lduncan

No, but it sounds interesting. Layton

TUNZE Streams are by far my best buy. Layton

Just and update. It's been over three weeks, and nitrates are still at 0, I have noticed a little bit of browning on one acro, but none of the others, so it's hard to tell whether it is related to the sugar or not. But so far I have been happy with the results. Layton

MTS strikes again! Layton

Someone needs to translate the translation.

but wait there's more...

Looks good, the photo's aren't the best, but I get the idea. Still recon that Steve Weasts tank is the best though! A DVD sounds like a great idea. I have access to pro video editing equipment and DVD recording equipment, I would be more than happy to put something together if people want to send me video or high quality still pics. Layton.

Now i'm interested, who is David Saxby, and please post some photo's of his tank. Sounds very impressive. Hey Steve can you get Nokia phones? Layton

no no no, wireless usb is a short range transfer (soon to be) standard, just like bluetooth. 802.11b/g are medium range standards. And are unlikely to see any more speed jumps above the current 54Mbps, unless they are moved out of the ISM band (2.4 GHz), the band only has 79 1MHz channels available. at any one time a single bluetooth device can use up to 3 channels, a 802.11b around 17 per connection and 802.11g can use 60+. So, they all use spread spectrum frequency hopping right? There should be no problems with interference, they will just hop to another frequency if the SNR gets too high. Wrong, you can show that with a single 802.11g network, within range of two bluetooth devices the transfer rate can drop to only a few hundred bytes a sec. This is because if each device trys to hop to the same freq, they both interfere with each other and must both imediately hop to another one. With only 79 channels (only 23 in Japan!) the probability of a collision is quite high with these devices. Each channel must hop every 4ms, so they never settle into interference free channels. Adaptive SSFH fixes this a little. Also, the modulation techniques used in both bluetooth and 802.11b (gaussian frequency shift keying) are channel intensive compared to those of wireless usb. Now introduce DECT cordless phones into this band, and things get crowded very quickly. hows that for some english Steve! Layton

480Mbps vs < 1Mbps, similar cost and power consumption... bluetooth is dead.

As far as engineering circles are concerned, BT is dead, too many shortcommings to design new products around it especially with the proliferation of wi-fi (major interferance problems), wireless USB is replacing it. The device will be a stand alone. Meaning it will act as a webserver WITHOUT connecting it to a PC. It will be able to be managed from a PC using a web brosers (similar to what most dsl routers allow) Reef- all that, and more complex actions, like pies has suggested, will be available, and easy to implement. All periphials will be wired, no X10, i don't trust it. The dallas 1-wire bus reduces the number of wires significantly. It only requires a wire similar in size to the 3.5mm headphone type cable, and can control thousands of devices off it. I hadn't thought about passive number plugging, that should be easy to include and very useful. The pre-prototype device only has 32k ROM and 32K RAM, enought to get the simple implementation and hardware designed. The prototype will have 128k ROM and 128k RAM, with the ability to intergrate more ram if required. This should be enough for 2000 log entries (unless you want to log still pics which would require a small HD!)

Sorry, but my inital enquiries to you about zeovit went un-answered, so I found other sources for it, and yes it is the original system I have. The zeovit came in clear plastic bags with blue german writing on it including "Korrallen-zucht" at the top. If you are the AU/NZ agent, then you really should reply to your customers enquiries, it's hard to sell stuff if you don't. Layton

Pies, 802.11b/g would be a custom option. The chipsets for these are still relatively expensive (10 x that of wired ethernet), and add significantly to the final cost of the product. BT... you mean BlueTooth? It's dead! No one is really using this anymore (other than phone manufacturers). Other standards like wireless usb are superseeding BT. Range is an issue, and again you would have a PC in there to convert to TCP/IP. The main problem with the neptune is that for remote control and monitoring, you must have it connected to an additional PC! This is something i want to avoid. Other issues such as the programming interface are vastly improved with a graphic display, and decent software. Layton

