A Sediment substrate that works
- Thread starter mojoreef
- Start date
Help Support Reef Aquarium & Tank Building Forum:
SeaQ
Active member
Wow,75% would be great,couple of ?
Because of the flux in the anaerobic zone from pulling the water from the plenum at a high rate, do you think it would be better to stir the plenum and let gravity draw the water off?
At the Carb Sea site the system they describe uses fiberglass screen,is this too large, if so any ideas on where to get 300 micron mesh,hacking socks up for a 150 gal would be a tad silly LOL. Would silk be something to look at?
Could the substrate be a smaller size? They have a reptile calcium carb. that appears smaller than the sea floor.
Thank Mike for getting back into this, we all know how crazy our schedules can get!!
Keith
Because of the flux in the anaerobic zone from pulling the water from the plenum at a high rate, do you think it would be better to stir the plenum and let gravity draw the water off?
At the Carb Sea site the system they describe uses fiberglass screen,is this too large, if so any ideas on where to get 300 micron mesh,hacking socks up for a 150 gal would be a tad silly LOL. Would silk be something to look at?
Could the substrate be a smaller size? They have a reptile calcium carb. that appears smaller than the sea floor.
Thank Mike for getting back into this, we all know how crazy our schedules can get!!
Keith
I dont see a problem with the flux Keith, max it would be fo a couple of days and I dont see any pitfalls from it. I dont think gravity would do much in getting the solids out, that and it would be tough to shake up the plenum space.
Go to Aquatic Ecosystems they have a ton of mesh of all sorts and microns.
You could go with a southdown type (oothlic) but I dot see a lot of gain with doing it, 6 months down the road and the carib sea would be the same size or at least close.
Mike
mojoreef said:
That's what I wanted to hear....
I am hoping that the rapid introduction of oxygenated water into the anerobic zone only temporarily inhibits the anerobic bacteria from doing their thing.....
Best of both worlds.....DSB nitrate reuction and reduction of waste buildup...
Here is my plan....I am planning on moving the contents of my reef from the 55 to a 75 with a lighting upgrade and a 30 gallon sump. I plan on having a shallow sanbed in the 75, with a DSP/Plenum system in the 30 gallon sump....anybody see any concerns with running a system like this remotely?
MikeS
Mike I dont understand the concept you are going after. Running a DSB type system remotely is much more ineffective then to have in in the main tank where it it garranteed to capture the things you want it to. What you will end up with is a remote system that only recieves a small portion of the over all detritus/waste that the tank puts out. So it will be auxilary only. Then you have a shallow system in the tank which recieve the vast ammount of detritus from the tank. Being shallow will mean that you will still get nitrification and denitrification but the capability of sinking will be greatly reduced.
IMHO if someone is going to run a remote DSB or Plenum stly filtration I think the best way to do it is to make sure you have enough flow and very good low flow to keep all the detritus in suspension so that it leaves the tank and goes to the remote.
just some thoughts
Mike
IMHO if someone is going to run a remote DSB or Plenum stly filtration I think the best way to do it is to make sure you have enough flow and very good low flow to keep all the detritus in suspension so that it leaves the tank and goes to the remote.
just some thoughts
Mike
Points taken mojo .....I'm undecided, but my thoughts were similar to some of what you said above....ie lots of flow, lots of flow on the low areas. I'd frequently clean out the SSB in the main tank as well. To be honest, I'd be doing it this way for astethics, I like the look of sand in the main tank, but I'm kinda tired of looking at my DSB. I figured if I set it up remotely, I'd still get decent nitrate reducing capacity in my system, without the headace of a DSB in the main tank....
But I see your points...
MikeS
.....I'm undecided, but my thoughts were similar to some of what you said above....ie lots of flow, lots of flow on the low areas. I'd frequently clean out the SSB in the main tank as well. To be honest, I'd be doing it this way for astethics, I like the look of sand in the main tank, but I'm kinda tired of looking at my DSB. I figured if I set it up remotely, I'd still get decent nitrate reducing capacity in my system, without the headace of a DSB in the main tank....But I see your points...
MikeS
Okay its stupid but I think you could use some type of air hosing run under your plenum or whatever you call it to have a way to remove it. BUT I'm worried about this whole thing. Very interesting you all and I'll continue to watch. Mike you gonna set this up?
Mac
Mac
Hey Mike, Yeah yeah these big ass threads . . . But seriously I do have some questions. I'm going back and rereading to make sure I haven't missed something. I think you guys are missing something about dsb's and why people want them though, I know I personally like my creatures. My cucumbers, my spoon worms, etc. And I wonder how they work in your plan. Don't worry i'm stuck on page 14 and i'll get to 24 soon enough with LOADS of questions.
