Refugium tips (formerly "flow rate thorugh a refugium") - Page 7

Anthony Calfo · #**151** 10/26/2005, 06:57 PM

sure... any place that you can conveniently add Chaeto is likely fine. It presents little challenge(s) and requires few things to get by. A neutral to positive yield here.

Bemmer · #**152** 10/26/2005, 08:56 PM

Thanks Anthony.

Any thoughts on the earlier post (just one prior to the last Bemmer post) about where the calcium reactor should be placed for the calcium drip to offer the best benefit. Sump or Refugium? Both are seperate tanks.

Anthony Calfo · #**153** 10/26/2005, 09:49 PM

not sure it makes much difference... other than avoiding either with significant bubbles/aeration if present.

Bemmer · #**154** 10/27/2005, 10:18 PM

Okay, so I can put the cheato in the center section of the sump and also have the DSB, LR and perhaps Mangroves in seperate refugium tank. From what I read in this thread, I will have difficulty getting the cheato ball rolling in the center of the sump because the overflow from the skimmer area will be coming off a baffle. Will that still be the case if I can glue on the 3" lip on the top portion of the baffle just below the water level? BTW, this refugium area in the sump is only 8"L x 30D" x 12H (water level in sump). Is that size refugium big enough to make any difference, if it just has the cheato in it?

Bemmer · #**155** 11/01/2005, 01:16 PM

Anthony,
I have decided NOT to have a center chamber in the sump, since I have the large refugium tank. So, I am going to put the cheato in the refugium with the DSB, LR and the mangroves. I want to add the lip at the short end of the tank just below my water level. But wanted to know if I should have the lip run the width (front to back) of my tank. Thanks.

Anthony Calfo · #**156** 11/01/2005, 02:14 PM

The mangroves are likely going to jam up the rolling flow pattern for the Chaeto. And... unless this refugium is enormous, the mangrives will grow out of the tank sooner rather than later (1-3 years if you are faithful about the crucial daily misting of the leaves with fresh DI/RO water daily).

Without mangroves... I would put the lip on a short end wall (full length of that side) just under the surface where the incoming water drops as described earlier in this thread.

Bemmer · #**157** 11/01/2005, 03:47 PM

Thanks Anthony.

okay, no mangroves then.

duvivier · #**158** 11/02/2005, 12:00 AM

Hey Anthony,

First, I would like to say that I've read quite a few books about Coral Reefs and marine biology and Reef Invertebrates and the Book of Coral Propagation are a few of the best ones among them directed to aquariums and marineculture, extremely forward and casual but still largely comprehensive. My sincere congratulations!

Know, since we are on a fuge discussion, I am designing my next fuge and my current project is a 80 cm side cubic fuge where I intend to keep on a side a few rocks and on the other side some mangroves, the fuge would have a tidal system, exposing part of the rocks and helping estimulate the aerial roots on mangroves
I would also have 3 types of substrate side by side, separated by some sort of eggcrate, a mud like one, aragonite sugar size and Halimeda, to encourage a larger diversity of organisms.
Since I live in Brazil I haven't seen any Chaeto avaiable on the market or any other species of "free floating" and intense light algaes. (Except for a few red algae especies that I can collect, gracialaria species from what I have seen)
Therefore I thought of having some hairy algaes and seagrass grow to create a prolific place for zooplankton and epiphytic organisms.

Any sugestions?

Thanks!

Raphael

Spuds725 · #**159** 11/03/2005, 01:24 PM

Can't believe I never stumbled on this thread (was linked here)...

I just read through this entire thread and I think I got a handle on how I want to do my fuge but my question is more on overall sump fuge exchange with the tank...

I have a 135 gallon tank (recently set up-- upgraded from a 72)-- I bought the tank used, along with it a pretty big homemade Euroreef knockoff skimmer-- it is a dual (sedra 3500 needlewheel) pump recirculating skimmer... I just hooked this thing up and have been tweeking the flow through it trying to get it to produce skimmate-- so far it seems to only produce skimmate if I maintain fairly low flow through the skimmer (under 100 GPH)-- its possible I don't have enough DOCs in my water for it to remove at this time-- I've only had my live stock in it a few weeks and it will produce more skimmate later at higher skimmer flows after I get more "stuff" in the water....

