29 Gallon Filtration

W

wannabefishguru

learning to be the best
Jun 29, 2005
363
0
0
somewhere by the grain elevator, iowa
Hello need some help, i can't choose what to use

what is the best filtration for a 29 gallon planted tank HOB or Canister?

which one is the best brand and less complications for a job like this?
 
Last edited:
I think HOB's. They are cheaper to buy and run. Aquaclear is my favorite and a lot of people on here seem to agree. (That is why I tried them, I have a top fin and a penguine, I prefer the AC). I don't use the carbon and use two sponges. Just squeeze them out in aquarium water once a month and replace the sponges when they need to be replaced. Filters with cartridges are much harder to clean, and really need to be replaced once a month.
 
With CO2 it's easier to control surface agitation with a canister. I've only used Fluval canisters and they do the job. Other people use other brands with mucho success also.
 
Added CO2 make a huge difference in filter choice. HOB's are great filters but they create surface agitation that drives off the added CO2. Canisters can be set up to minimize surface agitation, thus keeping CO2 levels higher.

In my 29 gallon I use a Fluval 304 whihc has been great for me. You could probably get away with a Fluval 204 or something with equal output in another brand like a Filstar or Eheim. Depending on tank load a like to aim for a min of 6 times water turnover an hour. The rates are listed on the box.
 
I might get flamed for this, but I think the jury should still be out on whether the surface agitation of a HOB significantly robs the plants of available CO2 to such a degree that they shouldn't be used in a CO2 injected aquarium. I'm no hydrologist, but I question the usual canon that believes surface agitation causes CO2 to run screaming from a fishtank.

I only started using a DIY injection on my 20g long last week. I have a jungle in there to begin with. All of this using both a HOB (Penguin 125...yes, a biowheel...a dreaded biowheel that will obliterate the CO2!!!! muahahahahah) and a Fluval 104.

I guess what I'm saying is that if my plants grew so well without CO2, then how can some CO2 loss (if that is even what happens from surface agitation) be that bad for a planted tank that is recieving pressurized CO2? It should still have a net gain in CO2 large enough to make the necessary impact. Plus I strongly believe just by intuition that it's always good for water to circulate and make exchange with fresh air.

Okay, I'm ready to be flamed now. But one day I plan to test this.
 
Last edited:
It isn't that they are bad it is that surface agitation of water leads the water to try and reach an equilibrium with the air overhead. This means if the outside air is rich in CO2 then the water would be as well. But generally there is a max level of atmopheric CO2 so the water will do its best to reach that. Gas excahge happens through agitation.

Now I have tanks that use no CO2 and have massive jungles of plants. But since I have no CO2 being added I don't worry about the agitation that happens as I know the water will reach an equilibrium anyway. Adding DIY or pressurized CO2 would be pointless, in that you will drive much of the added CO2 off. Will some excess still get used? Probably but not nearly as much as you are adding, so I see that as waste and an un-needed additive. Flourish Excell would be a better choice.

And just because the surface isn't bubbling away doesn''t mean gas exchange isn't happening anyway, it is just slowed down. Large weekly water changes will take care of stagnation lomg before it should happen. And skimmer attachments to canisters can help as well.
 
Any surface distruption will increase the rate of gas exchange - that much is a given. That doesn't, however, mean that surface distruption is a bad thing, on the contrary.

With a DIY system - from personal experience - surface distruption from an HOB can make maintaining contant, decent CO2 levels problematic. With a pressurized system this isn't such a problem, just increase the gas flow rate to compensate for the loss. Just keep the water level above the bottom of the filter return. Besides, you can always toss a filter sponge over the outflow to attenuate the return flow.
 
I didn't mean to say it was a bad idea to have agitation, just that I thought it was counter productive to holding the added CO2 in, which means you need to add more CO2 to make up for the loss, which means more money.

I still believe that canisters are a better choice in controling surface agitation but as long as everyone is aware of what is needed to keep CO2 levels high then that is fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom