# Filtration Turn Over Ratio



## BottomFeeder (Jul 26, 2008)

I like to over filter my tanks by adding a second filter. That way if one fails it shouldn't be catastrophic. For most of my tanks I can just throw in a extra sponge or HOB filter. If it is a planted tank though you don't want to loose all of the C02, so I would look to a second canister. Maybe pick up an eheim classic which is fairly inexpensive.


----------



## kali (May 8, 2009)

bottomfeeder said:


> i like to over filter all my tanks roud:


 +1111


----------



## rich815 (May 21, 2008)

kali said:


> +1111


Me too. I ran a 2026 and a 2028 on my 72 gal. Only switched out the 2026 recently with a good used XP3 I found so I could use the 2026 on my 60P.


----------



## kali (May 8, 2009)

rich815 said:


> Me too. I ran a 2026 and a 2028 on my 72 gal. Only switched out the 2026 recently with a good used XP3 I found so I could use the 2026 on my 60P.


 im with you on that .!!! there's no such a thing is called over filtration in my world ..as long as fish can handle the current of the water is all good . more filter = clean, heathty water= happy fish :fish::fish::fish:
90gallon mbuna ( heavy stock) : eheim pro 2 2028 X2 , AC 110 (HOB)
180 gallon plant tank ( in process) : fluval FX5 X2
210 gallon peacock and hap ( mid stock) 40 gallon sump ,1225gph return pump , eheim pro3 2080.


----------



## ricoishere (Jan 26, 2009)

Thanks for the info.


----------



## dutchy (Jul 31, 2009)

Filter capacity is bare pump capacity. My 2071 is rated 250 gph but the real output of the is just 142. Try it yourself. See how much seconds it takes to pump 1 liter.


----------



## BottomFeeder (Jul 26, 2008)

dutchy said:


> Filter capacity is bare pump capacity. My 2071 is rated 250 gph but the real output of the is just 142. Try it yourself. See how much seconds it takes to pump 1 liter.


That is a good point. There are also devices you can put in the pump path to measure flow rate.


----------



## inkslinger (Dec 28, 2003)

I have a Eheim Pro II 2028 Filter for my 110g tank , I also have a close loop with a Mag 5 500gph pump, AM1000 CO2 Reactor and a 300w Hydro Heater and I find that that is still not enough circulation for the tank {60x18x24}
I'm replacing my system with a 1 inch close loop with 2 returns , Blue Line 55 HD 1100gph Pump , 533 and a 547 Nu-Clear Filter and a Mazzie Injector . This should give me better circulation with the 2 3/4 inch loc-line returns.
Like kali and BottomFeeder it doesn't hurt to over filter a tank and have good water circulation with enrich co2 thru out your tank.


----------



## kid creole (Dec 25, 2008)

It doesn't hurt to overfilter, but you have to deal with the heat and the expense. In the first post, you mentioned 6x turnover per hour. That is really high if you intended it as a minimum. I think 2x is probably a bare bones minimum. If you have the money, 2x is not ideal, but if you are doing 6x and considering spending more money, I'd evaluate it more closely. 

I'm also a big fan of the redundant filters. If one goes bad, it's not a big deal. Also, you can clean them really well and not worry about removing the bacterial colony from the tank.


----------



## c_sking (Aug 4, 2008)

BottomFeeder said:


> I like to over filter my tanks by adding a second filter. That way if one fails it shouldn't be catastrophic.


+1 This is the best idea.


----------



## niko (Mar 8, 2006)

The turnover is not the only thing to be concerned about. 

You must make sure that the flow is indeed enough for your tank. Plants block the flow very efficiently. You may think that 200 gph in a 55 gal. tank would be a lot, but it's barely enough in a densely planted tank.

You will see a big difference in growth if your flow is consistent everywhere in the tank. Adding small powerheads goes a long way.

--Nikolay


----------



## niko (Mar 8, 2006)

The turnover is not the only thing to be concerned about. 

You must make sure that the flow is indeed enough for your tank. Plants block the flow very efficiently. You may think that 200 gph in a 55 gal. tank would be a lot, but it's barely enough in a densely planted tank.

You will see a big difference in growth if your flow is consistent everywhere in the tank. Adding small powerheads goes a long way.

--Nikolay


----------



## lescarpentier (Feb 2, 2008)

ricoishere said:


> I'm curious about the turnover ratio other members have for their tanks. I know recommendation is 6 times per hour.


