Tropical Fish Aquariums & Equip Marine Fish & Marine Inverts Malawi Tanganyikan Cichlids
Cichlids Discus Goldfish, Koi & Ponds Retailers & Services ALL ADS By County
|
Viewed: 1420 -- Replies: 61 | ||||||||
PM | All Topics | General | Cichlids | Marine | Coldwater | Tanks/Equipment | Diseases | Members | |||||||||
| Posted | What Filter Material R We All Using |
| 12-09-2006 16:29 by keith t |
Just wondering what peeps uses what in there external filters,
I run 2 filters on one tank, in them i have coarse sponges, fine, sponges, greenx ( removes phosphates and nitrates ), ceramic rings, activated carbon and filter wool. |
| 12-09-2006 16:41 by Malawimad |
I use the following
Malawi tank Fine sponges Filter wool Carbon Ceramics Discus Filter wool Filter sponge Carbon Peat extract (trapped in a net bag) |
| 12-09-2006 18:41 by wymcot |
Dont waste money or space on carbon, it just isnt worth it given the ineffectiveness of the stuff.
All filtration is based around mechanical filtration (sponges etc) and Biological (bacteriological growth), carbon is used in some cases as a chemical filtration method but its effectiveness is so short (a day or less) it not worth bothering with execpt in some rare circumstances. Assuming we all know about the nitrogen cycle, this is entirely based on the effects of bacteria which consume and convert the various elements, so giving them as much growing space as possible is the main aim. Theres plenty of media out there for bilogical growth and unfortunately Malawimad's Discus set- up does not afford that |
| 12-09-2006 19:21 by keith t |
wymcot i have heard this about carbon as well but its only been on this forum, why if it is so inaffective that it it used by so many aquarists and is sold in all lfs, and also sometimes comes with new aquarium filters. If its only good for a day why do people use it.
|
| 12-09-2006 19:33 by Phill Austen |
I think carbon has it's uses, yes it's expensive but provided you use enough it is great in quarantine tanks and for removing meds. |
| 12-09-2006 20:27 by wymcot |
Carbon is sold because its cheap and gets a very high margin.
Phil has suggested a couple of uses but as standard filter media your wasting your time and filter efficiency |
| 12-09-2006 20:27 by kevin george |
sponges ceramic and filter wool |
| 12-09-2006 20:33 by wymcot |
Kevin, why sponges & wool, why not one or the other and ceramic, ceramic, although I preffer lava rock to ceramic as it has a far greater area for biological growth |
| 12-09-2006 20:41 by heros hero |
why not sponges and wool? Sponge for mechanical, ceramic for biological, wool as a final polisher. Makes sense to me |
| 12-09-2006 20:52 by Jake Casson |
So what do you think i should put in my 14 litre eheim bucket bad boys (have 2 2250s)?  |
| 12-09-2006 21:04 by wymcot |
Top be clear, sponges etc are OK, just look at Jewel filters. However this type of media requires regular cleaning and wool regular replacement. Each time you do either your destroying huge colonies of bacteria and so potentially reducing filter performance.
Even cleaning sponges in tank water washes away millions of bacteria, which leaves those remaining having to grow and replenish the colony, only to be washed away again. So the more biological media you have, the less bacteria loss. This type of media only need periodic rinsing which does not have the same effect as squeezing sponges to get them clean. |
| 12-09-2006 21:06 by wymcot |
Jake, the choice of media is yours but take time to read all suggestions and form your own views.
I would strongly suggest you do a bit of web research on how filters work and the types of media available before going with any one suggestion made on here. |
| 13-09-2006 08:20 by Malawimad |
Wymcot, What did you mean by my set up cant afford that, can you clarify mate?
Dont get u at all! |
| 13-09-2006 10:09 by Alan |
ehfisubstrat and fluidised sand nothing else in freshwater unless its a small tank they just have a sponge then. |
| 13-09-2006 10:13 by Malawimad |
Alan ? |
| 13-09-2006 10:14 by wymcot |
malawimad - what I meant by that was the media you are using in your discus filter does not afford/allow a large area for bacteria growth.
Nothing to do with your ability to buy the stuff |
| 13-09-2006 10:16 by wymcot |
Just noticed on your other thread that you do not have an external on the tank so forget all of the above as Jewel Internal Filters are useless for anything other than sponges etc as they just aint big enough for suitable ammounts of biological media |
| 13-09-2006 10:18 by wymcot |
Alan mentions fludised sand filters.
These have to be the ultmate biological filtration and highly recommended to anyone I've got two running on my 7' tank |
| 13-09-2006 10:20 by Malawimad |
I wouldn't say uselss Wymcot, I suppose its all personal preference, Alot of peeps on here as well as me rate juwel internals, bare in mind its only 125ltrs, Which i feel the juwel internal handles pretty well, Parimaters remain stable, fish seem happy, nitrates never seem to go sky high!
