Anybody here used a turf scrubber before?

[SantaMonica]

Turf is different from a fuge in so many ways:



o Reduces N and P to much lower levels than fuge/macro can. And faster.

o Is very quick to respond to excess nitrate and phosphate spikes (the turf "screen" always
stays the same size after it is trimmed); much quicker than refugiums/macros which have
smaller surface areas after they are trimmed.

o Traps no waste/food like a refugium or DSB does; waste/food flows right past the screen.

o Does not release strands into display, like chaeto.

o Does not go sexual, like caulerpa can.

o Is 1/2 or 1/3 the size.

o Weighs nothing.

o Cools the water.

o Much easier to clean/harvest.

o Can be hung above tank so pods drain into tank.

o Is free.

o Is portable.

o Can run two, for backup.

o Will oxygenate the tank if main return pump goes out, if the scrubber drains into the display.

[SantaMonica]

Results of the day:

jski711 on the RF site says: "Well i ditched my euro reef skimmer and have not noticed any side effects from doing so. i'm still doing water changes on a regular basis but i have increased feedings tremendously and have no adverse side effects from doing so."

keithqueef on RC says: "Update. Well i received my screen from inland (12x12) last friday. and since putting it into my system my trates have gone from red to orange to now dark yellow not quite orange, i lost my color card so i dunno numbers. the screen is dense with it."

[Sweetpea]

Yes, it is interesting. I could not employ this method on my current tanks (simply for a lack of space), but I would like to know more about people who could and have actually made the change. Before and after photos would be a bonus, as would any "behind the scenes" pics.

[Grue]

Nice Write up. Great job of explaining. But as I understand it. It is just a differing version of a Referium. Yes, there are slight differences.
1 Yes can help cool the water. Easier to force the hot air out and thru the screen.

2 Scrubber can be used inconjuction with an referium.

3 Scrubbers can not do more than a referium as the alges grown ARE the same. What I mean by this is you are not bringing something new into the system. While it is true that you are getting alot more contact time with the alge it is the same stuff growing in your tank/sump/referium/alge scrubber.

Again I love the ideal, and will incorporate one within my referium to force the water either thru the screen or below it. My current setup forces return water thru live rock rubble. Within the referium I use cheato. No Cheato makes it to the main tank. (If it did the tangs would dispose of it)

Guess what I am saying is tho the differences are small. I don't see any major difference between an Well set up Referium, and a well set up Alge scrubber. It is also my belief that tho the benifits are very good. People tend to overstate what an Scrubber can do. Silly question If you put that much light in your referium, (Yes you would need a fan to cool it off) How much would your cheato grow? How much alge would grow on a screen you placed in there to grow alge? I would think quite a bit.
Grue

[SantaMonica]

The major difference in power is that of photosynthesis. That is what pulls nutrients out of the water. Macro in a fuge is blocked by the light having to be at a distance, and to go through the water. A scrubber does not, and the light can be right up on the screen. With light, you'd think that doubling the distance would make the power one-half, but it does not. Instead it make the power one-fouth. So, if the same bulb is 3" from a scrubber, and 12" from fuge macro, the scrubber is getting 12X the light power, and thus 12X the photosynthesis and nutrient pulling power. And this does not count the light in the fuge having to go through the water. Even two would be big increase, but twelve is huge.

[SantaMonica]

Ok here is a four-part video I made of the last scraping of the screen of my original bucket before I give it to the LFS to replace the tank-divider screen he's been testing. This video is low-light (with a 5 year old 2-meg camera), so you can't see the algae on the screen, but the purpose is to see the technique of screen cleaning/scraping:

Hi-res:

Part 1: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Scraping1.mpg
Part 2: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Scraping2.mpg
Part 2: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Scraping3.mpg
Part 3: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Scraping4.mpg

YouTube:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypgNfJV6gBo#"]YouTube- Algae Scrubber: Cleaning/Scraping, part 1[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9vlUorbooo#"]YouTube- Algae Scrubber: Cleaning/Scraping, part 2[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Voo4mBWWuuQ#"]YouTube- Algae Scrubber: Cleaning/Scraping, part 3[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2msQ4Nw0pYc#"]YouTube- Algae Scrubber: Cleaning/Scraping, part 4[/ame]

[SantaMonica]

The Power Of Light, another example:

Reader "varga" on the RS site just did a cleaning and sent in these pics; here is before the cleaning... it looks like the screen has an even coverage all across it:




But here is after:




Notice that the center area has a tougher, stiffer algae that holds on stronger because it is made up of less water and more fibers (i.e., more N and P, less H20). Now why do you think that the stronger algae formed in the middle of the screen? Here's why:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Yes, because of the lights. The screen may look evenly covered in light when you look at it, but your eyes can't tell the high power areas from the low power areas. Also, when you double the distance of the light, you would think the power of the light would be reduced to one-half; but it's actually reduced to ONE FOURTH of what it was. So when optimizing your design, you want the lights as close to the screen as possilbe, all the way across the screen.

