The RUGF on the 90 at one shop I worked at did not work. When we finally tore it out the visibility in the tank literally went down to 1-2". Nice theory, but just stick to real filters.
How does the under gravel filter work????
- Thread starter Winterose
- Start date
They require a lot more work just to keep par. If they ever get neglected it is almost impossible to undo the damage. With any other type of filter you can drag the whole thing to the sink or tub and clean it. Not so with UGFs. Almost no one suggests using them alone, meaning you have to buy other filters too. You might as well buy a slightly larger filter and be done with it than buy the other filter, the UGF, the powerhead, and do more work.
All this is pointless since sand is a better option anyways. It is cleaner, much more natural, and looks better.
People need to move out of the 80s. If you are modern enough to use the internet then you are modern enough to not use an UGF.
All this is pointless since sand is a better option anyways. It is cleaner, much more natural, and looks better.
People need to move out of the 80s. If you are modern enough to use the internet then you are modern enough to not use an UGF.
Me thinks the UGF has been around a bit longer than the 80s...same for RUGF....
Filtration will always come down to personal choice and tank needs....to blatantly eliminate a form of it is to bury your head in the deep sand bed.
Filtration will always come down to personal choice and tank needs....to blatantly eliminate a form of it is to bury your head in the deep sand bed.
Good, sand is better anyways. UGFs were around before the 80s, but went out of date about that time.
I don't see the need to be diplomatic about hurting UGF's feelings. They are old school, ineffective, extra work, and cause more harm than good long term. They provide NOTHING that a more proper filter can't (except the extra work and problems).
I don't see the need to be diplomatic about hurting UGF's feelings. They are old school, ineffective, extra work, and cause more harm than good long term. They provide NOTHING that a more proper filter can't (except the extra work and problems).
I agree Bob just because its old school doesnt mean its not effective you just need to know how to maintain them. I have had them in operation for 5+ years with out being torn down and never had any problems and minimal waste under them.
Sorry to disappoint you, they are still in use and for many breeders it is the preferred method of filtering right there alongside sponge filters. As I said in my earlier post, proper use and setup makes a huge difference as it does with any filtration system. Most people don't set them up properly to maximize their full potential. As far as their age of inception, I was using them in the '70's and even then they weren't new. They are still being offered today so don't say they went out of date in the 80's. If they didn't sell, they wouldn't be available.
As far as sand being the best option, you are saying that nothing else will work as well as what you prefer. You are eliminating the possibility that for others, alternate options won't work, which is not true. It all comes down to your equipment and you, the person responsible for the maintenance.
Disagreements spur the quest to design "the best" and most efficient system. As someone that owns just about one of every type of filter, I have yet to find one to be superior over another style. Each one has it's advantages based on the tank setup and stocking.
You kids are funny...I especially liked the bury your head in the deep sand comment - cracked me up.
UGF's work great but only if/when they're setup and maintained properly. First, they need a minimum of 3" of medium fine gravel. If the gravel size is too large or the depth too shallow you hear stories about 'mulm' under the plates. Something that can't happen in a deeper bed of gravel. Too small and it just doesn't work well at all. Next comes the maintenance. It's a filter like any other (although it has exceptional bio-capability). What other filter could you run forever without cleaning or changing the media. The gravel needs to be cleaned once in blue moon, unless there are critters and plants to handle the detritus material.
Now some fiddler thought the UGF would be better with powerheads - wrong. This just accelerates the movement of detritus deeper in the bed (and below) before it can completely break down and this is not better, but in fact worse. Then another chouderhead 'invented' the reverse flow UGF. Well, this is 'better', but now we have pre-filter and a couple of $20+ powerheads on a $20 UGF and for $60 plus, you can get a nice HOB or put a good dent in a canister filter that has somewhat superior bio-media.
Especially when you consider the fact the the UGF was often augmented with a power filter anyway, and the development of some pretty slick bio-media AND what we're learning about the biology of the undisturbed gravel and/or the deep sand bed and the use of living plants and we really should put the UGF down, outside the aquarium, (as I wrote before) putting it on the shelf next to the bubble up HOB and the in-tank corner bubble up filter.
