My setup.

[Vannpytt]

I'd like to run some ideas by you as I'm starting a 190G (720L) tank with 80G (300L ish) sump. I'm going to make the scrubber in acrylics with overflow feeding through 50mm PVC. Should be sufficient flow, havn't measured yet.

I'm planning on running 2x 18W 90cm tubes full spectrum 3000k on each side with a W:85cm H:40cm. I will have 4 surfaces and 4 light tubes. In total, the surface will be 85cm*40cm*4= total 1,36 m^2. The lighttubes will be placed 5cm away from scrubber surface with a thin acrylic glass to protect from corrosion and moisture. Would this work?

| = scrubber surface
L = light tubes
R = possible reflector
O = drain to sump

(from top)
|L||L|
|L||L|
|L||L|
|L||L|

(from side, obviously the whole side coverd in reflector material)
||||||||||||||||
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
||||||||||||||||
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
||||||||||||||||
---------------------O

(from front)
R|R||R|R
R|L||L|R
R|R||R|R
R|L||L|R
R|R||R|R
O---------O

Best regards

Henrik

[SantaMonica]

Your light power is too little, and your screens are too large.

18W tubes? Seems like a very low power bulb for 36 inches long. You should be using T8's... the kind in overhead lighting. Dirt cheap, and 30 watts for 36 inches long.

But back to your design... it's way underpowered. You are proposing 4 bulbs of 18 watts each = 72 watts for 270 gal. And worse, the screen will be 40cm (15 inches) high, with only two bulbs per side; this is not enough bulb coverage (much of the screen will be too far away from the bulbs).

Start with your gallons... let's assume that you will have living stuff in your sump. So when you count the sump, you have 270 gal. So for high filtering you need 270 total watts. For medium filtering you need 135 watts.

When using T5's or T8's, you want a bulb every 10 cm or so max, preferable closer. So you want 4 bulbs per side, not 2. This will give you 8 bulbs at 30 watts each = 240 watts. Perfect.

However I think your screens are too big. 270 gal needs 270 square inches (1688 square cm) with light on both sides. Divided by 2 screens, each screen needs to be 135 square inches (844 square cm), with light on both sides (or two sides separated, like yours). 135 square inches can be 10 X 14 inches (25 X 36 cm), which would fit into a sump. Or you could make it long and narrow, which is better: Best performance (although harder to build) for you would be two screens that are each 33 inches (85cm) like you planned, but only 5 inches (13 cm) tall. This is the same height as my acrylic design. This would require 33 X 2 X 35gph = 2310 gph (8778 lph) flow for both screens, which processes a lot more water than a taller design. Also it fits the bulb length perfectly; You still put 4 per side, but you stick them together with almost no space between them.

[Vannpytt]

Yeah, I already assumed that part, and figured it out last night. (T5/8's are not cheap in Norway however) Could you advice where to get such a light setup online? No one wants to ship int.

Second, the flow is comming from overflow drain, 2x50mm. This would not be sufficient to feed 8,7k l/h. More like 6k l/h. I'm not going to have anything living in the sump though, so I'm going for something along the lines of this:

2x W:50cm H: 20cm = 1000cm^2 (screen + light for each drain)
3x T5 30watts on each side (6x in total) = 180 Watts
2x 700 US gallons = 2 650 liter /hour

Better?

[SantaMonica]

Well if you are going to use T5's (it looks like 24" T5's)... they HO ones put out 24 watts, not 30. So I'd use 8 instead of 6. Any local lighting website or store will have these bulbs. Very common.

For the drain:

Screen Width-----Gallons Per Hour (GPH)

1" 35
2" 70
3" 105
4" 140
5" 175
6" 210
7" 245
8" 280
9" 315
10" 350
11" 385
12" 420
13" 455
14" 490
15" 525
16" 560
17" 595
18" 630
19" 665
20" 700


If you are doing an overflow feed, the overflow will determine how much flow you have to work with. You have to start from there, and size your screen accordingly. The maximum flow you'll get to the screen will be what's going through your overflow now. This is easy to figure out by counting how many seconds it takes your overflow to fill a one-gallon jug:

60 seconds = 60 gph
30 seconds = 120 gph
15 seconds = 240 gph
10 seconds = 360 gph
8 seconds = 450 gph
5 seconds = 720 gph


Take this gph number that you end up with, and divide by 35, to get the number of inches wide the screen should be. For example, if your overflow was 240 gph, then divide this by 35 to get 6.8 (or just say 7) inches. So your screen should be 7 inches wide.

When finished, this is how you want your flow to look:

http://www.radio-media.com/fish/UserZennzzoOnMFK-05.jpg

[Vannpytt]

I've been reading ShanGo's fiberglass scrubber and found parts for it.

Going to run a long scrubber with 2 screens. Flow is not calculateed, but is more than enought. Total growth surface each side of the screen is 35cm*40cm=0,14 m2 (0,28m2)*2 scrubbers. Is it pointless to have a scrubber this overdimensioned? The point is to have 1 running while the other screen is cleaned. Total wattage is 18w*6 for each screen=108w, 54w on each side. (216w for both screens) Do I need anything else? Total water volume will be around 700L in DT and 250L in Sump. Planning a DSB in the scrubber with live rock or SeaChem matrix http://www.seachem.com/Products/product ... atrix.html (http://www.seachem.com/Products/product_pages/Matrix.html)

Each screen (2 sided):
35cm wide * 40cm deep plastic canvas lit by 3x18w PL-L on each side.

L=18w
M=Mesh
|=Acrylic





| | M | | M | |
| L | M | L | M | L |
| | M | | M | |
| L | M | | M | L |
| | M | | M | |
| L | M | L | M | L |
| | M | | M | |

[SantaMonica]

I think you forgot an "L" in your diagram. So, assuming the middle has three "L" instead of two, you would have a total of nine bulbs.

Your total volume is about 240 gal, since you will be having living things in your sump. So basic specs should be:

240 total square inches, lit on both sides
240 total watts for high filtering
120 total watts for medium filtering

Your total screen area is 432
Your total wattage is 162 (not 216)

Your setup would work, but since the bulbs are such tiny spots of light on such big screens (no part of the screen should be more that 4 inches (10cm) from a bulb), there would be a lot of vertical screen not being used. Horizontally is ok, since you have three bulbs across it. But vertically you have one bulb across 15 inches (38cm), so basically the top and bottom of the screens would not be used. So it would be better to cut the height in half. If, however, you need that height so that the screen will touch the water in the sump, then cut the width in half, and arrange the bulbs vertically so that all parts of the screen are within 10cm. There is no need having screen that is not within 10cm of a bulb; it will barely grow, and will just evaporate more.

[Vannpytt]

no idea what i was on. The bulbs should be 24w. I could also use the 36w bulbs.

Assuming I use the 24w and stack another 1 on each side to get them all in good range (total 4|4|4 =12 bulbs)=288w on the 2 screens.

Would it be any point to get the 36w instead of the 24w? Cost wise it's not alot of money.

[SantaMonica]

24 is better, although, it's always better to use more smaller bulbs. This spreads the light and keeps from cooking small spots. Bigger bulbs do put out more light, but you can't use it all because it cooks the spot. So you have to tone it down, but then the outside of those spots don't get enough. That's why T5HO linear bulbs are best; constant light from one end to the other.

So, the more you can divide up the wattage into more smaller bulbs, the better.

[Vannpytt]

T5HO would be my first choice, but believe it or not, we don't have alot of these things available for less than a fortune in Norway.

What would you recomend? I can use up to 75cm wide fixtures. Depth doesn't really matter. It's 230V up here.

[SantaMonica]

Wider the better.

[Vannpytt]

So the T5HO 24w*5 with 5cm between them should give:
Screen= 55cm*30cm
|=Acrylics (|=5cm)
L=T5HO 24w (240w)
S=Screen (255 Square Inch)



|L|S|L|
|L|S|L|
|L|S|L|
|L|S|L|
|L|S|L|
| |S| |


More or less optimal this time?

[SantaMonica]

Yes this would be excellent.

[Vannpytt]

Building this as standalone filter for a 1000L system, (720L DT) 39*3 on each side.
[attachment=2:zsk2fwse]Scrubber1.jpg[/attachment:zsk2fwse][attachment=1:zsk2fwse]Scrubber2.jpg[/attachment:zsk2fwse][attachment=0:zsk2fwse]Scrubber3.jpg[/attachment:zsk2fwse]

[SantaMonica]

Looks good.

[mikepao13]

Verry good design mate
what type of t5's are u using? 24inces?

did u think anything about the heat from the t5's? are you adding any fan(s)?

i have a friend who has a verry verry similar to yours but with a small / thin cooling fan (cheap one - pc like) installed on the light acrylic

[Vannpytt]

36" with clipon reflectors for each. I'm obviously also adding electronic Osram ballasts and will consider the heat and adding of a fan when I see how warm it actually turns out. In norway during winter (wich is like 11 out of 12 months ;) ) the added heat would be usefull in the livingroom where the tank is, so I will be using ventilation system where the sump/scrubber will be standing. If this is not enought, adding computerfans to the t5's should be an easy fix. Starting the build on monday. Will post pics.

[rygh]

Just a note that it may be tricky to get the flow even across a 32" long pipe.
I had trouble at 22". And others seem to as well.
Suggest bringing water in at both ends, or from a T in the middle.
See other recent threads on that.

[SantaMonica]

Just keep a narrow 1/8: slot. I've made several and they all flow evenly on the first try. Of course, I'm now using a mini table saw to cut a straight line, so that helps.

[Vannpytt]

yes, its beeing fed from 2x32mm overflow standpipes with ballvalves on both to bypass when cleaning. The T feed could be considerd, but i'm not adding anything else to my sump at this point so it would just be better to go with the original plan. I'm using 4x Tunze Turbelle Stream2 to circulate the water so the added return flow is not really neccesary to circulate the water futher. The return is a 40mm PVC tube, where I'm adding a Y to send the wather back into the DT.

I did have a thought tho. My current design is going to be running straight into the sump so its not a closed acryllic box. If I was to seal the bottom and make outlets later on, would it be usefull to have small durso design pipes inside the acrylic box to make the flow silent?

Mine is "silent" now, but far from unhearable.

[Vannpytt]

Here it is, missing the 25mm slot pipe. (3mm cut slot for 2 layers or just for single layer?)

The pictures is a hassle to shrink. Go here to lookie and comment in this thread please.

http://www.saltvannsforum.no/forum/show ... post145031 (http://www.saltvannsforum.no/forum/showthread.php?p=145031#post145031)

[SantaMonica]

Needs a password.

[sklywag]

Whoa! Not in Kansas anymore Toto.

