Micro Scrubbing Bubbles.

[Cruz_Arias]

Yes! Everyone that reports good results is doing it right regardless of the changes they make to the directions while everyone reporting bad results is doing it wrong! It is perfect!

No. The method is not perfect, but when setup correctly, there are no adverse effects.
And how does teaching people and adding knowledge to the collective hobby mentality adverse?

If it is another tool to help, why not?

And if I wanted to capitalize on something, it would have been done already.

Altruistic.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

@Thales
How did you set YOURs up?

I'm curious.

 

[Thales]

LOL That's the definition of you... Correct?
At least I could do a REAL LIVE interview on bubbles and aeration without having to review or edit or scratch off questions to be asked of me ahead of time.

What are you talking about?

I'm not... I'm showing relational evidence in not following directions.
Impatience in this hobby is also another commonality when attempting to prove something unsound.

Haphazard setups to prove something not "effective" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You keep changing the directions.

 

[Squamosa]

@Thales
How did you set YOURs up?

I'm curious.

I'm curious too, I've documented my set-up every step of the way, both before and during and the record button is still on!
It is there for all to view!

Let's see the data!

 

[Thales]

No. The method is not perfect, but when setup correctly, there are no adverse effects.
And how does teaching people and adding knowledge to the collective hobby mentality adverse?

If it is another tool to help, why not?

And if I wanted to capitalize on something, it would have been done already.

Altruistic.

Earlier you wee posting drawings of an air stone near the intake of a pump as the right way to do this. Now that is wrong. You keep changing what is the right way.

 

[Thales]

I'm curious too, I've documented my set-up every step of the way, both before and during and the record button is still on!
It is there for all to view!

Let's see the data!

This is news - Where is your data? why didn't you supply it at the outset, you know, when we asked for it? It might of saved so much trouble! I am very curious of your pH numbers before and after

 

[ScoobyFish]

I did the bubbles thingy, used wooden airstone , i guess i made mistake and place pump on floor lolz, but everything is fine after 2 weeks, tank is cleaner visually and my corals were always fine but i was battling some diatoms and this has helped with that. So far so good no negs to report. oop one more thing i ran this thing for 1 week straight no stopping to battle the diatoms.

Mixed reef here 65 gallon corner bow

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

ORP before was 340 to 360 with an oversized skimmer only... 360 at lights on.
Maximums are 90 points higher with the enhanced aeration.

So one interesting question is whether it is from removal of organics by making the whole tank into a skimmer, or from increased O2 (or possibly both). Was the tank also skimmed, and if so, how much (qualitatively), prior to bubbling?

It can be difficult to disentangle O2 and pH effects on ORP in a reef tank (I've tried in the article below using some real data from a reef tank for a week), but there does not seem to be a strong indication that higher O2 leads to immediately higher ORP (ORP is usually higher at night due to the lower pH, and is higher by more than a simplistic pH calculation suggests, but the calculation necessarily makes ORP/pH assumptions that may not be true in a reef tank)), so I'd tend to think it has more to do with organic removal than increased O2, but thate is not conclusive at all.

ORP and the Reef Aquarium - Reefkeeping.com
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-12/rhf/feature/index.htm

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Oh no, sorry I didn't make that more clear. I also did a 5 gal water change where I cleaned out the ball chamber. I checked it literally as soon as I put the new water in and it was still reading 40. So I'm thinking that between the bubbling, the cleaning of the ball chamber, and a water change, it was like a power scrub.

This whole event was about 2 weeks ago, since then I've kept it up, but haven't done another water change yet. Checked them again last night and it was just slightly darker than the 0 color on the card. So somewhere between 0 and 5 now.

Like I said, I don't think it's a "miracle cure" and removes the need for routine maintenance. But it's really helping me keep everything stable and healthy between maint. which was a huge problem before. I also like that it's not just dumping a bunch of chemicals in, or changing out all the water and causing a cycle. It seems to be a much healthier way to naturally get parameters in line without shocking anything.
.

OK, thanks.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I did the bubbles thingy, used wooden airstone , i guess i made mistake and place pump on floor lolz, but everything is fine after 2 weeks, tank is cleaner visually and my corals were always fine but i was battling some diatoms and this has helped with that. So far so good no negs to report. oop one more thing i ran this thing for 1 week straight no stopping to battle the diatoms.

You sure they were diatoms? Not cyano or dinos? Diatoms are usually quite hard and encrusting, and won't be swept away by any reasonable amount of current or bubbling. If they truly went down due to bubbling, as opposed to running out of silicate during normal tank progression, then that would require some more complex explanation of how available N or P or silicate (or some other inorganic nutrient) declined.

 

[Squamosa]

So one interesting question is whether it is from removal of organics by making the whole tank into a skimmer, or from increased O2 (or possibly both). Was the tank also skimmed, and if so, how much (qualitatively), prior to bubbling?

It can be difficult to disentangle O2 and pH effects on ORP in a reef tank (I've tried in the article below using some real data from a reef tank for a week), but there does not seem to be a strong indication that higher O2 leads to immediately higher ORP (ORP is usually higher at night due to the lower pH, and is higher by more than a simplistic pH calculation suggests, but the calculation necessarily makes ORP/pH assumptions that may not be true in a reef tank)), so I'd tend to think it has more to do with organic removal than increased O2, but thate is not conclusive at all.

