Refugium tips (formerly "flow rate thorugh a refugium")

[gearhead]

what is a good flow rate thru a refuguim?? what factors go into deciding how much flow? thanks

[Anthony Calfo]

it depends wholly on what it is you are keeping/culturing in refugia.

Much like lighting and how important it is to define what species you will be keeping at what depth and their subsequent needs before (!) we buy lights/lamps

In the case of 'fuge water flow... it has been grossly underestimated to date. I'd say 10X turnover bare minimum in general... but more like 20X is better/best. You will find that Chaetomorpha and Graciliaria, etc grow much faster and with better vigor in such flow.

Any doubts?... look for nuisance algae that typically flourish in low flow environments like Cyanobacteria.

And like reef displays... be sure to distribute that flow well (no single nozzle injection). Produce random turbulent flow for most refugia to keep solids in suspension for increased opportunities for filter feeders to use/export the matter.

kindly,

Anthony

[gearhead]

right now i'm using a mag 9.5 for a return. it's a straight shot up about 4 ft. i know a 15g fuge is kinda small, but i'm gonna build 1 that is longer & wider & taller than what i have currently.

i have a chaeto in there. I quess my next thing will be to get some ideas from people who have built their own refugiums for some design ideas.

[Anthony Calfo]

a nice technique with good strong water flow is to seal (silicone/glue) a thin strip of acrylic or glass like a lip (2-3" wide) just under the water surface and on the short end of the tank where you allow the water to enter at.

When the incoming flow crashes down upon this submerged lip, it forces the water to "scoot" across the surface directionally... causing an eddy in the tank which keeps your Chaeto ball constantly tumbling. That in turn improves health and vigor in the colony while reducing the total need for light over the tank/colony. Steven Pro pointed this out to me on his tank. Very neat!

Anth-

[gearhead]

right now, my water enters into a 10"x12" section of a regular 15g tank. the water enters a 25 micron bag & i have a euroreef es5-3 skimmer in that section. then over, under, & over 3 baffels(spaced 1" apart with the middle 1 being 1" off the bottom of tank. then thru a 7"x12" section w/ LR, LS, & chaeto. then over another single baffel to the mag 9.5. i have a coralreef 9 watt light over the cheato.

[Anthony Calfo]

yikes.. that is staggeringly inadequate light for most any macroalgae my friend. I cannot imagine that you are getting vigorous growth (and substantial nutrient export in kind) with that glimmer of light.

Most popular green marine algae species (and true vascular plants) require reef lighting intensities or better since they come from the same or shallower waters as our corals.

A decent rule is at least 5 watts per gallon for such macros. A cheap DIY MH pendant (50 or 75 watt) with an excellent reflector would get you by here.

Anth-

[Cearbhaill]

Ahhh- the great macro lighting discussion continues!

Why do so many of us have difficulty growing chaeto until we l slap on a cheap incandescent light?
I had tried batch after batch with different lighting schemes, and always ended up with melting chaeto- the thread detailing it is
here. (http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=420710)
As per Randy Holmes-Farley's recommendation I tried incandescent, and now I throw out great gobs every week.

I am so glad to have you here!

[TacoKing]

I have a 55gal refugium filled with cheato. It has 4x40 4' NO floro's over the tank that are lit 24/7. The 55 is supplied by a Mag 7 and has two returns into the tank.

I am getting amazing growth of my cheato. I remove about a 5' bucket worth of it every month and I really think it helps control my nutrients.

Before using cheato I was using a form of calurpa and hated it. I wasn't getting the kind of growth I desired, which in turn didn't help my nutrient issue. Cheato all the way!.

-TK

[Anthony Calfo]

Well... its not realistic for us to pin survivability on one factor like lighting. Water flow and nutrient levels (or not) play an even greater role. And in brightly lit systems with poor water flow when Chaeto is not permitted to tumble - is it a problem... yes. I do believe. But that's not caused by the lighting. Or at least not alone. The poor flow and poorly lit overgrown under-region of the colony is the Achilles heel here.

All a case by case basis with this highly adaptable macro :)

But for others like Gracilaria... its cut and dry. They will indeed fail in lower light. Aquarists often mistake the yellowing or orange turning fringes as a sign of poor health in red varieties. On the contrary! That's when some of them are getting enough light. These types are grown (on line or tumbling in baskets) coastally at the surface of the water. In the tropics :D Strong water flow... strong lighting here.

For Red algae (Rhodophytyes)... the darker red it is... the lower the light is/has been (maybe good... maybe bad - depends on the specimens natural needs and adaptability).

Anth - :)

[ahenson]

Anthony I am curious as to best way to set up refugium with chaeto. Setup will be 100g rubbermaid refugium lit by 400w 6500. It will gravity feed into two prop tank. Refugium has 5" southdown bed. I want as much chaeto growth as possible. With good flow and strong lighting are there other limiting factors other than organic sources? Is iron or anything else a limiting factor? Would you dose iron or anything else or will water changes be enough?
Glad to have you on the board, just finished your book.
Andy

[sfsuphysics]

This is interesting stuff since I'm (if I ever fricking bring a new wire from the breaker box to the room) in the process of moving my tank an putting a 50g macro-tank/semi-refugium right next to it to be accented by light from the window, and most likely two 54w t5 bulbs, is there any word on color spectrum of the light which is preferable for macros? I'd assume a more daylight light (6500k) as opposed to the bluers (10000k+) bulbs. I'm only asking because 6500k t5s are way cheaper.

Also you mention turbulant flow, is there a cheap and easy way to do this without resorting to a scwd (i've heard bad things about them), or ocean motion (way to pricy for a refugium).? The plan I had was to dump the main overflow into the tank, then hit it with a seio620 from the other side (I'm a bit of an energy miser).

[billsreef]

Either Borneman or Carlson type surge devices are great inexpensive methods of getting some nice water movement. I'm using a Borneman type surge maker on my chaetomorpha culture, and it definately improves growth rates while using the same overall flow rate into the tank ;)

[gearhead]

where is some info on these?? i did search thru RC with no results.

[hail_sniper]

idk, if this was a bad thing or not, but on the nano i set up recently, im not worried too much on copepod's as the animals i have on their dont really rely on them, but i do want the macro algae, i have about 80X turn over rate, is that bad? i have noticed very slow growth, and its about a gallon sized fuge with about 12W of light, so is the flow rate being high causing it to 'stunt'

[mesocosm]

Greetings All !

"Why do so many of us have difficulty growing chaeto until we l slap on a cheap incandescent light?"

Spectrum. Most "intended specifically for marine aquaria" lights generally have a spectra of 6500K to 10000K + . Chlorophytes (Green algae) typically prefer a spectrum closer to 5000K . But as has been said, there's more to it than light ... .


sfsuphysics,

"is there any word on color spectrum of the light which is preferable for macros?"

If you want to play in the land of serious macroalgae spectral data (... with coverage of both growth and reproductive correlations ...), I recommend "The Biology of Seaweeds" (Christopher Lobban & Michael Wynne, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1981) ... great stuff, but requires effort to digest.

Such information is only now beginning to filter into the commonly available literature. IMO, "Reef Invertebrates. An Essential Guide to Selection, Care and Compatability" (Calfo & Fenner, 2003) presents the best information on the utilization of macroalgae and marine vascular plants available in mainstream hobbyist literature to date.

HTH.

[billsreef]

Here's some search results on both types of surge devices ;)

Borneman surge device (http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=3877405&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending)

Carlson surge device (http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=3877414&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending)

[hammerhead]

I use a 10k 65w PC on my refuge I have Cheato . I have 1400gph from my overflow to the sump. Im uing a mag 12 on my return I have alot of flow going through the refuge I also have a rio 600 in there a well. My light is on for 14hr's. I have to prune every 2 week to keep it from filling the sump refuge area.

[Triterium]

I get AMAZING growth in both caulerpa and chaeto!!!

I have a 20 gallon deep refugium lit by a cheap 175watt metal halide (4000K) I bought from Home Depot.

I have pretty much no water flow (maybe 5 gallons/hour). I do use air bubblers which create turbulent water movement in the fuge.

I had terrible growth before I upgraded to the MH light.

[gearhead]

whats cheap & where in HD was it?

[Triterium]

$85 for the whole setup(bulb, socket and ballast). It was by the floodlights

http://www.utahreefs.com/forum/uploads/BananaTropics/2004-08-09_191725_halide.JPG

http://www.utahreefs.com/forum/uploads/BananaTropics/2004-08-09_192127_fugeafter.JPG

[wayne in norway]

I was at the DIY shop a few weeks ago, and saw 500 watt work lights on stands for 25 dollars apiece.... very tempting. If I stick it on my little refugium I would get nearly 100 watts/gallon of nasty algae friendly light

[gearhead]

Triterium - thanks for the info, i'll go check them out tonite.

wayne in norway - i've got a set of those, they will light 1/2 acre of land quite nicely(mine has 2 500w lights). they also get quite warm.

[Anthony Calfo]

cheers, All... sorry for the brief silence in reply - I've been away for a few days.

sfsuphysics - very good point re: many popular macros favoring warmer colored lamps! And thanks for sharing the nifty "seaweed" reference.

Additionally, for anyone interested in more info on marine plants and algae... do track down many of the the works by the Littlers. These and other neat-O/uncommon books/references can be peeped/bought at seachallengers.com... among other places.

Bill/Billsreef... excellent to hear an expert "marine greens" enthusiast chime in here! Indeed... for this organism at least, (improved) water flow is very influentialas you have started/shared.

Which brings me/us to Andy's question(s) about dosing and outfitting for "Chaeto" overall (iron, etc.). Really, mate... Chaetomorpha is truly a staggeringly hardy and adaptable genera/variety! With reef-quality water that is good enough to keep cnidarians healthy (regular water changes, etc.)... you need not worry too much about dosing specifically for Chaeto beyond normal trace element/mineral supplementation. They really are quite adaptable to a very (!) wide range of lighting too. Anything approaching 5 watts per gallon (arghhh! I hate rules of thumb) and of a color leaning towards the warm end of the spectrum will be fine (hence the reason why "cheap" lamps work well for Chaeto... crappy non-designer warm colored or aged lamps start or stray to the arm side of the spectrum).