[Vannpytt]

Here it is. 5cm between each tube, 4-5cm to the mesh from each tube 6x39w T5HO divided as 3 on each side. ~3,5k lumen each tube. Osram reactors, notice the grounding for safety. Waterreistant tubeholders silicond to make them even more safe. Basically these could lay in water without taking harm for a while.

Mesh will be as long as needed to reach the water in the sump. Will be fed from 2x 32mm overflow durso standpipes in my DT. Using a Deltec HLP5250 as return. Hope it returns enought water. The sump will be 250L, the DT 720. Using the Tunze TS48 kit, moving from 12k-52k l/h + a wavebox.

The mesh is 90cm long and 20cm wide.
[attachment=0:rrdanjjo]pic3.jpg[/attachment:rrdanjjo][attachment=1:rrdanjjo]pic2.jpg[/attachment:rrdanjjo][attachment=2:rrdanjjo]pic1.jpg[/attachment:rrdanjjo]

[Vannpytt]

Continued[attachment=0:t3ghmqsl]pic4.jpg[/attachment:t3ghmqsl]

[SantaMonica]

Looks great. Nice and narrow. Get yourself a blow-out-bulb so you can spray down the inside of the windows when needed...

http://www.tools-plus.com/makita-765009-6.html

[Vannpytt]

So for the slot 1/8th inch for 2 layers?

[SantaMonica]

3/16 and widen if needed. Double layers need a tighter fit.

[Vannpytt]

From drawing to reality. It's up. there is another light fixture making the sandwich. 6x39wT5HO. If this doesn't work I'm going to cry. The plumbing was hell :roll:

[SantaMonica]

Boy will it work :)

[Vannpytt]

Can't really explain this.

Water started circulating 2,5 days ago (with scrubber at 50% power) 22kg fresh lr to cure, 75kg baserock and no already cured rock. No filtration what so ever except for this. I have bearly no amonia, 0 nitritt and 0 nitrates. calcium looking decent along wiht pH and sg. There is already a slight growth on the screen.

WTF?

[SantaMonica]

Explain what

[inkidu]

First off nice setup. I have been thinking of a large ats myself.

If I am reading your last post right ??? you're wonder why you do or don't have much algae growth.

nutrient supply/bio-load = algae growth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bio-load

That system is large enough you might be able to throw in a rather large dead fish in it with no problem.(the algae growth might not be so noticeable then neither)

Not that I am recommending it just trying to make the point that your setup has great nutrient/bio-load removal capacity.

Been wondering about large systems like yours. It seems to me if you already run a large pump, my main hangup, then there might be some benefits to

such a large system i.e. less regular maintenance, large capacity for any fish deaths, possible beneficial algae growth/expansion properties.

There is of course the ? is there a real need for such an oversized setup but if you are willing to invest in the initial cost and the operating costs

than I say all the power to you and I hope it works out well.

Please keep posted of your results over time.

Side note/suggestion

There are some very high powered LED on ebay ( 100 or 50 watt) that might work quite well for the other side.

[Vannpytt]

During the initial startup of a new system with no filtration and fresh live rock, you are supposed to have a few weeks of curing, shit water quality and algae blooms. I have perfect water parameters and algaegrowth on the ats already. pretty green 1-2cm long thin ones for now. It's been 3 days. That's more than amazing........?

I have the other fixture with 3x 39w's and ill run them once i start loading the system. Been looking into LED's, but i dont want to test. i just want filtration and i go big so i can load heavy. hopefully!

ohh, and i run very heavy circulation, and just enought return to feed the scrubber decent. I dont use it for filtration. i got the tunze big wavebox and 4x turbelle stream 6105. i got the deltec hlp 5250 return, maxing at 6k lph, probably more like 5k with 1,5m head loss.

[rygh]

Well, seems like you have an algae bloom - exactly where you want it, on the screen.

I think what you see matches what we would expect.
A big system like that can easily stay ahead of what is rotting in your live rock.
So no cycle ever.

[Vannpytt]

Very facinating to see that it growns better than my previous bucketsetup (by far) and the flow and acryllic lightprotection is really worth the space as I can put out as much flow as I 'want' and it will still run over the screen at some point. Since it's feed from both sides, it really is evenly spready. Will be adding fishes tonight if the water clears up enought.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyoPl3RuKpA

[Vannpytt]

Just to rub it into skimmers. 6 days since water was filled up, day 2 of livestock. Unfortunantly my coral beauty didnt make it into this. Died during the night of stress or a beating from one of the other 3 angels.

[SantaMonica]

Looks great. I myself have high pH most of the time... 8.7 or so.

[Vannpytt]

Everythign seems to be happy still. I flushed off the screen today after 7 days. It was some spots with loooooooong green hair algae, most of it was short short and just covering the plastics. Guess it will take a few weeks before it is in full effect and also, it has just been a day with bioload.

[Vannpytt]

Amonia 0
Nitrite 0
Nitrate 0
Phosphate 0

Week 2 growth. It's really stuck, really long, and really thin. For reference, this screen is 90cm wide, 35cm deep, (only 85cm*25cm) is intended to filter where the light is strong. It's equally green on both sides. Still have some algae in the aquarium on stones since startup, but recon these will die off pretty soon?[attachment=0:1imnk2or]small1-4.jpg[/attachment:1imnk2or]

[SantaMonica]

More flow will help the yellow turn green. If you can't do more flow, add some Kent's Iron+Manganese (per instructions) until it starts turning green. Three full cleanings should have the display looking better.

[Vannpytt]

I can probably do a bit more flow, but as it looks in real life, it's alot greener than on this picture. It's light green and dark green outside the lights. It's not a hard bioload on the filter yet, 10 small fishes and I got 110 kg rock.

[Vannpytt]

I'm experiencing massive amounts of live particles in my water. When the lights go out, and I turn on a flashlight, I can see with my bare eyes 1-3mm long shrimplike creatures swimming in the water, jumping on the stones. It's amazing, while the water is so clear, there are still so much life. I'm experiencing massive chritical comments from the local forums claiming I'm destined to fail etc.

I still have no values measurable of ammonia, nitrite, nitrate nor phosphate. The pH is fine aswell as the salinity. The algae growth that came initially is slower, and I added 2 lawnmovers to take care of the rest. Coraline is spreading on the live rocks, I added a Sun Coral who seems to be happy, aswell as some Zoa.

[SantaMonica]

Good to hear. It's clear that the local forum folks don't understand how the ocean operates. They probably still think that the sandy shores are what "skim'" the ocean, when in fact anybody who has studied oceanography or marine biology at all knows that it's the algae which does ALL the filtering, and feeding, in the oceans.

[Vannpytt]

I'm currently discussing with a "Molecular biologist". He claims so many strange things, I'm starting to belive he is promoting scrubbers for a commercial reason. The thread is a massive success tho.

[ShanGo]

I'm currently discussing with a "Molecular biologist". He claims so many strange things, I'm starting to belive he is promoting scrubbers for a commercial reason. The thread is a massive success tho.
Have you got the link

[Vannpytt]

It's in Norwegian, not any help to you people, so I'm on my own. I didn't even take biology at highschool, but so far, 23 pages, ca 230 posts in, there are still noone making valid points against me and the debate is turning into a war on me.

[SantaMonica]

It's the sellers of equiment... they use other usernames to pretend they are just "hobbiests". Tell them to go to Reefbase.org

[Vannpytt]

Well, at the moment we are discussing the limiting factors of trace elements in the water. We are down to stupid things like copper beeing the limiting factor as there is 1 one copper atom that is in the membrane surounding the cellulose and transfers energy from light during the fotosynthesis. Granted the debatant only said copper, while I had to figure out this myself, that there is indeed 1 copper atom for each membrane, containing roughly 100 cellulose cells as far as I could understand.

All this due to me not changing out water, just refilling with RO/DI and still not having problems with my water. As they didn't manage to establish that it was needed for exporting anything (or thinning out in decent quantities) they are trying to make it seem like the fish are swimming in fishpoop and fishpee as if fishes was hygenical. These creatures eat poop by mistake, and spit it out. They pee constantly. Aslong as the water is not toxic, they have no problems with it.

Any advice on import and unhealthy buildups due to dosing balling + and the ion ballance or why it is not needed and if not, what is the limiting factors and what timeframes are we speaking about?

[SantaMonica]

The food that you feed has lots of copper, and tons of iron. And the ocean and lakes have more DOC than anything else. They don't even understand biology 101 if they dont' know that algae does ALL the filtering and feeding for the entire ocean. That's why it's call the primary producer of the world. Just search for "dissolved organics" in reefbase.

[SantaMonica]

By the way, notice that they are not proving to you that there are NOT dissolved organics in the ocean. They just BELIEVE that is how it is. And this is the OPPOSITE of how it really is. So tell them that they have to link you to studies which PROVE that there are NO dissolved organics in the oceans or lakes. They will fail. Here is more:

2009 research on skimmer removal of dissolved organics:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2

"The skimmer pulls out all of the TOC that it is going to remove by the 50-minute mark. Beyond that time point, nothing much is happening and the TOC level doesn't change much.

"Thus, all skimmers tested remove around 20 - 30% of the TOC in the aquarium water, and that's it; 70 - 80% of the measurable TOC is left behind unperturbed by the skimming process. It may be possible to develop a rationalization for this unexpected behavior by referring back to Fig. 1. Perhaps only 20 - 30% of the organic species in the aquarium water meet the hydrophobic requirements for bubble capture, whereas the remaining 70-80%, for whatever reason, don't."

Here are some interesting 2008 technical points taken out of recent 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."

[SantaMonica]

This took one minute to find:

"It has been assumed that the bulk of DOC (and DON) has its fundamental origin in surface ocean waters via such processes as phytoplankton excretion, lysis and solubilization of living and detrital particulate organic matter (microplankters, fecal material, extracellular exudates, etc.) and "sloppy feeding" at various trophic levels"

page 3, first column:
http://www.tos.org/oceanography/issues/ ... ruffel.pdf (http://www.tos.org/oceanography/issues/issue_archive/issue_pdfs/1_1/1.1_williams_druffel.pdf)

[Eclip]

i have found that people that use skimmers are oblivious to what they actually do but use them coz it drags stinky stuff outta the water. By achieving something that is tangable most people feel convinced they are the reason for the water quality. and ther eis nothing wrong with DOC in teh water column it feeds a whole bunch of bacteria. Bio diversity and all that

[Vannpytt]

At night my Sun Coral, Orange Tubestrea is out with all its cups/tentacles, same as with my purple sand anemone. I've been target feeding it, but would this actually require separate feeding? Seeing all the particles in my water, do you think it can feed from that exclusivly? (i drop alot of frozen food in the water daily also tho, but when lights are on the coral is closed.

