drummereef's 180g in-wall build

[drummereef]

G'day Brett

How about one of these little fellas?

I have thought seriously about the Berghias but have seen mixed results in larger tanks. Seems as though they can take a long time to make a dent in the population and by that time there might be 10's if not hundreds more. Salty Underground is a large online vendor for Berghias and they just so happen to be in my area. I contacted them about the Berghias and they thought in my case adding a Peppermint shrimp or 2 might be a better first attempt. These are definitely on my list if I don't see any results from the Pepps though.

No - carbon won't absorb nitrate to any appreciable extent. I would suspect your algae and other photosynthetes was using your nitrates, and possibly you also have some anoxic dinitrification going on in your rock. Because the carbon is a source for phosphate, however, it's getting into your water faster than the GFO and/or algae is taking it out.

GFO doesn't really have a huge capacity for phosphate adsorption, relatively speaking. But because phosphate has to be put into the tank either through water, food, or rock/carbon leaching, using GFO is effective enough to keep PO4 low.

Honestly, I've never heard someone describe a "nutrient imbalance" with regards to phosphate & nitrate. My opinion is that you want them to be below the detection level of a test kit, and to provide the necessary amount through food.

Interesting. There's lots of discussion on the Redfield Ratio - which I know doesn't exactly relate to an "imbalance" of of NO3 to PO4 - but the idea from what I gather is still relevant. At least in my case I've seen a major improvement in the color and growth of many of my corals with a slight increase in NO3. I do think there's a limit of how hard you can push available nutrients but I've experienced on more than one occasion how my corals start reacting to the "lack" of nutrients in the water column.

About aiptasia control - if you don't want to go the nudibranch route, have you seen this video?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKETx7fzYBI

I have now! Thanks.

Tonight was my catch up night on some old threads. I have found a connection in your thread and Prop's thread as well. lol Unfortunately, both involve some of the struggles of this hobby.

I have tried everything for aiptasia... I would show you how bad my tank is but its embarrassing. I will give you my experience on each of the natural methods. I have tried kalk and it had the same effect as you experienced with aiptasia-X - massive growth later on. I later found a thread on a guy who cultures berghia who said that he uses that method to propagate his aiptasia. So I have turned to any other method and am reminded that everything you read on the internet is not always the answer. In this case, I think its a good solution for 1 aiptasia, but I believe the same solution becomes an issue when you are looking at much higher quantities.

First, I tried berghia. They only eat aiptasia so how could I go wrong? Well.... those guys are expensive. I do believe they can do the trick, but I never established a large enough population in my main tank. I also believe they don't acclimate as well as other inverts. The vendors didn't lie when they said you would never see them again in your tank, unfortunately, 6 months later and I still don't have any dent made in my aiptasia. I spent over $300 to get a large amount for my display of adult sized berghia and never saw them again. I also bought juveniles and adults for a biocube to try to get them breeding and they did well, but my travel schedule did not allow me to breed them well. This is the way to go with berghia if I ever did it again. It also requires you to isolate the anemones to feed them until you have a large enough population to really attach the main tank.

This caused me to turn to every other method I know. Fish and shrimp. I had success eradicating my first saltwater tank of aiptasia with peppermint shrimp. I just find that in the display tank environment, they get lazy and choose to eat the food you feed over searching for aiptasia at night.

I also have had 2 butterflies and 2 file fish. These guys are in a separate tank. I learned the hard way that filefish may eat peppermint shrimp so I will no longer be doubling up on my attack - at least in the same tank. The video posted by Dkeller looks interesting and I may give it a try - with the peppermints and filefish. The filefish eat mysis pretty well, so I may end up hand feeding aiptasia and letting them go after the food. If it works for one, I don't see why it wouldn't work for the other.

The other thing I have had success with, moreso than the filefish, is butterflies. I had a klein's for awhile and also a long nose. Both of them did better than the filefish I believe. The only issue is that they are picky eaters and I lost them shortly after getting them. My second shipment arrived DOA so I am picking up another set tomorrow morning (along with additional peppermints). I keep going back to these guys as I was able to clear 2 fully infested rocks in 3 days. I have had a few pop up on those rocks since then, however I am positive if I can keep them alive another go at it with those rocks would take care of it.