So based on that you cant really say its useless mate! |
| 13-09-2006 11:20 by wymcot |
But you only have a few fish in there so I wouldnt expect them to be anything other than OK, however theres also a lot of peeps out there who heavy stocking levels, and its in those circumstances they become useless compared to having a good external.
By the way, I'm speaking from experience here having had a jewel myself in the past, needless to say I took out the internal pretty quickly |
| 13-09-2006 11:35 by Malawimad |
Well like i said wymcot its personal preference mate, I have 2 Rio 125's, malawi and discuss, the malawi tank has 25 fish in it the filter never ever looses pressure and only ever give the filter a clean every four weeks, and even on the fourth week it maintains pressure. I've had lots of different filters myself and i've found that the juwel filters suit the tank there housed in!
I also find it easier than having hoses and leads everywhere, if for some reason i started losing fish for no reason then i would look at changing it, but up to now touch wood never had an issue with juwel filters, and until i do i wouldn't consider changing them! But as i said Wymoct, You may have had a bad experience with them, i haven't, i actually like the juwel filters! But, Personal preference! |
| 13-09-2006 11:48 by Malawimad |
Wymcot, Just done some maths at this end...
My juwel internal filter is 2" wide, 3" deep, 17" high, that 102" cubic inches, now compared to most standard size xternals, fluval for expample, the cubic "/volume is roughly the same, so the area for bioligical growth is roughly the same! |
| 13-09-2006 11:53 by wymcot |
Depends on the size of the external, the lower range Fluvals anre not much better than what you have in the Jewel, based as you rightly say, on thier size.
Nice to see you went to the bother of actually working that out though, even if it was only to try and prove me wrong |
| 13-09-2006 11:57 by Malawimad |
Wymoct, I value your advice dont get me wrong, I maybe slightly biased towards juwel cos like i say never had an issue mate, It just started to rack my brains when you mentioned the area, I'm an estimator for a construction company, curtain walling, cladding, ribbon windows, aluminium doors etc etc etc
So working out area's and volumes is my thing, Been a good thread this mate! But wouldn't try to make u silly mate, You know your stuff and would never dispute that! |
| 13-09-2006 12:16 by wymcot |
Lets hope our discussion helps some others to understand a little more about various methods adopted with filtration
Like yourself, I wasnt having a go at you either |
| 13-09-2006 12:20 by wymcot |
Looking back over some of my comments I can see where there may be some confusion over area.
This comes in two parts, the physical area for placing the media into, and the area for bacteriological growth which can be different in some ways For an example, if we take the bacterial growth area of one ceramic ring, and compare this to a similar sized piece of lava rock, the actual growth area would be far greater in the latter given its more porous nature |
| 13-09-2006 12:24 by darren653 |
ive got a fluidized bed filter but the pumps in the actual tank on mine and the sponge keeps getting blocked up. Would be good if i could put a pump for it at the end ofa sump so waters clear.
How are yours set up wymcot? |
| 13-09-2006 12:27 by wymcot |
Mine are each plumbed into the outlet of two of my externals.
The flow is regulated via an inline valve so that some water from the filter outlet is directed thru the sand bed at the correct flow rate and the rest is just pumped back into the tank as normal |
| 13-09-2006 13:12 by Malawimad |
I was going on cubic inch's of volume, not the substrate, but i can see now what your saying regarding different substrates and volumes/areas..
Inetersting thread this, i'm not going to pretend i know what you and Darren are talkin about becuase i dont, but i'll sit back, read and learn! |
| 13-09-2006 13:15 by Malawimad |
Trying to get my head around this...