Nicks, I haven't had it blow up yet! It will have all the features that the IKS has. The main additional feature is really an ethernet port, which means you can plug it into a network, or a DSL modem, and have secure remote monitoring, and optionally remote control (remote control will be optional. Some people are worried about hackers accessing and taking control of their tank, unlikely, but still possible), all through a standard web browser, no matter where in the world you may be. It has also been designed so that in the future usb may be added, so you could set up a web camera to take still photo's at regular intervals. This is all really to give you piece of mind that your tank is doing fine if you are away on holiday etc. Additionally the 128x64 graphic display makes programming and using it much easier. There will also be a web browser based configuration option. It will email, page, or phone alerts such as over temperature, low pH, flood etc. (may even add SMS) It also supports 8 analogue inputs, meaning you can connect pH probes as well as ion selective electrodes (if you want to spend the cash), ORP, Salinity, temperature. It will have 12 digital inputs, for float switches, flood sensors, etc. currently 12 controllable 240V plugs, with the possiblity of adding more. Now that i've got some tunze streams, I may even be able to reverse engineer their controller and intergrate something more sophisticated in terms of randomness of the cycle of the pumps in software. (I'll have to check this out legally, it could be dodgy otherwise) If anyone is interested it will use the Dallas 1-wire bus extensively, which means MUCH tidyer wiring. Hopefully the finished product will be smaller than the IKS. As far as how expensive it will be, I think I can manufacture and sell it for less than the aquacontroller pro, including a healthy markup. ;-) Computers are really too bulky and expensive (even an old 386) for this sort of thing. An embedded stand alone device seems more practical to me. Pies, I told you DIY is more expensive for high tech equipment! Well there's still a LOT of code to be written, the hardware is the easy part! Layton

Hey Nicks, how about this for DIY: This is the pre-prototype of my very own aquacontroller. I designed it from scratch, basically cause none of the existing off the shelf controllers have the features I need. Currently I have all the hardware sorted, now it's just a matter of writing the software for the microcontroller. It is completely standalone, and doesn't need a PC to run. Hopefully i'll have it finished this year, maybe even produce a few to sell. I may even send a demo unit up to Alk so you guys can play with it once it's finished. Layton

hufa's are just a class of chemical, some may smell some may not, it depends on mostly how large the molecule is. I have not doubt that the zeovit system doesn't use either vodka or vinegar. A patent search could quickly tell someone enough information about the system so they can copy it (assuming they can read German, or that a US patent has been granted). A patent really only gives the creator a legal foot to stand on when someone starts selling a rip off of the system. Layton

Pies, i know what you mean, but I still stand by my thoughts regarding skimmers. Anyone could slap a skimmer together. But whether or not it works, or works efficiently is another story. Efficient skimmer design IS tricky, creating and controlling turbulent flows, creating bubbles of the right size and injecting them, creating flow patterns to maximise contact time within reasonable space considerations, right down to minimising bubbles outputted. Skimmer operation is far from low tech. Lighting is just a few wires and some electricity with a bit of glass to hold it all together. Layton

I'm not saying that the zeovit system is vodka/vinegar based, just that the general chemistry/biology behind it is similar. That is a specialised organic (carbon based) food feeding nirtrate and phosphate reducing bacteria. As I understand it zeofood's smell is actually mainly due to the highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFA) which have a very distinctive smell, unlike either vodka or vinegar. As far as vodka having been proven not to work, do you have any evidence for this? Layton

Pies, I don't really know reefs motives behide Custom Built vs. Buying a brand name skimmer, but one thing that came to mind is maybe it seemed a better option at the time. Shipping a 5 foot skimmer from the otherside of the world can not be particularly cheap, or convienient. It may have seemed cheaper to have one made here in NZ, but as with many DIY type projects costs can sometimes run away with you. Here is the link to the article that pies referred to, it contains some very good practical information. http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-02/eb/index.htm I tend to agree with reef in that DIY for critical, and technical components, such as skimmers should be avoided, unless you are really willing to spend a lot of money and are extreemely interested in the intricacies of the hobby. On the other hand, for more 'low tech' areas, such as lighting, sumps, and overflows, DIY can often work out cheaper and far more effective than 'off the shelf' solutions. My lighting for example is completely DIY, even the reflectors. It would have cost me in excess of $3500 to put MH lighting over my tank using standard aquarium pendants, such as the arcadia ones, instead for under $600 i got dual 400W 10k lights, and i'm very happy with them! Layton

Hey pies, you might be surprised at the colour of my green sinularia, it is actually green, unlike a lot of those sacrophytons which are labelled as green, but really are just white with a touch of green, i'll send some up when we get around to a frag exchange. also got some pink sinularia, (different growth form from the green one) Both grow very quickly. I also have some pink/brown capnella, which aparently grows like a weed, but it's not doing to well in my tank, (neither does my xenia) maybe it's a lack of nitrogen? They seem to love higher nutrient systems. Layton

