Remote dsb with lr

[Reefer54]

**perhaps reading just the first and last pages of this thread would give some insight to what thread i refer to.
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1652103&page=28

I have read no less than 20 lengthy threads about DSB and RDSB, a book, and currently have some 8 inches in the majority of my sump (75g sump, no sand in the return chamber)). I did have the same 8 inches in my DT, but a goby my kids lured my wife into has turned that into a 11 inch side and 2 inch side. funny, but what a pain, and just about impossible to properly maintain. However, Nitrate is not a real problem....minimal readings

I am moving all LR and livestock to a new 143g cube, might put 40 or 60 lbs of arag in the DT. very bare sump this time too (have 200+ lbs LR in the current sump, and i am tired of a dirty looking sump, i want it clean). But i intend on implementing a Remote Deep Sand Bed. I want to use a 27 gallon brute tub, with lid, filled with both sand and LR. a RDSBWLR if you will.

My question pertaining to the RDSB is twofold. Calfo says to use a minimum 10 inches of sand when using a bucket. the OP of this (link above) thread says not to go beyond 6 in. Calfo's method includes just a few inches of water above the sand. My method would include rock and more like 9 inches or so of water above the top of the sand.

Q1. What is the importance of how much depth of water is over the sandbed; i feel like it would be regarding the advection\convection efficiency, but cant wrap my head around how it would really matter if enough flow through the container is implemented (27 gallon brute with 1500gph is my plan).

Q2. and this relies on Q1. I intend on filling this Brute with LR ( i have about 350 lbs) and i can not find very much info on Cryptic RDSB. With the rock, my water must be higher than the Calfo suggestion. Has anyone read or seen this in action.Ideally, i could remove and continue to use the rock as i need to replace the RDSB in a couple years.

please comment, critique....etc.

and FWIW, clearly i am a total believer in the DSB.

 

[IanWR]

Why not separate the two and have the brute with rock as a cryptic fuge, and run a 5g bucket as your rdsb? If one bucket is unable to process the nitrates to the level you want you can add a second bucket in series. As I understand it the rdsb is to be run without infauna. The flow through a shallow amount of water (the Calfo design) is to help detritus not to settle. Adding rock on top will trap unwanted gunk. As for your cryptic fuge I think 1500gph is way too much (but maybe you aren't really wanting a cryptic zone?)

JMO,

Ian

 

[ca1ore]

I run a small (20g tank) cryptic RDSB on my tank and have been quite pleased with the results. It is a quite significant contributor to the pod population in my tank, though it's effectiveness on nitrates is less clear because I employ multiple strategies. Must confess, I didn't spend a lot of time worrying about depth. I use about 6" of the really fine sugar-sized sand, with some live rock on top. Water level is enough to submerge the rock; about 6" above the sand. Flow is modest, probably in the 100 gph range.

 

[Reefer54]

thanks both.

i have decided to daisy chain two 5g buckets together to save on space and allow for easier changes if and when i need to. As well, i have a jebao dc pump which throws out about 800 gph and after head loss should be closer to 600 or less. i cant decide now if i want to do both buckets sand\rock, or 1 sand and 1 rock......i guess it doesnt really matter. Though, i would be tempted to say that the first bucket being rock and second being just sand would provide the least of amount of organics entering the dsb....thoughts.

I appreciate the feedback.