Who rates skimmers

[pterfloth]

+1 Mr Wilson!

[golf nut]

The slower the tank skims the more concentrated (read dirty) the water going to the sump is, the dirtier the water the more efficiently the skimmer functions.

[banditpowdercoat]

But would that really mean the skimmer is more efficient, or working more efficient? or just theres more there to remove.

Like vacuuming a dirty 3 year old carpet compared to a 1 month old carpet? does it mean the vacuum is not working as efficiently on the newer carpet because its not pulling up as much junk?

[golf nut]

Dan, if you wanted to remove a film of oil from the surface of a tank of water would you slowly add water to the tank so it comes off the surface slowly and gets caught in a sponge or would you pump it quickly.

[mr.wilson]

Originally Posted by sphelps

only external/recirculating skimmers have an adjustable turn over rate

Absolutely, you cannot use the type of skimmer feeding that I am recommending with a one pump skimmer where the water feed and air production are produced with one pump. These protein skimmers are less efficient for that very reason. One pump skimmers still benefit from directing the effluent (processed) water to the return pump section of the sump as it allows new unprocessed waster to be pumped through. These types of skimmers function best if they are plumbed directly to the tank with no sump as they process water indiscriminately (no first in first out).

...and none are traditionally gravity fed, unless by gravity fed you simply mean with a pump because no skimmer should be run off gravity (such as straight from overflow) as it will never produce constant flow and cause the skimmer level to be either too high or too low.

The most efficient and quite drain from a surface skimmer is a siphon with an emergency overflow that has a constant slow trickle. There is no "toilet flush" siphon and siphon break with a constant siphon drain so the water level will be constant. A Durso or Stockman drain will also drain steadily if it is vented properly. The only instance that could cause a variation in the drain rate would be a toilet flush of an improperly vented drain. If "X" amount of water goes into a display tank, then "X" overflows at the same rate. The water level in the protein skimmer is regulated by the back pressure of a gate valve and or the height of the drain line.

Also building a separate skimmer chamber which requires a pump to feed water out at the same rate of the skimmer is a new one for me, I have never seen this.

It is a simple idea that greatly improves efficiency that is over-looked.

The 10X turn over recommendation is based on tank/sump flow and not skimmer flow, I have never heard of someone running 10X tank turnover through a skimmer before.

Tank flow rates are governed by closed loop pumps or less effective powerhead systems. Moving water to and from a sump does nothing for tank flow other than a side effect. The purpose of having a sump is to create a remote location to place filtration devices. Once you establish how many GPH these devices require, then you can pick a pump that does moves that much water. Anymore flow redundant at best, but more likely to decrease the efficiency of the filtration devices through a shorter dwell time and less concentrated surface skimming. Excessive, redundant turnover also causes noisy drains, salt creep, micro-bubbles, less surface tension at the overflow, and heat & electrical costs of an oversized pump.

Today's skimmers are not co-current, air stone powered tall structures. They mostly use a single pump and do not offer flow control.

You are correct, most skimmers these days are counter-current. The skimmers that were used in Escobal's work were also counter-current. Almost any protein skimmer can be plumbed for a closed loop (recirculating) pump for bubble production and a secondary feed for throughput of water. Protein skimmers with wood air diffusers introduce more air flow and with smaller bubbles than needlewheel, pinwheel, and venturi aspirated skimmers. The air-driven diffuser skimmer in the skimmer test I sited gave the same results as the downdraft and needlewheel skimmers in the test.

Lastly sumps should be designed to handle the tanks/owners requirement for flow

If you base the design on what you want, then stick with 10x turnover. If you want energy efficiency, better water quality, less noise and micro-bubbles, then size the return pump according to what the filtration requires to operate best.

this is fairly simple and eliminates things like mechanical filtration bypass and would provide adequate contact time for carbon.

No, delivering more water to the sump than the filtration devices require is not simple, it's more complicated and a waste of resources. The only bypass I would recommend is an emergency bypass for the protein skimmer feed incase something gets clogged, but I would have one in place with any drain system that doesn't have an emergency overflow. Todays standards are 20-40 x the volume of the tank in total flow. I go for quality over quantity, but even with the best flow dynamics, you won't achieve this with 10x the volume of the tank.

The worst scenario I come across is what I call a "water mover system". This is a sump with one or two poorly tuned or non-functional filters and lots of water coming and going from the display tank. A lot of resources are used to move the water, but little or no positive gain is achieved. Typically these systems have old carbon that is allowed to leach out any and all TOC (total organic carbon) it has absorbed, UV sterilizers that act only as heaters because the bulbs are expended or burnt out, protein skimmers that don't collect skimmate or sludge in the neck, and refugia that are allowed to overgrow and shadow the lower portions causing a slow unnoticed die-off.

[mr.wilson]

Originally Posted by Mr OM

Dan, if you wanted to remove a film of oil from the surface of a tank of water would you slowly add water to the tank so it comes off the surface slowly and gets caught in a sponge or would you pump it quickly.

The other way to test the theory is to take a small cup and quickly dip it into the tank, then do it again but this time submerge it a millimeter bellow the surface and you will see the surface tension isn't broken as much and water & oil is pulled from a thinner sample, over a greater surface area. You will see it pull water from several feet away.

