UV Sterilizer - Suggested Flow Rates

[Woodstock]

HMA posted this information in a different thread but I felt it best to also give it a sticky thread
Thanks HMA!

Originally Posted by hma

A very good idea fishead. Around my aspect somewhat more to describe here the translation of one of my reports to this topic. Like all my reports among other things to find on my web side.


UV-C and the sea water aquarium


I would like to point out my aspect in some sentences to the topic " UV-C and the sea water aquarium ".

What causes a UV-C light in an aquarium at all? Can it be in certain situations rather harmful and/or counter productive? Now, I would like to analyze these questions here a little more near.

Regards one the existing quantity of water of an aquarium more exactly, is immediately clear, that is really in no case with the living conditions of our animals in nature comparable. The water is however one of the most important factors for a healthy and nature near attitude of tropical fish and low animals in an aquarium. This artificial environment should of us, which we maintain animals in an aquarium, as nature near to be arranged as only at all possible. In addition we need a filtering as optimal as possible. But even the best biological and mechanical filtering the tremendously high number of possible unwanted micro organisms and parasites as well as viruses and bacteria from our aquariums will not be able to hold back. And here now the UV-C light is used. With its assistance it is possible the germination number in an aquarium on one, for the fish, well compatible measure to hold. Ultraviolet light helps us thus thereby, for in an aquarium living animals, to create a healthy "water climate".

What is that actually, ultraviolet light? Ultraviolet light are rays of light wich lie exactly in the electromagnetic spectrum between the not visible X-ray and the visible light for us humans. For the application in a UV-C lamp comes, in such a way specified, “low pressure mercury light". It is made of a particularly made glass, which the necessary spectrum of light, and/or light of a certain wavelength, lets through. The wavelength of the ultraviolet light is measured in "Ångstroem", the optimal necessary range for the targeted killing of the germs is exactly 2537 Ångstroem. This wavelength has the capability, everything this flash spectrum suspended bacteria, Viruses and micro organisms to kill and/or provide that they can not further increase. A further cell division and thus the further increase of the bacteria population with it successfully are prevented. Neither taste nor smell is affected; still any chemical reaction occurs in the aquarium water. Neither the chemical structure nor the pH values of the aquarium water are affected negatively. The usually positive bacteria film on the aquarium decoration and the sand remain, just as fish and low animals, uninfluenced by it.

In order to kill unwanted organisms in the aquarium is it necessarily these to a certain quantity and/or intensity of ultraviolet light to be exposed. The germ-killing effect of UV-C light is to be regarded thus in the relationship time and intensity of the irradiation. Like before already briefly mentions, causes the ultraviolet energy of the light a change of the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) of the illuminated organism, which entails that the organism can not further increase. The destruction of the unwanted organisms thus essentially depends on the flow rate of the aquarium water by the UV C light, not so much of the Watt strength of the light. The longer the retention time of the water in the lamp body is, the more highly the UV dose is and thus also the degree of the sterilization. With increasing flow rate the effect and/or sterilization decreases, therefore it is to be paid attention to as optimal a flow rate as possible. A too slow flow rate has however no negative effect on an optimal sterilization. An often asked question, is possible an overdosing of UV-C? This is to be answered with a clear NO. A further question often is, whether a higher Watt number of the UV C light in the relationship aquarium/pump affects itself negatively? Here again a clear NO is the answer, since water can not store UV C jets still transport. However none to strong pump should be used, since otherwise the period spent of the water in the UV C light is too small and thus no optimal sterilization can take place.

Mostly UV-C lights are built into the back cycle of the aquarium as bypass, thus between return pump (sump) and aquarium. I do not find this solution optimal, since the return pump thereby achievement becomes "branched". In my eyes it is a much better solution to use a small pump, the Watt number of the UV C light adapted, and to use a separate UV-C pump cycle in the sump. In a multi-part sump one takes the water for the UV-C in the last part (return pump) and leads it across the UV-C back into the first part (water intake). Since the pump for the UV-C light should have at least 2/3 less achievement than the return pump is guaranteed which one optimally sterilized. I prefer for a continuous operation (24/7 to 365 Days) this solution.

The following table shows in the rough relationship of aquarium size, Watt of the UV-C and optimal flow rate.

