|
|
Underground filters
Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read
(published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. Grandpa John |
Underground filters
On Sep 20, 11:34 pm, Tynk wrote:
On Sep 20, 11:25?pm, John DeBoo wrote: Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. Grandpa John Hello there Grandpa John. Under gravel filters are still around, however filtration has come along way. If they are not used properly and taken proper care of, they end up being cess pools just waiting to set free a toxic gas bubble. Sounds pretty wild, I know. But that's the extreme worst thing that can happen with them. Mainly, they're a pain the butt and outdated. Depending on the size of the tank, better options would be: Sponge filters run by an air pump. Power filters. These hang on the tank and make a lot less noise than anything making bubbles. Canister filters for large tanks. Do you have tanks running now or are you getting back into the hobby? Undergravel filters are rarely used anymore. In a lot of stores they are hard to even find.....If properly maintained and installed they work great. YOu would be have much better luck with a hob (hang on back) type filter such as the work horse Aqua Clear filters. They work for ever and do the job, and are extremely easy to maintain. ||Even on a 29 gal tank I would go with the largest model offered, which is the AC110 (old model 500) They are fully adjustable and can be found online for $35 or less or if there is a Petsmart store near you just print out the webpage on them with the price and Petsmart will price match prices (you'll save approx 50-60%| that way) as they sell it for close to $80 in the stores. Canister filters are mnore excpensive and can form a bnitrate factory very quickly. Media replacement is more costly too in a lot of the canister types. The hang on the bac (|hob) such as the Aqua Clears are extremely quiet and you will not hear any noise, unless you have air trapped in the system. They just do not make noise and they last forever. Media replacement is quick and easy and cheap and a lot of varioius other media can be used in these hob filters than just the stuff Aqua Clear sells for it. Trust me, your fish and you will appreciate a good AC110 on a 29 gal tank. Air powered filters are for the most part no where near as effectiveas they lack any real circulation or filtration and yes eventhough they do filter water, they certainly are not quick about it or provide much current, which also helps in any tank. Air powered filters anymore are usually used in breeder tanks and such.rarely in a larger display tank. Who wants top hasbve top be putting their hands and arms ina tank to clean filters etc. ||The hob Aqua |Clear is lift lid, pull basket out, clean and reverse removal process and go! Eviderntly Aqua Cl;ears are too "complicated " for some fokos so they go the old air powered way. And as much as I hate to do it, TYNK seen perfectly fit to trash RMs other post as well as some I made. See what| I mean about TYNK needing to be in charge and receive 110% of the attention . I could easily trash this post, but I fortunately do not have the resident trolls nasty habit of of being a hipocrite |
Underground filters
"John DeBoo" wrote in message . .. Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. Grandpa John ========================= Good morning John. I stopped using UGFs years ago. It was almost impossible to get the crud out from under them and who knew what deadly gasses were developing in the decomposing mulm (bits of food, plant matter and feces) caught there. Trying to clean them was the pits. I finally broke down every tank at the time and one by one removed them. I just use gravel and a gravel vac now. I use HOB Aquaclears and have been very satisfied with them. -- RM.... Zone 6. Middle TN USA ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(๖ |
Underground filters
Reel McKoi wrote:
"John DeBoo" wrote in message . .. Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. Grandpa John ========================= Good morning John. I stopped using UGFs years ago. It was almost impossible to get the crud out from under them and who knew what deadly gasses were developing in the decomposing mulm (bits of food, plant matter and feces) caught there. Trying to clean them was the pits. I finally broke down every tank at the time and one by one removed them. I just use gravel and a gravel vac now. I use HOB Aquaclears and have been very satisfied with them. Good advice, maybe I'll use whatever filter comes with the set up and a gravel vac. I used one of them years ago with good success with the UGF system I had then. Grandpa John |
Underground filters
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:25:35 -0600, John DeBoo wrote:
Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. I don't like them, but if you insist get the reverse UGF. You're much better off with an Aquaclear. |
Underground filters
On Sep 21, 3:25 pm, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:25:35 -0600, John DeBoo wrote: Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. I don't like them, but if you insist get the reverse UGF. You're much better off with an Aquaclear. Undergravel filters can and do work well if they have sufficient flow through them and to be honest the air line bubble type of flow is far from being adequate. Stick an good Maxi jet or Mini Jet power head on one and its good to go. IN saltweater setups they used to use a plenum type affair which is similar to what a FW undergravel filter is, and if it was provided with sufficient flow etc it too worked just fine. However if it was not you had problems just oiek a FW under gravel filter The white bagged play sand sold ata home depot and that is typically seen in cigarette ash trays outside commercial establishments works great to mix in with and under fine gravel. Bout $3.50 a 50# bag.Its a silica or actually a quartz based sand... I use a limestone sand sold by Homedepot called Old Castle or southdown sand. Its the same sand used by marine fish keeps. Its also about $3.50 a 50# bag, and its perfect to use with mbunas or any of the malawi or rift lake fish. This sand is uniform in size to what typical play or masonary sand is, and is snow white in color but once in use it soon becomes a gran or tan color. This sand is agreat buffer and it will not affect ph if your ph is not too far out of wack normally. If its really on the low or acid side it helps immensly. |