Chaeto is so desrvedly popular in large part because of its great adaptability and hardiness.

kind regard to all,

Anthony


Andy -

[fishdoc11]

What's the secret to "getting the ball rolling" (couldn't resist). I have ~ 600 gph going through a ~ 5 gal section(water volume) of my 30 gallon sump. The chaeto seems to sink after I clean it of detritus and doesn't want to float again for a couple of weeks and then it's time to clean the sump again. Also what is everybody's opinion on the bulb Melev has posted in his huge thread in the Reef Discussion forum. It's a power compact encased in a floodlight body. I'll post a link if I can find one.
thanks, Chris

[fishdoc11]

Here is the bulb I am using:
http://www.melevsreef.com/fuge_bulb.html
thanks again, Chris

[thrlride]

When you say 20x's turnover in the fuge, is that 20 times the total volume of the whole system or 20 times the volume of the fuge? I am designing my plumbing system now.

[sfsuphysics]

Fishdoc, I think that bulb Melev uses is great. Now I haven't used it myself, but it fits the bill of everything you want, its intense (65 watts wasn't it, and they're "better" better watts too! More efficient ones than the watts per gallon rule, btw Anthony I hate those rules as well :)), it's compact (no 2-4 foot bulbs here), its focused (you point the light where you want it doesn't shine all over the place), it doesn't require anything overly special (a standard plug for bulbs, no ballasts, no endcaps, no worries about matching up exact bulbs), and its good price for the length the bulb lasts (CF bulbs have a life time of 5+ years, note: I'm unsure how the color spectrum works over this time line).

All this talk of flow, surge, etc has gotten me to rethink my future tank setup now and has actually given me a bit of an idea. I was toying with the idea of using a skimmerbox inside my show tank (135g) and pulling a siphon straight to my macro-tank (50g) without the need for an outside overflow box, since the other tank itself would essentially be that outside box and keep the flow regulated, unfortunately that tank on the stand I got (free tank + cheap $20 stand) is about 10" lower than the show tank that idea went out the window. Although I have been toying with putting it up on blocks to raise it, it just would look to ghetto. Now with this surge idea, I might have the perfect solution, siphon all the overflow to surge box/bucket/tank (whatever I get my hands on) the surge itself would prevent oversiphoning from occuring (just like the outside overflow box does), and then instead of putting a steady current into the macro tank (ie refugium) it would surge it when the surge filled to the trigger point.

The benifit of this is I get my surge action, the same amount of flow is still occuring just with breaks inbetween (which could actually be benificial), and best of all malfunctions are no longer an issue, since if for whatever reason the surge flapper (or whatever mechnism I go with) fails the surge won't overflow since it'll stop when it reaches the level of the show tank, or if the flapper doesn't go down, then I have a standard overflow (of course if the return pump fails there could be issues). Best of all, no need for an additional pump to fill the surge.

Anyways sorry to sidetrack, just had some musings I wanted to share, if anyone is interested in a diagram I'll whip one up later, now I gotta go to work though. Man I love this thread :)

[Anthony Calfo]

Chris... in your case, a quick and easy fix to get this Chaeto tumbling would be to:
- keep the refugium vessel free of any large obstructions beyond the Chaeto
-apply your water flow via something like a quickly rigged spray bar or several tees across a feed pipe. This bar is to be placed at or just slightly below the surface of the water the length of one short end wall of the aquarium (like the lip mentioned higher up in this thread). Aim this effluent water at a slightly downward angle but mostly jetting across the planar surface. This will create very simple rolling recirc of water in the tank. It really is as literal and simple as it sounds.

Anth-

[fishdoc11]

sfsuphysics,
Thanks for the reply. That's the bulb I'm using and my growth isn't that great but I'm thinking it's because of low nutrient levels. I was just wondering what kind of growth others got:-)
Chris

[Anthony Calfo]

thrlride... 20X is really just a ballpark guide. Like lighting... it needs to be adjusted/finessed on a case by case basis for the specific animals you keep... and presumes you will keep a realistic and compatible group of organisms that can actually fare well under the standardized parameters you set.

That said... the 10-20X guide is for the individual tank (display or refugium). Thus... for Chaeto in a 20 gall 'fuge... a 400gph flow (20X) is not asking a lot. Its not enough flow in many cases (like when significant particulates enter from incoming water). In such cases where aquarists get misled to use the old slow-flow recs (under 10X)... it is no wonder the refugium becomes a cess-pool of nuisance algae.

Slow flow in most any refugium (other than settling chamber styles that are actively serviced) has been one of the single biggest tidbits of "mythinformation" promoted at large in recent years. Its patently bad husbandry IMO.

Anthony

[Kc189]

My question is would 70X turn over rate be to much though a Fuge? At this point I am open to any type of Marco. I plan on having 16G fuge on a 80G tank. I was planing to put 1100gph thought the sump. Any thoughts?

Keith

[DgenR8]

Originally posted by Kc189
I was planing to put 1100gph thought the sump. Any thoughts?

Keith


I think you're going to have a hell of a time controlling micro bubbles.

[Kc189]

The sump its self will be 30lx14.5wx20t. So would you run about 800gph hour or lower?

Thanks in advance!

Keith

[fishdoc11]

Anthony,
The fuge just contains chaeto and the water comes over a baffle on one end and then goes over another one so I have a good stream across the surface. The reason I think it's not working is because the chaeto isn't floating. Would adding the lip you described but angling it slightly downward and putting it on top of the incoming water instead of below help in any way. I know it's hard to describe over the net and I aprechiate your help. I may just have to cut a piece and play with it. A spraybar really isn't practical for the setup I have. I allready have three pumps in another section of the sump and I don't want to add another.
thanks, Chris

[Anthony Calfo]

Chris... the baffles are an impediment and, even if not, diffuse the flow. You do not want to angle the lip downward either as this will break the pattern of flow. You are missing the point here my friend. Water flow needs to be focussed and horizontally shot across the surface to make this long rolling flow pattern.

Your baffle instead is nothing more than and overflowing dam. Indeed, do experiment/try this my friend... even take some clamps and a strip of plastic and rig up a small temporary lip to the overflow side of that baffle. Its tough for both of us here perhaps to explain via text. bummer :p

do take a stab at it and holler back. Take pics too if you can :)

Anthony

[fishdoc11]

Thanks alot Anthony. I'll play around with it this weekend. I get what you are saying now. It's great to have you here on RC.
Chris

[Anthony Calfo]

thanks Chris... all good too :)

The temporary rigging of clamps will allow you to experiment with optimal lip height and depth for optimal flow.

Please do share your results :)

[tstone]

Anthony
I disagree with you on the grounds that we are using the fuge as not only nutrient export with chaeto but also to grow pods, mysis and other small critters that (correct me if I am wrong here) like calmer waters.

I think the slow flow is more for pod and critter health/growth.

As you put it earlier in this thread it is a highly adaptable macro. The chaeto grows well anyway with strong enough light.


In my opinion the fuge is a nursery for bio-diversity and a nutrient export tank

I think for overall health of the fuge slow flow is the way to go.

I don't think 50GPH in a 30g fuge is good but certainly 200GPH is fine.

Who cares if there is some cyano? It is consuming nutrients just like chaeto. Just siphon it off when you harvest the macro.
Just more nutrient export.

I think nutrient export is a part of the equation but bio-diversity is a building block for stability.

IMO

[tstone]

One other thought.

If you are just building an algea scrubber then the 20X turn over is a good idea.

But for a real fuge take it slow dude.

[billsreef]

Better yet, with the use of baffles and/or rubble piles you can create some nice slow flow areas for the pods et al in the high flow fuge. The best of both worlds ;)

[tstone]

Now there's an idea. I may have to give that some thought in my latest setup

[Dag]

The links to the Borneman and Carlson surge do not work.

[tstone]

Do a search and you will find the threads.

[wayne in norway]

Perhaps if you're after maximum nutrient export you are going to sacrifice pod growth in the refugium to some extent. It seems to me the two are ultimately incompatible.
I remember seeing how much cyano a certain amount of nitrate would produce.. it was enough to convince me it wasn't a viable way to remove wastes...

[bergzy]

i have had my new 40g fuge set up for about a month now.

the original chaeto that was growing in my bucket fuge was starting to die (hooked up to my old 125g set up).

i originally had a flow of about 300g through it via a split from my main return pump. the fuge initially started growing cyano but i saw a lot of pods crawling around. tons!!!

i then placed a maxijet 1200 in there.

chaeto started to tumble as anthony clafo stated one should do.

it has more than tripledin size since then. the green has also become very dark grean with a firm crisp texture. when i put the chaeto in originally, it was light green, soft and wilted.

i just added another powerhead and plugged them both into a spare red sea wavemaster pro.

this brings the total circulation to almost 900gph or 22.5x turnover per hour. chaeto looks phenomenol.

but...the pods must be hiding or chewed up from the powerhead cuz i havent really seen any. that looks like they don't like the heavy flow.

my fuge is meant for nutrient export and not pod production as there is a sponge prefilter on the overflow to prevent stray chaeto bits from entering the main display.

with 180 pounds of lr in the main display, this should be more than enough for my mandarin goby!

[fishdoc11]

I am still decicing on whether or not to "get the ball rolling". Initially the section of my sump that the chaeto is in was intended as an area for detritus to settle out so it could be easily removed. So I am debating leaving it like it is, rolling the ball, adding a 2" layer of Southdown to reduce my NO2 reading of 0.2ppm and help process detritus or a mixture of a couple of these. Decisions, decisions, decisions.....
Chris

[bergzy]

if you ever 'get the ball rolling' ;), it is actually quite entertaining to watch!

[Dag]

I put my chaeto in my overflow box. It doesn't tumble but it has got lots of flow, and it grows well there.

[Anthony Calfo]

Wayne et al. have really "hit the nail on the head" so to speak: some of the things we seek to achieve in refugiums are difficult if possible to achieve to the same/highest level(s) at the same time.

