# 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ?????



## sgl101 (14 May 2009)

Hi

Im in the process of setting up a new tank ... (Long Story)

is it possible to set up a huge planted tank ?

also what sort of planning etc would i need to do

i would like to run on 2-3 fluval fx5 filters

it will be lt with halides

and i will be using tropica substrate

all info greatly recieved

Steve


----------



## Dan Crawford (14 May 2009)

It certainly is possible, check this out viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5838
Tom Barr has done many of these projects.
The green machine have several large display tanks too. http://www.thegreenmachineonline.com/gallery.html


----------



## hellohefalump (14 May 2009)

Are you going to be using CO2?  If you are, I would definately go down the fire extinguisher route (cheaper) or keep it low tech and low light.


----------



## sgl101 (14 May 2009)

hellohefalump said:
			
		

> Are you going to be using CO2?  If you are, I would definately go down the fire extinguisher route (cheaper) or keep it low tech and low light.



Why low tech and low light ?

Just wondering ?

Steve


----------



## aaronnorth (14 May 2009)

sgl101 said:
			
		

> hellohefalump said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



so you dont have to inject CO2. Obviously on massive tanks getting the CO2 delivered to all corners will be a hard job, however, i am sure Tom (plantbrain) can give you some tips.


----------



## a1Matt (14 May 2009)

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> Obviously on massive tanks getting the CO2 delivered to all corners will be a hard job



and CO2 adds more expense as well.

Although I guess a successful planted tank of this size is going to be expensive no matter what options you take.


----------



## sgl101 (14 May 2009)

My last tank was a 10x4x3 full reef tank with 3kw of lighting and a 22k budget.

I want to do this right and right first time.

Regards Steve


----------



## Garuf (14 May 2009)

I'd vote you need many many more filters than just 4 fx5's.


----------



## LondonDragon (14 May 2009)

sgl101 said:
			
		

> My last tank was a 10x4x3 full reef tank with 3kw of lighting and a 22k budget.


Got any photos Steve?? would be nice to see it, cheers
Welcome aboard and good luck with the new project


----------



## TDI-line (14 May 2009)

Hello and welcome.

Just out of interest but why have you choosen the Tropica substrate over others like ADA aquasoil etc.


----------



## Simon D (14 May 2009)

sgl101 said:
			
		

> Why low tech and low light ?
> 
> Just wondering ?
> 
> Steve



High tech (ie CO2 injected) and high light will incur lots of maintenance as (generally speaking) plants grow fast and need more attention

Low tech would be easier to maintain in a tank of that size.


----------



## sgl101 (15 May 2009)

LondonDragon said:
			
		

> sgl101 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



there is a 70 page thread on ultimate reef under "steve's big one"

Regards Steve


----------



## sgl101 (15 May 2009)

TDI-line said:
			
		

> Hello and welcome.
> 
> Just out of interest but why have you choosen the Tropica substrate over others like ADA aquasoil etc.



i have seen it used in my lfs and they are having great results the tank was in last months pfk and it seems to be doing well


----------



## sgl101 (15 May 2009)

Garuf said:
			
		

> I'd vote you need many many more filters than just 4 fx5's.




i would like to here more on this as the tank will be approx 1500ltrs which each fx5 is rated at so 3/4 would be 3/4 times the filtering required and also there will be supplemented flow?

Regards Steve


----------



## Garuf (15 May 2009)

We recommend as close to 10x turnover as a minimum the closer to 20x the better. You're looking at massive turnover pond pumps and you're well into reefer territory come that point, especially as I would imagine you'd be using a sump or something similar.


----------



## sgl101 (15 May 2009)

Garuf said:
			
		

> We recommend as close to 10x turnover as a minimum the closer to 20x the better. You're looking at massive turnover pond pumps and you're well into reefer territory come that point, especially as I would imagine you'd be using a sump or something similar.



i appreciate turn over is important although it varies to a reef as you want a turbulat surface in a reef for oxygen exchange and to thrash out the co2, however in a planted tank i was going to use under water currents and water movements, which will give me the turn over, but this is surely differant to the need for external filters, as plants will take up nutrients and with a low fish load more than 4 seems over kill imo

Regards Steve


----------



## TDI-line (15 May 2009)

sgl101 said:
			
		

> Garuf said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My tank is 720 litre, so nearly half of yours, i use an Eheim Pro 3e 2078 (700 litres) and an Eheim Pro 3 2075 (600 litres), and i am thinking about adding a third one too. 

