Jump to content


Photo

Eheim Substrat Pro


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Livewire88

Livewire88

    Team TetraTEC

  • Moderators
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 12 October 2011 - 07:46 PM

Hi,

I have just purchased 1 litre of Eheim Substrat Pro, I would like to add it to my EX700 but need to know the best way to go about it?

Should I put half in the tray with Ceramic Tubes and half in the tray with the Bio Balls, then once it has been in the filter for a month or so replace the Ceramic Tubes with the Eheim Substrat Pro, (ie remove the Ceramic Tubes and fill that tray with the rest of the Eheim Substrat Pro from the Bio Ball tray)

Any help much appreaciated :good:

#2 KittyKat

KittyKat

    Fish Gatherer

  • Moderators
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 12 October 2011 - 08:35 PM

…but why are you wanting to replace ceramic media with ceramic media?

Google shows me that there are 4 media baskets in the filter, most of them full of sponges. I would recommend that you just replace one of the baskets full of sponges with the ceramic balls, instead of replacing the noodles.

But if you really want to just replace the noodles, as long as you treat your sponges as bio-media (i.e. do not change or do anything to kill bacteria), you should be fine replacing half and half. I would recommend that you wait at least 6 weeks between first half and second half.

#3 Livewire88

Livewire88

    Team TetraTEC

  • Moderators
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 12 October 2011 - 09:26 PM

Only reason I am going to change is because I have been led to believe that Eheim Substrat Pro can hold a hell of lot more bacteria than standard ceramic tubes.

Edited by Livewire88, 12 October 2011 - 09:26 PM.


#4 tmh0921

tmh0921

    Fish Fanatic

  • Member
  • 198 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 12 October 2011 - 11:58 PM

I use it in all of my filters, canister and HOB, it's great.

#5 KittyKat

KittyKat

    Fish Gatherer

  • Moderators
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:41 AM

Only reason I am going to change is because I have been led to believe that Eheim Substrat Pro can hold a hell of lot more bacteria than standard ceramic tubes.

The difference is unlikely to be as much as you were lead to believe, but the difference between a sponge and any porous ceramic media would be huge! Is there any specific reason you want to keep the sponges? Personally, I use sponges only for pre-filtering and polishing, with all my media baskets being full of porous ceramic media.

#6 Livewire88

Livewire88

    Team TetraTEC

  • Moderators
  • 1,986 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:55 AM

No reason for keeping the sponges, I am a noob at this so assumed that I should just replace the ceramic media I allready had with the Eheim Substrat Pro.

So if I get rid of the sponges and fill that try with the Eheim Substrat Pro, should I put that tray between the Ceramic Tubes and Bio Balls, or on top of the Bio Balls?

This is the reason I asked because I dont know much about canister filters, I obviousley know how they work but just wanted to get advice from experianced members who may have done this before.

Thanks again for your advice :good:

#7 KittyKat

KittyKat

    Fish Gatherer

  • Moderators
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:28 AM

Are your ceramic noodles (tubes) porous or smooth?

If porous, then this order: tank -> plastic balls -> old ceramic media -> new ceramic media -> tank (with sponges spread out wherever you like)

If smooth, then this order: tank -> smooth ceramic tubes -> plastic balls -> new ceramic media -> tank (with sponges spread out wherever you like)

Apparently, smooth ceramic noodles and some types of plastic balls have a primary function of spreading out the flow more evenly, which is why I'd put them at the front.

#8 raptorrex

raptorrex

    Inactive

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:49 AM

Only reason I am going to change is because I have been led to believe that Eheim Substrat Pro can hold a hell of lot more bacteria than standard ceramic tubes.

The difference is unlikely to be as much as you were lead to believe, but the difference between a sponge and any porous ceramic media would be huge! Is there any specific reason you want to keep the sponges? Personally, I use sponges only for pre-filtering and polishing, with all my media baskets being full of porous ceramic media.


the difference between substrate pro, and even efi substrate is great. the difference between the Efi products and a lot for other ceramic media( though not all) is also great.
however thee main benefit is the vast reduction in clumping. giving more efficient flow for longer than irregular shaped media. and vastly more area than the silly tube noodles peddled by some.
The "noodles" you mention, are for mechanical filtration and are none porous (eheim . though porous in the tetra, they are still used as mechanical media.). substrate pro is small smooth porous round balls.
substrate pro also degrades slower than most ceramic media. it just does not crumble like so many.
I've never seem the logic in "noodle style" bio media. how can you have maximum surface area, when half the filter box is empry?

