Josh Blaylock's 125 gallon stream tank. Build and updates.

Nice job. Enjoy! And keep us up to date.

I did use the 3 existing filters. What's my what.....measuring levels, I don't.

I'm assuming a mini-cycle due to 2/3 new water and moving the gravel.

If you used filter media from an old tank and didn't let it dry out, then there's no reason why the cycle would restart. Because the nitrogen converting bacteria live on external surfaces and not in the water column, transferring water doesn't significantly transfer the colony. Gravel's surface is, again, many times less than the surface area inside the filter, so that's really what you have to focus on. *nods* Since you moved the media your tank should still be cycled.

Looks awesome! So when can we expect a video?

The cloudiness (though I can't see any from the pictures) is probably just from the gravel. This would especially be true if you used new gravel. I have found that I always get some sediment from new gravel no mater how much I rinse it.

Can you strap your underwater camera on the back of one of your dace for some POV shots?

Edited by GreenRiverKY, 11 May 2011 - 07:43 AM.

The cloudiness (though I can't see any from the pictures) is probably just from the gravel. This would especially be true if you used new gravel. I have found that I always get some sediment from new gravel no mater how much I rinse it.

Can you strap your underwater camera on the back of one of your dace for some POV shots?

I should have been a little clearer. It looks clear to me when looking straight on, but when I look down the length of the tank it looks a little cloudy. It was actually a bit clearer today. I did use two bags of new gravel (didn't rinse), and roughly 2 5-gal buckets of old gravel.

I am going to make a few videos, probably this weekend.

One of the nicests tanks I have seen posted. Love to see when someone takes the time to get the details right. Judging from my tank keep those intake holes clear. I have large intake areas and they occasionally clog up and really reduce flow, and really lower the water level behind the background.

And, speaking of backgrounds, did you build yours or order one?

Andy

Thanks Andy. Looking back I would have done a few things differently. I bought my background. I'm just not artistic enough to build it.

Looking back I would have done a few things differently.

I agree with that. I have built a few of these backgrounds and even though it looks good on paper, and as a completed project, there are always little things that could have been done better. It really is a continuous learning project.

But it really does look good. What company did you buy the background from?

Andy

I agree with that. I have built a few of these backgrounds and even though it looks good on paper, and as a completed project, there are always little things that could have been done better. It really is a continuous learning project.

But it really does look good. What company did you buy the background from?

Andy

I bought the background from Designs by Nature. Webiste. They had great customer service and shipped the product well and fast. They actually offered free shipping via Greyhound Express. This was great as UPS would have costs $100+ for a piece that big. It's a rigid foam, which made it easy to work with.

So, my tank has been rolling along for about a year now. One of my older canister filter has really slowed down and even after cleaning, the output isn't what it should be. It's a Fluval 305. I am thinking of replacing it with a new Fluval 406. This uses the same connectors that connects the tubing to the filter so I wouldn't have to redo any of the tubing and such as with my background, that would be nearly impossible

So, my question is, should I use the old filter to circulate the water behind the background? I have found that gunk settles behind the background. I would have the intake and output both behind the wall. Would having the old filter back there impede the filtration of the other three filters? I would rather just add another filter to the main side of the tank, but I can't measure/drill holes now. Well, I could, but the chance for error would be great at this point. So, would keeping the old behind the wall be beneficial?

thoughts..opinions....anybody?

So, my tank has been rolling along for about a year now. One of my older canister filter has really slowed down and even after cleaning, the output isn't what it should be. It's a Fluval 305. I am thinking of replacing it with a new Fluval 406. This uses the same connectors that connects the tubing to the filter so I wouldn't have to redo any of the tubing and such as with my background, that would be nearly impossible

If it were me I'd look into a fluidized bed filter. One of the major advantages to them is that because sand is very abrasive, the inside of the filter never gunks up. The intake tube can certainly clog just like any other filter, but the internal workings never do. Fluidized bed filters are about $70 online. I'm not sure what you mean when you say 'redo any of the tubing' but you can just get potable PVC pipe adaptors to connect this new filter to the tubes the old one used.

If your filter has a warranty it might also be worth your time to look into that. Some brands like AquaClear replace all the parts in their filters for life as long as you still have the original receipt and a copy of the lifetime warranty.

So, my question is, should I use the old filter to circulate the water behind the background? I have found that gunk settles behind the background. I would have the intake and output both behind the wall. Would having the old filter back there impede the filtration of the other three filters? I would rather just add another filter to the main side of the tank, but I can't measure/drill holes now. Well, I could, but the chance for error would be great at this point. So, would keeping the old behind the wall be beneficial?

Is the gunk a bad thing? Does it smell? Are your nitrates high? I feel kind of like I need pictures to properly address this part of your post. I'm not sure what sort of 'gunk' you're talking about.

Edited by EricaWieser, 23 March 2012 - 10:42 AM.

Erica, thanks for your input, I was hoping you'd respond since you are well versed in aquatics. Flip back through this thread and you'll see why I need to replace what I have with a similar model. I have output tubing drilled through an expensive 3d background. Plus my filters create the current in my tank as well. Also, the filter I'm talking about was used when I got it so there's no warranty.

Let's say I replace it. Would it be worth it to have that old filter circulating behind the background?

I can try to get photos of the junk in question, but it's just nastiness that builds up on the bottoms behind the background.

Would it be worth it to have that old filter circulating behind the background?