I wish you luck. I also have the issue with cyano and I have not read far enough back in the thread, but it appears you have read the article that links the two issues together. I am gathering this based on the "imbalance" discussion - I tend to remember an article that addressed both aiptasia and cyano as a nutrient imbalance. I will tell you, that the few pieces of live rock I was able to get clean of aiptasia have remained free of cyano for 3 weeks. This is after being returned to the display. My display tank has the highest flow of any of my tanks and they are all 1 system. Neither of the frag tanks (1 has corals and the other has these unsafe fish in them) have issues with cyano even though they have lower flow and similar lighting (I run T5s on my display and frag tank and the fish tank has a chinese LED fixture over it). All of these tanks have plenty of lighting to feed cyano if it wanted to grow. My display is the only one with the issue. My display is also the only one that gets sunlight exposure however I am not willing to say that is the main factor, although it could definitely be a contributing factor based on the fact that many people are successful with the lights approach. (I have done this as well - it was only temporary relief in my experience).

Where does this mass of words leave us? We all struggle together in this hobby. I hope that my rambling can help you move toward a better tank. I know that every time I pop into this thread I am either entertained or I leave with a little better understanding - sometimes both! Thanks again for taking the time to document your tank and share it with the rest of us!!

Cheers! Now I am going back to catch up on the rest of the stuff I have missed.

Thanks for posting, much appreciated. Glad you get something out of my many ramblings and discussions here. Perfection is near impossible in this hobby that's for sure. It's difficult to accept that as OCD as I can be sometimes. I appreciate the advice again, thank you.

My Kliens destroyed an infestation of colonial hydriods and mojanoes practically in a matter of days and has been a model citizen since then. It's a small one in my 29g tank that is mostly LPS, softies and leathers (there's an encrusting monti in there too). It hasn't bothered my RBTA either. On a side note, while not the prettiest fish it's not horrible looking either and makes your other fish look even better. Think of it as the pretty good looking girls ugly friend, suddenly that pretty good looking girl looks a lot better when her friend walks up. :lol:

Hahaha!! That's what I've heard as well, Kleins are a pretty solid bet against Aiptasia. I'm going to try the invert route first and if I see no improvement, plan B here I come.

I don't believe his statement is correct, running water slower through your ro membrane does not make it better, unless I'm reading his statement wrong. I believe even some people have to put booster pumps on their ro/di to improve flow through the system.

True. In fact, I might actually have too much pressure! I had someone out to the house today to look at some stuff and they thought my pressure regulator was bad or going bad. I need to put a meter on a faucet and double check it. It's been a couple years since I've tested pressure. Might be on to something here...

I HATE YOU!

If someone gave you a goldfish bowl you'd find some way to pimp it out wouldn't you!

LOL! Pimpin' is my middle name... Oh wait, that didn't come out right. :rollface:

He did.... The goldfish bowl is his tank!

You should have seen it before he started... He already deleted those posts.

:lol:

Yeah, that's a misinterpretation. What Brett and I were originally discussing a couple of pages back was the potential for ammonia and/or chloramine making it through his system. And it is true that slowing down the water flow rate through the carbon pre-treatment that is standard in all RO/DI systems will definitely increase the percentage of chloramine split into its constituent parts and removed by the carbon. In order to do that on a typical RO/DI system, you want to valve down both the waste and product outputs rather than valving down the feed water.

The reference to a water softener, though, specifically refers to the reject ratio of an RO membrane. RO membranes have different reject percentages for different ions, and (importantly in Brett's case) will easily foul if the feed water is really hard (that is, it contains a lot of Ca, Mg, Fe, etc...). This is the reason that most commercial systems contain either an up-front salt regenerated water softener or an anti-foulant injection pump, or both.

And while a TFM (the most commonly used type for hobbyist systems) will leak a little of the sodium ions in the feed water coming from a softener, these are easily removed by a mixed bed DI (also a common component of a hobbyist system). Some of the contaminating ions that would otherwise be in a hard water feed not run through a water softener aren't so easily removed by a mixed bed DI.

Wait, I thought we were talking about Iron and Silicate! I do agree though, there's something getting through my RO system. I might have a slight issue with the pressure regulator on the incoming water to my house btw. I have a meter I need to hook up again to double check... but this could at the very least eliminate one reason why potential nutrients are being pushed too fast through my RO/DI. I'll report back.

