Newbie looking for feedback

[IanWR]

Originally Posted by Myka

- Daily small WC is a waste of salt. Larger weekly or bi-weekly WC are much more effective.

I'd like to respectfully disagree with this point. I remember reading a RHF article where he crunched the numbers on the effects of many smaller changes vs 1 large one. This article (thank you google): http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/

I think the take away was that 1 30% change a month removes 30% of nitrates (for example), and an infinite number of infinitely small changes that equal the same 30% over a month would reduce it by just under 26%. So you do lose 4% efficiency by continual water changes, but gain consistency and possible ease of maintenance.

You also lose the siphoning of the sand to remove gunk, but you can always do an extra change just for that.

[Myka]

Originally Posted by IanWR

I think the take away was that 1 30% change a month removes 30% of nitrates (for example), and an infinite number of infinitely small changes that equal the same 30% over a month would reduce it by just under 26%. So you do lose 4% efficiency by continual water changes, but gain consistency and possible ease of maintenance.

Sorry Ian, you misunderstand the article (or maybe you misunderstand what I was referring to). The article references continuous water change, as in you're removing old water at the same time as you're pumping new water in, not daily water changes.

I was referring to daily WC where the total WC volume is removed, then consecutively replaced. Since every time you do a WC you're removing a portion of the new sw you just put in yesterday it is less effective. If the OP chooses to do daily AND continuous WC (which could very well be the case If he's using a doser for it) that would compound it by another 4%.

[Sidius]

My plan was to still do one or two larger water changes a month (Im used to over 100 gallons per week on my cichlid tank) and syphon sand/rocks. I got the idea for automatic daily water changes from reading through a thread over on thereeftank where a member did daily one gallon water changes and posted his results over the course of a year or more (I believe, though I could be wrong) and it was very successful. That sparked my curiosity to pound the Google pavement for more info and it seemed like the consensus was exporting nutrients daily was a good thing.... that being said, I am new to reefs and saltwater and I'm not about to disagree with anyone lol. Maybe I'll set the auto water change to do 15-20 gallons per week, instead? I know from experience with years of huge freshwater changes that if I can automate something like water changes, my life will be a lot better lol.

In regards to the skimmer, my main problem with the vertex alpha is just how expensive it is. I have a lot of other expensive items to buy and the SRO3000 gets pretty good reviews/feedback. I want the alpha but I don't want to overspend for better build quality if the SRO is going to be just as efficient at removing nutrients. These are just my thought processes and reasoning behind what I've come up with so far though.

I really appreciate the advice and it's given me some things to reconsider and keep it coming.

Sent from my SM-N920W8 using Tapatalk

[Sidius]

I didn't know that about the UV and bio pellets. Good to know. If I decide to run a bio pellet reactor I'll be sure to shut off my UV. I need to read up on bio pellets more to understand them better.

Sent from my SM-N920W8 using Tapatalk

[Sidius]

That water change article is a great read. I'm still reading through it but there's some great info in here. It's possible that this question is answered already in that article and I haven't found it but I wonder if the benefits of daily, continuous water changes would out weigh the fact that they're slightly less effective? Exporting nutrients seems so crucial for some corals. If it's just straight up wasteful and not very beneficial (or not enough to be worth it) then I will definitely reconsider my plan.

Sent from my SM-N920W8 using Tapatalk

[F.H]

I quarantine, and do a prophylactic tank transfer treatment (for ich) on all new members that enter my display. If done properly, tank transfer can almost guarantee to rid your fish of ich, even if you don't see anything on them.

I have a hippo tang, and I've never seen a single spot of ich on him since I've had him for about 8 months now. Same goes for the other 6 fish (knock on wood).

Some may find it a pain to be to meticulous about it, but I lost all my fish, when I first ventured into saltwater, to ich. Since then I've learned my lesson, and I'm willing to put in the effort if it'll greatly improve the chances of my inhabitants.

Of course, with this method, you have to be a bit more careful about anything you introduce into your display, including frags, inverts, etc. So you definitely have to be more aware of trying to minimize any possibilities for introducing disease in your tank by making sure not a single drop of foreign saltwater, regardless of where it came from, enters your tank, having separate nets/equipment as to not contaminate the display, etc.

As things go with all other aspects of this hobby, you'll find people that will say, and have experienced, the opposite. It all depends on whether you're willing to take a risk or not. Some people live with ich, have healthy fish, feed properly, and their fish can combat the ich on their own, given a strong immune system.

Just a thought, if you're worried about ich on your tang(s).

[Myka]

Originally Posted by Sidius

• RO/DI plumbed with a solenoid and float switch to keep my ATO reservoir topped off

I just noticed this line in your first post. If you do something like this make sure there is redundancy because I can tell you about several tanks that have crashed when an ATO fails to turn off and it's attached to an unlimited supply of freshwater. Murphy's Law says you won't be home when this happens - you'll be on a beach in Mexico or something.

