Used 125 gal

[duanes]

Today one of the local guys dropped in, said he'd been down to the local stream and noticed lots of shrimp, so caught a couple dozen to sell.
They ranged in size from that of a baby guppy to a few inches. Some went in th Andinoacara tank, I dumped a dozen in the new tank.

 

[FJB]

Very nice!
They are Macrobrachium, but there are several similar species native to Panama and neighboring areas. You showed several ranging from juvenile to adult, and male (large, colorful claws) and female.
Adults are scavengers but also fairly effective predators of nearly everything, including each other and small fish.

 

[duanes]

Because the tank is undrillable, I have decided to make it a combination sump and tank combination (at least in theory).
So I ordered a large piece of Porrett foam to be placed the entire width an height of the tank at one end with the pump behind it, so water will be sent to the opposite side of the tank, and drawn the length, and thru the foam before being pumped to the tank next to it. Porrett foam is about 2" thick, and quite dense.

I had seen this type of filtration used in one of Ted Judy's videos.
The Porrett will be a combination mechanical, and biological unit all in one, although some other biomedia will probably be suspended in the space (if there's room).
And (also in theory) inserting plants into the Porrett, that when established would make the foam become a kind of planted wall.

Because Panama is going into a serious lockdown with curfew starting tomorrow, and thru the first week of the year, totally isolating the island, it may take a while to get the plants.
To beat the lockdown, I hit the mainland Monday for PVC fittings, and to the PO Box where the foam arrived (and for extra food and drink), just before ferry service is stopped .
But the tank is becoming more interesting as sand and rocks are added, and the shrimp provide a bit of animation.


At the opposite end from where the foam and pump will sit, a large Papyrus plant was sunken in, and held down by a rock.

 

[esoxlucius]

Because the tank is undrillable, I have decided to make it a combination sump and tank combination (at least in theory).
So I ordered a large piece of Porrett foam to be placed the entire width an height of the tank at one end with the pump behind it, so water will be sent to the opposite side of the tank, and drawn the length, and thru the foam before being pumped to the tank next to it. Porrett foam is about 2" thick, and quite dense.
View attachment 1443855
I had seen this type of filtration used in one of Ted Judy's videos.
The Porrett will be a combination mechanical, and biological unit all in one, although some other biomedia will probably be suspended in the space (if there's room).
And (also in theory) inserting plants into the Porrett, that when established would make the foam become a kind of planted wall.

Because Panama is going into a serious lockdown with curfew starting tomorrow, and thru the first week of the year, totally isolating the island, it may take a while to get the plants.
To beat the lockdown, I hit the mainland Monday for PVC fittings, and to the PO Box where the foam arrived (and for extra food and drink), just before ferry service is stopped .
But the tank is becoming more interesting as sand and rocks are added, and the shrimp provide a bit of animation.
View attachment 1443858
View attachment 1443859
At the opposite end from where the foam and pump will sit, a large Papyrus plant was sunken in, and held down by a rock.
View attachment 1443860
View attachment 1443862

I foresee a major problem with that set up, and one which totally goes against your principals of removing waste before it starts degrading into nitrate.

A single vertical sponge acting as mechanical AND bio, and the eventual plant roots which will overwhelm it, will make it very difficult to remove regularly to rinse the crud out. The crud which you are so anal about removing!

Would a double vertical sponge set up not be more practical for you? The first sponge can be taken out and rinsed as often as needed, the second sponge with plant roots can remain more or less permanantly in place without disturbing it.

 

[duanes]

This Porrett foam is fairly easy to clean (I'm using some smaller, thinner pieces in my sumps at the moment), it is just tossed on the ground and hosed it out (in theory the plants will be securely rooted by the time cleaning is needed).
I don't foresee any fish for a month or more), of course this also remains to be seen.
But because this tank will be in-line with the larger 180 gal tank, that gets daily (or minimum every other day water changes) and already tests only 0-5ppm for nitrate (probably because of its heavy planting) it will be an interesting experiment.

 

[Milingu]

I foresee a major problem with that set up, and one which totally goes against your principals of removing waste before it starts degrading into nitrate.

A single vertical sponge acting as mechanical AND bio, and the eventual plant roots which will overwhelm it, will make it very difficult to remove regularly to rinse the crud out. The crud which you are so anal about removing!

Would a double vertical sponge set up not be more practical for you? The first sponge can be taken out and rinsed as often as needed, the second sponge with plant roots can remain more or less permanantly in place without disturbing it.

