TimDanger's CADlights 39g Pro

November 19, 2009

... herbie? i'm not sure i've heard of this. i'm afraid this is my first crack at this whole "plumbing" thing.

is that something i could do in my overflow? would it fix my crazy gurgling/hiccuping issues?

As long as you have two holes in the glass behind your overflow you can use it. You'll need to bring the return line up from the back, though. Here's a pic illustrating the concept:

You don't need to split the primary drain, that's just what I did for the 90g.

The idea is to use the ball valve to tune the drain rate precisely, so that the water in the overflow always stays between the two drain pipes. Thus, the primary drain is always completely under water, no air enters, and it is silent. If something happens and the water rises in the overflow, the second pipe is there as a safety (it is always 100% open... you will hear air being sucked in if it is being used, alerting you to its presence). If the water level drops too low in the overflow, the main drain will just suck in air, you will hear it, and adjust the valve (no risk of damage). Preferably, you should use a gate valve for your tuning valve.

I tuned mine so that the water level was pretty close to the top of the overflow. That way, I didn't have any noise from the drain itself, OR from water spilling over the inside of the overflow. Like I said before, it is dead silent when dialed in.

One more thing: you need to make sure the safelty is capable of draining faster than your pump can pump (so you can never overflow the main tank). In my case, it required 1". That way, if something blocks your primary drain, the backup will be able to handle the whole drain load until you figure out the problem. I also used a strainer (common plumbing part) over the primary to keep this from happening, but it never hurts to have redundant safeties!

There is a big thread on RC about it if you need more info!

November 24, 2009

To avoid thread-hijacking, my response to Becact re: DSBs:

My DSB being useless in small fuges comment was based on something I read which indicated DSBs only gain their function, or become efficient at nitrate reduction, further out from the glass walls, like a foot out. So someone with a 3 by 6 foot tank bottom running a DSB would have some denitrifying area to work with, whereas someone with a 40 breeder might not have much effective area. Again, everyone has differing opinions on this issue, and I've not done a ton of research of DSBs. But even assuming DSBs are equally effective over their whole area, you've got to wonder how effective a very tiny surface area (as is common with nano DSBs) can really be.

Also, don't rely on nitrate testing to tell you how your tank is doing nutrient wise. I know that sounds absurd, but in my 90g, which was an algae farm, my nitrates always tested 0. This is because as soon as a trace of nitrate is produced, it is consumed by the algae. I would use phosphate as a more useful measure of the tank's nutrient state, personally. Though this is also consumed by the algae, it seems to linger in the water so you can test it. Perhaps the algae can not consume it as fast as the nitrate, or needs less of it (that's a question for a biologist!). I have known people to have very high nitrates, but still not have an algae outbreak, so I've formed the opinion that phosphate is the oft overlooked culprit with nuisance algae problems, not the commonly ascribed nitrates, which are more a problem for animal health, IMO.

If I could offer some advice Tim, I would honestly suggest to remove the DSB in your fuge, and just pack that area full of chaeto and mangroves. I think the space would be much better served in that function. Plus, you give more room for pods and other critters to multiply (a good thing). But I would even more highly suggest doing a ton of research and drawing your own conclusion!

I've been thinking about this (dangerous, i know).

First, I've never had any measurable nitrates or phosphates since I set up my tank in August. I think that it's possible that phosphates get sucked up by algae in the display just the same as nitrates might get sucked up, thus keeping both undetectable. however, i still attribute algae in my display to a lack of supplemental flow (I only have the stock return pump for flow at this time), which produces dead spots/detritus build-up on rocks and sand, which then turns into localized algae outbreaks.

And, because i'm using the arag-alive fiji pink sand, which is courser than a typical oolitic sand, i'm going to get zooplankton production out of my DSB (using just oolitic, i would primarily just get natural nitrate reduction (NNR) benefits). I have some chaeto in my fuge, as well as a lot of LR. I don't see pod production as an issue at this time (especially being that I have no present plans to keep a mandarin.

