Can you have too much flow through a Refugium?

[Jakesaw]

I'm still crawling through my first nano tank build and saving money so I don't start on a shoestring of a budget with no funds to recover if I make a mistake or two along the way.

 

I was advised from my LFS ( specializes in saltwater fish only ) that I didn't want so much flow through my refugium - and I should have some of my powerhead overflow come direct from the display tank and soem from the Refugium?

 

My question is - if I ignore the LFS advice - is there any downside that I'm unaware of - by having excess flow through the refiguim? powerhead rated Flowing rate of roughly 16 x tank size through the the refiguim / chaeto algae chamgers?

 

Thanks

[holdorf333]

I'm still crawling through my first nano tank build and saving money so I don't start on a shoestring of a budget with no funds to recover if I make a mistake or two along the way.

 

I was advised from my LFS ( specializes in saltwater fish only ) that I didn't want so much flow through my refugium - and I should have some of my powerhead overflow come direct from the display tank and soem from the Refugium?

 

My question is - if I ignore the LFS advice - is there any downside that I'm unaware of - by having excess flow through the refiguim? Flowing rate of 20 x tank size through the the refiguim / chaeto algae chamgers?

 

Thanks

Low flow is just fine; contact time is crutial for a 'fuge to operate properly. Please look up articles from Mr. Levinson regarding the issue.

 

[Jakesaw]

Low flow is just fine; contact time is crutial for a 'fuge to operate properly. Please look up articles from Mr. Levinson regarding the issue.

 

 

The orinal question still fuzzy? Can you have too much flow in a refiguim?

 

I'd be happy to look up and read Mr Levinson's articles. I don't however have a clue how to find em however. If you could give me a method of finding them - I'll gladly look em up and read up on the topic.

 

Thanks

[Mr. Fosi]

a.k.a. "Melev"

 

I suppose you could have too much.

 

- Too much flow can lead to microbubble and salt-creep problems.

- Depending of the flow regime, you could firehose or otherwise disturb the population(s) of the small, mobile inverts that most people like to see in their refiguia.

- Lots of flow could allow fragments of macroalgae to escape your refugium and appear in your display. Depending on the macro species, this could be a serious issue.

 

I suppose I could think of more but those'll do to start.

 

EDIT: Why the heck did the forum software censor salt-creep without the hyphen?

[Urchinhead]

Don't forget the whole macro algae won't have enough time to take up as much of the nutrients you don't want in the tank part as well.

[Mr. Fosi]

Huh?

 

Macro will take up nutrients whether you have lots of flow or just a little. I'd like to hear more about this "contact time" line of reasoning.

[tinyreef]

EDIT: Why the heck did the forum software censor salt-creep without the hyphen?

old flame collateral damage.

 

in some fuge types too high of a flow isn't preferable and can be detrimental, e.g. cryptic refugiums.

[Mr. Fosi]

old flame collateral damage.

 

More details pls.

[Urchinhead]

Huh?

 

Macro will take up nutrients whether you have lots of flow or just a little. I'd like to hear more about this "contact time" line of reasoning.

 

Eh? I think it was you who told me of it in the first place...? Perhaps all those blows to the head from Rugby are coming into play. Sorry. For some reason its stuck in the brain pan that Fosi said to slow the flow for a fuge due to wanting more hang time for the macro other than cheato, the pods, etc.

[Mr. Fosi]

... the pods, etc.

 

Maybe for the pods but I can't think of a reason that high flow would negatively impact the nutrient assimilation ability of macroalage.

 

I sure hope I didn't say that high flow was bad for macro because if I did, I was being retarded.

[tinyreef]

More details pls.

and that's why i think closed/"deleted" threads should still be viewable under a locked forum/controlled conditions.

 

maybe even charge admission to read it. yeah, it'd be like an internet carny-freakshow of past battles.

 

c'mon, that's worth the price of premium membership! entertainment!

[Mr. Fosi]

So you won't provide more details?

[tinyreef]

So you won't provide more details?

when did i become official storyteller/historian?

 

salt_creep (as spelled continuously) was a former member with a number of ID's. long story short, he set up a "competing" site and spammed NR, conducted various raids, was given many chances, finally banned. the "salt_creep" word had to be flagged because of his many attacks.

 

maybe it's unnecessary presently. *shrugs*

[Mr. Fosi]

Now that is a fine piece of NR lore.

 

I hereby name you, tinyreef, official NR historian. I expect you to make weekly reports to me on how your "Complete History of Nano-Reef.com" is progressing. Now get to work! *whipcrack*

[jeremai]

lol, those salt creep threads were HILARIOUS

 

 

 

ps, ime high flow = better nutrient export. More the better, I say.