Underground filters
They are still aound, but not very popular any more. They got a lot of bad
press when fanmcier (and much more expensive) alternates came out. Undergravel filters are still a great low-cost option for drastically increasing your biofiltration capacity. In my experience, they excel in freshwater tanks, but are mediocre in sal****er. However, you need sufficient water flow through the gravel. A decent air-lift will do great if you regularly vacuum or stir up the gravel to prevent "mats" forming and binding the gravel together. The gravel should be stirred or vacuumed every week or two to ensure that it hasn't matted. Some people have reported problems using undergravel filters when they have live plants - they either can't keep the plants alive or clog the UG filter. I simply put my plants in shallow pots - this gives the plants a place to anchor, and provides boundaries for the vacuum (I don't vacuum the pots so I don't disturb the plants roots). It also makes it a lot easier to apply fertilizer (if you want to). I always use UG filters in all of my freshwater tanks. My filtration typical setup is an UG filter and a canister (for particulates not biofiltration). I have tanks from 5 gal through 125, and haven't had any water quality problems. I use two lift tubes per UG filter, and make sure that there is good airflow (small bubbles provide more lift per volume of air - as the stones clog, you need to clean/replace them). My personal opinion regtarding the decrease in popularity of UG filters is because the sellers simply don't make as much money on them, and many of the aquariasts today want things with a high "gizmocity factor". A UG filter is simple, doesn't require much maintenance, and does what is supposed tp. But it doesn't look impressive or give bragging rights about the $X,000 filtration system..... -JD "John DeBoo" wrote in message . .. Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. Grandpa John |
Underground filters
I guess it depends on how you use your filters. I do have a canister filter,
but it is only part of my filtration system - the UG filter is just as important. The UG drastically increases the biofiltration capacity of any tank (if properly maintained). The idea that the canister filter performs "better" is simply inacurate. the canister filter is designed to perform a different function. Yes, it does provide some biofiltrtation, but then almost everything does (including the walls, decorations, nd pretty much any wet surface in an aquarium). An example of how important the filters are can be demonostrated by observing the water quality. When the canister filter slows down, the water qualioty does not change significantly. As a matter of fact, at one point the canister filter failed, and I didn't get around to rebuilding it for about 3 weeks - no change in water quality. However, when I had an airpump fail, and the UG filters flow was drastically reduced, the water quality started deteriorating in almost immediately - there were noticable changes within 2 days. I am not saying that a UG filter by itself is a good filtration system. I would not set up a tank with UG alone. I would also not set up a tank without UG. The extra protection that UG filters provide is a lot more valuable than the small extra expense needed at setup. As far as sound - I run some sort of aeration all the time - I wouldn't even think about setting up a tank without it. The sound of bubbles coming from the UG tube isn't any worse than the sound of bubbles coming from an air stone. Of course, I use airstones in my UG tubes - the small bubble size greatly increases the lift capacity of the air tubes... The lift tubes are easily hidden by plants, so they don't effect the beuty of hte tank, and there is no additional maintenance needed - I vacuum on a regular basis anyway. UGF may not be something that everyone wants, but they are an option that have definite advantages. In my opinion, the advantages far exceed the disadvantages. Of course, in my case, the only disadvantage is spending an extra $30 or so when I set up a 125 gallon tank - pretty insignificant when I usually spend about $2,500 - $3,000 setting up a new tank.. -JD "Tynk" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 28, 7:04?am, "jd" wrote: They are still aound, but not very popular any more. They got a lot of bad press when fanmcier (and much more expensive) alternates came out. Undergravel filters are still a great low-cost option for drastically increasing your biofiltration capacity. In my experience, they excel in freshwater tanks, but are mediocre in sal****er. However, you need sufficient water flow through the gravel. A decent air-lift will do great if you regularly vacuum or stir up the gravel to prevent "mats" forming and binding the gravel together. The gravel should be stirred or vacuumed every week or two to ensure that it hasn't matted. Some people have reported problems using undergravel filters when they have live plants - they either can't keep the plants alive or clog the UG filter. I simply put my plants in shallow pots - this gives the plants a place to anchor, and provides boundaries for the vacuum (I don't vacuum the pots so I don't disturb the plants roots). It also makes it a lot easier to apply fertilizer (if you want to). I always use UG filters in all of my freshwater tanks. My filtration typical setup is an UG filter and a canister (for particulates not biofiltration). I have tanks from 5 gal through 125, and haven't had any water quality problems. I use two lift tubes per UG filter, and make sure that there is good airflow (small bubbles provide more lift per volume of air - as the stones clog, you need to clean/replace