Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old 26-02-2004, 09:15 PM
Harry Muscle
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

I know that surface turbulence is bad in a planted CO2 injected tank since
it drives off the extra CO2 that is pumped into the tank. However, what
about a planted non CO2 injected tank, like mine? I'm setting up a 55G
planted tank with 1.75wpg, and instead of CO2 I'm using Flourish Excel. Do
I want surface turbulence or not?

I can see both an argument for and against it. For ... you want to rep
the CO2 that is being used up by the plants. Against ... you don't want to
drive off any CO2 that is produced by the fish and the plants at night. So
which one is right?

Thanks,
Harry




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #2   Report Post  
Old 26-02-2004, 09:37 PM
Harry Muscle
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

"Andrew Roberts" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Muscle wrote:
I know that surface turbulence is bad in a planted CO2 injected tank

since
it drives off the extra CO2 that is pumped into the tank. However, what
about a planted non CO2 injected tank, like mine? I'm setting up a 55G
planted tank with 1.75wpg, and instead of CO2 I'm using Flourish Excel.

Do
I want surface turbulence or not?


Harry, if you are using Excel for a carbon source, I wouldn't worry too
much about surface turbulence. We're talking normal HOB filter
turbulence, and not Jacuzzi jets, right?

--Andrew


I was thinking air bubbles, my wife likes the look of them.

Harry




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #3   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 01:12 AM
Dunter Powries
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

Harry Muscle wrote in message
...
"Andrew Roberts" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Muscle wrote:
Harry, if you are using Excel for a carbon source, I wouldn't worry

too
much about surface turbulence. We're talking normal HOB filter
turbulence, and not Jacuzzi jets, right?


I was thinking air bubbles, my wife likes the look of them.


I've got a tank with an air driven sponge filter that I u cel on
(when i remember to add it) and crypts, anubias, bacopa and najas all do
fine. Growth isn't explosive, but I do see benefits from the excel.


Just for curiosity's sake, anybody know what the answer would be if I were
not using flourish excel?


Well, all things being equal, the CO2 levels in the water over time will
tend toward equilibrium with the CO2 levels in the atmosphere. In order to
answer your question, you need to know whether CO2 production in your
aquarium exceeds ambient CO2 levels outside your aquarium. So, the
unscientific answer is that, unless you have an awful lot of fish and an
especially shortened period of photosynthesis, more CO2 is *probably* being
adsorbed into the tank than is being expired out.



  #4   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 01:16 AM
Dunter Powries
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

Harry Muscle wrote in message
...
"Andrew Roberts" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Muscle wrote:
Harry, if you are using Excel for a carbon source, I wouldn't worry

too
much about surface turbulence. We're talking normal HOB filter
turbulence, and not Jacuzzi jets, right?


I was thinking air bubbles, my wife likes the look of them.


I've got a tank with an air driven sponge filter that I u cel on
(when i remember to add it) and crypts, anubias, bacopa and najas all do
fine. Growth isn't explosive, but I do see benefits from the excel.


Just for curiosity's sake, anybody know what the answer would be if I were
not using flourish excel?


Well, all things being equal, the CO2 levels in the water over time will
tend toward equilibrium with the CO2 levels in the atmosphere. In order to
answer your question, you need to know whether CO2 production in your
aquarium exceeds ambient CO2 levels outside your aquarium. So, the
unscientific answer is that, unless you have an awful lot of fish and an
especially shortened period of photosynthesis, more CO2 is *probably* being
adsorbed into the tank than is being expired out.



  #5   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 02:44 AM
Eric Schreiber
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

Victor Martinez wrote:

Is that a 20g long? With an Eclipse 3 hood? I have one of those and
my plants grow great!


20 high with an Eclipse 2. I had to add extra lighting for the plants,
but I'm very happy with the system.


--
www.ericschreiber.com


  #6   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 02:52 AM
Eric Schreiber
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

Victor Martinez wrote:

Is that a 20g long? With an Eclipse 3 hood? I have one of those and
my plants grow great!


20 high with an Eclipse 2. I had to add extra lighting for the plants,
but I'm very happy with the system.


--
www.ericschreiber.com
  #7   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 05:04 AM
Harry Muscle
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

"Andrew Roberts" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Muscle wrote:
Harry, if you are using Excel for a carbon source, I wouldn't worry too
much about surface turbulence. We're talking normal HOB filter
turbulence, and not Jacuzzi jets, right?



I was thinking air bubbles, my wife likes the look of them.


I've got a tank with an air driven sponge filter that I u cel on
(when i remember to add it) and crypts, anubias, bacopa and najas all do
fine. Growth isn't explosive, but I do see benefits from the excel.


