Let's talk about water quality in an SPS tank.

[Travis]

FWIW, you can get a Hanna colorimeter and 100 reagents for just under $200. That comes out to about $2 per test. When you run out of reagents you just purchase another 100 pack for around $20. Then you are down to about $.20 per test. If you plan to use it a lot it may be more cost effective in the long run to go with a Hanna.

With the Deltec/Merck, do you need to purchase a new kit every time or can you just get the reagents? If the latter, how much for the reagants and how many tests do you get from them?

[vair]

http://www.deltecusa.us/aquariummedi...atetestkit.php

Dave

[Fliger]

A friend has that colorimeter and it is cool. When my Deltec kit runs out I'll decide which to buy. I'm not sure, but I think you have to buy a whole new kit every time - but I really like the kit.

One thing is for sure, the Salifert test kit is rather useless for a reef tank, IME. And I love Salifert.

I do also agree with JBNY the the Deltec FR509 is a nice piece of equipment. The TLF Phosban reactor is improved, but its still not really in the same league as the Deltec. I hate the TLF sponges.

[melev]

Why do you guys not like the Salifert kit? Have you told Habib this so he can make any necessary adjustments? Paying $15 for that kit vs $200 for the one you guys are suggesting is a tough pill to swallow.

[wfgworks]

You dont have to buy a whole new Deltec PO4 Kit when you run out. Doug sells seperate refills depending on what you run out of.

[Hef]

It's just that the PO4 and in my opinion, the NO3 kits are way inferior to the more definitive read Ca, Alk, and MG kits that Salifert makes.
I've been testing for 5 years with a Salifert test kit, and I dont think I've ever seen any reading of PO4 on a test. I'm not nieve enough to think I dont have any, I just cant see any color change on the test. On the NO3 test now, you are looking through I think 1ml of water from the side. It just seems very inacurate.

[wfgworks]

What do you guys think of the MRC Fluidized Reactors for Carbon or a GFO?

I can understand certain technology when it comes to Protein skimmers and Cacium reactors, but a Fluidized reactor seems pretty basic with the upflow design.

[Fliger]

Melev - I just find it hard to read, and get inconsistant readings. The graduations of the Deltec kit are much smaller, and leave little doubt. It is $100, and is good for 100 tests. I think the Salifert kit is about $20 and its good for about 50 tests. So really its $40 vs $100 and I think its a very well spent sixty bucks.

Cool news wftworks. I hate your avatar. I flew to KC for the KC/Philly game. I'm in therapy for it. ;-)

[dgasmd]

Originally posted by Travis
FWIW, you can get a Hanna colorimeter and 100 reagents for just under $200.

Can you provide us with a link to the colorimeter you are suggesting?

[melev]

Originally posted by Hef
It's just that the PO4 and in my opinion, the NO3 kits are way inferior to the more definitive read Ca, Alk, and MG kits that Salifert makes.
I've been testing for 5 years with a Salifert test kit, and I dont think I've ever seen any reading of PO4 on a test. I'm not nieve enough to think I dont have any, I just cant see any color change on the test. On the NO3 test now, you are looking through I think 1ml of water from the side. It just seems very inacurate.

Hef, how about I send you some of my reef water, so you can test that? About two months ago, PO4 was 3.0. As of last Saturday, it was .1 finally. I'd love to have your problem, seeing a reading of 0 all the time.

Hey, I've got a better idea. Try feeding your tank occasionally. (I'm known for heavy feedings.)

[Travis]

melev, IMO and IME, the Salifert kit is only sensitive enough to tell you if you have a PO4 problem. It will not pick up low levels. FWIW, I've used the kit for several years. The only time I get any color change at all was with my DSB tank that had algae growing like crazy. Even then it was only reading .015. With my current tank I can't even get it to change color and I know my PO4's are not really 0, probably not even close.

wfgworks, how much are the Deltec kit refills and how many tests are they good for? I used to run the larges sized MRC reactor on my tank. I ran 1 L of Rowaphos in it and I never had a problem with it. I ended up selling it as I decided to stop running GFO's as I didn't see it benefitting me. I agree with you that, for the most part, a fluidized reactor is a fluidized reactor. As long as it has bottom up flow it should be fine.

dgasmd, The only person I know of that is getting them and selling them to us hobbiests at retail prices is Madison Bellanger. His screen name is OUinLA. You can PM him over on Z.... .com but I think he is in the middle of moving right now so may not be able to answer right away.

[wrassie86]

I have/had a newer salifert po4 kit that always read 0.i went out and bought a AQ po4 test kit and got a reading 1.0 then took action.the AQ now reads 0 and the salifert went in the trash.

[wfgworks]

How many GPH are you guys running through your Phosban reactors or whatever type reactor you are using for GFO?

