Mr. Fosi's budget 20L

[Mr. Fosi]

He was iffy. He seemed peripherally interested.

[bluebastion]

He was iffy. He seemed peripherally interested.

 

 

I think because he was super busy that day. I honestly think he didn't come in with the intentions of working atm, but got "stuck" with customers, so he was kinda.. ticked. Don't take it personal.

[Mr. Fosi]

Doesn't hurt my feelings, he didn't know that he would be meeting me besides the customers. He didn't want my contact info though, he said that he would contact me through you if he needed me. I'm not sweating it. If he needs someone I'll hear from him.

 

Plus, now that I have a beefy pump I'm not hot-to-trot for a Mag7. The only stuff I plan to be buying anytime soon is water.

 

That reminds me: I was able to get my tank water tested for PO4 and it came out somewhere between 0.03 and 0.10 ppm, which would explain my recent algae issues. I didn't get a chance to test the water from school, but I did find out that it is DI only. I also had my tank water tested for Ca and it came out at 400 ppm on the dot. I didn't test the alk though.

 

Now that there are no fish in the tank, there is no feeding so if I keep up on the basting/vacuuming for the next several waterchanges I should be able to knock down any in-tank sources of PO4. If I couple that with low-PO4 water, I should be able to lick the algae issues within a couple months.

[bluebastion]

Please don't lick the algae.

[travisurfer]

Please don't lick the algae.

chaeto does taste good though

[Mr. Fosi]

I don't want to lick the algae I want to lick the algae issues.

 

A few days ago, I participated in a debate about how long it takes for SW to equilibrate with the atmosphere. I decided to try a little experiment tonight to investigate ways to prevent the precipitation of CaCO3 out of my newly mixed SW.

 

I bought some $0.50 carbonated water from Walmart and I mixed it into some SW to see how much it shifted the pH. The mix was 50/50 30 ppm SW/carbonated water and the result was a pH below 6.0; no surprise there. What was more interesting was this: when I mixed in 1/4 tsp of dry kalk into the 400 ml mixture, it took 2.5 hours for the pH to come up above 7.0. I would have thought it would be sooner, especially with the addition of kalk. Of course, the water was just standing in a beaker rather than being agitated or aerated.

 

So I decided to go ahead and try it with a 5 gal volume: I poured the remaining 800ml of carbonated water into 5 gal of RO/DI water and immediately mixed in my salt. I got a lot less precipitation than normal (though I did still get some), but the resulting pH was again lower than 6.0!

 

I didn't expect it to have that much of an effect. So I am heating and aerating the water now to drive off some of the CO2 and bring the pH up to something closer to 8.0. I guess we'll see how long it takes.

 

Kindof a neat result, really. It is obvious that carbonated water as a lot of CO2 in it, but I didn't think it would have enough for a ratio of 24:1 would be enough to drag the whole 5 gal SW mixture down below neutral.

 

I also added an MJ1200 and threw on my HOT Magnum (packed with filterfloss) on the display to stir up and catch more detritus.

 

Time for another trip to the LFS for water!

[c est ma]

Why is it that anytime I drop in on your threads I end up spending half an hour or so reading?

 

J/K! I love the science. Loved the debate thread--when it stuck to science, anyway...

 

(For a group who once questioned the conventional wisdom that nano-reefing is impossible, some of us are still pretty conventional...)

 

Appropos of nothing (and this should be in that other thread, but I don't want to join it!), I've found quite a few mistakes on wetwebmedia, PhDs notwithstanding. Mostly identity-wise. Just recently found a ctenophore prominently labeled a hydroid...

 

--Diane

[Mr. Fosi]

That's an easy answer! You spend so much time reading my threads because my scientific and hobby prowess is astounding! ... NOT.

 

I think that some nano-reefers have become conventional in two ways: 1) the hobby is has been around long enough to start forming an establishment and 2) this still a difficult hobby so it is tempting to simply stick with what has worked in the past.

 

When a person challenges the status quo, they contend with a general feeling that someone with a PhD is less likely to make a mistake or make an untrue statement. Even I am prone to this feeling and I plan to be a PhD someday.

 

However, my own experience also tells me that a person who has a reputation to protect may be more likely to leave a debate (falling back on their credentials and reputation) rather than admit that they were wrong. I try not to be that person because, in my opinion, admitting when you are wrong and trying to amend the error strengthens character as well as reputation.

