ATS screen size formula, has it changed in the last few years?

[Devaji]

SO I am in the market for a ATS decided to buy one instead of DIY as I wanted a finished looking product.

I know scrubbers are biased on "cubes per day" and not tank gallons. this change was made w/ most simmer brands around 2013 ish.

just wanted to know if the formula had changed in the last few years with LED lights getting better =more powerful and perhaps better spectrum.

this is what I found to be the standard but is an older formula is it still valid in today's world

Vertical, lit from both sides: 12 square inches of screen material per cube of food per day, 12 watts of light split between each side.

so if I use this calculation a screen that is 7.25x 7.25 with 52.5" per side and a total area of 105" would be able to support 8 cubes a day?? this seems not accurate a little on the high side.

feedback?

 

[Devaji]

anyone? just waht to make sure i size the scrubber correctly...

 

[VintageReefer]

If you are buying one don’t they already break down the feeding limits of the scrubber?

What models are you considering ?

 

[Devaji]

If you are buying one don’t they already break down the feeding limits of the scrubber?

What models are you considering ?

yes they do. however it's not same across brands. there is often a few inches in screen size difference between.

 

[VintageReefer]

yes they do. however it's not same across brands. there is often a few inches in screen size difference between.

Honestly there is only one current manufacturer whose specialty is scrubbers; Santa Monica.

Ice cap is a commercial company who rebrands Chinese made units. While ice cap scrubbers work, I don’t expect support at ice cap to be able to offer any real advice or knowledge on them.

Santa Monica has many patents and inventions, I would view them as having the latest info, as they are constantly testing and periodically update their designs and standards and ratings

Turbo aquatics also I would trust, but from my understanding their production is suspended at the moment.

 

[Vivid Creative Aquatics]

I'm not sure about the cube per day formula, but I have been using an Clearwater Scrubbers (now Adaptive Reef) ATS for a while now - both on my previous tank for a few years and on the current office tank for the past 2.5 years

For the last build, i went with the recommended size based on the tank size (it was a 125-galon mixed reef). I want to say the screen was about 10 x 10in - maybe a bit lager. It worked well - but almost too well. If I wasn't carful it would strip the tank of all trace and most nutrients pretty quick.

For the current tank - 134-glalon mixed reef, I went with a slightly undersized unit. My thinking is it would be easier to control and not nearly as aggressive. So far, its been working out perfectly. its much easier to control and to keep things in balance.

Not sure that helps, but it id what I have experienced

 

[Devaji]

Honestly there is only one current manufacturer whose specialty is scrubbers; Santa Monica.

Ice cap is a commercial company who rebrands Chinese made units. While ice cap scrubbers work, I don’t expect support at ice cap to be able to offer any real advice or knowledge on them.

Santa Monica has many patents and inventions, I would view them as having the latest info, as they are constantly testing and periodically update their designs and standards and ratings

Turbo aquatics also I would trust, but from my understanding their production is suspended at the moment.

yeah I got the formula from Bud ATS forum. he is down and out due to sme medical issues so no turbo scrubbers for a while.

I am leaning towards a hang on sump ATS from a LFS that has a few styles. they do have a tank volume rating but like everything in reefing I always double check and get personal real world feed back.

 

[Devaji]

I'm not sure about the cube per day formula, but I gave been using an ClearWater Scrubbers (now Adaptive Reef) ATS for a while now - both on my previous tank for a few years and on the current office tank for the pas r2.5 years

For the last build, i went with the recommended size based on the tank size (it was a 125-galon mixed reef). I want to say the screen was about 10 x 10in - maybe a bit lager. It worked well - but almost too well. If I wasn't carful it would strip the tank of all trace and most nutrients pretty quick.

For the current tank - 134-glalon mixed reef, I went with a slightly undersized unit. My thinking is it would be easier to control and not nearly as aggressive. So far, its been working out perfectly. its much easier to control and to keep things in balance.

Not sure that helps, but it id what I have experienced

Hey thanks for the feedback. I am leaning towards a slightly under sized scrubber as I have a big skimmer and will use Ozone.

on a side note. do you guys make your VCA thingies for the larger IM tanks? I have yet to even look. haha

 

[Garf]

SO I am in the market for a ATS decided to buy one instead of DIY as I wanted a finished looking product.

I know scrubbers are biased on "cubes per day" and not tank gallons. this change was made w/ most simmer brands around 2013 ish.

just wanted to know if the formula had changed in the last few years with LED lights getting better =more powerful and perhaps better spectrum.

this is what I found to be the standard but is an older formula is it still valid in today's world

Vertical, lit from both sides: 12 square inches of screen material per cube of food per day, 12 watts of light split between each side.

so if I use this calculation a screen that is 7.25x 7.25 with 52.5" per side and a total area of 105" would be able to support 8 cubes a day?? this seems not accurate a little on the high side.

feedback?