[Vannpytt]

These are 3 pictures I took before taking it down to harvest. I took out aprox 40-50g of dried algae from the two sides, but left alot for filtering. I've measured, and this scrubber is almost 2x the size of what I need. Should I wait a bit longer? The algae is really stuck on the screen.

Not sure if I mentioned this, but when I started my tank I had 50% of the tank stocked with Dry Baserock. I'm suspecting this to leech phosphates since there are GHA growing on them exclusivly. Would this be a problem? The sand is white, yet I do get a slight film on my glass.[attachment=0:z07i25zh]Scrubber6.jpg[/attachment:z07i25zh][attachment=1:z07i25zh]Scrubber5.jpg[/attachment:z07i25zh][attachment=2:z07i25zh]Scrubber4.jpg[/attachment:z07i25zh]

[SantaMonica]

If you let it grow until it almost fills up the box, you will get more coral food, but at some point your nutrients will start rising. It is a trade off.

The rock does not matter.

[Vannpytt]

http://www.seachem.com/Library/SeaGrams/Filtration.pdf

I don't really get what's with the ionic balance spoke of here etc. Could you explain why the scrubber removes the need for waterchanges more in depth?

[SantaMonica]

Read the faq first: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=68 (http://www.algaescrubber.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=68)

Next, most of the time when someone saya "ionic" balance, they mean cal, alk, mag and str. And it's true you need to replenish those somehow, since algae has nothing to do with them.

Other than that, all the other "stuff" that tanks need comes from algae, just like in the ocean. Algae is what put everything in the ocean that feeds everything, and corals and fish have adapted to eat it. So the more algae in your system (with no mechanical filters), the more the "balance" will be similar to the ocean.

[Vannpytt]

4th cleaning, still got growth on my rocks, I'm still fairly suspicious its from leeching phosphates. Got some growth on the glass now after 7 days alos, but nothing bad. Can't measure any bad values, but something is feeding the algae in my tank. Wich is the limiting factor for alage growth, phosphates or nitrogen? if my rockwork is leeching phosphates but I cannot measure nitrates nor phosphates, what is fueling it? If I remove phosphates by RowaPhos i.e I might end up killing my screen, wich is still not green fully, more like very light green/yellow. Growth is however wicked, and question is how much should I put, effortwise, into making it green?

[SantaMonica]

It's from the rocks.

If you can increase flow, do so. Otherwise just clean every 7 days and wait to see what happens.

[Vannpytt]

Today I measured with Tunze's High Sensitive phosphate testkit. It's nowhere close to coloration on it. Really, its 0.0. Probably somewhere along there is a 1, like 0,001 or something. My nitrates, ammonia and nitrites are also this low. It's still growing some on my baserock though. I adjusted lightperiod in the DT down a bit as I have quite intense LED's.

I'm wondering if there might be any silicates from when I glued the overflow/sump etc with aquarium silicone. I've used RO/DI water the whole time, the sand and most of the rocks where new so I don't really know what's fueling it, but it does seem it's dying off the last week. Should I worry about it dying off in the tank and take some kinda of action against it?

Yesterday was my 5th cleaning, 3,5th with proper algae on it. I also have massive amounts of flow, like 50-60k l/p in a 720L DT.

[Vannpytt]

Ohh, and a little update on my (sun coral) tubastrea. My non photosyntetic LPS who is dependent on target feeding of each head. Well, going on week 2 without target feeding, 3rd week in my aquarium. It's alot more active now then it ever was, even when I'm not feeding it. I have no mechanical filtration, only the scrubber and pumps. It's working.

[SantaMonica]

It's phosphate in the rocks; it's not your lights.

[Vannpytt]

Just a quick reply to share my stupidity.

The Deltec HLP was running 50% due to crap getting stuck in the engine since week 2. I noticed it today by sheer luck, while its soo obvious. It's now running ALOT more flow, and I guess the increase in circulation of water also will contribute immensly to the nutrient export. I also rearranged a couple of my rocks to improve flow patterns. All in all, with a bit of luck, my scrubber should be taking care of the algae i got left in my display in rather short time. This is a perfect scenario for me to actually see if its as good as I built it to be, while it sucks it hasn't run properly more than 2 out of 7 weeks.

[Vannpytt]

Nuisance alge reducing in my DT. Algae growing on my scrubber x2-3. Green as never before. How long should I expect it before the alge dies off? Lot's of detrius stuck in the hairs, and they are not really easy to manually remove either.

[SantaMonica]

3 to 20 screenfull's, depending on how much phosphate in your rocks.

[Vannpytt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnHTW46X25s

2 days overdue. Sucks, but I'll stick to it more on a schedule next time.

[SantaMonica]

Yep that's good green growth.

[Vannpytt]

Algae on the rocks turning light brown. can blow them off just by looking at the tank. Is this the "next step" when reducing excess nutrients? Also, some brown slime alga on the sand wich is new. I removed quite alot of growth last clean and today it was alot less than normal. Lot's of "empty" spots on the screen. I'm considering make a new set of screen, even more rought, and a new pipe with a wider slot to improve flow.

[SantaMonica]

Yes if the nuisance algae on the rocks went from green to brown, it's probably adjusting to less nutrients.

[Vannpytt]

Last week i drilled holes in the slot to make it "wider" and it does seem to run smoother. My tank is 2 meter, with return water outlet at the same side as the overflow, I did some testing with CaribiSea Purple Up wich gives the water a milky look when poured in. I could easily see that the flow from the other edge was not getting into the overflow as it should so I rearranged my pipe to let water flow out at the oposite side of the overflow. Hope it has some impact on my battle to grow coraline rather fast. Algae is loosing off the tank, and I'll post some before/after pictures in a short time. (Stupid videocamera charger lost due to my young son "cleaning")

[Vannpytt]

I'm experiencing less and less algae in the aquarium, added a few sps frags, but my millepora has withdrawn it's polyps. Any idea why? Nothing is measuring out bad, and it seems to be growing. Could it be a result from one of my angels?

Anyways, my sump where the wather comes from the scrubber is filled with foam ontop. (almost like skimming) meaning it's probably alot of protein in my water, and I got heavy growth on my glass all of a sudden. (Have to lcean once a day). I've also started to getting brown slime on sand and while thinner, brownish short hairs on the rock. (1-2cm at longest).

Master Algae, please explain? :) Scrubber is growing good, flow is good, so what is causing this?

Edit: This is 1 day after cleaning screen

[SantaMonica]

Will need before and after pics of screen, to be sure.

How much are you feeding?

Generally, sounds like you had a nutrient spike after cleaning the whole screen, so in your case it might be good to clean half at a time.

[Vannpytt]

2-3 cubes selfmix of aremia, brine, pellets, 1-2 sheets of nori, some plankton food and spirulina (just a small flake)

I'm upgrading my pumpin a few days to a Tunze Master with 8500 lph, from my current Deltec 5300lph. Seems the Iron is not turning it green as I would like, and I suspect that the algae simply cant grow enought due to lack of iron/flow. Would that make sense?

Ohh, and it is kinda funny. I ran a skimmer for a week (2-3 weeks back) and the effect was astonishing. I lost 3 large filterfeeders (worms) and my tube anemone faded away almost, then I turned the skimmer off, and everything was in much much better shape.

Could there be too little corals in my system to use the nutrition considering I don't get green algae?

[SantaMonica]

Your screen should be able to handle 10 times that amount of food. Weren't you getting thick green before?

[Vannpytt]

No, too thin yellow in my opinion. It was very yellow, then it was greenish yellow thin, now it's light green. Upgrading my pump will give me darker green I suspect. And yeah, I should be able to feed considerable amounts, but since it's not growing as I want it, and I don't want to clean the glass several times a day, I stick to this. Then again, it should only take a week to rectify the lack of flow when I get my new pump.

I suspect it won't only "double or triple" the export, but pretty much eat everything I can put in there. It will probably be excessive overkill. My system is almost designed to be 1,5 of the recomended size for high filtration standalone..

[Vannpytt]

New pump online. First cleaning tomorrow. Will be interesting to see how it is going to develop next cleaning with 1,5x more flow.

[Vannpytt]

Split up the screen yesterday to have 2 halves to clean each 5 days. The new growth is green, though I only used the new pump for a few days prior to cleaning. Will clean other half on friday if there is some algae on the new screen by then.

I blew off LOTS of detrius and dead algae from the rocks. Added 3-4 more corals (10-15 more sps next week) and measured my Nitrates with Salifert. Even on the low scale I'm unable to tell if there is anything. (Tried 2 kits now, nothing on either). My phosphates are also unmeasurable by the Merck Kit wich is supposed to be decent. Guess I'll only have to wait for the rest to die off. Hope it won't take too long time.

[SantaMonica]

If you can blow it off the rocks, it dead.

[Vannpytt]

Hi SM,

MY scrubber has now been running for some 3 months or so, growth hasn't been green untill now, but alot of yellow. My nitrates, phosphates and ammonium has always been undetectable. I'm using RO/DI water only, and don't feed that much. I get lots of detrius on/between rocks (Althought the flow should not be the issue) stuck in algae. They grow on my glass every day, or every other day, yet I still cannot measure anything in my water. It's also still slightly growing on rocks. It's dark brown, and green on my scrubber. All paramters are "perfect" so why do I still have algae in my tank? I don't have a thick layer of substrate, I don't have alot of load on my system.

Any suggestions as to how I can fix would be greatly appreciated. The good side is, I do have these water parameters, my fish are happy and very fat, my NPS seems to thrive, though some of my SPS retract their polyps. I had "low" alk for a while, but it's now around 11dKH.

I split my screen in half last clean, and thus only cleaned 1 side. The new side is already growing long green hairs. Cleaning again tomorrow, but I'm afraid of loosing all the filterpower.

[SantaMonica]

Is the top of your screen still like this:

http://www.algaescrubber.net/forums/download/file.php?id=982



I think it doing fine. Let's see some pics of the rocks.

[Vannpytt]

Cleaning today. The growth is thick green in some places, yet yellow from not cleaning it other places last time since i changed the pump. Hope the green will grow on the entire screen now. The flow is very much better.

No, it's not really like that. The screen is more coverd, and ALOT greener in some places, but yellow in other places. A sign that the flow is not even I guess.

[Vannpytt]

This is the flow at the bottom of the screen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVefsLOBBI4

Here is the aquarium

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrk9Z8xwm6g

How do I fix this?

[SantaMonica]

Wow you have a lot of phosphate in the rocks. Just keep on growing and cleaning the screen... will take several months...

