I was thinking it was a bit high-powered too, but it's what he says he wants.

Hit the nail on the head.....

true

I will also be dosing diy phytoplankton and have a small fishload so I want to leave in alot of protein's I know I could just get a skimmer and feed more and add more fish but would rather not just to see if I can duplicate my last few tanks while mass dosing phytoplankton

it is more of a coral prop tank with 1 mandarin and 2 chromis



I'll be placing the ATS right over the sump in the middle about 6" above top of sump and build a shelf aprox 12" W with legs then drill holes for the return/drain

unplugged and sold this guy




bought this stuff so far:









hoping to grow this:

I'm pretty sure a screen and light will not grow a human hand.

Don't mind if my measurement's are off I'm not all that good at DIY

I'll stick with 6500K for now then try a lower K possibly later as the screen grows to see if I get a little extra growth

What light cycle should I use 16 hours or 18 hours ON or?

will a reverse cycle help keep ph a little more balanced at night when display light's are off?

will the 750 gph of water going over say a 24" screen with 4 x 24" t5 h.o effect water temp and how lower/higher/balanced out?

was thinking of using 3/16th thick acrylic would this be thick enough because I'm trying to go for this look



but in black

I like that suggestion about leaving a small gap between the canopy and acrylic box because in this pic ^
I noticed there is a real small gap

If I can get another human hand like this



worth of phosphate and nitrate would be great because all I'm scrapping from the glass/overflow box now is less then 1 ounce a week

That's up to you. Depends on how much energy you want to use and how much N/P reduction you are trying to attain. It also depends on how often you want to clean the screen. More light = cleaning more often.



It can but whether it will is something you have to test.



Again, you'll have to test it. If it is hot in the box and little moisture can escape, the water temp will increase. If the box leaks air, then you'll get more evap but it's hard to know if that will balance out the radiant heat transfer.



I suppose you can use whatever you want, but I wouldn't use anything thinner than 1/4".



Looks relatively safe and non-ghetto. You can have that look with 1/4", you just need to measure/cut properly.

If you have a firm idea of what algae you want to have on that screen, I strongly suggest that you seed or "pre-plant" the screen before you start it. If you don't, you are leaving it up to the competition/grazing dynamics to do it for you and you may not like where it shakes out.

what about a drain I'm a little concerned about if something like the turf or whatever ends up growing will fall off for what ever reason and clog a small drain say under 1200 gph drain

should I just play it safe and go with 2 x 1200 gph drain's front and back at the bottom or more?

I'll probably add 1 large fan blowing accross one side this one here

will it be enough to keep cool with a 1/4" gap between box and light canopy and not melt 3/16th acrylic?

I'll probably leave the lid off as well for extra cooling because I don't want to add 1 degree to my 8 t5 h.o on a 90G/25G sump

If you have a firm idea of what algae you want to have on that screen, I strongly suggest that you seed or "pre-plant" the screen before you start it. If you don't, you are leaving it up to the competition/grazing dynamics to do it for you and you may not like where it shakes out.

how would I do this?

Backup drains are always nice, but you are already overshooting your pump output by more than 400gph. If you can fit it and be happy, go for it.

True

I'll put 2 x 1200 gph drains

this will allow me to see the water level at the bottom of the box at all times

how far approx from the bottom of the drilled hole using 1200 gph drain hole to the bottom of the acrylic box should I leave because I don't want it cracking if I hit it a bit is 4" fine using 3/16" thick acrylic it will be placed in the middle of the box 1 in the front and 1 in the back towards bottom?

I'm hoping to have atleast 10" under the light canopies

I'll let someone else chime in here rather than talk out of my butt.

Well if I am reading this right the unit is only 24" x 6" x 6" which equals less then 4 gallons total. You are planing a 750 gph pump for only a 4 gallon ATS ?? Even if you add in some head pressure for elbows etc... that is still 150 times turnover per hour or more. I always thought ATS's worked better with slower flow compared to higher flow. Either way 150 times turnover seems way overkill and plumbed correctly would be closer to 200 times turnover.

