Kat's Ol' Max

[jedimasterben]

A clear cyanobacteria? The cells couldn't possibly photosynthesize without pigments

[markalot]

It's probably related to the same clearish brownish snot that shows up when heavily dosing amino acids. A lot of people have witnessed this stuff. It does not seem to harm corals, and my Foxface eats it.

[metrokat]

A clear cyanobacteria? The cells couldn't possibly photosynthesize without pigments

Yes smartie pants. It's the Katobacteria. Point is there stuff I don't want in the fuge.

[metrokat]

Plumbing Questions. Drains.

- Would you run a true union ball valve on the drain? Why, why not?

[jedimasterben]

Plumbing Questions. Drains.

- Would you run a true union ball valve on the drain? Why, why not?

With a single drain, never, ever, EVER do anything to block it.

[hey]

Plumbing Questions. Drains.

- Would you run a true union ball valve on the drain? Why, why not?

 

if your pump is matched correctly to your overflow noise wouldn't ever be an issue so no need to impede flow from the tank to dampen the noise.

[metrokat]

With a single drain, never, ever, EVER do anything to block it.

I agree. But I'm reading an article by Marcin Smock on reefs.org

 

 

c) the use of union type, swing valve in drain pipe does two important things:

- shut the water down allowing for removal of durso pipe without draining the overflow

- allow for quick removal of bottom section of drain to change filter sock (see point “d”)

 

I also read a comment on the article which said

 

I am not a fan of the valve on the drain. If you would ever forget to open it after doing maintanence you would overflow the tank when the return pump is powered up.

 

I'm likely to forget to open the drain, so while the suggestion is practical, I suppose shutting off the return and waiting for the water to stop flowing from the overflow before changing the sock (like I do now) should continue.

 

if your pump is matched correctly to your overflow noise wouldn't ever be an issue so no need to impede flow from the tank to dampen the noise.

Ah. So the valve would be used to dampen the sound. Hmmm. Wouldn't an airline tubing run down the durso do the same thing?

And if the single drain is a herbie, there is less noise to begin with, correct?

 

if your pump is matched correctly to your overflow noise wouldn't ever be an issue so no need to impede flow from the tank to dampen the noise.

This brings me to the next question - the overflow is rated for 500GPH. But a 500GPH pump also needs to feed 1-2 reactors and a fuge. So how to calculate what pump is needed? I used the calculator on RC and with my Mag 5 it said

Total losses are 3.55 feet of head pressure, or 1.53 PSI. with a flow rate of 335 GPH. Process took 113 iterations.

 

I have no idea what that means.

[hey]

I agree. But I'm reading an article by Marcin Smock on reefs.org

 

 

I also read a comment on the article which said

 

 

I'm likely to forget to open the drain, so while the suggestion is practical, I suppose shutting off the return and waiting for the water to stop flowing from the overflow before changing the sock (like I do now) should continue.

 

Ah. So the valve would be used to dampen the sound. Hmmm. Wouldn't an airline tubing run down the durso do the same thing?

And if the single drain is a herbie, there is less noise to begin with, correct?

 

This brings me to the next question - the overflow is rated for 500GPH. But a 500GPH pump also needs to feed 1-2 reactors and a fuge. So how to calculate what pump is needed? I used the calculator on RC and with my Mag 5 it said

Total losses are 3.55 feet of head pressure, or 1.53 PSI. with a flow rate of 335 GPH. Process took 113 iterations.

 

I have no idea what that means.

 

The ball valve in the use your describing would be fine, it is kept 100% open on the time and if you look at the internal workings of one 100% open theres nothing stuff could catch on and i believe you still get something like 98% flow rate through that type of fitting if I remember correctly, which is fine.

 

basically for the pump you want to calculate everything seperately, say you want 400 gph to display because thats under 500, then you want 100 to reactor 1 and 100 to reactor 2, it would require calculating the headloss from the pump to reactor 1 and to reactor 2 and to the display to figure out if you need more pump or not.

[jedimasterben]

And if the single drain is a herbie, there is less noise to begin with, correct?

There is no such thing as a 'herbie' drain. The Herbie overflow is the whole thing, all three pipes and the hardware they use, not a single pipe.

 

With your single drain, I would not put a valve on it as putting backpressure on the Durso standpipe can cause odd noise that is difficult to eliminate (ask me how I know lol). Best practice is to use FlexPVC going straight into the sump from the bulkhead. (well, that's a lie, I use a male adapter to screw into the bulkhead and the FlexPVC is glued to the male adapter so that I have the ability to change the tubing without changing the bulkhead)

[hey]

headloss would just be the length of pipe to reactor 1 and any 90* fittings and any gate valves with the % they are closed. There is a k value associated with the fitting, I like to do my fittings and valves with the equivalent length they would be in pipe that way I can just calculate the straight distance of pipe to the application.