them). My personal opinion regtarding the decrease in popularity of UG filters is because the sellers simply don't make as much money on them, and many of the aquariasts today want things with a high "gizmocity factor". A UG filter is simple, doesn't require much maintenance, and does what is supposed tp. But it doesn't look impressive or give bragging rights about the $X,000 filtration system..... -JD - Show quoted text - Jd,... IMO, you're not having any water quality problems because you're using a cansiter filter. You're putting a little too much praise on the effectiveness of an UGF. It's not about looks or how much something costs, it's about the filtration system's effectiveness. When you put a canister up against an UGF....hands down the canister is a better filtration system. You get mechanical *and* biological filtration as well. Just like any other filter medium that isn't worn out, you rinse the canister's filter pad out in old tank water. Nitrifying bacteria are all over every surface in the filter too, so rinsing with old tank water is recommended. Refill with dechlorinated water. If you got rid of that UGF, you wouldn't have a dirty tank. You'd have an almost silent tank. You'd have no gurgle noises, no ugly tubes, more room for plants and fish to use, less work, a better looking tank, and best of all...no more air pumps to deal with! With your normal water changes and gravel vacuuming there would be no "cons", just "pros" without it. |
Underground filters
"jd" wrote in message . .. UGF may not be something that everyone wants, but they are an option that have definite advantages. In my opinion, the advantages far exceed the disadvantages. Of course, in my case, the only disadvantage is spending an extra $30 or so when I set up a 125 gallon tank - pretty insignificant when I usually spend about $2,500 - $3,000 setting up a new tank.. -JD ==================== Use what works for you. Some people like UGFs and some don't. -- RM.... Zone 6. Middle TN USA ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(๖ |
Underground filters
On Oct 8, 9:51 am, Tynk wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:44?am, "jd" wrote: . As a matter of fact, at one point the canister filter failed, and I didn't get around to rebuilding it for about 3 weeks - no change in water quality. However, when I had an airpump fail, and the UG filters flow was drastically reduced, the water quality started deteriorating in almost immediately - there were noticable changes within 2 days. IMO, the water quality deteriorated because your airpump failed, and bacteria were dying off. A cess pool was starting. That had nothing to do with the canister no wroking right or good enough. And your opinion does not count TYNK. NO one really cares what the hell you think TYNK,. We all know your a babbling idiot transexual buffoon...........where ever you go you manage to drag in the trash and disrupt the groups. Whats wrong, can you not compete with the moderated TFA group posters....yea, I thought that was the reason, you do not fit in as you do not have half a clue as to what your spouting off about 99% of the time.Go get help Tynk, they have meds to help idiots like you cope with day to daylife..No need to have a meltdown. |
Underground filters
On Sep 21, 1:32 pm, John DeBoo wrote:
Reel McKoi wrote: "John DeBoo" wrote in message ... Years ago I had two of these and they worked well. What books I've read (published 1995 to date) seem to say they are good inexpensive filters to use. However, in my trips to WalMart, a local fish store, Petco & PetsMart, they seem to have all disappeared - else I'm blind. Are these little hummers still available? Thoughts & comments on them welcome. Grandpa John ========================= Good morning John. I stopped using UGFs years ago. It was almost impossible to get the crud out from under them and who knew what deadly gasses were developing in the decomposing mulm (bits of food, plant matter and feces) caught there. Trying to clean them was the pits. I finally broke down every tank at the time and one by one removed them. I just use gravel and a gravel vac now. I use HOB Aquaclears and have been very satisfied with them. Good advice, maybe I'll use whatever filter comes with the set up and a gravel vac. I used one of them years ago with good success with the UGF system I had then. Grandpa John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - What a ****ing idiot you are old man. Must be a relative of TYNKs. |
Underground filters
On Oct 5, 9:15 pm, "Reel McKoi" wrote:
"jd" wrote in message . .. UGF may not be something that everyone wants, but they are an option that have definite advantages. In my opinion, the advantages far exceed the disadvantages. Of course, in my case, the only disadvantage is spending an extra $30 or so when I set up a 125 gallon tank - pretty insignificant when I usually spend about $2,500 - $3,000 setting up a new tank.. -JD ==================== Use what works for you. Some people like UGFs and some don't. -- RM.... Zone 6. Middle TN USA ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(๖ But Tynk said UGF are junk and do not work.................its not nice to counter what the mioghty TYNK says...as she is liable to have meltdown..........However I do agree with your statement RM.......its a personal choice just like feed is a personal choice, and what works for one may nro may not work for others, but there is no need to shove crap down foks throats oke TYNK and a few others do since they are of the belief its their waty or no way and thats the only way.. Happy ponding ........counting the days till we get back to CR again.I miss it already! |
Underground filters
I think you misread my post - the water quality stayed the same when the