The size guidelines were always all over the shop, and really can only be reached after experimentation due to the vast differences in thickness of the mat in different tanks. In my tank for example with a mat thickness of approximately 3/4 of an inch each side it gained wet weight of;

Quantifying Biomass

Thought it was about time we did some comparisons of biomass per surface area of screen. Maybe some of the myths can be dispelled and get the most efficient usage data for scrubbers. I'll kick it off; (I know you need to do dry mass for it to be accurate, but wet mass will suffice for now)...

algaescrubber.net

Now to obtain the dry weight necessary, it needs to be dried. In my case, dry weight was nearly 5% of wet weight. Then those so inclined can calculate how much N and P is removed approximately by applying Randy’s research;

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#21

It’s a lot less than one would presume. I quote;

“Harvesting 10 grams (dry weight) of this macroalgae from an aquarium would be the equivalent of removing 24 mg of phosphate from the water column. That amount is the equivalent of reducing the phosphate concentration from 0.2 ppm to 0.1 ppm in a 67-gallon aquarium. All of the other species tested gave similar results (plus or minus a factor of two). Interestingly, using the same paper's nitrogen data, this would also be equivalent to reducing the nitrate content by 2.5 grams, or 10 ppm in that same 67-gallon aquarium.”

Therefore in my 150 gallon (with large sump) removed approximately 20 grammes dry weight (400 grammes wet weight) and was a little more than double the water volume in Randy's example (conveniently). So my scrubber removed about 10ppm every 9 or 10 days (say 1ppm per day) with growth such as this but obviously, a lot of screens do not grow as mine did;

howdy from the uk - day one - Page 11

thought i would chip in and let you comment on my effort so far. Backgroung of display- 5 x 2 x 2 with 240 ltr sump containing skimmer (massively inefficient), DSB in display (silica play sand), approx 100 kgs live rock. Most corals are 7 years old and all fish but 2 of the tangs, are of...

algaescrubber.net

Therefore, it is assumed that my screen could handle approximately 0.25ppm ammonia per day, given the ammonia to nitrate conversion of 1:3.7

I expect @Dan_P or @taricha could convert any foods (with relative Nitrate / Phosphate concentrations) to approximate algae growth required, if you ask them nicely.

For comparison of the variability of growth on scrubbers, Sanjay Yoshi recently reported a nitrate consumption of 0.17ppm per day on his tank.

 

[ca1ore]

No idea how much ‘science’ went into the original guidelines, but a cube of food is still a cube and a square inch of screen still a square inch. All to say, I’d still follow the guidelines. That’s how I have sized my various DIY models and mostly felt they were on target.

 

[Vivid Creative Aquatics]

.Hey thanks for the feedback. I am leaning towards a slightly under sized scrubber as I have a big skimmer and will use Ozone.

on a side note. do you guys make your VCA thingies for the larger IM tanks? I have yet to even look. haha

We do have a few options for there larger tanks.

For their newest models however, they use a somewhat non-standard bulkhead (a factory modified 25mm bulkhead) so if you want to update them to 3/4in, you'll need to use out 2025-075 Multidapter fitting.

Send me a DM, and I'll point you in the right direction

 

[Devaji]

The size guidelines were always all over the shop, and really can only be reached after experimentation due to the vast differences in thickness of the mat in different tanks. In my tank for example with a mat thickness of approximately 3/4 of an inch each side it gained wet weight of;

Quantifying Biomass

Thought it was about time we did some comparisons of biomass per surface area of screen. Maybe some of the myths can be dispelled and get the most efficient usage data for scrubbers. I'll kick it off; (I know you need to do dry mass for it to be accurate, but wet mass will suffice for now)...

algaescrubber.net

Now to obtain the dry weight necessary, it needs to be dried. In my case, dry weight was nearly 5% of wet weight. Then those so inclined can calculate how much N and P is removed approximately by applying Randy’s research;

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#21

It’s a lot less than one would presume. I quote;

“Harvesting 10 grams (dry weight) of this macroalgae from an aquarium would be the equivalent of removing 24 mg of phosphate from the water column. That amount is the equivalent of reducing the phosphate concentration from 0.2 ppm to 0.1 ppm in a 67-gallon aquarium. All of the other species tested gave similar results (plus or minus a factor of two). Interestingly, using the same paper's nitrogen data, this would also be equivalent to reducing the nitrate content by 2.5 grams, or 10 ppm in that same 67-gallon aquarium.”

Therefore in my 150 gallon (with large sump) removed approximately 20 grammes dry weight (400 grammes wet weight) and was a little more than double the water volume in Randy's example (conveniently). So my scrubber removed about 10ppm every 9 or 10 days (say 1ppm per day) with growth such as this but obviously, a lot of screens do not grow as mine did;

howdy from the uk - day one - Page 11

thought i would chip in and let you comment on my effort so far. Backgroung of display- 5 x 2 x 2 with 240 ltr sump containing skimmer (massively inefficient), DSB in display (silica play sand), approx 100 kgs live rock. Most corals are 7 years old and all fish but 2 of the tangs, are of...

algaescrubber.net

Therefore, it is assumed that my screen could handle approximately 0.25ppm ammonia per day, given the ammonia to nitrate conversion of 1:3.7

I expect @Dan_P or @taricha could convert any foods (with relative Nitrate / Phosphate concentrations) to approximate algae growth required, if you ask them nicely.

For comparison of the variability of growth on scrubbers, Sanjay Yoshi recently reported a nitrate consumption of 0.17ppm per day on his tank.

wow thanks for this. I have been into the scrubber scene for many many years but for some reason only had one on a tank a DIY upflow it worked pretty good.

but now I need/want to "do it right" the scrubber will not be my main filtration but a big part of it.

thanks again for the info!

 

[Devaji]

No idea how much ‘science’ went into the original guidelines, but a cube of food is still a cube and a square inch of screen still a square inch. All to say, I’d still follow the guidelines. That’s how I have sized my various DIY models and mostly felt they were on target.

this was my basic thought too. but thought I would ask to see if things have chanced of the years with more experience.

also wanted to check my math.