Although we can enjoy numerous and simultaneous benefits from most any type of system - high/low flow, coarse/fine substrates, deep or shallow beds, lit/unlit, etc. - we really must focus on some primary goals and accept the compromises on other aspects.

You can imagine some really neat refugium styles/applications that are truly incompatible with each other: settling chamber or turf algae system? [slow versus high flow]... amphipod factory or, hmmm... spaghetti worm fetish? [coarse versus fine substrates]... Gracilaria farm or cryptic refugium [high versus low light].

Again... need to worry about a strict "rule" for flow :) No such rule exists.

In the case of Chaeto and Gracilaria, moderate to high flow and perhaps tumbling of the matter will not harm but likely help the colony. No more, no less :)

kindly,

Anthony

[fishdoc11]

Welcome back Anthony! Glad you had a good time with all the "fish nerds"...a moniker I wear proudly:-)
Chris

[biomekanic]

Lighting: I have a 25.5" x 4.5" x 12" HOB refugium with excellent Chaeto growth ( harvest about 1/2 to 2/3 every month). For lighting I use 2x 23w Panasonic GenIV 5000K bulbs in a "standard" dual incandescent aquarium hood. I modified the hood by putting in a reflector I picked up from Ahsupply.com. All told, it cost me about $40 for the whole works. After putting in the reflector, I got much better growth. The bulbs are good for about 14 - 16 months, when I was running them 24/7. I've switched to having the HOB on at the same time as the main lights, with the sump/refugium on reverse. When I first got the bulbs, they were $14.99 at a local light store, last time, same store, the price had dropped to $11.99, and according to the merchant, prices will continue to drop. IME, this is also a nice light if you want to do a planted FW or marine macro algae nano tank.
http://www.buylighting.com/Panasonic-GenIV.htm

[Anthony Calfo]

cheers, Chris... indeed - I wear the badge too :D

and much thanks for the lighting tip Mike/Bio :) Very good point about using a good reflector. If one is going to use lights for most any reason at all... a quality reflector is a must.

Anthony

[tabwyo]

Mr. Calfo, I am currently rigging up a scrubber fuge and would like your input. The fuge itself is a 58 quart "rubbermaid" container. I ntend to run 100% of my display overflow(roughly 290GPH) through it. I have read this thread a couple times and I have begun to have and idea. I can cut and bend a piece of plexi as a horizontal deflector that my overflow would dump onto. I would place this deflector about 10" from one side of the container deflecting the water into the larger area of the fuge. Giving me roughly 3/4 of the fuge area for a chaeto tumbler. Under the deflecto I would have an eggcrate wall to corral my chaeto ball. My outlet would be behind this "wall" and surrounded with extra rock rubble and such. This end of the fuge I hope will have a much less hecktic flow pattern and allow a last chance area of detritus to settle out befor it enters the sump. The entire fuge will have a shallow live sand bed as well. Any thoughts would be helpfull.

[Anthony Calfo]

please call me Anthony, my friend. :)

As best I can visualize, your notion sounds essentially fine. The vessel is small enough that manipulations to get the pattern you need will be relatively simple. No worries.

I do have some wonder and minor concern about the egg grate barrier. I'm not sure its needed and do expect that it will trap or hitch some Chaetomorpha.

Actually... in the big picture, you may not need to tumble Chaetomorpha at all in this refugium. Again, it is small enough in size that lighting and water flow will not be as difficult or expensive to produce as on a much larger refugium.

And since I'm a (very) big fan of keeping systems as simple as possible, I'm suggesting you maybe forego most of the customizing of this vessel and see how it flies at first. Adjust as/if needed afterwards :)

best of luck, life

Anthony

[tabwyo]

Will do, I have passed my fist leak test and I am biulding the deflector as I type. I was only thinking of the eggcrate as a way to keep the chaeto away from my outlet.

[charlesgage]

how is this setup at about 500 GPH of flow, it is in a 40g long 48x12x12

1 - 5 gal
2 - 4 gal
3- 16 gal
4 - 2 gal

comments? changes?

http://photos.imageevent.com/angieandcharlie/misc/SumpLayout.JPG

[Anthony Calfo]

above all things else... then skimmer needs to get all raw water first. Otherwise, organics that you would prefer to be exported are allowed to linger as sediment, get tied up in refugia otherwise, etc.

Be very direct about aggressive skimming and supply it with first chamber raw water.

The water flow may also need to be increased (because the baffles are very diffusive)

[charlesgage]

Well i already have it built and chamber 4 is too small for a sump, any suggestions that only involve plumbing changes or removing walls?

[Anthony Calfo]

you could build a small vessel just slightly larger than the footprint of the skimmer and place it inline next to the sump (and slightly higher) so that it gets raw water first then overflows (to the sump, again).

Else your skimmer performance will be seriously handicapped IMO.

Or... sell the sump you have to someone that does not place an emphasis on skimming ( they do larger water changes, lower bio-load, etc) and rebuild your sump.

do it right the first time, mate... you have a lot of money, time and life forms invested in this tank.

Anthony

[charlesgage]

1. where would the raw water come from (for the skimmer)?
2. I would have built it right the first time, but that is how i was told to build it!
3. I assume that if i switch the skimmer to go before the fuge, than all will be good? I could just move the one wall.

[Anthony Calfo]

yes... do switch the skimmer before the refugium if not giving it a catch basin (inline and before the sump) of its own.

No worries. And seeing you are from MI state.. are you aware of Preuss Animal House up north (Lansing area I think). Rick Preuss is one of the most conscientious merchants/people in the aquarium hobby/industry. A fine aquarium and pet store.

best of luck,

Anthony

[charlesgage]

Thanks, i have not been yet, I am heading out to preuss this weekend to get some livestock, I will talk to them, I can say hi if you want!

[Anthony Calfo]

They are all great folks... truly so.

But if/when you start to attend the hobby conferences like MACNA, you will soon develop an appreciation for how much work Rick Preuss has done for the industry.

best regards, Anthony

[tabwyo]

If the refugium has a sandbed, what critters would you stock.

[Anthony Calfo]

I like refugia for nitrate reduction (DSB) and zooplankton production (Chaetomorpha or unlit with a polyester fiber matrix to grow them in). Do check out some of the other threads on refugiums and stocking them in this forum and beyond. :)

[Bugger]

Hi Anthony Im just wondering what you mean by Raw water into the skimmer? At what flow rate would sand start blowing around? Is DBS really worth the trouble and expense.
Did people jump the gun with bare botton.
like you said most people run low flow rates through there refugiums bacteria rely heavly on strong currents to bring them nutriunts.
Also particle size and sand depth have little to do with bacteria numbers.
Sorry if this is just all just yesterday's news

Reference's
Adams,G and S. Spotte. 1985. "Carbonate Mineral Filtrants and New Surfaces Reduce Alkalinity in Seawater and Artificial Seawater:
Preliminary findings."Aquacult Eng 4:305-311
Anderson, T.K., M. H. Jensen and J. Soreensen. 1984. "Diurnal Variations of Nitrogen Cycling in Coastal, Marine Sediments I. "Mar Biol 83:171-176
Capone, D G., S. E. Dunhan, S. G. Horrigan and L. E. Duguay. 1992. "micorbial Nitrogen Transformation in Unconsolidalted Caroal Reef Sediments."Mar Ecol Prog Series 80:75-88.
Coull, B.C., M.A. Palmer and P.E. Myers. 1989. "Controls on the Vertical Disttribution of Meiobenthos in Mud."Mar Ecol Prog Series 55:133-140.

[wayne in norway]

Raw water to the skimmer means raw tank water goes to the skimmer first - this is the dirtiest water. Skim out as much as possible, pass this cleaned water to the filter bacteria to reduce load on them.
I will read the references you quote. However my first impressions would be , based on experience looking at sand beds in tanks and beaches that you are right to say bacterial numbers aren't much affescted by particle size and depth. However what I would say is that both of these, and water flow have direct efects on the behaviour of some of these bacteria as they have a control on the flow of oxygenated water through a sand bed.
Particle size increases - thickness aerobic layer increases as water penetrates more easily
Depth - more depth .... well obviously dissolved oxygen content decreases with depth
Water flow - higher = greater thickness richly aerobic zone.

SO it's not necessarily a measure of mow many bacteria are there, as to what they're getting up to.

[Anthony Calfo]

... and we are not talking about a beach on/near a reef... we are talking about a comparatively lifeless bed of sand in an aquarium with a staggeringly miniscule rate of water flow and exchange compared to the a given/analyzed portion of a beach.

In so many ways, we are talking about two different realities here. And so, we make concessions to the artifacts of captivity. That is the only biology I personally speak to/about. Aquarium science... not aquatic science, if you will :)

I do appreciate the references, Bugger... but 3/4 are 15-20 years old... the fourth is fast approaching that. Aquarium science and Aquatic science have evolved considerably since these excellent works were published, with all due respect my friend.

Anthony

[turbo2oh]

I'm bringing this thread back to life :) theres lots of good info here. I'm planning on building my own HOB fuge for my 29g. I plan on only having chaeto in there no sand bed or LR, and maybe a snail or two to help keep the walls clean.

I knew I wanted to keep the chaeto tumbling and was trying to come up with a good design for that. Its been hard for me to visualize some of the models discussed here so I made a quick model myself.

Please keep in mind I have no background in fluid dynamics :) I still have no idea how to setup the "spillover" area to return the water to the main tank. If Anthony or anyone could provide feedback that would be great.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/turbo2oh/idea1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/turbo2oh/idea2.jpg

[Anthony Calfo]

if the return water is a narrow nozzle, it will not move the surface adequately in a shear wave/wall.

That's the reason for the sealed plate under the surface of the water... to splash and divert the incurrent stream into a laminar plane of water. A spray bar could be a workable compromise here... although I've never liked the (poor) serviceability of spray bars.

[turbo2oh]

Thanks, I'm still a little confused though, should it be similar to my 2nd drawing or should the flow exit below the "sealed plate"? Does anyone have a link to a pic of a system like this?

[Anthony Calfo]

ah, I see. The second drawing my friend. I did not realize the line under the effluent pipe was a sealed plate (do draw an end wall perhaps for sharing this diagram in the future. A good diagram indeed).

