Reef Central Online Community
Live Aquaria

Home Forum Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences View New Posts View Today's Posts

Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Search Reefkeeping ...an online magazine for marine aquarists Support our sponsors and mention Reef Central

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community > General Interest Forums > Do It Yourself
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools
Old 05/02/2014, 01:24 PM   #1
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
DIY sponge core concrete live rock

Here's an idea I'd like to pass by the DIYers on here.

Since live rock is too dense to allow for denitrification, how about a sponge centered rock?

 photo E593CF7D-47CA-402E-9862-A88984456CB0_zps9p3sodb2.jpg

The sponge can be washed and soaked. The outside can be covered with a shell (1/8th to 1/4 inch ?) of concrete mix. Since it's not in the gating flow of water, it shouldn't accumulate detritus and should allow a slow diffusion into the anaerobic region inside the sponge.

I know that there are very strong proponents of an external DSB bucket, and turf scrubbers, etc... I am not against any of these ideas. I'm just thinking about a way to mix form and function the way nature does it.


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/02/2014, 06:51 PM   #2
NanoReefWanabe
A Pico Vase Guy
 
NanoReefWanabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,519
i think it will float…might work though…not sure…interesting idea though...


NanoReefWanabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/03/2014, 09:00 AM   #3
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
It may float dry, but once saturated with water, it should sink.


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 07:53 AM   #4
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
No feedback? DIY denitrification rock not an interesting topic?


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 10:52 AM   #5
uncleof6
Registered Member
 
uncleof6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: AWOL
Posts: 12,012
What do you suppose would be the mechanism for bulk water movement through the sponge? This is the part of the puzzle that is missing with porous rock. Just as the presence of water within the 'rock,' is not enough for denitrification to occur, simply having a saturated sponge, covered with a shell or otherwise, will not provide the necessary conditions for denitrification either. As with the rock, water must move through the "sponge rock" at precisely the right speed, so the oxygen level is reduced the right amount, or no denitrification will occur. If one were to "force feed" the 'sponge rock,' it would act as a mechanical filter, requiring regular cleaning, or it would just plug up. This would disturb bacterial population, something you don't want to do.


__________________
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (oft attributed to Einstein; most likely paraphrasing by Roger Sessions; compactly articulates the principle of Occam's Razor)

Current Tank Info: 325 6' wide Reef
uncleof6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 03:34 PM   #6
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
So let's imagine the rock is in a flow tunnel (with water). ... Go with me on this

The flow will be diverted around the mass. Some will follow the rock profile, some will even curl behind it. This surface water flow has some diffusion into the rock since the shell is relatively porous and only a few mm thick.

How much, how fast, how deep... Need to experiment to find the right balance.

If we think there is a mechanism, then the investigation is worthwhile. If the fundamentals are flawed, then there's no point.

Anyone with a fluid dynamics background willing to work out the math for the boundary layer flow around an object (assume sphere) that has a semi porous shell and then work out the diffusion formula inside with dependent variables (speed, porosity, thickness, etc...)?


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 04:43 PM   #7
Pife
Registered Member
 
Pife's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,283
I think it would soak up water and become stagnant, but I don't want to deter you from trying it and letting us know the results.


__________________
I'm not saying let's get rid of all the stupid people.* I'm just saying let's remove all the warning labels and let the problem work itself out.

Current Tank Info: 150g DT plumbed to an 80g frag tank and 220g sump in the basement. ~4-MP40s ~ ATI powered t5s ~ Reefbrites supplementing ~ Custom GEO Skimmer ~ GEO CA Reactor 6x12~ Iwaki 80 Return ~
Pife is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 05:02 PM   #8
uncleof6
Registered Member
 
uncleof6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: AWOL
Posts: 12,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by karimwassef View Post
So let's imagine the rock is in a flow tunnel (with water). ... Go with me on this

The flow will be diverted around the mass. Some will follow the rock profile, some will even curl behind it. This surface water flow has some diffusion into the rock since the shell is relatively porous and only a few mm thick.

How much, how fast, how deep... Need to experiment to find the right balance.

If we think there is a mechanism, then the investigation is worthwhile. If the fundamentals are flawed, then there's no point.

