PDA

View Full Version : Turf Scrubber vs 'fuge loaded with macro


KeithB
03/26/2013, 05:48 PM
I'm getting ready to start my new build and I'm at a quagmire as to go with a turf scrubber or a 'fuge loaded with macro. The both serve the purpose nutrient export and provide a place to grow pods. From what I have read so far, it appears that the turf scrubber is more efficient at nutrient export, but the 'fuge is more versatile to its functionality. Are there any other advantages disadvantages or each that I'm missing?

BCool
03/26/2013, 05:56 PM
Use both, a waterfall turf scrubber over a fuge.

SGT_York
03/26/2013, 06:05 PM
ATS are louder, but not too significantly if done right. Lighting on a fuge needs to be better to get the same amount of growth (depth).

All ATS's I've seen were over a fug but lighting in the fuge is usually less due to space shortage.

KeithB
03/26/2013, 06:06 PM
No worries about the Macro growing hair? I actually ran through that scenario in my head, but get freaked out by the thought of something loaded with HA feeding directly into something I don't want HA in/on.

MARINECRITTERS
03/26/2013, 06:36 PM
Algae scrubbers are a lot better, they remove more nutrients from the water and are easier to maintain, I have one a created, it looks very sleek and is in an acrylic casing.
The lighting and flow must be intense though, Lights must be about one REAL watt per square inch of screen. I have a 70 square inch screen for my 60 gallon tank, I run about 70 real CFL watts. The flow is very strong as well, powered by a reeflo pump.
While these filters are old school, when done correctly they can be an extremely efficient way of removing nitrates and phosphates.

MARINECRITTERS
03/26/2013, 06:38 PM
No worries about the Macro growing hair? I actually ran through that scenario in my head, but get freaked out by the thought of something loaded with HA feeding directly into something I don't want HA in/on.

The hair algae won't spread, some may get shoot up to the display tank but It will be out competed for nutrients and die. BTW hair algae is the best possible algae for a turf scrubber.

degibson84
03/26/2013, 06:40 PM
I am planning on doing both a gravity fed ATS going into the fuge

KeithB
03/26/2013, 06:49 PM
O.k.. so I'll just feed the ATS straight from the overflow. Is it possible to have too much flow over it?

degibson84
03/26/2013, 06:55 PM
read up here there is some great info

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1977420&highlight=scrubber

reeftanknewbie
03/26/2013, 06:59 PM
not to complicate things or this great feedback but I run both together with great success on my tank. I get amazing growth from both from a mature tank.

degibson84
03/26/2013, 07:02 PM
not to complicate things or this great feedback but I run both together with great success on my tank. I get amazing growth from both from a mature tank.
does your ATS run into the fuge or another compartment of the sump?

syrinx
03/26/2013, 07:23 PM
0 nitrates does not care where it comes from. Macro will do it with less plumbing, and work. ATS dont do real well in power outages and other unusual situations either. If it were a real ATS as originally designed, above the tank with surge action- yes it might be better. However for what people use as ATS now are no better than cheato- maybe worse. Of course they use all of the science and studies using a real addey based ATS as propaganda for their lesser versions. But as I said- 0 is 0, not matter where it comes from- and I do not begrudge people from liking the modern ATS- its just that its more for fun, rather than the most efficient.

mgraf
03/26/2013, 08:29 PM
I have ran both separately, I have had better results with the ATS. Not a lot of maintenance problems provided your design allows you easy access to the screen for removal. ATS takes up less space and mine has always out competed any macro that I have tried to grow while running it. Whatever works best for you is the best solution, neither one works very well in a power outage, no light=no growth, if the power is off for longer than 24 hours, you got bigger problems than your algae.

syrinx
03/26/2013, 08:40 PM
the cheato stays submerged-so it itself is unaffected.. If a pump or spraybar fails a light can cook a ATS pretty fast. All pie in the sky stuff-as I said I am for whatever level of tinkery people decide they want-but good water does not care the process- and both are successful!

KeithB
03/26/2013, 10:33 PM
Syrinx, wouldn't the sure based system suffer the same problem in a power outage?

jwoyshnar
03/27/2013, 06:12 AM
0 nitrates does not care where it comes from. Macro will do it with less plumbing, and work. ATS dont do real well in power outages and other unusual situations either. If it were a real ATS as originally designed, above the tank with surge action- yes it might be better. However for what people use as ATS now are no better than cheato- maybe worse. Of course they use all of the science and studies using a real addey based ATS as propaganda for their lesser versions. But as I said- 0 is 0, not matter where it comes from- and I do not begrudge people from liking the modern ATS- its just that its more for fun, rather than the most efficient.

Pretty poor and outdated advice. What is your experience with turf scrubbers or is it just what you have read? I find it pretty funny that most people that bash or condem scrubbers don't use them or have never tried them.

I for years have used both a refugium full of grape caulerpa and a waterfall turf scrubber. It has been the single best filtration combo I have used in 35 years of fish keeping.

Jstdv8
03/27/2013, 03:53 PM
I had a load of cheato growing in my sump and a bunch of GHA growing in my DT when I built my scrubber. Within 6 weeks the cheato was dead and the GHA was gone from the DT.
That by itself tells me that the ATS is farm more powerful at doing what we want macro algae to do.
The ATS also added a zillion pods to my tank within a few weeks. But these pods were very very small compared to the ones I already had. not sure why that is, but they are very abundant.
If built incorrectly the ATS is loud and can spray water. Those are the only downsides i can think of.
The scrubber is so awesome I only check my basic parameters once a year now.
I would recommend it for any tank that has a sump.

