Jump to content


Forum Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gary70au

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • State

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you very much for the suggestions. I will check them out
  2. Im visiting brisbane briefly next week and would like to check out some lfs with decent marine sections. Can anyone recommend some for me? Can possibly have a look in sunshine coast area as well. Cheers Gary
  3. Well the project has taken a small step backwards so pics could be a way off yet. I need to find the fittings i want at a much better price than i have locally, as the number of fittings required, to set up the features i want, are blowing the budget. The biggest issue is, in many positions, i need to use multiple fittings to achieve my goal. Some fittings are 70c, while others, which look like they might be twice as expensive to make, at most, are $3.70 each.
  4. Maybe the coarse sponge could just be the last stage in the pre-filter
  5. Thanks IsaRich, I would just like to see some coarse sponge in there somewhere for some reason lol. I will have a small space at the top and bottom of each chamber where there will be no media but there will be screens fitted to keep the media snug but not jammed.
  6. Another layout option is to run two pre-filters in parallel followed by just two 3 litre chambers in series. In that case i would use coral rubble and coarse sponge in the first chamber and the Macropore/chemipure and Marine spheres in the second. That would allow for a greater surface area to catch solids. I am thinking that in the pre-filter, i will run slightly coarser material on top as first contact with the dirty water, progressing to finer wadding towards the bottom. I feel this would allow more total solids to be absorbed by the pre-filter material before flow reduction would occur.
  7. ok guys Final draft done and what i end up with is a pre-filter area for mechanical filtration followed by 3 chamber is series approx 3 litres each. What media would you use and how would you arrange it. I am considering the following from suggestions in the discussions above. Pre-filter: wadding/sponges for solids removal. Stage 1: Coral rubble Stage 2: Marine pure spheres Stage 3: Macropore/Chemipure I am going to squeeze some coarse sponge in there somewhere, was thinking it could use it below the Macropore/chemipure. I arranged the media in this order so that after the pre-filter the bacteria in the coral rubble and marine spheres get the nutrients they need before the Macropore/chemipure strip it. Does this make sense? Also, can someone advise how much i should use of the Marine spheres and Macropore/chemipure. Should i stick to 2 litres as Donny suggested or should i fill a 3 litre chamber with it?
  8. Definitely will be some photos when its up and running IsaRich. I just better make sure its all working perfectly first lol. I have been scaling the system up and down for days now theoretically but i think i might have it where i will try it now. Smaller overall volume and with a pump rated at 1200 lph should have sensible flow rates and water speed over the media once friction through media, fittings and hoses as well as head height are taken into account. Possibly the best part is, that I should end up with a nice little system, that fits my space and requirements, for under $150. Plus the new tech media that i would still buy if i used a named canister anyway.
  9. Thanks Rod, I was hoping to find a happy compromise between flow rate and time of contact with the media. I will have a dedicated prefilter for mechanical only in a hope to keep as much solid waste as possible away from the media. My scenario was more a case of thinking i needed garbage can sized filtration but not having anywhere near the cabinet space. I think i might be getting close to what i will end up doing now. Lots of water changes will be happening in conjunction with sensible feeding.
  10. Thank you all very much for the discussion, lots of info here to get me thinking. My flow calculations started at 6 x turnover which is what i had stuck in my head for years for some reason. I then just made a general assumption, that if i had the media to service it, more flow would be better. Also, i was hoping to use just the canister to both filter the water and provide all water flow in the tank. Regarding the macropore/chemipure its seems i would only need a small amount, like 500 to a litre. Is this correct? Reduced size requirements for the media really pushes my diy idea to the front of the queue. I am however now wondering about the speed of water travel through the media. If i reduce chamber diameters in the system to reduce the amount of media volume available the water flow over the media that is there will be increased in speed. When does the speed of the water through media such as Jase and Donny have mentioned become detrimental? For a total cost still lower than originally planned, would i be better of splitting the system and running 2 lower output pumps, to reduce water speed over the media. This would be relatively easy as the setup is modular already. This would also give me some level of contingency should one part of the system fail. Also, is there a need for these media to remain in close proximity to one another for any reason? E.G. Is it ok to run each individual media in its own self contained chamber all connected in series?
  11. With the idea I have the ability to use smaller amounts of more effective media would only make it more cost effective. My large volume media idea, was partially to help overcome any shortfalls in a system, that would be much cheaper than but also less technologically advanced than a large off the shelf item. Given that I am putting a lot of consideration into water distribution inside the chambers I would hope not to be too far off the mark. If I could reduce to smaller chambers with new tech media I would almost reduce the project cost by 30 to 40% Looks like media research time lol
  12. Donny, what size of canister would you recommend? I am stocking it with peacocks and some assorted haps until the haps get bigger then they will be moved to another larger display. I plan on keeping this one pretty full though so am concerned about maintaining water quality and clarity. I had incorporated a back flow system in my original plan to attempt to clear built up mulm at regular intervals to extend time between full teardowns of the filter. Due to its modular nature i would be able to backflush to waste all or part of the system. And obviously my mechanical prefilter chamber would be opened and cleaned quite regularly.
  13. If it goes well i am considering another one on a 300 Litre tank i have.
  14. Guys the tank is only 160 litre. IsaRich that cooler one is pretty neat but i need to maintain a lower profile. My end result may look like a little group of cylinders linked together.
  15. Thanks guys, I was more interested in the media volume situation to determine if i was on the right track. I am using the tank as a display in my lounge so a few things i had in mind were noise, as little clutter behind or above the tank as possible, and because i am restricted regarding tank space i want as little infrastructure in the tank as possible. I own an FX5 so am fully aware of the capability of those filters and i also have large sponge and hang on type filtration on various tanks. In no way am i arguing the effectiveness of these filtration systems. I guess this tank has become a bit of a project and i would like to incorporate a few ideas i have of my own and a few i have stolen from others doing diy. I did consider a sump Donny but feel that the cabinet i have restricts me from having an effective setup. What i am contemplating doing is a multistage canister type system with a few linked media chambers with a mechanical prefilter stage in front. Return to tank via an inline pump and 2 return lines to provide extra water flow angles. One return line will have an inline heater unit. I am hoping for a quiet filter, easy to access and clean prefilter without disturbing bacterial etc media, minimal internal impact on the tank with hidden plumbing and a sense that i have put something together to specifically suit my needs. As i will be stocking reasonably heavily and want to have water as clear for me and as healthy for the fish as possible, i plan to heavily over-filter the tank. I am working on the logic, that if i pack more biological/chemical media than is strictly required for the tank volume into my system i should go ok. Once again thanks for your input, it is greatly appreciated and all taken into consideration. Cheers Gary From a cost point of view there are many cheaper options but none that suit my desired outcome without compromise.
  • Create New...