Anyone with a fluid dynamics background willing to work out the math for the boundary layer flow around an object (assume sphere) that has a semi porous shell and then work out the diffusion formula inside with dependent variables (speed, porosity, thickness, etc...)?
Well since water does not diffuse, there is little point in doing the calculations for water diffusion. Water would flow into the "sponge" through the pores, if they are sufficient in size (e.g. not really pores.) At that point, the water flow would stop. Then it would be up to diffusion of properties of, or material in, the water diffusing into the sponge. Such diffusion of properties or material, would be superficial at best, not entirely through the sponge as would be needed. Such diffusion would be short lived as well, as the "pores" plug up with larger material or bacterial secretions, that would in effect cease all diffusion into or out of the "sponge."

If we attempt to force the water through the sponge, then the flow rate would be too high.

Bernoulli's principle, would be applied to flow "around a sphere," with hydrodynamics and aerodynamics.... LOL...since the flow would be equal on all sides of the sphere, that is not much help...if we had an airfoil shape, one could raise the question of pressure differential being a motive force to move water through the sponge.

I don't think anyone will investigate this, as they haven't bothered to investigate the questions raised concerning rock and denitrification. With actual "live" rock, the motive question is answered. With dead rock, that may or may not have been taken from the ocean, (or DIY rock,) what have you, the question is not answered.

Aside from that, I think it is simpler to toss 60lbs of sand in a 5 gallon bucket, and call it a day. We know that works, and it works by diffusion of materials in the water, possibly pH gradients. (The interstitial space is greater in size than the pores in "porous" rock.)

Flow around a sphere:




__________________
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (oft attributed to Einstein; most likely paraphrasing by Roger Sessions; compactly articulates the principle of Occam's Razor)

Current Tank Info: 325 6' wide Reef
uncleof6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 07:59 PM   #9
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
that's flow around a solid rigid sphere.

there's also a happy medium between forced flow and complete stagnation.

With direct flow, a sponge would accept some advective diffusion. that's the transport I was thinking of. even a small pressure differential can pull water into some depth of the sponge.

It may be that a benthic zone is necessary with small worms driving the transport?

Whatever happened to the concept of a cryptic zone for living sponges to thrive?

I really don't have the answers. I'm just asking the questions.

If dead (no worms or pods) porous rock in open but strong flow doesn't work, then this likely won't either.


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/06/2014, 11:03 PM   #10
uncleof6
Registered Member
 
uncleof6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: AWOL
Posts: 12,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by karimwassef View Post
that's flow around a solid rigid sphere.

there's also a happy medium between forced flow and complete stagnation.

With direct flow, a sponge would accept some advective diffusion. that's the transport I was thinking of. even a small pressure differential can pull water into some depth of the sponge.

It may be that a benthic zone is necessary with small worms driving the transport?

Whatever happened to the concept of a cryptic zone for living sponges to thrive?

I really don't have the answers. I'm just asking the questions.

If dead (no worms or pods) porous rock in open but strong flow doesn't work, then this likely won't either.
Advective diffusion is a misnomer. The advection-diffusion equation, uses seperate terms for each. Advection, is the movement of a material or property due to the bulk movement of what contains it (medium.) Diffusion is the movement of a property or material, independant of motion of the medium. For example: Moisture in the atmosphere, due to the bulk movement of "air," or a pile of sand at a river bottom moving 20 miles down stream due to the water flow. (I only include this admonishment, because advection is a badly missused term, and consequently misunderstood.) Water does not advectively move anywhere, (moisture in the atmosphere does,) and it does not diffuse.

Advection is oft used to attempt to explain what is going on in a DSB. However, this is not the case. Water flow over a sand bed, does not cause water movement within the sand bed. If it did, the sand would move with the water. That would be advection. The sand goes nowhere, (well sometimes it blows all over the tank->advective transport...) Gravity is ruled out as well, but is responsible for the intitial flooding of the sand bed. Sand beds have definite physics for operation, but they are not well studied. What is known, is the water is not moving. So it is pH gradients, or other concentration gradients...and diffusion.

We have to be careful when we use water and diffusion in the same sentence as well. Water does not diffuse. The only time it diffuses is in the special case of osmosis. What does diffuse is properties of, or materials in, the water.

There still has to be a motive force for the bulk movement of the water, for advective transport. For instance, advective transport of fertilizers, chemicals etc. via ground water. The motive force is always gravity.

Anyway blah blah blah....

At the end of the day, you're right, if it does not work in "dead" or DIY rock, it won't be happening in sponge rock. If the rock is inhabited by infauna (inside life,) worms etc. then the movement of these critters can be the cause of water movement through the rock. At this time, this is pretty much accepted.