Right now I am running a rio 1400 on a single section sump (about 40 gallon currently holding about 20 gallons) as my return pump which gives me about 200 GPH at the 6 feet I'm pumping it up (I built a high stand for this tank)-- and diverting less then 1/2 my flow to the skimmer (under 100 GPH right now)

Now my question---

I plan on adding a 29 or 40 gallon glass tank for use as a refugium-- I plan on a DSB, with a live rock rubble pile at one end and will grow chaeto in it....

How much exchange of tank water do I need with my fuge??

I understand the flow requirements of the fuge and can supplement this with a pump/spraybar or powerheads in it (to get the chaeto tumbling) but wonder how much flow do I need to exchange with the main sump and tank-- will a low flow/exchange suffice (100 GPH or so or even less)-- or is this too low....

Secondary to this--- if low flow is ok....

1. Should I run 100% of my flow from my tank through my skimmer (this is a recirculating skimmer all the flow would in the top of the skimmer-- it does not draw water from the sump) and then tee off the return to feed the fuge (this would lower my sump/tank exchange to less then my 1x my tank volume per hour)

or

2. Tee off the water coming from my tank to the sump and run the water that doesn't go to my skimmer to my fuge??? Using my current pump would give me 200 GPH exchange between my tank and sump-- with about 1/2 going each to my skimmer and fuge.....

I know either way I'd be running either a low flow or very low flow sump/fuge-- just curious what the opinions on a setup like this would be.....

If you think neither give me adequate tank exchange what amount exchange with the tank would you recommend through the fuge?? I can size the pump I need based on this recommendation....I've been considering replacing my Rio anyway based on some horror stories of them frying and nuking tanks....

I would appreciate any comments...

thanks....

Spuds (aka Bill)

tonyf · #**160** 11/06/2005, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anthony Calfo
No harm... some help perhaps. At least in the sense that you do not want to drip your effluent from the Ca reactor into any high aeration/flow areas. Refugiums traditionally are not as dynamic as sumps or displays... so this may well be a fine place to drip.

Anthony, are you saying that we shouln't be directing the ca reactor effluent directly into the skimmer?

Thanks, Tone

PS since following your mantra, my reef tank has blossomed!

Glimmerman911 · #**161** 11/09/2005, 10:56 PM

Anthony, I am setting up a single refugium tank, but want to split it up into two zones. One zone will be a sand bed and live rock, the other zone will be a chaeto ball if I can find some to buy. My fuge is a rubber tub, 52"X28"X24", my main tank is 180 gallon, and my sump is 50 gallon.

Is this dual zone a good idea, and how would you set it up? Which would be the first zone, and which the second? How big for each, how much flow.

Thanks!

Bemmer · #**162** 11/18/2005, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spuds725
Now my question---

I plan on adding a 29 or 40 gallon glass tank for use as a refugium-- I plan on a DSB, with a live rock rubble pile at one end and will grow chaeto in it....

How much exchange of tank water do I need with my fuge??

I understand the flow requirements of the fuge and can supplement this with a pump/spraybar or powerheads in it (to get the chaeto tumbling) but wonder how much flow do I need to exchange with the main sump and tank-- will a low flow/exchange suffice (100 GPH or so or even less)-- or is this too low....

Secondary to this--- if low flow is ok....

1. Should I run 100% of my flow from my tank through my skimmer (this is a recirculating skimmer all the flow would in the top of the skimmer-- it does not draw water from the sump) and then tee off the return to feed the fuge (this would lower my sump/tank exchange to less then my 1x my tank volume per hour)

or

2. Tee off the water coming from my tank to the sump and run the water that doesn't go to my skimmer to my fuge??? Using my current pump would give me 200 GPH exchange between my tank and sump-- with about 1/2 going each to my skimmer and fuge.....