@OP. put the substrate pro in the third box up (from the bottom) ideally, replace the bio balls, in the basket below, with substrate pro too.

Edited by raptorrex, 13 October 2011 - 08:50 AM.


#9 KittyKat

KittyKat

    Fish Gatherer

  • Moderators
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 October 2011 - 11:35 AM

the difference between substrate pro, and even efi substrate is great. the difference between the Efi products and a lot for other ceramic media( though not all) is also great.

Phew, took a while to find that you were on about EHFI Substrat (which is now know as simply "Substrat", from what I can see)! So, how do you measure the difference? I use Substrat Pro and Fluval's noodles in identical filters and both are able to support approximately the same load without difficulty (I have never pushed the stocking high enough to see the limits of each).

however thee main benefit is the vast reduction in clumping.

What exactly do you mean by 'clumping'?

giving more efficient flow for longer than irregular shaped media.

What do you consider more efficient? Faster? More even? Slower? Less turbulent?

The "noodles" you mention, are for mechanical filtration and are none porous (eheim . though porous in the tetra, they are still used as mechanical media.). substrate pro is small smooth porous round balls.

There are plenty of examples where porous noodles are included as the main biological filtration (for example in Fluval and AquaOne filters), those specific products do provide a higher surface area than the sponges which are also included in the filter. Smooth/solid noodles, of course, do not provide the surface area that we want, but I have still never heard of them being sold as mechanical filtration, only for spreading flow more evenly through the filter.

substrate pro also degrades slower than most ceramic media. it just does not crumble like so many.

How long does it take for other media to degrade? Who was it manufactured by? I am only asking as none of my ceramic media has ever degraded, regardless of the manufacturer or shape, or shown any sign of degrading… but I have only been using it for 5 years now.

#10 raptorrex

raptorrex

    Inactive

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 13 October 2011 - 01:35 PM

the difference between substrate pro, and even efi substrate is great. the difference between the Efi products and a lot for other ceramic media( though not all) is also great.

Phew, took a while to find that you were on about EHFI Substrat (which is now know as simply "Substrat", from what I can see)! So, how do you measure the difference? I use Substrat Pro and Fluval's noodles in identical filters and both are able to support approximately the same load without difficulty (I have never pushed the stocking high enough to see the limits of each).

however thee main benefit is the vast reduction in clumping.

What exactly do you mean by 'clumping'?

giving more efficient flow for longer than irregular shaped media.

What do you consider more efficient? Faster? More even? Slower? Less turbulent?

The "noodles" you mention, are for mechanical filtration and are none porous (eheim . though porous in the tetra, they are still used as mechanical media.). substrate pro is small smooth porous round balls.

There are plenty of examples where porous noodles are included as the main biological filtration (for example in Fluval and AquaOne filters), those specific products do provide a higher surface area than the sponges which are also included in the filter. Smooth/solid noodles, of course, do not provide the surface area that we want, but I have still never heard of them being sold as mechanical filtration, only for spreading flow more evenly through the filter.

substrate pro also degrades slower than most ceramic media. it just does not crumble like so many.

How long does it take for other media to degrade? Who was it manufactured by? I am only asking as none of my ceramic media has ever degraded, regardless of the manufacturer or shape, or shown any sign of degrading… but I have only been using it for 5 years now.


point one. Efhi is the name given to many Eheim medias. and still stands.
you measure the difference by the volume of the respective medias. the higher the volume the more area the media has. problem with this is, most, makers haven't the faintest idea what the volume of their media is. i know, I've asked. hagen being a case in point. when asked about their media volumes. they said 20% better than what it replaces. asked the volume of the replaced media. they had no idea.
I cant remember the Substrate pro/substrate (they are both the same.) but the information will be freely given by Eheim.

