# filtering discussion



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

I have a question but first a little background. I have been keeping and breeding African cichlids for over 30 years. Started with Malawian and am now exclusively Tanganyikans At it's peak I had 9 tanks going. Marriage and children culled me down to 1 75 gallon . On this tank I've run 1 Eheim 2217 that just replaced my old 2017 (original version of 2217) and 2 mj900 power heads with foam filter. been doing it for over 10 years. I've had upwards of 18 fish in this tank at times depending on what I was keeping and never had issues. Water perameters are fine and water is crystal clear. Fish live long and prosper, fins always popping and fish breed.

So the question is why the desire to filter to 8-10x. My filter only turns my water over 3x and I've never had problems. I run a 2215 on a 55 that I breed fish in. power head configuration as mentioned no issues. Dr Paul Loiselle in his cichlid book recommends 1x turn over rate as adequate. So how did the magical 8-10x come about. Other then on forums I have seem no comprehensive article from any experts that says this is desired for cichlids. Seems to me that filter companies would make filters just for cichlid keepers if it was truly needed.
Have at it all.
Mike


----------



## Mcdaphnia (Dec 16, 2003)

Speculation. Perhaps it is parsimony. Filter motors produce waste heat that warms the water and reduces the on-time of any tank heaters. When I use oversize filters, I have seen some tanks warm up by as much as ten degrees. Since I would be spending the same money to run a heater, I might as well get "free" filtration for the same energy dollar. Crazy water flow can be controlled by using a Venturi effect in reverse or diverting flow and then aiming it at itself, and other means. So waste heat could be the limiting factor to how much maximum filtration you can have. 10X would be noticeable. More might warm up the tank too much.


----------



## laswabbie (Feb 23, 2015)

Good question!

I've kept new world cichlid tanks for 40 years, including large Oscars, with a single OTB filter.

I'm currently setting up a 75 gal African tank and have ordered a 350 gph canister filter [5 to 6 x turnover], and I thought I was good to go.

I'm now reading here that many (most?) members are running two canisters.

I'll be the first to admit that I have a lot to learn, but is that really necessary?


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

My thinking is it would be more beneficial to have a slower gph so that the biological filter media has more contact time with the water. This was eheim classics basic design thinking. I once spoke to a rep that told me just that when I mentioned this turnover rate theory. Of course there would likely be a bias. I forgot to mention. On the 75 gallon I did have an emperor 400 on the tank as well for a time. When they first came out my LFS brought 2 back from a pet expo and sold one to me at cost so I could give feedback. That brought the turnover on the tank to recommended 8-10x but I noticed no difference in the tank. It quit on me 4 years after and I never replaced because I saw...........no difference in the tank or parameters.


----------



## noddy (Nov 20, 2006)

I currently run two Eheim 2217's and two #5 hydro sponges stacked on top of each other, powered by a maxi jet 1200 in a 5' 120g tank. I have the same set up minus one of the 2217's in another tank the same size.The reason for the two canisters in my case is so that I can clean one out without worrying about killing off any beneficial bacteria. The sponges are strictly for water polishing and I rinse them out regularly under the tap. I will be adding another 2217 to the one tank and probably get rid of the sponge set up (although I do like thae fact that I can pull a sponge out at anytime and have a seeded filter for another tank). I also have a 210g tank with an Eheim 2262 and two Eheim 2217's on it. I also have an Emperor 400 strictly for polishing on that tank. I have also kept overstocked 5' Tropheus and Petro tanks ran with just sponges attached to maxi jet 1200s. As long as you have a place with enough surface area to house enough beneficial bacteria to house the amount of fish you are keeping, you have adequate filtration IMO. Frank on this site has a tank that is filtered by a 2262 stuffed full of pillow batting that he replaces whenever he services the filter. Obviously in his case, there is enough surface area on the glass and in the substrate to convert amonia. A lot of people seem to be of the opinion that canister filters should pick up all the debris in the tank. I/m not one of them.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

I have tried both 4X and 7X turnover. 7X turnover was night and day better than 4X with regard to debris in the tank. I agree more filtration will not improve your water parameters and most filters are going to have plenty of media to grow the necessary bacteria...for that I imagine 1X is plenty.

If your beneficial bacteria are fine...why should you not want the debris to be picked up by the filter? Is this not also a goal of UGJ and power heads...improve circulation so the filters can pick up the debris?