I know either way I'd be running either a low flow or very low flow sump/fuge-- just curious what the opinions on a setup like this would be.....

If you think neither give me adequate tank exchange what amount exchange with the tank would you recommend through the fuge?? I can size the pump I need based on this recommendation....I've been considering replacing my Rio anyway based on some horror stories of them frying and nuking tanks....

I would appreciate any comments...

thanks....

Spuds (aka Bill)

Anthony,
I was wondering the same thing as "Spuds". Is it best to pull water from the tank (raw water) to feed to the refugium or can it come from the "skimmed" water in the return section?

Spuds725 · #**163** 11/19/2005, 10:16 AM

I know my post was long winded-- I think skimmed is best (from what I've read) this is mainly to keep detritus from accumulating in the fuge-- if you have a "filter bag" that you can empty every few days you could probably run water directly to the fuge-- this was the only issue I had with feeding the tank water to the fuge directly-- I did this in an earlier tank.

The only reason I suggested running directly to my fuge is because I'm running such a small flow return pump-- this would increase my tank/sump exchange... rather then tee off my return to feed the fuge to set my skimmer flow.

but with my proposed setup, I'm really more concerned about a minimum tank/fuge exchange (volume wise)....this will really be controlled by the amount of sump return flow I end up with.

I'm not keeping a mandarin or anything but still want enough flow so the pods can get back to my tank, the fuge can help with pH control if I'm having any lighting/pH issues.

I'm still tweaking my DIY (recirculating) skimmer-- I think I got i dialed in pretty good now but had to raise the water level pretty high (about 2-3" below the lip of my collection cup)-- its producing a nice "dry" foam--- I estimate I'm running less then 50 GPH though my skimmer at this time-- I'm going to slowly kick up the flow to the skimmer and see how my skimmate production is affected.

Any comments from any "experts" would be appreciated as well as Anthony....

Thanks in advance...

Spuds

smp · #**164** 11/25/2005, 12:49 AM

I have the big aquaclear HOB filter set up as a fuge on a 29 gallon tank (I got the system complete, this isn't the way I would have done it).
One of those mini coralife fixtures is lighting the chaeto with two 9 watt PCs, one is actinic the other daylight.
My chaeto ball is healthy and crisp. Being that it occupies the entire area (except for a small sand bed and some rubble) of the filter it doesn't roll, but a lot of water does flow through it.

Lighting, cool.
Tumble, none.
Flow rate, High (compared to overall water volume I guess)

I haven't had the tank long but the chaeto is definitily healthy. I can't speak to the overall nitrate uptake because I haven't had the tank long enough to tell. One of the first things I did when I got this tank was lower the fish load. Right now the remaining tank inhabitants are probably enjoying the nitrate decrease thanks to the thinning of the population moreso than anything I could observe the chaeto doing (meaning that I've been lazy and not testing).

Also, Anthony I've been reading a lot of the posts in this particular forum lately and I gotta thank you for all the invaluable info .. and it makes sense!
Thank you!

Anthony Calfo · #**165** 11/25/2005, 10:29 AM

Thanks for your kind words smp... I do aspire to be practical as much as informative

emora · #**166** 11/27/2005, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tonyf
Anthony, are you saying that we shouln't be directing the ca reactor effluent directly into the skimmer?

Thanks, Tone

PS since following your mantra, my reef tank has blossomed!

Anthony,
I have the same doubt as tonyf, here.

Could you expound on your statement regarding the inconvenience of dripping CaRx effluent into highly aerated/dynamic zones?

Anthony Calfo · #**167** 11/27/2005, 12:05 PM

Hmmm... do y'all recall what happens if you let kalkwasser sit exposed to air? That chalky sheen on the surface: insoluble calcium carbonate that precips out and is useless and harmless.

Another famously oversimplified analogy by me

Really... this is best taken up with a chemist.

But still you can get my point, yes?

By aertating the effluent of a single stage Ca reactor heavily (or having a wickedly turbulent sump) you will indeed off-gas CO2 faster (good) and form more insoluble calcium carbonate (not good... or at least not ideal).