Just for curiosity's sake, anybody know what the answer would be if I were
not using flourish excel?

Harry




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #8   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 05:05 AM
Eric Schreiber
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

Harry Muscle wrote:

I know that surface turbulence is bad in a planted CO2 injected tank
since it drives off the extra CO2 that is pumped into the tank.
However, what about a planted non CO2 injected tank, like mine? I'm
setting up a 55G planted tank with 1.75wpg, and instead of CO2 I'm
using Flourish Excel. Do I want surface turbulence or not?


I can't give any absolute answer, but I have a heavly planted 20 gallon
with an Eclipse hood (lots of surface turbulance). I haven't injected
CO2 for several months, and I don't even use Excel. Plant growth is
excellent.


--
www.ericschreiber.com
  #9   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 06:39 AM
bannor
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:39:13 -0600, "Eric Schreiber" eric at
ericschreiber dot com wrote:

Victor Martinez wrote:

Is that a 20g long? With an Eclipse 3 hood? I have one of those and
my plants grow great!


20 high with an Eclipse 2. I had to add extra lighting for the plants,
but I'm very happy with the system.


How did you add extra lighting to this hood? I have the Eclipse 1
hood on a 10 with only 1 15 watt tube... is there an upgrade kit or
something available?
  #10   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 09:03 AM
Eric Schreiber
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?

Xref: 127.0.0.1 rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants:78898

bannor wrote:

How did you add extra lighting to this hood? I have the Eclipse 1
hood on a 10 with only 1 15 watt tube... is there an upgrade kit or
something available?


There aren't any formal lighting upgrade kits that I'm aware of. What I
did was buy the "2 x 13 Watt Deluxe Bright Kit" and two 6400K bulbs
from AH Supply (http://www.ahsupply.com). Added to the 30 watt already
in the Eclipse 2, this brought my total up to 56 watts.

I don't know how much room is in the Eclipse 1. The gap between the
standard light and the filter compartment on the Eclipse 2 is about
3.25" from front to back - just barely enough for the AHSupply kit to
fit into. I used a piece of plexiglass hanging on a pair of heavy gauge
metal hooks (covered in aquarium silicon to stop rusting) as a sort of
shelf for the light.

I'm extremely happy with the AHSupply kit, by the way. It's bare bones
but it comes with a great reflector, ballasts, wires and fixtures, as
well as clear instructions on how to do the wiring. If you're at all
handy with tools it's easy to set up, and does an excellent job of
lighting the tank.

And besides, it's always fun to play with electricity.


--
www.ericschreiber.com


  #11   Report Post  
Old 27-02-2004, 03:48 PM
Harry Muscle
 
Posts: n/a
Default Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad?


"Dunter Powries" fech.redcap@spedlin wrote in message
...
Harry Muscle wrote in message
...
"Andrew Roberts" wrote in message
. ..
Harry Muscle wrote:
Harry, if you are using Excel for a carbon source, I wouldn't worry

too
much about surface turbulence. We're talking normal HOB filter
turbulence, and not Jacuzzi jets, right?


I was thinking air bubbles, my wife likes the look of them.

I've got a tank with an air driven sponge filter that I u cel on
(when i remember to add it) and crypts, anubias, bacopa and najas all

do
fine. Growth isn't explosive, but I do see benefits from the excel.


Just for curiosity's sake, anybody know what the answer would be if I

were
not using flourish excel?


Well, all things being equal, the CO2 levels in the water over time will
tend toward equilibrium with the CO2 levels in the atmosphere. In order

to
answer your question, you need to know whether CO2 production in your
aquarium exceeds ambient CO2 levels outside your aquarium. So, the
unscientific answer is that, unless you have an awful lot of fish and an
especially shortened period of ynthesis, more CO2 is *probably* being
adsorbed into the tank than is being expired out.


Ah, well that makes sense. So the answer would be yes. In an average non
CO2 injected tank you would want surface turbulence in order to replenish
the CO2 that is being used up in the tank.

Thanks,
Harry




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Planted Tank Focus Group -- CO2 tank system fireblade Freshwater Aquaria Plants 1 06-09-2005 04:17 PM
Is 1.6 wpg enough for a low maintenance, non CO2 planted tank Harry Muscle Freshwater Aquaria Plants 6 15-07-2004 12:06 PM
Optimum light period for planted and non-planted tanks..? Phil Williamson Freshwater Aquaria Plants 4 02-06-2004 10:12 PM
Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or Andrew Roberts Freshwater Aquaria Plants 5 27-02-2004 02:13 AM
Surface turbulance in a planted non CO2 inject tank, good or bad? Harry Muscle Freshwater Aquaria Plants 0 26-02-2004 09:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017