[tbittner]

This is great information. I'm considering adding this to my system:

Aqua UV 114 Watt 2 inch w/ Wiper UV Sterilizer (Saltwater Aquarium Supplies > UV Sterilizers > Units > 114 Watts )

When the 360g predator tank is up and running, I'm considering plumbing this into the return from the predator tank. That will have around 3,000 gph flowing through it. The predator and reef are both plumbed together through the 300g sump/fuge/skimmer tub. I don't think it matters where in the system the UV is plumbed because all of the water will eventually pass through it. The question is, would a big one like this be the right choice or would a bunch of smaller ones be advisable in order to try to treat the water simultaneously...

I'm leaning toward the big one because based on the information that I have about the life cycle of Ich, all of the water would be treated before Ich would have a chance to propagate and spawn. That's my theory at least. I'm really interested in what others think.

[Triggerjay]

Terry, I have the 25w version of the same thing. Mine leaks at the wiper, when I use it for a couple minutes then the leak stops. Other than that, I have no complaints... I have not noticed a difference between running it, and not running it, but its there, and turned on 24/7. I have mine in my fuge, and use a powerhead 402 to feed it.

Jason

[BoomerD]

http://www.aquaultraviolet.com/instr...s/UVsizing.pdf

[JoJo]

i'm in the market for one so i'll be watching

[hma]

Originally Posted by Triggerjay

Terry, I have the 25w version of the same thing. Mine leaks at the wiper, when I use it for a couple minutes then the leak stops. Other than that, I have no complaints... I have not noticed a difference between running it, and not running it, but its there, and turned on 24/7. I have mine in my fuge, and use a powerhead 402 to feed it.

Jason

The best place to use a UVC ..... and Terry, 3000 gph flowrate is MUCH to high for a UVC. In Your case are 260/160 gph the maximum flow rate for an optimum use. For a permanent use the sump is the best of all suitable places, it can never come to a leakage and I reduce in no case the backflow rate. For many years I use this so already. In my tanks I still Never had ICH or any other bacterial illnesses of my animals. I must do something properly in the question " How I am use UVC properly "?

[tbittner]

If you look at this chart:
Aqua Ultraviolet (UV) Water Sterilizer Information

At 2,600 gph for saltwater, it's providing 45,000 uw/cm2 sterlization. That is supposedly good enough, and slow enough, to kill Ich.

[fishnu]

WW


At 114 watts I think you can probably get a suntan in the next room.

I just finished pvc'ing up my 25 watt uv on my 75g and still have to add my phoban to the outflow of the sterilizer; but that sounds like a lot of watts and a lot of flow. You could probably do fish surgery in there.

Got a surgeon fish?

[BoomerD]

Originally Posted by tbittner

If you look at this chart:
Aqua Ultraviolet (UV) Water Sterilizer Information

At 2,600 gph for saltwater, it's providing 45,000 uw/cm2 sterlization. That is supposedly good enough, and slow enough, to kill Ich.

"**Salt water gallons based on higher UV kill rate (targeting free floating parasites, i.e., Ich) and 3–5 tank turns per hour"

The numbers you see are for freshwater tanks and ponds. The ONLY saltwater numbers in that chart are on the far right.

[hma]

The longer the water remains in the UVC, the greater is the effect, the more bacteria and germs are killed. The faster the water the UVC passes the LESS germs and bacteria are killed.

A Quite simple, easy to understand and logical circumstance in my view.


In contrast to Marine Depot I do not sell a UVC as expensive as possible. However, I have tested at the University of Frankfurt with some students different UVC with different flow rates, the result stands in MY Chart and is based EXCLUSIVELY on sea water. We have really counted out bacteria and germs in a dedicated quantity of water for every tested UVC after 24 hours of running time. The results are to be read up in the Chart.

Of course would be also killed bacteria and germs with a quicker flow rate and higher wattage of the UVC but not so effective and with substantially higher costs. (power consumption, purchase price; spare parts)

In Germany we have a saying: " Why with doves to throw at sparrows "

My recommendation for a 360 gal. Aquarium is 18 watts UVC, used in a separate circulation with a small pump (240 gph) 24/7 in your sump.

