DSB Related Journals, Newspaper Articles, ETC...

[Mako]

Originally posted by gregt
Well I could go chase down a wild turkey for dinner today. But I'm much more likely to stop by publix and pick one up that's already prepared. I'm sure I'm less likely to get hurt and will expend much less energy picking up the prepared food. It's also far more likely that I'll be successfull in capturing the prepared food.

Where is the sport in that? You will appreciate your serotonin buzz much more later in the day if you were to chase him down yourself.

[SPC]

Originally posted by Mako
It seems to me that "could" is the operative word in a lot of what has been presented in this thread.

Morning Chuck,

What "coulds" are you referring to here?

Steve

[gregt]

I was wondering that myself Steve. Seems like this thread contains more research than anything the DSB people have put forth in 5 or 10 years...

[Mako]

I believe the "could" is obvious. No research is exempt from it as far as I know.

[Bomber]

Originally posted by gregt
I was wondering that myself Steve. Seems like this thread contains more research than anything the DSB people have put forth in 5 or 10 years...

Of course it does. There's no "coulds" in this research. DSB's act exactly like this. The could was the speculation of the DSB hobby experts of how they "hoped" it would work.
Remember they were trying to invent something new based on the understanding of what took place back then. We now know better and have know for quite some time. The processes that take place and the processes that do not take place have been documented well enough. These are facts.

[SPC]

Originally posted by Mako
I believe the "could" is obvious. No research is exempt from it as far as I know.

Well if you are referring to the research that has been presented in this thread, then I am lost as to your reasoning for "coulds". Or maybe its just as easy to understand the "could" in this situation as it is to fall off a log .
Steve

[ldrhawke]

This is a copy of a post to another thread. It applies equally to this thread.
_____________________________

Bomber this doesn't mean I don't agree with everything you are saying about DSB and BB, I am just curious and looking for other answers. Plus changing out my DSB is going to be a pain in the A*s.

_____________________________
quote:
I have a 60 cube. It has a 75gallon sump, a 45 (48x18x12h)gallon fuge, and a 45 gallon plenum tank. It also has a reactor running. The plenum has a tap under the sand so I can drain the plenum every month or so, as well as a crew of sand sifting/crap eating critters to keep it healthy. It gets only 100gph through it, and then just overflows back to the sump. The main tank has 6 fish in it, and the skimmer in the sump has been turned off for over a year. I haven't changed the water in...ok, technically I did change 10 gallons over the summer, but beyond that...nothing. The fuge has about 12 types of macro going on, 24/7 light from a 2x65 watt smartlight and gets 600gph through it before it overflows back to the main tank.


Wetworx.....that is a wonderful system. I only wish I had the space to allow for a system that had a ratio of 3:1 support volume. I don't and most of the people on this list don't. We are trying to make systems with zero to (0.5):1 ratios work. The only thing better than your approach is pumping water directly from the ocean.

The problem is we are trying to compare and evaluate the performance of apples and oranges. Changes and improvements to you system have little relationship to how they would affect mine. I only have a (.3):1 ratio with a 45g main tank and a 15g sump/fuge. I need all of my support processes working and maximum efficiency to maintain water quality. Your shutting off your skimmer off and my shutting my skimmer off are two different things. You have great buffering capacity through volume and biological surface areas to maintain quality water, I don't have that luxury.

The positive side of having a small system is I get very quick response and indicators to what is working and what is not working when I make changes. I believe their are some positives that come from using a DSB. It can act a biological buffer and produce food for fish and coral. My goal is to hopefully find a way to be able to operate a DSB that will not flip and kill all my fish and coral. All indications are that in the normal reef tank a build up of organic waste and phosphate in the bed are inevitable, the only variable is the individual tank fish, coral, and food in loading.

I believe a DSB with a plenum may offer a way to stabilize and extend the life of a DSB, hopefully so it never needs to be changed. If the testing done of a plenum system are correct and it does have a tendency to concentrate phosphate and and other organic waste, I want to use that to my advantage. Your approach to a continuous flow through the bed is in the right direction. The difference being I need to waste what is removed and not put it back into the tank. Your tankage support ratio may well work by recycling it back into the system, I don't believe mine will. I believe wasting a small amount from the plenum continuously is a better approach for my smaller system.

ORP readings are simply a tool that allows me to quickly see the water quality results for changes I make and the resultant trend in water quality. There is no question that it drops between my weekly water changes and that weekly water changes improve water quality. I compare a high ORP mV reading to a high alk reading, it simply tells me I have oxygen buffer capacity and higher stability.