If I was attempting this adventure I would go down to a pump that gave at the most 50 times turnover or so. A 300 gph pump with some head pressure would do the trick. If plumbed correctly you should be able to go down to 1" bulkhead with out any issues especially if you have a backup bulkhead.

To get 1200 gph capability you would need a 2" bulkhead.

A 1" bulkhead uses a 1 3/4" hole
A 2" bulkhead uses a 3 1/4" hole

The smaller the bulkhead --- smaller hole --- less stress on the design integrity.

Am i missing something here ?????

.

Not sure if this clears it up a little this is just a rough estimate and I'm concerned about algae blocking the drain or not going down if it was to fall off for what ever reason even thou I plan to rough it up like a cactus using a holesaw and scraping the 3 screens glued ontop of each other

The water level in the box should be imo around 3" to 4" max hopefully to make it structurally safe but double checking because it is a estimate

the box will be made with 3/16" thick acrylic approx 26" L x 3"-4" W x 12"-16" H height is depending on the distance the bulkhead is needed from the bottom to make it structurally safe

the screen inside will be 22"-24" L x 8-10"H

the unit will be light and filled with less then 2 G of water

But if anyone can suggest 2 bulkhead drain size that will be safe would help it look better and would be great?

how on earth did you arrive at 1200gph for a 2 gallon "fuge"?

Not sure I know everyone else is using less I just want to be safe that's all I'm new to diy and am concerned about clogging

I've been saving every info I get on word pad I'm down to just a few last questions

I want to keep the 2 bulkheads on each side even level wise 1 front and 1 back in the middle towards the bottom if I can get away with 2 bulkheads under 1200gph would be great any suggestions?

I'm really concerned because of how fast a 5G box can fill up using a 750gph pump

instead of making a bulkhead drain, leave the whole side open?

I could do that but I want it to go on the same side as my display side drain on the left side in this pic approx 12"x12x"12" that has a 1" opening at the bottom to prevent bubbles from entering the return

To pre-plant the screen with the algae you want by tying it on. Treat it like a planted FW tank. You can let it grow up without any help, but you don't know what you will get.

26" x 4" x 16" is still only a little over 7 gallons. 750 gph / 7 gallons is still over 100 times turnover per hour. My recommendation is still at most a 300 gph pump. You will need some kind of baffle system or the drain bulkhead up towards the top.

You really need to do a lot more research and come up with a reasonable plan for a ATS. IMO your current plan is not a reasonable plan. I am one to believe that any type of filter system can work as long as your dedicated in the design, on-going maintenance of that system and realize it's abilities and limitations.

With all that said I lived my 1st 30 years of life outside of Washington D.C. and went to the Natural History Museum (In Washington D.C.) at least once a year. They had a huge natural reef exhibit that used a ex-large wave bucket/ATS system as their main filtration. For years and years and years they killed corals in that system and only kept it somewhat alive by constantly replacing the corals. Eventually they took it down because the ATS was not a viable solution for long term filtration in a enclosed reef environment. ------ Just my personal observations after 15 or 20 years of looking at a constantly declining natural reef system.

Mr fosi

Is the algae on a average person's glass something that will turn into turf algae?

or is it usually the stuff that accumulates on overflow boxes?

or does it depend on your condition of your water?

asking because right now I have orange in my tank from adding new rock,last week red in my tank from getting rid of a detritus problem/flow problem but before that a healthy hair algae just in the overflow which is close to my light's when everything was healthy?

The other issue I see is maintenance on this system. From what I have read you will need to maintain this system a few times per week once it gets going. This system seems like a maintenance nightmare.

Why not put a shallow pan above your sump with a slightly raised up screen. Have a high flow power head pumping water into one side of the pan. Have the pan at a slight angle so the water naturally flows across the screen to the far end of the pan. At the outflow side of the pan have a short walled end so the water just flows over and into the sump. You can then hang some PC's above the pan. It would be an open top system so evaporation would be high but a simple ATO system would solve that problem. The open top would help with any heat issues generated in the main display and would also be super easy maintenance since you would have easy access to the algae screen.

