CREATING THE ULTIMATE FILTRATION AND EVOLVING WITH YOUR FISH!!!!!!

[Reedmaster16]

HULON,

Great looking filtration and bass. For discussion purposes do you have any concerns running the bio reactor as your primary source of biological filtration? I know the glass filter is primarily mechanical but provides some biological filtration as well. I run bio reactors (tumbling media suspended by large air pump) of varied sizes on all my tanks but also run ceramic rings in a sump system as a backup/failsafe. I would love to eliminate the sump and simply run the reactors as my primary source of bio.

My one concern has been the potential sensitivity of bio reactors to medications. I was just looking for any comments or experiences with bio reactors and meds that are not suppose to impact your biofilter such as prazipro etc.

When I built and plumbed my reactors I was advised to plumb in a bypass in the event the tank would require medication dosing. I am just a bit nervous to eliminate the ceramic rings in my systems because I know from experience they are not overly sensitive to supposedly biofilter safe meds. Just looking for any input/experience in order to eliminate unnecessary parts of the system to make it as efficient as possible.

Great thread so far,
Reed

 

[asm129]

This guy one upped you by getting his BB Grouper to 70lbs in a 210G. His sump looks tiny too. Pretty impressive, eh?

[video=youtube;7TcgGhMeSeU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TcgGhMeSeU[/video]

Head's up though man...if my experience was any indication, people are going to start hating on you big time for running all those bio-balls submerged.

What's the point of always re-posting this video? No one here is saying you can keep a grouper in a 210G. You guys like to use the most extreme examples. It's like going to a guy's house and taking a video of an aro in a 60g and posting it up to bash the arowana keepers here. Everyone here knows better than that but you're comparing us to the least knowledgeable fish keepers.

 

[HULON]

HULON,

Great looking filtration and bass. For discussion purposes do you have any concerns running the bio reactor as your primary source of biological filtration? I know the glass filter is primarily mechanical but provides some biological filtration as well. I run bio reactors (tumbling media suspended by large air pump) of varied sizes on all my tanks but also run ceramic rings in a sump system as a backup/failsafe. I would love to eliminate the sump and simply run the reactors as my primary source of bio.

My one concern has been the potential sensitivity of bio reactors to medications. I was just looking for any comments or experiences with bio reactors and meds that are not suppose to impact your biofilter such as prazipro etc.

When I built and plumbed my reactors I was advised to plumb in a bypass in the event the tank would require medication dosing. I am just a bit nervous to eliminate the ceramic rings in my systems because I know from experience they are not overly sensitive to supposedly biofilter safe meds. Just looking for any input/experience in order to eliminate unnecessary parts of the system to make it as efficient as possible.

Great thread so far,
Reed

Awsome Question!!! Meds effect any all Bio not just reactors different levels of coarse meaning different meds kill off more then others some will effect the way the media is churned or spun witch can effect how much Oxy your media will get Or not!!!killing yet more BB"S That is Exactly why i run A UV and if i happen to get a fish that is more stressed out and what little Parisite /Bad Bacteria /virus is still attacking a specimen then at that point it should be seperated and treated in a Quarantine tank with less volume less meds and peace and quiete for the animal to have a chance to recover heck like bed rest in a hospital ya Know!!!!That way they can feed get back to health without harrasement

 

[pacu mom]

Eventually all my systems will be completly closed loop The Bio and Mechanical all of it bing able to either backwash or open and maintain without disdurbing the BIO

I subscribe wholeheartedly to the closed loop filtration concept. I'm going with Ultima 4000s for biological and Pentair Rainbow RTL-100s for mechanical filtration on my new system. Will be using the sump tank primarily as a holding tank to run a Clarity CL-3 off of. As an afterthought I have decided to place some 5 gallon filter socks and throw in some Pond Matrix in the sump for secondary/tertiary redundant filtration. The sump tank will give me options to get creative with water changes/drip systems down the road, should I choose to go that route. Besides, I ordered my tank with eight feet of external overflow boxes, so I have to use them

 

[Reedmaster16]

Awsome Question!!! Meds effect any all Bio not just reactors different levels of coarse meaning different meds kill off more then others some will effect the way the media is churned or spun witch can effect how much Oxy your media will get Or not!!!killing yet more BB"S That is Exactly why i run A UV and if i happen to get a fish that is more stressed out and what little Parisite /Bad Bacteria /virus is still attacking a specimen then at that point it should be seperated and treated in a Quarantine tank with less volume less meds and peace and quiete for the animal to have a chance to recover heck like bed rest in a hospital ya Know!!!!