I have heard of the DSB "edge effect" theory, though I have not researched it extensively. I don't know that the theory state that the DSB is INEFFECTIVE so much as just LESS effective at NNR. However, I've also heard of many people operating "remote DSBs" by just putting sand in a bucket, basically. Based on my understanding, DSBs are effective relative to the system volume. Now, I'm not sure that the size I have here is big enough to be "ideal" for the display volume -- maybe one day I'll mod my sump by removing the baffles between the return pump chamber and the fuge chamber, and just make that whole chamber a fuge, then switch to a return pump that can be used out of water -- but for now, i think that even a small sand bed is providing a benefit, even if it doesn't achieve the optimal results that a larger, more display-volume-appropriate-sized DSB would produce.

at the end of the day, my nitrates and phosphates are 0. If they weren't, I'd be concerned and would have to begin to more seriously consider taking the DSB/etc. out, changing things, etc. But, as it stands, I have simple/obvious explanations for the algae in my display (flow).

Here are a few on-point excerpts from the wetwebmedia website FAQs on DSB Size:

Small Refugium DSB - 07/26/06

I made a 5 gallon refugium that sits behind my main tank, a ten gallon, with the goals of nutrient export, pod production, pH stability and increased water volume.

<<Excellent>>

I was planning on putting Chaetomorpha, live rock rubble, and some sand in this refugium and running it on a reverse photoperiod.

<<Okay>>

My question is would I see any benefits from a deep sand bed in this size refugium (the sand area's footprint would be 5"X15") or would I be better of with a shallow sand bed and more water volume?

<<Everything is relative my friend...considering the small size of the display, this particular DSB could indeed provide some benefit>>

Thanks a lot for any help you can give me.

Eli

<<Is my pleasure to assist. Regards, EricR>>

Remote DSB

Hello crew at WWM,

I’m a marine newbie…my tank is about 4 months old now…I’m thinking of adding a sump to my 55g reef/fish tank. The biggest tank I could fit in my cabinet would be something like a standard 10g tank but about ¾ of the standard height…so I would probably have around a 5-7 gallon sump. I would like to add a 4-5” DSB in it. Is that enough area (volume) for NNR for my 55g tank (around 35-45g of actual water).

...

<I'd go for it, Ronald! Even a small sandbed can have some very beneficial results! It is certainly worth the effort! Good luck! Regards, Scott F>

DSB (and nitrates) Question 8/18/05

I realize a lot has to do with maintenance, stocking levels, etc. but is there an effective "rule-of-thumb" ratio of Nitrate-consuming sump/'fuge size to aquarium size?

November 24, 2009

As long as you have two holes in the glass behind your overflow you can use it. You'll need to bring the return line up from the back, though. Here's a pic illustrating the concept:

You don't need to split the primary drain, that's just what I did for the 90g.

The idea is to use the ball valve to tune the drain rate precisely, so that the water in the overflow always stays between the two drain pipes. Thus, the primary drain is always completely under water, no air enters, and it is silent. If something happens and the water rises in the overflow, the second pipe is there as a safety (it is always 100% open... you will hear air being sucked in if it is being used, alerting you to its presence). If the water level drops too low in the overflow, the main drain will just suck in air, you will hear it, and adjust the valve (no risk of damage). Preferably, you should use a gate valve for your tuning valve.

I tuned mine so that the water level was pretty close to the top of the overflow. That way, I didn't have any noise from the drain itself, OR from water spilling over the inside of the overflow. Like I said before, it is dead silent when dialed in.

One more thing: you need to make sure the safelty is capable of draining faster than your pump can pump (so you can never overflow the main tank). In my case, it required 1". That way, if something blocks your primary drain, the backup will be able to handle the whole drain load until you figure out the problem. I also used a strainer (common plumbing part) over the primary to keep this from happening, but it never hurts to have redundant safeties!

