Origami

It's here: http://www.wamas.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28082

Incredible tank, Justin. I can't believe that I'm just now coming across this thread. Wow.

Stu, I have one you could borrow but I'm in Ashburn. If you can't find one closer, let me know. I also work in Herndon which is just a bit closer if that's more convenient. (BTW, it's an old bulb that you could have - so no return would be necessary.)

Maybe you've seen this already? http://saltaquarium.about.com/cs/aquariumd...yaqdiagram1.htm It looks like it's put together all at once. One pane after the other with multiple (two or three) joints after the first pane is installed.

I have my DSB in a 20H. There's about 8.5" of sand with the remaining volume used for chaetomorpha. I have 2 compact fluorescent reflector lamps hanging above to provide light for the algae.

Steve, I've got no knowledge of this but you may want to check with Glass Cages and see just what kind of sealant they use before putting just anything on. It may not be just your run of the mill silicone sealant....

Forrest, the DSB does not need light (unless you're going to also place macros in it, of course). Good luck with the new configuration.

Time for an update: 180 g DT with 310 g total in system (system includes 55 frag tank, 20 macroalgae/dsb refugium, 100 g Rubbermaid stock tank sump, and 10g "other" w/ a mantis refugee). Also 29 g biocube Total about 340 gallons

Correct - either that or make sure that you have an air-gap (tee) in the line (on the output side of the pump) that's above the highest point of the water in the reservoir. In my case, I used an aqualifter with a tee on the output side. I thought it ideal because it delivers at around 3.5 gallons an hour. Thanks for catching that, Doug.

Yeah, if for some reason, the float fails, not only will you have a heck of a mess to clean up, but your salinity could come crashing down, wiping out everything. Not a good scene. May I ask why you chose to use this kind of float over, say, a float switch (or redundant float switches) and a pump placed in an external reservoir (of limited volume)? Here's a graphic of an ATO setup that I used until recently. It used three float switches (shown in brown). Two were in the sump (where one of the two was a backup to the other) and one was near the bottom of my 11-gallon top-off reservoir. My kit was from Aquahub (http://www.aquahub.com/store/diygaquarium.html) and I bought it from BRK (they no longer carry it, I think) and it worked well. It was the so-called "Deluxe" kit (http://www.aquahub.com/store/product27.html). The kit cost was something like $50 and was easy enough to assemble, but you had to supply your own pump. In my case, I used an aqualifter as a pump.

Here's a link to a $100 pinwheel impeller from Euro-Reef's SPE5 (a modified Eheim 1262) pump which, if like my GSA Custom 8, should fit the Eheim on your skimmer. The impeller is very close in design to Deltec's pinwheel impellers and is used on some of Euro-Reef's bigger RC models (like their RC750 - RC2000, and CS180 - CS600). http://commerce03.i2net.com/able55new/stor...2-P173C105.aspx If the link ever dies, try Googling "Euro Reef SPE5 impeller."

Most of the time, it's just calcium carbonate that precipitates out in areas of especially high concentration as the salt mix dissolves. RHF had an article in 2005 that you may be interested in (http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-07/rhf/index.php). He writes, Most salt mixes leave behind a solid residue when dissolved, although the extent to which this occurs varies from brand to brand. I use Instant Ocean and rarely clean out the 44-gallon trashcan that I mix it in, so a significant residue builds up over time (Figure 1). In preparation for this article I removed some of this solid material, and found that it could be almost completely dissolved in hydrochloric acid with lots of bubbling. This demonstrates that these solids were probably calcium carbonate (CaCO3), perhaps also containing magnesium. Pure magnesium carbonate is undersaturated in seawater (which is detailed in later sections of this article) 1 and should dissolve in marine systems, so it isn't likely to be the precipitated material, although there may be significant magnesium in the calcium carbonate. (Figure 1. The residue on the bottom of the plastic trash can that I use to mix Instant Ocean. I rarely clean it out. The solid is most likely calcium carbonate. ) Based on the fact that the material exists as sheets that clearly did not arrive in the mix (as opposed to a fine powder which might have), I conclude that at least a significant fraction of this residue formed in the barrel. I cannot, however, rule out the possibility that some solid calcium or magnesium carbonate may have existed in the salt mix and was cemented together by additional precipitation of calcium carbonate during dissolution or storage. When salt mixes are dissolved, there exist local regions where the salt concentration is very high. In those local regions, the calcium and alkalinity must also be very high. In fact, as seawater is concentrated by evaporation, there is a well-established series of minerals that precipitate as the salinity increases. In this series, calcium and magnesium carbonate are the first to precipitate, appearing at a specific gravity of about 1.140, which is about a 50% solution of salt in water.1 Such conditions may well exist on the bottom of a saltwater reservoir as the salt is dissolving. With some mixes (but not the Instant Ocean that I use), the initial pH on dissolution may be very high (pH 8.5-9 +). As shown in detail later in this article, pH can play a dominant role in determining the rate of calcium carbonate precipitation, and such a high pH would make it more likely to precipitate. It has been suggested by some aquarists that some salt mixes may contain anti-caking agents, such as clays. I do not know if this is true, but if it is, they may form part of the residue that is left behind after dissolution. In order to minimize the formation of insoluble carbonate salts when mixing, the following suggestions may be helpful: 1. Add the salt to a full batch of water, rather than adding water slowly to a large batch of salt. The latter allows a greater time at much higher than natural seawater salinity, which may tend to precipitate calcium and magnesium salts. 2. Stir the mixture vigorously as it is being dissolved. 3. If using a mix with a high initial pH, aerate the mixture as well as stirring it. The aeration will reduce the pH.

