Drip system and chloramine removal

[DJW]

Your best bet is catalytic carbon with a sediment filter, basically a good quality HMA filter.

In your link it says:

"Coventry, Shelford and Miller (1935) found that 0.3 to 0.4 ppm of chloramine killed trout fry instantly and 0.06 ppm killed trout fry in 48 hours. It was also found that 0.4 ppm killed sunfish and bullheads, 0.7 ppm killed hardy species of minnows, and 1.2 ppm caused mortality to large carp and bullheads."

When chloramine is measured as chlorine you get less... so 0.03 mg/l-Cl is equivalent to 0.044 mg/l chloramine. Where did the 0.03 ppm measurement come from?

Another article suggests that 0.03 ppm is lethal to invertebrates and near the threshold for fish:

http://ceqg-rcqe.ccme.ca/download/en/208

UV supposedly breaks the chloramine and partly oxidizes the nitrogen, leaving ammonia and some nitrite in the water. UV doesn't look like such a great idea.

[LoGeek]

Here is a graph for comparison of the two water changing methods. The green line is a regular water change while the red line is a continuous water change through a drip system. X axis is the percentage of new water vs. total system volume, y axis is actual water change effected. Notice that between 10-40% the two compare pretty closely. It is only at larger percentages where you start wasting water.

CWC.jpg

Using a drip system to add 10-40% of the tank volume a day seems like a very efficient way of providing water stability in between regular water changes and vacuuming.

[LoGeek]

Thanks for your reply Dan!

The number 0.03 ppm Cl comes from emailing my water company. They guarantee monochloramine levels measured as excess Cl to be below 0.03. I have not verified with any measurement.

[Filip]

Here is a graph for comparison of the two water changing methods. The green line is a regular water change while the red line is a continuous water change through a drip system. X axis is the percentage of new water vs. total system volume, y axis is actual water change effected. Notice that between 10-40% the two compare pretty closely. It is only at larger percentages where you start wasting water.

CWC.jpg

Using a drip system to add 10-40% of the tank volume a day seems like a very efficient way of providing water stability in between regular water changes and vacuuming.

Your last sentence is the key to your misunderstanding "in between regular WC and vacuuming".
Everybody here will agree with this . It is a great Addition to your water changing and cleaning regime ,but not replacement .

[MD.David]

I must admit too I do both traditional water change, drain the tank down with a syphon hose till about 3inches left and they are all flat, then refill, I might do this 3-5 times a week, but if I'm too busy I can run my drip system, it changes about 200 gallons in an hr. All I do it flip a few values and switches and it's pouring fresh water in and sucking out water at the other end, I may run it depending on how I feel they are doing, currently right now it's been running for about 2hrs and the water you could drink right out of the tank mates!
But for guys that think your going to drill the tank in one corner and drip 80 gallons a day in the other corner and expect this to be healthy and all your going to do, I have news your sadly mistaken.
Discus need super clean and fresh water and they will thrive, at 100% WC traditionally a day and a mega drip system at 200 gallons thru a 120 gallon daily, they should have fresh enough water.

At least this is my take on the water change regime.

Cheers,

[atlantadiscus]

Seriously,go watch Joeys utube video on drip systems,he keeps all his fish,including healthy Discus this way......ZERO manual water changes in between,other than occasional vacuum of bottom.No need for manual water change if drip flow is correctly calculated.Ever seen a river drained and filled? Dilution is the solution in nature,and in a well balanced aquarium.

[nc0gnet0]

There are a lot of factors not discussed in this thread that are very relevant.

Stocking density
Feeding frequency
Feeding amount
ORP
Frequency of poo/uneaten food bottom vac's

The system could work very well in a lightly stocked tank with adults/near adults. But as a grow out tank with high stocking density and very young fish, it would be a terrible idea.

[nc0gnet0]

Here is a graph for comparison of the two water changing methods. The green line is a regular water change while the red line is a continuous water change through a drip system. X axis is the percentage of new water vs. total system volume, y axis is actual water change effected. Notice that between 10-40% the two compare pretty closely. It is only at larger percentages where you start wasting water.

CWC.jpg

Using a drip system to add 10-40% of the tank volume a day seems like a very efficient way of providing water stability in between regular water changes and vacuuming.