There is a big thread on RC about it if you need more info!

i am definitely considering this. there is very little i like about the durso. I don't really love the concept of running an additional return line up the back of the tank (especially because i have a fan over the overflow, and it seems like it can get "equipmenty" up at the tank surface very quickly for what is otherwise intended to be a fairly minimalist-looking tank. however, the benefits clearly seem to outweigh the drawbacks.

and, my wife would definitely agree that "safety first" is the way to go with this stuff. i spill enough water on our bedroom floor as it is, without even having any tank overflows.

November 24, 2009

Yup, definitely do not skip the safety drain My 90g used mine every so often; if I didn't have one, water would have spilled over the display tank.

You'll have to draw your own conclusions about the DSB, it's efficacy is still a topic of debate. A better approach might be to just not overfeed in the first place, and do frequent water changes, that way you won't have to worry about a nitrate build up. I think a DSB might be more useful in a very large tank where weekly 10% water changes might not be practical, or cost effective.

November 24, 2009

While I don't disagree that a safety drain is generally a good practice, I think you also need to consider the setup on which you are installing the safety drain to make the assessment as to whether or not you would be at risk of overflow without the safety drain.

Consider this...the water volume in the return chamber of the CAD sump is not very much. If you run your sump half full, that would be 6 gallons of water in the entire sump. However, when you consider the water displacement created by the return pump, skimmer, substrate, LR, and media you have in the sump, you would have less than 6 gallons of total water volume. If you assume that the 3 sump chambers are equally divided, then you would have less than 2 gallons of water in the return chamber of the sump. Being that the drain chamber and refugium chamber will only drain to the level of the sump baffles, you wouldn't be pushing much water into the tank should the single drain become clogged.

If it did overflow, I don't think it would be much. I am curious though, so if you decide to clog your drain and test it out, please post the results as I'm sure the CAD Pro Team would be interested to know for sure

November 24, 2009

While I don't disagree that a safety drain is generally a good practice, I think you also need to consider the setup on which you are installing the safety drain to make the assessment as to whether or not you would be at risk of overflow without the safety drain.

Consider this...the water volume in the return chamber of the CAD sump is not very much. If you run your sump half full, that would be 6 gallons of water in the entire sump. However, when you consider the water displacement created by the return pump, skimmer, substrate, LR, and media you have in the sump, you would have less than 6 gallons of total water volume. If you assume that the 3 sump chambers are equally divided, then you would have less than 2 gallons of water in the return chamber of the sump. Being that the drain chamber and refugium chamber will only drain to the level of the sump baffles, you wouldn't be pushing much water into the tank should the single drain become clogged.

If it did overflow, I don't think it would be much. I am curious though, so if you decide to clog your drain and test it out, please post the results as I'm sure the CAD Pro Team would be interested to know for sure

I don't have a pro, so I don't have to worry about crap like that

in your example, with no safety, you would burn out the return pump. With the safety tube draining into the return section, not only would you not flood, but your pump will not run dry because of it, either. There is really no disadvantage to having one if you run a herbie overflow.

November 25, 2009

Interesting stuff b. Makes me glad i have the signature series

November 25, 2009

are any other Cad Pro owners using Carbon, Purigen or Chemi-Pure Elite for chemical filtration?

I'm just running my tank "au naturale" and have been since day 1, and still sporting 0s all around on my cycle parameters + phosphates. on the other hand, i've got a pretty light bioload still with 4 small fish and a CUC, and as pointed out, i think it's very possible that the algae currently inhabiting the tank is "masking" nitrates/phosphates in the system.

so, my thought is 1) it couldn't hurt to add some chemical filtration; and 2) maybe it would suck up some of the fuel that is apparently still feeding my hair algae/small cyano outbreak. and, i have a couple of bags of purigen and some rowaphos laying around, so I figured, eh, why not give it a shot.

if i am going to use these things, though, how do people recommend employing them in the cad pro setup? i could just stick them down in the bottom of my filter sock where all my water from the overflow drains. wouldn't be as good as reactor, but i don't have any reactors, and if i'm spending money, i need to spend it on increasing flow.