point 2.
clumping is where areas of excess bacteria grow takes place. this both restricts flow, and causes accumulation of debris too small for the mechanical section. it means you have to clean the filter more often, killing bacteria as you do so.

point 3
the most efficient media is the one that allows the filter to work, and flow, as designed. causing as little reduction to flow as possible. it also makes it more efficient with power too. plus, for the most part, efficient flwo leads to efficient bacteria husbandry.

point 4
the noodles in the Tetra, are used, and described as mechanical media. they are on the bottom, thats where the mechanical media goes.
Efhi Mech is a noodle media, sold exclusive as mechanical media. they also sell an Efhi mech bio. but the bio refers to biological breakdown on none chemical debris. not beneficial bacteria.

point 5
virtually all ceramic media breaks down. I'm not talking about it disintegrating. well I am but very slowly.
tiny partials come away, over time. theses partials, for the most part get, caught by the fine filter pad in the final stage. this leads to a course texture to the pad, if you give it a hard rub. the partials also block some of the holes in the media. this, effectively, reduces volume/area. kind of a slow motion double whammy.

Edited by raptorrex, 13 October 2011 - 01:38 PM.


#11 tmh0921

tmh0921

    Fish Fanatic

  • Member
  • 198 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 13 October 2011 - 10:42 PM

KittyKat, I've had AquaClear BioMax crumble on more than one occasion.

#12 Tizer

Tizer

    Team TetraTEC

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,418 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 October 2011 - 11:38 AM

oh, this has become on of "those" threads hasnt it... :hyper:

My response for the origional poster would still be "If its not broke, why change it?" :D

#13 KittyKat

KittyKat

    Fish Gatherer

  • Moderators
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 31 October 2011 - 12:03 PM

[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318512944' post='3142600']
[quote name='KittyKat' timestamp='1318505725' post='3142483']
[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318495791' post='3142376'][…] substrate pro […] efi substrate […] Efi products […][/quote]
Phew, took a while to find that you were on about EHFI Substrat (which is now know as simply "Substrat", from what I can see)! So, how do you measure the difference? I use Substrat Pro and Fluval's noodles in identical filters and both are able to support approximately the same load without difficulty (I have never pushed the stocking high enough to see the limits of each).[/quote]
Efhi is the name given to many Eheim medias. and still stands.[/quote]
I was pointing out that it would have been easier to figure out what you were on about if you'd spelt the name correctly ;) But since you insist:
[quote name='Eheim']EHFI Substrat = Eheim (EH) Filter (FI) Substrat - that’s the same [as for] Eheim Substrat pro
The filter media;
EHFI FIX = that’s the same Eheim Fix
EHFI MECH = that’s the same Eheim Mech / the new filter media is Eheim Mech pro[/quote]
…which was accompanied by various material concerning their filter media, starting from old scans of booklets which mention "EHFI***" and links to current web pages which all state (as do photos of the media boxes on the all of their websites, which all show the newer box designs) are labelled as "Eheim ***".
Anyway, back to the actual matter of discussion as the naming makes no difference.

[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318512944' post='3142600']
[quote name='KittyKat' timestamp='1318505725' post='3142483']
[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318495791' post='3142376']the difference between substrate pro, and even efi substrate is great. the difference between the Efi products and a lot for other ceramic media( though not all) is also great.[/quote]
So, how do you measure the difference? I use Substrat Pro and Fluval's noodles in identical filters and both are able to support approximately the same load without difficulty (I have never pushed the stocking high enough to see the limits of each).[/quote]
you measure the difference by the volume of the respective medias. the higher the volume the more area the media has. problem with this is, most, makers haven't the faintest idea what the volume of their media is. i know, I've asked. hagen being a case in point. when asked about their media volumes. they said 20% better than what it replaces. asked the volume of the replaced media. they had no idea.
I cant remember the Substrate pro/substrate (they are both the same.) but the information will be freely given by Eheim.[/quote]
No one doesn't :) volume is how much "space" something takes up. So one litre of media has the volume of one litre. What we're interested in is surface area per litre, which according to Eheim is 450 m2/l for both Substrat[1] and Substrat pro[2][3]. And Seachem claim that the "useful" surface area of Sustrat pro is only 142 m2/l[4]. So either Seachem are lousy at research or Eheim are a bit liberal with the area measurements, I reckon it's probably both.

