to turbelle or not to turbelle

[amnesiac]

wanted to get some insight on an issue im having with an initial setup. im posting here because i plan to keep a majority of sps corals and figured here to be the best place for such a question. im setting up a 125 gallon (my biggest yet but quite average, im sure, amongst most people here) and have let slip a very big detail......................circulation. further details can be found here http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=894426 . im sure that makes some of you cringe that ive let this detail slip by, but at least ive made this mistake without the death of livestock to help me realize it. always a plus . to be honest circulation was given thought but not enough. my initial plan was to use a scwd connected to a mag 9.5. but even at compacity (which is around 750 gph) and with the 500 gph on my return lines (after head loss) im still under the MINIMUM recommended turnover of 15x which ive found to be the average minimum from what numbers i could find.
enter the turbelle!!!!
now the water movement numbers on the turbelle 6060 are just under 1600 gph (exceeding the before mentioned minimum by itself). i planned on adding this pump in conjunction with the circulation already planned and having it aimed to blow over the length of the tank slightly leaning over the sps. i contacted tunze for some insight and was told that the best thing to do is get two 6000's as they can be flow controlled and run them both with a controller. of course this is a better idea, but i get rather suspicious when a retailer's better idea also comes with a massive price tag. maybe its just me but im just not sure that if my plan was sufficient theyd let me know. especially if they thought they could sell me on a system that would cost me 6 times the single pump. heres the diagram

with the single turbelle i would be moving well over 22x the total display tank volume per hour. it would be a continuous stream yes but turbulance would be added from the water movement already planned for. so heres my questions (finally!!)
1. is this much flow overkill
2. is the static flow of the 6060 detrimental even with the switching current provided by the scwd
3. what is the meaning of life
4. why does peanut butter go so well with jelly

thanks for your time folks. always have been my best resource. -amnesiac

 

[jjjimmy]

I would be inclined to agree with the Tunze people. The (2) 6000's on a controller will work much better and in no way should it be to much flow for your 125.

 

[twon8]

if you plan on keeping sps, the 6060 and what you have planned is no where near sufficient. I've got way more flow than that in a 90. the tunze recommendation is expensive, but worth every penny imo.

 

[RichConley]

I'm not a big fan of the Tunze products. Theyre nice, but, IMO, there value is nowhere near their cost.


Are you DIY able? Can you handle a dremel?

I'd reccomend 2 maxi900 streams with octura 1435 props, both on swirler-steins. Should cost about $100 total, and will be more, and more turbulent/random flow than a pair of 6000s.

 

[dvanacker]

Rich....you would make a good spokes person for the maximod if they ever need one.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7900362#post7900362 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by dvanacker
Rich....you would make a good spokes person for the maximod if they ever need one.

I'm a big spokesman for anything that gives you equal performance for less $$.

 

[twon8]

but once you take into acct' the multicontroller it can't be labeled equal performance. dont' get me wrong i think the maximods are great, but they can't operate the same way the streams do.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7901215#post7901215 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by twon8
but once you take into acct' the multicontroller it can't be labeled equal performance. dont' get me wrong i think the maximods are great, but they can't operate the same way the streams do.

IMO, the wave action produced by a pair of Maximods on rotating mounts is GREATLY superior to anything the multicontroller can do.

Oscillating flow is better than single point flow that goes up and down in intensity. Think of it this way, if you take a pieslice shaped area in front of the tunze, flow will ramp up and down. If you do the same thing with a maximod on a swirler, and put the slice in the same place, flow will ramp up and down as the pump goes by.... but its also doing it in every other pie slice along a 135' arc, whereas the tunze does it in a linear fashion.

2500 gph going back and forth works much better than ramping up and down from 1000 to 3000.

 

[twon8]

i understand that the streams aren't going to putting out max flow half the time, but waves in the ocean are more of the up and down flow. the maxi's on mounts may be superior total flow wise, but imo the multicontroller enables a type of flow that is much more adjustable and superior. all imo.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7901266#post7901266 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by twon8
i understand that the streams aren't going to putting out max flow half the time, but waves in the ocean are more of the up and down flow. the maxi's on mounts may be superior total flow wise, but imo the multicontroller enables a type of flow that is much more adjustable and superior. all imo.

I gotta draw up some graphs. The thing is, you still get the same up and down flow, its just produced in a superior way with the rotating mount.