[Vannpytt]

So basically, I should add a skimmer and GFO to cope with it even faster?

[SantaMonica]

If your scrubber is growing well, then neither one will help much. The gfo would slow the scrubber. And a skimmer would take out coral food.

If you want to "do something else to speed things up", then make a second temporary scrubber. I'd normally say use more light, but you can't add more bullbs on yours.

Mine took six months with one scrubber.

[Vannpytt]

If anything, I need to add more water to mine.

Hence I was thinking this:

If the growth doesn't turn green enought this week I'm going to add a pump in the middle like this:


->_________||__________<-
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And feed it from the top also, alternativly, put endcaps in the middle to increase flow and make 2 separate screens. A bit less area to grow on, but wastly increased flow. It's already a 8,3k lph rated return, so I don't see how I can increase this even more.

[Vannpytt]

Do you think this is a viable path, or should I remove the middle of the 3 lights? In the middle, "nothing" grows. Too much light, while the flow should be quite sufficient and the screen, more than rought enought.

[SantaMonica]

No don't remove the middle bulb. Do the flow first. And try some iron, or just feed more.

[Vannpytt]

I'll increase feeding even more. I got 12 pcs SPS in of various Acropora. I'll be posting pictures from when the lights are on. For now, I acclimated them during darkness and the polyps are out already. Hope my angelfish can stay away for a while. The Millepora types are awesome.

[Vannpytt]

I'm quite sure I got dinoflaggelates, not brown algae. This is easily a logical explanation for a loss of snails, and the turn from green algae -> brown slime in the DT. Guess it's time to siphon out some crap and turn off my lights. The nutrients in my tank is already not measurable so I'll feed as normal and let my scrubber run. (this also explains why my fish and snails don't clean up the tank, and why it hasn't died under very low nutrient levels as it's getting it's nutrients from the dead diatoms etc from my algae bloom.) This might actually be a bad sideeffect of not letting the tank run its course the "normal" way. The scrubber simply strangled all my intank algae too fast for anything to clean it ut, and this is the result.

On a sidenote, Dino are also toxic for SPS.

[SantaMonica]

You might be surprised to learn that the ocean is loaded with dino's.... not as much as diatoms, but a lot. All scrubbers start off with dino's the first few days.

[Vannpytt]

Not really. I'm aware, but that doesn't help the fact that I don't want them in my DT :) I also know, Dino's and Cyano doesn't come due to poor waterquality, but rather good quality.

[Vannpytt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLvnzxZi9EU

Cleaning after increasing flow and dividing the slot. Greener, thicker.

What I did:

I shut of lights for 3 days running only lighting for 4-6 hours a day last week. I added carbon, along with skimming. I blew of detrius and filterd out with foam. I increased pH with kalkwasser each day the lights on the scrubber was off. I raised dKH (Alk) with bicarbonate. The tank is almost rid of algae. I don't know wich factor helped. The polyps, zooas and such seem alot more stretched. Once I get confirmation the scrubber works as intended I'll remove the carbon and skimmer. My problem is not what I can measure in the water as all my tests and checks are perfect. It's what I cannot measure. I even tested oxygen, wich is toprange.

[SantaMonica]

I forgot that yours was the tank with lots of phosphate in the rocks. As long as algae is on the rocks... the phosphate is still coming out.

[Vannpytt]

Algae on my rocks are diminishing after I added the abovementioned methods. Why? When do I know the scrubber can handle my DT? I have like 10 fish, all small except an achilles wich is medium at best (10cm). I feed about 5-10 cubes a day with frozen food + pellets and spirulina blend.

For me its not the cost of salt or equipment that is stopping me from running a traditional method. I'm honestly interested in making this work for the ecosystem perspective, and because I'm certain it's better than traditional systems once tuned right. I spoke to both Mr Adey himself and alot of "famous" publicists about it, and I too read alot of reports and papers on oceans and ecosystems, even water chemistry etc.

Tell me what I'm missing, since my rocks are MASSIVLY much cleaner after the skimmer and carbon + kalkwasser pH increase + bicarbonate. I'll even do a WC for show.

[SantaMonica]

Since a scrubber pulls out so much phosphate from the water, more phosphate comes out of the rocks. The more phosphate that comes out of the rocks, the more algae grows on them (until the phosphate is gone). So it may look like when you add a scrubber, more algae appears on the rocks, but that's because phosphate is coming out of the rocks (for a while). Evenually it stops coming out, and coralline starts growing.

If you swap a scrubber for a skimmer, the phosphate stops coming out of the rocks, and starts going back into the rocks. Thus, growth on the rocks stops, and it looks like things are better because "there is no growth on the rocks". But after the rocks fill up, growth starts on the rocks again, permanently. That's where you are now.

[Vannpytt]

im running:

Scrubber, skimmer, 2 part dosing, carbon and UV. It's still running and growing better than before (the scrubber). The skimmer does not negate the algaes power to remove phosphates.

I shuld not even be close to my scrubbers potential in removing nitrogen and phosphates, so how come it's not able to do it's job? I must be missing something, since what is happening is not to be ignored.

[SantaMonica]

I shut of lights for 3 days running only lighting for 4-6 hours a day last week. I added carbon, along with skimming. I blew of detrius and filterd out with foam. I increased pH with kalkwasser each day the lights on the scrubber was off. I raised dKH (Alk) with bicarbonate. The tank is almost rid of algae. I don't know wich factor helped.

Shutting off lights for 3 days. That's going to remove/weaken any algae.

It's still simple: Phosphate is coming out of the rocks, and going into the scrubber. That's why you measure zero. You cannot remove phosphate from the rocks in one day. Mine took six months.

[Vannpytt]

Excellent, so the advice would be to reduce lighting period in my aquarium to give my scrubber a competitive advantage?

[SantaMonica]

No. Run as normal.

Scrubbers grow best, and filter most, at low nutrient levels. If you kill the algae in the display, those nutrients go into the water and cause the algae in scrubber to grow darker. Darker does not filter as much as lighter.

If you do want to do something, you can manually remove the algae in the display; this will not put more nutrients into the water.

[Vannpytt]

Actually no, your wrong, atleast from my observations. Friday was last clean (the video), and today I could notice water running uneven at the bottom of the screen. This due to the algae growing THICK and green. By reducing the light in my DT, the habitat becomes less favourable in the DT and better for the scrubber.

This is very very exciting for me. I removed the gac and skimmer again. No foam, or anything. I reduce light in my aquarium by 3 hours, and will see if the results are as I'm hoping for. I get a new shipment of SPS and LPS in a few weeks. By that time I hope things has settled.

I remember reading about someone getting cloudy water the instant the scrubber lights came on again. I get that too. Could anyone point me in that threads direction again, or did anyone find a solution? It only lasts for like 15 minutes or so, then it's clear again.

[Vannpytt]

Last thursday 23.12.2010: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXT-oDBnXxo
This sunday, 02.01.2011: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jioY1dI4rm8

[SantaMonica]

That's what you want.

[Vannpytt]

You are correct sir.

[anders moon]

THAT LOOKS GREAT :shock:

[Vannpytt]

Massive drops in Alkalinity.

How to counter? I use BiCarbonate already, but 1,5 t-spoon a day just seems alot?

[wmilas]

I dose 2 part from bulk reef supply. So the Alk part is for you. My tank always has used massive amounts (Lots of coral).

Take a 5 gallon salt bucket. Drill two holes in the top. One large enough for airline tubing, one just big enough so that you don't create a vacuum in the bucket. In a second bucket mark lines at 3 gallons and 4 gallons. Now use that second bucket, and a piece of 1/2" pvc pipe (as a stirrer) to mix up alk. First fill to 4 gallon line with RO/DI water, then add 2 cups per gallon soda ash (I bought a giant 4 cup measuring cup). Mix as you add. Dump into dosing bucket. Buy :

http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/store/pro ... inute.html (http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/store/products/pumps-and-plumbing/dosing-pumps-and-auto-top-off-systems/brs-2-part-doser-1-1-ml-per-minute.html)

Set pump on timer, dose 4 times a day. Its the easiest way to keep alk stable when its taken up out of proportion (from calcium). Trust me, I've tried it all. When you alk bucket gets low, mix and new 3 or 4 gallon batch (based on how much is left in the bucket) and dump it in. Process is very fast. Don't bother messing with those small 1 gallon jugs.

[SantaMonica]

When both of my scrubbers are full of green, I need to add about a tablespoon a day of baking soda. So I just do it one a week; add some tap water to the soda and pour it in the sump. pH drops for a while and comes back up. But I need lower pH because the limewater + scrubbers get the pH up to 8.8 sometimes.

[Vannpytt]

Yeah, I'm going to aquire alot of bicarbonate and calsiumchloride and make my own 2 part dosing once mag is stable at 1500. I upped it to 1400 the last days. I can see the corals enjoying it when i pour in limewater.

On a sidenote, since my scrubber started growing green, the polyps on the sps has been INSANE. During light off period (when light is on the scrubber) the polyps extend 5mm looking amazing.

Thanks for the advice on alk/cal part guys! I'll set it up.

[Vannpytt]

So, alkalinity is up, going to measure the use. Adey said that it's beeing depleted rapidly if not maintained. Mag is also up to 1450, need it to be even higher for max growth, tought cal won't increase, so I'm going to supersaturate my limewater with vinegar, but then I also have to skim to get rid of the extra bacetrial load for the carbon dosing?

The scrubber is growing massive long green hairs. Have to clean every 5 days due to the algae growing the whole box full in that short time. The SPS are growing from day to day, pink and purple algae eating up my baserock, and the alga fading away. Things are going the right way. The pH is not as high as I would like, 8,3 stable on salifert test, but I guess it's ok for now. Calcification would be better with more.

[SantaMonica]

Well a scrubber already adds lots of carbon to the water, so the additional amount from the vinegar may not be as bad as you think.

Calcification maxes at 8.4, so you are almost there.

[Vannpytt]

And there went my impeller on the Tunze already.

Back to the old lowflow Deltec. Going to reduce the pipe lenght quite a bit to get more flow on what is there.

[Vannpytt]

Small update, the tank is clean, the SPS are more than happy, a few of my Acros extend polyps all over the place, especially the milleporas, and the fish are fat. The Salifert nitrate test show <0.1 and the same with the Merck Phosphate test. Life is good. Skimmer is offline. Running carbon and doing a small waterchange every month to reduce the sulfate buildup when doing 2 part Randy's recipe. Going to take the carbon out also, just not yet. Had some startup problems with Acro's stressing out and RTN'ing eachother. Seems fine now. (Please let me upload larger pictures and I'll post SPS tank running scrubber only.)

[SantaMonica]

Good to hear. I think you can upload decent size pics here.