Thanks for the quick reply and all great points. I am a big fan of UV and run very slow flow through it to assist in reduction/eradication of any free floating parasite/bacteria on my main tank. And it keeps the water nice and clear!

I almost never use medication but am keeping some more sensitive freshwater rays (p14). I have run into the issue recently where any stress from tankmates can cause the more sensitive rays immune system to slightly weaken, allowing some type of parasite/fluke to take hold. The parasite/fluke from what ive been able to learn may somehow lay dormant within the animal for months/years with no symptoms and emerge when the ray endures any type of stress from moving, tankmates, water parameter fluctuations, etc.
Sorry for getting off topic, its a very unique/specific situation.

My point was even with a clean disease free tank it seems as if I may need to periodically medicate my tank without the ability to remove the animal for quarantine. In my very specific situation I may require the backup bio filtration of the ceramics as a fail-safe in case the bio reactor is somehow adversely affected. DBJunkie started a tread in the ray forum a little while back that got me thinking about the potential sensitivity of the bio reactors.

I always planned on having backup bio for the reactor, but recently have been looking into ways to "trim any excess fat" off the filtration system without under-doing it haha. Anyone tested this? Could a drip system and the glass filter potentially hold enough bio to temporarily sustain a tank if the reactor is somehow impacted?

 

[jcardona1]

Filtration is always an interesting topic on this site. I never really understood why. People get too caught up in overall design, direction of flow and choice of media, etc and seem to forget just how easy it is to maintain biological filtration. We're just spoiled with all these cool methods of filtration these days. I remember when I was a kid you either ran an undergravel filter or a hang-on filter. That was it. And the fish lived.

Seriously. Keeping ammonia and nitrite at 0 is such an easy thing to do. You could spend a less than a $100 and build a filter that will support thousands of gallons of water and A LOT of fish. I know because I've done it on koi ponds. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. What we should be debating is NITRATES, and how to reduce them and keep them at near 0 levels. The guys in the cichlid section seem to be on the right path. I think this would be a better discussion.

Me personally, when I build a filter I go for low cost, ease of setup and simplicity of maintenance. That is why my sumps are so simple. You could say they're poorly designed all you want. But unless I'm getting readings of ammonia and nitrite, you will be wrong every single time. That's all there is to it. End of discussion. If ammonia/nitrites are at 0, then the filter is doing it's job and it was designed properly. There is not one single improvement you can make that make it more effective or efficient. None. You can make it prettier or easier to maintain, but that's about it.

All these fancy filters used these days is a matter of preference really. Pressurized bead filters, glass filters, bio reactors, fluidized beds, etc are nothing new and have been around for years. At the end of the day the same can be achieved with a sump. It's all about how fancy you wanna get with it and how much you want to spend. We have a giant pressurized bead filter on our koi pond. It was an expensive beast (about $1800) but it can support a 10,000g pond. Would I use it on a fish tank? Me personally, no. I think it's a bit much. But I can see the appeal. They're very easy to maintain.

As far as sumps go, I don't see them going anywhere. Wet/dry trickle filters are a different story however. This method of filtration I'm not a fan of. Too messy. There's a reason most reefers stopped using this years ago. But with sumps you have the ability to always maintain the main tank at a set level of water. You get the nice surface skimming with the overflow box, ease of setting up an auto water changer and you can get all the equipment out of the tank. For these reasons I choose sumps over a closed loop system. Sure you can do this in a closed loop system, but it involves more plumbing work and more $$$$.

And when you really look at it, it's about $$$$ and how much you're willing to drop on your setup.

 

[DB junkie]

I'm going to post some pics tonight so you can see how us hillbillies here in the corn field go big on filtration.

I make up for not being able to afford fancy stuff like backflushing bead filters with redneck engineering....