Okay I'm through again. Mike way back when you said you were setting up a system that would have a better change for longevity and for biolaod. (So what type of bioload have you invisioned on this for the long term? Will you have the creatures I mentioned that travel in the sand or will you have gobies that dig or will you just have the sand?)
You guys specify this is for solids removal. So let me ask you a bit about the idea of balance. (Is it possible that you could remove enough that it would send the tank out of balance?)
Mike did you choose every three months to do your maintence for a reason? Do you envision that as the tank gets older and the setup gets older it will need to have less maintenance or more?
And one more thing, You mentioned criter populations and having to have them repopulated. My experience is that the brittle stars multiply more rapidly than the bristleworms and I know others that have had chitons and or other creatures multiply faster. Don't you think that different tanks, different creatures, different feeding schedules will make a huge difference into the creatures that multiply?
Also Nikki do you mind explaining more about the backflushing idea you had?
Thanks Mac
You guys specify this is for solids removal. So let me ask you a bit about the idea of balance. (Is it possible that you could remove enough that it would send the tank out of balance?)
Mike did you choose every three months to do your maintence for a reason? Do you envision that as the tank gets older and the setup gets older it will need to have less maintenance or more?
And one more thing, You mentioned criter populations and having to have them repopulated. My experience is that the brittle stars multiply more rapidly than the bristleworms and I know others that have had chitons and or other creatures multiply faster. Don't you think that different tanks, different creatures, different feeding schedules will make a huge difference into the creatures that multiply?
Also Nikki do you mind explaining more about the backflushing idea you had?
Thanks Mac
Actually FishyinKy, IMO, I think that the mechanical process of periodically diffusing waste laden water through the sandbed and out of the system through the plenum will do a lot of the "work" so to speak that is normally done by the different critters living in the DSB, thus making the reefkeeper less dependent upon them. One thing I do agree with those who are critical of DSB's is that when it comes to critters, the DSB is a little over-dependent on them. Critter populations rise and fall, certain species die off as they are out competed against by others, ect. This does create somewhat of an unreliable system. Anything that can be done IMO to make up for this is a good deal. In addition, I think that this system will not have a huge impact on DSB life in the first place, maybe only on those living in the very bottom of the sandbed that are small enough to pass through the mesh.
On the balance question....how would removal of biodegradeable solids create an imbalance? An imbalance of what?
My take on the 3 month interval is so the sandbed can "do its thing", so to speak...reduce some of the wastes, remove nitrates, ect. Too frequently would cause too great a disruption in the anerobic zone IMO to justify having a DSB in the first place, since nitrate reduction is really the only reason to have one...
MikeS
On the balance question....how would removal of biodegradeable solids create an imbalance? An imbalance of what?
My take on the 3 month interval is so the sandbed can "do its thing", so to speak...reduce some of the wastes, remove nitrates, ect. Too frequently would cause too great a disruption in the anerobic zone IMO to justify having a DSB in the first place, since nitrate reduction is really the only reason to have one...
MikeS
NaH2O
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2004
- Messages
- 8,568
Mac, on your questions about the critters - I really don't think a tank would have the diversity or sustained population in the sand that is required, plus there is that whole bottom of the tank thing. Sure the stars grow substantially, but aren't they just taking in their food source and turning it into a smaller food source ----> continue down the poop line. I believe it is the worms that take a deep breath and head into the anoxic area of the bed, so in my mind that would mean they are more important. My feeling on this system is sand critters will still need to be present, in order to take in detritus, left over food, fish waste, etc - convert them into smaller particles, so they can be processed further until flush time.
My thought process on the backflush - I think, it seems like long ago - was larger particles would plug up the screening material or even areas of substrate, and then would trap the smaller sized particulate from travelling down. There would then be a "build-up" so to speak and wouldn't get the desired suction out. A gentle back flush would sort of dislodge those larger particles and open the path for the smaller ones to make their way down to be removed.
My thought process on the backflush - I think, it seems like long ago - was larger particles would plug up the screening material or even areas of substrate, and then would trap the smaller sized particulate from travelling down. There would then be a "build-up" so to speak and wouldn't get the desired suction out. A gentle back flush would sort of dislodge those larger particles and open the path for the smaller ones to make their way down to be removed.