It may well be a moot point either way (small matter). But as a point of improving technique, I strongly recommend folks use a second stage media chamber on Ca reactors to temper the acidity rather than aerate or expose the effluent to heavy aeration/turbulence.

Its a bit of a balancing act here. You really want the effluent to be diluted (ameliorated... not aerated) into the bulk of the sump/system ASAP. That will minimize wasteful preciptitation... and that can be done without aeration and minimal precipitation.

Has that explanation helped?

Anthony Calfo · #**168** 11/27/2005, 12:34 PM

a brief followup too... this thread is getting off topic. Fine topic... but not relevant to the thread, which as a sticky post, needs to be tidy for future archiving IMO.

Any Calcium reactor follow-up need a proper new thread of its own.

Thanks kindly,

Anthony

dfwatson · #**169** 12/13/2005, 08:58 AM

Back to flow...After reading all the posts and much good info, I would like your expert opinion on refugium flow. I am planning a 180 (72x24x25) aquarium and I would like to have about 2000gph flow distributed by the Calfo design manifold. I plan on having (4) 1.5 inch holes drilled in the back and plumbed to a 65 gallon refugium. My goal is to house my skimmer, tumble some cheato and achieve my 2000gph flow rate through the single manifold without any power heads in the tank. My question is... can I run that much flow through the refugium and back through manifold without having too many bubbles or other major problems. Also on a side note, your book on Reef Invertebrates adds some great insight. Thanks for your advise.

Daryl Watson

Anthony Calfo · #**170** 12/13/2005, 09:53 AM

thanks Daryl

As for flow through the refugium, 2K in 65 gall is brisk (30X turnover) but really not as high as one would have for some sps tanks (60X) and certainly not a problem. Especially after you diffuse it with a rolling laminar flow as stated above to make the Chaeto ball tumble. I say yay you can do it.

dfwatson · #**171** 12/13/2005, 10:24 AM

Thanks for input, I just needed an expert to tell me so. Trying to make my plumbing as simple as possible through (1) manifold. New book soon??

Daryl

dfwatson · #**172** 12/14/2005, 05:11 PM

After further review and the possible need for more flow, could I use the remaining drains as a closed loop and plumb them into the original manifold? Trying to get all my flow into (1) manifold.

Daryl

Glimmerman911 · #**173** 12/14/2005, 05:35 PM

This doesn't answer your question, but what benefit do you hope to get from using 1 manifold instead of having the manifold + closed loop?

Is this in a fish room where you don't care what everything looks like, or is it in a living room so you have to have everything under your stand?

One option would be to use something like a barracuda pump on a 1" manifold, with 6-8 t's, going to 1/2" loc lines. That will give you approx. 2500gph depending on the total head. That would cover your tank flow. This is what I have setup as a closed loop, it works very well.

The refugium flow, depending on whether you have a sump or not as well, would be fed seperately, possibly from a drain line depending on the height of your fuge. Then use a single pump for your chaeto rolling. Depending on the dimensions of the chaeto ball area in the fuge, you could use the smallest tunze stream, or go with something smaller such as a quiet-one, or eheim, or mag pump. This setup would have two pumps.

Need more information about your setup, heights of various tanks, etc. to give you more options.

dfwatson · #**174** 12/14/2005, 05:46 PM

My setup will be in a living room with the sump below in a cabinet. I was trying to direct all the flow (including closed loop) through the one manifold for ease of plumbing and looks. Guess I'm afraid that I wont have enough flow with just a return from the sump.

Daryl

Glimmerman911 · #**175** 12/14/2005, 05:57 PM

Ok. I tried running my sequence barracuda through my 50g sump, and no matter what I did, microbubbles were a huge problem because there was just too much turnover through the sump, not enough time for the bubbles to dissipate.

To be honest, if I were to do it again, I would use tunze streams (1 large, or 2 small), and not a closed loop for my water flow, and just use a mag 7 pump for your sump return pump. I know it puts pumps into your tank, but it is just 2, and they do not rely on suction cups like regular powerheads.