Waterfall Turf Algea Filter: CHEAP and EASY to build

[Rngrdave]

Santamonica has been banned as I still talk to him on another message board... `However if bans are going to be handed out then I can think of a few others who more than deserve to be canned for absolutely derailing this thread. This simply reaffirms why I don't post more than I do around here. There are 18 pages to this thread and most of them are by Tang Salad and SM arguing pointlessly over the metaphysics of reef keeping. Ridiculous. You could cut this thread down to 6 pages of actual useful information...

Either way I've had a 72 gallon reef set up for 8 years and I run just about every form of filtration there is. I dose carbon (but not vodka because I find that to be horse crap), ozone, UV, iron, iodide and several nutrients and minerals. With an MSX skimmer, wet/dry, live rock and DSB in the fuge the tank runs very well and stays clean.

I do have a phosphate problem and so I added an ATS to see if it would help. I've had it set up for 3 days and am taking pictures of progress and regular water tests. It may take a while before I can show what progress if any that this tank exhibits but when I do have some results, I will surely share them. I have made no changes to this tank in about 3 months when I last upgraded my skimmer... so I'm reasonable certain that any changes that occur can be attributed to the addition of an ATS...

/shakes head and walks away...

 

[UrbanSage]

What he is doing is similar to making a new pill for headaches but claiming it is the complete solution to pain.

While everyone thinks the pill is great for headaches and keeps stating this the only thing that is focused on is everything but simple headaches.


Sorry, bad analogy.
The turf filter/scrubber is not a new idea. I have no objection to letting him claim he redesigned it but it is unlikely to change much from earlier versions as far as overall impact to the display tank.

This being said doesn't mean it doesn't work. I 100% promote the use of ATS or refugiums and use them myself. (Not the ATS).

But they will not replace skimmers, carbon, breathing, eating, sleeping or cure cancer.

They are an amazing supplement though and I absolutely wish SM had refrained from making his bold statements because he was absolutely doing the right thing as long as he didn't talk about it

 

[Rngrdave]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13331928#post13331928 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by UrbanSage

But they will not replace skimmers, carbon, breathing, eating, sleeping or cure cancer.

They are an amazing supplement though and I absolutely wish SM had refrained from making his bold statements because he was absolutely doing the right thing as long as he didn't talk about it

I completely agree with you. IMO, this is a point I made earlier as well... I disagree with how SM pushed the ATS as the end-all to tank filtration... but others retaliated out of a sense of pride, trying to shoot him down.

If this thread still survives I'll post results if and when I see them... But if it doesn't then I have plenty of other message boards who are willing to listen.

 

[Michael]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13331943#post13331943 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Rngrdave
I completely agree with you. IMO, this is a point I made earlier as well... I disagree with how SM pushed the ATS as the end-all to tank filtration... but others retaliated out of a sense of pride, trying to shoot him down.

If this thread still survives I'll post results if and when I see them... But if it doesn't then I have plenty of other message boards who are willing to listen.

theres no reason why this thread wont survive if the scrubber is debated, now SM has been banished there should be no arguing, so go ahead and post your results, i for 1 will be looking forward to seeing them

 

[Tang Salad]

Well I am very sorry that my opinions have been so widely misinterpreted. I never intended to imply (and I never outright claimed) that TAS are useless, dangerous or bad. They just are not as useful as a skimmer. SM claimed they are better than skimmers and make "skimmers unnecessary" and can replace all other filtration methods; it was with these points that I disagreed. And I still do.

As for the personal attacks, please read more carefully. I criticized SM's claims, at times harshly. ..and if I was too harsh, then I'm sorry. But remember that SM was the person to accuse others of having financial interests in attacking 'his' method. SM was the person to suggest others ignore us (because we didn't agree with him). SM was also the person to PM others asking them to help him get us banned. Instead of responding to criticisms, SM chose to attack the criticizers.

For the last couple pages we've been trying to progress this thread past where it stalled earlier. We've posted some good background information on TAS. People with lots of TAS experience have chimed in. The topic is still open; let's try to keep it moving forward.