There is really no disadvantage to having one if you run a herbie overflow.

... except that you have to run the return line outside of the tank....

November 25, 2009

You'll have to draw your own conclusions about the DSB, it's efficacy is still a topic of debate. A better approach might be to just not overfeed in the first place, and do frequent water changes, that way you won't have to worry about a nitrate build up. I think a DSB might be more useful in a very large tank where weekly 10% water changes might not be practical, or cost effective.

full disclosure, i am a wetwebmedia (WWM) believer. i love bob fenner's conscientious marine aquarist book, i think anthony calfo is very smart, and even when i disagree with them, or even if they turn out to be wrong on something, i think that you can always be sure that they've got a good reason for saying what they say, and have at least given their position thorough and academic thought/research/discourse.

i acknowledge that there is debate over the efficacy; i just don't know that i agree with it. the WWM folks seem to think that a lot of concern over the use of DSBs may have to do with improper installation/husbandry/etc. They say that, in their experience, a lot of people who've had failed DSBs don't use appropriately-fine sand, for instance, or make the DSB too shallow.

in response to your point about DSBs being more useful in a very large tank, not to belabor a point, but again the WWM folks seem to be on board with the concept of a DSB being a beneficial addition to any size tank. the DSB FAQs even cite specifically to a 10g tank with a 5g refugium as being a setup that could benefit from the addition of a DSB.

November 25, 2009

While I don't disagree that a safety drain is generally a good practice, I think you also need to consider the setup on which you are installing the safety drain to make the assessment as to whether or not you would be at risk of overflow without the safety drain.

Consider this...the water volume in the return chamber of the CAD sump is not very much. If you run your sump half full, that would be 6 gallons of water in the entire sump. However, when you consider the water displacement created by the return pump, skimmer, substrate, LR, and media you have in the sump, you would have less than 6 gallons of total water volume. If you assume that the 3 sump chambers are equally divided, then you would have less than 2 gallons of water in the return chamber of the sump. Being that the drain chamber and refugium chamber will only drain to the level of the sump baffles, you wouldn't be pushing much water into the tank should the single drain become clogged.

If it did overflow, I don't think it would be much. I am curious though, so if you decide to clog your drain and test it out, please post the results as I'm sure the CAD Pro Team would be interested to know for sure

in your example, with no safety, you would burn out the return pump. With the safety tube draining into the return section, not only would you not flood, but your pump will not run dry because of it, either. There is really no disadvantage to having one if you run a herbie overflow.

i think this brings up several good points to discuss.

1) i agree that this could result in running the pump dry. however, running pump dry = better than overflowing tank in my bedroom, especially because my electrical equipment is on the floor near the tank (at least at this time).

2) if you have an ATO, you could certainly risk pumping more than just the return chamber's capacity into the tank. you could pump out the whole ATO reservoir onto your floor AND run your pump dry.

3) UNLESS you could somehow use a float valve or something to create a fail-safe. my idea is that you could install a small float-valve (with snail guard, i'd imagine) in the overflow box, and connect that to an on-off switch for your return pump. that way, no matter what happens, you don't risk the return pump overfilling your display.

(does anyone already make that? if not, i am hearby staking my claim as "first to invent" for patenting purposes).

NOW... if this float valve works, i can install a simple stand pipe like in the herbie, and still run my return pump in via the same bulkhead. this will also give me an excuse to hard-plumb my sump, which i've been wanting to do anyway (flexible hosing = gets in the way, plus i want to have some valves for when i do water changes/maintenance/etc.).

who's on board with this?

