New Set Up

[keith00]

Hi,

I have started to close down my 4' reef tank and intend to start a planted tank in a couple of months time so am looking to utilize as much of my present equipment as possible.

To this end I want to reuse my metal halide lights. They are 2 x 150 watt lamps of 10,000k in an Arcadia unit. In view of the heat produced what would be the best height above the water?

Also how often should the lamps be replaced for plant growth? The packet says they are good for 6000 hours but most reefkeepers would recommend changing them every year while some, mainly in the USA recommend 2 years. I appreciate it depends on the running time but assuming 10 hours per day this could work out to 600 days between changes but would the spectrum alter sufficiently to require an earlier change?

Look forward to any advice and I will be posting newbie questions on other forums.

 

[Themuleous]

First off, I reckon that's a hell of a lot of light over a planted tank, you don't need nearly as much for planted tanks. At 4' it must be in the region of 40g? That's 7.5WPG which is masses, which while possible, you'd be on a knife edge re algae.

I cant say I have any experience with MHs, but I reckon you'd need to change the bulbs to plant specific ones anyway, something like the ADA ones would do or these would probably be cheaper. Given that marine tanks have high K bulb for algae growth (as is my understanding) the last thing you'll want to do it encourage algae in a planted tank!

Hope that helps a little bit, sounds like its gonna be a nice set up, what fert dosing regime you planning on doing?

Sam

EDIT - welcome to the forum, nice to see someone going the other way with their tank

 

[George Farmer]

Hi,

I have started to close down my 4' reef tank and intend to start a planted tank in a couple of months time so am looking to utilize as much of my present equipment as possible.

To this end I want to reuse my metal halide lights. They are 2 x 150 watt lamps of 10,000k in an Arcadia unit. In view of the heat produced what would be the best height above the water?

Also how often should the lamps be replaced for plant growth? The packet says they are good for 6000 hours but most reefkeepers would recommend changing them every year while some, mainly in the USA recommend 2 years. I appreciate it depends on the running time but assuming 10 hours per day this could work out to 600 days between changes but would the spectrum alter sufficiently to require an earlier change?

Look forward to any advice and I will be posting newbie questions on other forums.

Hi Keith and welcome to TFF!

2 x 150w MH should be ok over 48". I assume its a 55G or higher? I would start of with small photoperiods of 6 hours or so then gradully build up to 9 or 10 hours max.

10000K marine spectrum may not be the best for FW plants but I know some that have had success. For photosynthesis blue and red parts of the spectrum are required, and 10000K will likely be very blue-bias.

I understand suspending between 12" and 18" is the general rule of thumb for a planted tank. Obviously the higher, the bigger the light spread, but the lower the intensity.

You will need to inject CO2 (pressurized is a must IMO for this set up) and keep the plants well fed via a nutrient-rich water column and/or substrate to avoid algae. Lots of light drives the plants growth, so without balancing this with other nutrients the plants quickly starve and algae takes over. Planting densely is a must too i.e. over half the substrate covered, ideally with fast growers.

I don't know how experienced you are with FW planted but the methodology is totally different to reef. We are dosing (or at least allowing the fish/tap water to produce) nutrients in a planted, aiming for some NO3 and PO4 etc. rather than eliminating it, as per most reefs.

Good luck with it.

May I ask why you are making the switch from reef?

 

[keith00]

Thanks for the replies.

Sam,

I take your point and will change the lamps for Iwasaki 6500k's. By the way the prices in the links you gave were horific. These people have much better prices. http/www.marine-lighting.co.uk/

George,

The tank is 63 gallons before adding substrate.

I intend to use CO2 and already have the gauges and needle valve for a DIY calcium reactor I made but no longer use.

As for experience this will be my first planted tank. I have sussed out the lfs but was not impressed with either their plants or their plant knowledge so will buy on-line.

I am not switching completely as I have a good looking 6' reef in the living room which I will keep (see my web site for details) but I am a bit bored with the 4 footer in my bedroom and thought a complete change would be good. I also fell in love with Cardinal Tetras if you please.

At the moment I am running a sump with an Eheim 1250 for the return and thought that I could keep that going and add a spray bar just above the substrate for the plants. The bar should reduce the flow sufficiently I think to about five times tank volume per hour. I will of course have a syphon break just under water level to avoid an overflow in the event of a power cut.

It has been suggested to me that I could use the sump for cuttings and maybe a dwarf water lily. What do you thing?

Regards

 

[Themuleous]

Yeh expensive! My only hesitation with those ones you liked to is that its a marine only site and I reckon the bulbs wont be right for planted tanks, despite being 6500k. I prob dont need to tell a marine fan that the k rating doesn't necessarily correspond to the light spectrum produced. The light spectrum of 6500k bulb could still be all wrong esp if its on a marine site, and if it is wrong then you'll only promote algae.

Thats the problem in my nano, daylight bulbs but they are of the wrong spectrum so that tank if full of algae

Sam

 

[BHornsey]

At the moment I am running a sump with an Eheim 1250 for the return and thought that I could keep that going and add a spray bar just above the substrate for the plants. The bar should reduce the flow sufficiently I think to about five times tank volume per hour. I will of course have a syphon break just under water level to avoid an overflow in the event of a power cut.

It has been suggested to me that I could use the sump for cuttings and maybe a dwarf water lily. What do you thing?

Hi, I have a similar setup: a 6 footer that has a sump. I'm still setting it up. I haven't planted it yet because I'm having some problems.

A bit of advice; I had a lot of problems keeping up CO2 levels in the tank. After some excellent advice from Plantbrain, I discovered the traditional return pipe arrangement causes a lot of foaming and gassing in the sump which drives off of CO2. His advice was to make the return chamber area sealed, with an option to fit a piped outlet fed to the pump inlet so that any CO2 is contained and either remixes with the water or sucked into the pump where it's atomised and shot back into the tank. Another option is to use a tower (similar to a wet/dry tower) containing a simple bag filter with a tight fitting lid.

I'm just making the mods to my sump now so I can't tell you how much of an improvement it will make. The hardest part has been finding filter bags in the UK.

Brian

 

[George Farmer]

Hi Keith,

As Brian suggests your biggest issue may be maintain CO2 levels with a sump. You need to avoid as much surface agitation and air/water interface as possible.

A sump is cool for keeping all the gear from the display. I personally wouldn't plant it as you'll need more lighting and the water movement through it may be too much.

What bio-mech filtration will you use?

 

[keith00]

Hm,

On reflection I don't think I will use the sump.

For lights I think the Aqua Medic Aqualine 5000k 150 w metal halides and for filtration probably the Eheim 2217 or the Fluval 305.

 

[George Farmer]

That light sounds good.

I'd go for a Fluval 405 personally in a 65G. Or even better an Eheim 2028, Rena XP3 or the new AquaEl 500.

Good circulation is preferable in a high-tech planted tank, despite what you may read about slow turnovers. As long as the filter output is directed appropraitely, CO2 loss through surface agitation is minimal.

 

[keith00]

Thanks George.