canister filter failed. When the airpump failed (another time), the water quality crashed. That would indicate that the UG filter was doing a lot more of the cleaning (at least bio) than the canister, and would even suggest that it is the canister filter that is not needed. The tank is very heavily planted, so there probably wasn't a huge drop in disolved oxygen - the fish certainly didn't seem to mind. I would expect the fish to react to lower disolved oxygen way before bacteria populations would crash - unless of course, the failure of hte airpump also stopped the flow of water through the gravel, which would cause localized lowered disolved oxygen in the gravel bed - which is what I think happened. The death of bacteria doesn't significantly change the water chemistry - what causes the change is the loss of the bacteria's metabolic processing. So this is another argument FOR an UG filter (and a spare airpump...). What is interesting is that the canister was running when the airpump failed, and still didn't keep the tank stable. When the canister failed, the UG had no problem maintaining water quality. I've never had both fail at the same time..... -JD "Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... On Oct 5, 7:44?am, "jd" wrote: . As a matter of fact, at one point the canister filter failed, and I didn't get around to rebuilding it for about 3 weeks - no change in water quality. However, when I had an airpump fail, and the UG filters flow was drastically reduced, the water quality started deteriorating in almost immediately - there were noticable changes within 2 days. IMO, the water quality deteriorated because your airpump failed, and bacteria were dying off. A cess pool was starting. That had nothing to do with the canister no wroking right or good enough. |
Underground filters
On Oct 8, 5:17 pm, "jd" wrote:
I think you misread my post - the water quality stayed the same when the canister filter failed. When the airpump failed (another time), the water quality crashed. That would indicate that the UG filter was doing a lot more of the cleaning (at least bio) than the canister, and would even suggest that it is the canister filter that is not needed. The tank is very heavily planted, so there probably wasn't a huge drop in disolved oxygen - the fish certainly didn't seem to mind. I would expect the fish to react to lower disolved oxygen way before bacteria populations would crash - unless of course, the failure of hte airpump also stopped the flow of water through the gravel, which would cause localized lowered disolved oxygen in the gravel bed - which is what I think happened. The death of bacteria doesn't significantly change the water chemistry - what causes the change is the loss of the bacteria's metabolic processing. So this is another argument FOR an UG filter (and a spare airpump...). What is interesting is that the canister was running when the airpump failed, and still didn't keep the tank stable. When the canister failed, the UG had no problem maintaining water quality. I've never had both fail at the same time..... -JD "Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... On Oct 5, 7:44?am, "jd" wrote: . As a matter of fact, at one point the canister filter failed, and I didn't get around to rebuilding it for about 3 weeks - no change in water quality. However, when I had an airpump fail, and the UG filters flow was drastically reduced, the water quality started deteriorating in almost immediately - there were noticable changes within 2 days. IMO, the water quality deteriorated because your airpump failed, and bacteria were dying off. A cess pool was starting. That had nothing to do with the canister no wroking right or good enough.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Listen up old man.........its not nice to argue iwth our miss know it all TYNK..........you got that? If not perhaps its best for you to take a hike and decide who yuo really are JD or John Deedumbass or just a crotchety old fart...I think its time for your fleet enema and some geritol and maybe someone will make you a cup of warm milk and tuck your decrepit ass into the bed. Oh yea don;t forget to take your teeth out since you seem to be into and very knowledgeable about "hummers" as I would hate to hear that you choked on them............. |
Underground filters
"Natsirt" wrote in message ps.com... But Tynk said UGF are junk and do not work.................its not nice to counter what the mioghty TYNK says...as she is liable to have meltdown..........However I do agree with your statement RM.......its a personal choice just like feed is a personal choice, and what works for one may nro may not work for others, but there is no need to shove crap down foks throats oke TYNK and a few others do since they are of the belief its their waty or no way and thats the only way.. Happy ponding ........counting the days till we get back to CR again.I miss it already! ======================== The crud that collects under the plates was what turned me off to them. Plants did OK though. Roots would grow over and through the holes in the plates. Trying to clean out that crud that collected was what turned me off to them in the end. -- RM.... ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(๖ |
Underground filters
Yeah, I can relate with the cleaning of the crud off th e plates, but I only
do that when I'm tearing atank down, which is hardly ever now. Since I'm not doing commercial or research work any more, my tanks are all recreational, and I don't have to tear them down unless there is a good reason. I have tanks that have been going for 6 years without a teardown, and they're rock solid..... -JD "Reel McKoi" wrote in message ... "Natsirt" wrote in message ps.com... But Tynk said UGF are junk and do not work.................its not nice to counter what the mioghty TYNK says...as she is liable to have meltdown..........However I do agree with your statement RM.......its a personal choice just like feed is a personal choice, and what works for one may nro may not work for others, but there is no need to shove crap down foks throats oke TYNK and a few others do since they are of the belief its their waty or no way and thats the only way.. Happy ponding ........counting the days till we get back to CR again.I miss it already! ======================== The crud that collects under the plates was what turned me off to them. Plants did OK though. Roots would grow over and through the holes in the plates. Trying to clean out that crud that collected was what turned me off to them in the end. -- RM.... ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(๖ |