Add a nice UV and I'd put my filter up against any typical MFKers anyday.

 

[HULON]

Thanks for the quick reply and all great points. I am a big fan of UV and run very slow flow through it to assist in reduction/eradication of any free floating parasite/bacteria on my main tank. And it keeps the water nice and clear!

I almost never use medication but am keeping some more sensitive freshwater rays (p14). I have run into the issue recently where any stress from tankmates can cause the more sensitive rays immune system to slightly weaken, allowing some type of parasite/fluke to take hold. The parasite/fluke from what ive been able to learn may somehow lay dormant within the animal for months/years with no symptoms and emerge when the ray endures any type of stress from moving, tankmates, water parameter fluctuations, etc.
Sorry for getting off topic, its a very unique/specific situation.

My point was even with a clean disease free tank it seems as if I may need to periodically medicate my tank without the ability to remove the animal for quarantine. In my very specific situation I may require the backup bio filtration of the ceramics as a fail-safe in case the bio reactor is somehow adversely affected. DBJunkie started a tread in the ray forum a little while back that got me thinking about the potential sensitivity of the bio reactors.

I always planned on having backup bio for the reactor, but recently have been looking into ways to "trim any excess fat" off the filtration system without under-doing it haha. Anyone tested this? Could a drip system and the glass filter potentially hold enough bio to temporarily sustain a tank if the reactor is somehow impacted?

Unique somewhat yes with the species unique to the Hobby as far as keeping fish with different needs no it's not but a problem none the less step back and take a minute think about what you are saying you are willing to put a well maintained and good running system in jeapardy because of the needs of two possably more species ..It is my believe Parisite /virus and bacteria the could possably harm are always present when stress happens the fish is then effected and not always in a good way don't get me wrong i practice this myself trying to keep a ballence that is good is a tough thing to do and i too enjoy watching different species together in the same tank but sometimes it's very tough to reach a good ballence!!!!

Filtration is always an interesting topic on this site. I never really understood why. People get too caught up in overall design, direction of flow and choice of media, etc and seem to forget just how easy it is to maintain biological filtration. We're just spoiled with all these cool methods of filtration these days. I remember when I was a kid you either ran an undergravel filter or a hang-on filter. That was it. And the fish lived.

Seriously. Keeping ammonia and nitrite at 0 is such an easy thing to do. You could spend a less than a $100 and build a filter that will support thousands of gallons of water and A LOT of fish. I know because I've done it on koi ponds. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. What we should be debating is NITRATES, and how to reduce them and keep them at near 0 levels. The guys in the cichlid section seem to be on the right path. I think this would be a better discussion.

Me personally, when I build a filter I go for low cost, ease of setup and simplicity of maintenance. That is why my sumps are so simple. You could say they're poorly designed all you want. But unless I'm getting readings of ammonia and nitrite, you will be wrong every single time. That's all there is to it. End of discussion. If ammonia/nitrites are at 0, then the filter is doing it's job and it was designed properly. There is not one single improvement you can make that make it more effective or efficient. None. You can make it prettier or easier to maintain, but that's about it.

All these fancy filters used these days is a matter of preference really. Pressurized bead filters, glass filters, bio reactors, fluidized beds, etc are nothing new and have been around for years. At the end of the day the same can be achieved with a sump. It's all about how fancy you wanna get with it and how much you want to spend. We have a giant pressurized bead filter on our koi pond. It was an expensive beast (about $1800) but it can support a 10,000g pond. Would I use it on a fish tank? Me personally, no. I think it's a bit much. But I can see the appeal. They're very easy to maintain.

As far as sumps go, I don't see them going anywhere. Wet/dry trickle filters are a different story however. This method of filtration I'm not a fan of. Too messy. There's a reason most reefers stopped using this years ago. With sumps you have the ability to always maintain the main tank at a set level of water. You get the nice surface skimming with the overflow box, ease of setting up and auto water changer and you can get all the equipment out of the tank. For these reasons I choose sumps over a closed loop system. Sure you can do this in a closed loop system, but it involved more plumbing work and more $$$$.

And when you really look at it, it's about $$$$ and how much you're willing to drop on your setup.