And this plate need not be very large. Just a couple inches wide.

I saw this on Steve Pro's refugium. Perhaps he has or can take a picture to share.

[Steven Pro]

Originally posted by Anthony Calfo
I saw this on Steve Pro's refugium. Perhaps he has or can take a picture to share.
The best picture I have of my sump/refugium is here,
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=27490&papass=&sort=1&thecat=500

[Anthony Calfo]

ah, fab! You can see the sealed glass lip on the right side very well (lust under the surface of the water). Works very well for causing a rolling action to the water for tumbling Radiolarian, Chaetomorpha etc... reduces the qty of light needed, stimulates vigor/growth in such algae, etc.

[walt13]

Anthony-

I have another question about flow rates. You helped me with my upstream 15 gal fuge and changing sand beds in my 55 gal FOWLR. We also discussed greyhounds a bit. I took your advice and did not lose any fish, snail, crabs ect. Thank you.

Now for my question. For the fuge I am going to use a mag 5 pump instead of a smaller powerhead. If I send all the water through the pump I will have roughly 400 GPH using the head loss calculator. I am planning on Chaeto and having a deep sand bed 6-8''. Would you recommend sending all the water through the fuge ore splitting it and having some return directly to the tank? The return form the fuge will be gravity fed.

thanks Walt

[Anthony Calfo]

do give this (Chaetomorpha) refugium at least 400-500 gph for vigorous growth and health :)

good to hear from you too, Walt.

kindly, Anthony :)

[walt13]

Anthony

Thank you again,

Walt

[Anthony Calfo]

always welcome my friend :)

[turbo2oh]

Originally posted by StevenPro
The best picture I have of my sump/refugium is here,
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=27490&papass=&sort=1&thecat=500

Does the water enter the fuge part by simply spilling over the neighboring side? It looks like it spills over then comes down onto the lip. Is this correct? Is there an decline ramp there where it spills over? Its hard to tell with the glare. The pic is much appreciated though :)

[Anthony Calfo]

I can comment here (am close friends with Steve, and have seen this display):

The water for the refugium does indeed spill over a shared wall (then crashes down on that glass lip sealed slightly below the water level on that right side).

Notice that the sequence is very appropriately: raw water from above (display), dropping to the far right (first) chamber (you can see the skimmer cup just behind the post)... then to the refugium... then to the sump proper before being returned (pump) to the display.

[ohioreef]

Below is a pic of my fuge. From reading this thread, I obviously do not have enough flow. I am trying to grow chaeto.

Would putting a PH running through a spraybar work to get my chaeto moving as well as increase flow?

The input is tee'd off my return pump and controlled by a ball valve. Right now I have it entering at the bottom of the fuge through a T, as you can see.

http://webzoom.freewebs.com/ohioreef/refuge.jpg

[spamin76]

Wow - great thread - I had been wondering on how to optimize my fugue - now a I know!!

[mike9515756]

Anthony, can i throw in cheato in my open sump, box it in with egg crate with no dsb and hope to reduce nitrates? Or is a DSB very important?

[Daemonfly]

Good thread :) Been reading up on it all as I'm going to be setting up a 20g long (wier/external overflow) with a 10g fuge.

[Anthony Calfo]

I don't see the Chaeto being your principal means of nitrate reduction, even indirectly with a larger quantity. It has many benefits... but does not excel on that point.

Instead... use a DSB, large-deep live rocks, and/or aggressive skimming to temper nitrates.

[Daemonfly]

Anthony, would you consider a 20g long or especially a 10g fuge too small for a DSB to even work efficiently, or much at all?

[Anthony Calfo]

it would depend of course on the bioload (need for denitrification not otherwise satisfied). But yes... they are rather small vessels even with a lot of sand to expect significant NNR in

[ohioreef]

I installed a spraybar in my fuge (see pic above) and increased the flow to get my ball "rolling."

My chaeto seems to be much healthier now. It is no longer floating. The color is a darker green and the balls are much denser.

[reefkeeper59]

Originally posted by wayne in norway
I was at the DIY shop a few weeks ago, and saw 500 watt work lights on stands for 25 dollars apiece.... very tempting. If I stick it on my little refugium I would get nearly 100 watts/gallon of nasty algae friendly light

I have a 500 watt shop light. They put out Alot of heat. Not sure that would be a good idea. I can put my hand 4 feet from the light and feel it. Don't dare touch the housing, you will get burnt. Much,much hotter than my 250w MH fixture's. May as well put a torch under your tank. I painted a bed room, and used 500watt for lighting. the room got hot.

[DgenR8]

Those work lights are halogen, and while they do put out a LOT of light, they are not effecient, you are paying (in electricity) for all that heat being created.

[Anthony Calfo]

It would be fabulous if there was a window close enough to set a small refugium on a shelf while plumbed inline to grab indirect sunlight at least :)

[Nuhtty]

Here is a quick design of my sump/fuge

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/3933/74268Refugium_Design.JPG



I am considering a new bulb. It was an old one I had hanging around.

I am looking for a light that can simply screw into the cone aluminum reflector.

Also, I have just added refugium mud to the system and have not yet added or decided on a type of macro.

Any suggestions? I am filtering a 65 gallon tank. The fuge has about 800gph of flow through it, but the bottom of the fuge area is calm.

Should I put a small powerhead in there or will the high surface flow be sufficient?

Thanks

[Anthony Calfo]

Nuhtty... the flow likely needs increased for this refugium in two principal areas. The "calm" zone at the bottom is a concern in almost any/every tank (excessively accumulating nutrients/solids over time) except for bare-bottomed vessels that are specifically acting as a settling chamber and get serviced regularly (siphon detritus weekly or more often).

Make a concerted effort to keep solids in suspension for processing by filterfeeders or exporting (via skimmers, mechanical filters,etc.).

My other area of concern is the live rock/rubble "prefilter" of incoming water. This honestly serves no practical purpose but instead tends to handicap the system (trapping detritus over time or simply nitrifying matter when we'd rather it got consumed directly, or exported as per above.

Very nice diagram too! Thanks for sharing :)

Anthony

[BrianPlankis]

Anthony,

I just read through this entire thread and it has given me a lot to think about! I'm getting ready to build a replacement sump for my 75 gallon tank. I have a 29 gallon tank and will be building my own baffles. If you could take a quick look at my design, do you see any major design flaws or could you suggest any improvements?

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/garagebrian/75_Journal/newsump1.gif

A couple of comments:

1. The shelf going into the refugium was a suggestion I saw in this thread, to give a more laminar flow that will help rotate the cheato.

2. I can position the output from my skimmer to return to the drain section, allowing some of the water to go through the skimmer again, is this a good idea?

3. Is my bubble trap correct, under, over, under?

Thanks!

Brian

[Anthony Calfo]

cheers, Brian (love the avatar BTW... heehee)

The design looks very fine... my one main concern is the the size of the sump proper is inevitably rather small here (less than 10 gallons of water for a 75 gallon tank. This is a problem with all such integrated refugiums... but is still a limitation to some extent.

Now with the evap top off device... it is less of a concern. So long as this small sump can handle the drainage from the display and plumbing above in the event of a power outage, all will be OK.

It still would be nice to have more water to buffer the system. Public aquariums often use sumps at 1:1 ratios with the display. Great benefits to having larger sumps indeed. I'd love to see at least a 20 gallon reserve here... 40 gall would likely have been my opt.

[Alfalfameister]

Heh... I know a guy, because of desk space, has a nice 15 gallon tank with a 50 gallon sump! He says at least he saves on lighting, and all he wanted was something on his desk anyway (his desk is drilled, and so is the tank).

[BrianPlankis]

Originally posted by Anthony Calfo
cheers, Brian (love the avatar BTW... heehee)

The design looks very fine... my one main concern is the the size of the sump proper is inevitably rather small here (less than 10 gallons of water for a 75 gallon tank. This is a problem with all such integrated refugiums... but is still a limitation to some extent.

Now with the evap top off device... it is less of a concern. So long as this small sump can handle the drainage from the display and plumbing above in the event of a power outage, all will be OK.

It still would be nice to have more water to buffer the system. Public aquariums often use sumps at 1:1 ratios with the display. Great benefits to having larger sumps indeed. I'd love to see at least a 20 gallon reserve here... 40 gall would likely have been my opt.

Anthony,

Glad you like the avatar, but I can't claim I made it, another RC reefer poormedstudent made it for me. But I am THE cirolanid hunter, but that is a WHOLE other story.

Glad you like the sump. I agree with you that bigger would be better, unfortunately due to my tank situation I am limited to a 30x12 footprint, there is simply no more room. I just checked all glass aquarium's website and they do offer a 37 gallon that is the same footprint but 22 inches tall. That might be too tall, but I'll do some measurements tonight.

The reason I'm making this 29 sump is that I currently have a 20L as a sump and while it will handle the drainage in the event of a power outage, the water goes all the way to the top and any tiny leak from my return pipe or drain will result in a flood, so the 29 will prevent that from happening.

Thanks for your input!

Brian

[stevedola]

Brian,
To increase water volume but continue to stay within your limitations you could employ a small 10 gallon gravity fed fuge that almost sits upon (with some stand mods) the 29g sump. The drain from the 75g could be split and valve to have water enter the fuge and sump and have the fuge simply drain into the sump for return to the main tank. This would give you almost 40g of added volume and still stay with in your limits. Ive seen it done and worked quite well. If you needed more flow you could just add a small power head to keep water circulating. Just an idea-

[stevedola]

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/31182sumpfuge2.bmp

[BrianPlankis]

Originally posted by stevedola
Brian,
To increase water volume but continue to stay within your limitations you could employ a small 10 gallon gravity fed fuge that almost sits upon (with some stand mods) the 29g sump. The drain from the 75g could be split and valve to have water enter the fuge and sump and have the fuge simply drain into the sump for return to the main tank. This would give you almost 40g of added volume and still stay with in your limits. Ive seen it done and worked quite well. If you needed more flow you could just add a small power head to keep water circulating. Just an idea-

This is an interesting idea and I'll look into it. Unfortunately it won't work with just a standard 10 gallon as my stand only has interior room of 29 inches and 18 inches and 10 inches are just too tight. I know a local reefer that does custom acrylic jobs and I might have him make a custom tank to use as a fuge in your idea. Things to think about.....

