DSB Heresy

Idrhawke

My cpw system has been set up for 2 months now. I have noticed that overpowering rotten egg smell everytime i drain a small amount of the cpw waste to throw down the drain. I did a good flush and i will now commence a moderate drip rate into my sump and monitor the
nitrates and phosphates. will post results in a months time
 
Nitrates are 5 ppm in the water column or out of the plenum? And, when you say draining into the sump, do you mean you have an effluent processing system like ldrhawke's?
 
i do not have a processing system its just going into the sump where the skimmer is. I want to see if a constant positive flow through the bed will reduce nitrates and the 5ppm is from the WC
This is still a new setup as far as livestock is concerened . the tank and live rock have been setup since Jan went through various alge blooms etc but i did not add any live stock till end march.
 
I am concerned about the rotten egg smell... that is sulfur I'm positive about it... but, I am not sure if that is a good or bad. As far as LDRhawke post with regard to PVC covering I used good old fashion screen... you need to be careful about what you use over the piping as that in sufficient aeration of the plenum could result in hydrogen sulfide gas...toxic seeping into the tank over time... another reason I am concerned about that "rotten egg smell" though something reminds me that sulfur as well as other hard metal are left in the plenum anyway
 
Papajin said:
Is this the stuff, or do you think it might work if it's not?

161840_3.jpg


Easy Gardener
4 Ft. X 200 Ft. Commercial Weed Barrier
Model 2511MJP



If you used this stuff very bad I have 20 years of gardening experience I am 26 years old water does not easily move through it; it rips and deteriorate easily over time
 
Dr-BYTES said:
i do not have a processing system its just going into the sump where the skimmer is.
In the event of a return pump failure (ie power outage) do you have something that will stop your drain? Like a siphon break, or an overflow box, or failsafe valve? ANd, are you sure what's being drained is safe to go back in the tank?
 
LDR,

Let me get this straight, sorry if this has been stated before in previous posts, but it seems like you have switched from complete removal of waste effluent to trying to recycle the waste effluent with alcohol dosing?

How's that working, and why did you go away from completely removing the waste? Why recycle it?

Thanks,
John H.

I'm planning on setting up a 60 gallon cube in the next couple of months, but I'm deciding between this system, DSB system in removable sump, or complete barebottom approach.
 
Shoestring reefer thank u for your concern i do employ a siphon break. Prior to letting it drain into my sump i did do a through flush of the bed till there was no more sulfur smell hopefully i did not remove all my bacteria in the process. with such a light bio load im not to concerened but am ready if disaster strikes. The water draining from the bed to the sump is a tad higher in nitrates
about 3 ppm more. no nitrites or amonia detectable i will continue
to monitor this closley all im trying to do is see if a constant moderate flow through the bed removes my nitrates and improves my water quality
 
i have today discussed the dsb question with a water treatment
specialist he is by no means a reefer here is his thoughts . He agrees the plenum under the sand bed is a asset but my procedure is flawed what we should not have is bacteria deep in the bed he say's that the best way to approach a dsb plenum
would be to drain waste from the bed but to back flush the bed with fresh salt water although the frequency of how often to drain and backflush is unknown i guess i may experiment . Any thoughts on this
 
Dr-BYTES said:
Idrhawke

My cpw system has been set up for 2 months now. I have noticed that overpowering rotten egg smell everytime i drain a small amount of the cpw waste to throw down the drain. I did a good flush and i will now commence a moderate drip rate into my sump and monitor the
nitrates and phosphates. will post results in a months time

Good show Dr-BYTES.

my nitrates as of to day are 5ppm and no readable phosphates......I do not have a processing system its just going into the sump where the skimmer is. I want to see if a constant positive flow through the bed will reduce nitrates and the 5ppm is from the WC
This is still a new setup as far as livestock is concerened . the tank and live rock have been setup since Jan went through various alge blooms etc but i did not add any live stock till end march.

Your are finding about what I found. The nitrates in the bed discharge are probably because of several reasons. Short circuiting at the extreme low flow rates, the bed hasn't reached a balance and reached full biological stability, or simple not enough de-nitrification time. Time may help to bring it into balance. I elected to add a de-nitrification stage because it was easy enough to do and doesn't hurt anything.

As I have noted, the bloom of nitrogen bubbles in my substrate leaves little doubt that nitrification is taking place. I suspect the flow through the bed may all be moving through a single area and allowing the nitrates in the water column to simply pass through and is short circuiting.

i have today discussed the dsb question with a water treatment
specialist he is by no means a reefer here is his thoughts . He agrees the plenum under the sand bed is a asset but my procedure is flawed what we should not have is bacteria deep in the bed he say's that the best way to approach a dsb plenum
would be to drain waste from the bed but to back flush the bed with fresh salt water although the frequency of how often to drain and backflush is unknown i guess i may experiment . Any thoughts on this

Your friend may know how to treat water but he doesn't know how to treat water with waste in it.

