FX5 + Modification

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
rasa92re

rasa92re

Candiru
MFK Member
May 22, 2008
278
0
46
New York
I was thinking about the FX5 and why Eheim provides better biological filtration. I thought that perhaps there was a way to take full advantage of the FX5's interior in regards to bio filtration. This idea is a bit wild but stick with me and let me know what you guys think.

My tank has two built in drains and therefore a center back built in overflow. Because water overflows into the rectangular overflow like a waterfall, I can use the gravity feed like a sump does. What if I cut a piece of eggcrate and give it a snug fit in the overflow and put let's say aquaclear foam blocks to rest on top. Therefore, water would be mechanically filtered as soon as it goes down the box for about 3 or 4 inches. Then I could remove all the foam sponges in the FX5 except for the first layer ones. I then fill the canister with bio media. (either bio max or eheim substrat in media bags) If the FX5 is packed with bio then the flow velocity would have to decrease and yield more contact time. I could also lower the flow rate manually if the intial decrease wasn't substantial.

What do you think? I really want to give it a go.
 
What if I cut a piece of eggcrate and give it a snug fit in the overflow and put let's say aquaclear foam blocks to rest on top
Click to expand...
If you want to pre filter the intake, why not just sponge the intake tube for the FX..

If the FX5 is packed with bio then the flow velocity would have to decrease and yield more contact time. I could also lower the flow rate manually if the intial decrease wasn't substantial.
Click to expand...
Then why have a FX5? I thought the big "pitch" on these was all about the flow rate.
Other than the overflow filtering thing, I would say..Go ahead, do it.
Here is what I think will happen..nothing.
Unless you have constant high nitrate levels the bacteria/waste levels are in balance. The addition of more bio media will not help or hurt you..
There have been a number of posts, MFK and elsewhere, as to the need of bio media(other than the gravel/decor/available in tank surfaces)at all.
 
I know that I only need more bio if my tank is overstocked. I fear that the stock would produce a SUBSTANTIAL bioload when the fish are mature.
 
My tank has two built in drains and therefore a center back built in overflow. Because water overflows into the rectangular overflow like a waterfall, I can use the gravity feed like a sump does. What if I cut a piece of eggcrate and give it a snug fit in the overflow and put let's say aquaclear foam blocks to rest on top. Therefore, water would be mechanically filtered as soon as it goes down the box for about 3 or 4 inches. Then I could remove all the foam sponges in the FX5 except for the first layer ones. I then fill the canister with bio media. (either bio max or eheim substrat in media bags) If the FX5 is packed with bio then the flow velocity would have to decrease and yield more contact time. I could also lower the flow rate manually if the intial decrease wasn't substantial.
Click to expand...

Its already been done. http://www.innovationlandscaping.com/fx5/internalmod.html

Then I could remove all the foam sponges in the FX5 except for the first layer ones.
Click to expand...

This will not do you any good. If you remove 4 sponges, just remove the last 2. Otherwise there will be a large mechanical bypass.

If the FX5 is packed with bio then the flow velocity would have to decrease and yield more contact time. I could also lower the flow rate manually if the intial decrease wasn't substantial.
Click to expand...

Your mixing Flow volume with flow velocity. In theory packing the filter should yield more restriction depending on the media used but this also depends on the cross section surface area. The more restriction you have, the LOWER the FLOW VOLUME but the FASTER the FLOW VELOCITY.

The Velocity is how fast the water is moving. So when you pose a restriction such as the media, the water moving into the small voids through the media has to speed up.
 
I saw your mod Jgray but I really don't want to take pieces out of the filter and experiment with it's parts. That's why I sought to use the built in overflow.
 
All you would take out are the baskets, that's it. When you remove the baskets you reduce the purging capabilities of the filter so you need to "ramp" the cover more toward the center so it will purge, or putting in a larger piece of tubing instead of the small one that's in there. HAvn't thought of that before, I may try this. The only thing this will do negative is recirculate more water from the output side of the filter back into the filter while its running. May not be that bad actually.

If the overflow has enough surface are for it to not clog, than go for it. You would have more SA in the Fx5 doing how I did it and how Hagen should have done it in the first place.

Everything is reversible in the fx5 after the mod.
 
rasa92re;3377808; said:
I was thinking about the FX5 and why Eheim provides better biological filtration.
Click to expand...


In my experience that statement is a bunch of hog wash and has never been put to any form of a test...

Based on my experience you are asking us how to reduce your filter's efficiency based on a false goal...

I think you will be well served to put a prefilter on your FX5 and clean it often... besides that I think you will be best served by not interfearing with the filter's intended design/use...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom