Edvet
Member
Ahh is that your new secret filtermaterial in those plastic blue rimmed square boxes?? Intriguing shape
-
You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up
(NO MORE) 2,000L High tech BEAST
- Thread starter Filip Krupa
- Start date
zozo
Member
That's a good point.. I experienced the same and also wondered why and what it might be that freaks out the fish.. Could be intensity and or the fish sp. susceptibility to it. Also with the nowadays modern controlibility i've seen video's from people creating blizzard lightning effects. Sudden lighting flashes as if there s a thunderstorm going on. And it didn't look like freaking out the fish.
Another theory i thought about is capacitive or inductive current blasting from the lights into the tank. There are numerous articles to find on the net from people measurig x voltage in their tankwater. Some report up to 40 volts and i've red even higher values. This was due to the Tube light ballasts blasting a capacitive current ito the tank water. Those floodlights also contain a driver instead of a ballast it might cause simmular effect.
As said it's only a theory, you can check with a multimeter in the tank water and see what voltage is measured.. I red articles about it, stating as long as the tank water isn't grounded this inductive or capacitive stray current shouldnt have any impact.. Also had fears debate with an alledged electricity proffesor stating the same. I'm far from a professor and just an amateur using logics.. And my question was, if a light ballast or a driver containing coils is able to blast capacitive current into the tank over the atmosphere without a cable touching the water. Than why is it so darn far fetched to suspect there will be some current exciting again?. That it is blasted in over the atmosphere is prooven and measurable.. Me stating if that's a fact why doesn't the same current come out the same route, over the atmosphere? That question was never answered, mater a fact it was ridiculed. Probaly because it can't be measured. 🙂 Still fish freak out occasionaly.. A short capacitive peaking electro shock is a possible suspect imho..
Last edited:
Costa
Member
Sorry to hear about your rummies. Did all 300 die? I would expect it would take a lot of 2.5cm fish to die to see an Ammonia spike in a 2000L tank...
Costa
Member
That's probably because you have all these rare plants that stun your fish when the lights come on 🙂
. makes sense what you said about a few die you cant see seem and it compounds the algae problemwas thinking the same myself with the PLC you can use up some of the spare outputs you have and have the lights come on incrementally
Fair to say this is a rubbish attitude to have, killing 300 fish and not caring is not part of the 'game'!!
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Filip Krupa
Member
Not sure what youre describing.
If what I wrote reads to you as "I killed 300 fish and dont care". Then this is not a thread for you.
I wont cry over spoiled milk. Thats my attitude.
Fil
Filip Krupa
Member
Well, it was the rummies freaking out. I did re-program the plc to phase the lights. It defo helped.
Thanks for reading
Fil
Filip Krupa
Member
Well, i put in about 300, and fished out perhaps 100 dead yesterday, there are no live ones left. I did pull dead ones out regularily before yesterday, but only a few at a time, guess it all adds up.
Also, Ive a seachem ammonia monitor in. Never noticed a spike.
However, from what Ive read. It only takes an unmeasurable ammount of ammonia increase to feed green water.
Thanks for reading
Fil
Filip Krupa
Member
Interesting!!! Where is my dusty old multimeter...
zozo
Member
Might like to read this.
https://www.dph.nl/article/cat-02/strayvoltages.shtml
Tho he makes some bold statements and has opinions about others opinions to be based on misinformation. I migt add, parts of his opinions and conclusions are based on not having or able to measure for all information.
As said in my opinion the most important question is completely ignored and deemed non excisting. But it stays a fact, light ballast can blast current into the water over the atmosphere without direct physical contact. But same current also exiting the tank over the very same atmosphere causing stress sensation on fish is considered a fairytale. It can't excist if it can't be measured? Since we always need a ground to be able to measure current. And the atmosphere obviously doesn't provide enough ground to measure it. So theoreticaly it is 0 without a ground, in practice i'm not so sure. There is more to electrical power than meets the eye.
I stand my ground 🙂 If it can get into the medium over the atmosphere without direct measurable physical contact, it likely can leave via the very same way.
Problem is, there is no device available able to proof it.
Last edited:
Filip Krupa
Member
I used my multimeter and it doesnt detect anything. Although when I put my tongue (I recommend!) between the meter and ground, I can defo feel a current! Below .5 miliamps i guess.
