wasp Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Put it this way Layton you've been running it a week now. Did it work? Any results? Before and after pics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Interesting. I'm not using either but i'd have chosen OZONE over UV because of cost. Someone earlier said Ozone adds something to the water? All it does is add an unstable molicule which can't stay for long. As for the harnful effects of ozone, not in the small quantities used for home aquairums, but its is 'possible'. Pie It's not only possible it's probable. Ozone will oxidise bromine compounds to hypobromic acid if it bumps into it. It's almost as nasty as chlorine bleach. (Bromine is also used in pools as a substitute for chlorine). Don't really want that being created in my tank, even in small quantities really. It may not be catastrophic, but it's not going to do much good either. There is a good alternative in UV. I guess to me UV is more fool proof. But of course heaps of people use ozone with great success. I prefer UV though. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Doesn't he have over 20 fish? No. Not that I've seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 It's not only possible it's probable. Ozone will oxidise bromine compounds to hypobromic acid if it bumps into it. It's almost as nasty as chlorine bleach. (Bromine is also used in pools as a substitute for chlorine). Don't really want that being created in my tank, even in small quantities really. It may not be catastrophic, but it's not going to do much good either. There is a good alternative in UV. I guess to me UV is more fool proof. But of course heaps of people use ozone with great success. I prefer UV though. Layton One of the tanks you gave as a great example of UV, is actually not UV at all. It runs ozone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brianemone Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 the one that said ozone next to it??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Carbon is fine in a correctly run tank. You mean carbon which leaches stuff (no matter what source)? Carbon which you have to replace? Carbon which doesn't actually remove the stuff from your system and just traps it, until you replace it? UV seems better to me. That's what I got it for, so I don't have to use carbon. Yip wasp, that one that said ozone next to it. I was really just using those to illustrate that UV isn't that uncommon, not as a example of how it makes a tank better. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Put it this way Layton you've been running it a week now. Did it work? Any results? Before and after pics? Yip, massive increase in skimmer output overnight. Will be interesting to see what effect it has on nitrates, which are just over 5 at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Yip wasp, that one that said ozone next to it. Layton Scratching to find enough UV ones? I was really just using those to illustrate that UV isn't that uncommon, not as a example of how it makes a tank better. Layton Using an ozone tank to demonstrate how UV makes a tank better is certainly an interesting, if somewhat confused, approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brianemone Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 come on children. i understand why he put it up, if you notice the tanks he put up where all TOTM's from RC im sure if he wanted to spend some time searching he could easily find more but that would have been the easiest place to look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Scratching to find enough UV ones? Nope, that was all of 5 min searching this morning. I didn't have to look hard. Using an ozone tank to demonstrate how UV makes a tank better is certainly an interesting, if somewhat confused, approach. I wasn't doing that. I wasn't even demonstrating how UV makes a tank better (you clearly still can't read). Just that it's more common than people might think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 I wasn't doing that. :lol: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 :lol: :lol: Still can't comprehend what you read. Your reading into things just to be argumentative. It gets tiresome sometimes. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 Quote "I try to give people info which is accurate. Sometimes it's what they want to hear. Other times, they don't what to hear it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 Actually Layton it is quite funny really. Every single thread I've ever started, or been in, trying to discuss filtration in a sensible manner, has been turned into a great big arguing thread, by you. I've never once been able to have a sensible discussion about zeovit on this forum, thanks to you. Now you get upset and abusive when I crashed your thread. Funny that. Just to show what a gentleman I am, I'll now leave your UV thread, it's yours :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 Actually Layton it is quite funny really. Every single thread I've ever started, or been in, trying to discuss filtration in a sensible manner, has been turned into a great big arguing thread, by you. I've never once been able to have a sensible discussion about zeovit on this forum, thanks to you. Now you get upset and abusive when I crashed your thread. Funny that. Just to show what a gentleman I am, I'll now leave your UV thread, it's yours :lol: :roll: So you set out with the intent and desire to "crash" this thread? How gentlemanly of you. :roll: I don't care whether you participate in this thread or not. But if you start assuming I mean something when I clearly don't, i'm gonna call you on it. It's not me getting "upset and abusive", it's me clarifying things. Like I said, you have trouble understanding what I mean sometimes. I don't see how posting information is equated to "crashing" threads. I don't believe I "crashed" any discussion on zeovit, just provided some observations and possible explanations. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostface Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 its going to seem really weird when it comes out that wasp and lduncan are the same person........ :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 LOL :lol: :lol: :lol: I just HAD to butt in one more time to laugh at that one !! Good one Ghostface ROTFL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 I blew out the rocks today, and there was a significant increase in detritus come off them. That's a sure sign that de-nitrification has kicked up a gear. I'll measure nitrates at the end of the week and see if it has had any effect yet. Judging by what is coming from the rocks, I would think it has. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 Not all detritus is the same, it depends just exactly what you blew off was. But to me, quantity of "detritus", is a general indicator of bioload, and DOC concentration, and general health of the bacterial population, and other things also, it is surprising what you can tell. If I'm running PO4 extremely low, and I turkey bast the rocks, I'll get a lot less detritus, than if i've allowed PO4 to rise. That's despite feeding the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 Not all detritus is the same, it depends just exactly what you blew off was. But to me, quantity of "detritus", is a general indicator of bioload, and DOC concentration, and general health of the bacterial population, and other things also, it is surprising what you can tell. If I'm running PO4 extremely low, and I turkey bast the rocks, I'll get a lot less detritus, than if i've allowed PO4 to rise. That's despite feeding the same. My ortho-phosphate is undetectable, has been for virtually all the tanks life, except for about a month ago, when I detected a faint blue colour on the test for a couple of weeks. Nitrates were just over 5 the day I added the UV. Detritus is a good indication of bioload, and bacterial activity. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 I didn't realise you could actually detect Po4, was it a Salifert kit? If you can actually detect any orthophosphate at all with one of those, you have a problem. How often do you clean your glass? And does a UV help with PO4? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 the UV. Detritus is a good indication of bioload, and bacterial activity. Layton It's also strongly linked with DOC's, I'm guessing that's what you've got the UV unit to help with, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 I didn't realise you could actually detect Po4, was it a Salifert kit? If you can actually detect any orthophosphate at all with one of those, you have a problem. How often do you clean your glass? And does a UV help with PO4? You say that like the Hanna kit is actually any more useful Don't clean the glass that often, two or three weeks usually. It gets corraline on which is more annoying than any other sort of algae. Also depends on whether I keep up with syphoning, as my flow isn't really up to keeping all the detritus it needs to in suspension to get to the skimmer. The UV provides additional food for the bacteria which perform denitrification (and any other bacteria that want's it), by splitting larger organics. It's these bacteria which are responsible for storing phosphate in sand beds, and are the ones which purge phosphate out of rock (the cooking/shedding process). So yes, it will help with phosphate I guess by the fact that denitrifaction and phosphate go hand in hand. The bacteria try to saturate themselves with phosphate. They absorb much more than they need to live and reproduce, so if you can get them to the skimmer (usually in the form of detritus) then you're removing phosphate. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted December 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 It's also strongly linked with DOC's, I'm guessing that's what you've got the UV unit to help with, right? Yip. I've got a few large soft corals in the tank, so it splits the aromatic rings in the terpine toxins they release, making them available to bacteria. The UV just makes DOC's smaller so bacteria can use them much easier, then the bacteria are removed through skimming. Better method than using carbon to me. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 Well if it's 3 weeks between glass cleans I guess PO4 must be OK. You sound doubtful about the advantage of a Hanna meter. Have you ever seen one? I guess to some people they would have to try one, to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.