Northside Reef
Premium Member
Thanks for the great post, that was good information from Randy.
Waterfall Turf Algea Filter: CHEAP and EASY to build
- Thread starter SantaMonica
- Start date
Thanks for the great post, that was good information from Randy.
GRREEF
Premium Member
Wow, I go away for a week and WWIII breaks out. SM may be gone, but I still think I'm going to incorporate a algae filter into my system. Its a rebuild so I'll keep everyone posted. I plan on keeping my skimmer, my phosban, my carbon and doing water changes. No miracles expected or sought.
keithqueef
New member
Update. Well i received my screen from inland 12x12 last friday. and since putting it into my system my trates have gone from red to orange to now dark yellow not quite orange, i lost my color card so i dunno numbers. the screen is dense with it.
miwoodar
Likey the bikey
I'm interested in turf filter updates too!
My update --- still no turf filter on my tank.
Still waiting for examples of tanks that I would want to emulate before I apply this to my system. My tank though - nitrates ND, phosphates ND (Salifert kit though so take this with a grain of salt), lots of food (3 to 5 large cubes per day), and no water changes since moving to the new tank a few weeks ago. Put a fresh dose of GFO (three tablespoons) in my reactor yesterday, and a fresh 1/2 cup of GAC in my mesh bag. Also restarted carbon dosing (VSV) at 0.75 ml/day.
My update --- still no turf filter on my tank.
Still waiting for examples of tanks that I would want to emulate before I apply this to my system. My tank though - nitrates ND, phosphates ND (Salifert kit though so take this with a grain of salt), lots of food (3 to 5 large cubes per day), and no water changes since moving to the new tank a few weeks ago. Put a fresh dose of GFO (three tablespoons) in my reactor yesterday, and a fresh 1/2 cup of GAC in my mesh bag. Also restarted carbon dosing (VSV) at 0.75 ml/day.
without giving too much away and upsetting the mooderators who have rightly suggested not talking about SM as hes no longer here, all i can say is, can you guys who are running the scrubber let us know what skimate your getting if you are still running a skimmeralong side, sorry its a bit bold this but i dont want to get into any trouble and this could be a factor,if you are running a skimmer can you clean the cup and post a pic of the amount of skimate after 3 days then 4 days i am genuinely interested in this, thanks for your patience
Day 1
Day 7
Day 9
Day 11- Growth seemed a little slow...rotated the light fixture closer to the screen to get more light. Much better.
Day 12
Day 14 -time to clean
Did a water test. Phosphates are still off the scale and so I can't report any findings until they start to come down. Nitrates have come down a little. I was originally reading 20ppm, maybe higher. Now the test is showing a little lighter. Hard to say exactly what it is but now it's 20ppm or less.
Still using an MSX 160 skimmer. Haven't really noticed a change in the amount of skimmate. Haven't cleaned the cup at all and it is really caking up with detritus. I still empty the cup about once a week. Will post results if that changes.
Still using ozone, UV, DSB and macros in fuge and wet/dry filter. Don't plan on getting rid of any of these. Supposedly if you are using an ATF as your sole source of filtration, you don't want to clean both sides. I went ahead and cleaned mine anyway because I am using so many other forms of filtration and am not relying on it exclusively.
I have noticed a slight decrease in the amount of algae haze that sticks to the front glass of the tank. I was having to remove the haze every 2 days but now it's more like 3... So some improvements in the amount of tank borne algae and some reduction in nitrates so far.
I noticed that when I cleaned the algae scrubber, my ORP dropped significantly. It normally stays around 360mv but dropped down to 316mv when I cleaned it. It took the ozone generator a little longer than usual to bring the ORP back up. It seems like the ozone generator is having to work a little harder than normal. So something in the system is lowering the ORP. Could just be the chlorophyll released in the water from all the cleaning...
Day 7
Day 9
Day 11- Growth seemed a little slow...rotated the light fixture closer to the screen to get more light. Much better.
Day 12
Day 14 -time to clean
Did a water test. Phosphates are still off the scale and so I can't report any findings until they start to come down. Nitrates have come down a little. I was originally reading 20ppm, maybe higher. Now the test is showing a little lighter. Hard to say exactly what it is but now it's 20ppm or less.
Still using an MSX 160 skimmer. Haven't really noticed a change in the amount of skimmate. Haven't cleaned the cup at all and it is really caking up with detritus. I still empty the cup about once a week. Will post results if that changes.
Still using ozone, UV, DSB and macros in fuge and wet/dry filter. Don't plan on getting rid of any of these. Supposedly if you are using an ATF as your sole source of filtration, you don't want to clean both sides. I went ahead and cleaned mine anyway because I am using so many other forms of filtration and am not relying on it exclusively.
I have noticed a slight decrease in the amount of algae haze that sticks to the front glass of the tank. I was having to remove the haze every 2 days but now it's more like 3... So some improvements in the amount of tank borne algae and some reduction in nitrates so far.