 

[Tang Salad]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13330035#post13330035 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by miwoodar

BTW - I am a huge proponent of carbon dosing (vodka, vinegar, sugar). I feel your pain. People *very* often doubt that it works. However, I KNOW it does.

Me too! I personally feel that carb/bac is the greatest development since protein skimming. But maybe we shouldn't open that can of worms here in this thread.

 

[Tang Salad]

Here's a page on industrial-scale TASs.

 

[Tang Salad]

This page has some great discussion on TASs in reef aquaria. Note that it's from the early 90s.

 

[One Dumm Hikk]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13331928#post13331928 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by UrbanSage

They are an amazing supplement though and I absolutely wish SM had refrained from making his bold statements because he was absolutely doing the right thing as long as he didn't talk about it

To be totally honest, I do too. All of my comments have been about his initial claim of an ATS being a catch-all filtration method. When you make bold claims like that, it tends to draw away from what your goal is and discredits you before you even get started.

Trying it and posting results is a good thing. I have always commended him for that. It's just the initial claims that I objected to.

 

[Michael]

its not just here the scrubber is getting some critisism, ive seen his scrubber thread elsewhere and some guys are questioning it there also, its bound to happen as debate always has 2 sides, but basically if you run a berlin system with skimmer and live rock etc and you can keep control of parameters then im sure the scrubber isnt nessassary, if you have a refugium the same, the only thing that concerns me about the scrubber is the look of it, where do you put it, im sure it could be an eye sore, then again it has its merits and im sure if you actually went for it, it could be hidden somewhere,i will read these links tang salad, thanks for posting them, another view again and more info so the thread continues in good spirit

 

[Michael]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13332141#post13332141 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
. But maybe we shouldn't open that can of worms here in this thread.

:lol:

 

[miwoodar]

OK - so I just perused the thread in it's entirety. I found one claim of 50ppm nitrate being reduced to 35ppm nitrate. Phosphate numbers were not reviewed. The brands of the test kits were not identified. It was also not stated whether or not any other changes were made to the tank. Only a scant summary of husbandry or equipment was included. Water changes? Feeding changes? Equipment cleanings? 50-35 is, at best, anedoctal. At worst, it could be misleading if all other variables were not held constant (this is sooo hard to do though even under ideal settings).

Rngrdave - you set up a hybrid SM system wherein you added a TS to your existing equipment. IIRC, 0.8ppm phosphates (my son, what in the world have you been doing to get a phosphate reading of 0.8?) and 20 ppm nitrates. Have you seen any significant drops? Test kits used? Did you hold everything else constant? Water changes? Major skimmer cleanings? Detritis removal? What traditional methods have you tried in the past that have failed?

 

[salty joe]

Hey InlandAqua, Hope you can time to popst pics of SPS tank with algae filtration & no skimmer.

 

[vitz]

If I get the gist of that, you are saying that because algae grows there is waste in the water which should be dealt with at the source. With that logic, skimmers are not a good idea because there is waste in the water which should be dealt with at the source. The source is fishfood. Waste has to be dealt with one way or another. Or am I missing something?

any algal 'scrubbing device' is simply relocating a problem indicator to a more localized are of a system for easier removal-it's really doing NOTHING to adress the mistakes being made in the husbandry of said system

Same could be said of a skimmer or any other export method.

your 'logic' is not mine, nor is it correct

i never said that removal means should not be used simply because a source is present-that would be plain stupid

skimmers remove wastes only, scrubbers also add wastes

water changes remove only, chemical ab/adsorption media remove only (more or less-some carbons can leach PO4 out into the water column)

i myself use 'algae scrubbing' of a sort via removal of the 'incidental' various algaes that grow along the walls of my sump- though i consider this a very very minor part of my nutrient removal, and make no special effort to cultivate them (their growth is relatively slow, in spite of the fact that i feed HEAVILY )

the only issue i ever contested were the claims of one method totally replacing others, and teh incorrect information given as to what each method does/how it works


having repeated myself for the umpteenth time, i'll also say this:

given what the various methods, and their relative EFFICIENCIES at how they do it, it makes all the sense in the world to me to use removal only (more efficient) methods FIRST, and as the mainstay of maintenance, than to use methods that are less efficient/waste producing

that doesn't mean any method is absolutely precluded from being used

i merely want to make sure the facts are straight, so the facts can be dealt with/discussed properly/cogently, as seems to have been the case as of late in this thread

i'm also NOT saying that it's impossible to run an sps tank with nothing but a turf scrubber, and never said such-it has turned out, however, that only a minority of folks have had long term success w/them, if only because they didn't adress the shortcoming of them method, or had an incomplete understanding of how the method acually works