I've been working on refugeless/skimmerless tanks for 7 years and will never say that my tank is better then a tank with a large fish load/large refuge and large feeding and large skimmer

but how does that compare to my successful refugeless/skimmerless tank with mass doses of phytoplankton what is it that allows my tank to be so successful without a large fish load/large feeding/large skimmer/refuge which your tank imo is better but mine is still OK?

my only problem with my system is the fact I have to scrape my glass 2 times a week when I want to cut it down to 1 time a week

can a ATS reduce the amount of inorganics in the water in which causes a successful refugeless/skimmerless coral prop tank to grow algae on the glass?

I'm not too much into failing because I would of failed along time ago with a refugeless/skimmerless tank it's just not going to happen because of my skill level and husbandry

but I can see why people are skeptical about a ATS because everything else has been proven wait and see if a ATS is proven and if it is not then at least for all the people that have a skimmer and have a refuge that can't reduce your nitrate/phosphate to acceptable level this is just another option that's all

JUST ANOTHER OPTION AT MINIMAL and a great option considering all the stories I hear about cheato not growing because of there ATS what a shame?

You weren't talking about a skimmerless/fugeless system you were asking about a ATS system and so that is a direct correlation.

My last very successful 7 gallon Minibow was skimmerless and fugeless and ATSless. Just a plain HOB for circulation and a bag of purigen.

As for cleaning the glass -- that is about 1 min's time twice a week with a MagFloat. I bet a ATS will be way more maintenance then that if maintenance in scraping the glass is your only goal.

more maintenance is welcomed this way you can feed and feed alot without worrying about lack of organics or increase in inorganics

your food is not being wasted your money will remain in your pocket and all things organics are consumed and everything inorganic is consumed/removed

hows it free? i have to buy the screen and light?

The algae that you linked as the algae you want to have is not like what I have seen in even the most poorly maintained tanks. I suspect that it isn't common since you don't see it on many of these setups.

You will certainly get algae on the screen and it may work for you, but if you want a specific sort, you will want to pre-plant it to be sure you get it.

Please help me not burn down my house and if I achieve this with your help I will give you the key on how to keep alive once hard to keep coral/pods/sponges/worms and make them easy for you to keep alive please help?

its for the better of the hobby we all know that skimmer's skim food so please help lets set aside are differences for the better of the hobby?

I see your point but what I think he meant is that his advice is free but....

I am here along with the multiple biologist's to help you achieve this safely what is your question ?

because we are here to make sure no one gets steered in the wrong direction but we also don't take full responsibility but I will give you my word that if you set this up properly you will reduce nitrate/phosphate in a safe way we are here to help you please ask question's as you go along because there will be 100's of people to help and confirm?

Don't mean to be hard headed but how do I acquire this turf algae? is it hair algae? or a specially named algae that grows in partial water/air etc?

or just by chance under healthy normal condition's?

or not at all and should not grow under no circumstances?

just asking because I'm planning on growing it under normal condition's and I'm assuming it is the same stuff that grow's on my glass in the long run over multiple week's without scrapping?

this is my last question along with the drain in my ATS

I personally want as little maintenance as possible so I have more time to enjoy the tank instead of always working on the tank.




So we have to help you NOT burn down your house and if we do that, only then you will give us your key to success. I thought your posts was to try and help people succeed --- if that is true give us your key to success now. I am sure if other people find your "key" of value they would be more then willing to help.




Seems like you are the one asking the questions. I don't even see where you have done the math in flow rates and bulkheads and gallons etc....

And why are you feeding a tank "mass doses of phytoplankton" anyway ?? I get the idea of feeding but probably the number one reason why people have problems in their aquariums if not outright failure is excessive feeding. It only leads to excessive nutrients that eventually harm your system.

Making a super filter to compensate for overfeeding seems like somebody going on a diet so they can stuff their gut all day long.

I don't know where you find the turf-like algae I have seen linked as an example of the ideal.

You can run it and see if you get the kind of algae you want, but from what I have seen, people generally get slimy microalgal mats instead of the turf-type.

IMO i would rather run a refugium, i liek looking at the little critters
& more volume in the water colum means better water quality overall.

this would work best in picos where space is a problem.