Don't plant anything on the foam and it can last from several month to years. I filter most of my tanks with "Hamburger Mattenfilter" and clean them once a year. The only time I got a nitrate spike was when I forget to clean one and it ran for nearly two years.
They work really good and cost effectiv (electricity is expensive where I live). Some people even use them with bigger fish like cichla and stingrays.
Regular removing and cleaning is not needed as long as you use foam with 20 ppm oder even better with 10 ppm. Smaller pores like 30 ppm clog too early. The bigger the pores the longer it lasts. Plants will only block the pores and make the foam clog.

Double vertical sponges work but the bioligical filtration happens mostly in first 2 inch. So the second matt will not have much effect.

 

[jjohnwm]

Don't plant anything on the foam and it can last from several month to years. I filter most of my tanks with "Hamburger Mattenfilter" and clean them once a year. The only time I got a nitrate spike was when I forget to clean one and it ran for nearly two years.
They work really good and cost effectiv (electricity is expensive where I live). Some people even use them with bigger fish like cichla and stingrays.
Regular removing and cleaning is not needed as long as you use foam with 20 ppm oder even better with 10 ppm. Smaller pores like 30 ppm clog too early. The bigger the pores the longer it lasts. Plants will only block the pores and make the foam clog.

Double vertical sponges work but the bioligical filtration happens mostly in first 2 inch. So the second matt will not have much effect.

I'm a fan of sponges in general and Mattenfilters in particular; double sheets can work very well if done properly. The only reason for biological filtration to drop off in deeper layers is simply because available oxygen can be consumed before the water penetrates to the deeper layer, or because all required nitrification has already taken place before the water reaches the deeper levels. But if the water entering the sheet is sufficiently oxygenated, nitrification will absolutely occur throughout the foam sheet.

My earliest experiments with Mattens always involved multiple layers of foam, because I was always concerned about being able to remove as much waste as possible manually, but wanted to do so without disturbing the bacterial colonies excessively. I would always remove the first layer of foam for rinsing/cleaning, and then move the rear layer to the front and replace the freshly-cleaned one at the back. By rotating them this way, each would be cleaned regularly, but the front layer was always populated by a bacterial colony that had not been recently disturbed. I thought (and still think...) that the logic was sound, but in practice I eventually found that a single thicker layer of foam, removed/rinsed/replaced, was just as effective a biological filter as the more complicated multi-layer version. My rinsing and cleaning was fairly energetic; I squeezed and pressure-washed the foam until water ran off clear, which removed a large amount of brown crud and certainly took a significant portion of the bacteria with it...but enough remained on even single layers of foam that I never experienced a nitrate spike or "mini-cycle".

I should add that I don't overstock my tanks ("How many arowanas can I squeeze into my 50-gallon tank? And would a school of pacus work in there as well? Will they get along with my 15-inch pleco?") and I practice religious water changes. When changing water I would aggressively vacuum the front face of the Matten sheet to remove as much solid waste as possible without actually removing the foam.

duanes , I've read enough of your posts to get a feel for your philosophy of aquaristics. If I'm correct, I would strongly recommend that you don't allow the plant roots to invade and pervade the foam sheets of your filter system; I don't think you will like the results. Don't ask how I know...

 

[duanes]

Thought this might be of interest for those not familiar with this type filtration concept.
Talking Mattenfilters with Swiss Tropicals pecktec pecktec • 44K views 4 years ago

 

[tlindsey]

Thought this might be of interest for those not familiar with this type filtration concept.
Talking Mattenfilters with Swiss Tropicals pecktec pecktec • 44K views 4 years ago

I talked to Stefan Tanner briefly about the Matten Filters at the Ohio Cichlid Association Extravaganza. Very kind man and represented himself like in the video. After watching the video I'm thinking very hard now about ordering a couple of the Matten Filters for a couple of my smaller aquariums. The surface area for bio bacteria is awesome and superior than any sponge filter brand. Thanks so much Duane.

 

[duanes]

Decided to jam the foam in today, to give an estimate as to how much it'll need to be cut down, and how obtrusive it might be.
The pump that will service the 2 tanks (about 300 gallons total) is about 5" wide, so the foam will sit at about the point its bulging out in the photo, reducing swimming space from 72" to 65" or so.


Could probably lose @ 5" of foam off the top, and another 2" off the side.
Also took the opportunity to move a Water Lily from the dark tank on its left, to an area with more sun in the 125, not under the patio roof.

It had survived in the dark tank, but never really thrived. The leaves only had a couple inch dimeter, and it never flowered.