UGF's work great but only if/when they're setup and maintained properly. First, they need a minimum of 3" of medium fine gravel. If the gravel size is too large or the depth too shallow you hear stories about 'mulm' under the plates. Something that can't happen in a deeper bed of gravel. Too small and it just doesn't work well at all. Next comes the maintenance. It's a filter like any other (although it has exceptional bio-capability). What other filter could you run forever without cleaning or changing the media. The gravel needs to be cleaned once in blue moon, unless there are critters and plants to handle the detritus material.
Now some fiddler thought the UGF would be better with powerheads - wrong. This just accelerates the movement of detritus deeper in the bed (and below) before it can completely break down and this is not better, but in fact worse. Then another chouderhead 'invented' the reverse flow UGF. Well, this is 'better', but now we have pre-filter and a couple of $20+ powerheads on a $20 UGF and for $60 plus, you can get a nice HOB or put a good dent in a canister filter that has somewhat superior bio-media.
Especially when you consider the fact the the UGF was often augmented with a power filter anyway, and the development of some pretty slick bio-media AND what we're learning about the biology of the undisturbed gravel and/or the deep sand bed and the use of living plants and we really should put the UGF down, outside the aquarium, (as I wrote before) putting it on the shelf next to the bubble up HOB and the in-tank corner bubble up filter.
hi all,
first time poster here. I am a returning aquariast after a 15 year break. I always felt UGF was a practical way to add bio-filtration to a tank (back in the day when I was keeping fish it was the way it was done). Today there seems to be many more filtration choices. Since regular water changes need to occur to control nitrate levels, etc.,why not take the time to vacuum the gravel? And then why not have an UGF component in your filter scheme? If not for the need to clean the substrate reguarly anyway I might be tempted to utilize the excellent bio filtration of a wheel. However, the reverse flow scheme of a UGF seems particuarly interesting to me (running the water flow down the stand pipe and consequently, up through the substrtate). And besides, I am a contrary ol bastid and enjoy making the old school ways shine and the kids howl
I just picked up a 80 gal tank, 48" wide x 18" deep x 22" high, and am preparing to install a filter system prior to cycling. I believe I will use a Fluval FX/5 canister to drive a reverse flow UGF setup. I will use the Fluval split output to drive the UGF's in reverse flow and the other for tank agitation/jet. Seems to me that with basic upkeep this would be an excellent filtering scheme for a medium stocked community freshwater setup. With the UGF to handle the bio filtration and the Fluval to provide prefiltering and charcoal filtration (it has been freed from doing bio by the UGF) it seems to be a balanced approach, to myself anyways And it is nice to have a good cannister filter for polishing and chem filtration when needed.
Anyway, I would appreciate any feedback on my proposed setup. Thanks all and I look forward to being a part of this forum.
first time poster here. I am a returning aquariast after a 15 year break. I always felt UGF was a practical way to add bio-filtration to a tank (back in the day when I was keeping fish it was the way it was done). Today there seems to be many more filtration choices. Since regular water changes need to occur to control nitrate levels, etc.,why not take the time to vacuum the gravel? And then why not have an UGF component in your filter scheme? If not for the need to clean the substrate reguarly anyway I might be tempted to utilize the excellent bio filtration of a wheel. However, the reverse flow scheme of a UGF seems particuarly interesting to me (running the water flow down the stand pipe and consequently, up through the substrtate). And besides, I am a contrary ol bastid and enjoy making the old school ways shine and the kids howl
I just picked up a 80 gal tank, 48" wide x 18" deep x 22" high, and am preparing to install a filter system prior to cycling. I believe I will use a Fluval FX/5 canister to drive a reverse flow UGF setup. I will use the Fluval split output to drive the UGF's in reverse flow and the other for tank agitation/jet. Seems to me that with basic upkeep this would be an excellent filtering scheme for a medium stocked community freshwater setup. With the UGF to handle the bio filtration and the Fluval to provide prefiltering and charcoal filtration (it has been freed from doing bio by the UGF) it seems to be a balanced approach, to myself anyways
And it is nice to have a good cannister filter for polishing and chem filtration when needed.Anyway, I would appreciate any feedback on my proposed setup. Thanks all and I look forward to being a part of this forum.