 

Follow-up on the water test: I checked the pH again before I went to bed (~2 hrs after initial mixing) and it had come up to 6.9. When I checked the pH this morning, approximately 11 hours after it started mixing last night, and it was 8.1. So the conclusion is that even when SW is mixed up with enough soda water to drag the initial pH down below 6.0, it will equilibrate back to proper pH in less than 11 hours. I imagine it probably took around 6-7 hours since it seemed to be raising at ~1.0 pH per hour.

 

This answers a different question than was addressed in the debate, but it is another interesting finding and one that confirms the conclusion of the debate.

[c est ma]

That's an easy answer! You spend so much time reading my threads because my scientific and hobby prowess is astounding! ...

 

There's an element of truth there. I also appreciate your patient manner in standing up for data...again...and again...and again...There's been too much flying-off-the-handle around here lately...

 

I think that some nano-reefers have become conventional in two ways: 1) the hobby is has been around long enough to start forming an establishment and 2) this still a difficult hobby so it is tempting to simply stick with what has worked in the past.

 

When a person challenges the status quo, they contend with a general feeling that someone with a PhD is less likely to make a mistake or make an untrue statement. Even I am prone to this feeling and I plan to be a PhD someday.

 

When I started FW, the Innes book was still the bible. TFH was about the size of the Reader's Digest, and Axelrod was young! (And unindicted...)

 

Change happens.

 

And it's not always comfortable. There's another element, too, I think, and that is that the scientific community has often disdained the "pet" crowd...there's often been a sort of mutual distrust. Less so in the SW hobby than most others, though...

 

I'm married to a PhD and was once a doctoral candidate myself...so much for any special reverence... But I certainly respect anyone who's put in the time and work to master any field of knowledge (or part of a field...)

 

 

However, my own experience also tells me that a person who has a reputation to protect may be more likely to leave a debate (falling back on their credentials and reputation) rather than admit that they were wrong. I try not to be that person because, in my opinion, admitting when you are wrong and trying to amend the error strengthens character as well as reputation.

 

I think we've all been there...human nature and such...

 

Follow-up on the water test: I checked the pH again before I went to bed (~2 hrs after initial mixing) and it had come up to 6.9. When I checked the pH this morning, approximately 11 hours after it started mixing last night, and it was 8.1. So the conclusion is that even when SW is mixed up with enough soda water to drag the initial pH down below 6.0, it will equilibrate back to proper pH in less than 11 hours. I imagine it probably took around 6-7 hours since it seemed to be raising at ~1.0 pH per hour.

 

This answers a different question than was addressed in the debate, but it is another interesting finding and one that confirms the conclusion of the debate.

 

QED.

 

--Diane

[reefdan]

fosi-

 

when are you gonna get on my level? haha just kidding. what's the progress?

 

btw, the return seems to be working great. a mag 3 at almost 4 feet is keeping my overflow busy.

[reefdan]

I could be wrong here, but i believe for saltwater applications mag-drives are to be used internally/submerged only.

 

my LFS warned me about running it externally. he said that the plastic casing has a tendency to crack over time in SW. with that he said i could do it and just think about checking it in a year or so. he also recommended i put a plastic tub under it for leaks.

 

i run internally, it works great.

[Mr. Fosi]

... the scientific community has often disdained the "pet" crowd...there's often been a sort of mutual distrust. Less so in the SW hobby than most others, though...

 

I agree here.

 

The pet industry uses science, they don't generally develop it.

 

There is often disdain for applied science in theoretical science communities. I know I have picked up some of that feeling but I still have one foot firmly planted on the applied side. IMO, science that isn't applied is useless and esoteric discussions, unless they actually relate to the real world, are even more useless. In the same sense though, I don't want to get stuck simply applying other's theories, I would like to develop some of my own.

 

The classes I have enjoyed most dealt with theoretical ecology... and its applications in the real world.

 

what's the progress?

 

On... the sump? Well, I have 98% of the plumbing I need. The same guy who was offloading all the freebies I listed several posts ago was also getting rid of a lot of misc plumbing fittings. I think I am going to go with 3/4" plumbing for the return because that is what I have the most of. The only hardware I need now is the PVC cement.

 

Before I start the build, I need to settle on a design and I'm not there yet. I have been reading up on how to calculate head loss so I can maximize the flow out of my pumps. I am also toying with the idea of using one of my Mag5s in a closed loop in addition to the sump return. If I plumb one as a closed loop, I will have headloss due only to friction, which is pretty small. Less headloss = more flowfield options, since I can have more outlets.