Underground filters
Tynk wrote in
ps.com: On Oct 9, 7:20?am, "jd" wrote: Yeah, I can relate with the cleaning of the crud off th e plates, but I only do that when I'm tearing atank down, which is hardly ever now. Since I'm not doing commercial or research work any more, my tanks are all recreational, and I don't have to tear them down unless there is a good reason. I have tanks that have been going for 6 years without a teardown, and they're rock solid..... -JD - Show quoted text - As you and RM mentioned...the crud under the plates is my biggest *con* when it comes to using them. (Pay no attention JD to the troll tailing me...we are simply discussing the pros and cons of them and he has to make it into something it's not...sorry *for* him). It's that crud that is basically a ticking time bomb. Often an area of it becomes a toxic cess pool that can release a toxic gas bubble into the tank. I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. THe rapidity with which his water quality dropped (2 days, IIRC) indicates more than just normal metabolic action of some fish in a heavily planted tank. JD's story may actually be another indictment of UG filters, as that rapid drop in water quality might not have occurred if the UGF wasn't there, but I guess not enough is known to say for sure. DaveZ |
Underground filters
On Oct 9, 1:30 pm, atomweaver wrote:
Tynk wrote oups.com: On Oct 9, 7:20?am, "jd" wrote: Yeah, I can relate with the cleaning of the crud off th e plates, but I only do that when I'm tearing atank down, which is hardly ever now. Since I'm not doing commercial or research work any more, my tanks are all recreational, and I don't have to tear them down unless there is a good reason. I have tanks that have been going for 6 years without a teardown, and they're rock solid..... -JD - Show quoted text - As you and RM mentioned...the crud under the plates is my biggest *con* when it comes to using them. (Pay no attention JD to the troll tailing me...we are simply discussing the pros and cons of them and he has to make it into something it's not...sorry *for* him). It's that crud that is basically a ticking time bomb. Often an area of it becomes a toxic cess pool that can release a toxic gas bubble into the tank. I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. THe rapidity with which his water quality dropped (2 days, IIRC) indicates more than just normal metabolic action of some fish in a heavily planted tank. JD's story may actually be another indictment of UG filters, as that rapid drop in water quality might not have occurred if the UGF wasn't there, but I guess not enough is known to say for sure. DaveZ- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The biggest problem is ignorance in how and what makes a UGF work, and unless the bio load is light you need much more than an air pump to get decent flow under the filter grates. The only way is with a decent powerhead in place of the airstone or bubblers. Reverse flow works fine too.............air powered tend to have dead spots, forced flow (powerheads) do not tend to have dead spots. |
Underground filters
"Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... When I had angels and betta spawns going, those mini power filters on the juvie male betta male tanks would have been so usefull! ======================== Depending on how many juveniles you have and what you can afford. These little mini filters cost $5.99 each! =:-O -- RM.... ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(๖ |
Underground filters
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:18:08 -0500, Reel McKoi wrote:
"Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... When I had angels and betta spawns going, those mini power filters on the juvie male betta male tanks would have been so usefull! ======================== Depending on how many juveniles you have and what you can afford. These little mini filters cost $5.99 each! =:-O I use something called "dispose-a-filter" in my fry tank. They come in a pack of 2. I don't remember the price, but they weren't expensive. I got them at Petsmart. You're supposed to replace them every 4 weeks, but that's just because of the carbon, which I sometimes take out. In any case, after I use the pack of 2 for 8-10 weeks, the fry are large enough that I can use an Aquaclear with a sponge over the intake. |
Underground filters
I have to disagree. With glass bottom tanks, it is very easy to see what is
going on under the UGF. There are no air bubbles. The air stones are located abotu an inch above the bottom of the lift tubes, so there isn't any way for air to get under there anyway... -JD "atomweaver" wrote in message ... Tynk wrote in ps.com: On Oct 9, 7:20?am, "jd" wrote: Yeah, I can relate with the cleaning of the crud off th e plates, but I only do that when I'm tearing atank down, which is hardly ever now. Since I'm not doing commercial or research work any more, my tanks are all recreational, and I don't have to tear them down unless there is a good reason. I have tanks that have been going for 6 years without a teardown, and they're rock solid..... -JD - Show quoted text - As you and RM mentioned...the crud under the plates is my biggest *con* when it comes to using them. (Pay no attention JD to the troll tailing me...we are simply discussing the pros and cons of them and he has to make it into something it's not...sorry *for* him). It's that crud that is basically a ticking time bomb. Often an area of it becomes a toxic cess pool that can release a toxic gas bubble into the tank. I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. THe rapidity with which his water quality dropped (2 days, IIRC) indicates more than just normal metabolic action of some fish in a heavily planted tank. JD's story may actually be another indictment of UG filters, as that rapid drop in water quality might not have occurred if the UGF wasn't there, but I guess not enough is known to say for sure. DaveZ |