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

Your point is well taken. Your saying it is about debris. If that is the case can we not define 8-10x turnover with the filter but rather water movement.. With the power heads I'm in fact moving water at 8-10x and filtering it with sponge filters. Despite what some may think a mechanical filter is still a biological filter.
I have no debris on my substrate. 2 power heads cost me about $80.00 dollars. It is much easier to clean, cheaper to run and certainly less of my maintenance time.
I get the argument that should the filter fail I have a backup however let's be honest bacteria exists on rock glass and substrate, well virtually any surface. So even if the filter was to fail the power heads would be fine to ensure adequate biological filtration until remedial measures are taken. Many articles I have read over the years say even an air stone running can save a tank from total disaster.
Just some thoughts


----------



## Mcdaphnia (Dec 16, 2003)

Cyphound said:


> Your point is well taken. Your saying it is about debris. If that is the case can we not define 8-10x turnover with the filter but rather water movement.. With the power heads I'm in fact moving water at 8-10x and filtering it with sponge filters. Despite what some may think a mechanical filter is still a biological filter.
> I have no debris on my substrate. 2 power heads cost me about $80.00 dollars. It is much easier to clean, cheaper to run and certainly less of my maintenance time.
> I get the argument that should the filter fail I have a backup however let's be honest bacteria exists on rock glass and substrate, well virtually any surface. So even if the filter was to fail the power heads would be fine to ensure adequate biological filtration until remedial measures are taken. Many articles I have read over the years say even an air stone running can save a tank from total disaster.
> Just some thoughts


 I have some propeller type power heads in four of my larger freshwater tanks. All four are controlled by a reef aquarium wavemaker. Because they cycle on and off they move detritus better than when on 24/7.


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

I'm actually looking into this and a fellow hobbyist is going to lend me a wave maker to test. Hydor also make a unit that rotates and I have heard some good things about those as well.


----------



## noddy (Nov 20, 2006)

DJRansome said:


> I have tried both 4X and 7X turnover. 7X turnover was night and day better than 4X with regard to debris in the tank. I agree more filtration will not improve your water parameters and most filters are going to have plenty of media to grow the necessary bacteria...for that I imagine 1X is plenty.
> 
> If your beneficial bacteria are fine...why should you not want the debris to be picked up by the filter? Is this not also a goal of UGJ and power heads...improve circulation so the filters can pick up the debris?


I prefer to vacuum the debris of the substrate manually rather than have it out of site in the canisters. The longer I can go without having to open up six canisters the better.


----------



## nodima (Oct 3, 2002)

Interesting question.

In my mind, there are at least 3 contributing factors to the desire to filter 8-10x turnover:

Mindset that bigger is always better
Easiest parameter to measure
Not understanding difference between flow/circulation and filtration

I'm American, and can only really speak from that perspective, but it seems that in the 25 or so years I've kept aquariums there has been a lot of change in our culture. Everything is about bigger, from car engines and horsepower ratings, to the average size of soft drinks. It is becoming much more accepted that we need 'more' and we often don't think about it. Filtration is easy to trick ourselves into thinking that more is better also. So, there is a big cultural part playing a role, whether we like it or not.

The first questions I tend to ask someone when they ask about needing more filtration are their current water parameters, and what they are observing that leads them to question their filtration. We all have a desire to be able to quantify 'stuff' easily and then be able to determine where we sit on that particular continuum. It is quite easy to just read the filter specs that claim x amount of turnover per hour. It is far more difficult to accurately determine water parameters, and monitor them enough to provide a good baseline. I'd argue that by measuring GPH (or lPH for international folks) we not measuring the right things, but merely measuring a proxy for the right things. Filtration needs are much different when keeping larger fish than with community fish, as a single 6" fish produces far more waste than 6 1" fish. Manufacturers don't make filters based on fish size, but only use general guidelines . With all the marketing claims on filters and the variables in set up and media, it is very difficult to shift focus away from measuring GPH, towards the amount of media used, and what the optimum flow through that media should be. Most filters and pumps are rated empty, with minimal head so as to give the highest GPH, but in reality deliver nowhere near that GPH. Filters which are adequately sized to have appropriate volume of media should still work with their rated tank, but if all that is measured is flow, the user is likely to be disappointed. Since it is much harder to measure media volume and make reasonable comparisons between the different types of filters, GPH and turnover is what is used.

There is a big difference between circulation and filtration, and as other posters have pointed out, the use of wavemakers and powerheads can nicely augment filtration. Circulation will help keep detritus in suspension to allow the filters to capture it and help keep the tank looking clean and pristine. Creativity and observation of flow patterns using wavemakers, UGJ's, or spraybars can enhance the effects of filtration.

Other thoughts
I know many breeders in my aquarium club who use just filter floss and air to run successful fish rooms. Of course, the trade off is more frequent water changes. This was also very common still when I got into tanks. They unfortunately are ugly (IMO).

I have two larger display tanks each filtered via a sump. Nominally, both tanks are set up with pumps rated for 10x the tank volume. So my 180 is run by a Mag 18, however with the 5' head, the twists and turns of the return lines and possibly the nozzles I probably am closer to 5x than 10x, but the sumps contain a relatively large volume of media, both mechanical and biological. There is very little debris settling on the sand, and the tanks look clear, and water parameters are solid and consistent.

