Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board > General > Reef

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-01-2008, 12:31 AM
kwirky's Avatar
kwirky kwirky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,127
kwirky is on a distinguished road
Default complex FTOTM's

It seems most "FTOTM"s from advanced aquarist and reefkeeping.org are super complex. Can anyone think of any awesome SPS tanks that are much simpler? I mean without wavemakers, calcium reactors, zeovit, combination lighting, etc etc. Is it possible or is keeping super bright SPS destined for gadgetry?
__________________
Everything I put in my tank is fully dependant on me.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-01-2008, 12:44 AM
24storm 24storm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 242
24storm is on a distinguished road
Default

Have you seen Gregs (snappy). It is not that complex. It is very impressive and i think the only thing he has on your list is he doses poly labs. No reactor no Zeovit No wave maker.

Correct me if I'm wrong Greg.

Keith
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-01-2008, 01:00 AM
mseepman mseepman is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vernon
Posts: 2,529
mseepman is on a distinguished road
Default

I agree....I just saw Greg's tank in person last weekend, it was awesome to behold and he follows the old KIS (keep it simple) methods it seems. I couldn't believe that he doesn't have a calcium reactor....
__________________
Mark...



290g Peninsula Display, 425g total volume. Setup Jan 2013.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-01-2008, 01:15 AM
Myka's Avatar
Myka Myka is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Saskatoon, SK.
Posts: 11,268
Myka will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mseepman View Post
I agree....I just saw Greg's tank in person last weekend, it was awesome to behold and he follows the old KIS (keep it simple) methods it seems. I couldn't believe that he doesn't have a calcium reactor....
*ahem That method would be called "KISS" (keep it simple stupid).

I've seen the odd TOTM here and there that was a lot simpler, but you don't see them often. I've seen a couple simple nanos make TOTM too.
__________________
~ Mindy

SPS fanatic.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-01-2008, 01:57 AM
justinl's Avatar
justinl justinl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,245
justinl is on a distinguished road
Default

I recall one nano system that made RC TOTM that was based around a very simple idea. A huge sump. It was just a densely packed (and gorgeous) display with a relatively large sump. can't remember who or when though.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-01-2008, 05:15 AM
kwirky's Avatar
kwirky kwirky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,127
kwirky is on a distinguished road
Default

I keep meaning to go see greg's tank. school's been SO busy lol.
__________________
Everything I put in my tank is fully dependant on me.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-01-2008, 05:20 AM
Delphinus's Avatar
Delphinus Delphinus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Posts: 12,896
Delphinus has a spectacular aura aboutDelphinus has a spectacular aura aboutDelphinus has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via MSN to Delphinus
Default

You want my honest opinion? I think calcium reactors are great but they are an idea whose time peaked about say 3-4 years ago. I still run a calcium reactor because I have one, and plan to run one for a while to come (hey, it's paid for, it does the job). But ... if I had absolutely nothing and was looking for getting something, I would skip the reactor and just go straight to an automated Balling (or 2-part, or 3-part) solution. Two or three peristaltic pumps (since you don't need the lab grade controllable flowrate for this), some timers, and away we go - and you have a solution that is likely superior to a calcium reactor, and by far cheaper in the long run. AND, for what it's worth, has a smaller carbon footprint.

My prediction is that reactors will be something we see less of in the future, and more Balling or just simple 2-part/3-part dosings.

I'm not sure that I agree that a wavebox makes a system "more complicated or complex". It's a water movement device, nothing more. You have to have something that moves water ... waveboxes make for a nice effect in a long enough tank but aren't a prerequisite for an SPS tank by any stretch. However what IS a prerequisite is adequate flow, which is, IMO, something that tends to be underestimated by many in the "quest" for an SPS tank. (I include myself in that broad paintbrush stroke .. I have SPS in my 75 and I feel the flow is wholly inadequate .. however I hope to not have that issue in my 280g .. whenever I can manage to finish that little ridiculous long standing project .. let's not go there ).

Greg might not have a "wavebox", but he does have appropriate flow conditions in his tank. And there is a wave like effect happening in his tank. When it comes down to it, flow is probably the most important aspect to a tank like this (lighting and nutrient management and parameter levels do count as very close seconds though). I don't know what his total volume turnover is but it has to be fairly significant.

Zeovit, compound lighting .. ah .. well ... no, none of it is specifically mandatory but the end results that they provide kind of are. I don't mean to say that a dosing system like Zeovit or Polyplaps is mandatory, it's just a tool in the arsenal against nutrient buildup. If you can manage it otherwise, then you're set. However one nice thing about those systems is that they have the side effect of feeding the corals AND making a low nutrient system. So, no it's not mandatory, but boy is it addictive when you see what you can achieve with it.

Anyhow there's my $0.02 on this
__________________
-- Tony
My next hobby will be flooding my basement while repeatedly banging my head against a brick wall and tearing up $100 bills. Whee!

Last edited by Delphinus; 04-01-2008 at 05:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-01-2008, 08:39 PM
mseepman mseepman is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vernon
Posts: 2,529
mseepman is on a distinguished road
Default

Haha...Myka, I was trying to be politically correct...I wasn't sure if anyone would pick up on the fact that an "S" was missing

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myka View Post
*ahem That method would be called "KISS" (keep it simple stupid).

I've seen the odd TOTM here and there that was a lot simpler, but you don't see them often. I've seen a couple simple nanos make TOTM too.
__________________
Mark...



290g Peninsula Display, 425g total volume. Setup Jan 2013.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-02-2008, 06:09 AM
kwirky's Avatar
kwirky kwirky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,127
kwirky is on a distinguished road
Default

u didn't hijack the thread greg

I totally didn't notice greg's tank on FTOTM in AA. after reading it his tank could probably have been even more simple as lots of things were added before the real problems were discovered (like RO/DI when it was the skimmer acting up).

I like that idea of the dripping of the 2 part.

I agree calcium reactors take less space than the basins for 2 part when using dosing pumps. Using a dosing pump like a litermeter would probably be WAY less work than a calcium reactor I'm thinking. There are people who've used them for 2 years before having to change the surgical tubing and they have a little beeper alarm reminding you when to calibrate them (every 6 months i think?)

I'm considering a litermeter 2 part doser for my own tank because it seems much simpler than a calcium reactor (and most reactors would be overkill for a 45 gallon tank). Also I see an advantage of a dosing pump being able to scale for any size tank. just increase the dosage.

I've been thinking hard about whether to not bother hauling water in RO/DI water from my mom's in the city any more. I have an analysis from foothill's hospital of the well water here and it says it's absolutely perfect except it's abnormally high in potassium. leaves white residue on the sinks n such. everything else is even BETER than city water. I've been using out of lazyness for the past month and my corals haven't been complaining. dkh ends up around 12 or 13 but most calcium reactors bring it there anyways I think.

but anyways I'm hijacking my own thread here lol

edit: scratch using the well water. it tests at a whopping 24 dkh when the salt is added!!!
__________________
Everything I put in my tank is fully dependant on me.

Last edited by kwirky; 04-02-2008 at 06:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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. The time now is 11:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.