Some points you are right Jose do these filter systems do the same thing yes!!!! are each of them equally efficient NO Overall $$$$ spent i would argue very close to the same Both need a pump both are a chamber of sorts both have to have media there are ways to cut costs shop around I'm not saying my choices are for the next guy i am just trying to offer alternatives that's all and sumps are dirty maitainence pits just like drip sumps simular but different to maintain !!!!Right now i have both chamber and tub a simple simple sump if you will and have had sumps used them and did away with them ....

 

[framcosco]

Filtration is always an interesting topic on this site. I never really understood why. People get too caught up in overall design, direction of flow and choice of media, etc and seem to forget just how easy it is to maintain biological filtration. We're just spoiled with all these cool methods of filtration these days. I remember when I was a kid you either ran an undergravel filter or a hang-on filter. That was it. And the fish lived.

Seriously. Keeping ammonia and nitrite at 0 is such an easy thing to do. You could spend a less than a $100 and build a filter that will support thousands of gallons of water and A LOT of fish. I know because I've done it on koi ponds. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. What we should be debating is NITRATES, and how to reduce them and keep them at near 0 levels. The guys in the cichlid section seem to be on the right path. I think this would be a better discussion.

Me personally, when I build a filter I go for low cost, ease of setup and simplicity of maintenance. That is why my sumps are so simple. You could say they're poorly designed all you want. But unless I'm getting readings of ammonia and nitrite, you will be wrong every single time. That's all there is to it. End of discussion. If ammonia/nitrites are at 0, then the filter is doing it's job and it was designed properly. There is not one single improvement you can make that make it more effective or efficient. None. You can make it prettier or easier to maintain, but that's about it.

All these fancy filters used these days is a matter of preference really. Pressurized bead filters, glass filters, bio reactors, fluidized beds, etc are nothing new and have been around for years. At the end of the day the same can be achieved with a sump. It's all about how fancy you wanna get with it and how much you want to spend. We have a giant pressurized bead filter on our koi pond. It was an expensive beast (about $1800) but it can support a 10,000g pond. Would I use it on a fish tank? Me personally, no. I think it's a bit much. But I can see the appeal. They're very easy to maintain.

As far as sumps go, I don't see them going anywhere. Wet/dry trickle filters are a different story however. This method of filtration I'm not a fan of. Too messy. There's a reason most reefers stopped using this years ago. But with sumps you have the ability to always maintain the main tank at a set level of water. You get the nice surface skimming with the overflow box, ease of setting up an auto water changer and you can get all the equipment out of the tank. For these reasons I choose sumps over a closed loop system. Sure you can do this in a closed loop system, but it involves more plumbing work and more $$$$.

And when you really look at it, it's about $$$$ and how much you're willing to drop on your setup.

Very well said.

 

[jcardona1]

Some points you are right Jose do these filter systems do the same thing yes!!!! are each of them equally efficient NO Overall $$$$ spent i would argue very close to the same Both need a pump both are a chamber of sorts both have to have media there are ways to cut costs shop around I'm not saying my choices are for the next guy i am just trying to offer alternatives that's all and sumps are dirty maitainence pits just like drip sumps simular but different to maintain !!!!Right now i have both chamber and tub a simple simple sump if you will and have had sumps used them and did away with them ....

Yup. The concept of bio filtration is the same no matter the system; take water out of the tank, pass it through some gizmo gadgets that are growing bacteria and then return it to the tank. Repeat

But I think money does play a factor. Some of the pressurized filters can get pricey. Of course it depends on how many bells and whistles you wanna add.

The tub you're using is basically a sump too About them being dirty, that all depends on how you set them up. Pre-filtering is key. Ever since I started using 50 micron of finer filter socks my sumps have been spotless. Even the sump in my 400g tank when it was full of pbass. The source of sump crud is the incoming water from the tank. If you pre-filter it properly and stay up on the regular maintenance, it won't get dirty. But if you slack on it, you'll see the difference. There's been a few times when I lagged on changing my filter socks and just let them keep overflowing into the sump. That's when the crud starts to accumulate.

And yes, it's all about options and alternatives. Like I said, we're spoiled these days