SC Aquariums Owners Thread

[soulpatch]

I've been using the triton method for a few months. I was warned about chasing parameters.

A few things...
1. If you are already dosing 2part -- you probably should be doing as much chemical testing as you would be doing if you did the triton method. Many crashes are simply because you are driving the car blindfolded. In some ways, the triton method forces you to do what you probably should be doing anyway.

I dont think I have ever seen someone not state that one should test for what you dose into your tank. The large difference is that many get away just fine with simple 2 part and as such require all of 2-3 test kits for most of their needs which will last months at minimal cost compared to the $50 or so test for the triton that takes up to 2 weeks in which case can already be wrong for what is in your tank at that moment.

2. Many folks use a refugium without using a triton dosing scheme. Either you rely on a refugium --- or you are wasting your time creating one.

Disagree to an extent. If you build a refugium and dont have any need to export waste due to ULN tank or other items I totally agree with you. No sense making one for the stuff to just up and die weeks later. Though most people do not run ULN tanks and as such have more then enough nutrients in their water column to see significant gains with utilizing a refugium. It can be as basic as chateo or as complex as multiple macroalgae, mangroves, and such.

3. The triton method never said you can't do a water change. You certainly can and will at some point. I'm not convinced you have to do their water tests, to execute the methodology.

You need to know what you are dosing to your tank and since they are the main game in town testing for their acids and such then yes you would need to do their tests, otherwise you are flying blind which you are railing against. The biggest issue I have is the time frame for the tests to be turned around.

4. IMO -- the goal is to heavily reduce water changes. Most people believe that 20% water changes are sufficient. If you didn't like the flavor of coke and you took out 20% and replaced it with water -- it would still taste like coke. That is my problem with water changes. We rely on them --- only to find ourselves driving blindfolded believing we have corrected a problem that was only 20% resolved with a water change.

Agreed to an extent again. If you use your analogy if you replaced 20% of the coke (toxin) with water you have now watered down the coke and eventually will replace it with enough water changes. It does not combat the source of the issue which needs to be found but it helps to alleviate the damage done until it is. The water change is not a savior for the source of an issue but it is paramount in detoxifying the tank of said issue.

When people ask for help here --- the first question is always what are your water parameters. In many cases, those parameters look normal. Perhaps we don't always measure what is needed -- that is where the triton and ATI chemical testing can help. I suspect some of the faithful 20% water changers out there -- at some point will consider running one of those tests.

I think a lot of people should run the triton tests. Again there is a difference between the triton water tests and the triton method. Testing is great and expected when you enter a hobby like this. Though even in my other hobbies like motorcycle racing guys will crash and upon asking them last time they checked their brake fluid or such you get a blank stare.

The bigger issue is that we really dont fully understand what those test results show. Look up the thread on alumium in the tank from marine pure and other ceramic media if you want a read on how we dont understand...

 

[soulpatch]

not sure why it double post.

 

[ggdowski]

Much like DVDS, CDS, and digital cameras... the price will come down. Or as you state -- they will focus the tests on the parameters that are more important once we know what they are.

The use of the refugium is the same regardless of what method you utilize. If my refugium suddenly died -- I would do the same as you and do a water change. Would I sit back and watch my tank die and simply say it was tritons fault? Of course I would fall back on what I have done for over 15yrs.

We simply disagree here on some things. I see the triton test as a diagnostic not as a maintenance test. Time will tell and perhaps I will each crow.

Coke example. Water changes are simple dilution of a problem. I think we agree that if you don't solve "said" problem it will reoccur and force you to do continual water changes -- at times over and over again. That statement hold true even for the triton method.

Totally agree on the testing issue. I have read the literature on the aluminum issues... as I was comparing efficacy in removing phosphates with GFO and aluminum. I guess I could do a water change ;-)

My concern with triton is believing in magic solutions that we believe are correct. Innovation is the act of trying to move a field forward rather than being content with the norm. That is why I'm willing to give it a try. Lugging water around a house and spilling it 60% of the time has gotten old over the last 20yrs. If I wish to continue it another 20years, it is only going to happen if I'm not lugging the water around.

 

[Chicagoreef2016]

Much like DVDS, CDS, and digital cameras... the price will come down. Or as you state -- they will focus the tests on the parameters that are more important once we know what they are.

The use of the refugium is the same regardless of what method you utilize. If my refugium suddenly died -- I would do the same as you and do a water change. Would I sit back and watch my tank die and simply say it was tritons fault? Of course I would fall back on what I have done for over 15yrs.

We simply disagree here on some things. I see the triton test as a diagnostic not as a maintenance test. Time will tell and perhaps I will each crow.