Underground filters
I'm not sure I would call it ignorance, as I have spent alarge part of my
life designing large and small filtration units, and have an excelelnt understanding of fliud dynamics and how filtration works. In any case, while powerheads can increase the flow through an UGF, a properly set up and maintained airstone can (and does) provide an excellent water flow. as an example, in one of my tanks the air lift tubes creates a little over 6" of lift (this is about average for my tanks). There are 6 lift tubes (it's a 125 gal), so summed together that is a lot of water flow. Even though a power head may provide a bit more flow, more is not always better, and I have ben very satisfied with the results at these flow rates. I have played around with power heads, and unless I ma trying to create a current in the tank, I don't see any significant advantage. -JD "eekamouse" wrote in message ups.com... On Oct 9, 1:30 pm, atomweaver wrote: Tynk wrote oups.com: On Oct 9, 7:20?am, "jd" wrote: Yeah, I can relate with the cleaning of the crud off th e plates, but I only do that when I'm tearing atank down, which is hardly ever now. Since I'm not doing commercial or research work any more, my tanks are all recreational, and I don't have to tear them down unless there is a good reason. I have tanks that have been going for 6 years without a teardown, and they're rock solid..... -JD - Show quoted text - As you and RM mentioned...the crud under the plates is my biggest *con* when it comes to using them. (Pay no attention JD to the troll tailing me...we are simply discussing the pros and cons of them and he has to make it into something it's not...sorry *for* him). It's that crud that is basically a ticking time bomb. Often an area of it becomes a toxic cess pool that can release a toxic gas bubble into the tank. I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. THe rapidity with which his water quality dropped (2 days, IIRC) indicates more than just normal metabolic action of some fish in a heavily planted tank. JD's story may actually be another indictment of UG filters, as that rapid drop in water quality might not have occurred if the UGF wasn't there, but I guess not enough is known to say for sure. DaveZ- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The biggest problem is ignorance in how and what makes a UGF work, and unless the bio load is light you need much more than an air pump to get decent flow under the filter grates. The only way is with a decent powerhead in place of the airstone or bubblers. Reverse flow works fine too.............air powered tend to have dead spots, forced flow (powerheads) do not tend to have dead spots. |
Underground filters
I still have to disagree - the buildup of crud on the plates is actually the
bacteria colonies - they're a PITA to clean off the plates when a tank is stripped down, but they don't cause any harm. While I have heard tales of the "toxic gas buildup" caused by UGF, I've never experienced it, and knowing the details of what it takes to cause it to happen, I find it very unlikely (OK, practically impossible) for it to happen - even without maintenance. No I know has experienced it either. Considering what it takes for this scenario to occur in the natural world, it would be practically impossible to hve it happen in a tank, even if you were trying to create it. Also, the chemistry that is needed to cause the "toxic bubble" would kill everything in the tank way before there was the possibility of enough toxic gas developing to actually make a bubble.... Without maintenance, I can easily imagine an UGF getting matted an clogged (actually, its the gravel that get clogged), but all that would really do is make the filter inneffective - it wouldn't make the gravel any worse than it would be without the UGF in place. Of course, as soon as the gravel was vacuumed or stirred up, the filter would kick back in , and the bacteria would repopulate the gravel pretty quickly. I would also reiterate that a UGF is not meant to be the sole filter in a tank. If that is how you were using them, I can understand why you would have had problems with them. (even with a sponge filter, all you are really providing is bio filtration - nothing else). Another factor that may be causing you problems is the size of your tanks. Bigger tanks are always more stable than small tanks, and a lot of the filter advances that have occurred over the past decade or so relate to trying to make smaller tanks more stable, making possible to have a larger carrying capacity (more fish per gallon), and making it easier to keep both fish and plants in the same tank. 20 years ago, all of these were labour intesive, and prone to error - the smaller the tank, the more likely it would be for an error to occur, and quickly spiral out of control. The new technologies have made it much easier to keep small tanks with lots of fish and plants, but they do not necesarily perform better than some of the older technologies - it really depends on what you want from your tank. powerheads and high throughput canister filters are not very good for a pond or lake setup - for fish that do not live in an environement with currents. UGF and low-throughput filters are much better for these tanks, as they can be run wothout creating alot of current. They ca move a lot of water through the filter media (gravel) without introducing a current to the overall tank. For a current environment (stream or river), powerheads and high throughput filters are great - you want all of that flow to create the currents that the fish "expect". In those environments, an UGF provides some ectra buffering of the biological filtration (I am a proponent of the "more is better" school of thought on biofilters). I must admit that I have never bothered to keep small tanks (I consider a 5gal to be a fry tank). I would suspect that on the tiny 1,2,3 gallon tanks, an UGF probably wouldn't make a huge difference - by the time you had a deep enough gravel bed (2" min.), you would have taken