[Vannpytt]

I'll upload youtube video for reference instead.

SM, could you please advice on feeding? I have no algae in the aquarium, growing on the glass still, but aslong as there is light and surface there it will be hard to avoid it. I started feeding liquid blend soup of lots of different foods mixed in including coral food. The polyps extend almost instantly when I pour it in. I'm probably feeding waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to little for my scrubber, but I don't have that much fish, so should I still feed alot more? Can the water get too low on food?

[SantaMonica]

Need to know N and P

[Vannpytt]

N<0,2
P<0,1

Not measurable either.

[SantaMonica]

0.1 is high for phosphate. Post some screen pics before and after cleaning.

[Vannpytt]

Was supposed to be <0,01, not measurable on the Merck testkit. screens are good, fat and green, but still some yellow. Seems they got alot of growing left to do. Before my tank was rid of algae they grew more. Now, as the tank is clean as it could be without looking sterile they growth is less, while feeding is the same. I don't skim at all.

[Vannpytt]

bump.

I have no nitrates nor phosphates. The screengrowth is green, some yellow spots. Some of my SPS does still display the behaviour I said earlier. Should I feed wastly much more? I read an article saying that for aquarium water to be filled with as much organics as in the ocean I would have to feed 120gram of food daily. I'm nowhere close to that.

How do you rate flake/spirulina/pellets etc into cubes? More/Less nutrition each? What would YOU feed a 180gallon with 15 fish ranging from large dottybacks to medium tangs/angels? I got some 10-15 SPS colonies. They are not very happy and all water parameters are "perfect"

[SantaMonica]

The study I read said that a 100 gal reef would get 1 pound (450 grams) of food a day. You don't have enough algae in your system to filter enough for this (the ocean is 90 percent algae), so you are limited by how much algae you do have. Since your N and P are low, you can start doubling your feeding each month, until your nutrients start rising. I'm sure your fish have plenty of food, so your goal is you feed the corals. You can buy liquid coral food (like blended oysters), or you can blend your own. Lack of food is almost certainly your SPS problem.

The reduced nitrate and phosphate that scrubbers provide (like the ocean) causes less zoothanthellae in the coral, which causes it to make less carbohydrates from light. This is supposed to be offset by very heavy feeding (like the ocean), so as to provide the nitrogen needed for growth. But if you are not feeding much (because you are not used to doing it), the corals starve. You need to be feeding ten times the amount you were feeding. Growth will then be proportional to the feeding.

I'm currently feeding 48 ml/day; about 1/10 the amount in the ocean. I plan on doubling this soon.

Here is a cheap coral food chiller:
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1152 (http://www.algaescrubber.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1152)

Here is cheap and easy liquid coral food:

1 cup or small bottle/can of fresh oysters.
4 cups or bottles/cans of water.
1/4 teaspoon (NOT tablespoon) of Sodium Alginate (http://willpowder.com/sodiumAlginate.html). This will be about 1.2 ml

Blend for 5 minutes (this may overheat your blender).

Keep very cold (almost freezing), in a clear container so you can see if it separates.

If after a few days it separates, then put back into blender and add another 1/4 teaspoon and blend for a few seconds.

If it instead turns into a gel "block", then you put too much Sodium Alginate. Put back into blender and add another cup of water.

This makes about the same amount of food as a 32 ounce size of Oyster Feast ($65) for about $5.

Flakes/pellets/etc won't be any good for corals unless you blend them.

[Vannpytt]

I feed more than anyone I know around here. You are 100% correct according to what I read also. We just get thought that "don't feed to much" from the start, and we get a bit scared of doing it properly. My scrubber is growing nicly, so the issue is the decoloration of SPS. I can't find any good reason why it should be so. I guess you don't want me to run GAC at all either?

[SantaMonica]

What type of decoloration?... turning pale, or turning dark? Pale is from ultra low nutrients (not likely with scrubber), and dark is from higher nutrients (from a weak scrubber).

[Vannpytt]

pale, as in loosing pigmentation, or not coloring out as supposed in strong colors, wich is the same thing as paling out. They are not brown, not even close to dark.

[SantaMonica]

Undetectable nutrients, and light sps color, seems clear that more liquid coral food is needed, on a continuous basis, especially at night.

Double your feeding now, and start looking into feeding pumps.

[Vannpytt]

I got one channel free on my GroTech. Going to add a container with liquid foods. For now i'll decrease the food for fish and increase coral from 1ml, wich i suspect was very little, to 5-10 or is this way to much?

[SantaMonica]

It's all dependent on how strong your scrubber is. I'm dosing 48 ml/day of very thick stuff.

However, inscrease slowly, becuase the screen needs to be able to take out the extra nutrients faster than you are putting them in. I'd say increase by 1 ml/day, as long as the screen grows green, and as long as the N and P measure zero.

[Vannpytt]

Sure thing, but I still feel that the corals need alot more food. I'll go to 5ml, decrease pellets and flakes (yet still doing 5-10 cubes of mysis artemia etc).

Wich liquid coral food do you use?

Setting up a plankton culture and brine hatchery the comming month to feed live foods also.

[SantaMonica]

Blended oysters.

[Vannpytt]

Would this work:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_mussel

[SantaMonica]

I'm sure any seafood blend would work. I like oysters because they have a sort of sticky glue that keeps them suspended longer, although the Sodium Alginate is what really does it.

[Vannpytt]

Maximum picture allowed is 256KiB. My camera does 2-5 MB. Any chance of compromise?

Full tank. Lost some of the SPS. They witherd and died due too underfeeding (Really underfeeding). If SM is feeding his 100g 48ml soup every day, I'm doing 10-15, and I have about 180g of habitated water. There are virtually no phosphates or nitrates available in the system. The glass still gets algae growth (due to very much light), but there is nothing nuisance on the rocks, except for mass detrius, wich i also assume is some kind of food.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yocz_Ur3O60

My Scrubber after 7 days:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxAFDha41bw

Clean scren:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaEOAdEyecY

[SantaMonica]

Good growth and cleaning. With that growth you should be able to feed at least 30 ml/day. Don't forget I also throw in a whole dead fish each week (silverside), and feed some cubes just for fun too, on top of the noori.

Use PicResize.com to reduce pic size.

[Vannpytt]

Yeah, I'll increase to 10-20-25-30 next few days. I also feed a seastar for my harleqiunn shrimps once a week and Nori every day. The SPS seen has witherd, not enought Zooxanthelle due to low iron and low nutrition I believe. Started liquid feeding 10ml yesterday, and the polyps extend almost imediatly. The more I feed the more they extend. Fun!

[Vannpytt]

Probably not new to you SM, but here it is and it is detailing what I'm experiencing quite perfectly.

http://blog.fragd.it/2009/11/10/stn-and ... es-part-1/ (http://blog.fragd.it/2009/11/10/stn-and-the-real-issues-part-1/)

My only Softie is withdrawn 24/7, my tubastrea sun coral is almost dying, and the dustfeeders are not happy campers anymore (except for the insane amounts of sponges growing under my scrubber :D)

I have 480W LED and 8*39w T5HO. I need to feed WAST amounts more if I read this right.

[SantaMonica]

Like the articles says, RTN starts from the base/inside of the coral. This is because the inside gets less food particles than the outside branches which are sticking out into the flow/food. The bigger the coral and the more branches it has, the more this is true. So it's time to get some zooplankton into the water 24/7... as much as your scrubber can handle.

[Vannpytt]

Well, I was thinking of an agressive approach to this, but I think my scrubber will catch up relativly fast. Like I mentioned, I'm currently setting up my own Phyto breeder DIY (Will post piccys), but for now it's an emergency, so I'm feeding rather heavy (20ml soup of artemia, brine, mysis, amino, flakes wich seems heavy for us not used to really feed).

How many ml should my scrubber be able to handle?

[SantaMonica]

Depends how thick it is, and if it's continous or all at once. Mine is like a milk shake, and currently is one dose every 3 hours.

[Vannpytt]

Everything looking good. Acros recovering after some color loss, no algae growth in dt, although I get some brown film on the sand. Probably needs to adapt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Pcaj6K6kw

After adding iron at a schedule, I get 35cm long gha strains into the water below the scrubber. Amazing growth latly.

[Vannpytt]

My girlfriend lost 5 table spoons worth of pellets into the aquarium almost a week ago. Now I have algae in the aquarium, but nothing died, and I could not measure ammonia at any time.

I learnt 2 things.

Don't let girlfriend feed.
A scrubber saved my tank.

[itzrulez]

"Don't let girlfriend feed. "

thats a rule....
ehiuehoieuhoeiuh

[Vannpytt]

Tap water or RO/DI for water changes?

As tapwater in norway is very clean already, and I'm at 0 on phosphates and nitrates, no really, I'm at unmeasurable in my tank with no algae strains in it I wonder if I either have to dose both or either. (I got algae en mas on the scrubber).

I think this is too effective tbh. My scrubber is built for a heavy stocked 240 gallon system, yet I only have 200 gallon light stocked.

A few weeks ago I did my waterchange (for adding trace and balancing salt) with Tapwater instead of RO/DI and everything virtually set off growing. Everything else is the same, so I'm sure this must be related? That there is something in my tapwater that spurred the growth?

I've heard ppl claim various statements as the tank is reaching 1 year old, but I simply do not believe that. I've seen beaching of SPS ever since I got them, even with heavy liquid feeding.

So, what do you think forum?

[Ace25]

How much chlorine was in the tap water? How much heavy metals like copper, mercury, etc? There is a TON of nasty things in my tap water, a lot of it put in on purpose to make it "safe for human consumption" which in turn makes if very much NOT safe for a reef tank. Phosphates and Nitrates are 2 very small things out of thousands that are in tap water, and even if phosphates and nitrates are present, they are usually not in a high enough amount to cause any serious issues, it is all the other junk in the water that causes the issues. I am just talking about most municipal water in the US though, I have no idea how the water in Norway rates. Here in the states they send out a letter yearly telling you all the stuff that is in tap water, and it is very scary to read, even makes me wonder how it could be safe to drink (high levels of e.coli in my water, higher than EPA says is allowed, not sure how they get away with it).

[SantaMonica]

Tapwater for a reef is not a good idea, unless you start from scratch with frags to see how it goes.

[Vannpytt]

Tapwater for a reef is not a good idea, unless you start from scratch with frags to see how it goes.

I have lots of friends with more than decent reefs who use tapwater only, and with great success.

Anyhow, what else can cause this growth? It's not random, I'm quite sure.

[SantaMonica]

If there is no pest/poisen/temperature/lighting problem, then the sps bleaching is from lack of food, which can also be caused from lack of flow, since it's the flow that brings the food. Remember corals are used to food particles 24 hours a day, especially at night.