That is the part you don't understand you don't understand on how much phyto a tank can consume nor do you understand on how little inorganics phyto gives off you like other's are left in the past and are chasing the acedemic's instead of comming to the realist aproach



I see your point and that is cool

I have been watching this crazy thread for some time now and have tried to stay out of it .............................

Why "O" Why did I let myself get sucked into this ??

<-- at myself

(c_k_kuehne let me know when you can contribute to the advancement of closed system's? what experiences/experiments have you had/done for the benefit of the reef community?


SO BACK ONTO HOW DO WE TRASH THIS THREAD NICE JOB WHEN I WAS ASKING SERIOUS QUESTION'S


WHERE DID YOU COME FROM ARE YOU THE COOLER LOL

I have to much to type lets take this to the lounge (c_k_kuehne regarding phyto and ATS only you?

Some people don't even care about dendro's or other hard to keep coral's so what.

at least I've like other's been been studying and experimenting

we will let you know when we find a way to keep organics in the system while taking out inorganics so we can benifit the health of hard to keep coral's while you keep dosing that vodka or over doing that protein skimmer everything is cool we will ignore that hard to keep coral/sponge/copepod/worm etc

so we can have tank of the month or be able to say you are awesome you know everything

LOL U like

NO SURPISE

I was just reading one of the links posted by someone earlier.

http://www.marineaquariumsa.com/featuredsystems/Aug2009/

Particularly the section on Filtration. He uses a combination of methods to maintain the tank. It looks pretty healthy to me.

I'm new to the reef world, but I've been a science geek for a long time. So understanding how your system stays alive (nitrogen cycle, food chain, oxygen cycle, etc.) is 90% of this hobby. 10% is knowing the methods of maintenance. People will make mistakes, and no two systems are alike. It's all one big science experiment.

In the end, we are ALL slowly killing organisms in your tanks, simply because it isn't a natural environment for them to be in, just some happen to reproduce a bit on their way out.

What I don't get is why people flame so much here for someone suggesting an idea??? Never mind the science behind it, which is correct (the effectiveness is in question).

Maybe Santa Monica's idea was a little sophomoric, and naive, but you have to give them credit for thinking, and wanted to apply something that they saw out there to their system.

Instead of a discussion on how this method could make it better for some people that don't have hundreds of dollars to sink into skimmers, media reactors and the like; it has turned into a noob bashfest.

Kind of childish, and frankly, it disappoints me. A lot of people that posted in response to this forum I respect for their knowledge, and wouldn't expect that reaction.

DoubleD... you know this forum is PACKED with people who successfully do not use skimmers, right?

Yes, and I've highlighted the key phrase here. One of the issues that I, and so many others have with Mr. Monica is that he claims his cyano farms are a miracle, one-stop answer for all your "filtration" needs.

Since you followed this thread from the beginning, you know that many of us haven't ridiculed him for "thinking" or "applying an idea he saw out there". Many of us, myself included, have stated that the idea of a turf scrubber can work in theory and if applied as part of a comprehensive nutrient cycling/removal system may be beneficial.

The real problem isn't Mr. Monica's obvious ignorance of the mechanisms or terminology... These are just side-issues. The real problems are 1) the blatant and unrepentant misrepresentation of other's work and 2) his unwillingness to actually engage in dialog.

Since you have read all the copypasta he has injected into this thread, I am sure you see how he completely mis-characterizes the findings of legitimate experimentalists and theorists to support his outlandish claims. You have also seen how when asked a question for which he doesn't know the answer, instead of acknowledging both the question and questioner, then admitting his ignorance, he justs ignores people and refuses to answer anything else they say.

As both a teacher and student, I know what it's like to be asked a question to which I should know the answer but don't. The proper response in such a situation isn't to ignore the questioner and accuse them of persecuting you. It also isn't to tell a bold-faced lie then go dig up several paragraphs of work done by a well-known name in the hobby that is unrelated to the question and paste it, along with a bracketed mis-characterization, as support for your lie. The proper response is to say, "I don't know", or "I'm not sure", then go and do your best to find the answer.