I've joked many times here that some people don't think they have enough filtration if there is any open space on the rear rim of the tank.


----------



## johnnymarko (May 30, 2014)

I should stay away from this thread...I run 3 canisters on a 55 gallon tank


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

Cyphound said:


> Your saying it is about debris. If that is the case can we not define 8-10x turnover with the filter but rather water movement.. With the power heads I'm in fact moving water at 8-10x and filtering it with sponge filters.


Turnover is measured by GPH. You would add power heads to see if you have 10X turnover. I would rather invest in a filter to get the GPH but power heads work too.



Cyphound said:


> Despite what some may think a mechanical filter is still a biological filter.


Agree.



Cyphound said:


> I have no debris on my substrate. 2 power heads cost me about $80.00 dollars. It is much easier to clean, cheaper to run and certainly less of my maintenance time.


OK cool!



Cyphound said:


> I get the argument that should the filter fail I have a backup however let's be honest bacteria exists on rock glass and substrate, well virtually any surface. So even if the filter was to fail the power heads would be fine to ensure adequate biological filtration until remedial measures are taken. Many articles I have read over the years say even an air stone running can save a tank


Filter failure is more about oxygenation than bacteria. If you want to use air stones as a backup that could work. I don't like air...too noisy for me.


----------



## BillD (May 17, 2005)

noddy said:


> DJRansome said:
> 
> 
> > I have tried both 4X and 7X turnover. 7X turnover was night and day better than 4X with regard to debris in the tank. I agree more filtration will not improve your water parameters and most filters are going to have plenty of media to grow the necessary bacteria...for that I imagine 1X is plenty.
> ...


Two thumbs up for this statement! Storing debris in a cannister is like leaving it the tank. As to "turnover rates", it is a term that has come to be synonymous with flow rate. the reality is that even with 10X flow rates, turnover may be less than 1 time per hour. A lot of factors would come into play here that would affect the true rate of turnover. For me, 1 turnover is when all the the water in the tank has passed through the filter once.This could be tested if someone wanted to. As to the 10X recommendation, it is an arbitrary number someone made up, that has since been repeated so many times, it has taken on a life of it's own.
If you spend any time on forums, you will soon notice that hobbyists know far more than the manufacturers of filters, about filtration.Really?


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

This is kind of my point. While I say "to each their own". To recommend 8-10x filtration seems over kill. It's expensive to purchase and to run, not to mention additional maintenance. Some people claim they keep 2 in case one quits. Fair enough. I suppose if you where away from home for an extended time and something happened it could be a problem. This is the main reason that I use a fish sitter from my local club so in the event something was to happen I know I could count on the proper remedial action to be taken. I'm willing to bet that there are more beneficial bacteria in the tank then you would find in a canister filter anyway and so as long as there is water movement you would be fine. I ran old ac's on my 35 and smaller tank years ago and all they had was mechanical.Anyway It is good to see that many don't necessarily subscribe to the 8-10x filtration and I think it is something we should give pause to consider. The hobby is expensive enough to get started and I always tell newbies start with a filter that is rated say one up for your size tank. If it works great if there are still problems then invest in alternatives.

I want to say as a side note that this topic discussion has been informative and without some of the vitriol that sometimes can ruin discussion. I'm sure it's hard enough for the mods just to find the time to do the job. Well done all


----------



## johnnymarko (May 30, 2014)

I definitely fall into the category of over filtration...like I said a couple posts up, I have a Fluval 206, 306, and 406 on a 55 gallon all male malawi tank.

I wouldn't recommend this to anyone. I started with a 306 and it worked just fine. As some know, all male malawi tanks can be a pain. So as I was changing my stock and bio-load, I added a 206 to aid with filtration. The 206 and 306 worked great together.

Then plans started on upgrading to a larger and/or second tank (90+ gallons). I decided to get a 406 in anticipation and work out how I would apply all 3 once I got the tank....Well, plans fall through as we all know, and the larger/2nd tank is on hold until I figure out my living situation.

I decided, what the heck, I'll throw all 3 on the 55. All my intakes and outputs are painted black with Plasti-Dip and positioned in a way that is both aesthetically pleasing, and works out well flow-wise.

The added maintenance is hardly noticeable, and energy costs didn't skyrocket (maybe went up a $1 or $2?). The 306 and 406 are jam packed with media, and the 206 has a little Matrix in it but is mostly mechanical filtration.

Like Cyphound said, to each their own. My filtration doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but my water is crystal clear, parameters tight, maintenance is easy, plumbing doesn't look bad at all, etc.

