Is more really better? Filter turnover.

[Dr Joe]

More like you can hold 3x more fish in the same size tank because you are force feeding the bacteria in the filter.

In your theory, all you would have to do is put the fliter material in the tank with the fish to maintain large bacterial growth rate to sustain 3x fish population and we know that won't work.

Dr Joe

.

 

[aquanaut]

Thanks Dr. Joe! The whole statement meant to hint at efficency. Twice the flow and smaller media vs low flow high surface area accomplish the same outcome. Dwell time vs Contact time is an arguement that can go on and on.
We are talking about nearly instantaneuos reactions here.

 

[milkman407]

I believe 3-5 times is best, and have a huge thing of media.

 

[pacu mom]

After reading Johnptc's poll on filter turnover;
http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56742
I was amazed how many people base their filtration on number on turn over.

To me this is only a part of the equation. You have to consider type of filter, type of media and amount of media, and of course bioload.

price range not a factor.

So heres a hypethetical tank set up tell me what is better.

100 gallon tank, fully stocked we are gonna go for 5x turn over rate. so 500 gallons per hour.

1 AC110 at 500gph or 2 eheim 2026 canister filters at 250 gph each. So we have 2 set ups, both with 500 gph.

You tell me are these two set ups equal filtration?

On another fish forum that I frequent, the recommended turnover rates for filters is based on the type of filter. HOBs are very strong mechanical filters (and can have good bio. components with biowheels), while wet dry filters can be strictly biological. Canister filters can be equally strong in both areas with the proper media. It is recommended that HOBs have at least 10x turnover rate, while canister filters have at least 4x turnover rate. Wet dry filters can have an even slower turnover rate. This means in an average stocked 100 gallon tank, your HOBs should have at least 1000 gph turnover. If you are using canister filters, it would be a minimum of 400 gph. In your hypothetical scenario, you would need two AC110s, but the 2 canisters would give you more filtration at 500 gph (you are exceeding the minimal of 400 gph). With only one AC110, you would be drastically underfiltered.

I subscribe to the theory that you cannot have too much filtration. On our 300 gallon tank we have a 400 gallon capacity Pro Clear wet dry filter run with a CA 6000 pump (1560 gph) for biological filtration. We have extreme mechanical filtration with two spa filters run by a Reef Hammerhead pump (5800 gph). For redundant back up filtration we run an Fluval FX5 with a 40 Watt UV sterilizer connected to it. This greatly exceeds the recommended turnover rates on all fronts. Our tank is overstocked by everyone's estimation--two 20 inch pacu, two large oscars and two 12"+ plecos. We maintain excellent water parameters with weekly water changes, or water changes on two consecutive days to get the nitrates super low. Our mechanical filtration is extreme, to say the least, with very innovative plumbing. Next week will mark one year that our rescued fish have been in their "new" home. There has not been any debris or feces to vacuum out of their tank in the past year, as our innovative "poop suckers" whisk away all debris from the tank in less than a minute. At 607 gph, the flow through the FX5 is slow enough to allow the UV sterilizer to do its job--the green water problem from continuous sunlight on the tank was cleared up. In theory, two FX5s should be able to do the job on a 300 gallon regularly stocked tank, but I wouldn't trade our current filtration system for anything. We love the easy tank maintenance!

 

[Dr Joe]

Thanks Dr. Joe! The whole statement meant to hint at efficency. Twice the flow and smaller media vs low flow high surface area accomplish the same outcome. Dwell time vs Contact time is an arguement that can go on and on.
We are talking about nearly instantaneuos reactions here.

Low flow and large surface area are better than low surface area anf high flow rate! They will not accomplish the same thing.

Dwell time for all intent and purposes here is contact time.

Nothing is instantaneous here. The bacteria take time to break down the ammonia.

Dr Joe

.

 

[Lil_Stinker]

My theory.
If you put two filters on a tank, then each one will have half the bacteria had it been in the tank alone.

I do believe there is no such thing as too much mechanical filtration, you can change/clean the media less often, however ...

I do believe there is a max to biological filtration. Biological filtration is a balance, if you add a second unit after the first is balanced, then BB in filter one will be reduced as BB in filter two increases.

I further believe there is such thing as an ideal flow rate (range) for a W/D, and a flow rate over or under this range will decrease efficiency, even if the params are still perfect. This range will depend on media capacity and bio load.

Your 500 gph & 250 gph will have the ability to handle many situations. but the 250 with the larger media capacity will ultimately have more surface area and be able to physically support more BB..

If the bio load being provided is not in excess of the lower capacity filter then the additional media was a waste of $$$..

In short, from a biological standpoint, if adding more media or another filter helps, then you were UNDER filtered.

Again this is just my twisted opinion.

 

[DeLgAdO]

i think the only good reason to have alot of turn over rate is for good circulation. keep waste production equally distributed so they dont accumulate in one or several place in the tank and so the filter can pick that loose debris.

 

[aquanaut]

Low flow and large surface area are better than low surface area anf high flow rate! They will not accomplish the same thing.

Dwell time for all intent and purposes here is contact time.

Nothing is instantaneous here. The bacteria take time to break down the ammonia.

Dr Joe

.

Pardon my ignorance.. would it be dependent on the available bacteria?

And can the available bacteria perform the reaction more often with more time?

Or is this reaction time set? It is my understanding that DO can decrease this reaction time... Correct?

 

[johnptc]

well stated

My theory.
If you put two filters on a tank, then each one will have half the bacteria had it been in the tank alone.

I do believe there is no such thing as too much mechanical filtration, you can change/clean the media less often, however ...

I do believe there is a max to biological filtration. Biological filtration is a balance, if you add a second unit after the first is balanced, then BB in filter one will be reduced as BB in filter two increases.

I further believe there is such thing as an ideal flow rate (range) for a W/D, and a flow rate over or under this range will decrease efficiency, even if the params are still perfect. This range will depend on media capacity and bio load.

Your 500 gph & 250 gph will have the ability to handle many situations. but the 250 with the larger media capacity will ultimately have more surface area and be able to physically support more BB..

If the bio load being provided is not in excess of the lower capacity filter then the additional media was a waste of $$$..

In short, from a biological standpoint, if adding more media or another filter helps, then you were UNDER filtered.

Again this is just my twisted opinion.

 

[spds31]

Seems to me that you guys are trying to over-simplify a very complicated process. If you really want to start confusing yourselves, try debating static media vs. dynamic media and denitrification.