If i had a brick that was 12x12x12, and a sponge that was 12x12x12 the sponge would have more area for bacterial growth due to material its made from? Am i right so far? So, If i crammed my internal juwel with ceramics only, no sponge... it wouldn't have a good area for bacterial growth, but if i had sponge only then the area for bacterial growth is greater! This is head mashing stuff this!  |
| 13-09-2006 13:20 by wymcot |
Point one is correct the sponge is better than the brick as it is more porous and as such has more spaces for the bacteria to grow
Point 2, in a filter that size yes, but you have to regulary clean the sponge so masses of bacteria are destroyed every time Problem with Jewels is that they are not designed for biological filtration but that doesnt mean that cant be used for it. The only problem is the area available for biological media which in all honesty isnt much |
| 13-09-2006 13:23 by wymcot |
Bottom line is to give as much space for a large colony of bacteria to develop without it constsntly being disturbed by cleaning |
| 13-09-2006 13:24 by Malawimad |
So Wymoct/Darren, are we saying that if you have small filters (ineternal or external) its best to use a material that is not dense i.e sponge wool etc to increase the bacterial growth area...? |
| 13-09-2006 13:26 by Malawimad |
I agree Wymcot, Its got me thinking now, Considering removing all ceramics and just having sponge, then reducing my filter clean out to every two weeks instead of four, what you think? |
| 13-09-2006 13:29 by Malawimad |
So, In my juwel filter i have to plastic U section which encase the media, if i was to leave one pad out of the bottom section, would this give me a greater area for bacterial growth or would i be taking media away which is beneficial? |
| 13-09-2006 13:59 by vu1974 |
The other important point is the flow rate through the filter media giving time for the bacteria to break down the waste. Obviously if you have a larger biological surface area (i.e sponge vs brick...don't remember my LFS selling bricks as filter material ) with all else being equal then it will be more effective. |
| 13-09-2006 14:16 by Malawimad |
|
| 13-09-2006 14:58 by wymcot |
malawimad - I shouldnt get too hung up on this. It started with your Discus set-up and the Jewel filtration is obviously doing the job in your case
As far as full mechanical/bilogical filtration is concerned, my personal view is that internals cannot achieve the optimum results when compared with externals. For a heavily stocked tanks, internals are far from the best option. Even with lower stocking levels/externals, you would benefit from far less filter maintenance, and far less disruption to the bacteria. Is your Malawi set-up run internals, because they are one very good reason for having externals given the bioload they produce |
| 13-09-2006 15:13 by Malawimad |
Yes my malawi tank is on an internal Juwel same as the discus set up, just slightly different substrates!
|
| 13-09-2006 15:31 by wymcot |
Do you have water quality issues with the Malawi tank?
Just thought, this could keep this thread going for ever |
| 13-09-2006 15:36 by Malawimad |
Yeh, Malawi tank sort of looks after itself mate to be honest, But must say if i forget to go the weekly water change then yeh Nitrates, amonia etc are sky high, But as long as i stick to my 30% every sunday (weekly), and my 30% including clean out (gravel hoover, glass, filters rinsed), then everything stays perfect mate!
I've never lost a fish in the malawi set up, the only time i did was when i fed my yellow labs bloodworm, woke up the morning after and they we're dead, but never ever lost anything through bad water! PH 8-8.3 Nitrates generaly less than 25ppm! |
| 13-09-2006 15:37 by Malawimad |
This is it wymcot!
 |
| 13-09-2006 15:39 by Malawimad |
As you can see the internal is powering away!
I've noticed too, on my mates tanks, when you have poor filtration it gives the alage a chance to settle on rocks and the gravel, but i never have this problem, to be truthfull the malawi tank is the easiest tank i've ever kept and its never thrown major problems at me! Just general maintenance as normal keeps it running sweet! |
| 13-09-2006 15:40 by Malawimad |
Meant to say 30% (Gravel hoover, glass filters, Fortnightly that 1 mate, but every week without fail i do 30% change! |
| 13-09-2006 15:54 by wymcot |
Your very lucky with your water paremeters although the essence of a Malawi tank is algae given its Mbuna basic diet
I do 60% changes every week and my filtration system circulates around 5 x tank vol per hour,but youve seen my tank posted on here before |
| 13-09-2006 16:00 by Malawimad |
Lots of peeps have said that to be honest, I've got a good set up with the malawis, There is also an air curtain in there which has improved flow thus improving filtration and surface movement!
Saying that Wymoct i have really good tap water too, I always supplement Mbuna's diet with cucumber (every 2 days) and the odd pea on a sunday afternoon... Cant say i've seen your tank Wymoct, Post a pic mate lets have a look. |
| 13-09-2006 16:32 by keith t |
Wymcot u say u have fluidized sand bed filters running from your externals, sand bed filters are the best for biological growth as long as they are running, having them on your externals means you have to turn it off for cleaning filters. This kills all the bacteria in your sand bed filter instantly as the need to run continuly |
| 13-09-2006 16:46 by wymcot |
Kieth - the vast majority of bacteria will survive for up to an hour or so, not sure where you got you info from |
| 13-09-2006 16:53 by keith t |
thought it was a well known fact they have to be running all the time, will try and find something on it for you. |
| 13-09-2006 17:01 by wymcot |
Kieth, been there and done it, the bacteria will start to decay every time water flow is turned off but the majority of bacteria will survive and quickly re-colonise once water flow is resumed |
| 13-09-2006 20:12 by darren653 |
blimey you lot virtually live on here!:o |
| 13-09-2006 20:15 by keith t |
thats coz im married, if im on here it means i dont have to communicate with the wife |
| 13-09-2006 20:15 by darren653 |
the bacteria will only die due to lack of oxygen it is recieving. I agree though that the time it takes to clean a filter wont do much damage. If it was that bad then all you bacteria in your external would die too - that wouldnt be good.
your externals quite powerful then wymcot? |
| 13-09-2006 20:16 by darren653 |
lol i see where you coming from now keith |
| 13-09-2006 20:18 by keith t |
slightly differant to filter darren, the bacteria die quicker in a sand bed filter due to the lack of oxygen available when the sand compacts at the bottom. |
| 13-09-2006 20:20 by darren653 |
just to add quickly too; ive got a trigon 350 with the jumbo jewel filter on it and fluidized bed. Havent cleaned them out for months though because im doing pretty much daily water changes lately. The fluidized is still running smoothly though.
