I've Seen The Light- UGF's SUCK

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
10-4, copy that, rojer-rojer!

Sometimes I just need to have the obvious pointed out before it truly clicks...
That's why I tried to take care not to accredit vspec alone, even though he held the clicker in that particular instance.
 
they are questions or thoughts that beg answering in order to proceed to the next step in my view

Same here, but, with not a single detail about your system makes the next step seem pointless.
I don`t want to read through another ramble espousing some holistic, ecco centered, mumbo jumbo with not a detail to be found.
So far, all I can gather is you had sugar sized sand.
Don`t want to be a jerk about it, but come on man..give us an easy to follow description of your sump.
Oh yea, sorry, you don`t have one anymore.
But surely you remember how it was set up.
I can only think of 2 reasons not to share.
1. You plan on some monetary gain from your design.
2. All that was posted before is BS.
Well 3, if you count just being so one way as to just not want too.
 
My sump? They are functionly all the same, water comes in, its follows your chosen path, its then sent out. Its not rocket science bud, and i would also suspect you guys have been around long enough for me NOT to lead you by the hand every step of the way.
Unless of course youve had zero exposure to sumping at all? In which case, visit your LFS to grasp it, then we can talk ideas on maximising it.
Cause im not really in the mindset for entry-steps these days.

If your still wanting an idea on my specifics, it logically varies based on whats needed or required. if i need to take particulates out, i'll throw a sock on the dump pipes, if i need more biological or buffer means, i'll design something that can be accomidated within the boundries of open space. These things i dont consider a teachable talent, as any monkey with a brain can sort something out. A sump is your work area, so its logically changeable.

I dont & didn't want to become a focus for this thread. All i was talking about was think abit more on the environment itself, & maximise it as best you can. Expand your own questioning, & you'll find it shows a bigger picture for greater control. - Thats it!
Im not here to ponder my own awsomeness, nor talk it up with fictious means, besides the fact i couldn't care less of the above, ive done my hard yards over the years & spent a small fortune doing it. My focus is on downscaling & refining by focusing on what my passion is now, the creativity side.

As i said, if you want to see pictures so badly, its got to wait till I build my new project. Im happy to share as they get pretty wild, however ether way it doesn't really concern me. I build my creative projects to push the envelope & challange myself to the max, or else im easily bored.

So back to CA's topic yeah, he's built this for a reason.
 
Nice, as luck would have it we live worlds apart with a comment like that. Doesn't matter where you go, there are always people that are of a lesser standard. And you bud, fit that category. Dont ever address me again.
 
interesting thread, I've never really needed to put anything under the subtrate as I always have very little gravel or bare bottom tanks (unless it's salt in which case deep sandbed that gets stirred by over filtration)


for the reverse under gravel and the under gravel jet we're looking at a concept to reduce maintenance correct?

as I assume in both cases a mechanical filter has to precede the ug system. Most often I see a sump and the pump inlet is the rugf or the ugj.

on that note has anyone tried to duplicate a river with single directional flow both above and below the substrate, inlet is easy and as long as the flow accross and below the substrate was significant not much waste could be trapped by the substrate and on the opposite end you'd have a bottom drain for the flow under the substrate and an overflow for the top (perhaps even another one mid tank level)

edit: also I haven't had to gravel vac in 5 years. That included when I did have deeper gravel beds. Powerheads always took the larger debris away and my plants liked what was left.
 
tried to duplicate a river

Now that would be trick.
Not sure how easy the intake/intakes would be.
Creating the flow would be the easy part.
Would need a "killer" filtration set up to mimic the constant flow of new, "fresh" water.

for the reverse under gravel and the under gravel jet we're looking at a concept to reduce maintenance correct?

Way back, the OP stated that was what spurred the unconventional under gravel filter/jet system he built.
From his description, would sound like he achieved his goal.
CA..man, we need an acronym for your system:naughty:
 
Darn, I thought I was being original in my development of a UGFJ system. I guess that I still am to a certain point.