I forgot to mention I use ozone O3, to help maintain a high ORP reading and good water quality, just like a I use a Calc reactor to maintain high alk and Ca readings.

Someone in the hobby or industry should take the time and money to do true controlled experiments with multiple tanks to develop more meaningful controlled numbers for DSB with plenums. The problem is we are not talking something that can be easily applied to different setups and tankage ratios. It could give some general answers.

For me all I can do now is experiment with what I have and see what works for me. I will be setting my plenum up to have computer controlled wasting out of my tank plenum, maybe a pint a day to start. For now I am simply going to monitor the ORP reading and trend and I hopefully expect to see that slowly increase over weeks. If it does improve it is telling me I may be going in the right direction, and I will play with the amount wasted and frequency.

Is it enough to save the dying DSB and it's apparent Achilles's heel with phosphate build up?...I have no idea. I see no down side in my test, and maybe it will give some meaningful results that will encourage other to build on it and do further testing.

[Aquabucket]

It will be interesting to test the water quality that is first flushed from the plenim.

[Bomber]

Hawke,

There was a big discussion about that years ago. I believe it was Richard Harker or Mike Wickham that was draining their plenums, at least a lot of people at the time thought it was a good idea to remove phosphates that way.
Since these organic phosphates build up so slowly (remember you're basically seeing a 3-6 year crash) it was the general consensus that draining the plenum was only needed about once a year. I believe they were using air line tubing and just letting it drip real slow, maybe a drop every two or three seconds - something like that.


Don't hold me to this, I wasn't running plenums, only interested in the conversation. I'm interested in these sort of things and tend to listen in.

[ldrhawke]

Bomber,

I initially considered doing that for using the DSB for anaerobic processing. The problem is the volume of the bed is far to small. To maintain strictly anaerobic condition, you would need to do exactly what they tried to do, drip only 20 to 30 drops per minute or less through the bed.

I figure that with 9,136 drops in a gallon, it would take 12 days to turn over a 60 gallon tank once. That is assuming plug flow. Since it would be remixed it may, take as a guess, 100 times that before you get a full tank turn over. I decided it was obvious that nitrates would simply continue to increase in the tank. Using the DSB bed as a nitrifcation zone is far too inefficient. It is far to small. Phosphate will continue to increase.

I am planning on using plenum volume as a concentrator for phosphate and nitrate. I will simply emptying the plenum on a regular timed schedule. The idea is very similar to cleaning up the waste that gathers in eddy current pockets on a BB.

I am not using the plenum as much as a biological process, accept for the possible phosphate going back into organic solution, with the lower pH in the plenum. I am looking at it more as a biological concentrator. I don't care if it denitrifies at all. I just want to export phosphate and nitrat from the plenum and keep it from going back into the tank.

I know...GO BB and skip that step. I think the DSB with a plenum can add biological stability, if it doesn't become a phosphate sink.

[Bomber]

That was their main concern, the phosphate build up under the plenum. I think I remember them talking about draining it slowly once a year, not on a continuous basis. Something about draining the volume under the plenum only.
I'm not sure about this. I'm call Mike over the weekend and see if he remembers. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure Sam Gamble was in on that conversation too along with Charlie Delbeck.
I'll see what I can dig up for you.

[Bomber]

You know there's no voodoo or magic to this at all. Phosphates will be organically bound in detritus - no matter what stage of decomposition that detritus is in and phosphates are limiting for hair algae growth. It's a bio-chemical process not chemical.

[Bomber]

The title of this thread is:

DSB Related Journals, Newspaper Articles, ETC...

You'd think with all the whining from the DSB supporters, they'd come up with a few "scientific" articles supporting DSB's.

[Yellotang]

I also am still waiting.

[skylsdale]

And I'm still tagging along...

[ldrhawke]

Hey Guys it is almost Christmas....be nice. You don't want coal in your stocking Bomber.

I'll bite.......I believe, (with no "scientific" articles supporting DSB's.), that with the additional biological surface a DSB gives it could potentially can be made a positive. It would required a different approach that simply piling sugar sand 4 to 6 inches deep and praying.

I believe by using a plenum, coarse aragonite, and a having a controlled flow through the substrate, it will allow the substrate to be the active biological bed it was meant to be and remove the potential for it going sour.

I agree a BB has the advantage of making the solid more easily accessible for daily removal. The problem if you do not remove it daily it will begin adding to the biological tank load. Also much of the waste is in solution and not accessible to siphoning off. The additional biological surface of a properly designed substrate, if it is kept active and controlled, can be a benefit in maintaining tank stability.

