Dos awc programing review- not as effective as one would think.

[slayertx]

Just wanted to share after haing a Neptune dos awc system setup for a few months that I believe the auto program feature severely limits the efficiency of the process.

Here is the problem. The system limits how much the dos can be used in a streight shot and breaks the "doses" up multiple times. Furthermore it adds and removes them at the same time.

So as a example I do a 2 gal awc on my 100gal tank every day now. Well that sounds like a strong amount as it equates to 14% a week or 60%+ a month. Half that should be enough to knock all nitrates,phosphate and undesirables in check..So why? I didn't start out here but it's what i needed to achieve the results i wanted.

So in reality what is happening. the dos takes 859ml in/out at the same time...then it pauses letting the old SW mix with the new SW...then it does another 859, and so on and so forth. This doesn't sound so bad but the math behind dilution makes this horible.

It would be much more efficient if the dos heads didn't break up the doses or if they did drain the old first and then put in the fresh after.

Because of this i am going to manual write the codes for the dos (and swap the lines as the one runs in reverse) to where I take out water first, then put water back in and at the same time have my ATO turned off for this duration. I highly suggest anyone running the default awc system programming do the same.

I also believe this effects anyone doing a larger "manual water change" using their programing.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this subject?

 

[rusty hannon]

Just wanted to share after haing a Neptune dos awc system setup for a few months that I believe the auto program feature severely limits the efficiency of the process.

Here is the problem. The system limits how much the dos can be used in a streight shot and breaks the "doses" up multiple times. Furthermore it adds and removes them at the same time.

So as a example I do a 2 gal awc on my 100gal tank every day now. Well that sounds like a strong amount as it equates to 14% a week or 60%+ a month. Half that should be enough to knock all nitrates,phosphate and undesirables in check..So why? I didn't start out here but it's what i needed to achieve the results i wanted.

So in reality what is happening. the dos takes 859ml in/out at the same time...then it pauses letting the old SW mix with the new SW...then it does another 859, and so on and so forth. This doesn't sound so bad but the math behind dilution makes this horible.

It would be much more efficient if the dos heads didn't break up the doses or if they did drain the old first and then put in the fresh after.

Because of this i am going to manual write the codes for the dos (and swap the lines as the one runs in reverse) to where I take out water first, then put water back in and at the same time have my ATO turned off for this duration. I highly suggest anyone running the default awc system programming do the same.

I also believe this effects anyone doing a larger "manual water change" using their programing.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this subject?

I don't have any ideas as I know nothing of the Apex,except what I'm learning from you n other folks sharing and for that thank you, but I'm curious on awc, do you still vacuum to get rid of debris n clean gra vel or how does that work? thanks again R

 

[slayertx]

I don't have any ideas as I know nothing of the Apex,except what I'm learning from you n other folks sharing and for that thank you, but I'm curious on awc, do you still vacuum to get rid of debris n clean gra vel or how does that work? thanks again R

For me no not as much at all. I really use my diamond goby to keep the sand clean. He does a fantastic job. Also the majority seem to be pushing towards bare bottoms anyway. I like sand and have a few hundred invested in it so it's staying.

On a side note I also have a roller mat on my system and the last time I did clean the sand. I just stuck the drain line down my overflow, went to town and my roller mat removed the gunk. It was a total "eureka" moment. Didn't waste any water and I could keep going instead of stopping to drain buckets. I would recommend a roller mat just for this feature alone!

 

[slayertx]

I don't have any ideas as I know nothing of the Apex,except what I'm learning from you n other folks sharing and for that thank you, but I'm curious on awc, do you still vacuum to get rid of debris n clean gra vel or how does that work? thanks again R

Just want to pipe in, the seasoned people all know when it comes to fish selection pretty much every one we pick has a purpose. I think in my tank i have 3 that are just there because they are pretty or because you can't have a tank with out a clown for visiting kids to scream "Nemo". However the majority all serve a purpose. I.e. diamond goby for sand clean up, 6 line for pests, cleaner shrimp, tangs and reef safeish angels for algea. I personally stay away from snales and tiny crabs... rather have a tang

 

[rusty hannon]

For me no not as much at all. I really use my diamond goby to keep the sand clean. He does a fantastic job. Also the majority seem to be pushing towards bare bottoms anyway. I like sand and have a few hundred invested in it so it's staying.

