How Much Is Too Much Filtration?

[bitteraspects]

As far as mechanically and biologically, there is no such thing as too much filtration. while there may be a point where the flow rate becomes too much for the beneficial bacteria to process ammonia, we do not use anywhere near those flow rates in our personal or commercial set ups. even in commercial set ups that use filters pushing thousands of gallons per hour, the bacteria is still able to effectively and efficiently complete nitrification.

the only time you can have "too much filtration" is when the flowrate is too high for the inhabitants of the tank. as vividly stated by markandhisfish.
too much current in your tank can easily stress your fish into disease or even death
for example, while a hillstream loach might rather enjoy a tank with a return flow of 5000GPH, something like a betta definitely would not appreciate it.

so, since even what we might consider to be "extreme" flow rates are still able to process ammonia and thus "filter" the tank, i guess the simple answer is, when your fish are no longer happy... its too much.

 

[theshadowinc]

I just want to say something, spray bars can be made to help out with pressure being to much flow you can slow this down, actually there is a such thing as to much filtration and to much water movement. The way you tell is by watching your fish, if they seem to be all together and not swimming around much this indicates a problem and usually is due to way to much flow, problem I have studied isn't in to much filtration, it was once stated if looking into the marine side of life that when doing a sump setup when bio balls where first introduced into our hobby that they did to good of a job!

Your question is there such thing as to much filtration or flow,
my answer
Yes!

How do you tell?
Observe your fish behaviour

not sure where I could send you for the research part of the filtration, but to much is actually a bad thing! All you want to do is be able to maintain 0 Ammonia and 0 Nitrites in a tank and keep Nitrate well below 150ppm at 150ppm is when nitrate starts turning into a poision for your fish

 

[OldMan47]

Flow needs, for biological filtration, can be quite small and very effective. Only mechanical filtration needs high flow rates. You need something to stir the dirt up off the bottom and enough flow to bring it to the filter for mechanical to really work. Many tanks run just fine with heavy stocking and simple air driven sponge filters. The sponge gives a good biomedia and the slow flow through gives plenty of time for the ammonia and nitrites to interact with their bacteria. Ammonia and nitrites are dissolved in the water, they are not discreet particles floating around. They are brought into good contact with the biomedia at slow flows and that is all that is needed. The crazy high flow rates may be needed to avoid microscopic builds of chemicals in a planted tank where micro-environmental conditions can affect plant and algae growth, but they are not needed, ever, for fish health. If you clean your tank there will not be significant particulates in a tank and the slow steady flows through the biomedia will take care of the ammonia and nitrites. All that is needed for good bio-filtration is enough surface to support the bacterial population needed for your fish load and enough flow that the water eventually gets to the filter. It is a method that has been used for a very long time to filter tanks. It is only in the last couple of decades that anyone even tried to exceed 1x flow rates with so-called power filters. What we meant by that when they first came out was any filter with an impeller.

I doubt my sponge filtered tanks get anywhere near 0.5x , much less 5x or 10x. The fish in them thrive and are long term residents, not transients like in a LFS.

As for high flow rates in the tank, some fish really like the moving water and, for those fish, it is essential for their comfort that the water be constantly moving. Many of the loaches fit this category where flow is a must for their simple well being, not filter flow, just flow. Now we are back to what Schmill said, use a power head to get lots of flow if you want it.

 

[seanec]

ive gt the ex700 ive had my flow at a fast speed n slow n its in the middle ov that.




[font="arial][size="2"]My Aquariums & Fish:[/size][/font][font="arial][size="2"]3x convict cichlid, 1x red tail albino shark, 2x kribensis, 2x Irian Jaya Rainbowfish, 1x Kissing Gourami
Pink Kisser, 2x Three-spot gourami, 2x angle fish, 3x zebra danio, 3x Dwarf Gourami, 1x silver dallor, 2x clown loachs, 4x male guppys,

juwel trigon 190[/size][/font]

 

[raptorrex]