 

The flow rate the RC calc is giving you is the flow rate from the mag 5 to the display, you would have 335gph making it to the display.

[metrokat]

The flow rate the RC calc is giving you is the flow rate from the mag 5 to the display, you would have 335gph making it to the display.

And is that sufficient?

[hey]

And is that sufficient?

 

depends, thats 335 to the display if you split that off to where some is going to each reactor its going to be a lot less, say you divert half that flow to reactors, well thats down to 160ish to the display and 160 split between the 2 reactors.

 

how much flow do you want in the display (from return not from powerheads aswell) and how much do you want in each reactor?

[jedimasterben]

And is that sufficient?

You want 5-10x turnover. Lower turnover rate means higher contact time with the skimmer.

[metrokat]

depends, thats 335 to the display if you split that off to where some is going to each reactor its going to be a lot less, say you divert half that flow to reactors, well thats down to 160ish to the display and 160 split between the 2 reactors.

 

how much flow do you want in the display (from return not from powerheads aswell) and how much do you want in each reactor?

It's 335 after accounting for elbows, splits, valves and pipe height

 

You want 5-10x turnover. Lower turnover rate means higher contact time with the skimmer.

how do I calculate that?

[jedimasterben]

how do I calculate that?

However many gallons you have coming out of the pump. I have around 400GPH coming out of my return, so for my 80g that's 5x turnover.

[hey]

it shouldnt be accounting for flow diversion to reactors. 4 ft of head is 310 gph. the reactors have to be figured out seperately and subtracted from the total flow leaving the pump with the set amount of head.

 

 

so say you wanted 400gph in display 100 to reactor 1 and 50 to reactor 2, need 550 gph total the closest pump to that is the mag7 but you would only get about 350 gph to the display.

[metrokat]

You lost me Hey.

http://www.reefcentral.com/index.php/head-loss-calculator

[hey]

ya that doesn't take into consideration you are diverting a % of flow to the reactors.

[metrokat]

ya that doesn't take into consideration you are diverting a % of flow to the reactors.

Alright. Even so, at 335 I'm at way more than 5X turnover so I think it would be alright no? If we took away some of the pressure for the reacto(s) , and the fuge that the manifold also feeds.

[hey]

Alright. Even so, at 335 I'm at way more than 5X turnover so I think it would be alright no? If we took away some of the pressure for the reacto(s) , and the fuge that the manifold also feeds.

 

how much flow do each of the reactors need?

[metrokat]

Phosbans most likely - so that is 20-30gph per website.

I'm looking at the Nextreef shorty but that footprint is too big

[hey]

Phosbans most likely - so that is 20-30gph per website.

I'm looking at the Nextreef shorty but that footprint is too big

 

so say 30gph through each reactor so -60 from 335, is that still above 5 times turnover? (btw I find 5x to be unnecessary but it is a standard many people shoot for, im sitting at about 3x)

[ZephNYC]

Good morning people of the reef. Hopefully today is water change day, it's been percolating for 3 days.

 

The autopilot tank is doing a little better than the last 2 weeks. I started seeing bare spots on the underside of the Setosa, Oreo the clam was extremely pissed off, the fuge looked like a slime bomb has gone off. Just a myriad of things.

 

I started using phosguard about a month ago. I used less than the recommended amount being that it is a new media that my tank has never encountered, you want to go slow. After about 2 weeks I saw the fuge getting gnarly so I added a little more phosguard while still being low or at recommended levels for my tank size. 2 more weeks passed and during these 2 weeks I started noticing the clam trouble and other things. The fuge was even more of a mess and in a crazy fit I put in a few more spoons of phosguard in a stand alone reactor and let it run for a few hours. I used 2 kits to test phosphates prior to doing this - salifer said phosphates were zero (which has NEVER happened in my tank, I mean come on does it look like I run a dirty tank with zero phosphates? pfft) , Red sea said my phosphates were 0.08 which has also NEVER happened during the 2 years of running GFO.

 

Fine! I shut off all phosguard and switched the standalone reactor to GFO. It took a day or maybe 2, but Oreo the clam is fluffy and happy for the first time in 2 weeks. I'm not confident in phosguard anymore, perhaps it stripped my tank too much, perhaps I did not use enough. The clams response suggests too much stripping (and I also lost a large colony of sunset montipora), but then how did the red sea test kit show 0.08?

 

Before and after my water change today I'm going to test parameters. But I will not be using phosguard again.

I get to say my very favorite 3 words in the whole wide world....

 

TOLD YA SO!

 

 

[jedimasterben]

[jbb]

so say 30gph through each reactor so -60 from 335, is that still above 5 times turnover? (btw I find 5x to be unnecessary but it is a standard many people shoot for, im sitting at about 3x)

 

 

She will also need to factor flow from the manifold to the refugium

.