Waterfall or upflow algae scrubber?
- Thread starter JPergamo
- Start date
- Tagged users None
SantaMonica
Valuable Member
Although the bubbles in upflows are technically more efficient, for most people the physical placing and harvesting are most important.
OP
OP
JPergamo
Active Member
I guess efficiency would be most important for me, I can't see a DIY up flow made out of the bottom of a Rubbermaid as being hard to remove and clean but I really don't know I have never ran either. I appreciate the response and any other info. I think I can make either one about 17'x17'.
OP
OP
JPergamo
Active Member
I also have 1 more question: would it work to have a regular light like a clamp on or small fluorescent on the outside of the glass for an upflow instead of a matching diy led opposite of the screen? Basically like an in-the-water waterfall but submerged with the bubbles?
SantaMonica
Valuable Member
Not sure what you mean, but clamp on CFL bulbs that are "warm" or "soft", preferrably 2700k, work well.
MaccaPopEye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2016
- Messages
- 697
- Reaction score
- 1,234
Everything I have read says that waterfall scrubbers are much more efficient than upflows for the same screen size. Waterfalls are lit on 2 sides and upflows are only lit on 1 side. So for a 17"x17" upflow you are only getting 17"x17" of grow space, but on a waterfall you are getting twice that. Even if the upflow has strings for 3D growth they still aren't going to equate to a whole extra screen size.
@JPergamo have a read of the "algae scrubber basics" thread on reef central, particularly the posts in Floyd R Turbo's signature on RC, the one on R2R looks to be a bit out-dated. Start with this post - http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1977420&page=131 . The size of the screen should be based on how much you feed and then base the flow and power of the light on the screen size. 17"x17" is a massive screen and should be able to support about 24 cubes of food a day.
You can use clamp on CFL lights as long as they are the right wattage for the screen you have. You can also use some of the pre-made LED grow flood lamps on Amazon and ebay, a lot of people have good results with them.
IMO if you have the room I would go with a waterfall scrubber.
@JPergamo have a read of the "algae scrubber basics" thread on reef central, particularly the posts in Floyd R Turbo's signature on RC, the one on R2R looks to be a bit out-dated. Start with this post - http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1977420&page=131 . The size of the screen should be based on how much you feed and then base the flow and power of the light on the screen size. 17"x17" is a massive screen and should be able to support about 24 cubes of food a day.
You can use clamp on CFL lights as long as they are the right wattage for the screen you have. You can also use some of the pre-made LED grow flood lamps on Amazon and ebay, a lot of people have good results with them.
IMO if you have the room I would go with a waterfall scrubber.
MaccaPopEye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2016
- Messages
- 697
- Reaction score
- 1,234
No worries. I am pretty sure Floyd put the updated how-to in the R2R thread as well but its just a lot easier to find on RC. I built a 2 cube per day waterfall using the LED flood lights and it is going really well. Massive decrease in DT algae. Floyd also goes through what wattage of LED lights are good for what screen size.
If you go for the pre-made grow LED flood lights they usually over state what wattage the lights are souse Floyd's instructions to figure out how much light you need and then get the next size up flood light (they come in 10W,20W,30W & 50W etc.) So if you work out that you need 10W of light get the 20W flood lights. As they say 20W but they are actually closer to 10.
If you go for the pre-made grow LED flood lights they usually over state what wattage the lights are souse Floyd's instructions to figure out how much light you need and then get the next size up flood light (they come in 10W,20W,30W & 50W etc.) So if you work out that you need 10W of light get the 20W flood lights. As they say 20W but they are actually closer to 10.
SantaMonica
Valuable Member
Probably because the people posting that are competitors, or customers or friends of competitors. Remember that many many people now build and sell the waterfall style that I invented in 2008, because it has no patent. Upflows do however.
There are many people that got rid of their waterfalls in order to use upflows instead. Also, an upflow's roots do not die when left un-cleaned, like a waterfall's roots do.
Only because it's harder to get a light inside the water for the 2nd side of the upflow. But, our new submersible light will be available soon, and will change all that
I like waterfalls, and the new designs I'll be posting soon will obsolete a lot of the current waterfalls. But upflows put up a good fight in a lot, lot less space, mess, and harvesting hassle.
OP
OP
JPergamo
Active Member
In my personal situation, the water flow would be super easy ran off of my manifold with a union. I actually have everything needed for an up flow as well, but If I can avoid an air pump and plugging in something extra, that appeals to me personally. The simplicity of the waterfall really is its best attribute
MaccaPopEye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2016
- Messages
- 697
- Reaction score
- 1,234
Actually most people I see saying that are DIYers who aren't going to buy an off the shelf ATS at all and aren't trying to sell a product, they just want to help other DIYers in the hobby. And if some of them are a customer of a competitor then I think that actually helps that said customer is happy with their scrubber rather than hinders.
I have also heard of quite a few people leaving up-flows to go to waterfalls so I don't see what impact that has either way. They both have their place depending on someones circumstance.
Only because it's harder to get a light inside the water for the 2nd side of the upflow. But, our new submersible light will be available soon, and will change all that
I like waterfalls, and the new designs I'll be posting soon will obsolete a lot of the current waterfalls. But upflows put up a good fight in a lot, lot less space, mess, and harvesting hassle.
- At first you said up-flows are more efficient because of their bubbles, not because it has less grow area.
- Then when I said it's because waterfalls are lit on both sides you said that isn't true and it's just rumor spread by competitors.
- Now you are saying that you are developing an underwater light which will allow an up-flow to be lit on both sides, hence making it more efficient. Are you sure that being lit on both sides makes it better is not just rumor spread by a competitor?
I really think that's a bit miss leading. Up-flows are good but until they can be lit on both sides their "efficiency" is about half that of a waterfall of the same size screen as they have half the grow area.
Waterfalls and up-flows both have their pros and cons and both have their place but you cannot say that a 3 cube per day up-flow is "compact" compared to a 3 cube per day waterfall as it needs to be twice the size and have twice as powerful lighting. I am not saying a 3 cube per day waterfall is any smaller. But I wouldnt say that either are more compact.
I also think harvesting my waterfall scrubber is way easier than my friends up-flow. I just have to undo a union, pull my screen out and scrape both sides. He has to un-plug an air pump, pull his grow screen away, which then makes his lights fall off as the magnets don't hold it on anymore. It's then more difficult to scrape the screen and sides of the grow area and then he has to plug the air pump back in and line up the grow screen and lights where he wants them again.
It should really be up to each individual to decide what works best for them in their situation, rather than you try and tell them up-flows are more efficient when it's very commonly known that waterfalls are more efficient.