But you might switch to distilled water for a few months and see how it goes. Something may have gotten into your tap water.

I topped off with distilled for 4 years before finally getting an RODI.

[Vannpytt]

When I spoke to Adey he said he urged Reef HQ to keep up alk. Any idea how high it should be? I can see alot of improvement by raising it to 9+, contrary to other ulns (because they don't have enought food in there).

Whats your thoughts on the matter?

[SantaMonica]

No opinion. I just try to keep it above 10.

[Dallas reefer]

So what about 14+? I think I may have got a bad sailfert batch.

Everything looks good tho.

[Floyd R Turbo]

When either alk or cal gets too high, it will combine with the other and precipitate out of the tank (and that won't dissolve). I've read that 14 is OK for FO tanks but I wouldn't go higher than 11 for a reef. I keep mine at 9, calcium at 425, Mag around 1350, but higher is fine (mine shot up to 1575 after I overdosed, now it's down to 1500)

[Vannpytt]

Seems my SPS in general are very retracted and I'm wondering if anything is released to the water from the algae. I'm also getting diatoms or cyano on some of the rocks and sand. Time to switch bulbs on the scrubber? They should be around 11 months now, T5HO with electronic ballasts.

I still can't get decent poly extension like I've seen in many SPS tanks. My nitrates are still unmeasurable on salifert, same with the phosphates. I'm running my skimmer and some GAC on the side. The scrubber is growing green, there are massive amounts of sponges and filterfeeders in my sump, but the SPS seems to loose color and polyps and I cannot figure out what does it.

The tank is now 1 year old, very little nuisance algae left, growing great on the scrubber (wich is about 40gallons overdimensioned), the values seems on spot, yet the SPS are still not happy, and I have lots of biofilm on the glass after just a few days.

Why?

[Floyd R Turbo]

It's plastered all over the place that you need to change your lamps every 3 months. You are way overdue

[Vannpytt]

Not actually correct, since it even states T5 can go far longer in the FAQ. It doesn't explain everything though. The phosphates are 0, so are the nitrates. The growth is green, so the question is still valid.

[SantaMonica]

The faq says 3 months for all bulbs. No scrubber bulb can go 11 months, at all.

Growth on the glass and rocks is your indicator of nutrients, not the tests. Nutrients never get to the tests.

[Vannpytt]

Lucky I got spare set then. I'll change it immediately. How does this affect the bleaching of Corals due to low nutrients then? How do I get massive green growth on the scrubber while the bulbs are 11 months old?

[Floyd R Turbo]

you're using 39W T5HO, right? Are those 36" lamps? What K rating were you using? I read back through the thread but didn't see it (quick scan).

[SantaMonica]

It doesn't matter how much growth you get; it only matters which is the stronger nutrient sink... your screen or your display. Since your scrubber is weak, your display wins.

[Ace25]

I am very curious, how did you come up with T5HOs need replacing @ 3 months? Having done spectral analysis and PAR readings on T5HOs being driven normally AND over driven with an Icecap660 ballast I know with a normal ballast there is not much spectrum shift or PAR loss within the first 6 months using most of the name brand bulbs on the market. One caveat though is I did these tests on 10k bulbs, not 3K. I saw less than 3% PAR loss and only a very slight reduction in blue spectrum on 10k bulbs. Actually the spectral shift should actually help out the algae on an ATS because that is one of the main reasons it is standard to say replace T5HOs on a display every 9-12 months, because spectral shift will lead to increased algae growth in the display. If you overdrive them with an Icecap660 though, then your looking at 30 days before spectral shift and 90 days before they require replacing if you can manage to keep the bulb going that long without exploding (I was exploding bulbs every 30 days on my Icecap and went through over 20 bulbs in a year before I said that was enough and replaced ballast with normal ones). So what parameter are you using for your basis that T5HOs need replacing @ 3 months? On CFLs I agree with you, but not on T5HOs and certainly not on LEDs.

[Vannpytt]

you're using 39W T5HO, right? Are those 36" lamps? What K rating were you using? I read back through the thread but didn't see it (quick scan).


3000 kelvin

[SantaMonica]

Because I've seen par graphs that show a steep dropoff at 3 months, and because I've seen people replace one bulb of a group of bulbs and the new one was noticeably brighter.

[Vannpytt]

How does this affect the bleaching of Corals due to low nutrients then?

[SantaMonica]

If you have nuisance algae in your display, then you do not have low nutrients. If corals are bleaching, then it's not from low nutrients.

[Vannpytt]

The main problem is not coloration on the SPS, but polyp extension.. Could there be so much nutrients in the water that this is the cause even if it's unmeasurable?

[SantaMonica]

N and P in the water will just cause a darkening of the coral.

Lack of food particles in the water will cause polyp extension to be less (since there is no food to grab).

You can try dosing some liquid coral food, although you really want to do it continuously, especially at night.

[Vannpytt]

I've tried liquid coral food for a while, without much help on the polyps. Then again, the brown algae is retreating already it seems.

It used to be PE at a decent level during nighttime, but now the last 2-3 weeks there has not been any from the two acropora in there.

[jnad]

Hello!

Have you tried with random flow on the corals?

After i started using a rotating flow deflector making the flow hit every coral in a sequence i have had more polyp extension, especially on my sps corals. I think the direct flow on a coral is beneficial as the flow bringing food directly to the coral, but corals do like random flow better than static.

I have reduced the amount of flow in my tank by over 50% by using another pump and deflector but the corals loves it, especially my anemone.
I think maybe the effect of powerful static flow is overestimated in our hobby, i think corals like less amount of flow that is variable or in waves, better than very strong static flow.

Maybe i am wrong, but this is how it seems to me in my aquarium.

jnad

[Vannpytt]

I have 1 Tunze Large wavebox generating oscilliating wave of 20k lph, 4x Tunze 6105 at 50-90% sequential randomized flow on controller roughly 30-40k lph ad a return of 6k lph.

The flow is not the issue. Neither is light. There is either a, something excessive in the water, or something missing from the water.

[jnad]

I have 1 Tunze Large wavebox generating oscilliating wave of 20k lph, 4x Tunze 6105 at 50-90% sequential randomized flow on controller roughly 30-40k lph ad a return of 6k lph.

The flow is not the issue. Neither is light. There is either a, something excessive in the water, or something missing from the water.

I see, nothing wrong with your flow then, just a long shot to try to help out.

Hope you find your problem

jnad

[Vannpytt]

Like noted before, I have "troubles" with my SPS tissue and coloration. Then I stumbled upon a thread by Broder (Mudshark) where he claimed Iodine solved his problem. Measured my Iodine levels a few days ago, and the total amount of iodate and iodide was not measurable. I've added potassium iodine the last few days, and are now at 0.06ppm where I plan to keep it.

Can you cast some light on these issues SM? (Both iodide and iodate and the function for algae filtration in a reefaquarium where iodine is 100% nessesary, while in small amounts)

[Vannpytt]

Ohh, and I've also started dosing liquid NO3 in 2-3ppm range.

[SantaMonica]

Yes algae takes up a good bit of iodine, but if you feed nori you are putting it right back.

More important though, is that I've not seen any other cases of iodine dosing that fixed anything.

A note about Mudshark's previous scrubber... it was one-sided, which is known to be weak compared to two-sided.

[Vannpytt]

Mine is both oversized and very powerfull.

My iodine was depleted. Nitrate seems nice though

[Vannpytt]

Would vast amounts of detrius buildup in my sump account for the problems I've had (sps bleaching, algae growth on glass, and patches on the rocks) no matter how little I've been feeding?

We are speaking a 1-3cm layer of brown detrius on the sump floor. (1m*50cm= 0,5 m^2)

[Floyd R Turbo]

I would have to say yes. Anytime you have a buildup of waste is not a good thing. After about 2 months, I had about 1/8" of detritus in the sump (40 breeder, 36" long x 18" wide) and I siphoned all that out. A 3cm buildup is quite a bit. I don't know if it would explain your problems, but it certainly cannot be helping.

[Vannpytt]

Drained it down to 5% waterlevel in the sump, whilred it up and emptied the water, started a decent amount of GAC in a reactor to get rid of the excess, and pointed 2 pumps down there. Hopefully it will make a difference.

[SantaMonica]

sps bleaching: Probably not; this is due to lack of food (unless there is another big problem)

algae growth on glass: Yes

and patches on the rocks: Yes


no matter how little I've been feeding

If you just started feeding "little" in the last few weeks, and if the buildup in the sump is real organic material, then it could take months to disolved by itself because while it's dissolving it's trapping more particles. What I like to do is stir it up so it can feed the corals. It does no good sitting in the sump.

Sumps to nothing to help feed corals. They only hurt. I'm in the long long process of removing mine.

[Vannpytt]

sps bleaching: Probably not; this is due to lack of food (unless there is another big problem)

That other big problem beeing constantly leeching phosphates and nitrates from all that detrius? I'm adding 2 powerheads down there to keep it suspended, and removed what used to be a detritus labyrinth.

The water was so dirty I could not even see the bottom of my barrel (for water changing) when it was 5 cm deep filled with the stirred up sumpwater.

[SantaMonica]

No, high nutrients usually make corals brown, not white. Unless they are ridiculously high, of course.

And visibility means nothing. First, if you can see it, then it's a food particle. N and P are invisible. Second, some of the most productive (coral growth) areas in the world are in low-visibility lagoons (see my sig). The low visibility is caused by gigantic loads of food particles.

[Vannpytt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddtk3vHb ... ata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddtk3vHbIlE&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Still no sps growth :(

[SantaMonica]

When did you increase feeding, and by how much...

[Vannpytt]

A week ago, and amminos, but not by alot. This weeks cleaning was amazing. Alot more, and I usually have solid harvests

[Vannpytt]

About 1 month after I took the scrubber down completly, running biopellets, gac (very little in a fluidized reactor), and a massivly oversized skimmer (Bubbleking Supermarin 300), my tank is taking off. Corals growing, algae is vastly reducing to the point where there is only a slight layer left on the tank floor, windows stay cleaner for longer and all STN/RTN stopped. Polyps extend more and color is comming back.

Happy days!

I wish I could use the scrubber, since I put alot of effort into it, but it simply seems I cannot keep up with feeding?, or there is something else killing my tank from the scrubber. In any case, I've been patient, had massive algae growth on the screens, had "perfect" water measures, but something unknown is causing my problem, and since I lost corals worth thousand of $ while trying to tune in my scrubber, I gave up. Seems the skimmer/Bio pellets can keep up with whatever the scrubber could not.