Thanks,

Brian

[darrellh]

Hi Anthony,

Could you comment on the refuge/sump design in this drawing?

The refuge/sump is a standard 75 gal glass tank in the stand of the 215 gal main. The skimmer is an ASM-G3, and pump is a GRI-520. The suction for the pump is looped around the way its is to avoid drilling glass. Also I tried to show the horizontal launch plate from the skimmer zone to the refugium zone you discussed earlier in this thread.

Thanks,
Darrell

[darrellh]

Trying again to upload image.

[Anthony Calfo]

the one flaw I see if the splash plate for the skimmer overflow water.

As it is here, it will spill over (more downward) and not splash horizontally.

That is to say... the way you have the plate mounted here will make the water fall over and down unless you measure the sump wall panel very carefully and make it so that it is just high enough to always keep water over the plate.

Else... it looks fab my friend :)

[darrellh]

Anthony,

Thanks for taking a look.

So just slide the plate down a bit so that it's no higher than the top of the sump wall? Any gotchas to look out with the pump suction line going over the top?

Thanks again,
Darrell

[Anthony Calfo]

correct... sort of. Slide the plate down so that it is lower(!) than the sump wall/dam. Just slightly (say 1-2")

This will insure that the water overflowing the skimmer partition wall will spill over and crash down on the plate (since the sump wall maintains the water level higher) then be forced horizontally just across/under the surface of the refugium portion, creating the rolling water flow you seek.

[BrianPlankis]

Anthony,

I just wanted to thank you for your assist in my design of my new sump. I had to go with the 29 due to space limitations, but it sure eased my mind about a flood, lots of extra room for water:

I unfortunately had to put my HOB skimmer into my sump as I didn't want to drill the 29 for the input pipe, so my cheato area is smaller than I want:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/garagebrian/DIY/newsump5.jpg

But, now my skimmer pump draws water from the top 4 inches of the water instead of the bottom 1 inch and in eight hours I already have this:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/garagebrian/DIY/newsump8.jpg

The picture doesn't show it, but it is dark green yummy skimmate. I also had 1 inch of dark green skimmate in my overflow bottle in 8 hours, looks like I'll need to empty my skimmate every 1-3 days, much better than the 3-5 days it took to get one cup with my old refuge/sump.

THANKS FOR THE INFO! :D

Brian

[Anthony Calfo]

outstanding to hear!

It really is amazing what a properly installed skimmer can do.

When I tell folks that they can get daily(!) consistent skimmate... many are doubtful. Yet when you take the time to tweak and tun a good design, the results (skimmate and tank health long term) are impressive :D

[mwood]

Anthony, quick question. I've been reading about fuge flow rates and was wondering about sump flow rates. If you have the proper flow in your tank through closed loops, and the right flow going though a separate fuge, how much flow do you need going through a sump housing a skimmer and heater? I ask the question after reading an interesting thread about sending a thinner surface layer to the sump via smaller turnover rates. What do you think?

Marcus

[Anthony Calfo]

the sump loop can be rather slow and quiet. There is no hard and fast rule for minimums/max. You'll find that even the smaller duty pumps that will handle the job long term of even 4' head from the floor to the top of the tank, for example, are still going to give you at least 800-1000gph (as with a Quiet one, Mag 9, etc). This is a reasonable amount of flow for typical home aquariums 55-180 gall. And its more than enough for a skimmer to process organics.

[charley75]

Anthony,
My question is similar to the one above regarding sump flow.
I am hoping to upggrade in the near future from my current 75 to a 180, and then use my 75 for my sump/fuge. The sump will have the skimmer section at one end, the fuge at the other end, and the return section in the middle. I am also planning on using a Reeflo Dart for a CL. With all the recent reading on sump flow I'm beginning to think that there's no need to buy a bigger return pump (currently using Mag9.5). I was also planning on having an overflow in each back corner of the tank with 1 1/2 drains. Is this unnecessary as well?
Can I just have one overflow in one corner(or center), split with a T feeding the skimmer and fuge sections (each controlled with a ball valve). Would this be the better thing to do?
Thanks,
Charley

[Anthony Calfo]

cheers, Charlie

indeed... you do not need a bigger pump to run the sump loop. Leave your CL pump to do the heavy duty while keeping your sump quiet and smooth running

But please do not tee the overflow drain. Ever. Never! A simply dreadful notion for many reasons re: complicated plumbing, handicapping the downstream skimmer, etc.

As for the overflow drains... you may want/need to keep these too. While you do not need a large sump pump, you do want large/quiet overflow drains. Displays are too commonly underdrilled. One 1.5" drains may handle the mag 9.5 at the head you likely have on it... but it will be operating on the high end of the range. Too risky for me. Drill a 2" hole or stick with your original plan for two 1.5" holes.

FWIW... I never liked refugia integrated into sumps. Too cramped, limited production from such small refugia... and unduly restricts sump proper volume/buffer.

[charley75]

Anthony,
Thanks for the quick response. OK, so stick with the 2 drains....1 for skimmer, 1 for fuge. Is that enough flow through a fuge....roughly 400gph?
FWIW, I currently run a separate fuge, but am hoping to consolidate...also compromising with the wife by getting the fuge out of the utility room.
Charley

[Anthony Calfo]

no worries, Charley :)

I'm wondering though if you cannot simply send all raw water to the skimmer compartment first... then have that overflow to the refugium compartment... which then overflows tot he sump compartment before being pumped back to the display?

It is very important if/when using a skimmer to send all raw water to it if possible.

Anth-

[charley75]

Anthony,
Yeah, I could do that...I just though it was better to not skim the water from the refugium. I think I read that somewhere here on RC a while back. If that's the case and I only need one drain, does it matter where the overflow is....corner or center?

Thanks,
Charley

[Anthony Calfo]

it would depend on what you are growing in refugia... but most likely the optimal export of (accumulating) organics via the skimmer (getting all raw water) will likely serve the greater good if your tank is like most, my friend.

Anth-

[charley75]

In that case, my plumbing should be much simpler. Does it matter where the overflow is placed, center or corner?
Charley

[Anthony Calfo]

its no great matter overall... build it wherever it suits you best aesthetically, my friend.

[charley75]

Anthony,
Would one 2" drain be enough for the Dart on a CL since the intake on the Dart is 2"? Also, do you think the Dart is powerful enough to adequately supply a perimeter manifold? I am wanting to drill the bottom for the overflow and the CL. For the CL intake, I was thinking of coming up from the bottom of the tank to a T with a 2" strainer on each side. Is this doable or would It still create too much suction and shred my inhabitants?
Thanks a bunch,
Charley

[Anthony Calfo]

cheers, Charley

no... I rarely if ever recommend drilling the bottom of an aquarium. Undue risk and no practical service in most cases.

Feed/flood the pump from a 2" bulkhead that is about 1/3 down from the top of the tank. We don;t want to go down any further than we need to be safe in case of a bulkhead leak. But we do need to be down low enough to prevent the strong pump from sucking air.

As for the Dart on a manifold... do see if you can get at least 400gph from each 1/2-3/4 outlet (more if you are using larger tees). And see if you can come close to having one tee per ten gallons of water on the manifold loop.

[mr. maroon clown]

does anybody have any pics of chaeto? wanna see the good stuff

[pclausen]

Originally posted by mr. maroon clown
does anybody have any pics of chaeto? wanna see the good stuff

http://www.cstone.net/~dk/chato1.jpg

[killerwhale]

Anthony, I have the luxury of ample space and want to design multiple refugiums. My desire is to set up refugiums for nutrient uptake, DSB,and plankton generator. I want you to know I have read your books and gathered the info but I would like more specifics on setting up multiple refugums. I know you are always careful not to force your ideas on other people(you are wonderful about sharing your info and letting us decide what we want to do with it)But if YOU were seting up a 400 gallon tank and YOU had YOUR choice of 3 rugiums what size and configuration would you choose. For example If you are looking for uptake I know you like Cheto or Grac. but if you set up proper skimmers would there be more benefits derived from a big grass bed. If so how big would it need to be to gain the PROPER benifits( benefits that YOU would deem worth while) or would this even be in your design?If x amount of water is to be supplied to the skimmer is there enough to supply proper flow to other refugiums or do they need raw flow from tank also?So many questions. I hope I havent stepped out of bounds for the forum I know this is long. Truly I know 99.9% of us value your humble but most accurate opinion Thank you so much for all your efforts and willingness to share and help us.I'm truly blown away that this info that has been gathered at your most precious resource(time)would be shared with no strings attached.

[Anthony Calfo]

My latest (new) tank has a marsh refugium with intertidal grasses... for aesthetics and the fixing of some nutrients...

my workhorse is my (second) Chaetomorpha refugium: growing fast, being harvested (nutrient export and providing a fab matrix for micrococrustaceans in the process

I may add another Gracilaria (small) refugium to recycle nutrients for herbivorous fishes.

Above all... I do like Chaeto tumbling and vigorous.

kindly,

Anth :)

[killerwhale]

Based on all your lit. I assume you have a skimmer set up first. Are these set up in a series to be gravity fed after the skimmer or does it require being fed by the return pump to provide the proper flow.Maybe I'm assuming it takes alot more flow than what is really needed but you are always encouraging us to have proper flow.I know I have a problem with nuisance algea out competing caulerpa in an eco-system I have set up now.Sorry I don't know how to post previous quotes but you replied to mwood 800 to 1000gallonsto process organics That doesnt seem enough to accomplish flow in the other refugiums or am I just missing it.

[killagoby]

I have 152GPH going through my fuge which holds maybe 2 or 3 gallons of water (on a 29 gallon tank) and 18w of PC lighting on it. Will that be enough for my Cheateo if I run the lights 24/7?