Having a thin film overflow the surface skimmer will reduce the need for a coast to coast overflow. The best way to test the efficiency of an overflow is to place some flake food at one end of the tank and see if all of it either sinks or gets skimmed within 30 seconds. Any food that gets caught up in the middle, edges or corners means you have dead spots where films will accumulate. These oils are not only bad for water quality, they also diminish lighting intensity, and gas exchange.

[banditpowdercoat]

My coast to coast, in conjunction with the OM 4 way, no dead spots on my waters surface

[mr.wilson]

Originally Posted by banditpowdercoat

My coast to coast, in conjunction with the OM 4 way, no dead spots on my waters surface

Eliminating dead spots on the surface is another one of those details that makes a huge difference at no cost or compromise.

[sphelps]

Good points and good information there Mr. Wilson. I agree that the best skimmer design is based on recirculating counter current but of course it is a simple option and not a requirement (just like everything else). Recirculating skimmers, on average, cost double and not everyone should consider modifying there skimmers, this is not a simple modification for most. Drilling the expensive acrylic body can often result in fracture and voided warranty.

I wouldn't personally ever setup a skimmer to be fed by a siphon over a pump, in theory the perfect siphon will deliver consistent flow but in practice it's not the case and if flow is suddenly increased a big mess will exist. But that doesn't mean it can't be done, I simply don't see the benefit and wouldn't recomend it, however everyone's thoughts are different.

Moving a lot of flow through the sump has many benefits, of course so does moving little flow. It's important to remember it's not a simple science and there are many ways to skin a cat. I won't go into too much of my reasoning again but I will say real experience and evidence trumps theory. I believe that the best resource for this can be found in the RC site where every month some of the worlds best tanks are showcased and described. There you will find almost all tanks showcased run return flows around 5-10x display volume, if not more. For me it's hard to argue with success, they got to be doing something right.

You're obviously a smart guy and you have experience in aquarium design but we definitely have some differences in opinion and what we consider simple, which of course is a good thing
I also noticed you're new to this site (WELCOME BTW ), perhaps you could provide a link to your tank(s) or some of the work you've done. I always like to see the work of others who offer different approaches.

[mr.wilson]

Originally Posted by sphelps

Drilling the expensive acrylic body can often result in fracture and voided warranty.

I know, most people would rather do their own dentistry than drill into a new protein skimmer

I wouldn't personally ever setup a skimmer to be fed by a siphon over a pump, in theory the perfect siphon will deliver consistent flow but in practice it's not the case and if flow is suddenly increased a big mess will exist.

Never say never. Technology and methodology is always adapting and evolving. If a sudden increase or decrease of flow ever occurred I would spin it as "intermittent wet skimmate to remove strongly hydrophilic proteins"

Moving a lot of flow through the sump has many benefits

Such as...

It's important to remember it's not a simple science and there are many ways to skin a cat. I won't go into too much of my reasoning again but I will say real experience and evidence trumps theory.

You haven't gone into any details other than "everyone else is doing it", and from my experience they are not all doing it. In my travels I see 3-5x the volume of the tank to be the common practice for return pumps. Apart from theory, in practice I use 3-5x the volume with a total tank flow rate of about 20x the total volume.

Dr. Stephen Spotte said it best "The successful maintenance of a seawater aquarium is mostly witchcraft mixed with a little science. In this book I have attempted to describe the science, but with the realization that understanding the witchcraft might be more useful."

Unless you care to share some of your witchcraft, we are stuck with my science

I believe that the best resource for this can be found in the RC site where every month some of the worlds best tanks are showcased and described.

I contribute regularly to RC threads, but I have never bothered to read more than one or two TOTM profiles. I don't find them to be completely honest or particularly reflective.

There you will find almost all tanks showcased run return flows around 5-10x display volume, if not more. For me it's hard to argue with success, they got to be doing something right.

There is no cause and effect of what you are claiming. If sure most of the tanks were glass rather than acrylic and used metallic pumps rather than magnet coupled ones, but this doesn't offer empirical evidence of anything. If you look at the TOTM historically you will see an evolution of technology and methodology. To deny this is to deny progress, and that is what I see with your opinion.

You're obviously a smart guy and you have experience in aquarium design but we definitely have some differences in opinion and what we consider simple, which of course is a good thing

I'm more experienced than smart, but I'm getting there. I have the advantage of 30 years of mistakes to learn from. I'm done making most of them

I also noticed you're new to this site (WELCOME BTW ), perhaps you could provide a link to your tank(s) or some of the work you've done. I always like to see the work of others who offer different approaches.

I'm active on a few sites, so I decided to divert some of my time over to this forum. This forum seems more active than the other Canadian site I belong to that I won't mention

I don't expect anyone to do a 180 and follow my advice, and what I said last year was as different from today as today's will be from next year's. I participate on these forums to learn and share what I have learned. I get inspiration from others and new insight into old questions.

I didn't come here to pick a fight, but it looks like I landed in the middle of one. Don't take anything I have said personally. It's all in good fun.