The things that went wrong for me with a scrubber only system under a N/P free environment:
- STN/RTN on Acropora (The montiporas was just stagnated)
- LPS "melting" away along with Zooas and Soft corals
- Color loss in all corals
- Algae film taking over everything in the tank - Sand/Rock
- Algae film on the glass every day or two.

I do not believe this is evidence the scrubber does not work, I just guess it's come to a point where I had to try something else and for now I'm very happy about the results.

[SantaMonica]

Good that you are getting your livestock back. That's what matters in the end.

However the algae film on the sand and rock, and the glass cleaning needed every two days, means there was a serious lack of filtering, no matter how much growth there was on the screen. One day someone will figure it out what happened.

[kerry]

SM, When you say "lack of filtering" what kind of filtering are you referring too Sir. Are you referring to the size of screen required for the situation?

[Vannpytt]

No, I'm thinking of an unbalanced min maxing situation where for instance bacteria was suffering or something different. The scrubber itself did an amazing job at keeping N & P at undetectable levels. There is something missing that needs to be discovered.

[kotlec]

So there I am with you. Something there is missing in this puzzle.

I am having exact situation, except SPS are growing not stagnating. Bad colors though.
Question is : how can it be stated that ATS filtering is not matched while P and N are undetectable ? Isnt that what scrubber is intended to do. It is possible that our tests are not accurate, but I know skimmed tanks with higher levels of P or N (by the same tests), that dont have any of enumerated problems. I dont thing scientists will rush in to this this problem any time soon, so we are left to solve it making our own trials and errors.

[jnad]

Hello!

This is very interesting, looking forvard to see what experiences Vannpytt doing with his new set up compared to scrubber. Hope you ceep us uppdated.

I am not an scientist or a marine biologist, but maybe the anwer is simple, have to say a BIG MAYBE:

First, i do think scrubbers is great, but:

Maybe we tend to build our scrubbers to large and powerful, maybe the result is a very large biomass of algae in the system that can give off to mutch carbon to the system. I have seen many beautiful reef aquariums where corals flourish, and many of these aquariums have a tint of measurable nitrate in the water. I do think our corals like to have very small values of nitrate in the water, but not phosfate.
So MAYBE our scrubbers are to powerful stealing nitrate from the corals, therfore the lps and soft corals will be the first to suffer under a big scrubber regime.

Maybe when aquarists converts from skimmer systems to scrubber only systems the scrubber should be buildt as small as possible just to ceep up with the same feeding amount as you used when the aquarium was running on skimmer setup. Do not build the scrubber in a big size thinking you can stuff huge amounts of food into a small enclosed system as our aquariums.

This is just a thought from a beginner in salt water aquariums that use a scrubber.

jnad

[kotlec]

Thats one good theory. Until somebody else did not knock it. :lol:
Anyway I thing we need many ideas like that or simply guesses. May be out of them more questions can be answered finally.

[SantaMonica]

what kind of filtering are you referring too

Scrubber filtering.


The scrubber itself did an amazing job at keeping N & P at undetectable levels.

Levels don't matter. Rates matter.

You had a higher rate of nutrients going into your rock and sand algae, than you did going into your scrubber algae. This means that the scrubber was very weak. It's just like a river in front of your house that is only up to your ankles, but is flowing very fast, and is headed for your living room; in a few minutes your house will be filled with water. Compare this to a puddle in front of your house; it too is only up to your ankes, but it's not flowing at all, and therefore will not be causing any damage to your house.

Similarly, you could have a scrubber that is only 1 X 1 inch, and it could grow "very good", and nutrients in your tank could be "undetectable", even though you have algae on the rock and sand. The scrubber is not doing the filtering here; the algae on the rock and sand are.


how can it be stated that ATS filtering is not matched while P and N are undetectable

See above. Nutrients are flowing into your rock algae, even if the rock algae is only a thin film ("periphyton") covering that you can't see. By the way, if you don't have coralline on the tops of all your rocks, then you have periphyton. (Coralliine technically is periphyton too, which is why the rock are not white anymore, but it does not apply in this case).


I know skimmed tanks with higher levels of P or N (by the same tests), that dont have any of enumerated problems.

Because the tests only measure levels, not rates. Those skimmed tanks have very low rates. You can't measure rates; you can only see their results.


Maybe we tend to build our scrubbers to large and powerful

This would not be the reason for large rates going into rock and sand algae. It would be because the scrubber is too weak.


maybe the result is a very large biomass of algae in the system that can give off to mutch carbon to the system

A scrubber is a net consumer of carbon, not a net producer.


So MAYBE our scrubbers are to powerful stealing nitrate from the corals,

No, because nobody's tank has anywhere near the amount of algae (chlorophyll) per unit water volume than that ocean has. It's the algae in the ocean that controls the amount of nutrients, and the corals have adapted to this level.


Maybe when aquarists converts from skimmer systems to scrubber only systems the scrubber should be buildt as small as possible

I think it should be the opposite.

[dtyharry]

A scrubber is a net consumer of carbon, not a net producer.

Inorganic carbon yes, not dissolved organic carbon which I think was being referred to. Until accurate measurements are taken we will never know for sure the levels in scrubbed aquaria, but there is very little doubt that excess doc in natural reefs indirectly causes coral mortality.
I think vannypt would have been better off keeping the scrubber which is fantastic for nitrate and phosphate removal, and incorporating granulated activated carbon or similar to maintain doc levels at natural levels.
That would have been a far more satisfactory solution and costs pennies to test, what harm would trying it do. Maintain your feeding etc everything else could stay the same, if it doesn't work at least you have tried.

[kotlec]

Levels don't matter. Rates matter.

You had a higher rate of nutrients going into your rock and sand algae, than you did going into your scrubber algae. This means that the scrubber was very weak. It's just like a river in front of your house that is only up to your ankles, but is flowing very fast, and is headed for your living room; in a few minutes your house will be filled with water. Compare this to a puddle in front of your house; it too is only up to your ankes, but it's not flowing at all, and therefore will not be causing any damage to your house.

Similarly, you could have a scrubber that is only 1 X 1 inch, and it could grow "very good", and nutrients in your tank could be "undetectable", even though you have algae on the rock and sand. The scrubber is not doing the filtering here; the algae on the rock and sand are.


Im ready to give up on that. I am not able to understand how it is posible high flow of something what is nearly zero level . How these nutrients find time to get in to rock and sand when they arent (almost) even present in the water first of all. And same nutrients that are in big quantities but in skimed tanks are too lazy to go to rocks and sand and do no harm just floating in the water all the time 24/7.

I also dont understand how ankle deep river can fill my house more that ankle deep. Unless my house already is underwater level witch is not as rocks and sand in tank are intended to filter nutrients and not to absorb and distribute.

BTW my scrubber was calculated to old sizing guidelines. To new ones it is 10x too big already. How can it be too week at the same time ?
16G tank. 2 small fish. Feed 2-3 grams per day frozen food. 3x4 screen one side lit by 8w red led. Algae more yellow than green (definitely not brown or black and not slime ).

[dtyharry]

BTW my scrubber was calculated to old sizing guidelines. To new ones it is 10x too big already. How can it be too week at the same time ?
16G tank. 2 small fish. Feed 2-3 grams per day frozen food. 3x4 screen one side lit by 8w red led. Algae more yellow than green (definitely not brown or black and not slime ).

The old guidelines were 1sq in a gallon I believe for a 2 sided screen, double for a one sided screen so you were way undersized then, should have been 32sq in not 12. You would also have needed 16w of light minimum also so underlit also, even if they are led.
The new guidelines say a screen 3x4 if one sided you can feed 1/2 cube of frozen food per day. 1 cube of water weighs 1g so assuming frozen food weighs roughly the same you are feeding 2 to 3 cubes per day, way too much for an underlit undersized screen.
You certainly were not 10 times oversized unless of course the numbers you have given are incorrect.
Can't understand why people skimp on size etc, just get a good size screen and light and inorganic nutrients and display algae will not be an issue.

[kotlec]

Harry, sorry for confuzion. Just made mistake converting from centimeters to inches. Grrrrr. My screen is 6inch x 7 inch = 42inch.

I havent seen any algae in my DT from day 1. Just small bloom of ciano , when one snail dead and rooted. Only film on glass and brown corals. Considering the grams I can be wrong. Havent got scales to weight that small amount. But I feed my fish frozen food that I buy in cubes 1cm big. 1 cube I use to feed 10 days or more aproximatelly. Havent got scales to weight that small amount. Anyway I never had chance to measure any amount of P or N.

Turf is already yellow. I have decreased hours, because it was light yellow. Now its greenish. I thing I need decrease light to get it even more green - not increase.

The question on rates and levels still bothers me.

[kerry]

Your LED's could be to close if its yellow or you might need to dose iron but, if its getting green you might play out what you are doing now and see what happens.

[Vannpytt]

Do you also intend to apply this undersizing to my system while I now a few weeks with massive skimmer and pellets have about 1-2mm daily growth on my sps, especially montipora, and almost 0 alga left on sand and rocks?

I did try gac with scrubber without much difference.

I'm telling you, like SM also said, sometime, someone is going to find the piece missing from this puzzle.

[Vannpytt]

That would have been a far more satisfactory solution and costs pennies to test, what harm would trying it do. Maintain your feeding etc everything else could stay the same, if it doesn't work at least you have tried.

Cost is fairly unrelevant to the point where it is working; bang for buck. Maintaining a 6x39w T5HO swap 4 times a year (atleast) and using GAC is not cheaper. In Norway, even vodka dosing is expensive. A onetime investment of $2,5k on something that works is fine.

[dtyharry]

Just read entire thread of vannypt. Seems like the theme running through was feeding or lack of it. The scrubber was more than capable of a lot of feeding but there seemed a reluctance to do it, which may explain the poor results with the corals. As vannypt said, the scrubber did a great job of keeping the inorganic nutrient levels at an extremely low level.
I started a thread recently 'sps dietary requirements'' and posed the theory that maybe the coral nitrogen requirement could be supplied by the eating of heterotrophic bacteria produced by organic carbon dosing. Maybe the bio pellets are supplying sufficient carbon to enable the bacteria population to be enough to provide the missing nutrition caused by under feeding. I also said that algae provided organic carbon but could only do so if growing at a sufficient rate which would only happen of course if the tank was being fed enough.

[Vannpytt]

And the algae growing on the rocks, glass and all over the place?

[dtyharry]

And the algae growing on the rocks, glass and all over the place?
A mystery!!! Cant see how a skimmer directly could affect algae because it does not remove nitrate, phosphate etc. Maybe the bio pellets have promoted the bacteria levels to such an extent that it is taking the nutrient levels even lower than the scrubber. Both systems might give zero on test meter levels but maybe the bacteria are removing them quicker before it gets chance to reach the glass, algae etc. Just a theory!!