[melev]

Mine is very slow. I have the ballvalve closed most of the way, and the powerhead is a MJ 600. The flow is trickling out of the reactors.

[wfgworks]

Travis

The refills (which includes both sets of chemicals) are $42 and give you 100 tests.

[JB NY]

Originally posted by wfgworks
What do you guys think of the MRC Fluidized Reactors for Carbon or a GFO?

IMO it's too big for what it needs to to. That thing is 6" in diameter. With the amount of GFO I use, I only fill my 3" tube about 3/4" with GFO and anther 2"-3" with carbon. In my system a 6" chamber is just to large.

So IMO it's an expensive solution that is over built for what it's used for.

[Fliger]

About 125-150gph seems to work really well for me in both reactors. Sometimes you can get the media to "roll" which keeps it from clumping.

For scale here is a FR509 sitting next to a Phosban reactor when I was setting everything up. I use the Phosban reactor for carbon, work great. The 509 IMO is much better for ROWA, if you don't mind paying the extra dough.



And on the other end of scale .....

[Fliger]

BTW that's great news on the refills. $140 for 200 tests is very well worth it IMO.

[fishgeeksrus]

Just a quick question...

Pordon my ignorance.

If you buy the ROWAphos in bulk, will it exhaust itself while sitting on a shelf.

[Larry Combs]

As long as you dont let it dry out, it should be fine. You can always take a damp sponge and keep it in the container with the ROWA as a precautionary. HTH

[fishgeeksrus]

Yes, thanks

[THP]

Originally posted by JB NY
I'm a big believer of lots of flow through a refugium if you are using it solely for nutrient export via macro algae. In the past I had it set up with not a lot of flow and poorly designed so the surface of the water always had scum on the top as well as cyano growing in the tank. I redesigned the refugium and removed the substrate and went bare bottomed with only cheatomorpha algae in the tank. The result has been a very clean refugium that allows me to grow macro algae with none of the associated cyano or micro algae problems I had in the past. IMO the slow flow allows the nutrients to become a sort of sink that cyano and other micro algae thrive in. Also, once a week I siphon out any detritus that settles in the bottom of the refugium.

I also removed all traces of caulerpa from the tank. After looking into the matter and speaking with people such as Calfo and Borneman I can to the conclusion that caulerpa is just way too toxic to be in a reef tank. So only cheatomorpha for me from now on.

IMO if the macro is not growing the nutrient levels are not high enough, which is a good thing. I used to dose iron to help the macro grow. But I don't anymore. I feel if the macro is growing it's removing stuff from the water, if it's not, the water is clean enough right now.

Just a stupid qestion but being new to refugiums, I wonder if they are necessary at all. It seems that once the water quality has been reached, the refugium can barely survive. Any comments on this? Not trying to challange here but just curious on this topic.

[LobsterOfJustice]

Thanks to new technologies and husandry, refugiums aren't needed. They are certianly beneficial in some setups, but are not for every tank.

Skimmers today are much more efficient than ever before. Couple that with reefers today using higher flow to keep wastes and detritus in suspension, and you wont have high enough nutrients to grow algae. I've tried a few times, but have never been able to setup a successful ball of cheato, in a traditional refugium, BB, or otherwise.

[MiddletonMark]

Refuigiums [IMO] can have a number of purposes.

Perhaps in terms of nutrient-export via algae they may not be needed for some, as you mention.

But, in terms of providing a safe haven for lots of pods/life that can supply the tank with natural food/etc ... I feel that there would be benefit. [esp for heavy fish loads, anthias, mandarins/etc]

[THP]

Originally posted by JB NY
I'm a big believer of lots of flow through a refugium if you are using it solely for nutrient export via macro algae. In the past I had it set up with not a lot of flow and poorly designed so the surface of the water always had scum on the top as well as cyano growing in the tank. I redesigned the refugium and removed the substrate and went bare bottomed with only cheatomorpha algae in the tank. The result has been a very clean refugium that allows me to grow macro algae with none of the associated cyano or micro algae problems I had in the past. IMO the slow flow allows the nutrients to become a sort of sink that cyano and other micro algae thrive in. Also, once a week I siphon out any detritus that settles in the bottom of the refugium.

I also removed all traces of caulerpa from the tank. After looking into the matter and speaking with people such as Calfo and Borneman I can to the conclusion that caulerpa is just way too toxic to be in a reef tank. So only cheatomorpha for me from now on.

IMO if the macro is not growing the nutrient levels are not high enough, which is a good thing. I used to dose iron to help the macro grow. But I don't anymore. I feel if the macro is growing it's removing stuff from the water, if it's not, the water is clean enough right now.

Just a stupid qestion but being new to refugiums, I wonder if they are necessary at all. It seems that once the water quality has been reached, the refugium can barely survive. Any comments on this? Not trying to challange here but just curious on this topic.