![]() |
new skimmer in progress
well I started building my new skimmer today.
http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...er/1stside.jpg http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...er/3rdside.jpg http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...r/lastside.jpg http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...er/boxends.jpg and a mock up of the first riser http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...mer/mockup.jpg Steve |
:eek: What are the dimensions
|
I think you need a bigger box.... :rolleyes:
|
Quote:
Steve |
Quote:
the first riser tube is 8" dia and not sure what the hight is right now. Steve |
looks good. Are you use .25" for the box?
|
Quote:
Steve |
holly Man that's gona be huge. And built like a tank.
Look'n good. Keep us updated J |
:eek: What pump are you going to use?
Walter |
Quote:
Steve |
Hey there Steve I'm thinking of filling up my house and making it a salt water tank ,can you make me a skimmer to run 25oo sq ft
LOL mike nice pic's :mrgreen: |
Quote:
|
well got all the holes drilled and the bulkheads installed. main tube is glued on and routed out, also got the becket foam tubes made (well 1/2 made anyways)
http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...bulkheads2.jpg ignore the small tube ontop.. was just using a chunk of dirty 4" to get a feel for the hight. I will be using 6" for the actual riser. http://members.shaw.ca/steve-sherri/...er/mockup2.jpg Steve |
I saw a nuclear reactor that was almost that big......
Doug |
Why is your base that big ???
|
BECAUSE SIZE MATTERS
|
in my mind it's the height and the dia of the column, where contact time occur that is important not the base ???
|
Quote:
Steve |
Aren't you concerned about overskimming?
|
Quote:
|
I guess that question would be equally applicable to just about anyone here. Does anyone worry about overskimming?
|
Quinn, personally I think more is better. What are your concerns with this "overskimming" concept? What would I remove with too much skimming and why is it an issue?
|
Well, I haven't looked into it really, but I've read a few concerns regarding removing more organic material that is necessary, organic material that would serve as a food source for reef fauna, notably corals. I think a few people have written on the subject, possibly in AAOM or RK. I guess the idea is to avoid sterilizing your tank.
|
Quinn I also beleive you can overskim but, I don't know enough about it to put up a good arguement, if you can't overskim why not have a skimmer on a nano, so far my 155 has been running skimmer free for 2 months and I'm thinking I may stay skimmer free.. have to see...
Doug |
Quote:
Walter |
Quote:
now you will never get 100% efficiency in a skimmer something is always going to get through and this is compounded by the fact that the water flowing in is at a greater rate than the skimmer is processing, there for it is only skimming 66% of the water that flow through it. this is further compounded that not all the water that come from the tank is only un-skimmed water, as the new water returns to the tank it mixes and you get a blend so there are further inefficiency's there. so while you can come close to achieving a 0 nutrient level you will never actually be able to obtain it. Another reason for max skimming is it allows you to feed more as the excess will be removed be for it can break down and cause problems. this is an advantage because you can feed your tank more. another and probably the last reason I am not worried about it is that it is my opinion that most SPS obtain up to (and maybe more than) 98% of there food from there symbiotic algae or in simpler terms the light. and the remainder from ingesting (or how ever the do it) bacteria and food particles from the water. this also seams to support the "less nutrients the better" general consensus for SPS. Steve |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Steve |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.