Randy's Tank and Learn Thread

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Good idea. New tanks typically don’t have a high organic load, anyway.

I am on an ozone break for now. If I ever restart, it will be significantly less than what I’ve done in the past. I think I overdid it in the past, and I think some of the acropora suffered from it. I’d have to try it at a lower dose in the future and see if the same effects appear.

Would you consider calcium carbonate (coral snow) dosing in the future?

Possibly, especially if something like cyano become a problem. I don't think I'd use it as a regular thing due to concerns of what else it may be doing. I worry about two things, although I admit there's no current evidence of a problem by users that i am aware of:

1. Clogging of filter feeder pores with insoluble particulates. Especially organisms with very small pores such as sponges. I'm not convinced many folks dosing it track the effect on sponges, but I'd love to hear about it if any have.

2. Every dose will bind some trace elements to the particle surfaces. Of course, one could offset it with more trace dosing, but I think it just makes the whole process more complicated, especially if not using ICP-MS. I'm not sure that folks setting recommended doses (say, Tropic Marin with AFR or TM A and K) take into account such binding. It likely also is far more significant for some trace elements than others, and knowing which were most impacted likely means testing in any given tank (since the amount bound will depend on the element, the chemical form and organic binding to both the CaCO3 particles and the trace element ion).

I put CaCO3 particle dosing into the category of something that sounds simple, safe and appealing, but at its core is actually pretty complicated and may have different results in different aquaria.

 

[Featherweight]

So you just have to run the site for people to respond to build threads. Don't need pics or a running tank even. Haha. Have fun with it

 

[Miami Reef]

Possibly, especially if something like cyano become a problem. I don't think I'd use it as a regular thing due to concerns of what else it may be doing. I worry about two things, although I admit there's no current evidence of a problem by users that i am aware of:

1. Clogging of filter feeder pores with insoluble particulates. Especially organisms with very small pores such as sponges. I'm not convinced many folks dosing it track the effect on sponges, but I'd love to hear about it if any have.

2. Every dose will bind some trace elements to the particle surfaces. Of course, one could offset it with more trace dosing, but I think it just makes the whole process more complicated, especially if not using ICP-MS. I'm not sure that folks setting recommended doses (say, Tropic Marin with AFR or TM A and K) take into account such binding. It likely also is far more significant for some trace elements than others, and knowing which were most impacted likely means testing in any given tank (since the amount bound will depend on the element, the chemical form and organic binding to both the CaCO3 particles and the trace element ion).

I put CaCO3 particle dosing into the category of something that sounds simple, safe and appealing, but at its core is actually pretty complicated and may have different results in different aquaria.

Thanks.

I don’t use it anymore for 2 reasons:

1) I care a lot about my maxima clams (currently have 16) and this particle size can potentially clog the gills.

2) I keep a very high pH and alk tank for growout, and the new calcium carbonate surfaces would act like a huge seed crystal for CaCO3 precipitation.

 

[Pod_01]

2. Every dose will bind some trace elements to the particle surfaces.

I tried calcium carbonate to clean up mild Cyanobacteria and ended up with what I suspected was mild Dinos outbreak.

Once I stopped and I topped up on trace elements things improved. Actually I am not sure what helped, not using it or the extra addition of trace elements!!!

GSP after few months of not using it:

I suspect on some tanks additional trace elements (and perhaps PO4) or specific trace elements may need to be added when using calcium carbonate.

That is just my experience and definitely there are reefers that make it work. Maybe it is the bacteria mix they use that works…

I actually wondered about the particles, are corals able to digest them? Like add the calcium to the skeleton.

 

[Reefer1978]

I tried calcium carbonate to clean up mild Cyanobacteria and ended up with what I suspected was mild Dinos outbreak.

Once I stopped and I topped up on trace elements things improved. Actually I am not sure what helped, not using it or the extra addition of trace elements!!!

GSP after few months of not using it:

I suspect on some tanks additional trace elements (and perhaps PO4) or specific trace elements may need to be added when using calcium carbonate.

That is just my experience and definitely there are reefers that make it work. Maybe it is the bacteria mix they use that works…

I actually wondered about the particles, are corals able to digest them? Like add the calcium to the skeleton.

Mild Outbreak?!?!? :eek: :eek: :eek:

 

[Pod_01]

Mild Outbreak?!?!? :eek: :eek: :eek:

I call it mild, it did disappear after one month.
All I did is stop using calcium carbonate and added trace elements. No other extreme measures like UV etc… It may be because the tank has been running for 5 years so it recovered/ self corrected quickly.