__________________
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (oft attributed to Einstein; most likely paraphrasing by Roger Sessions; compactly articulates the principle of Occam's Razor)

Current Tank Info: 325 6' wide Reef

Last edited by uncleof6; 05/06/2014 at 11:17 PM.
uncleof6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/07/2014, 01:01 AM   #11
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
So we use DSB but don't know why it works...
But we're sure that the same mechanisms absolutely don't occur in a sponge... pH or other transport.

It's a little arrogant to profess certainty of what doesn't work without being able to explain how it does work when it does.


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/07/2014, 11:49 AM   #12
Mpy
Registered Member
 
Mpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Gainesville FL
Posts: 81
There are two kinds of diffusion, turbulent and molecular. Both occurring in water. Molecular diffusion is almost just an idealistic concept, but is important in a few instances, primarily being water movement in interstitial water in sand and rocks, it is very slow movement but is important for nutrient transport through sediments(not being stirred by organisms).

It is completely wrong to say that water does not diffuse or move by advection. The best example to give is the Gulf Stream, it is the mass advection of a water mass through the ocean(like the return line from a sump), and along the side of the stream the gulf stream water diffuses into the waters surrounding it. If you did not have diffusion in an aquarium you would have no mixing or anything.

It may be that the engineering definition of advection and diffusion is not happening, but the scientific definitions are absolutely at play in an aquarium.

As to the question at hand, having a sponge coated in a thin layer of DIY dry rock, you would create a larger more porous center and the possibility for more bacteria to inhabit it. It wouldn't really pick up any more detritus than normal live or dry rock, it would just replace the center of the rock which would take years and years to have water seep into and become useful. Once you were able to get bacteria to inhabit the sponge it would likely act just like bacteria inhabited dry rock or ceramic media.


__________________
55g w/ DIY overflow and skimmer, 25g cube (under construction)

Its a tad hard to play with your aquarium if you cant lift more than a gallon of water...
Mpy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 12:35 AM   #13
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
How about an experiment?

In a 10gal tank, I'll put 3 similar sponges coated with concrete (my method).

I'll just use fresh tap water... And immerse them for a day with a power head pointing at them.

Now that they're water logged, there should be no transport...

Now I'll add food die and let it circulate for a day. Then I'll take one sponge out and cross-section it.

After a week, I'll take the next one out and do the same.

Another week, and I'll take out the last sponge.

If there is a transport mechanism, then the sponges interior should get progressively more die in it.

As a baseline, I'll actively fill a sponge with water and die in a bucket to start with. I don't know if food die sticks to a sponge at all... So lots to learn.

If all the three test sponges are clear of die, then it's clear - no mechanism. Maybe we'll see a penetration depth of 1" or another data point...


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 03:34 AM   #14
uncleof6
Registered Member
 
uncleof6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: AWOL
Posts: 12,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mpy View Post
There are two kinds of diffusion, turbulent and molecular. Both occurring in water. Molecular diffusion is almost just an idealistic concept, but is important in a few instances, primarily being water movement in interstitial water in sand and rocks, it is very slow movement but is important for nutrient transport through sediments(not being stirred by organisms).
Water movement in the interstitial space in sand, soil, etc. is due to gravity, it is not advection. What is dissolved in the water moving due to gravity, is being advectively transported. By the way, the notion of advective water movement is wrong, and in contradiction to the sciences, and the definition of advection/advective transport.

Quote:
It is completely wrong to say that water does not diffuse or move by advection. The best example to give is the Gulf Stream, it is the mass advection of a water mass through the ocean(like the return line from a sump), and along the side of the stream the gulf stream water diffuses into the waters surrounding it. If you did not have diffusion in an aquarium you would have no mixing or anything.
The Gulf Stream is driven by the prevailing winds, not advection.

Diffusion is the "movement" of a solute within a solvent, from an area of a higher concentration of the solute, to an area of a lower concentration of the solute. Water is the solvent, what is dissolved in the water is the solute. Water does not diffuse, this is straight out of the text books—check it out...

Advective transport (again right out of the text books) is the movement of of a property or material due to the movement of a fluid medium. Or, to relate it to above, the movement of a solute due to the movement of a solvent.

Since water is always a solvent, (the universal solvent) and not a solute, water does not diffuse, and it cannot move advectively. Such beliefs are contrary to all the sciences, and torted by folks with little to no background in physics, or with the intent to mislead...The only time water will diffuse is across a semi-permeable membrane in a process called osmosis. This information is availble in lower level Biology courses, and even wikipedia...