Thats one thing about the juwel filters, the sponges get blocked so quickly that unless your constantly cleaning them, they get so blocked that the water pretty much bypasses them anyway (rendering them useless) |
| 13-09-2006 20:24 by darren653 |
yeh i see what you mean keith. Never really thought of that. When i get my next big tank (hopefully) i'll move the bed filter to that and run it from the end of my sump with its own pump so its constantly going.
I've got another thought on filters but ive got to pick up the mrs and put nipper to bed so i'll be back. This subject really gets the brain ticking ddont it? |
| 13-09-2006 22:56 by wymcot |
Malawimad - unable to post pic due hardware problems but here a link to it on another site
www.malawikeepers.com/index.php?ind=gallery&op=foto_show&ida=242 |
| 14-09-2006 11:01 by Alan |
Just to add to the surface area debate you mentioned a brick and a sponge and the sponge having the larger surface area I disagree.
A brick is porous and an average brick can hold 1 pint of water could a ponge hold a pint of water? Unlikely I would say the brick has the larger surface area. When comparing filters the size of the filter is irrelevant what is important is the potential surface area of the filter when the specified media is used. To give you an idea of potential surface area on average 1 litre of Ehfisubstrat has a surfave area of 450 m2 quite a lot considerably more than a comparable sponge but not as much as fluidised sand bed. From talking to friends and other hobbyist I have come to the conclusion Juwel filters are very good when the tank is stocked sensibly as is dictated within the hobby in Germany I believe the smallest tank legally allowed in germany is the smallest Juwel tank made and in the hobby in Germany you would seldom see an over stocked tank. Incidentally I have a fluidised sand bed filter that is about half the size of the juwel filter described above an can provide ample filtration for a 200 imp gallon aquarium but I never depend on one filter and certainly no on a fluidised bed as they are notoriously unstable and can easily crash so this is backed up by an old fluval 303 full of ehfi substrat and I never filter a large tank with a single system so this is further backed up by an eheim 2250 with about 8 litres of Ehfisubstrat in it the eheim alone has a bacterial surface area of 3,600 m2 I suspect the fluidised sand bed has a simialr surface area so that equates to 7,200 m2 plus the eheim holds about 1.5 litres of ehfisubstrat so that is a further 675 m2 totalling 7,875 m2 for bacteria to colonise that does not include tank decor and substrate. The size of the actual filter itself is irrelevant the relevant points are flow rate and surface area of the media. Personally if I ran a juwel filter I would look at way of replacing the sponges with a more effective media such as ehfi substrate perhaps a course foam at the entry point of the water followed by a mesh bag full of ehfi substrate then a finer mesh sponge after that. The course foam would collect big debris and prevent clogging of the ehfisubstrat and the ehfisubstrat would provide a huge surface area for bacteria to grow on and then the finer mesh foam would give a final polish to the water. However if I only had big polluters I would opt for fully biological so just a mesh bag full of ehfi substrat and I would clean it in tank water monthly. That would be more than sufficient. Just my opinion though hope someone gets something out of it. |
| 14-09-2006 11:10 by keith t |
Seems good advice to me alan |
| 14-09-2006 15:26 by darren653 |
yeh sounds good to me too.
Alan - are you externals full of just ehfisubstrat and no foam or filter wool etc? Also what are the best material bags/mesh to put the media in? |
| 15-09-2006 10:00 by Alan |
I used to have big polluters in the tank so there are no foam insert at all just the ehfisubstrat.
As far as bags go eheim sell mesh bags which are ideal certainly a neccessity with large amounts of ehfisubstrat such as the 8 or so litres of the stuff I have in my eheim 2250 or alternatively nick a pair of your other half's tights they work just as well with small volumes of ehfisubstrat just watch for ladders |
 |
|
NEW REPLIES ARE NOW CLOSED ON THIS FORUM
We invite you to join the NEW Aquarist Classifieds Fishkeeping Forum HERE
Your contributions to this forum are greatly appreciated.
This forum will be retained in archive status for reference.
Previous |
Fish Biz |
Sitemap |
Links |
Clubs |
Webmaster |
Our Sponsors |
ShopAds |
Directory
Visits
Enquire About Banners
| ||||
