Arofanatics Fish Talk Forums  

Go Back   Arofanatics Fish Talk Forums > Arowana Forum > Tank set-ups, Filtration & Water Management > Articles, Resources & FAQs

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18-02-2010, 01:31 PM   #21
stoner
Dragon
 
stoner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by atom View Post
4x is just nothing more than a guide. You can have 10x but you must have large sump with sufficient biomedia to compensate for the reduced retention period. I prefer high turnover. 6 to 8x will be nice.

An exaggerated example:

The water speeding pass a chamber containing CR at 1000 l/hr, can remove 4 mg/l of ammonia.
When the velocity increases to 2000 l/hr, the chamber can remove 2 mg/l of ammonia.
To compensate for the losses, the water has to pass 2 chambers in order to remove 4 mg/l of ammonia.
A very clear explanation...

Sweet!
stoner is offline  
Old 18-02-2010, 03:34 PM   #22
canopy
Dragon
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,451
Default

understand now. Is there a minimum limit to the sump size to have a good filtration? Basically, what is the minimum tank size recommendation for using sump method of filtration? 3ft main tank with 2ft sump tank?
canopy is offline  
Old 18-02-2010, 03:42 PM   #23
average_cc
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by atom View Post
4x is just nothing more than a guide. You can have 10x but you must have large sump with sufficient biomedia to compensate for the reduced retention period. I prefer high turnover. 6 to 8x will be nice.

An exaggerated example:

The water speeding pass a chamber containing CR at 1000 l/hr, can remove 4 mg/l of ammonia.
When the velocity increases to 2000 l/hr, the chamber can remove 2 mg/l of ammonia.
To compensate for the losses, the water has to pass 2 chambers in order to remove 4 mg/l of ammonia.
Thank u 4 the clarification very clear now ....cheers..
 
Old 18-02-2010, 05:26 PM   #24
naser90096
Endangered Dragon
 
naser90096's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,261
Default

prof atom, very interesting & valuable lesson again ...




i'm using an atman 8450L/hr for my 6X3X2.5ft with 5X2X1.5ft sump. turn over is ard 4.5X after pressure loss to height & elbows. water is crystal clear ...

also using a MeBner 6000L/hr for my 6X2.5X2ft tank with 4X2X1.5ft sump. turn over is abt 6X plus ...

no worries abt water quality.
now looking at ways to reduce NO3 without using denitrator, like optimising biohome fully using bigger compartment chamber to reduce flowrate thru media ...

Last edited by naser90096; 18-02-2010 at 05:27 PM.
naser90096 is offline  
Old 18-02-2010, 06:16 PM   #25
marshy

Senior Moderator
 
marshy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,712
Default

Anthony

Perhaps you could propose a sump layout design which you think would be optimum in filtration?
marshy is offline  
Old 18-02-2010, 10:12 PM   #26
atom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naser90096 View Post
prof atom, very interesting & valuable lesson again ...




i'm using an atman 8450L/hr for my 6X3X2.5ft with 5X2X1.5ft sump. turn over is ard 4.5X after pressure loss to height & elbows. water is crystal clear ...

also using a MeBner 6000L/hr for my 6X2.5X2ft tank with 4X2X1.5ft sump. turn over is abt 6X plus ...

no worries abt water quality.
now looking at ways to reduce NO3 without using denitrator, like optimising biohome fully using bigger compartment chamber to reduce flowrate thru media ...
I find the most effective method for limited amount of space is to use denitrator but ....it is not that simple and costly too.
 
Old 18-02-2010, 10:15 PM   #27
atom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marshy View Post
Anthony

Perhaps you could propose a sump layout design which you think would be optimum in filtration?
Actually ...most of the designs by the popular tank makers are works well. The problem is the laying of the biomedia and the water level.
 
Old 18-02-2010, 10:26 PM   #28
marshy

Senior Moderator
 
marshy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,712
Default

Hahaha.. well perhaps using those standard designs, you could advise on the optimum biomedia layout?
Base on normal as well as heavy bio-loads perhaps?
marshy is offline  
Old 18-02-2010, 10:38 PM   #29
BarraCuda™
SiaoGu Gives You Wings
 
BarraCuda™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,169
Default

My opinion for sump turnover is ... "as fast as you can afford".

Here's my reasoning,

Bio media is not single pass filtration. E.g Reverse Osmosis. Where the water only have 1 chance of passing through the media.

Bacteria will have higher efficiency when in higher waste concentration assuming carbon is not the limiting factor.

Eg. Both 100mg/l and 10mg/l of NH3 is passing through the same media with same flowrate. In terms of percentage NH3 removal, the 100mg/l will have a much higher efficiency than 10mg/l.

By introducing a higher flowrate, you are narrowing the gap towards perfect water circulation. The main idea is to bring higher concentration waste water(from main tank) to the bio media as fast as possible

Alot of pumps available in the market are rated at 0 head loss so you will not get the rated flowrate. Depending on the pump you use and headloss, flowrate can be reduced drastically to only 10-20%.

Biomedia and piping will clog overtime and that will reduce the flowrate further. So my opinion is, go for the highest flowrate and better quality pump.
BarraCuda™ is offline  
Old 18-02-2010, 10:47 PM   #30
|JTBC|
Dragon
 
|JTBC|'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
An exaggerated example:
The water speeding pass a chamber containing CR at 1000 l/hr, can remove 4 mg/l of ammonia.
When the velocity increases to 2000 l/hr, the chamber can remove 2 mg/l of ammonia.
To compensate for the losses, the water has to pass 2 chambers in order to remove 4 mg/l of ammonia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoner View Post
A very clear explanation...
Sweet!
Hi bro, I'm still not very clear can you elaborate to us.
So High/Low flow rate, big/small sump tank and more/less medias are good?
An understanding of concept is more important. Tks.
|JTBC| is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +9. The time now is 03:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2000-2008 Arofanatics.com (Since 30th August 2000)