So what do you do for filtration on a large tank?

[crissie]

skimmer: Does not remove nutrients; only food particles.

Skimmers remove organic matter - that includes the healthy and much wanted micro-organisms in our tanks, as well as food waste.

 

[SPotter]

skimmer: Does not remove nutrients; only food particles.
socks: Same as skimmers, but worse because the particles sit in the water longer.
GAC: Does not remove any nutrients at all.
GFO: Good at removing P, although expensive, messy, and lowers pH.
Ozone: Does not remove any nutrients at all.
UV: Does not remove any nutrients at all. Actually adds nutrients by killing animals.
Macro algae: Removes N, P, ammonia, copper, CO2, etc. Must be harvested, of course, or eaten by the animals.

Pretty sure the op was looking for what filtration you are using not your negative, biased opinion on all of the different filtration forms except for the one area that you sell a product for.

 

[SPotter]

On my new system this is what I will be using....
Oversized skimmer
No socks...dont mind cleaning my sump once a month
denitrafier
800 lbs live rock
Daily WC's
150g fugue with various macros

 

[msderganc]

I currently use biopellets and GAC, with a small refugium and a good sized protein skimmer.

I find that the biopellets are amazing (if you do go with them, ensure you keep your alkalinity near NSW levels). I feed very heavy and have no issues with nutrients at all.

Algae scrubbers are a good alternative as well.

If I had to do it again, I'd seriously consider Zeovit (zeoliths).

 

[Aquatron]

Filtration Plan

Filtration Plan

My new build filtration plan for 450 total water volume

1. 10 x turnover rate plus 8000gph close loop w/8 overflows/14 inlets @ different levels.
2. 150 gallon open sump.
a) Upper level Algae Turf Scrubber(4 units skimming surface water)
b) Middle level feeds Reactor's and 1 of 3 skimmers.
c) Bottom level cryptic/refugium zone and return pump feed.
3. Removable 4" filter socks used during maintenance.
4. 2 - 4" x 36" air driven skimmer's mounted to DT.
5. 1 - 8" x 36" oxygen tower.
6. 1 - 8" x 36" Bio Bale filter (can also be used as oxygen tower).
7. 1 - 8" x 24" fluidized sand filter.
8. 1 - 8" x 24" moving bed filter.
9. 1 - 4" x 24" carbon reactor.
10. 200lbs Dry rock.
11. Cutting board bare bottom w/ areas of Reef Flakes sand around bottom outlets.
* Open mind and enjoy learning!:hmm5:

 

[SantaMonica]

but if it's eaten by the animals doesn't all that stay in the tank when it poops it back out?

If the animal is growing, it puts much of the nutrients into the body.

skimmers, but they certainly do remove non-particulate organics from the water.

DOC, yes some. I think the study was 20 to 30%. But when are you going to add that Vitamin C, amino acids, etc back into the water? That's what the dissolved organics are. I'd rather not remove them at all, instead of removing them and then buying and dosing them.

as well as food waste.

Keep in mind that food waste = food for corals. I'd rather circulate them around and feed the corals, using those organic particles already in the water, than buy and dose additional organic particles.

not your negative, biased opinion

Please point out the error is my posting. I'm sure the OP would like to know if skimmers, socks, GAC, GFO, ozone, UV, or algae remove additional nutrients that I did not mention, or do not remove the nutrients that I mentioned. After all he is basing his decisions, and tank, on it.

150 gallon open sump.

Wow it must be a dream to have so much room to work in; the sump is bigger than my biggest display I've had

 

[crissie]

Keep in mind that food waste = food for corals. I'd rather circulate them around and feed the corals, using those organic particles already in the water, than buy and dose additional organic particles.

I am not sure if I am missing something or if you are contradicting yourself. Yes, food waste is food for corals, and yet you stated the removal of food particles as a positive use of a skimmer. This makes no sense when you put it in conjunction with the above post.

Please point out the error is my posting. I'm sure the OP would like to know if skimmers, socks, GAC, GFO, ozone, UV, or algae remove additional nutrients that I did not mention, or do not remove the nutrients that I mentioned. After all he is basing his decisions, and tank, on it.

I do believe an error was already pointed out, which you chose to exclude when you quoted me. Skimmers also remover the highly beneficial micro-organisms for out tank system.

I do not mean to be argumentative, I think it's very good to point out the negatives of each method, as well as the positives. However you missed out the negatives of using a protein skimmer, and there are negatives. It's a touch misleading to be negative towards all systems bar skimmer and GAC (I know nothing about GAC so can't comment on those).

 

[ca1ore]

DOC, yes some. I think the study was 20 to 30%. But when are you going to add that Vitamin C, amino acids, etc back into the water? That's what the dissolved organics are. I'd rather not remove them at all, instead of removing them and then buying and dosing them.

Study I read on protein skimmers was around 30% - but that's not 'nothing'; though as I noted in my post, all too frequently people do have unrealistic expectations for the skimmer. As for the latter, water changes accomplish wonders for replenishing all that stuff.

I like algae scrubbers, have run them for years (probably longer than you have :lol and if I have the space will always run one on my tank, but in combination with a skimmer.