Fil
Fil
Filip Krupa
Member
Just got rid of about 1 kg of vallis.
Nearly fell in...
Replanted the pogostemon carpet to "behind" the tank. No one could see it in the middle...
Im also loving my dwarf sag carpet, though at this point its more of a lawn!!!
See for youselves!
Thanks for reading
Fil
Nearly fell in...
Replanted the pogostemon carpet to "behind" the tank. No one could see it in the middle...
Im also loving my dwarf sag carpet, though at this point its more of a lawn!!!
See for youselves!
Thanks for reading
Fil
Diy UV has been done before, but there are many gotchas.
The main ones are:
- There are two levels of UV exposure useful in aquatic settings, clarification and sterilisation. Sterilisation uses mush more intense and longer timed exposure.
- There is a water "dwell time" for UV to be effective. Move the water too fast and UV has little or no effect on algae and spores in the water.
- UV tubes have a finite life before UV generation falls (maybe a year ?). But then it is not necessary to run 24/7.
- UV tubes are generally held in a quartz sleeve, which allows the UV through (normal glass blocks UV), allows UV tube to run hotter and more efficient. Also allows easier cleaning.
- UV attacks most plastics, which is why UV units use glass or metal tubes to the section in exposed UV light.
- UV will degrade the micro plant fertilisers, so turn it of when adding fertiliser.
I suspect with a tank your size your are looking at a large pond type UV unit.
Much more info here.
http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/AquariumUVSterilization.html
Filip Krupa
Member
Ian, helpful as always!!!
Thanks for the basics breakdown, i read a few paragraphs of the link too! Like it.
Shall read it tonight when kids are in bed, followed by a search for high output uv bulbs 😀.
On the point of the housing material, I will likely use some black soil plumbing meant for outside. I believe it has UV resistant particles in the plastic due to expected exposure to the sun. Should be fun.
Fil
Not convinced it will UVC resistant. Most UV equipment is contained in glass or stainless or specialist plastic. The Vectron UV unit uses a UV tube in quartz glass housing all contained in a special plastic tube. It states that the plastic fittings should be inspected regularly and replaced once "eroded" by the UV light.
Attachments
Filip Krupa
Member
I have a suspicion the bulb i bought wont be efficient enough to cause a problem.
I will make a diy unit, but most likely replace it with a manufactured pond uv.
Any idea why they rate these UVs differently for ponds vs aquariums?
E.g. 13w uv offered for ponds up to 10000L or aquariums up to 200L.
Thanks
Fil
Edvet
Member
I guess ponds are less "dirty" than tanks. Les kg fish/liter, larger volume so dirt falls to the bottom easier, temperature differences.
zozo
Member
That's a good question.. 🙂 Likely it is turnover rate, in ponds this is generaly a lot lower than in aqauriums. And it's the contact time what makes UV more or less effective. If there is a longer contact time due to a lower turnover you could suffice with lower wattage.
In your case with a sump, it is best to install it in a paralel system with it's own pump. This way you can decide the turnover and regulate it's contact time. You simply run it over the UV and back into the sump, since the water in the sump is constantly refreched you'll get to a treat of the complete volume anyway. If you put it directly into the main pump outlet, than you are hooked to the main and also higher turnover and contact time will be much shorter, resulting in need of more wattage.
There is no doubt about it that UV definitively sterilizes, it burns the crap out of free floating single cell organisme. It is also used in swimming pools to reduce or completely eliminate the use of chlorine. Since it is prooven that germs can get resistant to chlorine, but less likely resistant to UV.
But than again, in how far is this a nessecity in a single fish tank? If you watch Youtube videos from vendors explaining "Why you should!". All explain that test runs confirmed they had less issues with the tanks with an UV installed. Kinda makes me wonder why they have issues in the first place. I'm doing aqaurium for the biggest part of my life and a can't remember the last time i had issues in which an UV could have prevented it or cured it. 🙂 Kinda makes me suspect that all these pro advocating is done by proffesional fish keepers with a sh*tload of aqauriums with a higher turnover in fish than water.. 🙄 OK! Than having a UV in your system might be a very good idea. For a hobbyist with a single tank that gets a good and regular husbandry, you can put a huge questionmark to it if it is a need or just a waste of energy.
Anyway if you can afford it and don't mind putting the cost and energy in for you piece of mind. It wont hurt either..