Just think about what you are doing wrong with reverse flow in the substrate. You are feeding the anoxic zone on the bottom with oxygen and you are pushing the untreated waste on the upper surface of the bed back into the water column before it is processed......all wrong. You will load you system up with nitrates and nitrites. Don't run CPW in reverse. Also running in reverse can plug up the plenum holes from the inside.

Keep a record of your nitrate concentration in the discharge and the water column. I have not found any signification change in my system and I will continue to feed through my de-nitrification process to address it. I have a heavy fish load. You may find different results.

Everytime I feed heavily I can see the small patches of hair algae lightly bloom. It is on the rocks that breaks the surface. It is telling me nitrates and phosphates have increased. Within 24 hours the hair algae dies back as they rapidly decrease.

Keeping a system in balance is not simply addressing one area of a good reef system design. It is doing a number of things right since they all work together in making a reef system work.

As example, all the guys that have gone BB or plastic bottom have found out how critical it is to improve the tank flow rates and the need for more efficient skimmers. They all use much larger pumping systems and have even added things like eductors to signifcantly increase tank turn over. This helps to keep the waste from collecting in corners on the bottom and keeps it available to be treated with a good skimmer. I agree totally with this approach. In fact, if they did this while they were using a DSB or a substrate bottom*, they would have greatly reduced the biological loading on that part of the tank biological processing and may never have had convert to BB to attempt to solve their waste issues.

My point is we need to design the whole reef system better from the start. A weakness in one area will put additional biological loading on the rest of the tanks biological processing areas. CPW needs to be combinded with high flow rates, a good skimmer, etc.

*Note....with high flow rates in a tank, sugar sand needs to be replace with CC to keep it from blowing all over tha tank.

I have used high flow rates, in my 45g tank, from a Dolphin 3000 pumping and mixing in my system and have had good skimming from the start. Just because you have CPW doesn't mean these elements are not required for long term success.
 
Last edited:
So let me get this straight. The initial idea benind a plenum system was to prevent strict anerobic bacteria from colonizing the bottom of the substrate (they are the ones that produce the hydrogen sulfide). To my understanding, these bacteria quickly die when exposed to air (according to bob goemans). Anyone know what he thinks of this whole CPW idea? ldrhawke, if you havn't talked to him about it, you might want to, as he writes for FAMA.
So in a plenum you are supposed to maintain about .5g/L O2 in the plenum water. This is the anoxic zone where your friendly faculative aerobic bacteria live and produce N2 gas. Basically in the CPW system, you improve upon this by draining the plenum partly every day, forcing a small amount of arated aquarium water down into the plenum, and boosting the O2 level. It seems the key to this system is how much plenum water is drained.
ldrhawke, my question is what size substrate are you using? (forgive me if this has already been answered; I did not read the last 15pages of posts). Also, if you are using a larger grain size (2-5mm), do you think this system could succesfully employed with a finer grain sand such as in most DSB's?
 
Smaller Grain size

Smaller Grain size

I was also wondering the same thing as well, but I think the answer would be no... unless you could find a filter/screen fine enough to keep the grains from entering the drain holes of the PVC pipe. If you did find something like this, then the other concern would be whether, it would clog up in the long run?

Peace,
John H.
 
tankslave said:
So let me get this straight. The initial idea benind a plenum system was to prevent strict anerobic bacteria from colonizing the bottom of the substrate (they are the ones that produce the hydrogen sulfide). To my understanding, these bacteria quickly die when exposed to air (according to bob goemans). Anyone know what he thinks of this whole CPW idea? ldrhawke, if you havn't talked to him about it, you might want to, as he writes for FAMA.
So in a plenum you are supposed to maintain about .5g/L O2 in the plenum water. This is the anoxic zone where your friendly faculative aerobic bacteria live and produce N2 gas. Basically in the CPW system, you improve upon this by draining the plenum partly every day, forcing a small amount of arated aquarium water down into the plenum, and boosting the O2 level. It seems the key to this system is how much plenum water is drained.
ldrhawke, my question is what size substrate are you using? (forgive me if this has already been answered; I did not read the last 15pages of posts). Also, if you are using a larger grain size (2-5mm), do you think this system could succesfully employed with a finer grain sand such as in most DSB's?

Your first question....Yes and No....the idea behind CPW is to take fuller advantage it's biological filter potential, both aerobically and anaerobically, by positively feeding it with either a low continuous or periodic flow of a new source of food. By doing so it will also help to keep it from going too anaerobic and become sulfide laden, killing the anoxic and oxic zones in the process as it moves up.

From what I have read about Goemans concept of a plenum, and what it does and how it does it, I feel his thinking is closer to the thinking of his buddy, Dr. Ron. They will both love hearing that:p.

Dr. Rons thinks the critters are enough to transport fresh food in and out of the bottom of the bed and it can only work with very fine sand.

Goemans feels a magical transfer osmosis process happens when you give the bacteria a ball room (plenum) to dance in.