 

[dkeller_nc]

Wait, I thought we were talking about Iron and Silicate! I do agree though, there's something getting through my RO system. I might have a slight issue with the pressure regulator on the incoming water to my house btw. I have a meter I need to hook up again to double check... but this could at the very least eliminate one reason why potential nutrients are being pushed too fast through my RO/DI. I'll report back.

Hmm - I remember the initial comment was possibly some small amount of ammonia getting through from chloramine, then a discussion of iron and/or silica. But I could definitely be wrong (without going back and reading through several pages of posts) - maybe I'm getting senile in my old age.

I wouldn't worry too much about the head pressure on your RO/DI unless it's over 100 psig - then I'd be worrying about my house plumbing and hot water heater (not my RO/DI!).

One thought about this, though - if you really have got a great deal of excess head pressure on your system, you might well be pushing water a bit too quickly through your carbon block, and not getting the chloramine out. Under those circumstances, the chloramine will eventually destroy your RO membrane, and one of the symptoms is that it doesn't reject ions the way it should. One clue to this, other than measuring the conductivity of the RO product (before the DI cartridge), is how fast your DI resin is getting used up. If that's accelerating, it may be time for an RO membrane replacement.

By the way - since you're noting that your input pressure on your RO/DI system is very high, I take back what I said about adding a valve on the input side. Adding a flow restrictor in the form of a valve on the input side causes issues for most people because it drops the input pressure to the RO unit too much. But in your case, that might not be a problem, and it's certainly simpler to adjust one input valve than it is to do the ratio calculations for a valve on both the wastewater and product water on the output side.

 

[drummereef]

Hmm - I remember the initial comment was possibly some small amount of ammonia getting through from chloramine, then a discussion of iron and/or silica. But I could definitely be wrong (without going back and reading through several pages of posts) - maybe I'm getting senile in my old age.

I wouldn't worry too much about the head pressure on your RO/DI unless it's over 100 psig - then I'd be worrying about my house plumbing and hot water heater (not my RO/DI!).

One thought about this, though - if you really have got a great deal of excess head pressure on your system, you might well be pushing water a bit too quickly through your carbon block, and not getting the chloramine out. Under those circumstances, the chloramine will eventually destroy your RO membrane, and one of the symptoms is that it doesn't reject ions the way it should. One clue to this, other than measuring the conductivity of the RO product (before the DI cartridge), is how fast your DI resin is getting used up. If that's accelerating, it may be time for an RO membrane replacement.

By the way - since you're noting that your input pressure on your RO/DI system is very high, I take back what I said about adding a valve on the input side. Adding a flow restrictor in the form of a valve on the input side causes issues for most people because it drops the input pressure to the RO unit too much. But in your case, that might not be a problem, and it's certainly simpler to adjust one input valve than it is to do the ratio calculations for a valve on both the wastewater and product water on the output side.

OK, so I do have a valve on the input side of my RO/DI. What pressure should I target to get the maximum rejection rate? I thought it was ~65 psi but I swear I'm pushing 70-75 psi fairly consistently. No booster pump, just what's coming from the cold water supply.

 

[drummereef]

In a completely unrelated topic...


What Alkalinity have you seen the most color from your SPS coral? I typically run ~9.0 dkh but am considering bumping up to 9.5 or even 10.0. I've heard, albeit anecdotally, SPS tend to color up more at "slightly" higher Alk. Or at least are able to uptake calcium more efficiently at slightly higher Alk. Thoughts?

 

[tj1627]

In a completely unrelated topic...


What Alkalinity have you seen the most color from your SPS coral? I typically run ~9.0 dkh but am considering bumping up to 9.5 or even 10.0. I've heard, albeit anecdotally, SPS tend to color up more at "slightly" higher Alk. Or at least are able to uptake calcium more efficiently at slightly higher Alk. Thoughts?

I think its still being debated. There's a good thread in Advanced Topics that is looking into this: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2253547

They compiled data from TOTM winners here and elsewhere and found that on average they have "strong light", low to medium (7 - 8 dKH) alk levels and zero nitrates/phosphates.

The OP does go on to say that some people get away with higher alk levels by having >0 nitrates/phosphates in their water.