Ocean water movement is caused by interaction with the atmosphere e.g. air currents commonly referred to as wind. Since the ocean water is not dissolved or a solute within the atmosphere, (nor is it a solute or dissolved in the ocean water...) this motion is called a current, not advection.

ADVECTION:

noun
noun: advection
  1. the transfer of heat or matter by the flow of a fluid, especially horizontally in the atmosphere or the sea.
Quote:
It may be that the engineering definition of advection and diffusion is not happening, but the scientific definitions are absolutely at play in an aquarium.
"In physics, engineering, and earth sciences, advection is a transport mechanism of a substance or conserved property by a fluid due to the fluid's bulk motion."

I am sorry, but engineering is a science, and uses the same definitions as every other science. I don't like bringing bad news, but the science/engineering does not change, nor do the laws of physics get thrown out the window, because it is an aquarium.

"The term advection sometimes serves as a synonym for convection, but technically, convection covers the sum of transport both by diffusion and by advection. Advective transport describes the movement of some quantity via the bulk flow of a fluid (as in a river or pipeline)."

E.G. advection is NOT a synonym for convection.

Quote:
As to the question at hand, having a sponge coated in a thin layer of DIY dry rock, you would create a larger more porous center and the possibility for more bacteria to inhabit it. It wouldn't really pick up any more detritus than normal live or dry rock, it would just replace the center of the rock which would take years and years to have water seep into and become useful. Once you were able to get bacteria to inhabit the sponge it would likely act just like bacteria inhabited dry rock or ceramic media.
First you have to evaluate how there will be a bulk movement of water through the "sponge rock" at precisely the right speed, for denitrifiction to occur. Since advective water movement does not exist, what is the motive force for the water to advectively transport nutrients through the rock at precisely the right speed, and are the "pores" small enough so the flow is low enough that oxygen levels drop the right amount...

Lacking that, you need to evaluate whether diffusion alone, will provide the "processing power." Remember water does not diffuse, except across a semi-permeable membrane (osmosis the sponge and shell are not semi-permeable membranes. And if they were, the water would diffuse through, certainly, but from an area of lower concentration of solute, to an area of higher concentration of solute, or not at all if solute concentration is the same on both sides; what was in the water, would stay behind. Semi-permeable water will pass, but nothing else.

If neither can be present, then there is also no convection these things can be attributed to. These are the same things that put natural rock in question, and it is glaringly obvious that rock does not provide any significant denitrification: Otherwise, there would not be such a vehement search for something that does do the job...Every tank these days has more than enough rock in them..... 2 + 2 = 4, not 5, not 3.


__________________
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (oft attributed to Einstein; most likely paraphrasing by Roger Sessions; compactly articulates the principle of Occam's Razor)

Current Tank Info: 325 6' wide Reef
uncleof6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 04:31 AM   #15
Electrobes
Montipora type guy
 
Electrobes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 2,955
As a guy who makes rocks for saltwater tanks as a hobby, my biggest problem with the sponge idea is strength in general.

It takes a good while for bacterial/etc to penetrate the thickness of any rock, we're talking inch+ per year... it ain't fast.

My biggest fear is the core of the rocks being fairly weak. Between people stacking it, drilling it, etc... one fracture will most likely destroy the rock. One would have to be fairly careful not to have it be physically hit too hard or tinkered with (Drilled, chipped, etc) so as not to destroy it. You would most likely have to keep the rock on top.. not under the other rocks.

Even if you tried to thicken it enough to it could withstand the physical realities of us and our tanks, at what point does it get too thick for the sponge (Assuming the idea worked) to work?

Overall, while I love innovation, I don't see this working out all that well, IMO.


__________________
Christian

Current Tank Info: 100G Half Cylinder
Electrobes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 04:41 AM   #16
Cu455
Moved On
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 681
They make sponge bio balls and people use other sponge media. When people use deep sand beds water is flowing over it not through it. If you are worried about flow you can drill some holes through the sponge. This will allow water to easily flow through and create a suction.

You can also buy bottled bacteria and inject it into the sponge. You should set up a container with water from you tank and test the nitrate every few days. Maybe set up one container with a sponge and one with a similar size piece of rock.


Cu455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 07:45 AM   #17
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
I always drill my rocks, even when I just use PVC skeletons. They're riddled with holes.

