Nitrate control devices

[srusso]

I just have not seen a build that I am pleased with (again not taking away anything from the work of others). I have designed my own, but simply don't have the time or energy to fabricate the parts and have settled on my dump tray for now

Completely understandable, would love to see your dump bucket you built sometime.

 

[khowst]

I think what shy's people away from ATS's is the use of the "rules". I've only returned to the hobby about a year ago.... My past experience was with the utterly super advanced undergravel filters.

When I built my tank I elected to do an ATS, and as my bioload grew upgraded to a skimmer/ATS. Anyways in that time I have seen countless threads where the "rule" is a screen this size, lighting is "exactly" this and this many hours, only to see the self made experts change thier minds every couple months on screen sizing based on gallons, based on GPH, based on feeding in cubes, to even now where the recommendation is to build an insump screen with an air bubbler.

Is an ATS or any other piece of equipment the absolute end all bee all final answer the best thing? Nope, but like everyone has already said just another piece of kit. Hell, even the evil "nitrate factory" canister filter can be a great piece if used and maintained correctly.

Is the ATS an evolving piece of kit? Sure, absolutely. The downfall as I see it is in terminology. Use of the word "rule" and "must be". You have to remember peoples attention and memory span now adays is about as long as a facebook update. So when you say the sky is blue this month, and green the next simply based on the rule of cause I said so it will detract from you audience fanbase.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Completely understandable, would love to see your dump bucket you built sometime.

I did not build it, it is a class dump tray design that used to be sold before the lawsuits or whatever. It was a club members (or maybe more than one) and I now have it. Several local guys are still running theirs from 10+ years ago.

 

[srusso]

I think what shy's people away from ATS's is the use of the "rules". I've only returned to the hobby about a year ago.... My past experience was with the utterly super advanced undergravel filters.

When I built my tank I elected to do an ATS, and as my bioload grew upgraded to a skimmer/ATS. Anyways in that time I have seen countless threads where the "rule" is a screen this size, lighting is "exactly" this and this many hours, only to see the self made experts change thier minds every couple months on screen sizing based on gallons, based on GPH, based on feeding in cubes, to even now where the recommendation is to build an insump screen with an air bubbler.

Is an ATS or any other piece of equipment the absolute end all bee all final answer the best thing? Nope, but like everyone has already said just another piece of kit. Hell, even the evil "nitrate factory" canister filter can be a great piece if used and maintained correctly.

Is the ATS an evolving piece of kit? Sure, absolutely. The downfall as I see it is in terminology. Use of the word "rule" and "must be". You have to remember peoples attention and memory span now adays is about as long as a facebook update. So when you say the sky is blue this month, and green the next simply based on the rule of cause I said so it will detract from you audience fanbase.

I guess you could not like the word "rules", and that's fine with me :facepalm:. But to be honest the word "guideline" is used much more... Regardless, all equipment people use differs slightly so using the guidelines and HELPING OTHERS adjust their system and fine tune it seems straight forward to me. I am sure you can understand how (if you aren't reading the words on the screen) you may have not understood why we would be telling someone to adjust something that would differ from the "rules".

If you can't hang with being a pioneer, blazing a trail and learning as we go... then its not for you. The algae scrubber is a collected effort... not great for "busy facebookers"...

If you followed the thread, the sizing has only changed once in the time the thread was started. The air bubbler design, is clearly a design "alternate" and is not meant to replace the waterfall design. (In fact in my post describing it, even used the word "alternate design".)

Besides we, I should say I don't want the help of people who's attention can't be focused enough to do this anyway... :uhoh3:

I have to run quick I think someone just updated their facebook status!!!

 

[srusso]

I did not build it, it is a class dump tray design that used to be sold before the lawsuits or whatever. It was a club members (or maybe more than one) and I now have it. Several local guys are still running theirs from 10+ years ago.

That's great!! Must be the inland aquatics units. Very cool!