Really, Phil? You're just hammering away at the air intake with regular impeller blades? Interesting.

You'll be fine running this off of a DC8 (the current limit per socket - there are 8 of them on the DC8 - is 6 amps) as long as the DE bulbs are on individual power cords and you plug them into separate sockets. If you've got your equipment really spread out, you may find yourself needing multiple outlet banks, in which case you could go with multiple DC8's, DC4's (either the DC4 or DC4HD), or a combination. Here's a list of Neptune accessories: http://www.neptunesys.com/~clp//index.php?...3&Itemid=40

You mean DC8's, I think.

I've bought some and even made some like the MR2 (mag rack version 2) series rack from here: http://www.blackrockreef.com/index.html In many ways it's not unlike what you've linked to except that these racks use black egg crate. The biggest problem I had with the older design is having the rack occasionally "trap door" on me during water changes when the frags would begin to be exposed over the water line thus putting a heavier load on the magnets. Blackrock's new MR3 design has tried to fix this with some vertical stabilizers. The one problem that I have with the rack design you've linked to is the amount of solid acrylic that I see around the plug holes. It seems to me that this design would reduce flow around frags even more than a design based on egg crate. It might also present more drag which may make it more susceptible to dislodging and dumping your frags on the sand or in the rock below.

Here's an article that you might find helpful: http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-05/sh/feature/index.php (title: A Guide to Using Calcium Reactors, by Simon Huntington) It has a section on tuning your reactor.

Agreed. I want to be clear, my thoughts were not aimed at raising the rabble, nor were they intended as a criticism of Doug or anybody on the executive committee. I've seen enough of these people to know that they're good people giving their time and knowledge to our shared passion. I, for one, sincerely appreciate that effort. Sometimes, however, we don't see the potholes in the road ahead as we move forward and sometimes we run headlong into one despite our best intentions to steer a smooth course. I think that this may be one of those times. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a productive, civil, and forthright dialogue aimed at moving us forward together. It is, in my opinion, far more beneficial to move forward in this fashion than to engage in divide and conquer strategies. Thank you for taking the time to reconsider thoughtfully the whole DFS banner thing. I think that it benefits us all to know that we can raise potentially touchy issues and know that we have a board that will listen to our concerns. {edited for a grammar screw up}

Not to brow beat you, Doug, or anybody else for that matter. Also, I wasn't sure what "It is being corrected" referred to. When you originally posted that comment (or, "getting changed" as it were), I took it as meaning that DFS was changing their "stock response," not that we were taking some action. That's my first laugh of the day. Thanks, Mr. Tang! Hey, Doug, looks like you asked for it!