Flow needs, for biological filtration, can be quite small and very effective. Only mechanical filtration needs high flow rates. You need something to stir the dirt up off the bottom and enough flow to bring it to the filter for mechanical to really work. Many tanks run just fine with heavy stocking and simple air driven sponge filters. The sponge gives a good biomedia and the slow flow through gives plenty of time for the ammonia and nitrites to interact with their bacteria. Ammonia and nitrites are dissolved in the water, they are not discreet particles floating around. They are brought into good contact with the biomedia at slow flows and that is all that is needed. The crazy high flow rates may be needed to avoid microscopic builds of chemicals in a planted tank where micro-environmental conditions can affect plant and algae growth, but they are not needed, ever, for fish health. If you clean your tank there will not be significant particulates in a tank and the slow steady flows through the biomedia will take care of the ammonia and nitrites. All that is needed for good bio-filtration is enough surface to support the bacterial population needed for your fish load and enough flow that the water eventually gets to the filter. It is a method that has been used for a very long time to filter tanks. It is only in the last couple of decades that anyone even tried to exceed 1x flow rates with so-called power filters. What we meant by that when they first came out was any filter with an impeller.

I doubt my sponge filtered tanks get anywhere near 0.5x , much less 5x or 10x. The fish in them thrive and are long term residents, not transients like in a LFS.

As for high flow rates in the tank, some fish really like the moving water and, for those fish, it is essential for their comfort that the water be constantly moving. Many of the loaches fit this category where flow is a must for their simple well being, not filter flow, just flow. Now we are back to what Schmill said, use a power head to get lots of flow if you want it.

comparing sponge, external . is hard as they work, differently. the correct setup for one, will not be the same for the other. but higher flow rates do aid bio filtration. mainly because the harvest more water then slower units. UGF, Bubble, external all work in different ways. so, whilst you don't need high flow for bio with sponge filters, you do for mechanical. end result you still need the flow. you simply cant compare the different types, especially, based on flow.

 

[MermaidMel]

ive gt the ex700 ive had my flow at a fast speed n slow n its in the middle ov that.




[font="arial][size="2"]My Aquariums & Fish:[/size][/font][font="arial][size="2"]3x convict cichlid, 1x red tail albino shark, 2x kribensis, 2x Irian Jaya Rainbowfish, 1x Kissing Gourami
Pink Kisser, 2x Three-spot gourami, 2x angle fish, 3x zebra danio, 3x Dwarf Gourami, 1x silver dallor, 2x clown loachs, 4x male guppys,

juwel trigon 190[/size][/font]

I have a trigon 190 with about a quarter of your stocking

 

[OldMan47]

I not only can compare the internals, like my Fluval 4+, the canisters, like my Rena XP series, the HOB filters, like my Whisper series, and the simple sponges and box filters, I do compare them all the time. There is absolutely no difference in the way that they remove ammonia and nitrites, boboboy. They all work by bringing water containing the chemical into contact with a bacterial colony that is big enough to remove that chemical. They all require that the colony receive both the chemical itself and some oxygen with the water itself so that the bacteria can thrive and reproduce. There can be big differences between the methods that various filters use to remove particulate. Some are terrible as particulate filters, such as sponges and others are very good at particulate such as canisters.

The filter flow patterns of water in the tank make no difference for the ammonia and nitrite removal, as long as there is enough flow to bring the chemical back to the filter to be removed before it is high enough in concentration to be toxic. If the flow is very, very low, it is possible to actually have stagnant areas that develop significant ammonia levels before mixing with the rest of the water and returning to the filter to be processed. That extreme low flow is not the point of this discussion, I hope. In a case like that you could use an air stone to circulate the water and it would result in good filtration again anyway, you still don't need those power heads for filtration, just for the plants. Plant people just don't like air stones, sorry but they can serve a purpose.

We all kept what would be considered heavy stockings of fish in our tanks with no power filters having been invented when I was younger. Our fish thrived and our water was good in most tanks. The better of the filters were the hang on back filters that were driven by air lift tubes, much like the more modern UGFs and they did the job of removing ammonia from our tanks. We were not even aware of nitrites as a problem then, but it didn't matter, the fish had never heard of it either and they just kept on doing well. We sometimes had problems cycling a tank and often lost a lot of fish the first month or two to what we called new tank syndrome, although we did not really understand it. Once the tanks cycled, the fish deaths stopped and the breeding started with much less than 1x filtration.

 

[raptorrex]

I not only can compare the internals, like my Fluval 4+, the canisters, like my Rena XP series, the HOB filters, like my Whisper series, and the simple sponges and box filters, I do compare them all the time. There is absolutely no difference in the way that they remove ammonia and nitrites, boboboy. They all work by bringing water containing the chemical into contact with a bacterial colony that is big enough to remove that chemical. They all require that the colony receive both the chemical itself and some oxygen with the water itself so that the bacteria can thrive and reproduce. There can be big differences between the methods that various filters use to remove particulate. Some are terrible as particulate filters, such as sponges and others are very good at particulate such as canisters.

