co2 bubble accumulation/trapping
- compact design
- less Co2 required

The problem with conventional large media calcium reactors is...

- they can become mechanical filters
- they can solidify and cake, thus clogging the device
- channeling bypasses some or most of the media
- large media has less surface area, slower dissolution rate
- Co2 bubbles get trapped in the media

If you want to dissolve a solid in a liquid the first thing you so is start of with fine granules. The next thing you do is start stirring it. Why should a calcium reactor be any different than a cup of coffee :)
Click to expand...

I gave up on my CR and now use 2 part due primarily to the problems you have identified which resulted in wide fluctuations of alkalinity. Now with the use of 2 part alkalinity and calcium are stable.
 
These skimz line of skimmer llok interesting. Where do we get pricing info? Also any infoin US mesurements not metric:hammer:

Also if you don't mind...input on a pure cone design, half cone (ie just top few inches and straight cylinder? Pro's con's.....Again i was intending on the SRO XP 3000. Which is a tru cone design. However, these skimz look interesting as well.

Thanks,
 
danyalexa said:
Hello mr.wilson.For what tank are you going to use the skimz skimmer?sorry if i missed the info.
Click to expand...

The skimz is for one of the mars bars that is reserved for coral only. Mr. Wilson had a fair amount of retrofitting to do before it would be acceptable but now that we are getting there it looks like it was an excellent investment. Without Mr. Wilsons effort it would have been a disaster. I very much appreciate the fact that Mr. Wilson humoured me with my request to make it work. This fish room will not only look incredible as an integrated part of the display environment but it will be amazingly functional in its overall contribution to the health and welfare of the animals in captivity.

Peter
 
dave.m said:
This is great information and good to know. Thx!

But if a fluidized reactor is the best way to go for calcium, why not get another fluidized reactor and modify it to accept the CO2 feed, instead of modifying the calcium reactor? You'd already be half way there.

Also, the idea of a fluidized reactor sounds great, but why isn't it used for activated carbon? Is it that the particles for GAC are too small?

Thx again,

Dave.M
Click to expand...

One of the reasons I choose to order the fluidized reactors, calcium reactor, and skimmer from the same manufacturer is they share some common parts. Screws, lids, O-rings, pumps, and bodies are similar and often the same. This helps with spare parts and working with the device's quirks in general. It also looks pretty in pictures when everything matches, and the Skimz do look sexy :)

I can mix and match parts or have them fabricated locally at a CNC shop.

Yes, the carbon and phosphate removal media will have their own fluidized reactors. My only complaint about fluidized reactors is they require a sponge for and aft (top & bottom) to keep the media from escaping. We will be using ROX 0.8 carbon which is quite small so we need a fine pre & post filter. The problem with these sponges is they become mechanical filters by default. One of the purposes of a fluidized bed is to avoid clogging, but this is negated to an extent when you incorporate a mechanical filter that is hard to change regularly.

Ken Feldman showed the value of ROX 0.8 carbon at MACNA. This video makes it easy to see as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVpRGzerJFI
 
mr.wilson said:
One of the reasons I choose to order the fluidized reactors, calcium reactor, and skimmer from the same manufacturer is they share some common parts. Screws, lids, O-rings, pumps, and bodies are similar and often the same. This helps with spare parts and working with the device's quirks in general. It also looks pretty in pictures when everything matches, and the Skimz do look sexy :)

I can mix and match parts or have them fabricated locally at a CNC shop.

Yes, the carbon and phosphate removal media will have their own fluidized reactors. My only complaint about fluidized reactors is they require a sponge for and aft (top & bottom) to keep the media from escaping. We will be using ROX 0.8 carbon which is quite small so we need a fine pre & post filter. The problem with these sponges is they become mechanical filters by default. One of the purposes of a fluidized bed is to avoid clogging, but this is negated to an extent when you incorporate a mechanical filter that is hard to change regularly.

Ken Feldman showed the value of ROX 0.8 carbon at MACNA. This video makes it easy to see as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVpRGzerJFI
Click to expand...

Mr. Wilson, I'm not sure whether it's this maufacturer or not(it might have been (Deltec) but I seem to remember a recent update that reduced the sponge to one only at the top for the reasons you just enumerated.

Mars 1 = 78.5 this morn.... I think I may have discovered the cooling issue.

Peter

Peter
 
mr.wilson said:
One of the reasons I choose to order the fluidized reactors, calcium reactor, and skimmer from the same manufacturer is they share some common parts. Screws, lids, O-rings, pumps, and bodies are similar and often the same. This helps with spare parts and working with the device's quirks in general.
Click to expand...
Learning to think this way is, I believe, worth the price of admission.

Thx muchly,

Dave.M
 
dave.m said:
Learning to think this way is, I believe, worth the price of admission.

Thx muchly,

Dave.M
Click to expand...


Another candidate principle for best practice I think.

Dave, am I an email behind on the T shirts??? It's been crazy here in the last couple of weeks. Cliff and I went to The Wall concert, met with Roger on the opening night and the three of us ended up playing a round of golf on Friday at the Abbey. Then I got a chance to drive the new Mulsanne for a couple of hours which was incredible but killed another day. Then I had the closing field day for golf at my club....another day shot. In between all of that Mr. Wilson has been working magic in the fish room. For sure, when its moving towards its primary configuration goal, the fish room will draw as much appreciation as the display tank itself. It is certainly a complex environment to manage just to get the climate balanced, never mind the machinery.

Peter
 
Request for Information.

Request for Information.

I have four different devices measuring wet and dry temperatures. None of them agree with each other.

Can I get a good suggestion on what I should/could be using for reference purposes for both water and air measurements? It would be reassuring to find something that is trusted and reliable all the time.

Peter
 
Believe it or not the best temp probe is a meat thermometer. Surely you have a digital one in your kitchen. Use it to coroborate your aquarium measuring devices and toss the ones that are off.
 
nineball said:
Cliff and I went to The Wall concert, met with Roger on the opening night and the three of us ended up playing a round of golf on Friday at the Abbey.
Click to expand...
faint2.gif



e... e... m-m-mail sent ... (geez)

Dave.M
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
Why do oversized protein skimmers not adequately remove protein from a tank?
Replies
12
Views
293
Paul B
Paul B
R
The Role of Magnesium Salts in Coral Reef Health and Restoration
Replies
0
Views
103
runfucamg
R
V
Feedback on this stocking list for 30g
Replies
0
Views
106
Varanis
V
Jyetman
Please help
Replies
9
Views
639
Jyetman
Jyetman
D
Help with new tank cycling
Replies
9
Views
218
VWD
VWD
Back
Top