So I suppose the conclusion drawn there is you can get by with a low to medium alk level with zero nutrients, or a higher alk level if you don't strip out all of the nutrients but leave some behind.

 

[drummereef]

I think its still being debated. There's a good thread in Advanced Topics that is looking into this: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2253547

They compiled data from TOTM winners here and elsewhere and found that on average they have "strong light", low to medium (7 - 8 dKH) alk levels and zero nitrates/phosphates.

The OP does go on to say that some people get away with higher alk levels by having >0 nitrates/phosphates in their water.

So I suppose the conclusion drawn there is you can get by with a low to medium alk level with zero nutrients, or a higher alk level if you don't strip out all of the nutrients but leave some behind.

Thanks Tim! Good discussion in that thread, just got derailed towards the end. But the first couple pages are very informative. What's interesting, and my experience as well, it seems PO4 is the biggest enemy. I've backed out of running ULN for now just because it was too volatile for me, subtle shifts would cause major issues. It seems to me there's more of a buffer if there's a little bit of excess nutrients in the tank. Doesn't speak much for keeping aiptasia at bay but at least my SPS look better. :lol:

 

[d2mini]

Yeah, I agree Brett. ULNS looks great but it's like the tank has zero room for error. Ticking time bomb IMHO, at least for someone like me who can't always be right on top of the tank and sticking to a strict regimen of dosing. This is why I have not touched the whole ZEOvit reactor thing, even though I drool over friends' tanks that employ it.

As for Alk, I've been keeping mine on the lower side after reading that thread months ago. But my sps have not really colored up much... some still go a bit more to the browner side of things. Dropped below 7 this week... time to add more kalk! I'm going to bring it to around 8 if I can and see how that does.

 

[tj1627]

Thanks Tim! Good discussion in that thread, just got derailed towards the end. But the first couple pages are very informative. What's interesting, and my experience as well, it seems PO4 is the biggest enemy. I've backed out of running ULN for now just because it was too volatile for me, subtle shifts would cause major issues. It seems to me there's more of a buffer if there's a little bit of excess nutrients in the tank. Doesn't speak much for keeping aiptasia at bay but at least my SPS look better. :lol:

The thing I never understood about ULN systems is that coral health suffers if you lower phosphate and nitrate to undetectable levels. So what do they do? Start dosing amino acids and the like to bring coral color and growth back. I'd rather keep my nutrients low (not ultra low as in a ULNS) and my ALK a little higher to give myself some room to breathe.

 

[henrystyle]

I don't believe his statement is correct, running water slower through your ro membrane does not make it better, unless I'm reading his statement wrong. I believe even some people have to put booster pumps on their ro/di to improve flow through the system.

I thought booster pumps were for areas with low water pressure..

 

[henrystyle]

Lately I've been collecting sps frags from fellow reefers all over NY & NJ who all had simple systems with amazingly colored sps and excellent growth. One thing they all had in common was that they were all serious about nitrate and phosphate uptake. The majority of them dont even test there alk or other parameters. Everyone of them had different types of lighting. From my experience, elevated Alk will give you better growth and lower will give you better color. When it comes to sps color nitrates and phosphate uptake is key.
I keep mine around 8-8.5 dkh.

 

[drummereef]

Yeah, I agree Brett. ULNS looks great but it's like the tank has zero room for error. Ticking time bomb IMHO, at least for someone like me who can't always be right on top of the tank and sticking to a strict regimen of dosing. This is why I have not touched the whole ZEOvit reactor thing, even though I drool over friends' tanks that employ it.

As for Alk, I've been keeping mine on the lower side after reading that thread months ago. But my sps have not really colored up much... some still go a bit more to the browner side of things. Dropped below 7 this week... time to add more kalk! I'm going to bring it to around 8 if I can and see how that does.

Indeed. I haven't decided which way to go, higher or lower. Right now I'm hovering right at 9.0 and have fair color and growth, which could also be the algae/dino/cyano issues I've recently encountered. SPS are so dang picky! :lol: I do agree if you run a lower nutrient system it's best to keep the the Alk low as it can cause stress on hard corals. But there's a a guy or two in my area that keep theirs around 10 that have beautiful tanks too... guess I'll keep :reading:

The thing I never understood about ULN systems is that coral health suffers if you lower phosphate and nitrate to undetectable levels. So what do they do? Start dosing amino acids and the like to bring coral color and growth back. I'd rather keep my nutrients low (not ultra low as in a ULNS) and my ALK a little higher to give myself some room to breathe.