Personally, I am a fan of the concept of pushing the filth up so that the SUMP filters can grab it and clean it. It just seems like a more common sense approach to a circle of cleaning. What I didn't like with my first attempts was the bulkiness of the PVC pipes under the gravel and the "blind spots". The blind spots being areas where the water arcs in certain directions because of the gravel and water pressure above and forced through the pipes.

What I have been working on is a long flat box with a rubber bladder on top filled with hundreds of little holes. This box say 1/4 inch thick is able to take less water pressure from the pump and spread it out much more evenly because of the shape and size. Utilizing hundreds of holes spreads the water out so that you have much less arcing occuring.

I had to place small holes in each on the side of the box to account for those pesky corners in the tank. Now, I only used this prototype in my small 20 gallon. I plan to build a plywood 100 gallon or so to test the application on a larger scale. If it works, I'll let you know. So far the cleaning of the gravel has been next to nothing! ( I hate vaccuming gravel with a passion, which is why I developed this thing)
 
whew! I just read this tread and that was some wordy chatter.

I tried a UGJ a few years ago and completely failed :headbang2
I had an FX5 plumbed to 6" over the sand and that worked better than anything I've tried, it was the width of the tank and strong enough to clean all 6 feet. I removed the FX5 but plan to reroute the sump return to take it's place. Now I use korlia heads for there strong but gentle wide sweeping flow pattern. They do a great job of cleaning the sand but due to how far they stick away from the glass they are prone to dead spots behind them; multiple heads can resolve that problem in most cases. Of corse both of these methods leave visible pipe or power heads which may not be aceptible.

FG - I use a 60g conical shaped drum as a settling chamber on my 220 and it's amazing. The amount of debris it collects blows my mind. I have it plumbed to the house drain and only have to turn a ball valve for 30 sec's to clean it. That removes 1.3gal which the drip promptly refills. This is as KISS as it gets; it just requires space and build out costs. The issue with these is the particulate that is lighter than water will never settle out. I use a sock on the input to the sump from the SC for that type of debris.

Kaiser - I'm guessing Vspec is talking about deep sand beds and, if he's even doing freshwater, maybe plants as well. Also, denitrators may not be KISS but they are not gimmicks. Properly built and setup, they work. Zero nitrate effluent isn't a gimmick it's results! For the record I'm referring to sulfer not coil which you mentioned.
KaiserSousay;4462501; said:
I am a firm believer in the KISS principal.
Vortex chambers, de-nitrate coils, deep sand bed and a few others that I looked at have been put in the “'gimmick sh^t'“ folder for me.
They do nothing a simple water change and filter maintenance can`t take care of.
They are SW solutions to the problems/costs associated with a SW water change.
Click to expand...
I'm picking on you a little kaiser. Only because I don't wont to see ideas stifled. Some of the "gimmicks" may just be fringe filtering waiting for the right tweaking/changes to become the best thing since something really good. Some of it works great and some of it is plain BS; but we must keep an open mind. :naughty:

ps. I have a deep sand bed and watch nitrogen gas bubble out of it all the time. My parachormis built it for me, maybe they don't like my tank maintenance. I rarely test my water on established tanks so I can't say how effective it is but if there's nitrogen gas coming out then nitrates are being reduced.
 
After reading this entire thread I was wondering. Would it have been more beneficial to put the UGF under a Plate. Maybe made out of egg crate or something similar to a traditional UGF. Then you would need less PVC because the open space would allow for the water flow to move throw the gravel in a more even flow?

This thread is very interesting to me because I am currently planning a 150 Gallon set up that is 30" deep. I'm using Small and Large River rock as Gravel and would love a way to minimize Gravel Vacs. ATM: I've been planning a 50" Jet positioned 4-5 inches from the bottom of the tank to create a blanket of flow making any waste float to the Overflows up above. This jet would be created using the Return from an FX5.

Input?

Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom