To the Barebottom Reefkeepers: Sand in Refuge or No?

Jive Turkey · 12-01-2004, 06:10 PM

I am in the process of setting up a 90g refuge for my 120g BB reef, and am debating on whether or not to have sand in the refuge to help process the detritus that may accumulate in such a low flow area. I can always remove it with ease if it saturates with metals or organics. I have been having troubles keeping getting algae to grow lately in my 20g fuge, but I have 75 pounds of cooked rock that needs a home and my old 90g laying around.

Here is another reason I may put sand in the refugium. This is KevinPo's sump/refugium(the link below.) You'll see a DSB with sand in the baffles to stop microbubbles.

Who has a barebottom or Starboard and still keeps sand in the refugium? And has anybody tried sand in the baffles before? I don't imagine there are any micro bubbles in that tank.
Keep in mind, Kevin's tank has a DSB in the main also. Graham has mentioned to me in the past of an instance where he had sugar sand in his fuge while running BB in the main tank, and the DSB rotted in just a few months.

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-1...es/newsump.jpg

Any opinions appreciated. Joe

clownfishcrazy · 12-01-2004, 06:16 PM

What happens if the sand in the baffles get cloaged (sp.?)? I would feel safer putting a filter pad in the baffles.

Jive Turkey · 12-01-2004, 06:23 PM

If it got clogged, I may stir it up a bit with the retun pump off. But my sump to main turnover is minimal, in a 18" wide baffle. Not likely.
Mechanical filtration has to be cleaned twice a week in my opinion. Pads, micron socks and the like. I already have micron socks that get changed every few days.

HFG · 12-01-2004, 06:55 PM

There is plenty of oppinons about this on RC.
But to make a long story short:
BB = Big skimmer, big chunks of LR, No sand and optional UV Sterilizor.

You would only add a place for macro algea and or a sand bed if you were doing lots of softies and want extra nutrients.

stuckey_t · 12-01-2004, 07:13 PM

One thing you might want to check out is the 2005 annual issue of marine fish and reef on the shelves at the local fish store as of late. There's an article in there about an upside down sand bed that makes a lot of sense to me. I'm also debating the substrate in the refugium isssue and might be leaning towards that. It is definitely a progressive tank method that I haven't seen anywhere before and addresses many of the issues about detritus and such. Check it out!

Jive Turkey · 12-01-2004, 07:30 PM

"There is plenty of oppinons about this on RC.
But to make a long story short:
BB = Big skimmer, big chunks of LR, No sand and optional UV Sterilizor.

You would only add a place for macro algea and or a sand bed if you were doing lots of softies and want extra nutrients."

Thats what the plan has been so far, but I'm never totally convinced.

I do have lots of softies BTW, zoas and rics.

"One thing you might want to check out is the 2005 annual issue of marine fish and reef on the shelves at the local fish store as of late. There's an article in there about an upside down sand bed that makes a lot of sense to me. I'm also debating the substrate in the refugium isssue and might be leaning towards that. It is definitely a progressive tank method that I haven't seen anywhere before and addresses many of the issues about detritus and such. Check it out!"

I'll have to check it out. Upside-down SB. That sound interesting.

HFG · 12-01-2004, 08:35 PM

LINK FTW
.................
With a softie tank you have much more choices it seems

Graham · 12-01-2004, 09:23 PM

Why bother? Unless you have subpar export system(s) in place, you aren't gaining anything by doing it. My refugium/sump sandbed turned stanky in about 4 months when I tried it. Read any thread about BB vs. DSB and go with what you feel is best. There is operatively absolutely no difference where the sand is put. None. It all acts the same. I'd think siphoning it out would be the best thing to do, but really...

You can really go round and round about things like this, but in the end, you either go for it or don't (duh). I don't think reading what anyone tells you is going to make up your mind for you....I mean, aren't topics like this all over the boards, Joe? I seem to stumble on at least one a day. What I'm saying is that no one holds that elusive secret piece of information that will make you go "Aha!". I doubt the decision will make or break your tank, either. In other words, don't sweat it!

If you want it, try it. As you said, it's easy enough to remove, but I personally see nothing to gain by doing it.

BTW, you probably can't eliminate micro bubbles. If you remember that thread from a while back, they can be produced right in your tank. My tank bubbles like mad when the halides are on and the sump return is off. Try it out and see...it might not be worth even trying.

HFG · 12-01-2004, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham

Why bother? Unless you have subpar export system(s) in place, you aren't gaining anything by doing it. My refugium/sump sandbed turned stanky in about 4 months when I tried it. Read any thread about BB vs. DSB and go with what you feel is best. There is operatively absolutely no difference where the sand is put. None. If you are making the effort to get detritus into the sump, why not just remove it rather than let it stew in a sandbed? I just don't get it.

You can really go round and round about things like this, but in the end, you either go for it or don't (duh). I don't think reading what anyone tells you is going to make up your mind for you....I mean, aren't topics like this all over the boards, Joe? I seem to stumble on at least one a day. What I'm saying is that no one holds that elusive secret piece of information that will make you go "Aha!". I doubt the decision will make or break your tank, either. In other words, don't sweat it!

If you want it, try it. As you said, it's easy enough to remove, but I personally see nothing to gain by doing it.

Graham · 12-01-2004, 09:29 PM

Sorry HFG...I edited my post when I realized that part of my quote "If you are making the effort to get detritus into the sump, why not just remove it rather than let it stew in a sandbed? I just don't get it." is probably not true, since Joe said this is a low flow refuge (as in, he's not exporting detritus from tank to refuge)....but still. Remove it, don't stew it!

Jive Turkey · 12-04-2004, 04:10 AM

Thx for the input Graham. Thats what I thought you'd say...

I don't like siphoning detritus with a turkey baster. How else can I get it out of a tank sitting on the floor?

Graham · 12-05-2004, 12:54 AM

On the floor is tough. Wet-dry vac is your best (maybe only) option. Although, my sump is on the floor and I can usually manually siphon at least 7 or 8 gallons out of the sump before the suction is too little to pick up the crap.

Jive Turkey · 12-05-2004, 03:44 AM

I guess I never tried it. Didn't think it'd work.

Irenicus · 12-05-2004, 08:36 AM

Would a magnum cannister with the vacuum attachement work?

Graham · 12-05-2004, 10:49 AM

Joe,

Wet drys work great. It's a good investment - especially to clean up spills and overflows. I'm sure saltwater takes its toll on the metal parts (fasteners mostly, mine are all rusty), but I use mine for the occasional complete sump cleaning and it works like a champ. I've had the vac about 5 years and it works good as new, so I wouldn't worry about ruining it short term. I even used it to remove the sand from my old sump. But yeah, siphoning will work. It's just kind of a pain to get it started.

I'm not familiar with the Magnum vac attachment, but I've had trouble getting Magnums to work unless they are significantly below the water level (under the tank). I tried to run one on my sump for awhile and took forever to get it to prime.