AWC on a QT system?

[Enderg60]

So FYI this is purely a random thought at this point.

I have a permanent 75g system setup for QT which I will use for the usual copper then Prazi treatments.

The question is, for the copper portion of the process would an AWC be better than a large water change in regards to stability and fish stress?

The though process for the AWC being shut off the return pump, do the water change from the sump, dose additional copper and restart the return pump. Of course calibration and a testing period would be required.

Large water change would be, fish in buckets, drain the 75g(not the sump), refill, redose copper and wait for it to mix and get to temp before putting the fish back in. This would be done every 2 weeks, or as required by the ammonia.

What do you think?

 

[MnFish1]

I think that's a mistake. And - there is likely no need for a large water change - unless you have an extremely high bio load. in any case - Each time you do a 'large water change' - you introduce error into your QT system. NOW - If you had a large reservoir of water - with a known copper concentration sure - you can use an AWC - but is it really saving time effort - IDK - i.e. if the ammonia rises (or are you planning on having an active bio filter?) you will still need to do larger water changes. If you have an active bio filter - there would be little need for water changes right? (or am I completely misunderstanding what you're asking

 

[vetteguy53081]

So FYI this is purely a random thought at this point.

I have a permanent 75g system setup for QT which I will use for the usual copper then Prazi treatments.

The question is, for the copper portion of the process would an AWC be better than a large water change in regards to stability and fish stress?

The though process for the AWC being shut off the return pump, do the water change from the sump, dose additional copper and restart the return pump. Of course calibration and a testing period would be required.

Large water change would be, fish in buckets, drain the 75g(not the sump), refill, redose copper and wait for it to mix and get to temp before putting the fish back in. This would be done every 2 weeks, or as required by the ammonia.

What do you think?

Rather than AWC, I would use Hiugh grade carbon or Matrix for removal of copper. . Keeping it simple

 

[Jay Hemdal Verified Community Expert]

So FYI this is purely a random thought at this point.

I have a permanent 75g system setup for QT which I will use for the usual copper then Prazi treatments.

The question is, for the copper portion of the process would an AWC be better than a large water change in regards to stability and fish stress?

The though process for the AWC being shut off the return pump, do the water change from the sump, dose additional copper and restart the return pump. Of course calibration and a testing period would be required.

Large water change would be, fish in buckets, drain the 75g(not the sump), refill, redose copper and wait for it to mix and get to temp before putting the fish back in. This would be done every 2 weeks, or as required by the ammonia.

What do you think?

I'm not sure what AWC means - I presume it is an automatic water change system? If so, those are really inefficient in lowering pollutants in aquariums - small, constant water changes end up changing lots of water that was just exchanged. You get more "bang for your buck" by performing large water changes at one time.

My father helped me work out the math on this decades ago - I don't have the calculations any longer, but the math showed that small, continuous water changes were much less effective.

Jay

 

[MnFish1]

Rather than AWC, I would use Hiugh grade carbon or Matrix for removal of copper. . Keeping it simple

He is not trying to remove copper - he is trying to keep the copper dose stable - using an AWC - and managing toxins during QT - as compared to large water changes.

"The thought process for the AWC being shut off the return pump, do the water change from the sump, dose additional copper and restart the return pump. Of course calibration and a testing period would be required."