 

[srusso]

I guess you could not like the word "rules", and that's fine with me :facepalm:. But to be honest the word "guideline" is used much more... Regardless, all equipment people use differs slightly so using the guidelines and HELPING OTHERS adjust their system and fine tune it seems straight forward to me. I am sure you can understand how (if you aren't reading the words on the screen) you may have not understood why we would be telling someone to adjust something that would differ from the "rules".

If you can't hang with being a pioneer, blazing a trail and learning as we go... then its not for you. The algae scrubber is a collected effort... not great for "busy facebookers"...

If you followed the thread, the sizing has only changed once in the time the thread was started. The air bubbler design, is clearly a design "alternate" and is not meant to replace the waterfall design. (In fact in my post describing it, even used the word "alternate design".)

Besides we, I should say I don't want the help of people who's attention can't be focused enough to do this anyway... :uhoh3:

I have to run quick I think someone just updated their facebook status!!!

Sorry, after rereading this, it may have come off a bit strong.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Yup inland aquatics... can never remeber that damn name. Will be changing one side over (currently LOA fixure) to 660nm Oslon Golden Dragons to see how it fares under RED ONLY led.

 

[srusso]

Yup inland aquatics... can never remeber that damn name. Will be changing one side over (currently LOA fixure) to 660nm Oslon Golden Dragons to see how it fares under RED ONLY led.

If you don't mind me asking, why only using red leds?

Loads of professional research has been done with photosynthesis in red marine alga, should be rather easy to find tests showing growth rates with different light ranges. Red marine alga seem to have some medical properties so the research is well published. Although it is aimed at a different audience...

 

[BeanAnimal]

From what I gather the photon energy in the 660nm range is what produces the best growth in both horticultural and algae farming habitats. Orsam appears to b leading that segment of the LED market with their somewhat narrow binned 660nm emitters.

I am going to do one side simply to see how well it works

If it does not work well, then I have a magical "healing" light to try.

 

[Floyd R Turbo]

Bean, most have dropped Osram in favor of Philips Luxeon 660nm LEDs. Rapid dropped Osram, and about the same time they picked up Philips, Steve's LEDs stated carrying them also, except Steve's carries the best bin at a lower price. That's who I'm switching to pretty soon for all the scrubbers I build.

 

[G4546]

[*]Most (ALL?) systems have excess nutrients that need to be exported. The idea with the ATS is to give them a favorable place to be consumed instead of in the display.

[/LIST]Huh?
The algae consumes the nutrients from the water column (that would otherwise be consumed by algae in the tank). The algae is thrown away, taking the excess nutrients with it. The screen then grows more algae, taking away MORE nutrients from the system. If you are cleaning the screens and dumping the algae back into the tank, then of course it is counter productive.

Response :
-Yes, all systems have nutrients that need to be exported. Which is why we have skimmers, GFO, carbon and water changes. Why would you choose to grow algae in a "favourable" place? My question would be to you, why are your nutrients so high to begin with, is the skimmer not up to date? Are you not running reactors for GFO and carbon? Do you preform water changes? If yes to all of those, why ....

Response :
-Yes algae does consume nutrients within the aquaria. Algae needs phosphorus to grow. Phosphorus inhibits calcification. Why would you grow it in a heavily stocked SPS tank (which is what the original OP has posted)?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Floyd...

Is it because of color or price and availability? The Oslon Golden Dragons simply can't be had for "cheap". I know Phillips is really trying to get back onto the game and using price as a driving force. Have you used both?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Response :
-Yes, all systems have nutrients that need to be exported. Which is why we have skimmers, GFO, carbon and water changes. Why would you choose to grow algae in a "favourable" place?

Sigh...

The logic was already explained. It appears that you have no intention of acknowleding it.

Each of the tools you mention (skimmer, gfo, carbon, water changes) work in different ways and to an extent and on different compounds. Following your line of logic, why use GFO if you have a skimmer, carbon and do water changes? I never said an ATS was a MUST HAVE. It is a tool that can be used as an alterntive or in compliment to other tools.