November 25, 2009

in response to your point about DSBs being more useful in a very large tank, not to belabor a point, but again the WWM folks seem to be on board with the concept of a DSB being a beneficial addition to any size tank. the DSB FAQs even cite specifically to a 10g tank with a 5g refugium as being a setup that could benefit from the addition of a DSB.

Tim,

You don't have a 10g tank with a 5g refugium. If you did, I can see where you might stand to benefit from a DSB. What you have is a 39g tank with a thin sandbed and a 2g refugium with a very DSB. Because you have such a DSB in your refugium, I doubt the water volume in that chamber is even 1g. If your goal is better nutrient export, then I would argue that you would see far greater benefit with a 2" sandbed in your refugium chamber with a bunch of macroalgae and good lighting.

2) if you have an ATO, you could certainly risk pumping more than just the return chamber's capacity into the tank. you could pump out the whole ATO reservoir onto your floor AND run your pump dry.

Yep...if you use an ATO, then you would most certainly overflow if you had a drain clog. I don't use an ATO as my daily topoff is relatively minimal.

November 25, 2009

Tim,
You don't have a 10g tank with a 5g refugium. If you did, I can see where you might stand to benefit from a DSB. What you have is a 39g tank with a thin sandbed and a 2g refugium with a very DSB. Because you have such a DSB in your refugium, I doubt the water volume in that chamber is even 1g.

This is a very fair point about the size of my refugium. i do run a little more than half full in my sump (probably about 8.5" up from the bottom rather than 7.5"), but still, i think it's true that i shouldn't mistake my sump volume for my fuge volume.

as far as water column height/volume over the DSB goes, i don't know that it's really a factor for effectiveness. WWM says that you only need enough water over a DSB to keep the sand surface wet. i think that this is because the volume of the sand is what is important. all the water will eventually (ideally) make it to the sand, but the surface contact area for the sand is the finite resource here.

If your goal is better nutrient export, then I would argue that you would see far greater benefit with a 2" sandbed in your refugium chamber with a bunch of macroalgae and good lighting.

ya know, i guess i don't have a super specific goal (e.g. "nutrient export" or "natural nitrate reduction (NNR)" or "pod production") because i put the DSB in on day 1 prophylacticly, not in response to some issue i was experiencing or trying to avoid because of my planned stocking/etc. i do think that nutrient/organic export certainly is a goal, but i think the DSB can be used beneficially in conjunction with the chaeto. WWM often times will recommend using the two together, but they certainly don't take the position of "get rid of the DSB, just use the chaeto" -- if the chaeto were just a flat-out better alternative that does the same thing, why wouldn't they just say skip the DSB and just grow the algae? my thought is that it's because DSBs do something that chaeto doesn't: NNR. the inhabitants of the DSB are certainly detritivores, and that increased biodiversity is also an added benefit.

so, the question i think is whether the surface area is adequate to be beneficial. the water volume to surface area ratio is certainly smaller than would be ideal.

maybe a viable alternative is re-designing the sump. i could take the right-most baffle off of the sump, moving it as far to the right as i can (while leaving room for an intake hose for a new external pump) and attaching it from the bottom. then i could turn that whole area into a fuge, and that would give me a lot more surface area of DSB. of course, i don't know what kind of havoc that would play on my established system. sigh.

FYI, the lighting upgrade that you suggested is forthcoming as soon as I get back to HD or Lowe's. i think it's time.

and on an unrelated note, Mark, has your B-M skimmer arrived yet??

November 25, 2009

and on an unrelated note, Mark, has your B-M skimmer arrived yet??

Nope...no skimmer yet.

November 25, 2009

Nope...no skimmer yet.

how can this be??? this is crazy.

November 25, 2009

how can this be??? this is crazy.

I don't know. It's frustrating. I told Eddie, on a couple of occasions, that I was having issues with the skimmer pump when I got fed up with the stock skimmer and decided to place the order for the B-M skimmer over a month ago. He didn't even offer to send me a replacement skimmer pump. I asked him if he could get me the B-M skimmer quicker and he replied:

"Sorry, we had a few samples and had them sent out to a few customers after

we took pictures for the new catalog. once they come in i will have yours

shipped right away."

