Reverse undergravel filter

Grundy

"A Buckeye Behind Enemy Lines"
Jul 9, 2006
291
0
0
Michigan
Anybody a fan of these? Any potential problems that are different from "normal" UGF's?
 
theres a lot to be learned from google about this, but what i know is that instead of getting stuck in the gravel, debris gets stuck under the gravel unless your powerheads have a good prefilter. if youre gonna have a UGF i think reverse flow is the way to go, but in almost all cases it is better to not have a UGF at all.
 
Use UGF and RUGF, all in tandem with other filters. On the UGF, you end up doing more gravel vacs to get the debri that is trapped in the substrate. With the RUGF, the debri gets pushed up into the water column qnd filtered out by other filters.

I have never had a problem with collection under the plate.

IMO, you can not beat the filtration they offer.
 
UGF is practically obsolete now. there are much more efficient ways to get filtration for the money than on UGFs, whether they are run normal or reversed.
 
I've ran RFUG in two tanks in two different set up. One was pretty traditional. I just used two powerhead with sponge filter and a HOB filter. The other one I plumed the UG plates together with one common intake tube. I them plumed the output end of my magnum canister in the RFUG. Both set up worked fine for many years.
 
Undergravels are far from obsolete and are probably still the best bang for buck bio-filters out there. I agree with the RUGF part and the need to prefilter the PH intake. Also you do need to have a second filter primarily for mech. But also in case you need to drop in a bag or carbon etc.

The nice thing about RUGF is, when used with a second filter loaded mostly for mech filtration, you need to vacuum the tank less often. The RUGF keeps stuff suspended in the water where the mech filter can get it out.

The key to the success of any form of under gravel filter is having the proper medium sized gravel with a depth of 3-4 inches combined with regular maintainance.
 
UGF is practically obsolete now. there are much more efficient ways to get filtration for the money than on UGFs, whether they are run normal or reversed.

If there is a better all around format out there than UGF I'd Love to see it. Nothing I've run even comes close.

Two Tank JHit the nail on the head pretty well. I have converted to all RFUG's becuase all of my tanks are planted, and conventional UGF requires vaccuming which plants aren't fond of.
RTR wrote a great article on these filters that can be found at the Puffer Forum

All in all the RFUG provides excellent bio-filtration, decent mechanical filtration, exceptional water polishing, exceptional substrate circulation, and extremely low cost and low maintenance. There is simply nothing out there that can match it overall. There are other great filter formats out there, just none that add up in the total view.

Dave
 
I have used the UGF for many years with good results but I wonder how much trouble all that mulm may cause that builds up under the plates after years of use. I am currently using an UGF on my 125 gallon tank with airstones (not powerheads). I also have 2 Emperor 400's and I just set up a Fluval 305. I know I have enough filtration but if there is a way to make my existing set up more efficient / beneficial without making major changes I am all for it.
 
nevermind my previous post, it seems that grundy has much more experience than me with UGF's and so i guess a properly maintained RUGF has no build-up under it. and yes i agree 100% with the fact that they should only be used in addition to other filters.
 
AquariaCentral.com