On a side note I also have a roller mat on my system and the last time I did clean the sand. I just stuck the drain line down my overflow, went to town and my roller mat removed the gunk. It was a total "eureka" moment. Didn't waste any water and I could keep going instead of stopping to drain buckets. I would recommend a roller mat just for this feature alone!

Awesome and thank you. I have a small tank but am looking at a klir for my corner tank I'm buying things for.i do have a roll of felt that goes to one n I cut it down to fit in take n it filters great.i love it.thanks for the advice R

 

[Rick.45cal]

I’ve been using one for nearly four years now and personally wouldn’t change a thing. I think you’ve got a different expectation of what AWC accomplish than what my expectations and uses are for it. I personally want it changing small amounts throughout the day and I don‘t want it to change the volume of the sump or tank by doing it seperately as it complicates what my ATO needs to be doing. If you are looking at AWC to reduce nutrients it’s not going to make a noticable impact. I use it to trickle fresh saltwater with trace elements without influencing the stability of the system like changing an appreciable amount of water in one shot will do. I take water from upstream in my sump and it replaces the water in the return section of the sump. I’m not using AWC for nutrient control, If you want to do that you are better off doing water changes manually. We just have two different perspectives

 

[rusty hannon]

Just want to pipe in, the seasoned people all know when it comes to fish selection pretty much every one we pick has a purpose. I think in my tank i have 3 that are just there because they are pretty or because you can't have a tank with out a clown for visiting kids to scream "Nemo". However the majority all serve a purpose. I.e. diamond goby for sand clean up, 6 line for pests, cleaner shrimp, tangs and reef safeish angels for algea. I personally stay away from snales and tiny crabs... rather have a tang

Awesome n I'm getting there . I had a crash a few months back n lost most of my live stock.when I did this long ago we didn't have any of this stuff n when I started back up I had few fish but many corals n clean up crew but as I said I have lost most n starting again. Thanks for the info.

 

[rusty hannon]

I’ve been using one for nearly four years now and personally wouldn’t change a thing. I think you’ve got a different expectation of what AWC accomplish than what my expectations and uses are for it. I personally want it changing small amounts throughout the day and I don‘t want it to change the volume of the sump or tank by doing it seperately as it complicates what my ATO needs to be doing. If you are looking at AWC to reduce nutrients it’s not going to make a noticable impact. I use it to trickle fresh saltwater with trace elements without influencing the stability of the system like changing an appreciable amount of water in one shot will do. I take water from upstream in my sump and it replaces the water in the return section of the sump. I’m not using AWC for nutrient control, If you want to do that you are better off doing water changes manually. We just have two different perspectives

Beautiful tank and thank you for your perspective on this subject .I'm learning all I can before deciding on in or out for me but can't make a decision without all the information. It obviously works and thank you for the picture.very inspiring.

 

[Rick.45cal]

Beautiful tank and thank you for your perspective on this subject .I'm learning all I can before deciding on in or out for me but can't make a decision without all the information. It obviously works and thank you for the picture.very inspiring.

Thank you! I don’t do any manual removal of anything in the tank, it’s been a wonderfully effective system changing 1%-2% of the tank volume daily. I literally haven’t had my hands in the display in well over 3 years. It’s been a blessing in all honesty.

 

[rusty hannon]

Thank you! I don’t do any manual removal of anything in the tank, it’s been a wonderfully effective system changing 1%-2% of the tank volume daily. I literally haven’t had my hands in the display in well over 3 years. It’s been a blessing in all honesty.

That's awesome and as I said completely beautiful.very impressive as well as inspirational thank you again n I'm having my wife save your picture as it's quite a goal.