Once you start adding CO2 reactors and in-line heaters, the flow starts to drop. And you'll probably need a few of these too.


----------



## andy (15 May 2009)

have you considdered using a sump for filteration ?....i appreciate that many "plant keepers" are not in favour of this due to CO2 being lost in the sump but it must be worth thinking about.  You could also think of using a couple of the sequence 10,000's for circulation....a bit like you would with a closed loop system in a reef aquarium to get all those currents in inaccessible places.

Good luck with it mate....i bet, with a bit of planning, it could look awesome.  just one thing though, if you were thinking about putting Discus in there, think again....they're the most unnatural fish you could ever wish for in a planted tank (just my humble opinion   )

Andy


----------



## sgl101 (15 May 2009)

andy said:
			
		

> have you considdered using a sump for filteration ?....i appreciate that many "plant keepers" are not in favour of this due to CO2 being lost in the sump but it must be worth thinking about.  You could also think of using a couple of the sequence 10,000's for circulation....a bit like you would with a closed loop system in a reef aquarium to get all those currents in inaccessible places.
> 
> Good luck with it mate....i bet, with a bit of planning, it could look awesome.  just one thing though, if you were thinking about putting Discus in there, think again....they're the most unnatural fish you could ever wish for in a planted tank (just my humble opinion   )
> 
> Andy



i had an 8 foot sump on my 10 foter and had 6 closed loops run by 6 sequence 10000s


----------



## ceg4048 (15 May 2009)

Hi,
    It's not that "plant keepers" eschew the use of sumps. Instead it's necessary that they understand what the disadvantages of sumps are, and to address the weaknesses. 

Specifically, sumps tend to drive off CO2 because typically they are open to atmosphere and typically there is a lot of splashing going on inside the sump. This merely means that more CO2 needs to injected to compensate for the CO2 lost due to out gassing. The water volume held by the sump must also be taken into account when calculating the nutrient dosage.

If the sump can be sealed against atmospheric loss and if the internal pathways can be made less turbulent - and if the water volume is accounted for in nutrient dosage calculation, then the advantages of the sump are that higher turnovers can be achieved without the need for extra filters. So there is no inherent reason to avoid sumps if these weaknesses can be addressed.

Cheers,


----------



## Mowze (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*



			
				Garuf said:
			
		

> I'd vote you need many many more filters than just 4 fx5's.



 For the cost of 3-4 FX5s you might as well go systemised with a sump. Pressurised pond filters may also be something worth looking into, just because its made for a pond doesnt mean it cant be used in an aqarium and vice versa (You would be suprised how many people think otherwise.)



			
				ceg4048 said:
			
		

> Hi,
> It's not that "plant keepers" eschew the use of sumps. Instead it's necessary that they understand what the disadvantages of sumps are, and to address the weaknesses.
> 
> Specifically, sumps tend to drive off CO2 because typically they are open to atmosphere and typically there is a lot of splashing going on inside the sump. This merely means that more CO2 needs to injected to compensate for the CO2 lost due to out gassing. The water volume held by the sump must also be taken into account when calculating the nutrient dosage.
> ...



 It is easy enough to avoid splashing within a sump if designed correctly, also if there is a problem with the sump being open to the atmosphere and CO2 being lost that way, why do people keep open top tanks? All it takes is a peice of acrylic on the top... Job done!


----------



## ceg4048 (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*



			
				ceg4048 said:
			
		

> Hi,
> It's not that "plant keepers" eschew the use of sumps. Instead it's necessary that they understand what the disadvantages of sumps are, and to address the weaknesses.
> 
> Specifically, sumps tend to drive off CO2 because typically they are open to atmosphere and typically there is a lot of splashing going on inside the sump. This merely means that more CO2 needs to injected to compensate for the CO2 lost due to out gassing. The water volume held by the sump must also be taken into account when calculating the nutrient dosage.
> ...


Hi,
   My point was that most sumps aren't designed with the minimization of splashing in mind, just the opposite because splashing sumps increases the O2 exchange and so this is a good thing in non-planted tanks. For a planted CO2 injected tank this is a source of potential problems if one is not aware of it. Splashing in an unsealed sump drives off CO2 in the same way one might shake up a coke bottle and release the cap. So this is a bad combination that depletes the CO2 unnecessarily. In a 14 foot tank this becomes an economic impediment.