Also the plenum space can be designed to allow for the accumulated waste that concentrates there to be easily accessible for automatic daily removal. Which could eliminate the need for regular 25 to 50% water changes completely if done properly.

NO I can't prove any of this yet....Talk to me in a couple of years.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

PS...plus what am I going to do with my cute little JawFish if I go BB. They would end up seeing a shrink...

[Bomber]

That's the key Hawke, habitat for something like a jawfish. I imagine it's really hard for worm doctors to study worms without it too.

As the hobby has progressed from fish, to soft corals, to hard corals, to SPS - I imagine people will get a better handle on creating the type of tank designed to give optimum conditions for what they are keeping.

I keep SPS types, a sand bed in the bottom of my tank is the last thing I would want.

Originally posted by ldrhawke
NO I can't prove any of this yet....Talk to me in a couple of years.

I believe you're mistaken about the waste part, a good skimmer will remove it either directly or how it's associated (phyto, bacterial flock, etc), having to vacuum a sandbed is a step you can eliminate if you chose.

Even in a couple of years, unless you figure a way to totally go against nature, you're still going to be dealing with the breakdown of organics in the system. You're still going to need a good skimmer or water changes/siphoning, etc, to pull that off. I can get the same results - easier and quicker - with just the good skimmer.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO YOU TOO! :wavey:

[Bomber]

anything? anything at all??

Just one little bitty paper?

[skylsdale]

I think one of the biggest problems is that hobbyists don't want to specialize their tanks...or they don't know enough to realize the benefits of it. By "specialize" I mean focusing on a more specific environment and those animals rather than just a reef buffet. As it stands, too many people are trying to keep that proverbial elegance and acropora in the same tank...and it's just not going to work. You can't have the best of both worlds.

I think it would be largely beneficial for people to just narrow their systems down to smaller sections of the reef (or more specific environments) and just focus on replicating that as good as possible, rather than trying to create X number of micro climates in such a small area. Of course, that could be WAY too responsible to be realistic...

[Yellotang]

I think once we get passed the phosphate issue then we can worry about the tank zonation.

[kbreese]

Bomber, I am new to reef aquarium's and I may be confused but from what I gather you are against DSB's in reef tanks?

I will be setting up my first reef tank in the coming weeks and I am trying to decide what to do. If I were to go with a bare bottom tank, would it require much more maintenance? I do not want to be cleaning the bottom daily by any means!

The tank will be a 75G and will have 2 false percs and a small blue tang, and eventually a variety of LPS and SPS Corals. The skimmer I will be using is a Euroreef CS6-2, and there will be about 75lbs LR.

Is it possible for you to explain to me in layman's term's why you would be against me going with a DSB, and what type of maintenance i could expect with a BB tank? Would I need to add an additonal filtration going BB besides just the LR?

I asked Dr. Ron about DSB's and he basically just said the only reason DSB's crash is b/c they are not properly maintained, which I guess just means keeping a good population of critter's. Any thought's on this?

[gregt]

Merry Christmas kbreese!

I just want to point out one thing that is often unnoticed by many people and you can draw your own conclusions from the information. Dr. Ron has not yet been successful with his own DSB's.

[kbreese]

Originally posted by gregt
Merry Christmas kbreese!

I just want to point out one thing that is often unnoticed by many people and you can draw your own conclusions from the information. Dr. Ron has not yet been successful with his own DSB's.

Thanks Greg, merry xmas to you too!

The problem is I don't know how to interpret most of the information in this thread. Not only am I not a doctor or biologist, but I am only have a few weeks under my belt of learnign about SW/reef aquarium's. Yes, I am quite wet behind the ears of however that saying goes..

That's why I am begging for a laymans terms summary if possible.

[Mojoreef]

kbreese I think the simplist way to explain it would be is that a DSB is a storage system, that is designed to recycle waste/detritus/food. So in the early stages of it setup and running it can store and cycle the above mentioned. The problem is that it can only store and cycle so much, so eventually based on you feeding habits, bioload and maintenence it will reach a point where it ceases to function as a filter and will begin to leach the products it once stored and cycled.

Hope it helps


Mike

[jaypee]

Laymans terms?

DSB's leak "TOXIC WASTE" into your tank causing algae outbreaks, cyano bacterial blooms, as well as other sorts of blooms ... all of which you will have to deal with, none of it easily or perhaps cheaply ... and at the very worst they can cause death and destruction to all of the tanks inhabitants.

This is WELL documented in this thread!

There are NO scientific studies supporting DSB's ... other than Dr. Ron's claim "there are no studies".

From one layman to another, I think that about sums it up so far.