So the manufacturers don't know, we don't know, they don't know how to measure, we can't measure even if we knew… doesn't sound like we can really compare any of the media short of by experiment, but to get significant results, we would need to have 95% of the results per media being approximately the same (which would mean at least 20 experiments per media.

[1] http://eheim.de/ehei...tail_38154_ehen
[2] http://eheim.de/ehei...tail_38156_ehen
[3] page 33, Google translate should be able to help you: http://www.eheim.de/...gazin2005_D.pdf
[4] www.seachem.com/support/SpecificSurface.pdf

[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318512944' post='3142600'][quote name='KittyKat' timestamp='1318505725' post='3142483'][quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318495791' post='3142376']however thee main benefit is the vast reduction in clumping.[/quote]
What exactly do you mean by 'clumping'?[/quote]
clumping is where areas of excess bacteria grow takes place. this both restricts flow, and causes accumulation of debris too small for the mechanical section. it means you have to clean the filter more often, killing bacteria as you do so.[/quote]
Can you show me a photo of this occurrence please? I have never had it happen with any media I have used and, to be honest, have never physically been able to see filter bactera, but maybe I need a new pair of glasses :rolleyes: What I have seen is chunks of mulm/#105###/plant matter which have made it past the pre filter. From what I have observed these become caught physically on media, which happens more with more compact media (in the same way that fine sponges are better at picking out this stuff than rough sponges).

[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318512944' post='3142600'][quote name='KittyKat' timestamp='1318505725' post='3142483'][quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318495791' post='3142376']giving more efficient flow for longer than irregular shaped media.[/quote]
What do you consider more efficient? Faster? More even? Slower? Less turbulent?[/quote]
the most efficient media is the one that allows the filter to work, and flow, as designed. causing as little reduction to flow as possible. it also makes it more efficient with power too. plus, for the most part, efficient flwo leads to efficient bacteria husbandry.[/quote]
So is it, most efficient for the filter or for the bacteria?
For example, most efficient for the filter would be completely empty with no resistance from media because the more work the filter has to put in to shift the water, the more power it uses. How can you or I calculate the flow dynamics, given that they are not provided by the manufacturers? And what about the demands of the media? As opposed to the filter, (for example) carbon is most efficient in slow flow which is at the same rate though all the carbon. I can't tell you where exactly bacteria are on that spectrum, but I seem to remember that most are on the "slow" side, which would imply that the media probably needs to slow the flow down from what the filter will do when empty.

[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318512944' post='3142600'][quote name='KittyKat' timestamp='1318505725' post='3142483'][quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318495791' post='3142376']The "noodles" you mention, are for mechanical filtration and are none porous (eheim . though porous in the tetra, they are still used as mechanical media.). substrate pro is small smooth porous round balls.[/quote]
There are plenty of examples where porous noodles are included as the main biological filtration (for example in Fluval and AquaOne filters), those specific products do provide a higher surface area than the sponges which are also included in the filter. Smooth/solid noodles, of course, do not provide the surface area that we want, but I have still never heard of them being sold as mechanical filtration, only for spreading flow more evenly through the filter.[/quote]
the noodles in the Tetra, are used, and described as mechanical media. they are on the bottom, thats where the mechanical media goes.[/quote]
The point was that some noodle shaped media is porous and suitable for bacterial growth, not that smooth media does not exist. OK, so some manufacturers also recommend smooth noodles as "mechanical filtration" by *ahem* spreading the flow.

Tetra claim that the media does both[5] :)
[quote name='Tetra']# Mechanically removes large particles from aquarium water
# Distributes flow evenly through external filter[/quote]
[5] http://www.tetra-fis...d=13&lang_id=20

[quote name='raptorrex' timestamp='1318495791' post='3142376']Efhi Mech is a noodle media, sold exclusive as mechanical media. they also sell an Efhi mech bio. but the bio refers to biological breakdown on none chemical debris. not beneficial bacteria.[/quote]
Eheim claim that Mech works by causing turbulence in the flow [and thus slowing down and spreading the flow] to the point where crap can settle out on the bottom of the filter[6], but it does claim to do both in the process.
Non-chemical debris? For something to decompost, it has to start off organic and unless the aquarium water in question is extremely acidic or basic, the breakdown will be predominantely by bacteria. And since we *want* things to decompose, the bacteria are… beneficial.