[SantaMonica]

Many folks asked for pics of the jski711 no-skimmer tank whose test results I already posted, so here they are along with an update he posted:

"Well first i'll start by giving you a little background of my tank. its been up for 2 years now and am running t5 lighting. in the past i have had algae issues and phosphates tested above .1 from overfeeding. (i'm trying to fatten up my clowns and hopefully get them spawning). i've also got a 15g tank plumbed into my system that has a pair of mandarins in it which i am also trying to get spawning. i had a sick mandarin and dosed my tank with Maracyn to try and save him. after dosing this for a week i was unable to turn my skimmer on because it would just overflow from the medicine. after doing numerous water changes and about a month later i still was unable to turn it back on, thats when i saw [the scrubber] thread. I also had to turn off my calcium reactor because the co2 was dropping my ph too low; the bubbles from the skimmer were really helping me keep my ph up but with my skimmer not running, it had to be turned off. thats when i decided to give [the scrubber] a try. i purchased a pre grown screen from inland and off i went. since adding the "scrubber" i have noticed a major increase in ph which allowed me to turn my calcium reactor back on and get things stable again. the reactor has only been back on for about 2 weeks now and im "re dialing" it in. my ph fluctuates between 7.8 at night and 8.0 during the day. I have over 30 different types of sps in my tank, just did a quick count, and i have noticed no ill side effects at all. i have also been overfeeding a ton, especially to my mandarins! i have also noticed that the green film of algae i would get on the glass every few days has gone. I don't even remember the last time i scraped it, although in the pics you will see it needs to be done soon cause i have a ton of coraline algae on it. So IMO this "scrubber" has done wonders for me. I have been skimmerless for over 3 months now and still do my normal water changes, sometimes i do go 2 weeks but normally every weekend i do one. the turf that was on the screen from inland is still there but it doesnt seem to be spreading but not receding either. below are some pictures from today, they were just quick shots so sorry if they are blurry but you will see the colors i've got are great and like i said earlier i have had NO ill side effects at all."








.
.
.

[SantaMonica]

Part 1 of 2:

Growth Sequence of New Acrylic Screen

The new acrylic scrubber is up and kicking. These pics were taken while the original bucket was still operating, so the growth is slower than it would have been otherwise. I'm running 3000K on one side, and 6500K on the other, as a test. It probably won't make much difference until the holes in the screen are sealed off, but here are the daily pics. The T5 light on the front has been removed so you can see the screen:


Day 1


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay01.jpg


Day 2

http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay02small.jpg
Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay02.jpg


Day 3


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay03.jpg


Day 4


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay04.jpg


Day 5


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay05.jpg


Day 6


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay06.jpg


Day 7


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay07.jpg


Day 8


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay08.jpg


Day 9


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay09.jpg


Day 10


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay10.jpg


Day 11 (a huge growth increase):


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay11.jpg

[SantaMonica]

Part 2 of 2:

Notice that it takes several days before you can see any growth at all. And yes, I did seed the screen. Going back one day to Day 10, here are some closeups:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...seup1Day10.jpg


http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...Day10small.jpg
Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...seup2Day10.jpg


http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...Day10small.jpg
Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...seup3Day10.jpg



Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...seup4Day10.jpg



Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...seup5Day10.jpg


And here is a closeup from Day 11:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay11closeup.jpg


And what it looks like out of the stand. Note the algae coming out of drain; it was almost 2 feet long before I pulled it out for this pic:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/AcrylicDay11heldup.jpg


Here's the growth on the 3000K side:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...11out3000K.jpg


And the 6500K side:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/Acry...11out6500K.jpg


Instead of following the rule of cleaning only one side at a time, I had to do both in order to measure the algae of the 3000K side versus the 6500K side. Here is what was pulled off, like pulling a rope:




Here are the algae amounts removed, after a cleaning:




And here's the screen after cleaning; this is why you don't clean both sides, becuase it leaves left nothing on the screen for filtering:




A few notes:

o The screen is only 1.5 inches from the acrylic wall, and thus some water does get on the wall. But this unit is currently not setup for airflow with a fan, and it has a lid, so the water never gets a chance to evaporate. As a result very little saltcreep forms. I think I wiped it twice during the 11 days; however it did not do anything, just redistributed the droplets. On day 11 there was a small amount of creep; when I pulled the screen out I just reached in an splashed some water on it and it came off.

o There was a great increase in algae between day 10 and 11. I've seen this many times: once the hair algae gets to a certain point, the next day it covers everything.

o When the screen get covered, algae start flowing down the scrubber and out the drain. Not a little, but a lot. It easily reached the botton of the sump 18" below. I just grabbed it and pulled it off. This might be a way to feed tangs, if the unit were placed on the hood of the tank.