[xbwolfx]

I agree that the whole "long contact time" is more of a myth than anything else. I don't really understand the logic that if macro is in a low-flow area it will allow it to take up more nutrients than if it is in a high-flow area. When you are dealing with closed systems such as our aquariums, it doesn't seem like it would matter which molecule of water the nutrients are absorbed from....as long as some are absorbed from the body of water. I am often completely wrong though...

[tinyreef]

lol, those salt creep threads were HILARIOUS

heh-heh.

 

discussion of macro absorption rates though is strictly using refugiums as a filter. if it's used as a plankton generator or protected zone (uh, 'refugium' ) for baby or weak livestock, lower flow is definitely preferred.

[BustytheSnowMaam]

when did i become official storyteller/historian?

 

salt_creep (as spelled continuously) was a former member with a number of ID's. long story short, he set up a "competing" site and spammed NR, conducted various raids, was given many chances, finally banned. the "salt_creep" word had to be flagged because of his many attacks.

 

maybe it's unnecessary presently. *shrugs*

what were some of his alter-egos? Just wondered by the description if it was absolutc. I think if we can remember this stuff it means we spend too much time here

[tinyreef]

what were some of his alter-egos? Just wondered by the description if it was absolutc.

winner-winner, chicken dinner!

 

ah, i often miss the wild wild west days of the abs and espi era.

 

those were the frontier days of lawlessness and chaos in the nano world.

 

 

[BustytheSnowMaam]

winner-winner, chicken dinner!

 

ah, i often miss the wild wild west days of the abs and espi era.

 

those were the frontier days of lawlessness and chaos in the nano world.

 

 

 

Ha, I miss those days too. Like you said once before, you never knew what wackiness to expect!

[holdorf333]

Fosi, please excuse us N00bs for believing everything we read.

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/refugpbfaq2.htm (first article among others)

... to a good one to three, four volumes per hour. Bob Fenner>

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/refugpumpfaqs.htm

I know it doesn't have line graphs and beakers and bunson burners, but Bob's word is good enough for me. I don't want to come off like a butt; I have valued your advice and questioning of givens (remember the salt mixing thing?).

[Mr. Fosi]

I don't think you came off as a "butt" but I'm not sure what I said that you are reacting to.

 

That quote from your second link wasn't a question of flow-through but a question of flow within the refugium. Additionally, the flow-through of the person's sump was "3gal per hour" and Bob replied as you quoted.

 

Refugium flow rate

Hello Crew

I have a question regarding the flow rate in my refugium. About

2 months ago I setup a 10 gal refugium upstream from my 30 gal main tank. It

has a 3” sand bed. ¼ of the tank has about a 1” of crushed coral, and I have

some razor Caulerpa and Chaetomorpha. I now am getting a good growth of

copepods and amphipods in the refugium but with only about 3gal per hour

turn over how will the pods get into my main tank. The way I have it plumbed

now I cant get any higher flow without getting a lot of air bubbles into my

tank unless I have it overflow into my sump. My sump only sits about 4”

higher then my main tank so my overflow which I used ¾” bulkhead and ¾” pipe

only drops about 2” before dumping into my main tank. Any suggestions would

be greatly appreciated

Thanks

Mark

<Not much difference in height... but you could increase the flow here appreciably if you'd like... with a powerhead or small submersible pump... to a good one to three, four volumes per hour. Bob Fenner>

 

So was his recommended flow rate based on the volume of the sump or the volume of the display or the volume of the entire system? The numbers are somewhat different but all would still be considered fairly "low-flow" by many on this board.

 

Display: 90-120 gph

Sump: 30-40 gph

Entire: 120-160 gph

 

If anything, this seems to affirm what I said about the contact time hypothesis of algae scrubbing being bunk.

[Weetabix7]

[YeahitsK]

How do people measure flow rates through a sump versus the entire display? The display flow rate is the return pump output minus head loss + in tank flow from closed loop and/or powerheads? Is the sump flow- through the return pump output minus head loss?

[Mr. Fosi]

The flow going through the sump is the flow entering/leaving the sump (they have to be the same or the sump will run dry or overflow). If you have additional powerheads or a closed loop in the display, you effectively increase the flow both within the display and the system in general but the effects of the flow (gas exchange, cooling of coral and rock surfaces, etc.) are mostly within the display.

 

Therefore, if you have an overflow leading to a sump and it have a flowrate of 150 gph and you also have a closed loop that has a flowrate of 500 gph, I would say that your display flowrate is 650 gph but that your sump flowrate is also its flowthrough; 150 gph.

 

Conversely, if you have a 150 gph overflowing into the sump and an additional 150 gph powerhead circulating the water within the sump on top of the 500 gph closed loop in the display then I would say that your display flowrate is still 650 and that your sump flowrate is now 300 gph, though the flowthrough hasn't changed.

 

Am I making any sense?