[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re:Reverse UGFs

Ed writes:

> I have been debating the rugf for the new tank i'm laying out now.  It's
>  probably going to be a 30g X-high. am considering using this method for
>  co2 distribution but am also reminded that this method can be harmfull
>  to the tank by pushing stuff up to the top of the water colum.  Any
>  input on this??

My experience is that the stuff that is at the top of the tank is easier to
remove than stuff at the bottom of a tall, decorated, planted tank.  The same
stuff that these filters push to the top is the same stuff that would lie at
the bottom otherwise.  Having it in easy reach should make maintenance easier.
Having it lying on the bottom is certainly not any more or less healthy for
the tank overall.  Why not get it up where you can get at it?

Further, a well-designed RUGF will suck most of this dirt and detritus down
under the plate, where it will break down by bacterial action.  This is the
same thing that would happen with a conventional UGF, except that this dirt
would get caught in the upper part of the gravel and impede flow.  So I
personally think reverse is the better way to use UGFs.  But that's just my
opinion.  With my opinion plus a quarter, you can't even make a phone call any

Bob Dixon