[Vannpytt]

There was at no point slow or little growth on the screens, hence the nutrients had to be "high" while undetectable on a kit. I didn't feed alot, but had steady growth in tank and on screen.

Something else the algae was feeding of?

[dtyharry]

All algae needs to grow is carbon from dissolved carbon dioxide, nitrogen from ammonia, nitrate etc and phosphate along with some trace elements like iron. There is no mystery to it as far as I can see. Skimmers have been shown to not really do an awful lot but do reduce bacteria levels. If all you have done differently is to implement the bio pellets and skimmer then it must be its greater efficiency in your case to soak up the nutrients rapidly and a bacteria byproduct to feed your corals.

[Vannpytt]

Yes, but what is the origin? I feed slow, and have had the system first for almost a year, and then again for a few months with cycled water and stone.

Really? As far as I can tell, my scrubber is one of the "largest" in terms of wattage and screensize on this forum, and my tank is not really that large.

[SantaMonica]

Do you also intend to apply this undersizing to my system while I now a few weeks with massive skimmer and pellets have about 1-2mm daily growth on my sps, especially montipora, and almost 0 alga left on sand and rocks?

Yes. Not undersized... underpowered. If you had "algae on the rocks and sand", then something was serious not working.


I did try gac with scrubber without much difference.

Yes, that would not help remove any nutrients.


And the algae growing on the rocks, glass and all over the place?

A simple case of a the high rate of nutrients going to the rock/sand algae first, before making it to the scrubber. The strong scrubbing power of the rock/sand algae overpowered the scrubber. I don't know why. Wait... reading further... I think I do...


for a few months with cycled water and stone.

Ah ha ... I knew there might be a cycle involved somewhere. Same thing that happend to 180rftank when he moved his tank. This is where distributed filtration comes in...

In a cycle, the nutrients come from the rock; they hit the rock surface first, then the corals, then the water column, then the scrubber. Thus the scrubber, or any filter that is "plumbed" to a tank, can't help much because the ammonia does it's damage as it's leaving the rocks.

However, a "distributed filter" can do it. A distributed filter is a filter that is in all parts of the water column at the same time, and thus does not have to wait for nutrients to be "delivered" to it. Although your rocks may seem to have finished cycling, there most certainly were some remaining bits left over. So... how do you remove the nutrients just as they are leaving the rock, before they can touch anything? Your filter would have to be on the surface of all the rocks. Carbon dosing!

As strong as scrubbers are, they can't remove nutrients until the nutrients get to them. And a cycling rock is a nuclear reactor hot spot (even if mostly cycled) of nutrients, with corals setting right on top of them. So, the pellets grow the bacteria which distribute themselves throughout the water column, and thus become a distributed filter, catching the nutrients just as they leave the rocks.

So, your screen was growing good, but there was a HUGE RATE of nutrients going from inside the rocks to the surface of the rocks, where the rock-algae ate it (and the corals suffered). 180rftank got the worse of it because he did a complete tank move with a full cycle, but yours was still enough to cause problems.

Phytoplankton is the earth's natural "distributed filter", but I don't yet know how to concentrate enough live phyto in a tank to do serious filtering. So for situations where real or possible cycles have occured, carbon dosing may be a good temporary distributed filter to use.

[Floyd R Turbo]

Ahhhh!! Finally, an answer on the 180rftnk crash. That makes a lot of sense. Did you post that on that thread?

This also affects being able to cycle a tank with a scrubber. Maybe not as effective as I thought. Still could do it with fish only, but corals would have to wait I think.

[Vannpytt]

The thing that gets me every time I hear that argument is this:

- In a skimmed tank (And I've personally seen lots and lots of short skimmer/pellet cycled tanks with good growth and very little algae) there is non of the problems mentioned, while the detectable nutrient levels are (yes I know you feel there is a difference of rate and level, but if the level is higher, so is the rate) higher. My Acropora is showing massive growth along with my montiporas, (I'm doing pictures to show weekly progress and will post) who has been bleached and stagnated for months. Also, the initial tank with all the same problems was running a year give or take a month, and it also had these problems to the very end before restart. Your cycle argument is therefore flawed if not wrong, or I just have exceptionally shit rock, although I doubt that.

I think this is bacterial, in the lines that my scrubber was too powerfull, removing nutrients at a higher rate than the bacterias could survive on (Remember, my water was run through the screen 8x/h, yes, all of it), and with too little feeding they simply could not survive, leaving the rock and sand without filtering capacity, and thus the scrubber would be "overscrubbing". The liquid food I added went straight to the algae on the rocks, sand and glass, thus there would be nothing competing with it there until it died off, which it most likely would not, as it's only competitor was algae in a remote location. A metaphor would be, the tank and the algae did not even play on the same field. The scrubber got the second servings, the algae on the rocks and sand the first serving, and there was nothing left for the bacteria.

This explanation is in my view, far more logical. Prove me wrong or not.

Point of this "systematic change" is:

- No 6x39w T5HO tube switch every 3 months
- No cleanings once a week
- No need to add RIDICULOUS amounts of food a day (It was built to tackle 23 cubes a day, before understanding that this is probably in excess of 21 cubes more than I feed)

[SantaMonica]

In a skimmed tank (And I've personally seen lots and lots of short skimmer/pellet cycled tanks with good growth and very little algae)

Growth of sps, but not harder to feed corals.


if the level is higher, so is the rate

Not at all. They are completely separate, like voltage and current.


who has been bleached and stagnated for months

Yes, any nutrient problem that causes visible rock and sand algae, and 2-day glass cleanings, is going to slow coral growth.


the initial tank with all the same problems was running a year give or take a month, and it also had these problems to the very end before restart. Your cycle argument is therefore flawed if not wrong

You said you recently had another mini cycle.


removing nutrients at a higher rate than the bacterias could survive on

Most bacteria of interest feed on DOC, as in the ocean. Not inorganics.


leaving the rock and sand without filtering capacity

?? The rock and sand always have filtering capacity.


The liquid food I added went straight to the algae on the rocks, sand and glass

None of the food went straight to any algae, anywhere. Algae does not consume food, at all.


the tank and the algae did not even play on the same field.

This part is true, but the question is why, since everyone else's tanks work properly.


there was nothing left for the bacteria.

There is plenty for bacteria. Bacteria eat DOC from waste, algae, and food. This is the bacteria that feeds the oceans and lakes. The inorganic-eating bacteria from the carbon dosing is a separate issue.


- No 6x39w T5HO tube switch every 3 months
- No cleanings once a week
- No need to add RIDICULOUS amounts of food a day (It was built to tackle 23 cubes a day, before understanding that this is probably in excess of 21 cubes more than I feed)

If yours did not have the "problem", then you would not be able to make your comparison because your corals would have grown greatly, with no rock or sand algae, and with few glass cleanings. And you would have been able to keep more filter feeders, madarins, anthias, flame scallops, scooters, etc, with no target feeding, the same way other people can. The issue is not about a comparison, it's about finding out why your one tank had the problem.

[kotlec]

They are completely separate, like voltage and current.

Dont know how it is important for nutrients, but for electricity it is not true at all. At least how I was told at high school. Voltage and current are directly dependent.

And that is exactly that part , which I can not understand considering rates and levels. No voltage = no current. No levels= no rates.

[Floyd R Turbo]

I, like SM, am an Electical Engineer. You can have voltage and no current. They are not dependent on each other directly, but in relation to resistance, hence V=I*R, or with respect to power, as in P=I*V. His analogy does make sense.

[kotlec]

I got it now. Example:

Skimed tank with measurable nutrients and no problems = there is voltage , but no current. OK. But why in this case nutrients dont make any harm . Why power is not generated in this tank. It has no scrubber at all ! What makes that infinite resistance to stop any current (low rates in our case ) ?

[Vannpytt]

If yours did not have the "problem", then you would not be able to make your comparison because your corals would have grown greatly, with no rock or sand algae, and with few glass cleanings. And you would have been able to keep more filter feeders, madarins, anthias, flame scallops, scooters, etc, with no target feeding, the same way other people can. The issue is not about a comparison, it's about finding out why your one tank had the problem.

Yep, that is true, and if you find a viable solution I'm willing to set it up again. It's not a "scrubber don't work post; it's a "My tank does not work with scrubber even if the parameters are perfect" post.

Another clue would be that it works with pellets and skimmer. Why the tank so wastly outcompetes the scrubber, I do not know.

[dtyharry]

There is plenty for bacteria. Bacteria eat DOC from waste, algae, and food. This is the bacteria that feeds the oceans and lakes. The inorganic-eating bacteria from the carbon dosing is a separate issue.
Could you please clarify this statement, the two types of the bacteria you mention are one and the same are they not. The bacteria that eat the doc are heterotrophic because they cannot fix inorganic carbon themselves, and is the bacteria that feeds the oceans and lakes. Are these not the self same bacteria that are produced by organic carbon dosing, these also utilise inorganic nitrogen and phosphate in their growth, the reason carbon dosing is done.

[SantaMonica]

Both hetero but different strains, which is why you can have lots of organics and nutrients (typical overloaded tank), but the one bacteria won't consume the organics down to zero because they are not carbon limited, yet the other bacteria can consume nutrients down to zero if you give them carbon; these are the ones that are carbon limited.

Kinda like nitrifying bacteria; some are ammonia limited, while others are nitrite or nitrate limited, yet all are hetero.

[dtyharry]

Nitrifying bacteria are not heterotrophic they are chemoautotrophic, they fix the carbon they need from dissolved carbon dioxide, nitrogen from inorganics, ammonia, nitrite etc.
I see what you are saying about the other bacteria.

[Vannpytt]

For now it seems I stand corrected.

The algae and issues I had slightly improved when changing over to the skimmer/pellet, however:

1. This is not due to the fact that the scrubber didn't do it's job; -it's most likely as said by SM before, that I underfed.
2. The issue I had with my aquarium, and discovered just a few weeks ago; -CW Cree led's run @ 1A at too long time during the day leaves a few clues:

Burnt corals, Lots of green algae regardless of levels and filtration. I changed these two things out, started feeding more, and everything in the tank is improving. I expect it would be so with a scrubber also, however, having already invested in the skimmer, I will leave it running until I get either problems with nutrient levels, or need to increase the coral feeding.

[kotlec]

Can you give more detail on lighting ?

[Vannpytt]

120x3w Cree XP-E (CW 50:50 RB)

CW @ 1A
RB @ 750mA

Run 4-6 hours @peak on Profilux (100%) and rest increase/decrease 2-4hours