Poll: Do You Use UV Sterilization?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dbl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None

Do You UV Sterilize?

  • Yes - All the time

    Votes: 202 21.4%
  • Yes - Only when "needed" (discuss in thread)

    Votes: 69 7.3%
  • No - Tried one and didn't notice any difference

    Votes: 111 11.8%
  • No - Never tried one

    Votes: 560 59.4%

  • Total voters
    942
I am in no way an expert, but I have done a lot, and I mean a lot, of research on UV's as of lately after an unknown parasite slowly wiped out my entire tank, but that is a different thread. So I am now in the process of setting up a UV Sterilizer on my 180 gal before I start restocking. This is what I have learned after my research:
Purposes for using uv
  • water clarity (higher flow)
  • kill parasites (low flow)
First, Uv will kill (or damage them enough so they can not reproduce) only the things that go through the unit. Beneficial copepods and amphipods pods, which are benthic, (bottom-dwelling organisms often attached to hard surfaces such as rock, sand bed and glass), will not go through the unit and will not be harmed. However a few may get sucking in the uv. Only the free swimming ones will go through the uv. So no worries about killing off all your entire pod population. No, it will not completely eliminate all ich and other parasites from your tank but you shouldn't notice anything on your fish or have a major outbreaks that can wipe out your tank if using a properly sized uv.

Second is size of the unit. Most UV's are grossly understating the correct size you need to actually kill things. In this case going bigger is better! After my research and talking to local hobbyist that use uv, I am going with a 120 watt unit from Aqua-UV (formerly Pentair) for my 180 gal fowlr tank. If you are looking for water clarity then that is a different story and the smaller units will be fine.

Third is the flow. For water clarity faster flow is fine, but for killing parasites you will need slower flow, use the manufactures suggested flow rate for the size of the unit.

Last is placement. To be effective, 100% of the water needs to move through the uv unit. If you have it plumbed going only through your sump this will not be effeictive. Therefore placement is important. The chart @scardall linked in post #35 is a good example how to properly install a UV.

As for me, I will now run a uv 24/7.
Those charts all show the intake for those UV units starting in the sump.

The only difference returning the water to your display is in the efficiency of your return pumps.

1) Use the UV and return the flow to display....the gph through sump is cumulative and adds to the total gph.

2) Return the water to the return section .... you still have the same gph through sump as if you were not running a UV....the difference is a portion of the water bypasses the skimmer/refugium sections.

Lets say i run 800gph on my main pumps but run a UV at 150gph from directly behind filter socks directly to return.

Here is the total break down.

800 Gph hit filter socks.
150 gph bypasses skimmer and fuge sections and goes to return.

650gph takes the normal route through the sump, of which my skimmer processs 500gph...granted, a lot if that is recirculated with typical internal skimmers. 650 gph also goes through the chaeto bed, refugium.

No UV water gets treated twice within the sump unless your UV return comes back to the same section as your feed pump.

I am also not convinced that the manufacturers flow rates are 100% accurate.

Pentair says with a new bulb my unit can do 330gph sterilization...they say a 1 year old bulb does around 260gph. Then they say that any discoloration of the water or routine build up in the system means you need to disassemble and service or slow the flow yet again.

Since i don't actually have parasites and algae i am not sure i will always keep on schedule with much other than a yearly clean and bulb replacement. (The idea here is LOW maintenance).

No doubt i am loosing production right now at 125gph, but by years end ill bet that's about right.

Of course, if/when i do observe problerms with algae or fish behavior you can bet ill take the time to clean it and possibly add flow.
 
I set one up on my 300 when it was new and ran it continuously to minimize algae and dinos in "new tank syndrome" and it did a terrific job. No significant outbreaks. Now I run it one week a month for water clarity and see a small improvement.
 
I never planned to add a UV on my current sump so only place I could put it was over my ATO Reservoir. Do yourself a favor an measure it first :)

1016172359g.jpg
 
Those charts all show the intake for those UV units starting in the sump.

I think the chart was just to avoid clean water falling into an infinity loop, where sterilized water is routed back into the unit, bypassing the tank. Not the only way to skin a cat, for sure...
 
I don't know how they work, that was just my guess being it called a "UV Sterilizer" I have 5 Pod eaters in my 30g so copepods are a must
:)
Sure, but the pods need to go through the sterilizer to become sterilized. IME, that must not happen very often because I've got copeous copepods.
 
I run 11 watt submersible and it sits in chamber 3 of my biocube 32. It definitely helped clarify the water and algae on the glass is reduced or slowed down.
 
Just ordered one yesterday after a fellow reefer here said it helped them with dinos. Hope it works for me as well!
 
Samina

pair it with manual cleaning first

hand clean, siphon out that tank where you can't see any, then rely on uv, that's the trick, and repeat with the hand work as normal.

consider changing out the sandbed for new, this works in nanos to beat dinos such that UV probably wouldn't even be required but its so crucial for helping large tanks. great UV thread here.
 
Brandon429, thanks!!

Yes I actually partly did what you had suggested in response to my post. But I didn’t do a complete reset in a sense. I removed some of the rock that were the most affected and manually cleaned them well and siphoned the sand well. Did a 50% water change as well. Took GFO offline and have been skimming very wet. It is still pretty brown. I bought the UV that was also suggested in that post and am going to hook it up once it gets here tomorrow I believe. Hopefully that does the trick.

If not, then I will pretty much reset it with your method and may decide if I should just go bare bottom at that point. Hoping I don’t have to get to that point as it will disrupt so much life in and around the sandbed.
 
Does using a UV stop coralline growth? I have had a UV on my tank from day one and it’s over a year old and I still have no Coraline growth
 
I completely agree with this statement. I think most people do not buy a strong enough UV. I had a 57w prior and still had some small break outs. Since I have gone to my 80w and a very low through it - I have seen a complete difference. The upgrade to the 80w was the best move I made.

what brand 80w?
 
Not sure on coralline. Mine stopped growing forever after changing from power compacts lights to LEDs

PS
You know you are an old post reefer when only eighty percent of respondents know what power compact was without googling it. as that ratio reduces/getting old

I don't miss scraping it half inch thick off glass but I miss that heavy purple tone from it. Amazing to know that all variables are lined up for it and changing only tank lights made it stop growing on glass. The coralline on rocks remained and didn't add nor subtract on my setup.
 
Since I first did I always will and I have said it a few times here but I can't speak highly enough of debary units. They arnt cheap but they are super quality
 
My other side note with uv from my own personal experience is that all water going through the uv is far superior to it only doing part of the water. For instance being attached to return to display from sump verses it's own pump feed and returned to sump
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top