PDA

View Full Version : Bubble scrubbing


wetpets9
04/06/2016, 06:13 AM
I have been reading about bubble scrubbing which some people are saying is doing great for their tank. Take an airstone and put it by the return and fill the tank with micro/nano bubbles for several hours a night. Says it literally cleans the corals, fish, rocks etc and all livestock are happier, healthier, better growth etc. Has anyone done this, what are youryour results. I tried it for a night and it did not make my return pump happy having all that air going through it. Just trying to figure out if it is really that beneficial and if so how to do it without messing up the return pump.

ubasu
04/06/2016, 06:53 AM
Have not tried it but listen to this weeks reef threads podcast. http://www.reefthreads.com/

Harth23
04/06/2016, 07:30 AM
Would it help any if it was just in the pump to?

wetpets9
04/06/2016, 10:00 PM
Well the podcast didnt really support it. I wish, as they suggested, someone had or would do a side by side kind of comparison. May just hold off on this for awhile or until i can find some truely confirmed benefits.

PolyReef
04/09/2016, 02:02 PM
https://youtu.be/SClQryNtKu8

wetpets9
04/30/2016, 11:35 AM
I tried it for a couple nights and nothing looked happy. I dont know if im doing it wrong or what but i stopped.

el aguila
05/06/2016, 06:00 AM
I've been doing it for a month.

I have limewood diffusers pulling outside air close to the intake of my return pump in my sump, yet far enough away that the larger bubbles don't get pulled into the pump. This leaves the smaller bubbles which tend to stay in the water column, and according to the "bubbling gurus" is what you want.

I have not seen any negative effects on a 190 with mostly SPS. However, some of the experience/claims of ridding a tank of cyno have not been my experience.

Here again there is more than one thing that looks like cyno for example spirulina also dino. The only way to tell the difference is with a microscope.

On the positive side, I could not believe how much it cleared my tank water up. I believe that there will be positive long term benefits from having outside O2 rich air coming into the tank at night.

While this concept goes against the grain of most old reefers, I'm yet to hear a single negative from someone actually doing this, and there are quite a few who have been bubbling for some time including some Europeans and one of the RC tanks of the month.

oblio
05/06/2016, 01:26 PM
I put a limewood airstone in front of the return about 2 months ago. I too was looking for help with the cyno on the sand. It did not seem to help the cyno issue at all. But I simply cant see how this would negatively effect the system. So I left it set up on a timer that runs at night for 30 mins. I also manually turn on the airstone for a few mins and then use the turkey baster to turn the sand bed and blow off the rocks, the bubbles seem to help suspend and carry off the baddies into the sock. I airstone, turkey baste, turn off the air, wait 30 mins or so and then change out the bag.

conjuay
05/15/2016, 05:11 AM
one of my HOB boxes runs directly to the fuge. I don't think the cheato enjoyed the bubble bath.

Radioheadx14
05/15/2016, 08:59 AM
I'm going to give this a shot next week. I figured for only a $20 investment, its worth the shot. I do not run a skimmer, so it the minimum, I will get a little extra O2 in my water column at not and may help keep a stable pH.

ca1ore
05/22/2016, 09:48 PM
I cannot, for the life of me, see why this would make any difference at all. Sounds like a new set of clothes for the emperor. A health reef tank should be both crystal clear and approach oxygen saturation. Further, it's a comon misperception that an airstone directly adds oxygen to the water. It does not. It simply functions as a form of circulation. Unecessary as long as one has even a moducum of water movement. If this proves to be a sustaining improvement in the way a reef tank is run, I'll eat my hat.

jml1149
06/02/2016, 11:36 AM
I cannot, for the life of me, see why this would make any difference at all. Sounds like a new set of clothes for the emperor. A health reef tank should be both crystal clear and approach oxygen saturation. Further, it's a comon misperception that an airstone directly adds oxygen to the water. It does not. It simply functions as a form of circulation. Unecessary as long as one has even a moducum of water movement. If this proves to be a sustaining improvement in the way a reef tank is run, I'll eat my hat.