 

[slayertx]

If you are looking at AWC to reduce nutrients it’s not going to make a noticable impact. I use it to trickle fresh saltwater with trace elements without influencing the stability of the system like changing an appreciable amount of water in one shot will do. I take water from upstream in my sump and it replaces the water in the return section of the sump. I’m not using AWC for nutrient control, If you want to do that you are better off doing water changes manually. We just have two different perspectives

1st off beautiful tank.
So you agree with me that the dos awc schedule will not impact nutrients like I stated. 2nd wouldn't what I am suggesting work for you aswell and save you some money? If you fear your elements are being lowered weither it be alk,cal,mag,stron, .ect doing what I'm saying would require a smaller change per day. Also writing a if time = x:xx then off on a ato isn't really a big deal. I have my ato plumbed directly to a ro unit and have a timer that makes sure it's turned off.

In closing you have a system that's working so I wouldn't be prone to changing things. Have a good one!

 

[bobssecrtsn]

If im not mistaken apex DOS does simutaniously have both heads working at the same time (if you used their AWC setup guide) thats at least how mine is currently, both heads running in ADD mode ( i swapped the lines after i finished setting it up) also someone on here did the math and it was not worth having one head on per time. there wasnt much of a gain.

 

[Rick.45cal]

1st off beautiful tank.
So you agree with me that the dos awc schedule will not impact nutrients like I stated. 2nd wouldn't what I am suggesting work for you aswell and save you some money? If you fear your elements are being lowered weither it be alk,cal,mag,stron, .ect doing what I'm saying would require a smaller change per day. Also writing a if time = x:xx then off on a ato isn't really a big deal. I have my ato plumbed directly to a ro unit and have a timer that makes sure it's turned off.

In closing you have a system that's working so I wouldn't be prone to changing things. Have a good one!

First off thank you for the compliment!

I’m very happy with how it works for me, when I was deciding how I wanted an AWC system setup I wanted it to be a continous very slow process, so the way the DOS works really fits the bill. The benefit of stability through small constant change outweighs any savings in money doing it another way, in my opinion. I export nutrients via other methodologies, as I think larger manual water changes are ineffective ways of nutrient control in the long run, and they are good ways to get swings in parameters in my experience.

I can very effectively use my system to change elemental parameters VERY slowly by altering the make up of the new seawater (such as boosting the Magnesium levels). It takes a long time for the parameters to change in the main display but that’s the point. Corals don’t respond well to rapid changes, and most everything we consider slow as people, is still pretty rapid to corals. So that’s a big win in my scheme of reef keeping.

I definitely agree that you’ll not make a noticeable impact on your NO3 and PO4 levels but that‘s not my intention here and I realized that before I set mine up. (For a couple years I was having to dose Nitrate and Phosphate, so helping eliminate them certainly wasn’t a goal of mine). Stability via constant small change in a large system, having happy corals because of the trickle of fresh seawater/fresh elements constantly, not having to do weekly manual water changes, and being able to sit back and enjoy the tank instead of work were the ultimate goals . It’s worked out far better than I ever thought it would!

You should give it a shot and let it do it’s thing and see what happens, I’d never steer you wrong about it.

FWIW I use plain old Instant Ocean salt and have for nearly the entire time my tank has been set up.
Be well!

 

[slayertx]

If im not mistaken apex DOS does simutaniously have both heads working at the same time (if you used their AWC setup guide) thats at least how mine is currently, both heads running in ADD mode ( i swapped the lines after i finished setting it up) also someone on here did the math and it was not worth having one head on per time. there wasnt much of a gain.

Yes and that is part of the problem and what I'm talking about changing. it would work as one would expect except for one flaw. THE PUMPS STOP! wait a few minutes then start back up.

So follow me on this if you have a cup of water with red dye in it. You remove 50% and fill it back up. the concentration of that dye was cut by 1/2. But if you take 10%. fill it up and take another 10%.. well after doing this 5 times you have only taken 40% vs 50%. Now factor in my awc breaks my wc 11 times a day and you see the problem. The diminishing return on it is not very good. That's just the math behind it. I did a pretty deep search on reef2reef to see if any one had talked about it and suprisingly no one had that I could find.