Coke example. Water changes are simple dilution of a problem. I think we agree that if you don't solve "said" problem it will reoccur and force you to do continual water changes -- at times over and over again. That statement hold true even for the triton method.

Totally agree on the testing issue. I have read the literature on the aluminum issues... as I was comparing efficacy in removing phosphates with GFO and aluminum. I guess I could do a water change ;-)

My concern with triton is believing in magic solutions that we believe are correct. Innovation is the act of trying to move a field forward rather than being content with the norm. That is why I'm willing to give it a try. Lugging water around a house and spilling it 60% of the time has gotten old over the last 20yrs. If I wish to continue it another 20years, it is only going to happen if I'm not lugging the water around.

That's why after researching and having discussions like these I am leaning towards the ATI Essentials. Triton, the leader, certainly is a program which for someone new could be a good roadmap to follow to get started. Will you have issues, probably at some point. But you will most likely have issues not doing Triton as well. OTherwise someone, like I was a 1.5 years ago when I started in this, can get overwhelmed with opinions on what to do: flow, lighting, water changes, how much, how often, too much, too little, dose this, dose that, etc. etc. ATI seems to be more open architecture so to speak; use a refugium if you want, or don't.

And I agree, not carrying buckets would be nice. As well as saving the 4 gallons of water wasted to make 1 gallon of rodi water, and I try and re-purpose a lot of it to water my garden/flowers. I watched Tritons video from Macna this year, and I do appreciate the sustainability portion of their message/intent.

Thx for dialogue. I am going to have Steve make me a customer tank here in early 2018, I will be sure to share my progress.

 

[Schnizzle]

I wanted to chime in here with my first post for any last second input. I've been a lurker on the forums for over a year. I'm planning to pull the trigger on a SCA 90.
I was set on the Triton method but reading through the posts here has me second guessing. However, in reference to the above post, I doubt I'll find a 100% agreed upon method...

 

[ggdowski]

I have the SCA 90. It is about 3yrs old and I bought it second hand. I like the triton method because it is founded on trying to keep the tank as stable as possible on a day to day basis. Unless you are changing water on a daily basis -- that goal is not the same. I think the decision is based on what level of "stability" you want and how important you believe that to be in reef-keeping. Neither approach is wrong. Neither is maintenance free.

If you pursue the triton method, here are the things to ponder about the SC 90.

I have two drains, one that was modified by the last owner. One is a 3/4" and the other is a 1". It is setup as a Herbie system. HOWEVER.... you will never get the 10x flow that triton wants with that 3/4" drain. I had to reverse the herbie and use the 3/4" as the emergency and the 1" as the primary. That poses risk in overflowing the tank. I mitigated that risk by putting a level sensor on the tank so that the Apex system I have can shut down the return pump if the water level flows high. Neptune sets up those sensors so that the default turns off the pump (ie. if the sensor gets unplugged). It also sends me an email if it experiences an issue. Not entirely fail safe -- but tolerable.

I also feel that the walls of the area used to create the drain --- are TOO HIGH and they are glass. That makes the water level in my tank only about 3/4" from the top of the tank. That makes me very nervous when I'm trying to achieve return pump rates of about 1000G/hr.

If I had to do it all over again, I would ask Steve to create a coast to coast drain system with at least 2 1" drains but would probably even go as high as 1.25" drains.

 

[ggdowski]

BTW. I did think about redrilling the drains. The LFS person I go to for drilling wasn't comfortable redrilling the holes and warned me of the possibility of cracking the bottom glass. That led me down the path of alternative methods in increasing the flow rate. I could have simply closed off the holes in the bottom, removed the walls of the overflow, and redrilled the back for a coast-to-coast system. That just seemed extreme to me and killed a lot of the savings I realized in buying used.

 

[KJoFan]

I have discussed this in the FB SC group, but I'll also post here for others' opinions that might not be present there.

I have many seams on my new 150g, especially along the bottom seam that seem to be pretty thin on silicone between the panes. As we all know, the silicone between the panes is the stuff that matters, hence my concern. Some is thin enough that a good portion of one seam is exposed.

I measured the thin areas just along the front bottom seam and come up with about 30 of the 60" with this problem.

Am I headed for trouble down the road with this? Are these areas weaker and likely to leak when the tank is full long term?

I tried to take a photo to represent what I mean, though it's hard to capture exactly. This is taken looking up at the bottom from underneath. You'll see that a good portion of one pane is exposed from the lack of silicone.