The filter flow patterns of water in the tank make no difference for the ammonia and nitrite removal, as long as there is enough flow to bring the chemical back to the filter to be removed before it is high enough in concentration to be toxic. If the flow is very, very low, it is possible to actually have stagnant areas that develop significant ammonia levels before mixing with the rest of the water and returning to the filter to be processed. That extreme low flow is not the point of this discussion, I hope. In a case like that you could use an air stone to circulate the water and it would result in good filtration again anyway, you still don't need those power heads for filtration, just for the plants. Plant people just don't like air stones, sorry but they can serve a purpose.

We all kept what would be considered heavy stockings of fish in our tanks with no power filters having been invented when I was younger. Our fish thrived and our water was good in most tanks. The better of the filters were the hang on back filters that were driven by air lift tubes, much like the more modern UGFs and they did the job of removing ammonia from our tanks. We were not even aware of nitrites as a problem then, but it didn't matter, the fish had never heard of it either and they just kept on doing well. We sometimes had problems cycling a tank and often lost a lot of fish the first month or two to what we called new tank syndrome, although we did not really understand it. Once the tanks cycled, the fish deaths stopped and the breeding started with much less than 1x filtration.

you misunderstand me. the mechanics(filter) of how the culture is grown and fed is different in each type of filter. i dont think i mentioned the bio process was different. no just checked, i didn't! its simply you cant compare the flow rate needed for a sponge filter, with that of a cannister. i am making no point, on the relative effectiveness of the different types. but, as i have cannisters, it seems sensible to make sure i use THAT system to its utmost. a 1x flow with a cannister, would not lead to a viable filter. so i'll stick with 5x. if i do go for a sponge filter. i'm sure my setup will be simmilar to yours. after all. they all do the same thing, just in different ways.

 

[theshadowinc]

you misunderstand me. the mechanics(filter) of how the culture is grown and fed is different in each type of filter. i dont think i mentioned the bio process was different. no just checked, i didn't! its simply you cant compare the flow rate needed for a sponge filter, with that of a cannister. i am making no point, on the relative effectiveness of the different types. but, as i have cannisters, it seems sensible to make sure i use THAT system to its utmost. a 1x flow with a cannister, would not lead to a viable filter. so i'll stick with 5x. if i do go for a sponge filter. i'm sure my setup will be simmilar to yours. after all. they all do the same thing, just in different ways.

The flow rate of a sponge filter is determined by the air pump running it, IMO they all do work the same way but looking at mechanical vs a sponge it takes a tank with a sponge filter alot longer to cycle then it does a mechanical system. But in breeder tanks they are small and usually have big sponge filters in them the more surface area the better. IMO after 5x it becomes useless unless running a planted tank and the reason for filtration as high as 10x is because of the plants are actually overstocking the tank IMO, but also require high flow rates. I guess really it does depend on stalking but even looking at a breeding setup using sponge filters in a 10 gallon and lots of fry later usually moved out to a grow out tank with the same setup. I guess the focus is if you are having issues in the tank keeping 0 ammo and nitrites. If you are not having this issue why bother going for more?? Maybe it comes down to looking into velocity? Just like Koralia's come with.....

hmmm.... has me thinking, but I still remember reading something about to much filtration in the early systems, but I think this applied to salt water only. Still not sure on that, but when they first came out and introduced bio balls there was a huge issue when you filled the chamber you ended up having to much filtration or to good of filtration....... I never thaught it was possible till I read it and it explained how the sumps actually work. Although I am the farthest from experience with a sump setup its just something I have read, and with seeing sponge filters used for filtration I assume it has nothing to do with flow rates.

 

[raptorrex]

you misunderstand me. the mechanics(filter) of how the culture is grown and fed is different in each type of filter. i dont think i mentioned the bio process was different. no just checked, i didn't! its simply you cant compare the flow rate needed for a sponge filter, with that of a cannister. i am making no point, on the relative effectiveness of the different types. but, as i have cannisters, it seems sensible to make sure i use THAT system to its utmost. a 1x flow with a cannister, would not lead to a viable filter. so i'll stick with 5x. if i do go for a sponge filter. i'm sure my setup will be simmilar to yours. after all. they all do the same thing, just in different ways.