I noticed that when I cleaned the algae scrubber, my ORP dropped significantly. It normally stays around 360mv but dropped down to 316mv when I cleaned it. It took the ozone generator a little longer than usual to bring the ORP back up. It seems like the ozone generator is having to work a little harder than normal. So something in the system is lowering the ORP. Could just be the chlorophyll released in the water from all the cleaning...
Last edited:
UrbanSage
New member
Running an algae filter will reduce the amount of skimmate you will collect.
You will get this result from a refugium and I am sure a turf filter.
This is because the turf removes components the skimmer will remove eventually.
You can apply the same logic in reverse.
Add a skimmer to a tank that has only been running with algae filtration, now your algae should grow less speedy.
Conclusion; they supplement each other great!
You will get this result from a refugium and I am sure a turf filter.
This is because the turf removes components the skimmer will remove eventually.
You can apply the same logic in reverse.
Add a skimmer to a tank that has only been running with algae filtration, now your algae should grow less speedy.
Conclusion; they supplement each other great!
really?, well i would agree normally but have evidence to say otherwise with this particular scrubber, as mentioned i have to be careful about my comments but would love to see actual skimate from reefers who use the scrubber and skimmer together, i get your point urbansage and think your comments are correct, but need a little more input from scrubber users, perhaps then i can confirm your views or i may have a suprise for you with the skimate quantity
Northside Reef
Premium Member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13390173#post13390173 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Michael
really?, well i would agree normally but have evidence to say otherwise with this particular scrubber, as mentioned i have to be careful about my comments but would love to see actual skimate from reefers who use the scrubber and skimmer together, i get your point urbansage and think your comments are correct, but need a little more input from scrubber users, perhaps then i can confirm your views or i may have a suprise for you with the skimate quantity
I would be surprised to find that the moderators are really censoring your opinions or your experiences using an ATS.
Please stop with the cloak and dagger stuff. SM was banned because of his actions not his opinions.
If you have something to say just say it.
Thanks.
Frank
yeah sorry about that frank, ok, what i am seeing elsewhere which is suprising is the skimate is actually increasing and nitrate readings are usually high, i am being cautious so not to start talking about SM, because hes gone, probably overreacting sorry about that, i am reading about this elsewhere and suprised by the actual readings concerning nitrate and the phisical skimate amounts, by the way the thread elsewhere says that a skimmer is not required if this system is used, then attitudes change, im being told now that skimming is ok with it, but the inital thread suggested it was not needed and the scrubber replaced everything, however so far it is worse with it and without the skimmer, and when the skimmer is added the skimate is horrendous, im try ing to mentally find out whats going on here with this "wonderful" system and think its not near as good as first thought, i was hoping the guys running the scrubber on here could post their skimate quantities to see if they are a close pattern to the others, then perhaps we can try to piece the whole results together to get a actual realistic idea about this whole thing, my gut instint is this could have merit but wonder if the scrubber is actually making the overall system worse for controlling unwanted nutrients, should i get to understand more about these results i could probably get a better idea of the scrubbers overal merits, however at present i belive its looking like crap and skimming without it looks better, and the basic refugium even better, so is this system actually as good as a lot of guys are suggesting, well unlikely, but id like some more info and need to get it without purposely talking about SM, hope you get my point here frank
Northside Reef
Premium Member
Thanks Michael, since I have not read the other posts you are referring to it was getting a little frustrating trying to decipher what you were getting at.
More skimate by adding an ATS seems odd, unless the turf algae is not staying confined to the screen, then I guess that would make sense that it would end up in the skimmer. Possibly the green tinge that Rngrdave is referring to?
Thanks for clarifying.
PS: If you could PM a link to this other discussion I would appreciate it.
More skimate by adding an ATS seems odd, unless the turf algae is not staying confined to the screen, then I guess that would make sense that it would end up in the skimmer. Possibly the green tinge that Rngrdave is referring to?
Thanks for clarifying.
PS: If you could PM a link to this other discussion I would appreciate it.
Last edited:
matt & pam
Member
Michael,
IMO, It would be premature to conclude whether your turf scrubber is effective or not in just a few weeks or month. Even though some pics have shown some type of algae, that is not similar to the algae on my scrubber that has been running for > 2 years. I am not able to scrape mine bare like some are showing. I ultimately added a skimmer, and the "look" of my tank is improving. I have a few acropora frags that are growing. Most success in my tank has been with some LPS (Caulastra), montipora and clams.
I'd be surprised if you could quantify anything by looking at skimmer production pre/post ATS, especially considering an immature ATS. It took my eco-wheel about 6 months before it was covered in turf. I would suggest letting your scrubber work for a while (6+ months) before you conclude whether it is helpful or not.