Hey Mac good to see you jump in on the conversation. The concept of this project was not to really get into the value of a dsb or to really change it. A dsb is what it is and isn't what it isn't.
Their are IMHO two glaring problems with a dsb, the rest are like and dislikes. The first main problem is a dsb doesn't have the kind of depth it does in the wild, along with the constant flushing it gets out Their two. The bottom and sides of our tank reduce the sand from being flushed or from sinking end product to the depths. Theirs nothing stopping the bed from building up end product detritus. SO the concept with this design was to allow for this build off to be periodically mechanically removed. This should add considerable lifetime to the bed. The 3 month period was a shot in the dark, it could be 6 months, the idea is not to allow it to build up over the years.
2nd problem is the reliance on critters. YOu can have as many as you want as far as I am concerned. In your tank your not going to get the recruitment that sand gets in the wild. I have done a ton of reseach and calculations on the amount of critter you would need to to churn the sand as it does in the wild. The numbers are staggering. We address this problem also with the suction, the suction pulls down organics in a variety of stages, so your reliance on critter is not critical, they just become complimentary. It will also help pull the P back down in the bed where it belongs instead of in the tank where it become algae.
Also on the critter you mentioned it has a lot to do with preditation, enviroment and really if the critter is going to remain in the bed or just be born Their and then live in the rocks. I know in my tank I have billions of mini brittles and a chiton explosion every so often.
hope it helped
Mike
Their are IMHO two glaring problems with a dsb, the rest are like and dislikes. The first main problem is a dsb doesn't have the kind of depth it does in the wild, along with the constant flushing it gets out Their two. The bottom and sides of our tank reduce the sand from being flushed or from sinking end product to the depths. Theirs nothing stopping the bed from building up end product detritus. SO the concept with this design was to allow for this build off to be periodically mechanically removed. This should add considerable lifetime to the bed. The 3 month period was a shot in the dark, it could be 6 months, the idea is not to allow it to build up over the years.
2nd problem is the reliance on critters. YOu can have as many as you want as far as I am concerned. In your tank your not going to get the recruitment that sand gets in the wild. I have done a ton of reseach and calculations on the amount of critter you would need to to churn the sand as it does in the wild. The numbers are staggering. We address this problem also with the suction, the suction pulls down organics in a variety of stages, so your reliance on critter is not critical, they just become complimentary. It will also help pull the P back down in the bed where it belongs instead of in the tank where it become algae.
I would assume with this help you could increase your bioload from what it would be with out it. Hard to really throw exact numbers at it until the unit has been tried. But definitely more then what it would be with out it.
Good question. I do believe Their will be a short term out of balance, but I don't think it will effect anything. This out of balance will occur in the anaerobic zone, the area will become oxygen rich, and will stay that way for a couple of days until the bacteria deplete the oxygen. The reason I don't see a problem is that along with the solids goes the nitrates they would be consuming. By the time the oxygen is depleted a new batch of nitrates should be on its way down from the aerobic zone.
I would say the suction intervals would become more frequent. This will not make the DSB last forever, but it should greatly increase its lifespan.
I am sure food input would play a role, slow flow to. Here is an example of what I am talking about. It has a lot to do with carbon budgets..but thats a tough one to explain, so lets go this route. Say you have a tank with a 24x 48 inch foot print, six inch bed, you load it with pods, bacteria, different kinds of worms, sand clams and so on. As time goes by, with out recruitment the population will diminish until you are left with a dominate species, in the case of our tanks that would be the bristle worm. Plus you are starting the bed with hundreds of species less then the wild has ( I think Ron was saying 400??). Now also this patch of sand is in a constant state of flux, larvae hatching over Their, bacterial bloom over here, but still confined to the space. In the will the flux zone streches for hundred of Cubic feet, if not thousands. So if you put your tanks foot print in this lagoon or beach you are not just going to get critters from with in this foot print but you are going to recruit critter from vast distances. We cant duplicate that, plus you throw in the flushing qualities of waves (which you cant do in your tank) and the occasional disturbance such as a storm (which you don't want to do in your tank). So you can see with out these things our dsb's are not what nature had in mind for the overall concept here, thus IMHO they need help.
Also on the critter you mentioned it has a lot to do with preditation, enviroment and really if the critter is going to remain in the bed or just be born Their and then live in the rocks. I know in my tank I have billions of mini brittles and a chiton explosion every so often.
hope it helped
Mike
RedEyeReef
Well-known member
Hey Mojo, what ever happened to your test tank on this thing? Did it work and how? I'm sure your busy with your new skimmer. lol