In terms of structural strength, I would use a practical support mechanism like eggcrate and PVC as I do now. The only difference is that the open space inside the skeleton would be filled with sponge instead of just water.

Concrete skin + PVC/eggcrate rib cage + sponge organs


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 07:58 AM   #18
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
I really don't want this post to turn into a dispute or semantics competition.

Water motion will result in other water motion. You can write the formula any number of ways: as pressure gradients, as particle to particle interaction due to shear forces, etc... It doesn't matter because in the end, the results are consistent.

The question here is whether the construction and materials used - concrete, sponge - stop this external water motion (due to pumps) from becoming internal water motion or whether it just slows it down as a function of the properties of the object.


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 01:45 PM   #19
uncleof6
Registered Member
 
uncleof6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: AWOL
Posts: 12,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cu455 View Post
They make sponge bio balls and people use other sponge media. When people use deep sand beds water is flowing over it not through it. If you are worried about flow you can drill some holes through the sponge. This will allow water to easily flow through and create a suction.

You can also buy bottled bacteria and inject it into the sponge. You should set up a container with water from you tank and test the nitrate every few days. Maybe set up one container with a sponge and one with a similar size piece of rock.

That is exactly why it does work, because water is not moving through it. If water was moving through it, it would be nothing but an undergravel filter, addressing only the first half of the nitrogen cycle: ammonia --> nitrate, which is an oxidation process.

If holes are drilled in a media (sponge rock for instance) to allow water to easily flow through, you end up with an undergravel filter again...it is unproductive in terms of denitrification, becasue the oxygen level will not drop sufficiently during the traverse. Hence the issue of 'at the precise speed"

FYI, bottled bacteria are heterotrophic bacteria cultures. Heterotrophic bacteria, are not responsible for any part of the 'nitrogen cycle.' ammonia --> nitrogen gas. Heterotrophic bacteria produce the "ammonia" (organic --> inorganic) that subsequently is processed to nitrogen gas by the "nitrogen cycle," performed by autotrophic bacteria. Bottled bacteria is snake oil, and a waste of time. There was a great deal of "playing" with these concepts back in the late 70s and early 1980s: the black box denitrators. All of which promoted heterotrophic bacteria, which biologically speaking, is the wrong approach.


__________________
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (oft attributed to Einstein; most likely paraphrasing by Roger Sessions; compactly articulates the principle of Occam's Razor)

Current Tank Info: 325 6' wide Reef
uncleof6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 02:37 PM   #20
karimwassef
Registered Member
 
karimwassef's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,589
The holes are drilled in the concrete and PVC, not deep into the sponge.

Usually about 1/4"

Primarily, they are to allow coral and rock attachment with solid airline tubing but the unused holes double as access points for small organisms to get behind the concrete surface.


karimwassef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05/09/2014, 07:50 PM   #21
Cu455
Moved On
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncleof6 View Post
That is exactly why it does work, because water is not moving through it. If water was moving through it, it would be nothing but an undergravel filter, addressing only the first half of the nitrogen cycle: ammonia --> nitrate, which is an oxidation process.

If holes are drilled in a media (sponge rock for instance) to allow water to easily flow through, you end up with an undergravel filter again...it is unproductive in terms of denitrification, becasue the oxygen level will not drop sufficiently during the traverse. Hence the issue of 'at the precise speed"

FYI, bottled bacteria are heterotrophic bacteria cultures. Heterotrophic bacteria, are not responsible for any part of the 'nitrogen cycle.' ammonia --> nitrogen gas. Heterotrophic bacteria produce the "ammonia" (organic --> inorganic) that subsequently is processed to nitrogen gas by the "nitrogen cycle," performed by autotrophic bacteria. Bottled bacteria is snake oil, and a waste of time. There was a great deal of "playing" with these concepts back in the late 70s and early 1980s: the black box denitrators. All of which promoted heterotrophic bacteria, which biologically speaking, is the wrong approach.
You drill a hole as one to let water pass through. It will be like having 2 deep sand beds one one the outside and one through the middle. It will also prevent the water from going stagnant which you were so concerned about .

If you will like I will record me doing this again. And my friend to ammonia and water and sea chem stability. It did reduce the ammonia.

I think you have just been drinking to much of the hateraid. A sponge in a tank is nothing like a under gravel filter. That is a terrible comparison, especially if he has a sand bottom tank.


Cu455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:02 PM.


TapaTalk Enabled

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2017 Axivo Inc.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef CentralTM Reef Central, LLC. Copyright 1999-2014