I prefer to have a limited supply of RO available in a reservoir. I aim for 10% of the tank volume. That's enough for a week's worth of top off for most tanks, and it's little enough that if the ATO pumped it all into the system the salinity won't drop so much that it will kill everything. I also design the sump so that it will hold the entire volume of the ATO reservoir so that if the situation does happen the floor doesn't get wet. Redundancy, redundancy.

Originally Posted by Sidius

That water change article is a great read. I'm still reading through it but there's some great info in here. It's possible that this question is answered already in that article and I haven't found it but I wonder if the benefits of daily, continuous water changes would out weigh the fact that they're slightly less effective? Exporting nutrients seems so crucial for some corals. If it's just straight up wasteful and not very beneficial (or not enough to be worth it) then I will definitely reconsider my plan.

My thoughts on the automatic WC is just that it's one more thing to go wrong. If you do design an automated system make sure there is redundancy.

My preferred method is like this:

- Tee off your RO/DI so you have a line and a float valve going to RO tub (not the ATO reservoir) and a line going to your SW mixing tub. You can use manual ball valves, or you can hook it up to the Apex with solenoid valves so it will automatically refill these once a week (OWHY).

- Use a pump and hose to refill the ATO reservoir from the RO tub.

- Use the same hose (sans pump) to drain the tank via siphon to either a floor drain, laundry tub, or bathtub. While draining, use a gravel vac and bucket to vacuum sand (you'll only need to do maybe 3-4 buckets for a tank that size) and dump down toilet.

- Once draining is done, refill with hose and pump. Just drop the pump into the SW mixing tub.

I use quick connect hose fittings for hoses, and I use a Quiet One 6000 for a pump which moves water pretty quick. Pick up a few plastic spring clamps to hold your hoses in place while you draining and refilling. If you have space you can plumb in the pumps and use ball valves so you don't have to use a hose. You can hook the pumps up to switches so you just have to flick a switch to refill the tank.

The reason I like this is that "nothing" can go wrong. Sure, you can forget the siphon hose and drain too much out. Fix that by submerging the hose only to the line you want to drain to. If you had solenoids doing this, one could fail so it drains but doesn't refill (return pump runs dry), or it fills but doesn't drain (wet floor).

It's up to you, but this is something I just don't trust to complete automation. You can do all sorts of things to partially automate it.

[IanWR]

Originally Posted by Myka

Sorry Ian, you misunderstand the article (or maybe you misunderstand what I was referring to). The article references continuous water change, as in you're removing old water at the same time as you're pumping new water in, not daily water changes.

I was referring to daily WC where the total WC volume is removed, then consecutively replaced. Since every time you do a WC you're removing a portion of the new sw you just put in yesterday it is less effective. If the OP chooses to do daily AND continuous WC (which could very well be the case If he's using a doser for it) that would compound it by another 4%.

I don't think I misunderstood either you or the article. You suggested changing 2g a day was wasteful and weekly or biweekly was "much more effective". I disagree with that assessment (again, respectfully! 😀 )

The OP is talking about a 180g tank (let's assume for the sake of argument that the total system water is 200g). If they change out 2g a day they are doing about 60g a month, for a total of 30% water volume. If they did it all at once every month it would reduce nitrates (and any other accumulated pollution) by 30%. By changing 2g a day it is reduced by about 26% (per the RHF article). There has been a 4% waste, in this case 8g.

I don't see 8g of saltwater a month lost to be that big of a waste to gain the benefit of automating the process (plus stability benefits, plus not having to heat the new water).

I don't mean to derail this thread, just wanted the OP to hear that I thought the plan for using the DOS to change 2g a day was a good one (IMHO).

[Myka]

Originally Posted by IanWR

I don't think I misunderstood either you or the article. You suggested changing 2g a day was wasteful and weekly or biweekly was "much more effective". I disagree with that assessment (again, respectfully! �� )

Sure, but the article doesn't support your opinion then. The article refers to a single continuous WC, not a daily consecutive WC.

For a daily consecutive WC of 1% per day for 30 days you will have 26% new SW in the tank. For a weekly consecutive WC of 10% weekly for 30 days you will have 34% new SW in the tank. If you change those WC numbers to 2% and 20% you will change 45% and 60% over 30 days respectively.

[Reef Pilot]

Originally Posted by Sidius

I didn't know that about the UV and bio pellets. Good to know. If I decide to run a bio pellet reactor I'll be sure to shut off my UV. I need to read up on bio pellets more to understand them better.

Sent from my SM-N920W8 using Tapatalk

Some people run UV for ich control. But with proper QT practices that isn't necessary. Also, beneficial bacteria is an important part of a healthy reef tank, the concern is that UV may kill or reduce that benefit.