This may not seem like a big deal to some but it is truly just money you are throwing down a drain because of the way the math works out.

 

[homer1475]

Your missing the whole point of AWC. It has nothing to do with removing anything other then old salt water. An there has always been the debate about the small amount taken throughout the day as opposed to more larger changes. But the whole point of AWC is that any change is very small and does not swing the system one way or the other in any great amount.

And peri pumps are not meant to be run for long times at high speeds, that is the whole reason the DOS "rests" between pumping. I think with the way your planning on doing it, you'll burn out the pump heads much faster then anticipated.

 

[slayertx]

Your missing the whole point of AWC. It has nothing to do with removing anything other then old salt water. An there has always been the debate about the small amount taken throughout the day as opposed to more larger changes. But the whole point of AWC is that any change is very small and does not swing the system one way or the other in any great amount.

And peri pumps are not meant to be run for long times at high speeds, that is the whole reason the DOS "rests" between pumping. I think with the way your planning on doing it, you'll burn out the pump heads much faster then anticipated.

How would it burn it out if I set the dos to change a lesser amount from say 8-10 to remove and then fill from 10-12 vs both going from 8-10? If anything doing this will extend the pump life because it will be more efficient.

 

[homer1475]

Your own OP post your removing 2G at a time, then replacing. If thats split into several times a day, the pump head runs at say 60ML/M running at several short bursts(motor has time to rest between sessions).

Now if your going to do that all in one shot, the pump has to run either at a higher speed(more then likely anyways), and for a longer period of time in one shot. Your not giving the motor time to rest.

I get what your saying, and your mostly right(dilution thing), but the pumps are not designed to be run in this manner, as they are not continuous duty pumps.

There is a reason Neptune set them up to run this way. No one says you have to run them in the way they were designed, just be aware that premature pump failure maybe an issue with the way you want to program them.

 

[slayertx]

The only thing im changing is 1 pump running at a time vs them both running. The apex will still split the doses up per pump. However this way I do all the removing first, then add water so I'm not getting the diminishing return on value. I'm hoping to drop down to a gal per day over say a 8 hour period at night so 3 hours to remove, then 3 hours to put back in. Then my ato can work in the rest of the time. Shouldn't see much of a swing in sal in a 6 hour period at night. the return section of my sump is 10 gal, so pump wont run dry.

I'm really confused as to if y'all are saying you run your awc system for 24hours and if so 1..isn't that anoying as the dos is by far my loudest piece of equipment even on the slowest setting. 2. the diminishing return has to be so aweful it's almost pointless to even be doing it with out changing out some serious volumes.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for a little bit each day but it needs to achieve something.

 

[homer1475]

Guess I misunderstood your post then. From what I read you wanted to take out all 2G at a time, then replace at a later time, again, all at one time. My mistake, and I apologize.

What I do is remove from my skimmer/sock section(first section), then add in to my return pump(last section). This way any water I'm adding at the same time as I'm taking out, doesn't get much chance to "mix" in with the new water. It has to mix in with the tank, then get removed. Similar to what you want to do, with the exception it's done at the same time.

 

[xiaoxiy]

Hamzasreef.com has an effective water change calculator, which can be used to estimate the water change amount in continuous water changes.

I use the DOS to change approximately 3G water daily across the span of 5 hours on my 80 Gallon tank. According to Hamzasreef, I am doing the equivalent of a one time 2.34G water change, which isn’t that horrible IMO. This comes out to approximately 15G (18%) weekly water change for continuous vs 18.78G (23%) weekly water change for daily non continuous.

For me, the difference is okay. Would I be saving on salt and fresh saltwater if it wasn’t continuous? Definitely, but instant ocean salt is cheap. If I wanted higher water change percentage, I could just just increase the daily volume.

Continuous water changes has also worked out well for me in terms of stability and tank health. Here is my tank earlier this month, at only 4 months old.