Very true. I guess it's to "dial" in the specific look you are after. But man it seems like a lot of work to get it right. I'm kind of the same mindset now, after attempting the ULNS thing in the past. Unless you are right on top of minute changes it can cause some serious problems. Perhaps the Zeovit system gives a little bit of wiggle room, not sure, but my system definitely didn't have much in terms of the "human error" factor. LOL

I thought booster pumps were for areas with low water pressure..

I believe this is what Crome was saying... but there were 2 different points being made at the same time that might have been misconstrued a couple pages back. Booster pumps are definitely for low pressure situations - to boost the flow rate to the specification of the membrane manufacturer. I'm dealing with the opposite - too much pressure. Which isn't the fault of my RO/DI, it's the pressure regulator on my house pushing too much water through the membrane. Great, I get to spend more money!! :lol:

Lately I've been collecting sps frags from fellow reefers all over NY & NJ who all had simple systems with amazingly colored sps and excellent growth. One thing they all had in common was that they were all serious about nitrate and phosphate uptake. The majority of them dont even test there alk or other parameters. Everyone of them had different types of lighting. From my experience, elevated Alk will give you better growth and lower will give you better color. When it comes to sps color nitrates and phosphate uptake is key.
I keep mine around 8-8.5 dkh.

That's crazy man, they aren't checking Alk?? Are they running Ca reactors or dosing pumps? They would have to be given their lack of concern for Alk. Either that or are just doing frequent water changes? :hmm5:

Interesting findings on the high/low Alk debate. Makes sense seeing that a little boost of alkalinity could cause the corals to uptake calcium and possibly grow faster. I don't exactly understand why better color at lower Alk but I've heard similar results from other people too.

 

[henrystyle]

That's crazy man, they aren't checking Alk?? Are they running Ca reactors or dosing pumps? They would have to be given their lack of concern for Alk. Either that or are just doing frequent water changes? :hmm5:

They all varied. Some did weekly water changes and some did monthly. But I'm telling you the sps colors had to be the nicest I've seen in person in a very long time. The weekly wc guy used Acurel nitrate and phosphate pads in his sump (the most impressive. I'm trying that!) and the monthly guy had a seagrass refugium tank, gfo and a algae turf scrubber going. (also had impressive color and growth as well). Neither tests there Alk. Pad guy doesnt dose anything and used Oceanic Salt. Monthly wc guy had a bubble magus triple doser. (Much bigger system) Instant ocean salt. Both tanks full of fish as well.

 

[dkeller_nc]

I thought booster pumps were for areas with low water pressure..

True enough. The pressure provided by the water source or pump "reverses" the osmotic pressure differential between high TDS water on the feed side of the membrane and the low TDS water on the product side of the membrane - hence the term "reverse osmosis".

The higher the pressure the differential pressure between the feed and product sides, the greater the flow of product water per unit area of membrane, all other things being equal, like temperature and TDS of the feed water.

So valving down the waste water (and therefore increasing the pressure across the membrane), changing the flow restrictor to a smaller diameter, or adding a booster pump on the feed side will all increase prodcution of water.

However, there's a limit to what the anisotropic structure that makes up a thin-film-composite membrane can take; exceeding this pressure may rupture the membrane. Valving down the waste water too far will make the concentration of certain ions on the feed side of the membrane too high, causing precipitation and fouling the membrane.

 

[worm5406]

True enough. The pressure provided by the water source or pump "reverses" the osmotic pressure differential between high TDS water on the feed side of the membrane and the low TDS water on the product side of the membrane - hence the term "reverse osmosis".

The higher the pressure the differential pressure between the feed and product sides, the greater the flow of product water per unit area of membrane, all other things being equal, like temperature and TDS of the feed water.

So valving down the waste water (and therefore increasing the pressure across the membrane), changing the flow restrictor to a smaller diameter, or adding a booster pump on the feed side will all increase production of water.