up a lot of the tank volume with gravel. In those tiny tanks, keeping the water volume as high as possible is probably the most critical thing, so exxternal filtration would probably be the way to go . Not only would the filtration not be taking up tank volume, it would be adding ot hte total water volume by providing an exterior "resevoir" in the filter itself.... "Tynk" wrote in message ps.com... On Oct 9, 7:20?am, "jd" wrote: Yeah, I can relate with the cleaning of the crud off th e plates, but I only do that when I'm tearing atank down, which is hardly ever now. Since I'm not doing commercial or research work any more, my tanks are all recreational, and I don't have to tear them down unless there is a good reason. I have tanks that have been going for 6 years without a teardown, and they're rock solid..... -JD - Show quoted text - As you and RM mentioned...the crud under the plates is my biggest *con* when it comes to using them. (Pay no attention JD to the troll tailing me...we are simply discussing the pros and cons of them and he has to make it into something it's not...sorry *for* him). It's that crud that is basically a ticking time bomb. Often an area of it becomes a toxic cess pool that can release a toxic gas bubble into the tank. Yeah, I know that sounds pretty stupid, but it does happen and it can kill fish. Now that doesn't mean they're all like that, as proper maintenance plays a huge part. However, in reality not too many are. Another *con* for me is when there is a breakdown (either pump failure, clog, or powerhead failure) and it can turn into a bigger problem. I wonder if it has to do with the crud under the plates in addition to dying bacteria? Maybe it's because the canister isn't actually inside the tank and a malfunctioning canister is somewhat contained. I like the canisters that also have a biowheel. For folks who don't want a lot of added noise in the same room as a large tank, such as a tv room or family room, etc...it's a better choice than an UGF. If noise and less equipment running isn't a concern, and they're properly maintained, then sure...they have their purpose. I can't deny them that. I just find them to be a pain in the butt, and there to be better, less noisy options out there. I remember years ago taking out the UGF in my 29g (back then my tanks were either run by an UGF or sponge filter or both), and taking that first step away from them. It was scary for me, as well as for many long time hobbyists. After realizing there was no downfall, no *con* without it, only good things...I've never used since. I actually toss out the new ones that come with tank set ups, and replace it with a power filter. Heck, even those have a long way too! Now they have mini power filters for tiny 1g tanks. Filtration has come a long way recently, and I just wish they would have done it years ago. = ) When I had angels and betta spawns going, those mini power filters on the juvie male betta male tanks would have been so usefull! |
Underground filters
"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message ... On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:18:08 -0500, Reel McKoi wrote: Depending on how many juveniles you have and what you can afford. These little mini filters cost $5.99 each! =:-O I use something called "dispose-a-filter" in my fry tank. They come in a pack of 2. I don't remember the price, but they weren't expensive. I got them at Petsmart. I assume they're powered by air?!?!?! You're supposed to replace them every 4 weeks, but that's just because of the carbon, which I sometimes take out. In any case, after I use the pack of 2 for 8-10 weeks, the fry are large enough that I can use an Aquaclear with a sponge over the intake. I just use sponge filters with fry until they're large enough to be comfortable with the small Aquaclears. Aquaclears are too large for Betta bowls or tanks. A mini Azoo at $5.99 for each Betta tank can get costly when you breed and raise them. -- RM.... ~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(รถ |
Underground filters
(top-posting repaired...)
"jd" wrote in : "atomweaver" wrote in message I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. The rapidity with which his water quality dropped (2 days, IIRC) indicates more than just normal metabolic action of some fish in a heavily planted tank. JD's story may actually be another indictment of UG filters, as that rapid drop in water quality might not have occurred if the UGF wasn't there, but I guess not enough is known to say for sure. I have to disagree. With glass bottom tanks, it is very easy to see what is going on under the UGF. There are no air bubbles. The air stones are located abotu an inch above the bottom of the lift tubes, so there isn't any way for air to get under there anyway... -JD *shrug* Perhaps a UGF dead spot holds the toxics dissolved in water, then. My own experience with UGFs is limited, and had poor results compared to modern options.... But, people used UGFs for decades, and they kept FW tanks just fine. It seems you can make UGFs work for you. Good on ya', then. HOBs and cannisters are IME much easier, safer and effective, but if you've got something that works, too, keep at it. Still, a big water swing in two days with an active operating cannister filter is an indication that something more was going on in your tank. Big die-off in the UGF bacterial colony itself, maybe? Once you stop flowing water in the UGF, that underplate area could go anaerobic pretty quickly, kill off your bacteria colony, and then diffuse into the tank from there. (another) *shrug*... like I said, not enough known to say for sure. DaveZ |
Underground filters
actually, the most probably cause is the fact taht having the UGF lets me
