Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Undergravel filters

Started by Guest_SeaSprite_* , Dec 23 2007 11:39 PM

Please log in to reply

11 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_SeaSprite_*

Guests

Posted 23 December 2007 - 11:39 PM

Hopefully I won't open a can of worms, but I wondered if there is any reason to use an undergravel filter in a Native aquarium? I gre up with UG filters, so never really questioned using them until now

. With a 40 gallon community fish tank (I'm leaning towards wanting action in the aquarium, not having to search vegeation/decor for any sign of fish life lol) I wonder if a canister filter would be best? And no ug filter?

Sorry for the newbie question, not had fish in a awhile and want to get the foundation right if that makes sense.

Matt

Back to top

#2 Guest_puchisapo_*

Guests

Posted 24 December 2007 - 12:10 AM

undergravel filters are yucky.

my vote wouuld be for shallow natural sand or fine gravel substrate with sponge filter filter if needed.

Back to top

#3 Guest_teleost_*

Guests

Posted 24 December 2007 - 12:19 AM

I still use under gravel filters (UGF) in many of the tanks I maintain. I use them in the warmer sections of my house since I can use them for all of my biological filtration without the addition of heat that power filtration often adds to tanks. I don't think they're necessary but I can get away with a little more since they operate at lower temperatures. I don't use them in my basement.

Back to top

#4 Guest_mikez_*

Guests

Posted 24 December 2007 - 06:53 AM

I was about to give a negative answer until I read Uland's post. He's on to something with the heat issue. I'm struggling right now with too much power equipment using too much expensive juice and adding too much heat. Of course a lot of that comes more from wanting to add current more than bio filter - which wouldn't be solved by UG filter.

The principle behind the UG is totally sound and has been used for decades with great success. A certain amount of the current disfavor it is held in comes more from popular trend. I remember working in a LFS where the boss taught everyone to condemn the UG out of hand but failed to explain why. When ever an older, experienced hobbyist tried to question it, most of the clercks had no clue. "It's just bad" was the best they had to offer.
Keep the gravel clean and they work great.

Back to top

#5 Guest_hmt321_*

Guests

Posted 24 December 2007 - 08:02 AM

what about reverse flow UGF

My warmouth is a very messy eater, I am going to be moving in about a month, and i plan on adding a RUGF to his 75 gal.

Back to top

#6 Guest_Ironhand74_*

Guests

Posted 02 January 2008 - 07:38 PM

Hello,
I've used rev-flow UGF's for years with excellent results, no more "dead spots" , uniform water temp through the strata (heated and unheated) and can be powered with the usual powerhead configuration or with a modified connection with a canister filter , including modular in-line components. Beneficial bacteria that has established in the substrate gets a constant supply of fresh oxygenated water...
just a few + points to the overall advantages incorporating such a device, oh yes.... you can still do this even with sand, tricky but can be done.

J.

Back to top

#7 Guest_edbihary_*

Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 02:07 AM

For the reverse flow, do you have any suggestions as to how to connect the powerhead? Is there a particular model of powerhead that is more suitable for the purpose. I have AquaClear 30, 50, and 70 powerheads in my tanks. The powerhead outputs are obviously too narrow to fit into the UG standpipes. Normal flow works well, but I do want to try reverse flow. I like the idea of not having to use the gravel vac as often.

Back to top

#8 Guest_tglassburner_*

Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 07:28 AM

For the reverse flow, do you have any suggestions as to how to connect the powerhead? Is there a particular model of powerhead that is more suitable for the purpose. I have AquaClear 30, 50, and 70 powerheads in my tanks. The powerhead outputs are obviously too narrow to fit into the UG standpipes. Normal flow works well, but I do want to try reverse flow. I like the idea of not having to use the gravel vac as often.

MY aquaclears have a revers option, but some I have seen have a modified output nozzle.

Elmer's probably has some.

Back to top

#9 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 08:16 AM

For a stream tank I think a UGF using a powerhead is a great option. Not only are making a better attempt at using the gravel as filtration (pseudo hyporheic zone?) but with the simple addition of a small air hose to the powerhead you are injecting alot of oxygen into the flow. I liked using a shorter lift tube to hide the powerhead a little better behind some cobble and have it blast water over the rocks. They add some heat but I've never had that be an issue. Just required me to think a little longer before I placed tanks in a room.

Back to top

#10 Guest_edbihary_*

Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 01:10 PM

MY aquaclears have a revers option, but some I have seen have a modified output nozzle.

The AquaClear reverse option does not work well, I've tried it. Also, their output nozzles are rectangular in cross section, so if you use them for input you can't easily adapt a pre-filter to them. You want a pre-filter on your input, otherwise you will be injecting wastes into the bottom of the UGF, defeating the purpose of reverse flow (flushing wastes out, instead of accumulating them, while providing a home for beneficial bacteria). I would think that there's got to be a more suitable power head.

Back to top

#11 Guest_viridari_*

Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 01:51 PM

The AquaClear reverse option does not work well, I've tried it. Also, their output nozzles are rectangular in cross section, so if you use them for input you can't easily adapt a pre-filter to them. You want a pre-filter on your input, otherwise you will be injecting wastes into the bottom of the UGF, defeating the purpose of reverse flow (flushing wastes out, instead of accumulating them, while providing a home for beneficial bacteria). I would think that there's got to be a more suitable power head.

I recall one clever aquarist a number of years ago that had an oversized Eheim canister filter on a 30 gallon "long" marine fish tank. He had the output of the canister filter adapted to push down into the lift tube of a UGF. You could see sediment hovering just above the gravel. The lift tube was modified in length to pull from down near the gravel and was very effective in this role.