However, there's a limit to what the anisotropic structure that makes up a thin-film-composite membrane can take; exceeding this pressure may rupture the membrane. Valving down the waste water too far will make the concentration of certain ions on the feed side of the membrane too high, causing precipitation and fouling the membrane.

WOW...

Do you work here where I work?

(that was a compliment btw.)

 

[drummereef]

They all varied. Some did weekly water changes and some did monthly. But I'm telling you the sps colors had to be the nicest I've seen in person in a very long time. The weekly wc guy used Acurel nitrate and phosphate pads in his sump (the most impressive. I'm trying that!) and the monthly guy had a seagrass refugium tank, gfo and a algae turf scrubber going. (also had impressive color and growth as well). Neither tests there Alk. Pad guy doesnt dose anything and used Oceanic Salt. Monthly wc guy had a bubble magus triple doser. (Much bigger system) Instant ocean salt. Both tanks full of fish as well.

Interesting Henry. Do you know what kind of rock the two systems used and where they got it? Base or live rock and from where?

 

[henrystyle]

Interesting Henry. Do you know what kind of rock the two systems used and where they got it? Base or live rock and from where?

The guy with the larger system said he got his rock a few years ago right out of the Florida waters himself. The other one I have no clue. Are you suspecting that the marco rock maybe leeching something causing problems?

 

[dkeller_nc]

WOW...

Do you work here where I work?

(that was a compliment btw.)

Hmm - Maybe. My education is a PhD in Chemical Engineering (bachelor's in CHE also) and I've primarily worked in the pharmaceutical and IVD industries during my career. Water purification systems is sort of a core thing for CHEs in the pharma industry.

 

[drummereef]

The guy with the larger system said he got his rock a few years ago right out of the Florida waters himself. The other one I have no clue. Are you suspecting that the marco rock maybe leeching something causing problems?

Bingo, real rock! That's the key to success IMO. Not that it can't be done with base rock, just a lot more time intensive. And yes, I think my rock has high contents of heavy metals i.e. IRON. I did not do a Muriatic Bath to the Marco Rock when I set up the tank - just rinsed it in RO/DI. I think the iron is constantly dissolving and becoming a natural fertilizer to the various algaes and dinos I've had since I started the tank. I'm convinced it's not excess organics anymore as those would have been used up by now, it's metals.

Hmm - Maybe. My education is a PhD in Chemical Engineering (bachelor's in CHE also) and I've primarily worked in the pharmaceutical and IVD industries during my career. Water purification systems is sort of a core thing for CHEs in the pharma industry.

dkeller, is there a way to chelate excess iron from an established reef tank? Would running Poly Filter help to expedite this process? I'm convinced now there was excess iron in the base rock that wasn't properly dealt with when I set up the tank.

 

[dkeller_nc]

dkeller, is there a way to chelate excess iron from an established reef tank? Would running Poly Filter help to expedite this process? I'm convinced now there was excess iron in the base rock that wasn't properly dealt with when I set up the tank.

In theory, yes. But it's not too practical. Potentially you could run a chelating resin in the tank for a while (if you could find it at reasonable cost - chromatography resins don't come cheap). The problem is that a chelating resin, at least one intended for metals, will bind most divalent cations very strongly, and you have a great excess of divalent cations in your tank water that you want to keep, such as Calcium and Magnesium to name just two.

I'm not sure whether polyfilter or chemi-pure are, in fact, chelating resins/fibers. But it would make sense if the manufacturer's claims of polyfilter taking 80% of copper contamination out of saltwater are true.

All that said, the safest and simplest way to knock down any soluble contaminant is with water changes, save those things produced in the tank (like Nitrates).

 

[drummereef]

In theory, yes. But it's not too practical. Potentially you could run a chelating resin in the tank for a while (if you could find it at reasonable cost - chromatography resins don't come cheap). The problem is that a chelating resin, at least one intended for metals, will bind most divalent cations very strongly, and you have a great excess of divalent cations in your tank water that you want to keep, such as Calcium and Magnesium to name just two.

I'm not sure whether polyfilter or chemi-pure are, in fact, chelating resins/fibers. But it would make sense if the manufacturer's claims of polyfilter taking 80% of copper contamination out of saltwater are true.

All that said, the safest and simplest way to knock down any soluble contaminant is with water changes, save those things produced in the tank (like Nitrates).

Thanks dk.