The flow rate of a sponge filter is determined by the air pump running it, IMO they all do work the same way but looking at mechanical vs a sponge it takes a tank with a sponge filter alot longer to cycle then it does a mechanical system. But in breeder tanks they are small and usually have big sponge filters in them the more surface area the better. IMO after 5x it becomes useless unless running a planted tank and the reason for filtration as high as 10x is because of the plants are actually overstocking the tank IMO, but also require high flow rates. I guess really it does depend on stalking but even looking at a breeding setup using sponge filters in a 10 gallon and lots of fry later usually moved out to a grow out tank with the same setup. I guess the focus is if you are having issues in the tank keeping 0 ammo and nitrites. If you are not having this issue why bother going for more?? Maybe it comes down to looking into velocity? Just like Koralia's come with.....

hmmm.... has me thinking, but I still remember reading something about to much filtration in the early systems, but I think this applied to salt water only. Still not sure on that, but when they first came out and introduced bio balls there was a huge issue when you filled the chamber you ended up having to much filtration or to good of filtration....... I never thaught it was possible till I read it and it explained how the sumps actually work. Although I am the farthest from experience with a sump setup its just something I have read, and with seeing sponge filters used for filtration I assume it has nothing to do with flow rates.

its hard to see how a sponge filter works the same way as a cannister. though, as i have said they do the same thing.
i'm interested in your "too much filtration" comment. as you can only have as much bio culture as the tank supports. though, with some media (carbon) mineral and other traces can be removed. you have any links to the subject?

 

[theshadowinc]

you misunderstand me. the mechanics(filter) of how the culture is grown and fed is different in each type of filter. i dont think i mentioned the bio process was different. no just checked, i didn't! its simply you cant compare the flow rate needed for a sponge filter, with that of a cannister. i am making no point, on the relative effectiveness of the different types. but, as i have cannisters, it seems sensible to make sure i use THAT system to its utmost. a 1x flow with a cannister, would not lead to a viable filter. so i'll stick with 5x. if i do go for a sponge filter. i'm sure my setup will be simmilar to yours. after all. they all do the same thing, just in different ways.

The flow rate of a sponge filter is determined by the air pump running it, IMO they all do work the same way but looking at mechanical vs a sponge it takes a tank with a sponge filter alot longer to cycle then it does a mechanical system. But in breeder tanks they are small and usually have big sponge filters in them the more surface area the better. IMO after 5x it becomes useless unless running a planted tank and the reason for filtration as high as 10x is because of the plants are actually overstocking the tank IMO, but also require high flow rates. I guess really it does depend on stalking but even looking at a breeding setup using sponge filters in a 10 gallon and lots of fry later usually moved out to a grow out tank with the same setup. I guess the focus is if you are having issues in the tank keeping 0 ammo and nitrites. If you are not having this issue why bother going for more?? Maybe it comes down to looking into velocity? Just like Koralia's come with.....

hmmm.... has me thinking, but I still remember reading something about to much filtration in the early systems, but I think this applied to salt water only. Still not sure on that, but when they first came out and introduced bio balls there was a huge issue when you filled the chamber you ended up having to much filtration or to good of filtration....... I never thaught it was possible till I read it and it explained how the sumps actually work. Although I am the farthest from experience with a sump setup its just something I have read, and with seeing sponge filters used for filtration I assume it has nothing to do with flow rates.

its hard to see how a sponge filter works the same way as a cannister. though, as i have said they do the same thing.
i'm interested in your "too much filtration" comment. as you can only have as much bio culture as the tank supports. though, with some media (carbon) mineral and other traces can be removed. you have any links to the subject?

Julian Sprung is the author of the article, this guy explains it better than I would (Back in the 90's)
http/www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWmJvhI7KW4
LA Fishguy 46 pt2
Sorry I am in a rush this morning

 

[theshadowinc]

http/www.aquariumadvice.com/articles/articles/14/1/Berlin-method-of-filtration/Page1.html
Here is some of the article that explains it, couldn't find the actual article, but this explains the same principles behind what I am looking for, and from the same person I was mentioning and the video mentioned

 

