Skimmer for approximately 800g Total Water Volume?

mch1984 · Sep 29, 2018

mrpizzaface said:
I think the basic idea is the fish load. An 700 gallon display (with a 100 gallon sump)and 100 fish is a much different load than a 400 gallon display ( with a 400 gallon sump)and 50 fish. Though they have the same water volume, they have a much different fish load.

I guess I can see that.

SeabrookZoo · Sep 29, 2018

mrpizzaface said:
I think the basic idea is the fish load. An 700 gallon display (with a 100 gallon sump)and 100 fish is a much different load than a 400 gallon display ( with a 400 gallon sump)and 50 fish. Though they have the same water volume, they have a much different fish load.

Regardless of display or and sump size would it not be correct to purchase a skimmer that would be rated for the total system volume in addition to its specific bioload. I am assuming that a person with 700g display and a 100g sump with 100 fish could have the same bioload as a person who has a 400g display with a 400g sump with 50 fish if he was a heavy feeder. That being said the heavy feeder could also have a higher bioload with less fish or am I misunderstanding?

mrpizzaface · Sep 29, 2018

SeabrookZoo said:
Regardless of display or and sump size would it not be correct to purchase a skimmer that would be rated for the total system volume in addition to its specific bioload. I am assuming that a person with 700g display and a 100g sump with 100 fish could have the same bioload as a person who has a 400g display with a 400g sump with 50 fish if he was a heavy feeder. That being said the heavy feeder could also have a higher bioload with less fish or am I misunderstanding?

I was trying to illustrate a fairly simple example. 800 total water volume with 100 yellow tangs fed 10 units of food per day, will have a higher bioload than 800 total water volume with 50 yellow tangs fed 5 units of food per day. I would almost always base the skimmer on bioload rather than total water volume.

This is of course an over simplification and I am sure you could come up with examples when it wouldn’t make sense.

ca1ore · Sep 29, 2018

mrpizzaface said:
I think MTC and lifereef make great skimmers. In the case of the HSA 1000 if you were to bring an equivalent pump to the RD3 speedy your skimmer and pump combo (with shipping from Jeff) would be approaching $1400-$1450. While still a $400 dollar difference with the bubble king, closer than one might think. In this hobby $400 at least to me is nothing. ( especially in the case of these large systems)

Having run the HSA-1000 for many years (now the MTC PowerPro), spending that kind of money on a pump is lunacy ..... in my opinion. I would imagine most running such a skimmer would have some kind of dedicated fish room (it's not a stand friendly skimmer) so a pressure rated panworld is a better option. $200 and change for a model 100. Mazzei and Beckett still sizably outperform needle wheel venturis. Not so easy on the power bill though.

ca1ore · Sep 29, 2018

SeabrookZoo said:
Regardless of display or and sump size would it not be correct to purchase a skimmer that would be rated for the total system volume in addition to its specific bioload. I am assuming that a person with 700g display and a 100g sump with 100 fish could have the same bioload as a person who has a 400g display with a 400g sump with 50 fish if he was a heavy feeder. That being said the heavy feeder could also have a higher bioload with less fish or am I misunderstanding?

There are many factors that dictate bio load, and no reliable way to accurately size a skimmer. Sizing them based on tank volume is a proxy at best .... and not a particularly good one. I do agree that sizing based on bio load is the way to go. Trouble is it's almost impossible to arrive at a way to easily measure it; just too many variables. I've long thought that skimmers should be sized based on food input, like algal turf scrubbers.

mrpizzaface · Sep 29, 2018

ca1ore said:
Having run the HSA-1000 for many years (now the MTC PowerPro), spending that kind of money on a pump is lunacy ..... in my opinion. I would imagine most running such a skimmer would have some kind of dedicated fish room (it's not a stand friendly skimmer) so a pressure rated panworld is a better option. $200 and change for a model 100. Mazzei and Beckett still sizably outperform needle wheel venturis. Not so easy on the power bill though.

At the risk of derailing this thread what does your maintenance look like on the hsa-1000?

mch1984 · Sep 29, 2018

I don't think you are derailing this thread, it's good convo. I asked because I'm about to start working on my fish room in the coming months. The plan is a 3oo ish display but a 700 to 1000 gallon system. It's just hard to size a skimmer for it.

SeabrookZoo · Sep 29, 2018

mrpizzaface said:
I was trying to illustrate a fairly simple example. 800 total water volume with 100 yellow tangs fed 10 units of food per day, will have a higher bioload than 800 total water volume with 50 yellow tangs fed 5 units of food per day. I would almost always base the skimmer on bioload rather than total water volume.

This is of course an over simplification and I am sure you could come up with examples when it wouldn’t make sense.

ca1ore said:
There are many factors that dictate bio load, and no reliable way to accurately size a skimmer. Sizing them based on tank volume is a proxy at best .... and not a particularly good one. I do agree that sizing based on bio load is the way to go. Trouble is it's almost impossible to arrive at a way to easily measure it; just too many variables. I've long thought that skimmers should be sized based on food input, like algal turf scrubbers.