Disagree. This is the same concept as attaching an outside line to the intake of your skimmer to raise pH. By forcing CO2 deficient air into the tank (fresh air) CO2 transfers from the tank water into the bubbles which are then released into the atmosphere when they exit. I think conceptually you're just increasing the air/water boundary from the top of the tank, to the surface area of the top of the tank plus the surface area of all the bubbles inside.

The only way to increase pH is to reduce CO2, and there shouldn't be any disagreement that works.

So if CO2 can transfer from the water to the air, if the water is O2 deficient, why can't we expect O2 transfer from the air to the water? I'm not a chemist but seems like the same equilibrium mechanism at work.

slief
06/04/2016, 10:02 PM
Disagree. This is the same concept as attaching an outside line to the intake of your skimmer to raise pH. By forcing CO2 deficient air into the tank (fresh air) CO2 transfers from the tank water into the bubbles which are then released into the atmosphere when they exit. I think conceptually you're just increasing the air/water boundary from the top of the tank, to the surface area of the top of the tank plus the surface area of all the bubbles inside.

The only way to increase pH is to reduce CO2, and there shouldn't be any disagreement that works.

So if CO2 can transfer from the water to the air, if the water is O2 deficient, why can't we expect O2 transfer from the air to the water? I'm not a chemist but seems like the same equilibrium mechanism at work.

As ca1ore noted, there should NEVER be o2 deficiencies in a properly setup tank. A properly setup tank will always have adequate dissolved o2. That's not to say that a bit more o2 to displace co2 won't increase pH in cases where the house has elevated co2 but as said, a properly setup tank will have plenty of dissolved o2 as a result of sufficient surface agitation, protein skimmer and even our overflows. FWIW, what some consider low pH isn't as low as some would think. I've seen plenty of very healthy tanks with pH levels as low as the upper 7.8's. Further, low pH isn't always due to elevated Co2. It can also be a result of low alkalinity. Regardless, the theory of bubble scrubbing isn't anything like running your skimmer airline outside and isn't about adding more dissolved o2 to the water. It more about turning your tank into a giant protein skimmer so that the microbubbles created during the bubble scrubber bind with proteins in the water and carry them the surface and into the overflow. It's more about waste expect and irritating the corals such that they produce a slime layer and stuff off toxins. Additional dissolved o2 would be a byproduct of it but certainly not the driving principle behind it. Regarding the air stone adding o2 to the water, he is correct there too. Most of the dissolved o2 in our tanks comes from surface agitation. It's been proven that even protein skimmers add very little dissolved o2 to the water. While an air stone will add a bit of dissolved o2, they add very little. The dissolved o2 they generate is more from the surface agitation the produce when the bubbles hit the surface. In the case of microbubbles, the a very fine wood air stone is used and placed in front of a power head, that would generate more dissolved o2 but the bubbles have to be extremely small. Much smaller than those generated by a typical air stone.

That said, I agree 100% with ca1ore. For a well setup tank with adequate solid and organic removal, bubble scrubbing is in my opinion a total waste of time and in some cases can do more harm than good.

kutcha
06/12/2016, 01:49 PM
so what would the general consensuses of this be is it beneficial or just a waist of time?

roosterchef
06/12/2016, 04:41 PM
General consensus is waste of time. Some anecdotal stories about success, but also a vendor with a product to sell (can also be done without their product). Unfortunately, this is how all new techniques start out. Most fail, a few succeed, but can't know yet which this is. No help at all, right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A

kutcha
06/12/2016, 05:19 PM
General consensus is waste of time. Some anecdotal stories about success, but also a vendor with a product to sell (can also be done without their product). Unfortunately, this is how all new techniques start out. Most fail, a few succeed, but can't know yet which this is. No help at all, right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A

lol no it was helpful i now know i have to wait for more results lol