I do not believe in using either Ron's or Bob's approach you have adequate transfers of fluid into and out of the lower zone of the substrate and at some point in time, based upon a lot of variables, you are at risk of the bed becoming sulfide laden. Dr. Ron has written a paper saying it is inevitable and when it happens you can release heavy metals accumulated. I don't know if that is true or not. I do know it doesn't make sense to take the risk.

CC vs sugar sand........I don't believe sugar sand will allow enough flow. We keep hearing that sugar sand has more surface area for microbes to grow on. Theoretically that is true, but it discounts the advantage of CC in having a better ability to transfer food in and waste out. It breathes. The microbial density that actually builds and occurs in the substrate is more dependent on bacteria being fed and able to breathe as it is the surface area to grow on. You can have all the surface area in the world, but if don't give the bacteria food and the proper conditions little will happen.

And no....I don't believe a little excess oxygen will immediately kill off the all the de-nitrifying bacteria. It will retard it's growth, but once it has been well established, it is sitting waiting for the right food and anoxic conditions to eat and make merry. It is also amazing how it can rapidly modify itself to make normally unacceptable conditions acceptable as it does.

This is just my personal opinion and real world experience in processing waste. Of course I used to think Liz Tayor was going to be a nun too.:lol:
 
Last edited:
Yea, Bob doesn't like the idea at all. I don't understand what could be wrong with it though. The Plenum seems to be concentrating all the waste/nitrates/phosphates into an easily flushed area. Why would you want to keep that in your aquarium any longer than you need? Where does it have to go anyways? To me it seems no different than draining the waste water from your skimmer. Either way, I think I will try this setup when I move up to a 65g. If at the end, it doesn't work, well, you don't have to drain anything out (but why you wouldn't, I can't imagine). This slow plenum wasting is the most logical Idea I have heard in a while in this hobby.

Mac's Rock!!!:thumbsup:

DSB Heresy!
Heresy to Hero
Not the first time in the history of orthodoxy...
 
Dr-BYTES said:
the 5ppm is from the WC
This is still a new setup as far as livestock is concerened . the tank and live rock have been setup since Jan went through various alge blooms etc but i did not add any live stock till end march.
Is there any chance you were testing the waste water for nitrates before you increased the flow to get rid of the rotten egg smell? I think a difference between nitrate readings in the WC and discharge, and how that difference is related to flow rate and "rotten egg smell", would be interesting.
 
Orp values?

Orp values?

Hey ldrhawke,

How are your orp values nowadays? Do you still dose ozone since it seems like your orp values would indicate that you don't really need it.

Thanks,
John H.
 
General CPW update

General CPW update

ORP is sitting at 321 with ozone feed set at 310. I have found normal ORP swings and the brand of probe can make a wide variation in readings. Also, if you don't clean the probe on a very regular basis it can quickly climb to high 300's and gives a sense of false security. I use it for trend analysis more than a number to shoot for because of this wide variation.

As an example, I had to change out the black 1/4" tubing on my denitrification system. When I fed vodka into the line before the oxygen deleption tubing, the tubing quickly blinded with a build of of bacteria on the tubing walls.

I tried back flushing first the whole CPW system. When I back flushed, and reverse flows the DSB, the ORP dropped to 150 within a few minutes. When I reinitated the denitirification operation it quickly climbed back into the 300's.

I changed out the 1/4" tubing and have installed 3/8". The 1/4" was plugging from bacteria flock build up inside it. The total feed pressure is only about 2 psig, the natural tank head of about 4 1/4 feet. It is not pumped.

I also moved the feed point for Vodka to right before the denitrification canisters, and not into the tubing first. The flow rate is back to normal, which is a steady stream that forms drips just before entering the water. It had stopped flowing.

When the 1/4" tubing blinded with bacteria floc and the flow stopped, within a few days my fine fern algae on the top of the coral column near the water surface and lighting bloomed from the increase in nitrates. Within 12 hours after replacing the 1/4 tubing and getting the flow back to normal, the algae is turning white and dying back rapidly. The SPS coral polyups opened back up and the SPS color change was dramatic and obvious. They are very bright colored again.

With the fine fern algae sitting on the top of my live rock that breaks the surface, I have found I don't need to take nitrate or phosphate measurements with Salifirth. The fine fern algae is a live indicator. Zero phosphates and the growth stops, but the algae remains green. Zero nitrates and the algae turns gray. Both zero and it rapidly dies back.

The vodka feed into denitrification system gives immediate, with 12 hours, visable positive results, once the filter is well seeded with bacteria. Even with back washing the DSB and increasing oxygen in the system, it responded very quickly and started denitrifiying again within a few hours. Which what I have contended all along also happens in a DSB when oxygen increases and denitrifying bacteria growth slows. When the high flow rates bringing oxyxgen into the bed stops. the available oxygen is rapidly depeleted and denitirification goes back into full swing.
 
Back
Top