I'm going to take my last post one step further and ask that the officers consider the following carefully, and perhaps to reconsider this Drs. Foster & Smith banner idea. 1) The Drs. Foster and Smith banner is automatically presented on every WAMAS page. 2) There are untested but promised benefits to having the banner exposed to the membership. (Promised by Drs. Foster and Smith, of course) 3) What exactly these promises gain the membership is completely unclear. 4) Further, these "promises" are only realized if a member clicks through the banner to Drs. Foster & Smiths' website to "vote." These votes, of course, put the member just one click away from their retail website and also adds to their visitor count. It is very clear from this alone that Drs. Foster & Smith benefit from this exposure. 5) Not only do we place the banner on every WAMAS page, we put it right next to our sponsoring vendor's banner. 6) Our sponsors pay for these banners, which not only shows their personal and active support of our club, but also provides them exposure that presumably is good for their business. 7) Our sponsors pay good money, and in these tough times perhaps even hard earned money, for this benefit. And, finally, 8) Our paying sponsors' banners only fly on randomly selected pages while Drs. Foster & Smith, a non-paying beneficiary, get their banner flown on every page. Consequently, our paying sponsors must timeshare their benefit (which they pay for) with other sponsors, while Drs. Foster & Smith get full access to the banner space. I, therefore, submit for consideration that we have inadvertently created a "super-premium" class of sponsorship in providing preferred access to our membership. And, that we have done so without appropriate and measurable compensation or benefit. I would ask you to consider that perhaps we have fallen victim to a rather clever marketing ploy that not only provides Drs. Foster and Smith with free exposure and easy click-thru access to their retail website, but also are providing Drs. Foster and Smith added credibility in the hobby as a resource capable of judging the ranking club website resources. (Note, for example, that RC has not signed on to this, nor has RS, though both are very popular web resources available to the hobbyist.) Further, I would argue that we, in the process of creating this higher level of sponsorship, have subordinated the class of sponsorship that our regular class of sponsors have obtained through a payment of fees. And, in providing this preferred class benefit without appropriately scaled compensation, have undermined the spirit and value of club sponsorship. Summarizing, I think that we have done ourselves a disservice, and our vendors a different disservice by taking on the Drs. Foster and Smith banner, and ask that it be removed unless some tangible and superior benefit can be described that justifies the superior treatment, access and exposure that Drs. Foster and Smith are receiving in excess of that which we are providing our paying sponsors. I'm not a rabble-rouser but think there is a real question of fairness here to be thoughtfully considered. Additional thoughts and contrary opinions are invited.

I emailed their customer service department the other day asking them the following: "What is your "Fins Up" program and how does it benefit the nominated organization (if it even does)?" They responded today as follows: "When the banner is placed on your website, it is a nice validation for others visiting your site that it has been nominated as a good resource by Drs. Foster and Smith, as many people in the hobby feel that we are a reliable source of information." Maybe it's a canned answer, but if accurate, it seems like we're simply providing free advertising for Drs. Foster & Smith.

Fully saturated, the effluent can be as high as 40 dKH. Chip's advice is good (as usual). Reduce your effluent drip rate and, correspondingly, drop back on your bubble count. It appears that you're adding effluent well in excess of consumption. With balanced consumption, alkalinity will go up 1 meq/l (or 2.8 dKH) for every 20 ppm of calcium. The calcium level that you're maintaining (430) balances with about 10 dKH normally. Consequently, you may wish to shut your reactor down while letting the alk deplete normally, supplementing the tank with calcium chloride (that is, dosing calcium) in order to maintain your calcium levels, until you reach the 10-11 dKH range. Then bring your reactor back online, monitoring your alk level to match supplementation (via your calcium reactor) with consumption. Water changes can also help you bring your alk levels down to more typical levels. Some studies that I've read recently have shown that certain coral species (e.g. porites) actually grow faster in very high alk conditions (20+). I'm curious what you're seeing in your tank under these conditions?

Rob, you seem to be aware of this float thing. Does this float block the vent into a durso-like drain or something, thereby causing a siphon on the drain side that can handle higher flow?

Dano, if you can post a picture of your overflow, it would be helpful. As for the return: If your return is coming into the tank below the water line (that is, it's not dropping through the air onto the surface of the water), then there is the risk that, when the return pump stops, of the return line siphoning the water out of the tank into your sump (unless there's something in the line that prevents this reverse flow such as a check valve). (Check valves, by the way, can and do fail, so if you're dependent upon them, someday you'll likely be regretting it.) Imagine it this way - you have a tube full of water coming from your tank going to your sump - that's your return line. Normally, the water is flowing from your sump up to your display because the pump is operating. When the pump stops, however, it may allow water to flow through it the other way (most do). In this case, you've now got a siphon situation and water will now flow from the display to the sump. Most of the time, though, we drill a small hole (normally just below the surface but sometimes above) that functions as a siphon break. In this case, when the return pump stops, water is siphoned back to the sump until this hole is exposed. Once exposed, air is drawn into the return line and breaks the siphoning action, stopping the reverse flow. We try to keep this hole clear because, if it gets clogged with debris or algae (or even blocked by a snail), the preventative measure against siphoning is defeated. It's unclear to me, however, if this is your problem by the way you're describing your setup. I'm not sure that I can accurately picture this thingamajig with the float that you're describing. That's why a picture would help.

The Urchin is too small, in my opinion. Depending upon your bioload, a Remora Pro with a Mag 3 may even be a bit undersized. The Aqua Medic turboflotor 1000 multi SL costs as much as a Remora Pro but is sized for a larger system. It's not as sleek as the Remora Pro but I think you may be looking at a Hang-on-Sump installation, not something that's hanging off of your display. If you're too space constrained even for a Turboflotor (which I think will probably work for you, but if not) but less constrained on price, another option is the Deltec MCE600.