Who recommended 6 ?

I think that 10 is more like it,and that may not be enough with a single output.



niko said:


> The turnover is not the only thing to be concerned about.
> 
> You must make sure that the flow is indeed enough for your tank. Plants block the flow very efficiently. You may think that 200 gph in a 55 gal. tank would be a lot, but it's barely enough in a densely planted tank.
> 
> ...


I completely agree.You will also have a more forgiving tank if your flow is excellent,which is good for somebody like me who doesn't like to worry about his tank all of the time.


----------



## kid creole (Dec 25, 2008)

lescarpentier said:


> Who recommended 6 ?
> 
> I think that 10 is more like it,and that may not be enough with a single output.


I recommended two. To be clear, this is for sufficient biological filtration. 10 is borderline ridiculous, but I'm understanding this number to be a minimum, not the ideal.


----------



## bibbels (Sep 29, 2008)

lescarpentier said:


> Who recommended 6 ?
> 
> I think that 10 is more like it,and that may not be enough with a single output.


I agree. I actually aim for at least 20x on high tech tanks (high light/high CO2).

For example; on one of my high light 40 breeders I have an Eheim 2217, 2 Koralia model 1's, and 1 Koralia model 2. That's around 1600 gph flow and if I'm remiss in trimming I still get dead zones.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

It's easy enough to tell if you've got enough flow or not; add some flake food and see where it goes.

There's no "perfect" turnover rate; every tank is going to be different depending on bioload, plant load, and hardscape. 

On my own 90gal I started off with a Rena XP2 and an AquaClear 110- now I have an XP3 and an XP4 and IMO that's a much better flow; much less debris is allowed to build up on the bottom of the tank- it gets sucked into the filter intakes pretty quickly, which is the point. I'm also a big fan of redundancy on big tanks; IMO the larger investment in the plants and livestock make it more that worth having a failsafe should 1 filter fail.


----------



## inkslinger (Dec 28, 2003)

Like bibbels say's I would go with 10x over here is something to read about:
http://aquariumalgae.blogspot.com/
With my Eheim Pro 2 2028 and a Mag 5 close loop was not enough circulation all my plants grew great on one side of tank.


----------



## ron521 (May 12, 2008)

One of my tanks is 75 gallon, heavily planted community tank. The ONLY filters in that particular tank are two Lustar HydroSponge IV, each rated for tanks "up to 80 gallons".
So in theory, I've got biological filtration for 160 gallons, but since the filters are powered by airstones, I doubt my turnover rate is more than 3x, and might not even be 2x (it's difficult to accurately measure the output from airstone-powered filters). Nonetheless, the tank stays clean, water quality is perfect, and fish appear healthy and content.


----------



## daFrimpster (Mar 7, 2005)

I have a ten gal and a 20 gal with no filtration and great plant growth.


----------



## mott (Nov 23, 2006)

ron521 said:


> One of my tanks is 75 gallon, heavily planted community tank. The ONLY filters in that particular tank are two Lustar HydroSponge IV, each rated for tanks "up to 80 gallons".
> So in theory, I've got biological filtration for 160 gallons, but since the filters are powered by airstones, I doubt my turnover rate is more than 3x, and might not even be 2x (it's difficult to accurately measure the output from airstone-powered filters). Nonetheless, the tank stays clean, water quality is perfect, and fish appear healthy and content.


Sponge filters are not given enough credit, that being said air pump driven type are not so good for the planted tank.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

mott said:


> Sponge filters are not given enough credit, that being said air pump driven type are not so good for the planted tank.


Slap them on the intake of a canister filter for a prefilter.
Slap them in the canister filter etc

You cannot have too much filter really.
Better to have more than less.

Never seen a case where that was not true.

Can I get away with less on smaller tanks?
Sure, but why?

Tanks are more stable with filters.

I actually like to have a decent fish load also, filterless is not going to offer you any real advantage(please entertain me if you dare) since you still require water movement. So it's not energy savings and there's still dirt to remove(in the filter or the tank, your choice there).