"overload" the system pretty heavily - that is one of hte reaswons I like it so much. What was really interesting was that when the canister tanked, the water quality didn't really change, but when the UGF tanked, there was a pretty fast crash. My guess is that the difference in surface area for bacteria to love on is what really make sthe diff - the canister has a lot less surface area for bacterial colonies than the huge gravel bed (a 125 tank, 2-4 inches of gravel, as opposed to a (roughly) 1.5 gallon canister. I agree that UGFs aren't for evreyone, but (like almost any tool that can work) eliminating them out of hand is foolish. If you've tried them, and not had luck, they obviously aren't for you. My main point was that they have a bad rep that, in my decades of experience, is undeserved. When I work with newbies to set up tanks, I always start them out with a UGF as a component of their filtration system. If they decide they don't like it, they can always simply pull out the lift tubes. The space under the plates will fill pretty quickly with loose gravel (no caps on the lift tube holes), and the only real difference is that there is a bit of extra plastic inthe tank... - "atomweaver" wrote in message ... (top-posting repaired...) "jd" wrote in : "atomweaver" wrote in message I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. The rapidity with which his water quality dropped (2 days, IIRC) indicates more than just normal metabolic action of some fish in a heavily planted tank. JD's story may actually be another indictment of UG filters, as that rapid drop in water quality might not have occurred if the UGF wasn't there, but I guess not enough is known to say for sure. I have to disagree. With glass bottom tanks, it is very easy to see what is going on under the UGF. There are no air bubbles. The air stones are located abotu an inch above the bottom of the lift tubes, so there isn't any way for air to get under there anyway... -JD *shrug* Perhaps a UGF dead spot holds the toxics dissolved in water, then. My own experience with UGFs is limited, and had poor results compared to modern options.... But, people used UGFs for decades, and they kept FW tanks just fine. It seems you can make UGFs work for you. Good on ya', then. HOBs and cannisters are IME much easier, safer and effective, but if you've got something that works, too, keep at it. Still, a big water swing in two days with an active operating cannister filter is an indication that something more was going on in your tank. Big die-off in the UGF bacterial colony itself, maybe? Once you stop flowing water in the UGF, that underplate area could go anaerobic pretty quickly, kill off your bacteria colony, and then diffuse into the tank from there. (another) *shrug*... like I said, not enough known to say for sure. DaveZ |
Underground filters
(top-posting repaired (again). In Usenet, top-posting = bad manners. Please keep your elbows off the table, jd. ;-) ) "jd" wrote in : "atomweaver" wrote in message ... (top-posting repaired...) "jd" wrote in : "atomweaver" wrote in message I'm not big on fluid dynamics, but it seems totally plausible to me that JD was holding such a bubble in a static location (a "dead" corner?) under the UGF with the flow from his air pump, and the failure of the pump is what allowed it to diffuse into the tank. I have to disagree. With glass bottom tanks, it is very easy to see what is going on under the UGF. Still, a big water swing in two days with an active operating cannister filter is an indication that something more was going on in your tank. Big die-off in the UGF bacterial colony itself, maybe? Once you stop flowing water in the UGF, that underplate area could go anaerobic pretty quickly, kill off your bacteria colony, and then diffuse into the tank from there. (another) *shrug*... like I said, not enough known to say for sure. actually, the most probably cause is the fact that having the UGF lets me "overload" the system pretty heavily - that is one of the reasons I like it so much. Understood. You can crowd the tank, since you've got more surface area of gravel with active bacteria. What was really interesting was that when the canister tanked, the water quality didn't really change, but when the UGF tanked, there was a pretty fast crash. WHy is that interesting? My guess is that the difference in surface area for bacteria to love on is what really makes the diff - the canister has a lot less surface area for bacterial colonies than the huge gravel bed (a 125 tank, 2-4 inches of gravel, as opposed to a (roughly) 1.5 gallon canister. Right. So when you do go down, you've got more biomass in bacteria dying off, _and_ more fishies making number 2. Which is the greater factor in water degradation? Dunno, myself... I agree that UGFs aren't for evreyone, but (like almost any tool that can work) eliminating them out of hand is foolish. If you've tried them, and not had luck, they obviously aren't for you. My main point was that they have a bad rep that, in my decades of experience, is undeserved. Bad rep? No. They have advantages and disadvantages, and for many in the hobby, those trade-offs don't line up with their preferences. Given what you've said about over-stocking a tank, I'd guess it has to do in part with system stability when the power goes off. When I work with newbies to set up tanks, I always start them out with a UGF as a component of their filtration system. I hope you tell them about how easy it is to over-stock the tank... If they (like me) have blackouts from time to time, its an advantage to have tanks which can sustain themselves for a while, or at least know that once the power goes off, you've got a situation on your hands. If they decide they don't like it, they can always simply pull out the lift tubes. The space under the plates will fill pretty quickly with loose gravel (no caps on the lift tube holes), and the only real difference is that there is a bit of extra plastic inthe tank... Don't you use some sort of a screen mesh to keep the gravel above the plenum? DZ AW |
They are still aound, but not actual accepted any more. They got a lot of bad press if fanmcier (and abundant added expensive) alternates came out. Undergravel filters are still a abundant bargain advantage for drastically increasing your biofiltration capacity.
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:31 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FishKeepingBanter.com