[outy]

i have a 50 g sump for a 100G softie and sps tank,i put in a devider to help with keeping raw water and water level to my skimmer [thanks Anthony] got the idea here [not done yet with tweaks]. I just put in another divider to keep my mag9.5 in. my sumps in my basement and ive got about 800gph flowing through. i will get chaeto i wonder about sand depth and with that i have some free live sand [in the bag] would it be better to go to a DSB or use the so called bagged live sand.

thanks for your input Anthony i have better nutrient export now

[Anthony Calfo]

I don't regard the bag "live" sand as being particularly live.

I'm sure that you will get much more life forms from live sand harvested form the ocean or even another aquarists mature/established tank.

[poopsko24]

Anthony, can't wait to get youre new posters, ordered them the other day. I'm trying to come up w/ a good fix for my tank/ refug. I have a 170 custom. I want to make my fuge out of a 29. Already have a seperate sump going. Now the 29 will fit behind my display on the floor. The display is on a 33" stand. I already have both my 1 1/2" drains feeding my euroreef skimmer section and think its best left at that. Now I have a gen X 1090 gph pump for my return. The 29 gal. fuge is already drilled on in the front uppermost part to accept a 1" bulkhead w/ screen to drain back into my sump/return section. What is the best way to feed and deliver it to my fuge ? I think that my only left option would be to tee off my return (which would'nt be so bad) If I'm going to have a 3/4" line for my return off of my 1090 gph return pump should I tee it off to the fuge ? Then the fuge drains back to the return pump section of the sump. My other question is if I tee it off to the fuge then at what point on the fuge should the exit nozzle of the return be at ? Or should I have a spraybar there? or 90 it right across the waters surface or submerged ? thanx alot.

[poopsko24]

Oh, I forgot to mention that I want to grow chateo in the fuge and was thinking about a DSB in the fuge ......yes or no on the DSB. Or should I just do the chateo.???

[Anthony Calfo]

I agree on the tee of the return pump... this is tidy and usually works very fine.

Add the DSB if you think you need nitrate control. Maybe some more worms or fine zooplankton. Else no worries... keep it simple/empty for the Chaeto ball to tumble.

[poopsko24]

ok, that said how should i have my outlet going into the fuge ? Should I have an 90 degree elbow just blowing across the top of the water ? Or should I submerge it ? Or is a spraybar across the top of the water surface better than the single 90 degree elbow ? thanx Anthony

[Anthony Calfo]

as per earlier chats in this thread... a splash lip just below the surface.

[poopsko24]

I would do a splash lip , but I'm not overflowing into the fuge like that... I'm going to be flowing right into it w/ a 90 degree elbow , do you think i should do a splash lip and just not put a 90 on there and have it just be a the pvc pipe hitting a splash lip instead?

[Anthony Calfo]

I do/most always like the splash lip for creating rolling water flow patterns.

[cabbagehead]

This forum is great. Can't belive I waited a year to come here
Does this setup look ok? Or should I change the supply side of the sump to include a piece of plexi to direct water flow? Thanks
http://images.snapfish.com/344%3A762%3B23232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E2334%3D687%3D527%3DXROQDF%3E2323%3A%3B375394%3Aot1lsi

[Anthony Calfo]

if I understand your diagream correctly (shouldn't the arrow on the far right side/section be pointing upwards as the sump return?), then your sump proper is waaaaay too small for safe running here.

Even with a very precise evaporation top-off system... you will be cutting this close. Without auto-evap top off, you will be a slave to evap and likely burn out some pumps!

As for the baffle on the left side from the first (skimmer?) chamber... it really is not needed if your flow is appropriately slow enough through this sump (it cannot be too high for noice and microbubble concerns... leave the bulk of the flow needs/duty up top on a closed loop or in display pumps).

I do think you would be better served with a submerged refugium spillway/lip at least to get the rolling water flow pattern we have talked about in this thread (assuming you'll keep the typical macroalgae species).

Incorporating a refugium into a sump in such downstream applications (as opposed to my preferred upstream - above sump or next to/above display) is one of their greatest limitations.

And... welcome to the forum, my friend :) Thanks for peeking in :D

[barryhc]

Anthony, I've been researching for a sump/refugium, that I'm designing now to DIY for a couple of months now. I read this entire thread today, very very informative!

My display tank for this is a 27 gal. hex, with 6" of sand and gravel ( 1 1/2" of 1-2mm arag. at the surface ), and lots ( about 35 #'s ) of live rock.

The design as of now, is a 30x18x18 ( 42 gal. ) which is intended to be divided into 3 compartments:

> 15 gal. secondary display

> 10 gal. refugium

> 10 gal. of sump ( several compartments, overflows etc. )

I understand you're not a big fan of "combined sump/refugium" setups, but the whole thing has to sit out in the open, I need ( and want ) the extra display space for compatability issues, plus the 27 is "quite full".

My current set-up uses an overflow to a 16 gal. walmart tub, 450 gph ( "head rated" ) return with anti siphon holes, which only drains 1/2 gal. at power-off.

I understand how to handle the mechanical issues here, but here are the paramaters and questions.

The main tank has about 18 gal. of actual water. The new secondary display will be about 12 gal. actual water, and the refugium portion will be about 8 gal. of actual water.

That means about 30 gal. of display water to 8 gal. of "fuge" water ( or about 25% ). At 450 gph, thats 56 times the "fuge" volume per hour, 25 times the main display volume per hour, and 37 times the secondary display volume per hour.

>All the animals are happy now with the 25 times per hour in the main display, but what about that 56 times in the "fuge"?

I'm looking to grow Chaeto most likely, and hopefully lots of little "feeder critters".

The main display is handling itself pretty well in terms of nitrate already( it is rather heavily stocked ) at less than 2ppm, and Phosphate has finally dropped to less than 1 ppm and is on its
way down. I will probably run several inches of sand-gravel in the secondary display, so it should nearly handle itself in terms of nutrients.

>I can cut down the flow rate pretty easy in the fuge, while I'm still designing if need be. Should I?

What sand, gravel, mud, you name it, is appropriate in the refugium, if I'm looking to grow macro for export, and "critters" to feed?

Are there any caveats here that you see me falling into?

Thanks, barryhc :)

[barryhc]

Anthony, please apply this information to the post directly above.

Quote from Anthony:
my workhorse is my (second) Chaetomorpha refugium: growing fast, being harvested (nutrient export and providing a fab matrix for micrococrustaceans in the process

>>I think this is the same function I'm looking for. Keep in mind, that the fuge is directly behind the secondary display and will not be seperated from light. I will be running an "opposite" lighting schedule, of probably 12 on, 12 off? ( between the primary display, and secondary "display-fuge") Is the 12-12 photoperiod problematic for this type of fuge?

I got the part about flow being good in most cases at a nominal
value of 20 X "fuge" volume. Is there a high border for flow that will affect the "microcrustaceans matrix", and about that matrix?

Thanks for being here, it is a blessing. > barryhc :)

[cidory]

This new 38 gallon sump will sit under my 50, comments welcomed.
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v633/cidory/sumpdesign.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

[Anthony Calfo]

really no such thing as too much flow, for microcrustaceans... or really most any other creatures practically kept.

The calmest reef you will ever see is still staggeringly more dynamic than the most turbulent aquarium. The real issue with "too much flow" is the application (direction... as in too linear/laminar) and not the (high) volume. It is the very focussed linear flow pattern such as with powerheads and pump nozzles that is so very awful and unnatural for many reef creatures if unmodified in aquaria.

So by providing the wide rolling (indeed laminar but diffused) flow as with a tumbing chaeto ball... or the fab turbulence of a multi-tee manifold like some do on displays, we can sufficiently diffuse water flow while still enjoying high volume.

As far as the 12/12 photoperiod... it is a must! One of the biggest mistruths in aquarium algae culture is that all or many species can endure an uninterrupted 24hr photoperiod. Not true! Not even close. Most will suffer and dwindle in time without adequate time (night) for respiration. Among commonly available plant and algae species... only some Caulerpa will live well in stasis with constant illumination.

Really... the majority of marine plants and algae will thrive, if not need(!), a proper and natural day/night photoperiod :) 12/12 is fine with most lamps. Focus more on finding warm coilored lights of high PAR value.

[barryhc]

Thanks Anthony, that sets me up nicely, for flow, mine will be well diffused, with an option to "roll" the flow in that chamber, as well.

I have followed your flow-lip technique, and that is the "option". The standard flow at about 50 "times", when fully "dispersed", is still only 8mm per second, of velocity, which is almost "miniscule".

Could you offer some advice or info. on the substrate to use, with the primary objective being the production of "food critters", and where macro algae will be promoted, but is secondary to ( or even in support of ) the "critter production".

Thanks again, > barryhc :)

[Anthony Calfo]

I'm not a big fan of substrates in the sump proper for critter production. I much rather prefer a suspended matrix like the Chaeto ball or spaced polyester filter pads (on a string to act as a pod condo).

Fine (<1 mm) sand for a DSB for NNR (see DSB bucket thread stickied atop this forum) is good. But beyond that... I am not a fan of placing rubble, live rock or coarse sand in the sump. In most cases, it accumulates/traps more solids than its worth (for pods).

[barryhc]

Originally posted by Anthony Calfo
I'm not a big fan of substrates in the sump proper for critter production. I much rather prefer a suspended matrix like the Chaeto ball or spaced polyester filter pads (on a string to act as a pod condo).

Fine (<1 mm) sand for a DSB for NNR (see DSB bucket thread stickied atop this forum) is good. But beyond that... I am not a fan of placing rubble, live rock or coarse sand in the sump. In most cases, it accumulates/traps more solids than its worth (for pods).

Ok, so would a 1 1/2" to 2" depth of <1mm, be adequate, and is there a "micron equivalent" or "otherwise" description of the filter pads that would work well. I am guessing that a fairly coarse pad would work well, and maybe 1/2' to 1" thick?

Also, to sort of "finish" here, a reccomendation for what are good critters for "feeding" would be exceedingly helpful here. I would like to support sand bed types of animals, such as jaw-fish, gobies, mandarin, gobies, etc. primarily. I think I can feed other types of fish adequately, in most cases, without growing their food.