If you take a maximod and rotate it at the correct speed, and take a tunze, and have it ramp up and down, and select a point directly in front of each one, they will see EXACTLY the same oscillation pattern. The problem is, with the Tunze, the wave action is unidirectional, whereas the swirler, its multidirectional.

I gotta draw up some graphs for you. Its tough to verbalize, but theres a very large advantage to the rotating mount vs the changing intensity.

 

[amnesiac]

good information, but id really appreciate some numbers. for instance if this my plan is still short the needed flow, what is the correct amount needed??? minimum, optimum and overkill?? i cant seem to find any information on google about the maxi900 stream and reefcentral isnt letting me search right now (have to do my searches at night!!). please advise. -amnesiac

 

[slug]

the maxi's on mounts may be superior total flow wise

I don't think the maxis would have more flow... I think the important point is that they would be on rotating mounts allowing them to cover a greater area of the tank.

 

[twon8]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7901783#post7901783 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by amnesiac
good information, but id really appreciate some numbers. for instance if this my plan is still short the needed flow, what is the correct amount needed??? minimum, optimum and overkill?? i cant seem to find any information on google about the maxi900 stream and reefcentral isnt letting me search right now (have to do my searches at night!!). please advise. -amnesiac

the truth is there isn't a number to give you, it all depends on what you are going to keep, how much rock is in the tank,

for me, i would go with 2x 6100's on a multicontroller, or the 2x6000 with multi and maybe even a wavebox.

minimum for sps, I would say at least 40x, but that is personal preference.

overkill, i don't know that anyone has ever had too much flow in a large sps tank, not that it couldn't be done. somewhere well over 150x in tank turnover imo.

in my 180, which is same length as a 125, i have 2x6100 and a 6200 on a multicontroller; i plan to add another stream as things grow in, probably another 6200. six months ago i would have thought that much flow would be insane, but seeing how sps and acros in particular respond to the flow I realize more is better.

and also, stay away from the sqwd, mine broke in two months, not worth the reduction in flow.

 

[amnesiac]

i plan on keeping, ummmm id say 75-90% sps with som lps here and there and maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe a ricordia here or there. youre right that much flow seems insanely much, but i guess id have to see results before i could start to second guess it. i found information on the sea swirls and decided that really once you figure in buying a pump for each sea swirl youre really not saving much. plus theyre another outlet that needs to be taken up as they need to powered. im confused though, i thought that the tunzes couldnt be kept on a wave box because rapid shut down is detrimental to the pumps. also if you would look at the above diagram, where would place the two??? my idea is to just place them on both sides facing each other.. thanks for your quick response. -amnesiac

 

[old salty]

Re: to turbelle or not to turbelle

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7899178#post7899178 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by amnesiac

4. why does peanut butter go so well with jelly

Because peanut butter has no bones, and sticky has jelly in it.

 

[twon8]

a wavebox is not a wave controller. check tunze site for wavebox

how many sides is the tank viewable from?
as long as you arent' having three sides viewable, the streams on opposite ends facing toward each other but slightly angled at the front glass is fine imo.


one idea, the 6000's can be upgraded to 6100 by simply buying a transformer for ~$72, so you should probably buy the 6000's with the idea to upgrade once things grow in. another benefit to the tunze, they can be put on a ups(backup power supply normally used on computers) and they will operate for hours when the power goes off, and imo flow should be all your tank will need to survive for a few days in such circumstances.

 

[Syris]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7900307#post7900307 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
I'm not a big fan of the Tunze products. Theyre nice, but, IMO, there value is nowhere near their cost.


Are you DIY able? Can you handle a dremel?

I'd reccomend 2 maxi900 streams with octura 1435 props, both on swirler-steins. Should cost about $100 total, and will be more, and more turbulent/random flow than a pair of 6000s.

Totally agree, except why MJ900s and not a MJ1200 w/Dumas 3004 prop. Im setting up 2x MJ1200 mods for my 125g. Just finished one last night, flow is outstanding. Should easily be able to replace my Sieos (2600 + 1100) with less power consumption plus I can put the MJ1200 on a UPS for backup flow during outages.

 

[twon8]

because the 900 only use 11w compared to the 25? of the 1200

 

[Syris]

hmm..your right I just looked it up. MJ900 8.5w MJ1200 20w. Didnt realize there was such a power difference between the two.

 

[twon8]

yeah, less than half the power for 30% less flow.