Tunze Foam extractor

[drdavethedude]

Hello,
I am thinking of ordering the foam extractor to enhance the performance of my 3 year old Tunze 9010, which I'm using for a 120 gallon I just finished cycling. I would appreciate some feedback on my questions.

1)If the skimmer over-foams, the sealed cup ensures the skimmate stays within the skimmer, but with the extractor what keeps it from draining the sump and causing a problem should "overfoaming" occur?
2)The 9010 skims much better when the neck is clean, but with the extractor one of the benefits is to go longer between maintenance...will this kill some of the added benefit since there will be longer gaps between cleanings and thus dried skimmate on the tube for longer periods?
3)The reactor isn't cheap for what it is, and I could get the 9410 for just 200$ more...would that make more sense or will the 9010 with reactor be adequate for a 120 gallon (planning medium fish stocking with lots of LPS corals)
Thank You,
Dave

 

[rvitko]

You would have the hose drain into a bucket, once the bucket fills up so the drain hose is submerged, skimming stops, the backpressure breaks the foam column.

You still want to clean the extractor weekly for optimum results.

The 9410 is a stronger skimmer, the 9410 can also be boosted by the foam extractor. The foam extractor lets you run more air on either model. I personally think in the majority of cases a stock 9010 is sufficient for a 120 and a stock 9410 should definitely be enough.

 

[drdavethedude]

Hi Roger,
Just a couple follow-up questions.

Does the bucket have to be of a minimal height?...I'm thinking that if the container is low/small there won't be enough back-pressure to stop the skimming...am I right? What is the minimal height?

If the extractor needs weekly cleaning anyways, doesn't that then defeat the benefit of draining into a bucket? I'm thinking a bucket of skimmate in a week is pretty unlikely unless skimming very very wet, so perhaps a "juice" jug might be adequate?

In your experience would you say the 9010 PLUS foam extractor brings it pretty close in capacity to the 9410?

Thanks so much,
Dave

 

[rvitko]

That is a tough call, while they would be close, the needlewheel skimmer has smaller bubbles and is more aggressive. Short of a self cleaning cup or extractor, that same problem would apply to any skimmer, while you could go longer, after a week the production will be cut at least in half as the sludge will break down the foam column. Once the hose is submerged just about 1" the backpressure is sufficient to stop skimming. The 9015.140 cup is yet another option, it is about the same height and just catches everything in a bigger cup.

 

[drdavethedude]

Thanks Roger!

To make sure I'm understanding correctly:
1) So essentially the main benefit of the reactor is the ability to open the air screw further and this should produce greater quantity of skimmate, correct?

2) If you want the bucket to hold more skimmate before the back-pressure takes effect and stops skimming, can you shorten the hose so it doesn't extend as far into the bucket?...or will that reduce/eliminate the effect?

Thanks again,
Dave

 

[rvitko]

Yes and yes, you will essentially be able to run the air open almost all the way and use the full performance of the pump, on the downside you lose range of adjustment and skimming really wet will no longer be possible.

 

[drdavethedude]

Very helpful, thank you

 

[drdavethedude]

Hi Roger,

Something occured to me: I read in these forums that you feel the 9015/16 skims too dry, and I remember on a past thread (might have been some years back) you posted that Tunze was considering making a slightly shorter cup for a future rendition of the 9015/16 to make wetter skimming possible. What ever happened with that? I think that would be closest to what I'm looking for...higher capacity without extra complexity with buckets/hoses etc.

PS Has anyone ever "modded" the 9015 cup by trimming the top edge of the riser tube so it's about the height of the extractor?

Thanks
Dave

 

[drdavethedude]

whoops, double post

 

[rvitko]

In the end with the 9016 we ended up using a larger hose so the airflow increased just enough that the cup worked as is. It would be tricky but doable to trim the cup riser down. It is polycarbonate and cracks easily but a dremel tool with a guide or a nice laminate router I could imagine it would work.

 

[DiscusHeckel]

You would have the hose drain into a bucket, once the bucket fills up so the drain hose is submerged, skimming stops, the backpressure breaks the foam column.

You still want to clean the extractor weekly for optimum results.

The 9410 is a stronger skimmer, the 9410 can also be boosted by the foam extractor. The foam extractor lets you run more air on either model. I personally think in the majority of cases a stock 9010 is sufficient for a 120 and a stock 9410 should definitely be enough.

Hi Roger,

I have found this old thread and have a question about a point you made.

I would like to know how the foam extractor lets me run more air when used on 9410? I have looked at its pictures and cannot see any holes for air to be drawn into the simmer's cup like in sum skimmer cup lids.

Can you please elaborate?

Thanks

 

[rvitko]

Instead of having to partially restrict the air flow to the pump, you can run it open 100%, generally a 9410 or 9011 was run with the air restricted to about 60-75% of maximum capacity.

 

[patchesj]

I run my 9011 with foam extractor and air wide open. I skim on the wet side, but this is on a loaded 54g tank so adjusting for dry skimming is a bit difficult (slightly oversized skimmer for tank).