 

btw, the return seems to be working great. a mag 3 at almost 4 feet is keeping my overflow busy.

 

Well, if you are pumping vertically to 3.5', 2' horizontally and I have counted up your fittings correctly (3/4" -- 5x90-degree, 3x45-degree, 1xball valve, 1xunion and two outlets), that puts the Mag3 at about 242 gph total flow. That's a little less than an MJ1200, which isn't bad.

 

I'm shooting for closer to 540 gph if I use the Mag9 and up to another 424 if I tack on my closed loop idea. I know that is a crazy lot amount of flow so I am still on the fence while I do more reading. I don't have any SPS (aside from the Madracis) so I know I don't need 1000gph in a 20g but this tank has suffered for lack of flow and I want to fix it with this upgrade.

 

my LFS warned me about running it externally. he said that the plastic casing has a tendency to crack over time in SW. with that he said i could do it and just think about checking it in a year or so.

 

Yes, this is what I had thought might be the case. That is why, when I talked to Danner, I asked them specifically about SW applications. Of course they aren't going to warn you about age and SW making the impeller cover brittle but that is why they sell cheap replacements.

 

I am sure you already know this, but for other readers: You should check your main pumps more often than once a year. It is well-advised to pull them offline at least every 6 months and check the impeller/case for CaCO3 deposits. Even if you don't see any, it is a very good idea to soak the disassembled parts in vinegar for several hours to dissolve any such deposits.

 

Checking the rest of the plumbing isn't a bad idea either because the inside may look like this:

 

 

 

From: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/10/aa...erm=head%20loss

 

Also, in case anyone cares, here are a couple of the more useful articles I have found regarding plumbing construction and head loss caculation.

 

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/5/aaf...erm=head%20loss

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/jan2003/featurejp.htm

[reefdan]

i use 1/2" for the return (it's the outlet size on the mag 3). i don't know if that raises or lowers flow.

 

i like not having a huge amount of water running through my sump for piece of mind. i feel like the more the flow the more the potential for overflow. i know this isn't good logic as careful planning is always best but it helps me sleep better. plus i feel like the stuff in my sump (i am building a fuge w/ various macros, some shrooms, brittle stars, etc.) doesn't get swept away. what i'd really like is a few dwarf seahorses in there but i am not sure i am fully committed to their care yet.

 

anyway, the closed loop sounds like a good plan. just keep the leaking potential in mind w/ the mags.

[Mr. Fosi]

i use 1/2" for the return (it's the outlet size on the mag 3). i don't know if that raises or lowers flow.

 

That'd cut it down but I didn't feel like re-running the numbers. Hardly matters, though; as long as you like it, it is just right.

 

As far as the closed loop goes, I did some poking around the two large SW tanks that are maintained by our marine science people and I noticed something I hadn't noticed before. Here is a less-complicated pic:

 

 

 

 

They have two tanks (120g and 75g) and both tanks have a sump and a closed loop. The flow from the loops are controlled by two differently sized Oceans Motions and the plumbing from the OMs look something like the pic above.

 

They run from the OMs across the tanks to a capped Tee resting on the other side, allowing the designer to have the outlets all the way in the corners and at different depths. It also cuts down on the number of elbows which significantly decreases headloss.

 

This style my favorite design so far. It would allow me to have outputs at different heights in every corner, which would allow me to create virtually any flowfield I felt like. If I don't find another design that I like in the next week or so, this is the one I will go with.

 

I have several things that I would like to do on this system, not the least of which is to design a neater way of organizing my bird's nest of plugs. I also still need to get an aqualifter for the overflow and figure out where I am going to mount the pump(s). With any luck I will be able to get it all sorted out so I can start the upgrade before the end of January.

[Mr. Fosi]

I scored two 6 plug powerstrips today which is perfect since I estimated that I would need at least 12 outlets to fit all the equipment. Of course, I will surely need more than what I estimated, but that is why I also plan to continue using the 6 plug strip I am currently using for a total of 18 outlets. Now I just need to figure out where I am going to plug them in. So far, it looks like I will be pulling 288W with the new setup, but I don't know how many amps.

 

I pulled out all the junk that I have been hiding in my stand and starting thinking seriously about how I am going to re-design the sump... After looking my the previous design (the duplex sump), I have decided to scrap the eggcrate and go with a more conventional design including 5 baffles.