Thanks again Anthony, I'm "almost on my way". > barryhc :)

[Bemmer]

Anthony,
Along the same lines as Barryhc as it relates to live food/pods, I have been told that it is best to return the water from the refugium directly back into the main tank, if possible. That is to avoid having the pods go through the return pumps running from the sump. But if that is not possible, as in my case, where the refugium return is gravity feed back to the sump, will I loss alot of pods because of the impellers on the pumps or is that a myth?

[barryhc]

Originally posted by Bemmer
Anthony,
Along the same lines as Barryhc as it relates to live food/pods, I have been told that it is best to return the water from the refugium directly back into the main tank, if possible. That is to avoid having the pods go through the return pumps running from the sump. But if that is not possible, as in my case, where the refugium return is gravity feed back to the sump, will I loss alot of pods because of the impellers on the pumps or is that a myth?

I can answer this one Bemmer, it is primarily a myth. A needle wheel type of pump MIGHT cause a bit more trouble, if at all, but it is unnecessary to have this type of pump in your return.

Check with Anthony on this one, but I think, that a skimmer in the return path would be a bigger disadvantage, and I don't know of anyone promoting this.

Happy reef keeping, > barryhc :)

[Anthony Calfo]

the issue of impeller shear (on plankton) is a bunk myth. Really... of very little matter or consequence. The studies on it were bunk (used Artemia!) and the practical reality is quite different: most plankton passes through just fine... and what doesn't is just as edible on the other side ;)

Do not worry about impeller shear on pods.

[Bemmer]

Thanks guys, I can sleep better tonight knowing that my pods will be alright "on the other side". Wink right back at ya' ;)

Another one...I am thinking of putting my calcium reactor (made by MyReefCreation) in the sump since I have the room. Andy, at MyReef said that it would be good to drip the calcium from the calcium reactor into the refugium tank (separate from the sump). Is there a real advantage to this? Enough to consider putting the calcium reactor on a shelf closer to the refugium tank instead of in the sump.

I can do either since I am still in the setup stage.

Thanks

[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.

Andy at MRC is a wise chap too... good advice.

[Bemmer]

Anthony,
So, I should strongly consider putting the calcium reactor closer to the refugium tank, which is sitting 37"h on a stand and is 6 1/2 feet from the sump. I have it up high for the obvious gravity feed back to the sump. Can I mount the MRC cal. reactor on the wall up close to the refugium? Will there be any issues with plumbing it into the main pump (Sequence Hammerhead), which will be much lower to the ground? Or is it best for the reactor to be sitting on the ground next to the sump?

[Bemmer]

Anthony,
A second question for you...
As you may have read in my last post on this thread, I have a seperate refugium tank (36 x 24 x 13H), which will have the DSB and live rock. The way I am designing my sump, I will have a center section between the sump area and the return that will not have anything in it. (That is assuming that I may have the calcium reactor up near the refugium tank to drip the calcium into the tank). With the open section in the sump, can I put a big ball of Cheato in the sump and then run the refugium return pipe into that same open section instead of into the skimmer section?

[Anthony Calfo]

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]

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]

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

[Bemmer]

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]

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]

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]

Thanks Anthony.

okay, no mangroves then. :D

[duvivier]

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]

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]

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?
:eek2:

Thanks, Tone

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

[Glimmerman911]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[emora]

Originally posted by tonyf
Anthony, are you saying that we shouln't be directing the ca reactor effluent directly into the skimmer?
:eek2:

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[dfwatson]

Thanks for the reply. Maybe I will just go about it in a different way. Maybe 1/2 the flow thru the sump to a split return in the main tank and a closed loop to provide a much larger flow thru the closed manifold. Right track???

Daryl

[Glimmerman911]

Could you list the size and location of all the holes in your tank?

[dfwatson]

(4) 1.5 inch bulkheads across the back. (undetermined location/height) Still in the process of odering tank drilling specs.

[Glimmerman911]

Perfect time to plan waterflow then, good stuff.

What style, number, and locations of overflows are you going to use? Are you going to drill the bottom of the tank for the overflows?

Two corner overflows, each with 2x1.5" bulheads would be nice, use one in each overflow for drain, 1 for return. To add in redundancy I would only have the pump matched to a single 1.5" drain though, so if one fails, the other can take up slack.

Then use probably 3 1.5" bulheads for the closed loop, 1 to pull water from the center of the tank, and 2 spread out to distribute the watet back in, preferably pointing somewhat towards each other to get some turbulent flow. You could t-off the returns with 3/4" or 1/2" loc line to distribute the flow around the tank more too.

[dfwatson]

I was thinking more along the line of the (4) 1.5 bulkheads on the back wall with strainers, not in the bottom. I guess I don't see the advantage of overflow boxes compared straight bulkheads.
Daryl

[dfwatson]

Also the return from the sump would be over the top and I would still have (2) drains to the sump.
Daryl

[Glimmerman911]

I wouldn't make the return from the sump over the top if you have the chance to get a hole drilled.

Main advantage is the amount of water you can put through a single 1.5" bulkhead vs. a 1.5" bulkhead in an overflow box. The amount of water for the bulkhead will be much more limited. Couple other advantages are that you can do something like a durso standpipe or equivilent to reduce noise of the water falling, you pull off the surface of the water (strainers can too though), and they can be a little safer for things not getting sucked against the strainer and dieing and clogging it up, with an overflow you have a lot more surface area to diffuse the flow, but that is only important if you are pushing a lot of flow, which you won't be if you are using a closed loop in conjunction with the strainers.

There might be other advantages that I do not know about.

[Glimmerman911]

Disadvantage is of course the space it takes up in your tank.

[dfwatson]

Didn't know you would get more flow from an overflow box, guess I will have to rethink where I get the tank drilled. Thanks for the help.

Daryl

[guntercb]

I much rather prefer a suspended matrix like the Chaeto ball or spaced polyester filter pads (on a string to act as a pod condo).

If I place a polyester filter pad in my sump to try to act as a pod condo do I need to provide lights in my sump? Or can I have healthy pods that live their whole life in the dark?

Thanks,
Chris

[Glimmerman911]

dfwatson, you probably don't need that much flow through your overflow though, if you are going to use a closed loop for water flow.

Get a barracuda or hammerhead pump for the closed loop, then just use a mag7 or similar for the sump return. You don't need that much flow through your sump, just enough to heat the water, and feed the skimmer. Keeping the flow through the sump slower will help keep microbubbles down, and it sucks having to redo your system because of microbubble problems.

[dfwatson]

I do want enough flow thru the sump/refugium to tumble my cheato without putting another pump in the sump.(just flow from drains) After reading many posts I believe I can tie in the sump return pump with the closed loop pump to both run the single closed manifold.(saw that Steven Pro did it) Now just need good hole placement and correct pump sizes.

Daryl

[Glimmerman911]

Im not sure what you mean by closed manifold, or what benefit you think you get by doing it that way.

Are you doing a manifold along the top of the tank, or are you doing a closed loop with bulheads along the back of your tank?

[dfwatson]

I am planning a closed loop manifold to go around the top perimeter of the tank for my sole circulation/flow for the whole main tank. I want to power the manifold by using the sump return pump and the closed loop (not to be confused with the closed loop manifold) pump. The benefit that I see is with the manifold I can direct flow to many different areas of the tank and have no poweheads or other plumbing inside the main tank.

Daryl

[Glimmerman911]

Gotcha. I would hook the sump return into the manifold with a Y fitting then, not a T, if you really want to hook it in. I don't see any benefit to hooking it in vs. putting the sump return into a bulhead you have drilled in the back of the tank, but whatever you like.

It is important to match the size and number of nozzles to you total flow in the manifold. For a 180g for example, if you want 15x, so 2700gph. Run a 1" manifold, with reducing t's. 1/2" would work well with 400gph through each nozzle, so you would want 7 nozzles. I would use loc line, then you can glue the rest of the manifold to stop air leaks and microbubbles, the loc line will give you all the flexability you need.

By the way, I have a sequence barracuda hooked up with 7 1/2" nozzles on a 1" manifold over a 180g, all nozzles get equal flow, works great.

[dfwatson]

I want to combine the two pump flows and their pressure into the manifold for the combine flow effect of both pumps. That way I can have many nozzles coming out of the manifold, running some or cap some as needed for flow in different areas of the tank.

Daryl

[Glimmerman911]

You will lose more flow piping the sump return pump into the manifold compared to running it right into a bulkhead. There would be fewer bends, and less head height.

I would get the tank drilled low in the back, and use the sump return to put flow behind your rock where the manifold would have trouble reaching, that is my only complaint about the manifold system is that it is tough to get flow behind the rockwork unless you drop the outlet to the bottom of the tank behind the rocks, which puts too much PVC visible IMO.

[dfwatson]

Good to know, Thanks for you input.

Daryl

[Glimmerman911]

No worries, post some pics when you decide on your setup.

[prezioso73]

Does it make any sense to have a DSB in my fuge, if little light hits the bottom of the tank? THe Chaeto blocks about 80% of the light?

[guntercb]

Prezioso,

I am curoius how people answer your question. I am not expert, but I would guess that a deep sand bed would provide you an anoxic area for denitrification and therefore would be good even without light. Not to mention cops and stuff may thrive there. I guess it depends on what you want your refug to accomplish.

Everyone, If I hang poly pads in my sump for a pod condo would the pods need lights to thrive or can I keep them in the dark?

Thanks,
Chris

[Glimmerman911]

Prezioso, guntercb is right, it depends on the purpose of your fuge.

A DSB, even with only 20% light will provide an anaerobic zone for denitrification, and if you can get a couple cups of sand from a well established tank, you will soon have all kinds of pods, worms, etc. in there.

So yes, it can make very good sense to have a DSB in a fuge.

[prezioso73]

I just read the thread about the Remote Deep Sand Bed...wow!


I think I am going to go with that and keep the space under my chaeto clear so it is easy to remove detris.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=595109&perpage=25&pagenumber=10

[hondadude2k5]

I converted my AquaClear110 into a refugium and it seems to be working great but my chaeto doesn't look like it is doing so well. Alot of it looks like it is loosing color and withering away. I have a clip on 18w mini compact light over the refugium and my MT lights are 1x65w PCs. Am I doing something wrong? Should my lights be on all the time over the fugium or should it be alternate of my MT? Any tips would be great Thanks.