[6] http://eheim.de/ehei...tail_38167_ehen

Edited by KittyKat, 31 October 2011 - 12:04 PM.


#14 KittyKat

KittyKat

    Fish Gatherer

  • Moderators
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 31 October 2011 - 12:09 PM

substrate pro also degrades slower than most ceramic media. it just does not crumble like so many.

How long does it take for other media to degrade? Who was it manufactured by? […]

virtually all ceramic media breaks down. I'm not talking about it disintegrating. well I am but very slowly. […]

So you don't actually know that Substrat pro degrades any slower than Substrat or any other media.

KittyKat, I've had AquaClear BioMax crumble on more than one occasion.

Thank you for pointing out, this is very useful to know :)

#15 raptorrex

raptorrex

    Inactive

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,470 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 31 October 2011 - 03:27 PM

So you don't actually know that Substrat pro degrades any slower than Substrat or any other media.


yes i do, it does. vastly slower. indeed its hard to find any debris from it. but the filters with plain substrate, has debris and show the signs with reduced volume. you can also see the edges of the media rounding. plus the substrate bag(when new) had a fair amount of dust in it. Pro had, virtually, none.

plain substrate, is broken, uneven chunks of ceramic media.
substrate pro is properly formed balls, though in various sizes. and is made of a different material.

kit why are you linking tetra info. its irrelevant to this thread
I specifically said EHEIM mech media. and did say other makers do make/sell porous ceramic rings.
once again, Eheim Ehfi Mech is none porous. and not suited to carrying Bio collony. other than by a covering of bio film.

no, no photo of clumping. but most will notice higher area's of build-up, when cleaning their media. its also a common phanomina is all loose material filtration. pool filter sand being specifically designed, to avoid this. (smooth edges with a regular shape.)

there is a fair amount of fish waste that turns to ammonia, virtually, as it contacts water. same with human water waste. no ammonia content (or minute) but breaks down to ammonia very fast.
so it becomes chemical waste.

so lets cover what Eheim actually say about Ehfi mech, and its brothers

EHEIM Mech: Mechanical filter medium for effective water treatment
Packing sizes: 1 l, 5 l

Directly after the entry into the filter cycle, the water is swirled through the hollow ceramic material. Through this action, the coarse dirt particles are going down. The pre-filtered water treated in such a way then continues its route through the other filter layers.

EHEIM Mech is easy to clean and can be used several times.

no mention of bio function. as i stated

EHEIM bioMECH: Mechanical-biological filter medium

Packing sizes: 1l, 2l, 5l

Excellent mechanical filtration with special dirt-trapping pockets Optimum pore structure ensures faster and safer decomposition of toxins

no mention of any bio function there. except to aid decomposition. again as i stated.

EHEIM MECHpro
Its unique spiral shape ensures excellent trapping of even small dirt particles <li>The ribbed surface structure also allows the colonisation of bacteria which break down toxins, thus guaranteeing an additional biological water cleaning
not ceramic rings. so i didnt mention it before.

so to the volume. as its volume that media area is measured in not surface area. something that surprised me at the time. but if you have trouble contact bignose. he explained it to me.
the reason i said nobody knows is because they dont. they have a theoretical figure, but no more.they cannot make each ball or chunk of media exact the same. all they can do is make it the same way.

the figures i was quoted by Eheim were indeed the same. (so long ago). the advantages, in volume/area are gained by having less of the pores blocked or covered by adjoin bits of media. coupled with the fact that regular shaped (spherical) causes far less resistance to water, allowing more even distribution of the water flowing through. the constant movement of the media balls also help avoid the media pores blocking with any larger waste that get through. and clumping, dont forget clumping.

there are a couple of other bits, i will cover later. (bit rushed now.)

Edited by raptorrex, 31 October 2011 - 03:32 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users