Like I said, I don't really recommend this to anyone, but I had the equipment and it works to my liking (even my pocket book) so it's all there to stay...

YMMV


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

johnnymarko said:


> I should stay away from this thread...I run 3 canisters on a 55 gallon tank


...me too... 3 canisters and 2 hydor 1150's in a 75 gallon...


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

...me too... 3 canisters and 2 hydor 1150's in a 75 gallon.
Your pulling my leg I'm sure. What do you keep. I'm guessing Malawians. What are the canisters. The 2 hydor would but 30 turnover alone


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

Cyphound said:


> ...me too... 3 canisters and 2 hydor 1150's in a 75 gallon.
> You're pulling my leg I'm sure. What do you keep. I'm guessing Malawians. What are the canisters. The 2 hydor would but 30 turnover alone


No, I'm not pulling your leg. The hydors are on a timer, so they don't run all the time, however. They only run 30 minutes every 2 hours, and only during the day. They move poo - but my mbuna (you guessed it) really do seem to like it. They "school up", for lack of a better term, in the current, and swim in it until it goes off, even though they don't have to. The 2 hydors make a somewhat counterclockwise circular flow on the outside of the tank as you're looking down into it.

I have 2 ea Cascade 1500's and one Fluval 405 for about 1150 gph. The Cascades have the biomedia. The Fluval is mostly for more mechanical filtration (much better designed than the Cascades, IMO) and all I run in it is coarse sponge, carbon (that I change every 3 weeks). I used to be afraid of carbon, but the article in the library here pretty much convinced me it was OK if you change it often enough... it really does help with water clarity and odor.

Here's the reason I personally have so much flow/filtration... I started out with about 20 mbuna, and with the initial fry survival rate I have about 40 now... because they never. quit. spawning... and 3 catfish... In a 75 gallon tank... to keep the aggression down (praise God I haven't had any problems) they have to have lots of visual breaks, fake plants, corals, caves, etc. There is so much "stuff" in the tank that it is nearly impossible for me to eliminate dead spots. Honestly, my tank is a lot of work to keep clean. So, since some are hybrids - gotta keep those, and I'm not willing to part with any of the others, and I would never "cull them"! So, I do what I can to take care of them until I get a larger tank.

All that said; the addition of the Fluval helped me with mechanical filtration, and so do the Hydors. The 2 Cascades were enough for the bio filtration, but not enough for the mechanical and keeping the water crystal... which I am really picky about.


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

After I sent the last post out I started figuring you might be using the powerheads in that manner. It would be to stressful during sleep time for the fish otherwise. I wasn't being rude about your choice of fish but figured that they had to be Malawians. I kept them for the first 10-12 years in the hobby because that was really the only Africans you could get in Ottawa. When I changed to tangs It took a while to understand them. They can't be overcrowded and the do not like the equivalent of a washing machine on high for water movement. That is one thing in the discussion that probably might have been informative is what do all keep and at what stocking levels.


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

Cyphound said:


> After I sent the last post out I started figuring you might be using the powerheads in that manner. It would be to stressful during sleep time for the fish otherwise.


Yes, that's what I thought, too.



Cyphound said:


> I wasn't being rude about your choice of fish but figured that they had to be Malawians.


You were not rude at all! 



Cyphound said:


> <tangs>... can't be overcrowded and the do not like the equivalent of a washing machine on high for water movement.


Funny! I'm an American, however... hail from the South - lived in the mighty republic of Texas and now in Arkansas... therefore, bigger is better (you should see my hair!) and I would therefore _require _Tangs to like the washing machine action of my tank! But seriously, with all the "stuff" in my tank, it's really not as crazy as it would be if there were more open spaces...



Cyphound said:


> That is one thing in the discussion that probably might have been informative is what do all keep and at what stocking levels.


Yes, I did just learn that Tangs don't like a lot of water movement... interesting thread. some other threads on this topic have become a bit crazy, even being locked after a time... So much more pleasant when everyone just wants to share an opinion or two, and learn something, eh?


----------



## noddy (Nov 20, 2006)

Cyphound said:


> After I sent the last post out I started figuring you might be using the powerheads in that manner. It would be to stressful during sleep time for the fish otherwise. I wasn't being rude about your choice of fish but figured that they had to be Malawians. I kept them for the first 10-12 years in the hobby because that was really the only Africans you could get in Ottawa. When I changed to tangs It took a while to understand them. They can't be overcrowded and the do not like the equivalent of a washing machine on high for water movement. That is one thing in the discussion that probably might have been informative is what do all keep and at what stocking levels.


Tropheus and Petrochromis being the exception. :wink:


----------



## Cyphound (Oct 20, 2014)

"Tropheus and Petrochromis being the exception"
There you go, learned something new today.


----------