 

[clekchau]

alot of information are misleading on rc, are you kidding me?

maybe there should be a 'misinformation police' similar to the tang police to chastize, criticize and eventually drive out people who are trying to find new ways to improve the hobby.

 

[mxett]

The reason I would like some further investigation and research in to ATS is to see if a cheap DIY design can actually keep a substantial reef.

The alternative filtration methods in this hobby are often outrageously overpriced, keeping many potential hobbiests away, and at times making it into an elitist persuit for the wealthy or obsessed.

If a DIY ATS could actually be the only filtration, demonstrating long term success, this would be a significant advancement in our hobby.

Unfortunately people of SM's passion and determination are rare, so maybe we will not find the answer to my question.

I realise his original statements were unproven. Surely experienced hobbiests can judge that for themselves. I for one was willing to overlook these claims to wait and see the results before throwing out my skimmer, carbon and fuge.

The results alone would have vindicated or condemned his claims, not the arguing that followed.

 

[miwoodar]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13334542#post13334542 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by clekchau
alot of information are misleading on rc, are you kidding me?

I believe there is indeed a ton of crap on any 'open' forum on the net. This is not limited to reefkeeping. I quit the hobby for a few years while I was working on the road. When I re-entered I read page after page after page on Wet Web Media. Then I discovered RC. I would rate the quality of the average post MUCH higher on Wet Web Media. It's staffed by people who have been around for many, many years (many as professional aquarists in one way or another). RC is great. At this point in the hobby I get a lot more out of it. The cutting edge is here and at the other 'open' forums. There is definitely a lot of bad info on these sites though and a lot of people who could help just don't bother to weigh in. I don't understand why they would bite their lip but they do. Maybe it's just easier? Maybe they don't want to get into the ruckus? I don't know. To a newbie though who might not have read a book yet and is at the point of throwing money at his/her new tank, buying truck loads magical potions (we all did that when we entered the hobby, right?), and adding regal angels to 30 gallon tanks that are two months old, RC can be a dangerous place to hang out.


*edit*
An example, I met a guy last year who had 7 tanks and a huge room full of equipment. He had been in the hobby for less than 12 months. After talking to him at length on many occasions, it became clear that had never read a book. He was on RC, and only RC, *all* of the time though. When he asked 'can I put a tang in my 125 reef' RC said yes without asking questions. He failed to mention that he already had well more than a dozen fish in the tank (I can't recall exactly how many). Eight of his fish ended up being tangs, four of were damsels, plus the others including a at least three dwarf angels. The tank had been set up for a measily four months and he did equipment revisions on nearly a weekly basis as he upgraded from his craigslist buys. Eventually a few people started giving him direct advice to go slower, including myself. He responded by saying it was OK because people on RC said it would be. Well, he lost everything and left the hobby in disgust. I don't know what to say. It's his fault for not doing his homework I guess. But I feel partly responsible for not pushing harder for him to chill out.

 

[danorth]

Idea, not sure if it has been mentioned.

What if in a typical sump with bubble baffles, the center piece where the water is to flow underneath was made of screen and had the algae grow on it. If the algae was dense enough it would work pretty close to a regular baffle in purpose.

 

[miwoodar]

It's a neat idea. How would you protect the lights from being submerged should the power go out?

 

[danorth]

Lights could be suspended on either side above the baffle.

Lights could be set with clamps on either side like regular home depot metal dome lights.

Or lights set on the rim spanning from front to back on both sides of the baffles.

The lights wouldn't be in the sump, just over.