November 25, 2009

wow.

if it were me, i'd be inclined to cancel my order.

for what it's worth, i like the skimmer, but i don't think it's "irreplaceable" by any means. you may even be able to get as good a Bubble-Magus or better off of ebay or something, or maybe from nuocean? cadlights' Bubble-Magus is based off of the NAC3. I see nuocean sells the NAC6. or, there's this ebay ad for the new NAC3A.

Or, then there's the NAC7 cone skimmer that the kids on reef central are talking about.....

again, i don't know if they'll fit. maybe you could adjust the size of the acrylic sump chambers to make it work if it didn't.

if it makes you feel any better, i mean, i really like the skimmer. i still get good production out of it, despite everything i do wrong in my tank. so, once you get it, i think you'll be happy. i'd just be sick of dealing with it if i were you, though.

November 25, 2009

wow.

if it were me, i'd be inclined to cancel my order.

for what it's worth, i like the skimmer, but i don't think it's "irreplaceable" by any means.

if it makes you feel any better, i mean, i really like the skimmer. i still get good production out of it, despite everything i do wrong in my tank. so, once you get it, i think you'll be happy. i'd just be sick of dealing with it if i were you, though.

I have been inclined to cancel my order at least once every day for the past month. The bottom line is that want a skimmer in there that works. It's unfortunate that a skimmer that I bought with a package not so long ago already needs to be replaced...and that I am going to have to fork out the cash for that replacement. But, a good skimmer at the price he is offering is hard to pass on even if it's from a guy that sold me a skimmer that hasn't been reliable (man, I know that doesn't make sense). So, every time I think about cancelling, I think about what alternatives would be and come back to wanting the B-M skimmer. I guess I'm just crazy.

Thanks for your feedback on the B-M skimmer and the pics you've posted.

November 25, 2009

mkregs, have you seen the new cone skimmer from BM?

http://www.marinesolutionsinc.com/catalog/...oduct_info.html

tim mentioned it, and maybe it won't fit, but it's worth looking into!

November 25, 2009

Or you could stand this one next to your tank. It's external, I think

November 25, 2009

^^Awesome

November 25, 2009

mkregs, have you seen the new cone skimmer from BM?

tim mentioned it, and maybe it won't fit, but it's worth looking into!

Yep...I took a look at that one. It won't fit in the sump.

Or you could stand this one next to your tank. It's external, I think

I am interested in this one though. I would love to see that baby in action.

November 26, 2009

I've been researching skimmers (always on the lookout for an equipment upgrade), and found the ATB "multiuse" skimmer. There's a big thread on RC about it. It's a cone skimmer with a 6" cone, sits about 22" high I think, and uses an eiehm (know I spelled that wrong) pump. It's excellent, but pricey at $650. You can also hang it off the back of a tank, with the pump in or out of the water They were $500 a few months ago, so asking nicely might get them to knock it down for you. ATB is cream of the crop when it comes to skimmers, and cones are the best skimmer design. Not sure if it would be necessary on a seahorse tank, though, or if it's more than you want to spend.

http://glassbox-design.com/2009/atb-multi-...r-now-shipping/

I'm thinking about upgrading myself... :unsure: . I'll have to think really hard, though, because I'm not sure if it would be needed on such a small bioload.

November 30, 2009

Well, in light of our debate, I've gone to the master for input, and he has responded! The following is my email conversation with Bob Fenner, with his reply built into it, cut down to get to the most pertinent parts:

Subject: DSB size

My question for you this morning is about the effectiveness/utlity of what I am fairly confident is an undersized DSB. I've seen lots of related FAQs/etc. related to this issue (including the www.wetwebmedia.com/dsbsize.htm FAQ), but none that have directly addressed my issue. I am basically trying to decide whether to continue using my current DSB, whether I should try and expand it, or whether I should just remove it and use chaeto and a thin sandbed instead.

