Skimate

[Fishnut]

I do not know how skimate should be measured, but has anyone
summarised whether "weak" skimate produced by pushing more air through
the skimmer, gets rid of more total gunge than "dark" skimate produced
using less air ?
For example, in (say) a 3-day period, if the weak setting produces 10
times the amount of liquid as the dark setting, which extracts more of
the gunge from the system ?

Regards, Fishnut.

[Simon O'Keeffe]

I believe watery skimmate actually removes more nutrient but the major
factors influencing this is the actual turn over of water, more water
through the skimmer means more nutrient removed the dark/light skimmate
thing is just personal preference.
I will say however the wet skimmate lovers can have more problems with
skimmers overflowing as the line between where the skimmer is working
and when it's over flowing clean water is a lot finer.
The dark skimmate people might not be getting the absolute best from
their skimmers but there is probably very little in it. I think newer
skimmers can remove up to 90% of removable particles in a single pass,
multiple passes do not increase this figure they just reduce the overall
efficiency of the skimmer. This is because the skimmer is re skimming
clean(90% cleaner anyway) water when it should be removing 90% from
dirty water instead of another 5 % from the clean.
So dark light is not as big an issue as complete turn over.

That seemed to take a long time to say, so it much be time for a beer.
Cheers all.

Simon


Fishnut wrote:

>I do not know how skimate should be measured, but has anyone
>summarised whether "weak" skimate produced by pushing more air through
>the skimmer, gets rid of more total gunge than "dark" skimate produced
>using less air ?
>For example, in (say) a 3-day period, if the weak setting produces 10
>times the amount of liquid as the dark setting, which extracts more of
>the gunge from the system ?
>
>Regards, Fishnut.
>
>
>

[Fishnut]

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 14:58:37 +1000, Simon O'Keeffe
> wrote:

>I believe watery skimmate actually removes more nutrient but the major
>factors influencing this is the actual turn over of water, more water
>through the skimmer means more nutrient removed the dark/light skimmate
>thing is just personal preference.
>I will say however the wet skimmate lovers can have more problems with
>skimmers overflowing as the line between where the skimmer is working
>and when it's over flowing clean water is a lot finer.
>The dark skimmate people might not be getting the absolute best from
>their skimmers but there is probably very little in it. I think newer
>skimmers can remove up to 90% of removable particles in a single pass,
>multiple passes do not increase this figure they just reduce the overall
>efficiency of the skimmer. This is because the skimmer is re skimming
>clean(90% cleaner anyway) water when it should be removing 90% from
>dirty water instead of another 5 % from the clean.
>So dark light is not as big an issue as complete turn over.
>
>That seemed to take a long time to say, so it much be time for a beer.
>Cheers all.
>
>Simon
>
>
Thanks for the reply, Simon.
I asked the question because almost every post made says the skimate
should be very dark. But it occurred to me that unless a tank is
grossly overstocked, overfed, or neglected, why is there so much dark
skimate to remove ?

Regards, Fishnut.

[Mort]

<snip>



> But it occurred to me that unless a tank is
> grossly overstocked, overfed, or neglected, why is there so much dark
> skimate to remove ?
>
> Regards, Fishnut.
>


I have often wondered the same thing. I turn my air valve down a little bit
because I prefer a drier skimmate but mine has never been dark. (usually
light brown) and it has never really been overstocked either.

hth

~Mort