Myself and others in this thread have expressed concern that Mr. Monica's behavior isn't that of a contentious hobbyist that is trying to disseminate useful info but rather that of a person stumping hard for a product they sell. This concern has some basis in fact since Mr. Monica has several times offered to sell people equipment in some of this "informative" posts.

I haven't even mentioned his contradictory statements have I? For example: He correctly states that an alge-screen system will increase the amount of small benthic inverts ("pods"). However, he goes on to say in one post that these animals need to be removed from the system as a means of nutrient export, then turns around several pages later and claims that they should instead be left as a food source for livestock in the display. Which one is true? Now, I can imagine arguments to support both claims but Mr. Monica not only fails to furnish them but continues on following pages to make these contradictory claims willy-nilly and ignore people who ask him to clarify. You can't claim that 1+1=2 in one place, then blithely claim elsewhere that 1+1=5 and reasonably expect not to be questioned about it.



You've bought into Mr. Monica's pity party, I'm afraid.

The thread didn't start in flames, it started in reasonable requests to clarify claims and furnish evidence. He is free to suggest any idea he wants, as evidenced by 22 pages of travesty, but if he refuses to engage in discussion or furnish photographic evidence of his wild claims, he'll do little to persuade those of us who insist on evidence.



On the contrary, Mr. Monica has made a great many claims about the science behind his version of these tools. Many of his critics, myself included, have admitted that these systems can be useful. The problem is that very few of the claims are supported by any credible source. He also deliberately misrepresents the science (peer-reviewed or not) of others. We who have criticized him have done so on very specific points regarding claims that he makes that are neither reasonable nor supported by the body of legitimate science.

Of course some, like me, have also taken the opportunity to ridicule him more openly. This is done to illustrate the error of his claims and his methods as well as to amuse ourselves and others.

As you saw in the responses to Phyto4life's recent posts, many here are willing to help those who want to try these things out. What we will not do is support the false and misleading claims a person like Mr. Monica who apparently doesn't care who's house he burns down as long as he can sell them some roughed-up plastic screening first.

I must have missed the posts where he was openly "selling" snake oil.

I was reading about the science behind it, trying to cut through all the childish dribble.

i.e.:

(^^^^^^^^ The comment above this one.)

Since you have stated that it's a worthwhile concept, minus the personality that started this thread, why not actually have a ATS thread? So we can stop resurrecting this garbage.

Thanks for your thoughts.

And yes, I know this forum is packed with tons of people that don't use skimmers and are successful.

I'm a fan of KISS, and if anything, nature does a better job then me.

I've yet to see a reef dose itself with vodka.

Go for it. I could see a place for it in the biological filtration forum.



Only the really depressed ones do this.

I am sad to say that I think Mr. Monica will continue his drive-by copypasta posts so this thread is unlikely to remain dorment for long. So long as he continues his dishonesty and dissemination of confusion, people will post here to refute his claims.

Mr. Fosi FTW again!

Hehe, I should post some macro shots of the tank in my avatar. The rocks are absolutely carpeted in sponges, tubeworms, micro brittle stars, newly settled Tubastrea polyps, etc. The rocks look "fuzzy" from the brittle star arms there are so many of them. All in a tank with an enormous downdraft skimmer and no turf algae.

This whole line of logic that running a skimmer means a sterile tank absolutely baffles me. Let's see the photos of your tank to prove your method, otherwise it is all hot air...

i cant believe this thread is still around

That's what I'm saying, we should carefully extract any "useful" info and start a real ATS thread.

well he isnt breaking any rules so unfortunately they cant close it

This is all pretty simple actually.

Look at Santimontica's ATS tank:

http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Tank.htm

Now look at the 100's of NR's tanks who don't use an ATS:

http://www.nano-reef.com/forums/index.php?showforum=3

The conclusion: who gives a sh*t about your dumb ATS.

/thread

Also, anyone who posts pages and pages of crap from Borneman is a moron regardless of the subject at hand. Then again...Borneman is pretty talented in the pseudoscience department, so I see why you two see eye to eye.