[dave_oddballs]

so on my 1072 litre tank i have 2 eheim pro3 2080's and a fluval fx5 giving just short of 6x turnover, and this is going from reviews, not whats on the box! now, 6x turnover imo is not too much, any one of my filters, going by what it says on the box could filter my tank alone. which in reality it can't, i only added the fx5 this weekend as the 2 "highly rated" pro 3 2080's don't even come close to be able to cope with my relatively low stocking. in an ideal world id be happier coming closer to 10x turnover on the big tank and only then would i say its overly sufficient.
what would your views be on these 3 filters on a 1072 litre tank if you didn't know what i just said about them?
what it says on the box is a load of rubbish, another example is my roma 240 tank that came with a fluval 305, not a cat in hells chance would that filter even come close to adequately filtering the tank so i added an fx5 which did the job well (but still not excellently!) and my girlfriends roma 125 which came with the fluval 3+, same story really, no chance it can cope, so i gave her the 305 to put on it and even thats a bit dodgy when it comes to sufficiently filtering the tank.
i would have got another fx5 on my tank making it 2 eheim pro3 2080's and 2 fluval fx5's but i only have one cupboard compartment left now and need it for the big air pump, plugs and food stuffs etc etc.

would just like to hear your views on this??
cheers, Dave

 

[theshadowinc]

so on my 1072 litre tank i have 2 eheim pro3 2080's and a fluval fx5 giving just short of 6x turnover, and this is going from reviews, not whats on the box! now, 6x turnover imo is not too much, any one of my filters, going by what it says on the box could filter my tank alone. which in reality it can't, i only added the fx5 this weekend as the 2 "highly rated" pro 3 2080's don't even come close to be able to cope with my relatively low stocking. in an ideal world id be happier coming closer to 10x turnover on the big tank and only then would i say its overly sufficient.
what would your views be on these 3 filters on a 1072 litre tank if you didn't know what i just said about them?
what it says on the box is a load of rubbish, another example is my roma 240 tank that came with a fluval 305, not a cat in hells chance would that filter even come close to adequately filtering the tank so i added an fx5 which did the job well (but still not excellently!) and my girlfriends roma 125 which came with the fluval 3+, same story really, no chance it can cope, so i gave her the 305 to put on it and even thats a bit dodgy when it comes to sufficiently filtering the tank.
i would have got another fx5 on my tank making it 2 eheim pro3 2080's and 2 fluval fx5's but i only have one cupboard compartment left now and need it for the big air pump, plugs and food stuffs etc etc.

would just like to hear your views on this??
cheers, Dave

Although I am not experienced when it comes to trickle systems, I would say the best bet in this tank would be a trickle system since the tank is pushing 270gal am I right?
http/www.aquarium-design.com/reef/wetdry.html, the fish only tank is the part for you I would assume
I myself am not a eheim fan, and I don't really like the new fx5, the reason is I find the media compartment small in them(take the xp4 for example I can put more media in it compared to the fx5), maybe it is slight clogging you are running into for both of these units, I have heard good things about both, I have my opionion about them both I will keep to myself(The ehiem is actually better than the FX5 but for the price the fx5 is the winner), as I have not kept anything bigger than 90gals in my life I can't really point you in a good direction. I can turn the lights on and say maybe trickle system is something to do some research on, especially in a fish only tank. Something this big I would go with a trickle system as its just to big for anything on the market as you are seeing for yourself. (Not only price wise is it somewhat cheaper but also probably the best filtration when you are talking tanks of this size)

I always thaught a bigger tank was easier to keep because of the volume of water......

My 10 gal tanks are unstable and require more waterchanges then my 40 and 55gal tanks, ....

 

[raptorrex]

http/www.aquariuma...tion/Page1.html
Here is some of the article that explains it, couldn't find the actual article, but this explains the same principles behind what I am looking for, and from the same person I was mentioning and the video mentioned

lol. thats a whole other method of filtration. little if anything, is truly relevant to our discussion.

all the methods we have talked of work, to some extent. but things move on, advances in mechanical wisdom and husbandry techniques come all the time. cannisters were not invented for people to talk about on the net. they came about because they have positive advantages to the hobby. and like it or not, they work, and (in the right circumstance) work better than other systems. UGF and bubble filters were in the past cutting edge, now not so much. even today they have applications. but, for the most part, modern internals and cannisters offer a better option. some dont like that. but, to be fair, thats their problem, not ours.
we all find the systems we use fine. providing they dont break down and fish stay alive. its often only when you are forced, or decide to, change you notice the difference.

there is another point too, low flow, 1x. in nature how many fish live in water that slow? there are a few, but not many.