Was not trying to counter your statements just trying to clarify. Basically stating that that my understanding was a skimmer should be sized to the specific system volume and bioload. Taking both into account not deciding using one or the other.

ca1ore said:
Having run the HSA-1000 for many years (now the MTC PowerPro), spending that kind of money on a pump is lunacy ..... in my opinion. I would imagine most running such a skimmer would have some kind of dedicated fish room (it's not a stand friendly skimmer) so a pressure rated panworld is a better option. $200 and change for a model 100. Mazzei and Beckett still sizably outperform needle wheel venturis. Not so easy on the power bill though.

For this build all of my equipment will be in a fish room behind the tank, so size and noise will no be an issue.

ca1ore · Sep 29, 2018

mrpizzaface said:
At the risk of derailing this thread what does your maintenance look like on the hsa-1000?

I don't have it anymore. I cleverly crushed it during a house move. Maintenance was mostly the routine stuff like emptying the skimmate container, cleaning the neck and collection cup. The Beckett injector is quite prone to getting bunged up with debris. My original unit was an early model with a sealed Beckett. Bad design and MTC redesigned it and sold a beckett retrofit to make cleaning easy. Performance goes way down if the Beckett is clogged. Same issue with the mazzei injectors on my current MTC PowerPro (a recirculating skimmer versus the HSA that is a pass through); though with the PP, you can back flush the injectors. I run a neck squeegee now ..... highly recommended if, like me, you hate doing maintenance.

The only thing with MTC is that I am not sure they are still open and operating; so,going that route may mean buying a used unit.

Muttley000 · Sep 29, 2018

mrpizzaface said:
At the risk of derailing this thread what does your maintenance look like on the hsa-1000?

I clean the neck every 2 weeks, and once a month or so remove the Venturi to clean it. When I had a lot of small snails in my sump occasionally one would make its way in. I also turn the air adjustment one turn closed and then back to my setting every 2 weeks because I have found that dust or something seems to slow down the air flow if I let it go too long. All in all my skimmer probably gets 30 minutes a month of maintenance which would be reduced considerably if I got a neck cleaner.

mrpizzaface · Sep 29, 2018

ca1ore said:
I don't have it anymore. I cleverly crushed it during a house move. Maintenance was mostly the routine stuff like emptying the skimmate container, cleaning the neck and collection cup. The Beckett injector is quite prone to getting bunged up with debris. My original unit was an early model with a sealed Beckett. Bad design and MTC redesigned it and sold a beckett retrofit to make cleaning easy. Performance goes way down if the Beckett is clogged. Same issue with the mazzei injectors on my current MTC PowerPro (a recirculating skimmer versus the HSA that is a pass through); though with the PP, you can back flush the injectors. I run a neck squeegee now ..... highly recommended if, like me, you hate doing maintenance.

The only thing with MTC is that I am not sure they are still open and operating; so,going that route may mean buying a used unit.

I just bought a 30” MVX skimmer from MTC this past spring. I think they are still around, but could be wrong.

mrpizzaface · Sep 29, 2018

SeabrookZoo said:
Was not trying to counter your statements just trying to clarify. Basically stating that that my understanding was a skimmer should be sized to the specific system volume and bioload. Taking both into account not deciding using one or the other.

For this build all of my equipment will be in a fish room behind the tank, so size and noise will no be an issue.

You are probably in the minority with you display/ sump fuge ratio. If I were interested in a bubble king skimmer I would ask slief in the royal exclusiv forum over at Reefcentral what he would recommend. Likewise either of the Jeff’s at lifereef or MTC would give you advice over the phone. If you are interest in other manufacturers I would ask in their forums. I am curious what recommendations you will get.

lapin · Sep 29, 2018

SeabrookZoo said:
I have been looking around a little more and I think I am leaning toward the SRO. The one you list above shows to be discontinued now. While looking on their website I found this one.
https://www.coralvue.com/sro-xp8000-recirculating-external-protein-skimmer
The specs show their footprint is about the same. The one you have has a bigger neck and is shorter, this one has a smaller neck and is taller. The max feed for the one you have is 300gph more than this one. They both have a suggested feed rate of 1.5-2x system volume. The difference in the bioload handling is negligible as is cost, this one cost 100.00 less than the one you have. The biggest difference between the two is the shape. This one has a cone shape whereas the one you have is more cylindrical. Does this really make a big difference? Am I being to critical when looking at these?

Does this really make a big difference? I dont think it makes that much difference at this level. Its not like you are going from a 50 gallon skimmer to 100 gallon, doubling your volume. You need a good feed pump and the bubble blaster will make your foam. My biggest issue is drain back into the sump when all the pumps are off since the thing holds a AIO worth of water. The demand for the 8000 was prob more than the 7000 and since they are close in specs they decided to slim down the model line. It did come in a box strapped to a pallet via truck. I picked it up at the UPS trucking terminal.