Extreme water change

[SpaceSea]

Hi,

I have tested several times how much my nano system could face extreme water change.

What I have found for my nano is after 200-250% within a around 1 week with 50% water change each time on the other day, I began to see that my corals began to be unhappy. I don't really understand why.

Most of the time my parameters are in the range of:

Salinity : 1.025-1.027
PH : 8-8.2
Alk : 8.0-10.0
CAl : 420-460
Po : 0-0.04
No : 0-0.1
Salt :Aquavitro
RODI water
Mixed reef - No sand, no BH, no Snail, carbon all the time.

I do those test for prevision purpose - in case of a very harmful contaminant hits the nano system. So I am confident to be able to perform with ease and confidence 200% water change in short period of time without harming too much my corals due to the heavy water change.

I took a look on Randy's post about water change:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/index.php

Still, I cannot explain to myself ... Is it because of the level of the column which drop and raise too often ?

Something began unbalanced in my system ? Bacterias for nitrification etc are no supposed to be in the LR ?

Water chemistry shift ?

Is there a common limit of water change ?

Any idea ?

 

[bertoni]

There are a number of possible issues. I prefer to do small water changes (10% or so) to avoid any sort of shock, and to avoid exposing live rock to air, which can cause various problems. What's the purpose of the large changes?

 

[SpaceSea]

There are a number of possible issues. I prefer to do small water changes (10% or so) to avoid any sort of shock, and to avoid exposing live rock to air, which can cause various problems. What's the purpose of the large changes?

I do/did those test for prevision purpose - in case of a very harmful contaminant hits my nano system. So I am confident to be able to perform with ease and confidence 200% water change in short period of time without harming too much my corals due to the heavy water change.

But other then stressing out the corals, any change in chemistry or bacteria population ?

 

[bertoni]

Okay, I think I understand. You're testing to see what might happen in an emergency? If so, your results seem reasonable. Large changes might affect the bacteria population (by exposing live rock) and change organic and nutrient levels.

 

[SpaceSea]

Okay, I think I understand. You're testing to see what might happen in an emergency? If so, your results seem reasonable. Large changes might affect the bacteria population (by exposing live rock) and change organic and nutrient levels.

Exact ... as a nano is a pretty small system, it has not much inertia and may be very sensitive to major contaminant.

Also there is 2 existential question :

. Can MAJOR WATER CHANGE (on a healthy population) CRASH a tank - due to unbalanced bacteria population (nitrification, etc), chemistry (due release of harm unhappy corals), or other parameters ?

. With continue water change with man make with RODI and industrial salt (not natural from the sea) like 100% every day. Is it better than saying 30% monthly water change ? if so why ?

Thx

 

[SpaceSea]

Okay, I think I understand. You're testing to see what might happen in an emergency? If so, your results seem reasonable. Large changes might affect the bacteria population (by exposing live rock) and change organic and nutrient levels.

Exact ... as a nano is a pretty small system, it has not much inertia and may be very sensitive to major contaminant.

Also there is 2 existential questions :

. Can MAJOR WATER CHANGE (on a healthy population) CRASH a tank - due to unbalanced bacteria population (nitrification, etc), chemistry (due release of harm unhappy corals), or other parameters ?

. With continue water change with man make with RODI and industrial salt (not natural from the sea) like 100% every day. Is it better than saying 30% monthly water change ? if so why ?

Thx

 

[jcw]

Four 50% changes do not equal a 200% change. It's more like 100% - .5 * .5 * .5 * .5. or 93.75%.

Some salt mixes up with ammonia present.

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/rhf/index.php#5
http://web.archive.org/web/20001215...om/fish2/aqfm/1999/mar/features/1/default.asp

 

[bertoni]

Yes, a large water change can cause problems and crash a tank, although that's not always going to happen. I would keep changes at 10% or less.

I think 30% a month, say three water changes of 10% each, should be fine. You can do small or continuous water changes, but I don't think more than 30% a month is all that useful, on average.

 

[reefmatenate]

great idea. lets "test" something thats just utter nonsense. If you practice common sense, read what works on here. and follow the simple rules that are tried and true you should never have that issue. for example if someone wanted to test if you would survive if you would die if they stabbed you I'm sure you wouldn't be a happy person. Seriously. test something else. you could kill innocent corals and fish.

 

[SpaceSea]

great idea. lets "test" something thats just utter nonsense. If you practice common sense, read what works on here. and follow the simple rules that are tried and true you should never have that issue. for example if someone wanted to test if you would survive if you would die if they stabbed you I'm sure you wouldn't be a happy person. Seriously. test something else. you could kill innocent corals and fish.

Already do the test 2 times with my nano settup.

My point was I better have some data then having nothing - even if it hurts a little bit.

For me it's like a Fire estinguisher procedure - you cannot efficiently put one in place .... when the house is already burning.

I mean, if I had a Kent Carbon problem ... how can I react with efficience ? I will do what, how long ?

Water change ? how many ? polyfilter ? what else ? ... at the end of the day, how can I know if I am not killing more the corals with the supposed cure ... ???

My comon sens told me to try - Yes you have right, perhaps I may ask before ... but for me each system is different so having a limit on my own nano system seems a good thing to do.