You could not keep the fish loads I have without a filter.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## ron521 (May 12, 2008)

I used to run dual Emperor 400's on my 75 gallon tank, so was turning my water over roughly 10 times/hour. Water quality was excellent, fish seemed happy, my Anubias grew well.
With the HydroSponges, I'm only turning over....2 or 3 times/hour (?) if that much, water quality still excellent,if anything MORE oxygenation (lots of nearly microscopic bubbles from the airstones), fish seem even happier in the more gentle current, Anubias seems unchanged.
If at a given rate of turnover, ammonia is undetectable, and the water is carrying all the dissolved oxygen it can, how is turning it over faster beneficial? 
The optimum turnover rate would seem to be the LOWEST rate which gives the desired water quality.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

More turnover = more flow in the tank = better chance of trapping debris in the filters instead of accumulating in dead spots.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

ron521 said:


> I used to run dual Emperor 400's on my 75 gallon tank, so was turning my water over roughly 10 times/hour. Water quality was excellent, fish seemed happy, my Anubias grew well.
> With the HydroSponges, I'm only turning over....2 or 3 times/hour (?) if that much, water quality still excellent,if anything MORE oxygenation (lots of nearly microscopic bubbles from the airstones), fish seem even happier in the more gentle current, Anubias seems unchanged.
> If at a given rate of turnover, ammonia is undetectable, and the water is carrying all the dissolved oxygen it can, how is turning it over faster beneficial?
> The optimum turnover rate would seem to be the LOWEST rate which gives the desired water quality.


Might seem reasonable at 1st glance.
However, your tank and 99% of the other tanks will not be the same.

Fish loads vary drastically, wood mass, detritus production, when problems do occur(not when the sky is sunny), with higher growth rate species of plants that can melt or slough leaves at a higher rate(Anubias are hardly the model), while for your tank and under your conditions at this point in time, it is working nicely, this does not imply more flow is worse/detrimental.

Biowheels also remove lots of CO2, sponges are not.

That alone could account for the results.

Also, once plants are well established, they determine the system provided their demands are met, and much less the bacteria in the filter.

At that point, the filter is just a mechanical dirt remover and a method to move water around in the tank. The biological function is far more plant dependent once plants are well established.

The bacteria act as a secondary back up, which you might not need in many cases.............but having not will not do any harm.

The strongest argument might be for less energy use but canister filters use very little relative to powerheads, so you really do not win going filterless or lower flow there.

*I like filters for dirt removal mostly, surface skimming, place to put the heaters and other items out of the aquarium, hidden from view and with high density fish loads.

Very low flow systems will respond much slower to changes in O2. This means it's fine with a few fish, but the higher loading you do, the less O2 there is and the exchange rate is less than with higher flow systems.

In other words, how much risk is really worth using less flow rate in a planted tank? If using a little less electricity is your game, you do not have high fish stocking levels, then the risk might be less, but many like their fish or have more sensitive/$$ species.

I prefer redundancy and it cost me little, can I get away with less? Certainly, am I willing to run it down till I start losing fish over time? No. 

Do you think other folks will have the same results?
Is there some large gain from it?
Is there a large risk?

Risk<=>gain 
CO2 <=> O2 draw
Species of plants
Wood
Hardscape layouts
Light
Water change frequencies
Goal

All these things come into play.
It's not just about seeing if you can get away the least, if that is really your game, start with light, how low can you go there?

I have to wonder why more that really are into this concept do not apply it to lighting/CO2 etc.

If it's really about using less.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## kid creole (Dec 25, 2008)

plantbrain said:


> I have to wonder why more that really are into this concept do not apply it to lighting/CO2 etc.


I see a lot more people recommending very high flow rates as "minimums", similar to the high light syndrome.


----------



## fox (May 16, 2006)

dutchy said:


> Filter capacity is bare pump capacity. My 2071 is rated 250 gph but the real output of the is just 142. Try it yourself. See how much seconds it takes to pump 1 liter.


About two weeks ago out of curiosity after doing maintenance on a ProII 2028 I did a bucket test and got a flow rate of 211 GPH just a tad over what Eheim states.


----------



## ron521 (May 12, 2008)

My lights are two 15 watt flourescent tubes, so 30 watts/75 gallons = 0.4 watts/gallon. They rest directly on the glass tops of the tank, not raised above the tank.


----------



## daverockssocks (Dec 1, 2008)

I run an XP3, a QuietOne 1200 with a modified sponge filter powering a UV sterilizer and an AQ 20 powerhead just creating flow and I often wonder if I should get another XP3.


----------

