Skimmer Q&A Thread
- Thread starter mojo~
- Start date
Sharkus333
New member
Just recently upgraded to an Aquamaxx HOB-1 for my JBJ 28g Nano Cube. It's been running for 2 days, and already impressed with the skimmate production. Having one issue though that was hoping I could get some answers on. It's producing a loud gurgling noise coming from the air tube, and air silencer that I just can't seem to figure out why. Has anyone come across this issue that could shed some light what I could be doing wrong to get this annoying sound from it? lol
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
the bk is super quiet, the atb uses the same pump. for added silence get the elegance pro. THe bk is a little more quiet because the pump is internal like the elegance pro, but the bk uses just a little thicker acrylic. Both are great.
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
it will quiet down as it breaks in. just make sure it hooked up right and it should settle down some.
Ninja1
New member
I need help guys- which skimmer should I buy? What will work with a TS 36s : http://www.triggersys.com/sumps_detailed.html
pudge_cat
New member
75 gallon with 25 gallon sump
75 gallon with 25 gallon sump
Great thread, I've gotten some good ideas.
I've been running an ASM G4 for 5 years now. Tired of the noise, the overflowing, the constant adjustment and its getting pretty beat up after a couple of moves.
It's a 75 gallon tank with soft corals and low bioload (one tomato clown, one 10 year old damsel, I may add 1-2 small fish). I have aspirations of upgrading to a 90 gallon tank so it would be nice if the skimmer could handle the upgrade.
Must be an in-sump with a total footprint (including pump) of less than or equal to 13x11 inches, but the smaller the better. Must be as quiet as possible. Prefer solid construction. Any height will work. Lower maintanence is better.
Considering Deltec SC2060 or Bubble King mini 180 or 200. Something in that price range should be fine.
Thanks
75 gallon with 25 gallon sump
Great thread, I've gotten some good ideas.
I've been running an ASM G4 for 5 years now. Tired of the noise, the overflowing, the constant adjustment and its getting pretty beat up after a couple of moves.
It's a 75 gallon tank with soft corals and low bioload (one tomato clown, one 10 year old damsel, I may add 1-2 small fish). I have aspirations of upgrading to a 90 gallon tank so it would be nice if the skimmer could handle the upgrade.
Must be an in-sump with a total footprint (including pump) of less than or equal to 13x11 inches, but the smaller the better. Must be as quiet as possible. Prefer solid construction. Any height will work. Lower maintanence is better.
Considering Deltec SC2060 or Bubble King mini 180 or 200. Something in that price range should be fine.
Thanks
Sharkus333
New member
pblogic
Member
I got to thinking about how we actually measure the performance of skimmers and found this interesting article:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature
Conclusions
Many factors contribute to the "value" of a skimmer to an aquarist, including quality of construction, size, footprint, noise level, ease of cleaning, energy efficiency of the pump, and of course, the ability to remove organic waste from aquarium water. Our data show that there are not compelling or remarkably large differences in measurable skimmer TOC removal metrics among the seven skimmers tested, although the Reef Octopus 150 consistently underperformed compared to the other skimmers. However, in the larger picture, it is equally apparent that if an aquarist runs a skimmer continuously (24/7), then any of the skimmers tested would perform adequately in terms of rate of TOC removal; the only practical differences might involve the frequency of skimmer cup cleaning. A perhaps more interesting observation to emerge from these skimmer studies involves not the rate of TOC removal, but rather the amount of TOC removed. None of the skimmers tested removed more than 35% of the extant TOC, leading to the conclusion that bubbles are really not a very effective medium for organic nutrient removal. If fact, the presence of refractory, or unskimmable, TOC, coupled with the likelihood that endogenous TOC consumers (bacteria, among others) also do not remove all of the TOC present (cf. Fig. 4), suggest that in an operational sense, TOC can be categorized as follows:
1.TOC that a skimmer removes
2.TOC that a skimmer does not remove
3.TOC that is consumed by microbes
4.TOC that is not consumed by microbes
5.TOC that is (indirectly or directly) harmful to tank livestock
6.TOC that is not harmful to tank livestock
The last two categories must be included as a result of recent work of Forest Rohwer (See the January 2009 Advanced Aquarist article for a discussion), and they really highlight why an aquarist might be concerned with rising tank TOC levels. Of course, there will be much overlap between these categories. Ultimately, the crucial question for sustaining aquarium livestock health over the long term is, "How much of the harmful TOC (#5) is removed by either biological consumption or by skimming?" That question remains unanswered at present.