In my early days of reefing I had outbreak that lasted lot longer :zany-face: …

 

[Kenmx10]

Return Pump Turnover Rate



Perfect topic for a discussion. :)

I'm expecting to have pretty low turnover. 1x per hours seems plenty to me for these reasons:

1. In tank flow is provided by in tank powerheads (the Tunze stream 6105 eco). Each provides 3,000 to 12,000 L per h flow. In a 120 gallon tank, that's 6.6 to 26 x turnover on each one. I do not anticipate running them near 100%.

2. I cannot think of anything that would change in the water in the tank in less than an hour that necessitates it being run through the filtration system. Not temperature, O2, pH, organics, waste products, etc.

3. Lower return flow is easier to accommodate from return pumps and from overflows and return pipes, with potentially lower sound.

Does anyone see a reason to want higher than 1x turnover per hour?

I would be more concerned about the flow rate going through the sump. Especially since you have 4 brute cans. I think you could get a lot of detritus or other debris settling out at the bottom that could cause issues over time unless you are constantly cleaning them out. I personally like see enough flow going through the sump to keep everything suspended and moving through at a good rate. JMO

 

[Kenmx10]

I would be more concerned about the flow rate going through the sump. Especially since you have 4 brute cans. I think you could get a lot of detritus or other debris settling out at the bottom that could cause issues over time unless you are constantly cleaning them out. I personally like see enough flow going through the sump to keep everything suspended and moving through at a good rate. JMO

Sorry Randy, I was just reading thru earlier post and realized that what I just posted has already been mentioned.

 

[BeanAnimal]

3. The tank has a very slight cant to the right that results in only one overflow getting water at the rates I'm using. I'm not concerned about the structural integrity since its only a couple of mm across the 4' tank, but I'd like at least a little water go over both so the less used one doesn't stagnate. I don't really see how I can easily level it better with this type of stand without stressing the stand unevenly, so I'm just going to cut some passages through the weir of the less used overflow so that it gets at least a little water during normal operation.

Assuming these are flat weirs…. 3D print some weir lips… or usereport binder slides or plastic channel of some kind on the low one.

The most irritating leak yesterday was a threaded pipe section between 2 brute cans. After lowering the water level, I had to remove one bulkhead completely, remove the threaded pipe section from both bulkheads, then add the paste and more tape, and reassemble it all. But it worked well.

Too late for uniseals??

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I would be more concerned about the flow rate going through the sump. Especially since you have 4 brute cans. I think you could get a lot of detritus or other debris settling out at the bottom that could cause issues over time unless you are constantly cleaning them out. I personally like see enough flow going through the sump to keep everything suspended and moving through at a good rate. JMO

Thanks, yes, I do expect detritus settling. There was a 1/2 to 1” thick mud of it in my sump last time.

What concerns would you have about a layer of detritus?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Too late for uniseals??

Yes, because it’s working now. Lol

 

[BeanAnimal]

I put CaCO3 particle dosing into the category of something that sounds simple, safe and appealing, but at its core is actually pretty complicated and may have different results in different aquaria.

This has been somewhat my thought all along, though I only considered the possible clogging effect, not the biological or other possible side effects like binding trace.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Brute Can 2:Skimming and Cooling


This can seems good to go. I got the cooling coils working yesterday, and they are just in standby. The inkbird I want was on sale at Amazon so I picked it up. It will control the cooling, and 1 heater. WiFi setup is working after a bit of messing around. Thus, I can monitor temp from afar. The picture of it mounted in a 2x4 above the can looks like it is missing a digit, but that is just mismatch of the photo timing and flicker rate. Right now it is controlling the refugium temp.

I set up the Tunze 9410 AC skimmer and got it working. I had to cut a short piece of 2” pvc and put it into the drain to raise the water depth to 6” on the skimmer. Seems to be working fine. There is very little organic matter in the water now since it could only come from the refugium, and even that has only sent a portion of its water into the other 250 gallons of new salt water. Just letting it break in for a while, then I’ll shut it down until the rock and sand arrives a week from tomorrow.

Skimmer pokes its head through a hole in the Brute lid in the picture below. The hole was already there, or I would have made it smaller.

Looking down into it, the inlet is in the right, overflow drain on the left, cooling coils around and below the skimmer that is standing on the inverted and cut down laundry basket.

 

[Kenmx10]

Thanks, yes, I do expect detritus settling. There was a 1/2 to 1” thick mud of it in my sump last time.

What concerns would you have about a layer of detritus?