ORP and the Reef Aquarium - Reefkeeping.com
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-12/rhf/feature/index.htm

Hi Randy

Here is 6 days of ORP and pH data of a member who's just started with the bubbles, I use it with permission. A 24 hr period of ORP and pH data is highlighted for day 6.

He has it on a 100 gallon tank that is kept meticulously clean.

Only sps corals, minimal fish load and bare bottom.

A large skimmer, 25% weekly water changes and continual siphoning of detritus is all the maintenance done on this tank.

No carbon dosing, GFO or GAC.

All elements dosed by Apex dosing pumps.

He did notice an average reduction in alk consumption of 3% for the first 4 days, but has said that this has since returned to his 'normal', prior to bubbling, consumption on days 5 and 6.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Earlier you wee posting drawings of an air stone near the intake of a pump as the right way to do this. Now that is wrong. You keep changing what is the right way.

Once again it is representational based on various pump manufacturers and pump curves.

Please continue to take things out of context... A Picture without words can be misconstrued as it seems like you are of the "Picture Pages" mentality and have issues reading.
You're claims are anecdotal.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

So one interesting question is whether it is from removal of organics by making the whole tank into a skimmer, or from increased O2 (or possibly both). Was the tank also skimmed, and if so, how much (qualitatively), prior to bubbling?

It can be difficult to disentangle O2 and pH effects on ORP in a reef tank (I've tried in the article below using some real data from a reef tank for a week), but there does not seem to be a strong indication that higher O2 leads to immediately higher ORP (ORP is usually higher at night due to the lower pH, and is higher by more than a simplistic pH calculation suggests, but the calculation necessarily makes ORP/pH assumptions that may not be true in a reef tank)), so I'd tend to think it has more to do with organic removal than increased O2, but thate is not conclusive at all.

ORP and the Reef Aquarium - Reefkeeping.com
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-12/rhf/feature/index.htm

We did not pull out the filtersock and weigh it "dried" to determine the total organic mass...
This would be extremely hard over a long period of time especially with feeding the system, etc.

I'm wondering, how would you do this, Randy?

We only noted observations of the filter sock being "dirty" or "dirtier than" but it is extremely difficult to quantify.

 

[cb684]

Do we have a minimum air volume / gallon?

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Do we have a minimum air volume / gallon?

I don't know if that would be sufficient... everyone's bioload is different...

My thoughts are if we maintained "Dissolved Oxygen Levels" and "Oxidation Reduction Potential Levels" that should be sufficient...

Thoughts, @cb684 ?

 

[The Macro Guy]

EXPLAIN THESE AND YOU WILL ANSWER SOME OF MY QUESTIONS.

Lol smh..

Thank you @Cruz_Arias.
If I may ask what products are you talking about if I may ask ? I did not know that there where other products involved was under the impression it was only bubbling.

NB4 "soooo it's NOT just bubbling giving you these results and growth."

Called it! Anyone with not positive results is doing it wrong. Of course doing it right is a moving target and has changed significantly in the last few weeks.

You are the soul reason this thread keeps derailing into arguments and you should be removed from it.

You,Jedi, and passive agressive greenman have contributed absolutely nothing but doubt to this thread, Randy may be against it, but at least he is approaching it with science.

At no point in time has his directions for how to do this changed. I posted a picture of the airstone directly under MY pump, as it was the only way to get the bubbles into the DT for me, even with this, Im still showing positive results throughout the entire spectrum of my tank. 42 fish with 3 times a day feedings and weekly heavy feedings of 25+ anemones for 3 months with 40g water change on a 255g(correction) system once a month, when I finally took it upon myself to actually test nitrates, I was inbetween 15 & 20. Not bad imo.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

This is news - Where is your data? why didn't you supply it at the outset, you know, when we asked for it? It might of saved so much trouble! I am very curious of your pH numbers before and after

How did you set yours up, Rich? Your one day "test" to prove it didn't work... How did you set it up?

Why are you dodging the question?

 

[Greenstreet.1]

I will ignore that cause I'm a grown man I don't play with kids. I don't have to contribute anything I'm not the one that came up with the idea or claimed it work. How can you get upset at someone for wanting information lol
Don't get mad cause I'm not down with you.


@Cruz_Arias I understand that we all have jobs. So I will be waiting for your answers.

 

[jedimasterben]

You,Jedi, and passive agressive greenman have contributed absolutely nothing but doubt to this thread, Randy may be against it, but at least he is approaching it with science.

You're making this far more personal than it needs to be. You're acting like I am running your dog over and Rich is riding shotgun peeing in your wheaties.

Cruz has made some extraordinary claims and has dodged every question for the data to back them up. The burden of proof is only on the person making the claims (this is how science works, if you tried to submit a paper for peer review with no data to back up claims, you'd be laughed out of academia), yet he (and many others) is continuing to tell others that the burden of proof is on them. Cruz continues to claim to be a scientist with 'science degrees' and yet refuses to actually comply with the 'science' part.

 

[Thales]

Once again it is representational based on various pump manufacturers and pump curves.

Please continue to take things out of context... A Picture without words can be misconstrued as it seems like you are of the "Picture Pages" mentality and have issues reading.
You're claims are anecdotal.

HA!