<Ok. I understand the proposition>

My water tests as: undetectable ammonia/nitrite/nitrate/phosphate, specific gravity of 1.024, pH of 8.2, temperature between 80-82F, calcium ~420ppm, alkalinity ~9dkh. I do not use any carbon/GFO/etc. I dose Brightwell Aquatics Reef Code Parts A + B and Seachem Magnesium, as needed. I use

only RO-DI 0 TDS water for daily top-offs and bi-weekly water changes. I run a Bubble-Magus Mini skimmer made specifically for the Cadlights tank 24/7.

My display has about 60lbs of LR in it and what averages out to be a 1-1.5" sand bed (it gets deeper and shallower in some places, thanks to a certain mischievous jawfish).

The sump is divided by double baffles into 4 separate chambers. There are basically three equal-sized chambers, the first of which is divided in half to make four total chambers. Water drains from the display into one of the half-chambers through a filter sock and LR rubble, then into the other half-chamber (which contains the skimmer). Water flows from both of those half-chambers down and then up into the next chamber (which contains a refugium with a 5" DSB of caribsea fiji pink (not oolite, but fairly fine particles), 2-3 small pieces of LR, a ball of chaeto and a hermit crab), and then down into the last chamber (which contains a return pump). The actual surface area of the DSB is approximately 6"x16".

As far as any issues I've noticed, I have several patches of GHA and a small bit of cyano, but I am confident that this is likely the direct result of a lack of flow/dead spots/detritus build-up. I do what I can to manually remedy these issues, but there's only so much tweezers/turkey basters can do. I plan to add a Ecotech Vortech mp20 within the next month, and I think that will fix my issue.

I haven't noticed any problems that I think are the result of the DSB, but again, I haven't had to answer to the added bioload from the corals I plan to add. So, what's the verdict? Is my DSB too small to make a difference, or is even an undersized DSB worthwhile?

Should I remove the DSB and just use chaeto and a thin sand bed?

Or, would it be worthwhile to expand my sump's refugium chamber to allow for a larger DSB (this option is not very attractive to me from a logistical standpoint, but I don't want to pretend like it's not a possibility, either)?

Thanks in advance for any advice you can offer!

Best regards,

Josh

November 30, 2009

Mark, you'll be happy to hear I upgraded my fuge light to the one you suggested. And, after putting a 23w spiral 6500K CFL in there (decided the 100w replacement one would be too hot), I've already noticed, in just 4-5 days, a HUGE difference in growth speed for my Chaeto. I would say my chaeto ball is already 25% bigger than it was just a few days ago. flippin' awesome.

thanks for the suggestion! Here's the fixture i bought from Lowe's.

only issue i'm wondering about: the bulb is just sorta sitting out there with no cover over it. what happens if water splashes up on it? does it matter? would it be worth taking the current bulb out and substituting one of those "covered" CFL bulbs (you said that you used one that has a cover on it to make it look like a flood light)?

November 30, 2009

Hey Tim, on the issue of the CFL, I had that same reflector fixture, and went with the floodlight-like 6500k bulb. One advantage of the floodlight type bulb is it has a reflector built in, so you can ditch the reflector of the fixture. That lets the heat escape a bit better from the bulb

Glad to find your DSB will be effective!

Sign In

TimDanger's CADlights 39g Pro

Recommended Posts

becact

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

becact

Link to comment

mkregs

Link to comment

becact

Link to comment

Rehype

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

mkregs

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

mkregs

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

mkregs

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

mkregs

Link to comment

becact

Link to comment

becact

Link to comment

Rehype

Link to comment

mkregs

Link to comment

becact

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

timdanger

Link to comment

becact

Link to comment

Archived

Recommended Discussions

Home

Library

Forums

Journals

Gallery

Sponsors