Here is the way I look at it. I want the cleanest water possible. And the sump is one of the tools used to help filter out proteins that would otherwise build up in the tank creating elevated nutrient levels. If the sump is used to collect detritus and food particles instead of exporting them, then it will create an environment where it will be rotting in the bottom of the sump and breaking down as ammonia/nitrite/nitrate. And like you mentioned, eventually turning into a thick layer of decayed matter built up in the bottom of the sump. A few things come to mind that I would be concerned about. 1st would be battling High nutrient levels. 2nd would be dirty water. 3rd would be that any harmful contaminates that would normally be exported, might settle out in the mud and remain trapped there. 4th if the mud ever got stirred up from working on the tank, moving things around, cleaning out the sump or skimmer, etc., they could be released back into the water column instantaneously causing unknown harm to the living organisms in the tank.

Not saying that all those things will happen, but in this hobby I've come to realize that it is much easier to prevent a problem than to deal with it after it has occurred. JMO

 

[BeanAnimal]

A few things come to mind that I would be concerned about. 1st would be battling High nutrient levels. 2nd would be dirty water. 3rd would be that any harmful contaminates that would normally be exported, might settle out in the mud and remain trapped there. 4th if the mud ever got stirred up from working on the tank,

I gave up on cleaning the sump over 10 years ago and have not run mechanical filtration since. I used to throw a filter sock on the return and stir it up….

4’ long sump. This is a corner, an egg crate platform an inch off the bottom sits over most of it is covered with 30-50 pounds of rock. The rock is covered mostly in brown silt on the top exposed surfaces.

My nutrients levels are fine, if not a bit low. The system is over 20 years old now and has never been broken down.

Not arguing for or against, but rather just showing what I have.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Here is the way I look at it. I want the cleanest water possible. And the sump is one of the tools used to help filter out proteins that would otherwise build up in the tank creating elevated nutrient levels. If the sump is used to collect detritus and food particles instead of exporting them, then it will create an environment where it will be rotting in the bottom of the sump and breaking down as ammonia/nitrite/nitrate. And like you mentioned, eventually turning into a thick layer of decayed matter built up in the bottom of the sump. A few things come to mind that I would be concerned about. 1st would be battling High nutrient levels. 2nd would be dirty water. 3rd would be that any harmful contaminates that would normally be exported, might settle out in the mud and remain trapped there. 4th if the mud ever got stirred up from working on the tank, moving things around, cleaning out the sump or skimmer, etc., they could be released back into the water column instantaneously causing unknown harm to the living organisms in the tank.

Not saying that all those things will happen, but in this hobby I've come to realize that it is much easier to prevent a problem than to deal with it after it has occurred. JMO

Ok,thanks. I can give the alternate view:

1. The detritus provides an environment for microbes up to pods and add to the biodiversity. I had some sponges that were growing on it.

2. The release of nutrients provides a buffer against these getting too low.

3. The mud provides a place for bacteria to live that were consuming the vinegar I dosed.

4. The settled particles kept them from visually detracting from the main tank.

5. I never cleaned this sump in many years. Less work.

:)

 

[dwest]

I have a trio of clowns in my elegance. But only two will come out right now for pics :)

 

[Pod_01]

1st would be battling High nutrient levels. 2nd would be dirty water. 3rd would be that any harmful contaminates that would normally be exported, might settle out in the mud and remain trapped there. 4th if the mud ever got stirred up from working on the tank, moving things around, cleaning out the sump or skimmer, etc., they could be released back into the water column instantaneously

I been using skimmer and GAC for about 5 years now… I prefer the floaters to stay in water column as long as possible, I figure it is additional food source for corals to filter out. There are critters in the sump doing something with the accumulation… it can’t be that bad…

Couple of pictures:

Every time I tried to clean up the sump, corals didn’t look happy.

My NO3 tends to be below 1ppm and PO4 I keep between 0.2-0.4ppm.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

In Tank Flow

I got the two Tunze stream 6105 eco up and running. One on the back wall to the left of the left overflow, and one on the right side wall near the back (will be very hard to reach a magnet on the back wall right side once the hood is in place.

At 10 % they move the water very quietly. At 100% there’s is more noise, but I’m not sure I’d use that much flow. It’s a lot in an empty tank. I’ll have to see what flow looks good with creatures and rocks in the tank.

The Tunze web control allows lots of timing control of flow, so it will be easy to set flow low in the very early morning when quiet is preferred, and higher the remainder of the day.

 

[rishma]

In Tank Flow

I got the two Tunze stream 6105 eco up and running. One on the back wall to the left of the left overflow, and one on the right side wall near the back (will be very hard to reach a magnet on the back wall right side once the hood is in place.

At 10 % they move the water very quietly. At 100% there’s is more noise, but I’m not sure I’d use that much flow. It’s a lot in an empty tank. I’ll have to see what flow looks good with creatures and rocks in the tank.

The Tunze web control allows lots of timing control of flow, so it will be easy to set flow low in the very early morning when quiet is preferred, and higher the remainder of the day.

IME the noise they produce at any level diminishes after a few weeks of running in when new.