Skimmer Q&A Thread

[bernie lyons]

removing toc's

removing toc's

So you don't think removing the most TOC is as important or more so more important than the rate of removal.

Ok now, you missed the point of the test , yes I believe a skimmer that can remove the most toc's at the fastest rate is the skimmer of choice for me.Why you ask , well think about it, I feed the tank heavily every day and I want the skimmer that can remove as much Toc's and other inorganic garbage as soon as possible . If it take's a skimmer much longer to remove the "said" Toc's and other crap out of my system then my PH and Redox will certainly fall by the time the skimmer decides to kick in...that's an "unbalanced" water column and that has an impact on my corals !

 

[Squidward5]

ok now, you missed the point of the test , yes i believe a skimmer that can remove the most toc's at the fastest rate is the skimmer of choice for me.why you ask , well think about it, i feed the tank heavily every day and i want the skimmer that can remove as much toc's and other inorganic garbage as soon as possible . If it take's a skimmer much longer to remove the "said" toc's and other crap out of my system then my ph and redox will certainly fall by the time the skimmer decides to kick in...that's an "unbalanced" water column and that has an impact on my corals !

+1

 

[acabgd]

Is there a "preferred" skimmer for a 75g tank? What would be the best options? I currently have the Tunze 9005 but I'm not really happy with it. Please note I'm in Europe so I may not have access to some less known US skimmers.

Thanks!

 

[ksed]

I totally understand, and agree that rate of remove is important. If you had a choice between a BK 160 which has a TOC removal of 37 with a 0.55 k rate of removal or the Precision Marine with TOC removal of 24 and a 2.3k which one would you choose.

Were talking about a difference of 13 TOC average more that is quite a bit more.It seems like the PM gets it out quicker but the BK keeps your tank cleaner.

How do you explain that the venturi skimmer removes it faster than a downdraft. Downdraft typically uses a higher flow pump, which in turn should remove it quicker as well.

Ok now, you missed the point of the test , yes I believe a skimmer that can remove the most toc's at the fastest rate is the skimmer of choice for me.Why you ask , well think about it, I feed the tank heavily every day and I want the skimmer that can remove as much Toc's and other inorganic garbage as soon as possible . If it take's a skimmer much longer to remove the "said" Toc's and other crap out of my system then my PH and Redox will certainly fall by the time the skimmer decides to kick in...that's an "unbalanced" water column and that has an impact on my corals !

 

[ksed]

Do you want a hang on the back, in sump or external skimmer?

Is there a "preferred" skimmer for a 75g tank? What would be the best options? I currently have the Tunze 9005 but I'm not really happy with it. Please note I'm in Europe so I may not have access to some less known US skimmers.

Thanks!

 

[Swim]

Is there a "preferred" skimmer for a 75g tank? What would be the best options? I currently have the Tunze 9005 but I'm not really happy with it. Please note I'm in Europe so I may not have access to some less known US skimmers.

Thanks!

Yes, the largest beckett or Mazzie venturi powered skimmer, preferably made of "cast cell" and not "extruded" acrylic, you can afford.

 

[Swim]

I totally understand, and agree that rate of remove is important. If you had a choice between a BK 160 which has a TOC removal of 37 with a 0.55 k rate of removal or the Precision Marine with TOC removal of 24 and a 2.3k which one would you choose.

Were talking about a difference of 13 TOC average more that is quite a bit more.It seems like the PM gets it out quicker but the BK keeps your tank cleaner.

How do you explain that the venturi skimmer removes it faster than a downdraft. Downdraft typically uses a higher flow pump, which in turn should remove it quicker as well.

Venturi skimmers are usually designed to recirculated which greatly increases contact time and downdrafts do not recirculate.

 

[ksed]

Is that particular skimmer in that test a recirc venturi skimmer?

Venturi skimmers are usually designed to recirculated which greatly increases contact time and downdrafts do not recirculate.

 

[bernie lyons]

pm

pm

Is that particular skimmer in that test a recirc venturi skimmer?

Yes.

 

[bernie lyons]

removal

removal

Bump

 

[bernie lyons]

removal

removal

I totally understand, and agree that rate of remove is important. If you had a choice between a BK 160 which has a TOC removal of 37 with a 0.55 k rate of removal or the Precision Marine with TOC removal of 24 and a 2.3k which one would you choose.

Were talking about a difference of 13 TOC average more that is quite a bit more.It seems like the PM gets it out quicker but the BK keeps your tank cleaner.

How do you explain that the venturi skimmer removes it faster than a downdraft. Downdraft typically uses a higher flow pump, which in turn should remove it quicker as well.

The difference in removal of 13 toc is actually quite small according to the scientist . In fact they said that because of the small percentage of "overall" removal rate difference on all the skimmers in the test (don't forget these skimmers were allowed an additional of a least several weeks to see what the difference in overall removal rate would be) that an water change by that point would have made an much greater difference in removing the Toc's from the tank. Bottom line for me is, that just about everybody cleans the skimmer cup once a week on average and checking to make sure the skimmers venturi's ,beckett, pinwheel are operating "full tilt" , so that would basically allow the skimmer to perform at it's optimal every time this is done , then the importance of removal rate and time (K Value) becomes paramount in keeping the tank and it's inhabitants very happy !

 

[sirreal63]

Is that particular skimmer in that test a recirc venturi skimmer?

Yes.

No, it was the Precision Marine ES100 which is not a recirc skimmer, unless we are thinking about a different test.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature

The only recirc skimmer tested was the Octo 150, which was a horribly balanced skimmer.

