Skimmers vs . . .

[cdouble]

Thanks guys! I didn't think I was overdoing it. Glad to see I'm on the right track. Thanks again!

 

[mr.maroonsalty]

I ran open cell sponges in a Hagen for quite a while; I saw them working both biologically and mechanically. I would never kill my cycled sponge by putting it in fresh water let alone a detergent! But what do I know; i followed along the with what the same hobby rags published as most of us did, and not necessarily what scientific periodicals would say. I would rinse it as well as I could during weekly wc's in my waste bucket. There was usually a point where the detritus suspended in the pail would rinse the sponge no further. All my tanks had at least one hagen fitted with a sponge until my current system; I simply didn't have the space for even one. The basket and hob itself becomes an incredible cryptic fuge. When i syphoned detritus they gathered i would always let the bucket sit so i could harvest my weekly supply of baby snails.

Ats's are not at all new, it's just that the patent expired a couple years ago opening the marketing up. I love adding diversity to my system, but I am also constrained by electrical costs. I found that the wattage demanded by a sufficient sized ats is considerably more than most new skimmer pumps.

Success is very subjective, maybe the healthiest tank for many of the fishes we keep would be one full of beautifully moving true hair algae. Every system regardless has limitations as to what livestock can be kept healthy, if your minds eye is looking to have a specific looking type of tank, then find a few that look like what you want and do what they do making sure to pay extra close attention to those tanks with the longest growth, and less to those that are less than a 1 1/2 - 2 years old.

 

[dkeller_nc]

I ran open cell sponges in a Hagen for quite a while; I saw them working both biologically and mechanically. I would never kill my cycled sponge by putting it in fresh water let alone a detergent!.

Honestly, I wasn't really suggesting that someone actually do this, just that to be an effective transport method for removing bacteria from the tank (as opposed to a skimmer), one would need some way of destroying and removing the biofilm that builds up in a sponge. There are quite a few ways of removing a biofilm - the most familiar to all of us would be soap and water (hence the detergent comment). But there are other ways - the sodium hydroxide in bleach would be effective at killing the biofilm and digesting the protein contents, hydrogen peroxide would kill the cells and strip them off by oxidization, etc...

All in all, none of that seems worth doing in comparison to the ease of use and very large capacity offered by a protein skimmer. Note that I'd contrast that with the use of a sponge, filter sock or some other means of mechanical filtration for the purpose of detritus removal, which is a bit different than bacterial stripping.

 

[FlyPenFly]

After a certain level of build up, a skimmer does an amazing job of reducing bacteria populations. This was from tests done at AA.

 

[Reefin' Dude]

Are there other methods of bacteria export besides a skimmer?

the siphon. go after the detritus, not the water.

if brown fluffy matter is not being removed from the entire system, than it is not being exported.

G~

 

[ifringe]

For what it is worth, for years I had been doing only mechanical (sponge) filtration with perfectly good results.

Then I put a skimmer in, an old one at that, and now I see what I have been missing all these years. Heading for a "real" skimmer now! So... don't fight getting a skimmer

 

[D0GFISH]

Does everyones skimmer mostly just extract junk for a limited time every day? What about with carbon dosing? It seems like carbon dosing might help at some level because it enables the skimmer to work round the clock.

 

[ca1ore]

Bacteria are a great way to control some nutrients but you need a method to export them, such as a skimmer. If you do not, then the nutrients are still there and as soon as the bacteria die they will release those nutrients back into the water column. Since no filter for our tanks is 100% efficient you should employ several forms of export.

This sums it up nicely I think. You need to be exporting nutrients in balance with adding them (through feeding). I think a skimmer is as close as we get to a required piece of equipment, although clearly there are alternative mechanisms. I have a heavy fish population in my tank, and feed more than is probably wise. I run:

1. ASM G4+ skimmer with a neck swabbie that seems to keep it running efficiently
2. Recently added a waterfall ATS, and it is growing green turf algae gang busters
3. I have designed my sump with a settling chamber form which I siphon detritus once every two weeks as part of my 10% water change (I don't use filters socks, don't like them)

 

[D0GFISH]

This sums it up nicely I think. You need to be exporting nutrients in balance with adding them (through feeding). I think a skimmer is as close as we get to a required piece of equipment, although clearly there are alternative mechanisms. I have a heavy fish population in my tank, and feed more than is probably wise. I run:

1. ASM G4+ skimmer with a neck swabbie that seems to keep it running efficiently
2. Recently added a waterfall ATS, and it is growing green turf algae gang busters
3. I have designed my sump with a settling chamber form which I siphon detritus once every two weeks as part of my 10% water change (I don't use filters socks, don't like them)

Do you have any details on your sump? I've also moved away from any kind of mechanical filter in the sump but I like the idea of an area specifically for detritus accumulation. Is it just a bare bottom area with the inlet near the bottom of the tank and the outlet at the top? I'd be curious if anyone knows how to figure out how wide to make it for a given flow if we want the detritus to sink.

 

[ca1ore]

Do you have any details on your sump?

Well, it's nothing particularly fancy, just an initial chamber with a baffle that runs 15" high so there is plenty of height for the particles to settle. Also, I am in the low-sump flow camp - probably run no more than 400 gallons/hr through the 75 gallon sump.



Basically I run most of the drain from my tank through the algal turf scrubber that is over the settling chamber area. There is a 12" 1 1/2" PVC pipe that extends out of the bottom of the scrubber to direct water to the middle of the settling chamber, and gravity takes care of the rest. If I had thought of it before, I would actually have put a bulkhead and ball valve at the bottom of the settling chamber to easily remove the buildup - as it is siphoning the chamber is OK, but a bit awkward. In the photo above, you can sort of see the black/grey buildup that occurs in the bottom.

 

[_shorty_]

Well, it's nothing particularly fancy, just an initial chamber with a baffle that runs 15" high so there is plenty of height for the particles to settle. Also, I am in the low-sump flow camp - probably run no more than 400 gallons/hr through the 75 gallon sump.



Basically I run most of the drain from my tank through the algal turf scrubber that is over the settling chamber area. There is a 12" 1 1/2" PVC pipe that extends out of the bottom of the scrubber to direct water to the middle of the settling chamber, and gravity takes care of the rest. If I had thought of it before, I would actually have put a bulkhead and ball valve at the bottom of the settling chamber to easily remove the buildup - as it is siphoning the chamber is OK, but a bit awkward. In the photo above, you can sort of see the black/grey buildup that occurs in the bottom.

Good stuff. ya - I want to design a conical settling tank into my next system!