I did reach out to Steve about it and received this response:

"I’ve seen the picture that you sent me, the silicone that actually hold the tank together are between the seams which you will not able to touch them, the silicone that you can touch is filled for cosmic purpose only, they aren’t the structure silicone seam. I am ensure that your tank will not leak and is safe to use."

I want to trust what he says but I have seen some issues with quality control from others purchases lately and want to be sure before I go on with my build.

What do you all think? I can attempt to provide more pictures if needed. These thin areas are visible when looking at the tank from the front, you can see light along the bottom seam everywhere the silicone is lacking.

 

[KJoFan]

Anyone? ^

 

[KJoFan]

No one has input on if this tank were their's, if they'd put water in it or not?

 

[soulpatch]

If the silicone between the panes is good then you are fine. If it is only the filler silicone than not much worry. They were a bit sloppy on the bottom of my tank but to Steve's point no one will ever see it so not the place to spend finishing time on.

That said you are the owner and the one who can see it first hand. If you have concerns of its durability then discuss with Steve.

Still though so long as the silicone between the panes is solid you are good.

 

[KJoFan]

The thinner areas show up lighter, as if light is getting through somehow when you look at the front of the tank along the bottom. does that make sense?

Those areas are thin enough that the edge of at least one pane is exposed, which I'm guessing is causing that light bleed?

That said, I would venture to guess the majority of the silicone between the panes is there, and maybe it's only the filler that's missing. I guess I'm not sure where the filler starts and the needed silicone ends in these cases.

As stated, I want to trust what he says, but at the end of the day he is a businessman and a salesman.

If you think you'd trust it, I'll trust it. That's why I was seeking other hobbyist input.

 

[KJoFan]

ETA: these thin areas are on the outside of the tank, not the inside where the cosmetic/filler mostly is.

 

[soulpatch]

the silicone between the panes is what holds everything together. Filler silicone is more or less for visual as well as protection so your scraper and such doesn't poke holes or damage the structural silicone.

The bottom however isn't take the impact especially on the bottom edge as that is on the stand.

Steve for his part is an employee but one that knows for a small time shop reputation is everything. He has gone out of his way for many. I had a scratch on my stand door he saw in my one picture that I had not even gotten around to picking up on and overnighted me a new one.


All that said only those in possession of an item can truly determine if they have an issue.

 

[luckyk0505]

If you are not comfortable with the silicone job, you should have someone else look at it. In the end, you are the one losing sleep over it. If the tank does leak in the future, manufacturer will just replace your tank, but you will have $$$$$$ damages in your home as well as your livestocks.

 

[clk51212]

steve is good to work with maybe a bit slow but is fair. had an issue with my 80 and silicone that we found yesterday after taking delivery of the tank dec 11 and he is replacing it but my silicone issue was a gap in the seam in the bottom corner

 

[KJoFan]

It's my decision. I get that. I can't really get someone else to look at it, as there are not other hobbyists in my area. This is why I posted up the pic for you all to chime in on.

In the end, there is probably sufficient silicone where it counts. But, I'm also no aquarium builder.

 

[Chicagoreef2016]

It's my decision. I get that. I can't really get someone else to look at it, as there are not other hobbyists in my area. This is why I posted up the pic for you all to chime in on.

In the end, there is probably sufficient silicone where it counts. But, I'm also no aquarium builder.

Maybe ask another aquarium builder, acting like you are going to get a tank and doing research?

I am getting very close to having Steve build my tank for me, although I am getting a bit nervous with this recent rash of "concerns" shall we say that I have seen on this forum and facebook.

 

[madweazl]

The thinner areas show up lighter, as if light is getting through somehow when you look at the front of the tank along the bottom. does that make sense?

Those areas are thin enough that the edge of at least one pane is exposed, which I'm guessing is causing that light bleed?

That said, I would venture to guess the majority of the silicone between the panes is there, and maybe it's only the filler that's missing. I guess I'm not sure where the filler starts and the needed silicone ends in these cases.

As stated, I want to trust what he says, but at the end of the day he is a businessman and a salesman.

If you think you'd trust it, I'll trust it. That's why I was seeking other hobbyist input.

I'm assuming this is what you're talking about? In my case (a 150g), the only area that is missing silicon is that area where the glass is beveled; the seem itself is fine. I'm not worried about it but you're the only one that can make that decision for your own tank.

 

[KJoFan]

Yes! That's exactly how mine is in areas. As best shown in your photo on the far right side of the pic. I think it's because the bevel is exposed that it can be seen from the front like that.

At any rate, I think I've decided that if this tank had a traditional plastic trim on it, I wouldn't even see this or know about it and be fine so...I'm going to proceed with plumbing today (I hope) and carry on.