 

Under my current design, the Mag9 will sit in in a chamber that will hold ~1.6 gal, which is important since I don't want any overflows. As it is, I could fit another ~1.4 gal in the display before it overflowed onto the floor and I can easily run it a little lower.

 

The new design also allows for a little more static volume, topping out at almost exactly 4.0 gal. That should leave me enough room for a heater, cheato, 2 two ill-treated mangrove pods and an ATO float switch. Of course, the sump will hold more than 4 gals but only those 4 will be usable.

 

I will be deconstructing and cannibalizing the cracked 20g to provide glass for the baffles. My wife made fun of me to keeping that tank but I keep telling her that I will use the glass.

 

There is a 30g up for grabs at school but I don't have anywhere to keep it and nothing to use it for. *sigh* Alas, I wish that I had some reason to grab it up. If it had a suitable footprint, I would consider using it for a sump.

 

I also haven't decided how I might mount a Mag5 for a closed loop... Maybe I won't even use it. I'm not sure what to do on that end...

[reefdan]

damn fosi, i am trying to follow along but you lost me...

[Mr. Fosi]

Synopsis:

 

- I now have enough powerstrips to clean up my plug nest but I am not sure where I am going to plug them in.

- I am redesigning my sump to function a little more conventionally and I am doing it to reduce the risk of a future flood.

- I will be using the glass out of my cracked 20g for the new baffles.

- There is a 30g that I could get for free but I don't have a use for it and I am sorry I don't.

- I haven't figured out where I would put a Mag5 for a closed loop and I'm not sure if I should do it at all.

[travisurfer]

lol fosi, just put it all together already

[Mr. Fosi]

Easy for you to say!

[BDTropicals]

A "Plug nest"? Sounds erotic!!!

 

Did you ever find out where your fish went?

 

D

[Mr. Fosi]

Well they never turned up, either in the tank or on the floor so I still think a predator is the best hypothesis.

 

Nothing as risen to 2 separate bait traps but a good friend (who is a night owl) is coming into town tonight for the holiday. Every time he is around I don't get to bed before 3AM so I should have a couple more opportunities to bait and see if I catch anything.

[yardboy]

I scored two 6 plug powerstrips today which is perfect since I estimated that I would need at least 12 outlets to fit all the equipment. Of course, I will surely need more than what I estimated, but that is why I also plan to continue using the 6 plug strip I am currently using for a total of 18 outlets. Now I just need to figure out where I am going to plug them in. So far, it looks like I will be pulling 288W with the new setup, but I don't know how many amps.

A=W/V

= 288/110

A= 2.62

 

Why not rig up a closed loop like mine, which is the same as the diagram you showed from school, but mine's cheaper (naturally).

I've even modded a SCWD, but haven't hooked it up yet, as I'm trying to talk myself out of the lazy but expensive way - Locline.

[Mr. Fosi]

D'oh @ the simple physics! *smacks forehead* And to think I took two physics sources when I was an undergrad.

 

You know I forgot all about your awesome closed loop and I even posted about it back in March! Man, it seems like March was so far away... It looks like your loop puts out something on the order of 325 gph?

 

 

 

 

If I assembled mine using the same size (3/4" correct?), type and number of fittings you have (3x90-degree, 6x45-degree, 1 ball valve, 2 unions and 2 exits) but scaled up the pipe lengths to fit the 20L (~1.5' vertical and ~2' horizontal), I'd get ~355 gph with a Mag5. I'm not sure if I need more than that, but the Tim Taylor in me wants to get as close to 500 gph as I can.

 

What do you think? Is it worth the 35W (Mag5) for 355 gph?

 

I really like your setup but I don't have a rear shelf to mount the pump on. The only thing that is keeping me from plumbing the closed loop ASAP is the lack of a mount-point. I could always kluge one on the stand, but my wife won't tolerate much ghetto. She keeps my design skillz sharp.

 

Funny you mentioned Locline because among the various plumbing parts I've acquired were 3 sections of the 3/4" size. They all have a male threaded segment on one end and a circular nozzle on the other, making them a must-use for my upcoming design.

 

Why do you want Locline for yours? You're pinched PVC nozzles seem like they work well...?

[Mr. Fosi]

Strike those flow rates.

 

It occurred to me that there is no headloss due to vertical height in a closed loop. Updated numbers to come later.

[bluebastion]

http://www.melevsreef.com/closedloop.html