Matt
IMO, It would be premature to conclude whether your turf scrubber is effective or not in just a few weeks or month. Even though some pics have shown some type of algae, that is not similar to the algae on my scrubber that has been running for > 2 years. I am not able to scrape mine bare like some are showing. I ultimately added a skimmer, and the "look" of my tank is improving. I have a few acropora frags that are growing. Most success in my tank has been with some LPS (Caulastra), montipora and clams.
I'd be surprised if you could quantify anything by looking at skimmer production pre/post ATS, especially considering an immature ATS. It took my eco-wheel about 6 months before it was covered in turf. I would suggest letting your scrubber work for a while (6+ months) before you conclude whether it is helpful or not.
Matt
UrbanSage
New member
Well, my thoughts at the time of debate although kept to myself till now was that the algae filter traps food particles in the system as opposed to a skimmer that pulls it to a remote collection cup.
I don't see how a turf filter is anything but a filter sock sitting long enough to grow algae. (simplified).
My refugium on the other hand is crawling with life and has a balanced amount of critters to deal with the waste my skimmer doesn't pull.
If I overfeed I see an explosion in pods, if I don't feed for a week I see pod numbers adjusting.
A screen will not in my opinion have the same performance, as you keep having to interfere with nature by scraping it and the life living in it off.
Michael, that is interesting what you are finding. And I absolutely think relating experiences are the point of the web boards.
Are you saying that you ran skimmerless and when you turned the skimmer back on it surprised you that it has to work overtime?
If so I still think I would anticipate that result. And I will stick to my opinion that the turf filter may be a great addition to an already established skimmer/refugium/water change filter.
Interesting...
Interesting...
Here are some interesting technical points taken out of the current issues of Advanced Aquarist:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2
"Greater than 97% of the organic matter in the oceans is in the form of DOC"
"The majority of the DOC in the oceans is consumed over a time span on the order of hours-to-weeks."
"The generally accepted value of deep ocean TOC (DOC in this instance) ranges from 0.45 - 0.60 ppm, a number that appears to be insensitive to collection location. On reefs, however, the DOC (and TOC) value is considerably higher. Even with this point noted, the values of DOC on reefs from the South Pacific to Japan to the Caribbean to the Red Sea are remarkably consistent in their range: 0.7 - 1.6 ppm"
"Bacteria are a critical component in the food web of the reef, as they occupy the role of 'middle man' in the transfer of energy from the source (sunlight) to the consumers on the reef"
"sponges are some of the most prolific repositories of marine bacteria. In fact, some sponges have been studied as effective bioremediation agents in marine aquaculture as a consequence of their exceptional ability to absorb TOC"
"Where does the DOC go ... studies suggest that it is rapidly consumed by bacteria that live in and on the coral itself and not by bacteria present in the water column. Shutting down these endogenous bacteria by antibiotic treatment abolished DOC uptake."
"In total, these data unequivocally demonstrate that the [skimmer] is not required to deplete the aquarium water of TOC. Apparently, naturally biological processes are sufficient in and of themselves to return the post-feeding TOC levels to their pre-feeding values after about 4 hrs or so ... Clearly the skimmer is doing something, given the copious residue accumulated in the collection cup at the end of the week. Perhaps, however, the residue removed by the skimmer is only a rather small, even inconsequential, portion of the entire TOC load that develops in the aquarium water over the course of a week."
Interesting...
Here are some interesting technical points taken out of the current issues of Advanced Aquarist:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2
"Greater than 97% of the organic matter in the oceans is in the form of DOC"
"The majority of the DOC in the oceans is consumed over a time span on the order of hours-to-weeks."
"The generally accepted value of deep ocean TOC (DOC in this instance) ranges from 0.45 - 0.60 ppm, a number that appears to be insensitive to collection location. On reefs, however, the DOC (and TOC) value is considerably higher. Even with this point noted, the values of DOC on reefs from the South Pacific to Japan to the Caribbean to the Red Sea are remarkably consistent in their range: 0.7 - 1.6 ppm"
"Bacteria are a critical component in the food web of the reef, as they occupy the role of 'middle man' in the transfer of energy from the source (sunlight) to the consumers on the reef"
"sponges are some of the most prolific repositories of marine bacteria. In fact, some sponges have been studied as effective bioremediation agents in marine aquaculture as a consequence of their exceptional ability to absorb TOC"
"Where does the DOC go ... studies suggest that it is rapidly consumed by bacteria that live in and on the coral itself and not by bacteria present in the water column. Shutting down these endogenous bacteria by antibiotic treatment abolished DOC uptake."
"In total, these data unequivocally demonstrate that the [skimmer] is not required to deplete the aquarium water of TOC. Apparently, naturally biological processes are sufficient in and of themselves to return the post-feeding TOC levels to their pre-feeding values after about 4 hrs or so ... Clearly the skimmer is doing something, given the copious residue accumulated in the collection cup at the end of the week. Perhaps, however, the residue removed by the skimmer is only a rather small, even inconsequential, portion of the entire TOC load that develops in the aquarium water over the course of a week."
Similar threads