To me there would be three reasons to bother to circulate water behind the background. Those reasons are:
1. If the gunk smells bad
2. If the gunk produces nitrate so much that it makes you need to do water changes more frequently
3. If the degrading gunk is pushing your pH down

If none of those things are happening and you can't see the gunk and it's not bothering you or your fish, then I guess it doesn't matter whether or not you set up the old filter to circulate back there. I would still suck the gunk out every other water change or so because decaying mulm can push pH down very rapidly once buffering is exhausted. If your tap was has a medium KH or DH, for example around DH 6, then it's less of a problem. My water here in Winston-Salem North Carolina is KH 0 and DH 0, so there's constantly no buffering and if the pH starts to dip down there's nothing to stop it from plummeting all the way to the bottom. It's happened to both of my tanks now and wiped out all the snails but thankfully I did an emergency water change before it could claim the fish too. Now I have some crushed coral in my filter right near the water flow to prevent any such future surprises.

Some people's goal is to have an Amazon river or Okefenokee swamp biotope tank with a DH 0 and pH 5.5. In that case a large amount of mulm is really helpful. If you're trying to keep it around 7 pH but your DH is low and unable to protect you from sudden parameter swings, well, then, mulm might not be so great. I know you hate testing your water but it might be a good idea just to get a one time reading done for an idea of your tap water's and tank water's DH and KH. That will tell you how likely it is that a pH plummet will occur. If you've got a medium or high value for KH, then meh, who cares, it's not gonna happen (assuming you do regular water changes). But if both KH and DH are zero then it's something you might want to think about. If that's the case then you can prevent pH swings by getting rid of the mulm every now and then or adding a handful of crushed coral to the filter.

Edited by EricaWieser, 23 March 2012 - 12:23 PM.

Haha, you're right, I don't like testing my water. Ironic thing is that I actually do water testing for the KRWW several times a year. I have plenty PH test equipment as I have to test PH, dissolved O2, and metal in the water, but I'm not sure I've ever tested it.

I guess my whole deal is I want to replace that filter as the old one's GPH is way way down compared to the others (I have 2 large fluvals). I guess I don't want that filtration ablity, what little it is, to be wasted and hooking it up behind the background is my only option if I want to use it.

I guess I don't want that filtration ablity, what little it is, to be wasted

This is where water testing comes in again (I know, unfortunate ). If you test your water and both ammonia and nitrite are at 0 ppm, then that means that the surface area on your filters is large enough for a sufficient population of nitrosomonas and nitrospira bacteria to live there and instantly convert any nitrogenous waste. To rephrase that, if your ammonia and nitrite are at 0 ppm, then that means you don't need more filters--your filters are good enough and adding more filters will not help you at all. They are already functioning at full capacity. The limiting factor on the population of your beneficial bacteria is not the surface area they have to live on but instead the amount of food (ammonia, nitrite) for them to eat. More filters are unnecessary.

Now, if you test your water and your ammonia and nitrite are NOT at 0 ppm, then that means that more filtering would help. It means that the number of 'homes' you're giving your bacteria to live in is not enough. If you gave them more 'homes' (surface area), more bacteria could 'move in'. If ammonia and nitrite are not 0 ppm, another filter is needed.

So, once you test your water, it should tell you whether or not you still need that filter. My bet is that you don't, since you haven't been reporting crazy large numbers of fish deaths like you would be if you had ammonia or nitrite in nonzero concentrations in your water.

Edited by EricaWieser, 23 March 2012 - 12:30 PM.

So, once you test your water, it should tell you whether or not you still need that filter. My bet is that you don't, since you haven't been reporting crazy large numbers of fish deaths like you would be if you had ammonia or nitrite in nonzero concentrations in your water.

I seperate thread is coming on that later, I've started having some problems over the past couple days...more later on that.

One good thing about a heavy rain is it brings the worms out. I usually gather all the worms I can and throw them into the tank, the fish seem to enjoy them. I took this video when an Orangfin Darter grabs a worm and tries to eat it. The worm puts up a fight, and I'm not sure if the Darter ever got it down or not.

Resurrecting this old thread as some updates are coming.

As the old saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. The current pump in use for the majority of the current is WAY underpowered and I wish I had went more with the River Manifold System during the build process. I am currently in process of replacing the old pump with a new one and I've designed a modified system that will allow me to have the intake on one side and the output on the other. I'm using black tubing to run the length of the tank. This will allow me to route around the tank without having to completely empty it. I'm going to use 3/4 Loc-Line for the output and 2 3/4in intakes. Nearly everything will be burried under the gravel, except for the output and intake strainers. I am going to use a little PVC near the intake in order to turn from the hose on the bottom, up to the strainer. Instead of a singe 90 degree bend (which would be much easier) I'm going to use 2 45s.

Here's the mock up plans. I already have the pump and most of the tubing. I ordered the loc line and the connectors and should have them in a few days. I hope to dive into this next Saturday if all the parts come in. I may refinish the inside of the canopy too because I used urethane and it give off a yellowish tint in the tank.

https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

J, the first background looks very real...the trout stream looks better...take a look at my 125 in the general discussion forum...somewhere in there is a tank shot and video link...the background is homemade...they are easier than you might think...that was my first try at a 3d background...used sheet styro, great stuff foam, quickset concrete, concrete dye, used a dremel tool, a drill, and a saw to shape...was fun to build...my goal was to mimic an over hanging creek bank...good luck and if you have questions about a 3d fab shoot me a pm

Rich