GroktheCube
03/27/2013, 04:09 PM
I'd expect an ATS to perform better in terms of raw nutrient export.

Personally, I'm building my refugium more with plankton production than nutrient export in mind. Nutrient export is just a side effect more me.

I am contemplating building an ATS too.

syrinx
03/27/2013, 06:44 PM
I was in the business when Dr Addey published his paper on the development of the system. I have seen his original system in person as well. I also was around when Inland Aquatics began with their algae scrubbers. So my experience goes to the origin of the concept. There were drawbacks-but his system was by far more advanced, and had many more benefits than the modern versions. From my experiences, the modern version is really little different than cheato-and has more opportunity for failures. As I said I am not against personality based methodology, some people like more complex setups. To me the bottom line is water parameters-and the simplest, most fool proof and inexpensive way to achieve them, is the best.

Jstdv8
03/28/2013, 12:46 AM
Addey's system had an inherent flaw in that it could not be cleaned outside of the system.
People always want to compare the two systems, but they are only similar in tat they grow algae quickly and export it from the water.
Everything else is apples to oranges.
You cannot compare the original system and the failures they eventually had to the new style DIY systems.
There are now loads of examples of a scrubber being the only filtration in several different tank styles from freshwater to fowlr to lps and Sps tanks sustaining for a couple years now.
Santamonicas tank has been running it since 2008 with excellent results.

jwoyshnar
03/28/2013, 04:24 AM
Yes as I stated your info is very outdated. The newer info is up to date and shows how well these work. At the time when the information you posted came out, it was the most current and up to date info out there. That was along time ago. Things change. Remember at one point it was thought the world was square. Try the new ways honestly and you will see how much better a scrubber is compared to cheato refugium.

KeithB
03/28/2013, 03:17 PM
O.k.. So the next question. Do those of you with an ATS still skim?

Reefnation.Jon
03/28/2013, 03:31 PM
this would be fairly easy to see which works better. clean the ATS. put a certain weight of cheato in the fuge. one month later clean the scrubber again and remove and put back the same amount of cheato. let the remnants dry and weigh them. whichever weighs more has grown the most and in turn has exported the most nutrients.

Jstdv8
03/28/2013, 07:20 PM
this would be fairly easy to see which works better. clean the ATS. put a certain weight of cheato in the fuge. one month later clean the scrubber again and remove and put back the same amount of cheato. let the remnants dry and weigh them. whichever weighs more has grown the most and in turn has exported the most nutrients.

I had a huge ball of cheato in my sump when I started my scrubber.
After 6 weeks the scrubber had killed off all the cheato and all the gha in my display tank too.
Far stronger and much more nutrients exported weekly
You literally remove a plate full of algae every week from te scrubber. More weight than my huge ball of cheato ever weighed.

Jstdv8
03/28/2013, 07:22 PM
O.k.. So the next question. Do those of you with an ATS still skim?

I skimmed for a few weeks until my screen grew in.
Never plugged it in since, been 3 years now and no detectable phos or trates.
Skimmers take out coral food from the water too. Scrubbers leave the little stuff in the water. Skimmers will give a crystal clear water though.

jwoyshnar
03/28/2013, 07:57 PM
I had a huge ball of cheato in my sump when I started my scrubber.
After 6 weeks the scrubber had killed off all the cheato and all the gha in my display tank too.
Far stronger and much more nutrients exported weekly
You literally remove a plate full of algae every week from te scrubber. More weight than my huge ball of cheato ever weighed.

when done properly these are the results seen usually. Thanks for contributing.

Jstdv8
03/28/2013, 08:16 PM
Hardest part was getting the screen to grow in when the scrubber was competing with the cheato, the gha in the display and the skimmer.
I eventually plucked the gha by hand a few times in a row and then the screen caught hold and eliminated it from growing back like it had in the past.

KeithB
03/28/2013, 08:58 PM
I skimmed for a few weeks until my screen grew in.
Never plugged it in since, been 3 years now and no detectable phos or trates.
Skimmers take out coral food from the water too. Scrubbers leave the little stuff in the water. Skimmers will give a crystal clear water though.

Thanks. The big reason I'm doing an ATS is so that I can feed everything nicely. Though I am also into asthetics, so I'll play it by ear (eye) on the skimmer.

Jstdv8
03/28/2013, 11:03 PM
If your flow is good on the screen and you have sufficient light and screen area you can feed a ton. I actually reduced my feeding due to less fish now and the screen just kinda self regulated to only using about half of the screen to grow algea now.
They really are quite amazing.
Once I got comfortable with mine I started playing with less maintenance and different feedings. I'm back to cleaning mine once a week for best results, but I have gone as long as 2 months without cleaning the screen.
Eventually the water doesn't flow very well and you start loosing the FHA growth and get shorter stubby growth, not as good I guess. And then the bays just start peeling off due to weight.
Never did lose my parameters though.
I always know when my scrubber isn't doing perfect because my power heads will start getting light algae growth on them and I have to clean the front glass more often like I did with skimmer only.