Try this:
If you use your vacuum cleaner, mop, broom and dust cloth in your home, why use a furnace filter too? To that end, why not just run a furnace filter and use a big blow gun to stir the dust up in the house instead of dusting, sweeping, vacuuming and mopping. All the tools collect dust right? We use each tool (or a subset of those tools) depending on the situation (the load on the system) to affect the desired outcome of the system.

The bottom line:
If you put an ATS in your system, along side the other tools, and it GROWS ALGAE, then one of two things is true:

• there is excess nutrients in the system that the other tools are NOT taking out.
• -OR- If it "robs" those nutrients from the other tools, then clearly it is more efficient than they are at that particular task.

If you put an ATS in your system and and remove one or more of the other tools, then you have proven (at least in your environment) that the ATS is a viable alternative to that (those) tools that you have removed. This can be said for ANY methodology or tool and is not limited to the ATS.

My question would be to you, why are your nutrients so high to begin with, is the skimmer not up to date? Are you not running reactors for GFO and carbon? Do you preform water changes? If yes to all of those, why ....

Who said I had a skimmer? Who said I run GFO or do water changes? Your assumptions and bias are precenting you from understanding seeing the ATS for what it is, a tool that can be used in compliment (or sometimes in place of) other tools.

My question would be why do you use GFO, Carbon and Water changes? I mean the guy next door just uses water changes. GFO and carbon MUST be a useless waste that is bound for the junk heap of history right? What about PaulB, he does no water changes but uses other tools, does that mean water changes are destined for the junk heap?


You see, you have chosen a methodology using a system of tools and feel that it is acceptable and defendable, but don't accept an ATS as a valid tool as part of a system. I am not asking you (or EC) to use it or promote it. I am telling you that it is a viable tool, regardless of how you feel about it

Response :
-Yes algae does consume nutrients within the aquaria. Algae needs phosphorus to grow. Phosphorus inhibits calcification. Why would you grow it in a heavily stocked SPS tank (which is what the original OP has posted)?

You are confused:

The algae sequesters the phosphors that inhibits coral growth, so that the coral is not exposed to it. It is a means of EXPORT. The whole goal of the ATS (or any method of export) is to remove the phosphorus from the water column before it can react (be consumed) in the display.

 

[Paul B]

What about PaulB, he does no water changes but uses other tools,

Where does this come from? I do water changes, just not too many. Maybe 4 or 5 a year, but I still change water.
I love to throw wrenches in threads like these and I know that Bean loves it when I do also.
(he will most likely come up with a chart of graph showing how I am wrong, he loves to do that)
Nitrates are over rated, do not harm corals including SPS and do not always grow algae.
How do you like that statement? Don't believe me do you? That is understandable. But most of you guys (and girls) have not had a tank for enough decades to get cycles or really see how nitrate works.
In my tank, and that is the only experience I have with this but I have a lot of experience with it. Before I added my denitrification coil (which is working very well by the way, thank you very much) my nitrates were 40. Yes 40.
I have no hair algae and almost no other algae, my algae trough is empty.
But, and this is a big but, my corals never looked better or grew so fast.
Even tiny pieces that broke off my acro's and I thought were lost are all growing all over the place. These last few months completely changed my ideas about nitrates and I do not any longer want them near zero. I now want them to run about 15. No, I am not senile today.
It is just that for 50 years we have incorrect ideas about nitrate and it is not really nuclear waste like many of us seem to equate it with.
I have not tested in a few weeks but when they ran at 40 I was very happy with the growth and overall health of the tank.
So nitrates IMO "may" help to grow algae or damage corals, but there also has to be something "else" at work that is working in conjunction with nitrate that grows algae or slows coral growth.
I did not make this up, there are pictures of my tank all over here.
I can't explain it but that is a fact. :dance:

 

[Floyd R Turbo]

I was told a similar thing by a fellow local club member early on in my entry to the saltwater hobby. I believe, IIRC, that he read/heard Anthony Calfo stating that he liked to keep N around 10 or 20. I also heard some interesting viewpoints from a few very experienced people, one of them in particular stands out, and that is that there are multiple forms of Nitrate in our systems (magnesium nitrate, etc) and not all of them are harmful. Not sure how germane that is to the nitrate conversation. Bean, Paul, discuss!