I haven't had the time to look into the plot points on your graph to see if they are accurate or not. The problem I see with "most" drip system calculations (and I honestly don't know if this is the case on this one) is they fail to factor in the fact that the total amount of water being dripped into a system typically occur over a 24 hour time frame. What this means is that the water is constantly being fouled during the process, making it less efficient than one might expect. There was a good debate on it over a year ago on this thread here:

http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...highlight=drip

[LoGeek]

Your last sentence is the key to your misunderstanding "in between regular WC and vacuuming".
Everybody here will agree with this . It is a great Addition to your water changing and cleaning regime ,but not replacement .

Have I ever stated that the drip system would replace regular water changes? That's never been in question for me! My post was strictly about what to do about the chloramine constantly being added through a drip system. I have recieved some really good answers and links concerning this. Thanks!

Some however immediately stated that drip systems are "not good for discus" and "highly inefficient". I guess they interpreted my post as somehow meaning I would not do water changes and vacuuming.

The discussion about the effectiveness of drip systems was not the topic, but I must confess that it's a very interesting side topic. Considered strictly as an addition on top of regular water changes I still can't se how it's ineffective. I realise that the diagram I posted is theoretical but it's nonetheless valid I think. That the tank is constantly being polluted by the fish does not change the validity of the actual water percentage being replaced. On the contrary it seems like a perfect argument to utilize a constant drip between water changes to dilute the pollutants being added by the fish. Stability!

[LoGeek]

There was a good debate on it over a year ago on this thread here:

http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...highlight=drip

I've now read that thread and it's really full of misunderstandings of the nature of dilution/concentration/water changes. If I get the time soon I'll make some graphs with ammonia of different ppm being added and three plots showing drip only / regular wc only / the two in combination.

[Fishquake]

WE use a sort of “drip system”, but we can adjust the amount of water exiting or entering the tanks with valves that have different drip emitters attached to them, (5gph), (10gph) (18 GPH), etc. Right now we use an Eheim autofeeder to dose safe at various times during the day into the storage containers.

This week we are installing the Pelican PC1000 catalytic carbon filter which will remove chloromines and we won’t need to change the carbon for 18 to 24 months depending on our usage. It can clean 1,000,000 gallons before it needs to have carbon replaced.

Thank you Kathy for reminding me I have some plumbing to do tomorrow.

[nc0gnet0]

I'm not dead set on a drip system. I've never seen it as a replacement for frequent large wc but as a way of providing water stability in between them. If this thinking is wrong I'll gladly pass on all the trouble of installing it. According to online calculators a dripping of 50% of tank volume corresponds to a daily wc of 39%. Sounds like a good thing in between daily vacuuming of the bottom.
http://www.angelfish.net/DripSystemcalc.php

But if I'm wrong then maybe it's better to go for better wc equipment (large diameter hose and so on).

Do all of you with chloramine use something like prime? As mentiined my levels are low. I don't use it in any of my other tanks with fish, but maybe discus are more sensitive?

Taken from your link:

Assuming no additional pollutants are added,. drip system will replace 50.34 % of the Tank's water in a week.

That being said, I am not anti drip system when deployed in the manner in which you claim to want to use it. However, there is a lot of misunderstanding out there as to just exactly how effective they are in comparison to the amount of water they use. Whenever we factor in actual water use, a traditional water change method will out perform a drip system by a factor of 2 or more.

So while you very well might not have ever intended it to be used as a stand alone or near stand alone wc method, when you post graphs and calculators that make it appear that one could use a drip system as a stand alone system and achieve the equivalent of a 50% Daily water change by only using "x" mount of water (about 52.5 gallons in a 75 gallon tank), others are bound to chime in with exceptions, not just for your sake, but for the sake of anyone else that might be reading the thread.

[LoGeek]

I'm grateful for all feedback regarding the filtration of chloramines. Thanks!

The topic of drip systems in general turned out to be very interesting as well, so I've posted a new thread devoted to this.

http://forum.simplydiscus.com/showth...05#post1232205

[DJW]

...The number 0.03 ppm Cl comes from emailing my water company. They guarantee monochloramine levels measured as excess Cl to be below 0.03. I have not verified with any measurement.

I wonder if the water company has misunderstood your inquiry. You asked them how much chloramine will be in the water and they have given you an "excess chlorine" figure that is almost too low to be effective. Why chloraminate if the chloramine is present in such small concentration? In the chloramination process they are trying to add just the right amount of chlorine to water containing ammonia, and the addition of excess chlorine leads to the formation of di- and trichloramines that degrade the water quality. I'm not sure about this, its just something to verify.

If you test the water with a salicylate test for ammonia (such as API) it will indicate whether you have chloramine at the normal level, which is 1-2 ppm.