While we are talking about filter socks and other media... Question:

Jim Harrison

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
235
Reaction score
160
Location
Salem, OR
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I've built my sump a little high on the water line, so I don't think I will have enough space to use filter floss as a media. I've got about 3'-4" (will need to measure when I get home) of clearance above the water line. Seems I'm going to have to go with a filter sock, yeah?

Filter socks are ok submerged as long as the top clears the water line from what I understand.

Filter floss needs to clear the water line in order to be effective as I understand it.

Is my thinking correct on this? Or can I have a partially submerged section of filter floss?

I'm building my sump, so any suggestions or opinions are greatly appreciated.
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
It doesn't need to be submerged or exposed to be effective. Think spaghetti strainer. Both are mechanical filters, and strainers.

Personally I would prefer it to be submerged as the dry portions will have die off due to being exposed to air.
So as long at the floss blocks(strains) the full flow from the return it's the most effective.
If that makes sense.
 

Looking for the spotlight: Do your fish notice the lighting in your reef tank?

  • My fish seem to regularly respond to the lighting in my reef tank.

    Votes: 99 76.2%
  • My fish seem to occasionally respond to the lighting in my tank.

    Votes: 15 11.5%
  • My fish seem to rarely respond to the lighting in my tank.

    Votes: 8 6.2%
  • My fish seem to never respond to the lighting in my tank.

    Votes: 2 1.5%
  • I don’t pay enough attention to my fish to notice if they respond to the lighting.

    Votes: 2 1.5%
  • I don’t have any fish in my tank.

    Votes: 2 1.5%
  • Other.

    Votes: 2 1.5%
Back
Top