Ha... Just wait, there are so many different, sometimes confusing, debates going on in this hobby, it is still very much a work in progress in terms of different theories and methods. However current conventional thinking in maintaining reef tanks inparticular revolve around the following key points. 1. Major filtration is taken care of by a high quality protien skimmer, (If you don't know what this is please ask). 2. Biological filtration is taken care of by live rock. Currently due to MAF regulations on the importation of live rock it must be stored dry for the quarantine period of 3 weeks. This means that it is generally only available as a white "base rock". Redwood Aquatics in ChCh has a large amount of this rock available. Traditional freshwater canister filters are generally no longer used (as a biological filter) in marine tanks due to the efficiency in which they convert nitrites into nitrates, and their inability of them to then reduce nitrates into gaseous nitrogen. 3. Lighting, I argue that Metal Halide is the only choice in lighting for successfully keeping corals, even soft corals, which tend not to need as much light, but they definatly benifit from it. If you only want to keep fish, lighting is not really an issue. 4. Water Flow, i would say that 15x tank volume per hour is an absolute minimum for soft corals. Not such an issue with fish only, but they will definatly appreciate some current in the tank. Again i don't know how much research you've done in terms of modern methods, but there are quite a few people here who own very successful marine tanks. Pies, reef, jetskisteve and others. I think the one thing all of us have learned, some the hard way, is the following, 1. Research and Planning are critical, plan as much as you can BEFORE buying anything, you may regret it otherwise. 2. Do it right the first time. Marine tanks can be expensive, don't skimp when it comes to equipment, you get what you pay for. In the long run, it will be cheaper to buy the $600 skimmer now than buy a $100 one and end up upgrading to the $600 after you realise it's crap. Same goes for lighting, if you want to keep hard corals, don't even bother with fluoro's get Metal halides from the start. Now to answer your question, and really to give any practical advice on what type of flow you'll need, or would be acceptable, we really need to know a little bit more about your intended system, such as: What size tank you plan on using Are you going to run a sump or not? Do you want to keep hard, or soft corals, or just fish only? I hope that I haven't confused you more, but all of this is important info. No doubt, Pies will chime in with his thoughts and questions. If you are looking for a more comprehensive source of information, check out www.reefcentral.com they have many faq's and many recognised experts in they hobby posting there such as Eric Borneman (coral expert), Randy Holmes Farley (reef chemistry expert), Dr Frank Marini (marine fish breeding expert), and other individuals with many years experience. Layton

That photo almost reminds me of the one in Erics book with the mushroom eating a bangaii cardinal! Layton

hey Pies, i just got a similar acro, but more white and light green. It's quite a large colony too, i'll get some pics up later, along with my other recent additions. Layton

Pies, draino is surprisingly pure sodium hydroxide, and is really no more dangerous to your tank than calcium hydroxide (kalk). Any tank with a reasonable alkalinity (greater than 2.6) should have no problems adding it. The hydroxide ion reacts relativly quickly with dissolved carbon dioxide producing, there are also other mechanisms for the neutralisation of the free hydroxide. Which reaction is most significant is determined by the pH. 2(OH)- + 2CO2 ---> H20 + 2(CO3)2- The only difference between this and the kalk method is the spectator ion (Ca2+ as opposed to Na+). Kalk will do the same thing to your hand as sodium hydroxide, at a much much slower rate. If anything this method is easier on the fish, I had problems with fish eating, or trying to eat the white kalk paste. I for one wouldn't like a mouth full of kalk. The sodium hydroxide method is much safer in that it is completely soluble, such that any solution which doesn't make it into the aiptasia, is quikly netralised by surrounding water by the above reaction, and no solid remains to be eaten by fish. Layton

OK, here is my sure fire way, 100% success rate, never to return again method. Use a saturated solution of Sodium Hydroxide (Drain Away, Draino, whatever you like to call it) and water. Using a syringe, squirt about 0.5 mL into the mouth of each aiptasia. This will kill even the stubborn foot tissue. I initially used kalk paste like pies, by found that the success rate wasn't that great. Sodium Hydroxide is much more soluble than Calcium Hydroxide, and is more alkaline, completely nuking the aiptasia. Again don't dose too much at one time. It is not harmful to your reef, unless you directly squirt it onto corals. Just a warning that Sodium Hydroxide will cause sever chemical burns if handled, you can tell if you have it on your hands 'cause they will feel "soapy" and slippery. If you feel your hands becoming slippery, wash with a LOT of cold water. Preferably wear gloves when handling. As dangerous as the chemical sounds, it is really quite safe for your reef. It's great to see some different people on this board too, from what I hear, the hobby is really starting to grow. Layton