The results to date on protein skimming as a means of aquarium water remediation form a consistent picture that is at odds with some of the cherished dogma in the marine husbandry area. According to the data presented in this and the earlier paper (Advanced Aquarist, January 2009), protein skimmers appear to have a much larger variation in their prices than they do in their ability to remove TOC from aquarium water. Recent design innovations like bubble plates, conical sides, or pinwheel impellers do not seem to impact significantly on either rate of TOC removal or amount of TOC removed, at least for the skimmers tested. Thus, skimmer manufacturer claims about enhanced organic removal capabilities should be met with skepticism in the absence of compelling and quantitative TOC removal data.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature
Conclusions
Many factors contribute to the "value" of a skimmer to an aquarist, including quality of construction, size, footprint, noise level, ease of cleaning, energy efficiency of the pump, and of course, the ability to remove organic waste from aquarium water. Our data show that there are not compelling or remarkably large differences in measurable skimmer TOC removal metrics among the seven skimmers tested, although the Reef Octopus 150 consistently underperformed compared to the other skimmers. However, in the larger picture, it is equally apparent that if an aquarist runs a skimmer continuously (24/7), then any of the skimmers tested would perform adequately in terms of rate of TOC removal; the only practical differences might involve the frequency of skimmer cup cleaning. A perhaps more interesting observation to emerge from these skimmer studies involves not the rate of TOC removal, but rather the amount of TOC removed. None of the skimmers tested removed more than 35% of the extant TOC, leading to the conclusion that bubbles are really not a very effective medium for organic nutrient removal. If fact, the presence of refractory, or unskimmable, TOC, coupled with the likelihood that endogenous TOC consumers (bacteria, among others) also do not remove all of the TOC present (cf. Fig. 4), suggest that in an operational sense, TOC can be categorized as follows:
1.TOC that a skimmer removes
2.TOC that a skimmer does not remove
3.TOC that is consumed by microbes
4.TOC that is not consumed by microbes
5.TOC that is (indirectly or directly) harmful to tank livestock
6.TOC that is not harmful to tank livestock
The last two categories must be included as a result of recent work of Forest Rohwer (See the January 2009 Advanced Aquarist article for a discussion), and they really highlight why an aquarist might be concerned with rising tank TOC levels. Of course, there will be much overlap between these categories. Ultimately, the crucial question for sustaining aquarium livestock health over the long term is, "How much of the harmful TOC (#5) is removed by either biological consumption or by skimming?" That question remains unanswered at present.
The results to date on protein skimming as a means of aquarium water remediation form a consistent picture that is at odds with some of the cherished dogma in the marine husbandry area. According to the data presented in this and the earlier paper (Advanced Aquarist, January 2009), protein skimmers appear to have a much larger variation in their prices than they do in their ability to remove TOC from aquarium water. Recent design innovations like bubble plates, conical sides, or pinwheel impellers do not seem to impact significantly on either rate of TOC removal or amount of TOC removed, at least for the skimmers tested. Thus, skimmer manufacturer claims about enhanced organic removal capabilities should be met with skepticism in the absence of compelling and quantitative TOC removal data.
moondoggy4
Team RC
Hey Mojo I have a H&S 90-1000 in sump skimmer and I have been pump less for about 2 months now, waiting on a part. I was wondering if there are any comparable pumps to the Aqua Bee 1000. Going to need a back up pump. Thanks in advance
I have an octo extreme 250 running two of the sicce 2500 pumps. Today I finaly got my bubble blaster 5000s to replace these so I can stop manually starting the pumps every 2-3 days.
The fittings are much larger on the BB 5000 than the skimmer. Does anyone know the proper name for these fittings? So I can hunt down an adapter to make them work.
based on the size of the new pump I am thinking of having it attached to both the existing fittings instead of pluging one. Thoughts on this are appricated.
Mike
The fittings are much larger on the BB 5000 than the skimmer. Does anyone know the proper name for these fittings? So I can hunt down an adapter to make them work.
based on the size of the new pump I am thinking of having it attached to both the existing fittings instead of pluging one. Thoughts on this are appricated.
Mike
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
Honestly I would get the bk mini 160. IT will perform more consistant than the others and is quiet as a mouse.
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
the 2000 is the way to go. Save the extra money. the 2000 is a beast. Great upgrade.
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
you could use the bubble blaster 1000 or the tunze 9410 hydrofoamer would be a great option as well.
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
I would get a hold of the guys at reefspecialty. They will most likely know everything you need to get you taken care of.
mojo~
Skimmer Guy
The nac 6 would work well, it would be a slight upgrade but nothing huge. Its a nice skimmer though. For the money its really a great bang for your buck.
Similar threads