[pmcustom]

I am designing a new sump that will hold about 30gal. Everyone's saying to have high flow to tumble the chaeto, but I have a Mandarin and would like to help out the pod population as much as poossible. Would it be ideal to have 2 seperate compartments, one with high flow for the chaeto and the other with adjustable flow for the refugium (maybe LR rubble and a SSB) for the pods? Thanks.

[FishDad2]

FYI - I made some of the suggested modifications posted in the thread to improve my refugium's performance vis-a-vis Cheto growth and it's been a huge benefit! Thanks to all the contributors!!

I already had a Mag 9.5 pump on the fuge so I figured I had enough flow, but the water wasn't entering the tank in a way that generated the circular flow recommended to tumble the Cheto. The result was that the Cheto wasn't growing that fast and was being grown over by micro-algae. So, I made a spraybar and placed it so that the water entering the fuge shoots across from one side to the other just below the surface. When it hits the far wall, it's deflected downward then across the bottom of the fuge...generating the circular motion recommended.

I did have to place a row of rubble at the base of the far wall to keep the current from sweeping away the Miracle Mud, but that was no biggie.

This and switching from a 65 watt Coralife PC bulb to a pair of the 19 watt bulbs recommended in the link below (go all the way to the bottom of the page the comes up...you'll see the bulb I'm talking about) seem to have made all the difference in the world. The Cheto is growing like wild and the micro algae seems a distant memory.

fishdoc11 originally posted this link very early in the thread...gotta give credit where credit is due. Thanks doc!

http://www.melevsreef.com/fuge_bulb.html

[fishdoc11]

Glad it is workin for ya:D

The credit should probably go to Melev on that one.

Chris

[dendro982]

Free-floating Chaeto/Gracillaria and Maxi-Jet: small algae pieces are all around MJet's input grid/strainer.
What are you people doing to prevent this?

[capn_hylinur]

alot of great information here---I will link it to this thread which although more uptodate will certainly benifit from the info here:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1349443

[bergzy]

the blue barrel contains about 300 pounds of live rock:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y38/bergzy/IMG_5066edit.jpg

it is used for a cryptic zone wher there is a slowish water flow through it via the 5g white bucket which contains growing chaeto lit by a 65w lights of america fixture.

video of bucket with spinning chaeto:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y38/bergzy/th_MVI_5067.jpg (http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y38/bergzy/?action=view&current=MVI_5067.flv)

the bucket drains to the bottom of the blue barrel via a long length of pvc and flows upward to drain. thus, this gives it a fluidized flow to prevent stagnation of water at the bottom of the barrel. i also use some air to circulate water from the bottom to top. the water in the blue barrel then drains near the top and into my sump.

thus, no moving impellers to chop up anything and the flow is gentle enough to encourage the growth of sponges and tunicates.

the ball of chaeto in the video is much larger than i normally keep it as i was growing it out to give to local reefers. normally, i keep it trimmed to a softball size. plus, it is cooler to see in the video to see a big ball of chaeto spinning.

the white bucket is fueled by the excess bled off the over powered pump i use for my skimmer.

chaeto growth is very slow now which indicates that my phosphates and then my nitrates are very low.

this set up is on my 180g sps. i highly do not recommend running a dedicated sps tank skimmerless. i have had excellent results with skimmerless tanks when running lps and softies with a effective and efficient fuge growing chaeto...but with sps, any kind of nutrient affects them...and the macro doesnt soak up nutrients fast enough.

i also do not intentionally grow pods etc in my fuges. there seems to be enough of them as my mandarin is very happy as is my corals.

some of the refugium set ups would qualify as displays imo. but for me, my fuges are not meat to be looked at. they are for pure function. hence the utilitarian use of low cost and unaesthetic materials.

[capn_hylinur]

this is great--would you mind posting it on the other site--alot of guys will be interested in it

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1349443

[Young Frankenstein]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=3709444#post3709444 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Triterium
I get AMAZING growth in both caulerpa and chaeto!!!

I have a 20 gallon deep refugium lit by a cheap 175watt metal halide (4000K) I bought from Home Depot.

I have pretty much no water flow (maybe 5 gallons/hour). I do use air bubblers which create turbulent water movement in the fuge.

I had terrible growth before I upgraded to the MH light. The air bubbler part, I thing that works as well as MH, I have a 10gl refurgium with chaeto outdoors (shaded area) with a bubbler, indoors I have a 20gl with low flow also, but no bubbler+100w MH about 6k, I think the air bubbler works great, but how do you stop the bubbles from throwing salt all over the place?

[tntneon]

hello reefers,

-would it be a good idea to let the water comming from main display tank to pass at the bottom of refugium upwards trough soil , roots and leafs of the macro algea.

-this to have an evenly flow , and a great surface area for the macro algea to extract the nutrients from the watercolum and combining the filtering capacities of a undergravel filter.


p.s. sorry for my kindergarden englisch ,but i'm from the netherlands ,
soo far away from the u.s.a. or coralreefs


greetingzz tntneon:)

[bergzy]

hello and welcome to reef central!!!

i hope that reefing is alive and well in the netherlands!

your description sounds like you are wanting to utilize reverse flow undergravel filter.

it has been a while since i did freshwater but i think that this is/was a popular concept in freshwater or freshwater planted tanks (popular in the netherlands, yes?).

i would hesitate in using a regular undergravel or reverse undergravel as it will literally suck up detritus into the gravel only to have it eventually break down into nitrates (high flow of oxygenated water).

yes, while the macro will soak up nitrates upon the conversion...the idea is usually to limit nitrate production to as little as possible. nitrate removal is done with a host of methods from water changes, denitrators, protein skimming and macro growth (with harvesting it).

the water flow through the substrate will also not allow an anaerobic zone to develop. this is also where nitrates can be broken down to nitrogen gas via anaerobic bacteria (if your sand bed is deep enough).

most reefers will flow raw tank water across the macro for nutrient exposure.

if you have read through this entire thread...you may have noticed that calfo has suggested random alternating flow that is far from slow.

my fuges flow range from 120x to 150x per hour turnover...with excellent chaeto growth.

hope this helps a little. feel free to ask me anything else! and welcome to reef central!!!

[capn_hylinur]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13165477#post13165477 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bergzy
hello and welcome to reef central!!!

i hope that reefing is alive and well in the netherlands!

your description sounds like you are wanting to utilize reverse flow undergravel filter.

it has been a while since i did freshwater but i think that this is/was a popular concept in freshwater or freshwater planted tanks (popular in the netherlands, yes?).

i would hesitate in using a regular undergravel or reverse undergravel as it will literally suck up detritus into the gravel only to have it eventually break down into nitrates (high flow of oxygenated water).

yes, while the macro will soak up nitrates upon the conversion...the idea is usually to limit nitrate production to as little as possible. nitrate removal is done with a host of methods from water changes, denitrators, protein skimming and macro growth (with harvesting it).

the water flow through the substrate will also not allow an anaerobic zone to develop. this is also where nitrates can be broken down to nitrogen gas via anaerobic bacteria (if your sand bed is deep enough).

most reefers will flow raw tank water across the macro for nutrient exposure.

if you have read through this entire thread...you may have noticed that calfo has suggested random alternating flow that is far from slow.

my fuges flow range from 120x to 150x per hour turnover...with excellent chaeto growth.

hope this helps a little. feel free to ask me anything else! and welcome to reef central!!!

[welcome]

I am agreeing with Ben but the trade off with this high flow through the refugiums is that it will carry away your inverts very quickly to the display tank and thus make it more difficult to raise a substantial number there---one of the other functions of a refugium
I have found the best senerio for nitrate reduction to be two refugiums--one for macro algae and one with a deep sand bed.

there are a number of articles on my Log book that discuss and illustrate this:

http://www.reefcentral.com/wp/?p=346

[tntneon]

thank you guys,

-in the netherlands we have manny freshwater aquariums, reef aquariums is beginning to get more populair now.
but the quality of reef aquariums i`ve seen here just blows my mind.

that is just what i needed to inspire me to built my own little reef ,
therefore i`m now orienting what sort off refugium and sump set up i`m gonna use , it`s gonna be 75g display tank:) to start with:) ,this will probably grow with time and patience [wife :) ].

p.s. please excuse my kindergarden englisch:o


greetingzz tntneon
:)

[tntneon]

thanks capn-hyllinur ,for the link of your blog
this will help me a lot ,when i start my built off , i will
post the whole built up in the diy forum

greetingzz tntneon

[pjf]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13164334#post13164334 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tntneon
-would it be a good idea to let the water comming from main display tank to pass at the bottom of refugium upwards trough soil , roots and leafs of the macro algea.
The following suspended chaetomorpha refugium design accomodates a ~1000 gph flow. The current flowing under the first baffle suspends the algae against the PC light. Only a mesh screen keeps the algae from being swept into the return compartment.

The chaetomorpha grows quickly and acts as a mechanical filter. It traps detritus and is rinsed clean during water changes.

Needless to say, the current keeps the bare bottom refugium compartment clean and would obliterate a sand bed.
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/93304Refugium_975_gph-med.JPG

[capn_hylinur]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13299045#post13299045 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by pjf
The following suspended chaetomorpha refugium design accomodates a ~1000 gph flow. The current flowing under the first baffle suspends the algae against the PC light. Only a mesh screen keeps the algae from being swept into the return compartment.

The chaetomorpha grows quickly and acts as a mechanical filter. It traps detritus and is rinsed clean during water changes.

Needless to say, the current keeps the bare bottom refugium compartment clean and would obliterate a sand bed.
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/93304Refugium_975_gph-med.JPG

that's an excellent way of doing it--alot of reefers are running deep sand beds as a refugium and another refugium as just straight macro algae like chaeto.

[das75]

I'm doing the BB type as well but with LR for the critters and extra filtration (fr the LR).

Display is also BB and nitrates always test zero or near zero, figure if they ever do rise, could try a DSB in the fuge then.

Have relatively low flow (~200gph through the 20G) and since the fuge is feed direct from the DT with no filter sock, I get some detritus settling. The BB allows for easy siphoning.

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h316/das75/Ch_ref.jpg