 

[BeanAnimal]

Where does this come from? I do water changes, just not too many. Maybe 4 or 5 a year, but I still change water.

Ahh sorry Paul, My error! However, nice to see you reading along. Maybe it was not you I was thinking of from one of those old debates or maybe I rembembered confused "4 or 5 a year" to " not in 4 or 5 years"... who knows.

Nonetheless, the point I was trying to make does not hinge on that fact, or if water changes are needed or not. The point was that differnt tools can be combined to create a system of husbandry


I am not going to dive into the nitrate deabte at all, other than to say that in most cases when somebody has off the chart nitrates, they have other problems as well and the combination of those problems usually means problems with growth or nuisance organisms.

 

[Floyd R Turbo]

Floyd...

Is it because of color or price and availability? The Oslon Golden Dragons simply can't be had for "cheap". I know Phillips is really trying to get back onto the game and using price as a driving force. Have you used both?

I believe the main reason that rapid switched is because the Philips can take lenses, the Osram not so much. Originally I was told they were switching to the Oslon, so I was left a bit confused when they started carrying Philips, then Steve's picked up a whole line of Philips all of the sudden, so your comment about Philips trying to break into the market (again) makes sense.

I've build several scrubbers using Osrams, and I'm working on some now that are using the Philips ones. Honestly, I haven't had enough experience to tell you which ones are better, and I don't have any of the 670nm ones from Steve's (he chooses the deepest color bin) so time will tell.

Really though, it doesn't matter all that much which LED you choose IMO, because you just end up splitting hairs. I use 4x more LEDs than the minimum, then put them close and diffuse them, and knock the hours way back. Right now I put a fixture containing 6 660s and 1 455 on each side of a 4x6 screen, about 2-3' away, with a prismatic diffuser in front of it. I have spoken with people who use the same amount of LED on a 10x10 screen, backed off and spread out, and even then they get better growth over CFL/T5HO. So there's many ways to skin a cat.

 

[Shoryureppa]

Everyone has different experiences in what work for them and what doesn't. The OP was just asking for suggestions. But there will always be that someone who will flame something or someone, then off topic we go. Notice the OP posted only in the beginning? Probably because his head was spinning at all the crap some people put here.

This is what irks me about this site. Someone is always an expert. Give the OP options then let him choose which one he wants to use. Some method that didn't work for you, someone is using it effectively. I have a DSB, ATS, Skimmer and a refugium and am battling cyano plus all the other crap that is in my tank. I don't go around blaming things that did't work. All these methods are valid. Each persons tank chemistry differs from others(bioload, feeding habits and husbandry, etc).

Tell the OP what worked for you, let him/her decide which ones to use.

Beananimal, Floyd, Paul, I totally respect your opinions on these things. Thanks.

I really like this site beccause of helpful people but it's the critic who make me want to leave. They make the hobby too stressful for me. I think green hair algae looks great swaying in the current.

 

[Paul B]

I am not going to dive into the nitrate deabte at all

Sissy.

They make the hobby too stressful for me. I think green hair algae looks great swaying in the current.

Stress should have no place in a hobby. Thats why we call it a hobby and not work. :beachbum:
I also like green hair algae, it is very relaxing to see swaying. :wavehand:

 

[Gandolfe]

Bean i read somewhere that the ratio should be 7/1 red to white for optimum algae growth in an ATS, just can't remember if it was on here or another reef site!