How often do you guys empty your skimmer cups??????

[cplklegg]

Nice analogy EdKruzel, luv your Diceramphiprion oscellaris too!

[rkelman]

My CSS 220 gets emptied weekly. If i skim dry its only 1/3 full. The collection cup on the CSS is really big. I get alot of build up in the throat (about 1/8") that I have to clean out every time. If I skim wet it fills the cup in a week.

[Aquarist007]

Very nice post Edkruzel-----big question then--how do you rate the effeciency of the skimmer for your system----I know many reefers are like myself--just went on the skimmer the LFS recommended for their system.

(believe me noobie niavity at the time)

So this skimmer has been chugging along for a couple of years--but since then I have added a refugium, deep sand bed, lots of live rock in the sump, two phosban reactors, etc etc----
at the same time the water column has been increased by 60 gals from when I purchased the skimmer---
probably masking now whether that is the skimmmer for my system or not.

[allengy]

I have had my present skimmer for just two weeks now. It looks like at its current setting I'll have to dump the cup about once a week. The cup is pretty big. I noticed that the foam doesn't collapse when the neck gets dirty like my past skimmers did.

[EdKruzel]

Originally posted by capn_hylinur
big question then--how do you rate the effeciency of the skimmer for your system

Good Question

For many years manufacturers placed outlandish ratings on their skimmers (they're in sales, what do you expect?). Two older models I used and really liked was the Lifereef and a Turbofloater, each rated for a 250gal system. Both were well built and performed fine, but could only handle on a realistic bioload of about a 100-125 gallon system. Due to word of mouth through boards like RC and just the internet in general, manufacturers have taken a little more responsibility with their advertising. Euro's, ASM, Octo and a few like models give more accurate abilities.

Now to be fair, there are numerous variables when selecting a skimmer beyond tank size. For the tank size itself always be safe and assume a heavy bioload. For certain reef setups and lagoon biotopes I wouldn't run a skimmer at all or a very minimal one (maybe). For a FO even with LR I'd double the tank size or more for the efficiency rating (250gal FO = 500+gal skimmer). Other forms of filtration will assist or work against your skimmer. Remember your skimmer is used primarily to remove dissolved organics, but most forget the amount of added oxygen it can add to the system which is a great benefit.

Here is how I selected my new setup:
The tank is a 58RR with heavy internal circulation.
Primary occupants - RBTA 2 Clowns
Secondary - Monti's and smaller LPS, ornamental inverts (shrimp).
DSB
100gal sump (about 40gal water)
filter sock(s)

I won't need a refugium because I won't have anything in the tank to disrupt the DSB, and although the water volume will be near 100gallons, the bioload will be moderate for a 58. The added volume dispurses nutrient build up. I still chose the Octopus NW150 which will easily handle a heavier bioload in the size system I'm setting up.

It's easier to over-skim and do small water changes once a month to replenish needed minerals as opposed to under-skim and do large water changes often while fighting hair algae and cynobacteria.
A tank needs to be stable and balanced; maintenance is the only way to accomplish this, however the closer you get to balance with your setup and equipment, the less maintenance you perform. Less maintenance performed means more time to actually sit back and enjoy your slice of ocean.

[EdKruzel]

Originally posted by cplklegg
luv your Diceramphiprion oscellaris

if you get them angry they charge the glass and crack it.

[JPagliai]

I have the same skimmer as you and I empty the cup once a week, sometimes twice if I accidently over feed that week.

[Mavrk]

In terms of efficiency of the skimmer, I think it also depends on the decision to run wet or dry. For instance, I run my skimmer wet. This is inefficient of me, but has nothing to do with the efficiency of the unit.

I am by no means disagreeing with Ed. I just wanted to point out that just because one is emptying more often does not necessarily mean that the unit they are using is inefficient.

[EdKruzel]

Very true, depending on if you run wet or dry will determine how often you have to dump the cup, but for most applications a thick mud is preferred. Running wet is used for numerous good reasons such as over feedings with high metabolism species or to remove medication. Each hobbyists needs to evaluate their individual system and its needs.

Hopefully some of my general guidelines will help fellow hobbyists make proper choices of equipment. I always hated paying premium prices only to find I needed to upgrade later.

[JPagliai]

I agree Mavrk. Plus, each model of skimmer has a different size cup. The remora pro has a cup that would hold about 20oz, but other skimmers barely hold 8oz. The only way you really know how well a skimmer is doing its job is the results of your nutrient test kits.

[EdKruzel]

Originally posted by JPagliai
I agree Mavrk. Plus, each model of skimmer has a different size cup. The remora pro has a cup that would hold about 20oz, but other skimmers barely hold 8oz. The only way you really know how well a skimmer is doing its job is the results of your nutrient test kits.

No not entirely, skimmer cups are sized to proportion of its ability to efficiently skim (give or take a bit). While test kits are important, you must first be able to read your tank. There are numerous tanks covered in cyno or hair algae, but read zero on nitrates and phosphate. Why? Because the nuisance is absorbing it from the water column as fast as it enters. Every living entity in your system can tell you something about quality if you learn what to look for.

[Aquarist007]

excellent answer to my first question--Ed--thanks

I guess what your saying is that there is not quantitative measurements for deciding if your skimmer is effective or not for your system.
Here is what I am getting at: I have added a refugium since I set up my tank and live rock to the sump. I have also deepened the sand bed in my tank(where possible) to 4 inches.
I am considering turning the main sump into a mud/mangrove system.
How do I determine whether I need that skimmer anymore and or filter sock.
To me the ideal would be for all natural filtration---liverock/deepsand bed in the maintank--to mud refugium
The refug I have set up now could be purely for invert production.

[Aquarist007]

........and I would continue with 20 per cent water changes everytwo weeks and run the phosban and carbon the way I am doing.

[EdKruzel]

There are always elements that need to be factored, but yes you can determine a proper efficiency rating needed for the system you run. Again that's bringing ALL the factors of your system into play.

What you describe is a very complete filtration system and could thrive well without a skimmer, but what I must ask is what do you want to complete with your livestock? By eliminating the skimmer you do provide more nutrients for fauna and other small life like feather dusters. I've had great tanks with and without skimmers, but none of the systems would do as well if the filtration was changed (skimmer/no skimmer).

Eric Borneman is a well known hobbyists and author that has degrees in coral biology. He runs a very nice 1000gal system mainly SPS without a skimmer.

[Aquarist007]

I guess I want a balance, ED. eg I would like to continue using the skimmer but not at the expense of removing the small inverts etc that I am trying to produce. How much danger is there in that?

Maybe its fine now---my parameters are great, the growth of corals fine
as a mechanic used to say--if it ain't broken it don't need fixen

[EdKruzel]

I would leave it; some microfauna will of course be taken out, but as you've already noticed, many survive and thrive in your tank.

[Aquarist007]

thanks--that's the conclusion I was coming to--but it helps to have the mods reinforce it.