 

[bernie lyons]

pm skimmer

pm skimmer

No, it was the Precision Marine ES100 which is not a recirc skimmer, unless we are thinking about a different test.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature

The only recirc skimmer tested was the Octo 150, which was a horribly balanced skimmer.

Sorry ,I stand corrected !

 

[bernie lyons]

price

price

Sorry ,I stand corrected !

Also, I forgot to mention that the price difference of the bk-100 roughly $900.00 vs the precision marine venturi $150.00 is staggering ! Imagine if you bought precision marine's top flight skimmer at around $900.00 , the difference in performance would certainly be in another league of all these skimmers including the "overall" Toc removal rate !

 

[sirreal63]

I am not sure I have ever seen a recirc venturi skimmer, I have seen several downdraft and Beckett versions though. An interesting observation in how skimmers have changed over the years, neck size, even on massive Becketts, the neck size remained relatively small compared to the crazy neck sizes seen on current skimmers. I understand the idea behind it but I am not sure I agree. Massive amounts of air in tiny bodies with huge necks creates minimal contact time and when coupled with a small bio-load it makes for tea colored skim. It isn't until you have a very large bio-load and enough organics to build a good foam head that the design seems to work.

D2mini just went through a change in skimmers, from a large Vertex Alpha (huge neck, massive air and minimal contact time) to an old school venturi, which is working more to his liking. It would be improper to say the venturi in general is a superior skimmer, but rather that elusive "balance" of water/air and small enough neck to keep a good foam head matched up with his bio-load properly.

 

[bernie lyons]

skimmer

skimmer

I am not sure I have ever seen a recirc venturi skimmer, I have seen several downdraft and Beckett versions though. An interesting observation in how skimmers have changed over the years, neck size, even on massive Becketts, the neck size remained relatively small compared to the crazy neck sizes seen on current skimmers. I understand the idea behind it but I am not sure I agree. Massive amounts of air in tiny bodies with huge necks creates minimal contact time and when coupled with a small bio-load it makes for tea colored skim. It isn't until you have a very large bio-load and enough organics to build a good foam head that the design seems to work.

D2mini just went through a change in skimmers, from a large Vertex Alpha (huge neck, massive air and minimal contact time) to an old school venturi, which is working more to his liking. It would be improper to say the venturi in general is a superior skimmer, but rather that elusive "balance" of water/air and small enough neck to keep a good foam head matched up with his bio-load properly.

I'm not surprised by the fact that your friends recirculating venturi (that's replaced the big vortex skimmer) is performing better !
This has been my "bone" of contention , the skimmers that people throw into the sump are basically "stubies" that cannot and will not have the proper "dwell time" to allow for larger inorganic waste to attach itself to the "right " bubble . I've always said to guys that on a large aquariom 150+ gallons they should be using an external skimmer to get the height and a good diameter reaction chamber. This allows for proper "contact time" and "dwell time" for all types of inoganic waste to be in good "company" with the bubbles .
By the way MTC made recirculating venturi skimmers 15 years ago - and damn good ones at that !

 

[ksed]

I agree with contact time and larger skimmers, but after talking with Ken he mentioned that he could not find any correlation with contact time being better for removing more TOC.

 

[bernie lyons]

toc's

toc's

I agree with contact time and larger skimmers, but after talking with Ken he mentioned that he could not find any correlation with contact time being better for removing more TOC.

How about DOC's ?
Interstingly, having spoke with RK2 sometime back, they mentioned the importance of striving for a 120 second "contact time/dwell time" on all their skimmers? Now these guys build some of the largest commercial skimmers in the world !

 

[sirreal63]

I'm not surprised by the fact that your friends recirculating venturi (that's replaced the big vortex skimmer) is performing better !
This has been my "bone" of contention , the skimmers that people throw into the sump are basically "stubies" that cannot and will not have the proper "dwell time" to allow for larger inorganic waste to attach itself to the "right " bubble . I've always said to guys that on a large aquariom 150+ gallons they should be using an external skimmer to get the height and a good diameter reaction chamber. This allows for proper "contact time" and "dwell time" for all types of inoganic waste to be in good "company" with the bubbles .
By the way MTC made recirculating venturi skimmers 15 years ago - and damn good ones at that !

I think perhaps you are missing some of the point, it isn't the method of making bubbles, but the proper sizing of the skimmer for the load. His Vertex was just not being able to skim as well as it should because of a lack of organics and large neck size which hinders the foam head. The LifeReef he replaced it with has a much smaller neck size which is more appropriate for the bio-load. The contact time isn't significantly longer with the old one versus the new one, the important difference is the neck.

I am a firm believer in contact time, if I had the space I would be running a very tall skimmer but most people don't have that luxury. Being limited to what will fit in the space you have makes it tough to get contact time. The best I can do with the under the tank skimmer is a recirculating variety. I have played with several pump/body combinations and have found what works for my tank, it may not work as well on some else's tank. I do agree with the lack of "deep" skimming in most of the newer skimmer designs.

Bernie I take it back, I do remember those old large recirc Venturi skimmers, there were quite a few of them from different people. I had forgotten about them, they were large skimmers, usually with a lower box and many with dual chambers.

 

[Mike S]

Can the breed of DC pumps provide sufficient pressure to run a becket skimmer like the Mtc HSA1000? Or maybe one of the larger Lagunas? It seems like that would be a good compromise if you had the space. I'm still weighing my options for my 315 gallon reef. The suggestion that beckets need frequent adjustment /maintenance gives me pauses since I travel somewhat frequently.