Tropical Fish Forums

[temp2]

I have finished designing a external filter system, it has an altomatic shut off and everything. but when I asked about it the guy said that there is no need to have a UV steroliser (unless you have a invertebrate and/or coral aquarium) because if the water is too clean, the slightest desease will kill off the whole populations. Is he right because I am concious of marine aquariums being expensive and I don't want to loose my first fish(s). the fish are occellaris clownfish.
_________________
ha ha this log in is only available until the other is up and running

[dale]

Hi Temp2,
U.V. units have their uses but aren't really neccisary for well run home systems. The two things one might want to kill off are free floating algae and parasites, both of which can be controlled by proper quarentine and nutrient control procedures. They will also kill off any free floating cope/amphripods which may be detrimental to some dependant fish species.
In a reef setting, U.V. sterilizers also have the disadvantage of killing off rotifers and phytoplankton, both food sources for corals and polyps.
LFS's often use U.V. units because they have so much livestock come and go that they cannot employ proper Q procedures.

When you say external filtration what do you mean? What components or stategies are you considering and how large is your tank?
Just curious.

Hope this helps.
_________________
Intelligence is not having all the answers; it's knowing how to think!

[temp2]

It is a home made one which is going to be constructed out of an old tank, it is going to have multiple conpartments (each compartment is separated by glass) to filter the water.
_________________
ha ha this log in is only available until the other is up and running

[Oscer]

I agree with Dale

As Dale has said, A UV sterilizer kills floating algae and parasites; these are the main "good points" of a UV (it only performs this task while the bulb/s are
_________________
Years of fish keeping = Good advice

[temp2]

No sorry it is still on the drawing board.

what it does is it drains water from a fish tank, through a water flow restricter and then into the first chamber where it is poured over ceramic or crushed coral, then it moves under the first sheet of glass, dams up against another and flows over it into the filter floss, flows under the third sheet, dams up against another sheet whiles flowing through acitve carbon, the UV camber is nexted, then to a water meter which attaches back up to the water restricter, then the water gets sucked up by a pump and pumped back into the main aquarium.

The guy at the not so local aquarium (the only one that sells marine where I am) said it is neccessary to have a good fitration system and he showed me a filter similar to the one I am building. is this all neccessary? because in a book I've read it said you just need a biological filter and a mechanical and you'll be fine. and another said I only need a biological filter system. which one is right?

The main tank is going to be 250L
_________________
ha ha this log in is only available until the other is up and running

[dale]

Hi temp2,

For ease of reference, the tank holding this equipment is generally refered to as a sump. The LFS worker was right when he said you need a good filtration system for S.W. but some of your choices, and the way they are arranged, could be more effective.

The following is based on a set up employing live rock as a form of biological filtration (there is a section in the article linked below that explains live rock and its superiority over other forms of biological filtration).

First, let me say; the simplest form of sump, that will also be quite functional, is a tank with a skimmer in. Water in, skimmer, water out. Everything beyond that is just an elaboration. How fancy you get is up to you.

But... if you like to tinker:

The first stage of filtration in the sump should be mechanical (a sponge or filter floss mesh). This traps out large chunks of detritus and should be easily removable for cleaning.

The second stage should be a good quality protein skimmer. Though many new S.W. keepers quibble about the initial cash outlay to purchase one, it will provide the best filtration possible. If you calculate the eventual cost of fish and corals, and the risk of losing them to poor filtration, the outlay will seem reasonable.

The third stage could be a refugium, a chamber where macroalgae is grown and harvested to remove nitrates. This is optional but worth researching.

The last stage should be chemical (your carbon and/or phosphate removers). This provides the cleanest water to the carbon and keeps it from clogging so fast. I don't use carbon myself (the effectiveness of it is shortlived) but others do so I'll leave that one up to personal preference.

Here is a link to an article describing a filtration regime for a small skimmerless tank. While it may not directly apply to your set up there are some helpful sections in it that describe what we are trying to achieve in the tank, filtration wise.

http://www.aquahobby.com/articles/e_small_aquarium_filter.php

and a link to my own display/sump building project. Again, it may not be what you envision but there are some considerations and calculations that will be applicable.

http://www.aquahobby.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=29175

Good luck with your project. Take pictures and post them if possible so others can learn from your experience.
_________________
Intelligence is not having all the answers; it's knowing how to think!

[Oscer]

[geoff]

Hi this is temp 2
the account was only temperary until I got this one working, now that it is, you will be speaking to this account now

I have spoken with a fish breeder (fresh water), he said it is unneccessary to have a sump in an aquarium so small (unless there are marine invertebrates or coral), the best filter needed would be a canister filter. is this correct?
_________________
Knowledge is power. Yeah right.

[dale]

Hi Geoff,

Opinions are like -------. Everbodies got one (including me ). It is important to weigh the experience and reasoning behind various set ups. I'm not saying right or wrong but ask the breeder how he would cope with the harmful build ups of nitrates and DOC's that will occur with his system. I also spoke to a local LFS staffer that stated they only ran a large cannister on a 200G. heavily stocked tank and only cleaned it out every couple of months. I looked in on his store the other day and his tank had crashed (become completely overrun with algae) so ??? I'm sure his way worked right up to the moment it didn't.

Here is a link to an article I wrote re. running a tank with out a skimmer (and sump). It answers some of your Q's and is what you should, in general, consider if going the sumpless, and I imagine skimmerless route. It's not impossible, and many people do it, but you should understand the limitations imposed by that route and plan accordingly. http://www.aquahobby.com/articles/e_small_aquarium_filter.php

Sumps serve other functions that you should think of:

Holds all your equipment so that your display looks neater.
Can house macro algae or a DSB for nitrate control.
Can house sensitive species, extra liverock or populations of cope/amphipods to sustain specific fish species.
Can house calcium, carbon and phosphate reactors
There's probably more but I'm tired

Either way, consider all the pros and cons. Rather than sump/no sump, I think the bigger question is skimmer/no skimmer. There are threads on the board dealing with this topic.

Hope this helps,
Good luck.
_________________
Intelligence is not having all the answers; it's knowing how to think!

[Oscer]

Hi Geoff

I second everything Dale has said. And Concerning the fish breeder, ask what his setup looks like, how long it has been running and ask him to explain why he uses (or doesn
_________________
Years of fish keeping = Good advice