Pictures of Bomber's barebottom SPS tank and related equipment

[tankslave]

Originally posted by Bomber
I figured. Plan your vacation after the first cold weather.

Can I come?

[Bomber]

Si.

[boxfishpooalot]

I have always been interested in no sand bed. But, im still skeptical. I need to know information on specific things like ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, phophates and how many fish you have in that tank. Would a bare bottom be able to support my tank with theese fish"
-11 chromis
-1 dog faced puffer
-2 tomato clowns
-1 6" unicorn tang
-1 powder blue tang
-1cleaner wrass
-1yellow tang
-1 regal tang
-naso tang
-1 yellow spotted boxfish
-1 sea urchin(diadema)
-valentini puffer

With 22 fish do you think that a bare-bottom tank would support the amount of ammonia production in a tank with water volume of 135 gallons? Or I would not have enough bacteria and surface area?

[Bomber]

Originally posted by boxfishpooalot
Would a bare bottom be able to support my tank with theese fish"

The question is - would a person be able to get it to the skimmer, turn it over enough, have the right skimmer, and be able to operate that skimmer correctly - to do it.

It has very little to do with the size of the tank and what you put in it - and everything to do with your ability to remove it.

[boxfishpooalot]

Originally posted by Bomber
The question is - would a person be able to get it to the skimmer, turn it over enough, have the right skimmer, and be able to operate that skimmer correctly - to do it.

It has very little to do with the size of the tank and what you put in it - and everything to do with your ability to remove it.

I do see your point. Like maco to remove ammonia ions, and skimmers to remove raw organics. Equalls lower pollutants. Equalls less ammonia ions. If I knew how much ammonia fish produce per hours time, then maybee I would do the switch.

[Bomber]

ammonium, phosphate, etc is removed by skimming.

If you mean macro, like algae scrubbers, that is actually a poor way of removing nutrients. Not only do all algae leak, they are not able to use it all.

Your front line is bacteria and phyto production in closed systems, that you can remove with skimming.

[boxfishpooalot]

Originally posted by Bomber
ammonium, phosphate, etc is removed by skimming.

If you mean macro, like algae scrubbers, that is actually a poor way of removing nutrients. Not only do all algae leak, they are not able to use it all.

Your front line is bacteria and phyto production in closed systems, that you can remove with skimming.

Ammonium is removed by skimming? Randy says ammonia ions can not be removed by skimming. Just when they are in the raw form(organics)

[Bomber]

How long does ammonium stay as ammonium ions? If it did for long, you couldn't keep anything in a aquarium in the first place.

What takes up ammonium? and can you skim that out?

of course you can.

[boxfishpooalot]

Originally posted by Bomber
How long does ammonium stay as ammonium ions? If it did for long, you couldn't keep anything in a aquarium in the first place.

What takes up ammonium? and can you skim that out?

of course you can.

I see your point on export, like phyto taking up ammonia then your skimmer removing it. I like the idea of no sand bed, but as everone says I also love the look of sand. But their are alternatives, like a faux sand bed. I seen a silicone/sand mixed into it bed and looked real! I dont know, If I removed my sand bed what would happen, the tank is only 6 months old. Also are you suggesting that my skimmer does not perform like it should? Check my pic in my gallery and let me know what you think. It was my first attempt at making a diy skimmer,and it works alright(Iwill make a new one.)

Also Bomber, I do not see any macroalgae like chaeto in your tank. What are your comments on that?

[boxfishpooalot]

Also, if you want to grow phyto, why not get rid of that uv light you got? I had a phyto outbreak in my tank(completely green) and the uv killed it all, but I had no skimmer at the time and my light was 6500k full sunlight 400 watt halide.Now, its 20k with no phyto.

[Bomber]

You didn't kill it all.

You just starved it out.

There's a lot of things I don't like about algae filters. The main one is for algae to grow, you have to create the nutrient conditions that you are trying to eliminate in the first place.
That and all algae leak.

[tankslave]

So you read through this then:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/sh...5&pagenumber=1

Algae just won't grow in a properly setup BB system. And they shouldn't.

If you don't care for the white starboard, try the black one. It's pretty popular. You might already have a black back to your tank, why not just match the bottom. Personally, I love it. Very Zen like. Oh and the pink coraline on the black bottom is actually very artistic looking...

[tankslave]

Ok, think about it. If you can have a very sucessfull reef aquarium, without an algae turf scrubber, without a DSB, what does that say about those two foroms of "filtration"?

[Bomber]

Which came first - the DSB or the algae scrubber?

[tankslave]

Hey Bomber, you ever have problems with that angel picking at your coral?

[Bomber]

I'm surprised you weren't more impressed with this guy.



They both leave the corals alone though.

[tankslave]

Smooth Trunkfish? Never really had any boxfishes of my own. You must feed them some pretty tasty snacks to leave your corals alone!

[Flatlander]

Originally posted by tankslave
Ok, think about it. If you can have a very sucessfull reef aquarium, without an algae turf scrubber, without a DSB, what does that say about those two foroms of "filtration"?

In who,s opinion.

[tankslave]

You didn't see the pictures on page 14? I doubt anyone will argue...

[Flatlander]

Originally posted by tankslave
You didn't see the pictures on page 14? I doubt anyone will argue...

What pic is that Bombers? If it is, I have seen it many times. Thats not what I pointed out. I also forgot to add, I meant only algae turf scrubbers, as I have no love affair with sandbeds of any kind.

[Bomber]

I knew that.

psst ts, Doug helped me put this tank and equipment together.

and here's his godchild:

[tankslave]

Oh, that's funny.

Could you come over and help me out with my next tank!


oh, well, what can I say, I have mangroves in my sump and brown acros up top...

[Bomber]

Did you think about that yet?

You have one system that requires dirty to function - hooked up to another system that requires clean.
Somehow people got the idea that the dirty system - cleans - the clean system.

[tankslave]

Yea, I know. Its the one last remnant of the dirty system days. Need to find someone less enlightened to take home all that caulerpa. Hey Marc...

Should make a nice little prop tank area.

[Chip Douglas]

Originally posted by boxfishpooalot
I have always been interested in no sand bed. But, im still skeptical. I need to know information on specific things like ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, phophates and how many fish you have in that tank. Would a bare bottom be able to support my tank with theese fish"
-11 chromis
-1 dog faced puffer
-2 tomato clowns
-1 6" unicorn tang
-1 powder blue tang
-1cleaner wrass
-1yellow tang
-1 regal tang
-naso tang
-1 yellow spotted boxfish
-1 sea urchin(diadema)
-valentini puffer

With 22 fish do you think that a bare-bottom tank would support the amount of ammonia production in a tank with water volume of 135 gallons? Or I would not have enough bacteria and surface area?

Do you really want that many fish in a 135? The dogface and tangs alone will take up quite a bit of space. 22 fish in a 135 seems pretty cramped. I've seen about a dozen fish in a 180 before and it looked packed.