BTW ... I am use a 11 Watt 24/7 for my 225 gal FO.

[dfurbee]

So, if I put a 160 gph PH on my new turbo-twist UV sterilizer, will it be too much or not enough? Thanks, Deb

[fatman]

Or as the great Martin Moe Jr. would say, "why rent a truck to return a library book." Nearly all tables provided by aquarium retailers and manufacturers are very optimistic and quite skewed about the capabilities of their equipment. They also do not tell of the decline of a UV's capability with out the water being crystal clear, nor due they talk about the lights loss of effectiveness with age. And as can be seen, they usually just provide tables that are based on a lights ability to kill phytoplankton in fresh water ponds. Then they throw out a few rough guidelines for salt water or salt water parasites that are nor substantiated with research/test data. The reefers in Germany have been using UV lights a lot longer than the US reefers. I would be more inclined to follow the Reefers advice form Germany than some inadequate tables supplied buy a retailer. A very large portion of the advances in Reefing are due to the German reefers and German manufacturers. We generally just take their equipment and build it out of cheaper materials of lesser quality and call it American made, or we contract the manufacturing out to the Chinese and call it an American product.
Small pumps are cheap to run, I would recommend a separate loop for the UV light utilizing a small pump and not a large flow pump shared with a sump return system. The large wattage light is larger than is needed to be effective.
As for its effectiveness at killing the Ich parasite. You have only about 48 hours that the Ich tomites are free swimming and therefore capable of being in the water stream to be pumped through a UV light. Whether or not that happens is more dependant on adequate circulation within the tank more than killing power within the lights UV waves. It does not take extreme intensities of UV lighting to kill the free swimming tomites but it is very hard to ever get the tomites into the water stream in order to get them to the UV light. They are typically hatched in or on the substrate and very quickly attach to a host upon hatching. Healthy fish with a good mucus layer do not normally have parasite attachment problems. Please also consider that circulation heavy enough to keep parasites in suspension in the water will also keep most plankton and pods in the water system also flowing through the killing UV lights. UV lights are considered by many as best for treatment of bacterial and algae blooms, or prevention of same, but not for parasite preventive measures. Unless your running a bare bottom tank where tomites can not hide in the substrate, and therefore will be kept in circulation within the water.

Originally Posted by hma

The longer the water remains in the UVC, the greater is the effect, the more bacteria and germs are killed. The faster the water the UVC passes the LESS germs and bacteria are killed.

A Quite simple, easy to understand and logical circumstance in my view.


In contrast to Marine Depot I do not sell a UVC as expensive as possible. However, I have tested at the University of Frankfurt with some students different UVC with different flow rates, the result stands in MY Chart and is based EXCLUSIVELY on sea water. We have really counted out bacteria and germs in a dedicated quantity of water for every tested UVC after 24 hours of running time. The results are to be read up in the Chart.

Of course would be also killed bacteria and germs with a quicker flow rate and higher wattage of the UVC but not so effective and with substantially higher costs. (power consumption, purchase price; spare parts)

In Germany we have a saying: " Why with doves to throw at sparrows "

My recommendation for a 360 gal. Aquarium is 18 watts UVC, used in a separate circulation with a small pump (240 gph) 24/7 in your sump.

BTW ... I am use a 11 Watt 24/7 for my 225 gal FO.

[hma]

Originally Posted by dfurbee

So, if I put a 160 gph PH on my new turbo-twist UV sterilizer, will it be too much or not enough? Thanks, Deb

Yes Deb the pump is 100% enough. The more slightly the flow rate of a UV C, the more effective is the degermination.


Nevertheless, this is a relatively slightly understandable logic. The longer the ultraviolet light on bacteria and germs can work, ever better it can eliminate them. The faster the water by the lamp flows the less time the light has an effect on the germs, the less effect has it.

[dfurbee]

Originally Posted by hma

Yes Deb the pump is 100% enough. The more slightly the flow rate of a UV C, the more effective is the degermination.


Nevertheless, this is a relatively slightly understandable logic. The longer the ultraviolet light on bacteria and germs can work, ever better it can eliminate them. The faster the water by the lamp flows the less time the light has an effect on the germs, the less effect has it.

vielen Dank, Heinz