People keep open top tanks because for various reasons, such as aesthetics, economics (non-standard tank dimensions and the cost of a hood to fit those dimensions) or for practicality due to configuration issues, tank in-situ installation problems or for ease of maintenance. They rarely, if ever, do it simply because they disbelieve or want to disprove the theory of CO2 loss at the surface. Nevertheless, open top tanks tend to have a greater CO2 loss than if they were covered, and so this has to be compensated for by having a higher injection rate than they might otherwise need if they were covered. Again, this is not an impossible situation, merely something that ought to be accounted for when designing or implementing a tank configuration.

In CO2 injected tanks, a standard technique for minimizing CO2 loss at the surface is to avoid splashing at the surface. Orient the filter return so as not to break the surface, but to merely have the surface ripple. If there are bubbles or breakage of the surface this accelerates CO2 evaporation in exactly the same way as discussed in the sump.

Cheers,


----------



## Mowze (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*

For a tank this size the sump is likely to be custom built in which case a large sump could be designed specifically with the planted aquarium and mininalising CO2 loss in mind.


----------



## ceg4048 (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*

Yes, that is correct. However again, my point is that the designer must be aware of the issues/limitation involved with the tank being used for plants and must therefore incorporate solutions to these issues as a set of basic parameters of the sump design. 

Now that the OP is aware of the unique issues and limitations, I'm sure the sump will incorporate these plant specific design features instead of a fish-only conventional design.  

Cheers,


----------



## CeeJay (16 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*



			
				hellohefalump said:
			
		

> Are you going to be using CO2?  If you are, I would definately go down the fire extinguisher route (cheaper)


Big fire extinguisher  
A 25kg bottle may be more appropriate from one of the major gas suppliers like BOC, on a tank that size


----------



## hazeljane (17 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*

Some cabinet to get a bottle in of that size      



Stu.


----------



## BAE (21 Mar 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*

yeah that would be a pretty big cabinet unless the bottle is  wider than usual


----------



## jcastell (6 Apr 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*

has anyone ever done any CO2 measurements in sump setups?

let say, for the sake of argument, that water when gone through the sump and returned had all its CO2 taken out, this would undoubtedly mean that we have to use more CO2 to replenish the lose to maintain the level in the main tank, but I haven't done any experiments on this and I'm wondering if anyone has. There is an article of people using trickle filters for planted tanks, but they cover up their filters so I suppose any CO2 getting splashed about stays enclosed and gets reabsorbed again by the water?

I am seriously thinking of setting up a 3 - 4 metre planted tank some time in the future (when I move house), and for that size, sumps are the only option I see. I will NOT use large canisters, but I want to experiment first and was hoping someone else took the plunge before me to give some feedback.

As far as I see it I want to adopt what Amano does on his super large tank except:

1) I will be using trickle towers, and they will be aerated so probably all CO2 will be gassed. This is to ensure the biological tower works at its optimal efficiency. The bio towers are totally maintenance free.

2) the prefilter/siphon box will incorporate filter floss so water is fine filtered before it even hits the bio tower. This alone is what makes the sump arrangement worth it, since it is open to a quick change whereas using canisters filters it's extremely cumbersome to get to.

3) dosing inputs can be done into the sump and not into the tanks, which is neater

4) same for heating or whatever water treatment you might want to do

5) return via Deltec HLP pumps, totally silent, and I'll probably use a Mazzei jet unless someone else has a better suggestion

6) water changes can be easily implemented and made automatic if required

I love sump set ups, despite the drawbacks of CO2 degassing and the vast space required along with the need to properly engineer the siphon box right.


----------



## Always Broke (6 Apr 2010)

*Re: 14 foot Planted Tank ................  is it possible ??*

I am running a sump in my tank.
The system will be up and running at the end of the month all planted out.
I have a fair bit of air coming down my standpipes so that will be driving the Co2 off but I am happy with that for the bio stages. I think if you run weirs in the tank you will not avoid this problem
Its a 800 ltr system in all so we shall see how much Co2 it uses. At the moment its got 1 6.25 kg bottle to supply it. I may need to increase this dependant on how long it lasts. I am also injecting at one point ,but that is the input to the return pump which is an Aquamax 10000 returning through a full length 40mm spay bar . We will see how it gets on.
I was thinking of putting a drop checker in my last bio stage  just to see if there is any co2 present at that point but I am not to hopeful.
I would love to run trickle towers as I use them on my outside set up and are totally maintenance free if I had the room.

Simon


----------

