Author Topic: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"  (Read 1244 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dmitry Beryozkin

  • Guest
To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« on: February 17, 2005, 08:31:20 AM »
How do people feel about underground filters?  Some articles I've been reading about filtration, as well as about keeping African Cichlids, discourage their use.  Aquarium for Dummies, on the other hand, never even suggests that one can do without an UGF.  So...what are people's thoughts and what are the best way to keep the gravel clean, and to clean the undergravel filter?  ><:

Offline Gerry

  • Administrator
  • World Cichlid God
  • ******
  • Posts: 10615
  • Fishy Rating 78
  • Gender: Male
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2005, 10:31:27 AM »
Cichlids make to much mess for a UGF , so they are generally not recommended for them..

the best way to keep your gravel clean is,
don't over feed and remove any food left with a net or vacuum the gravel.
do weekly gravel vacuum as a routine.
have a good filtration system other than UGFs.

well thats my opinion anyway O0

Offline Ezekial

  • Senior Member
  • Dovii
  • *****
  • Posts: 3272
  • Fishy Rating 161
  • Gender: Male
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2005, 10:55:35 AM »
In general, undergravel filters are not the most efficient way to flter the tank.  Cichlids are too messy and like to dig so they will expose the filter often.  Also there is no easy way to clean under the filter and junk will collect under there.  Go with hang on back filters and make sure you have enough GPH's (gallon per hour) of filtration.  This is usually considered your tank size X 10.  So a 55 gallon tank would need 550 GPH's of filtration. 

1 EBJD (Cichlasoma Octofasciatum)
1 Salvini Cichlid (Cichlasoma/Nandopsis Salvini)
1 Royal Pleco (Panaque Nigrolineatus)
4 Clown Loaches (Chromobotia Macracanthus)
6 Bleheri Rainbowfish (Chilatherina bleheri)
8 Boesmani Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia Boesemani)


<a href="http://www.aquarank.com/in.php?id=worldcic" target="0">
Vote for us" width="88" height="31" border="0[/url]

Offline fnesr

  • beer-a-cuda
  • Administrator
  • Dovii
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
  • Fishy Rating 236
  • Gender: Male
  • Queensland Australia
    • Recichlidus Forums
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2005, 12:40:49 PM »
i agree that UGF's are really not suitable for cichlids however that being said i have a freind (squarepants) running a UGF in reverse in his african tank and it works exceptionally well, it is tricky and took him quite alot of playing around to get it set-up though. it runs current in reverse from the tray up through the gravel and is pre-filtered through a powerhead before entering the tray. conventionally using a UGF though generally ends up building up much too much unvacumable waste under the tray so i'd definately avoid using one if at all possible.



Dmitry Beryozkin

  • Guest
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2005, 05:04:33 AM »
Okay, no UGF it is!  Less things to worry about. O0  Petco.com has pretty cheap Aqua Clear Power Filters.  A 100 gallons filter for $24.99.  That seems cheap to me!  :D  It won't blow the fish out of the water in a 15 gallons tanks, will it?  I figure the bigger, the better...   ::)  I also know there needs to be current in the tank, to circulate the water.  An UGF does that well, I think - what other devices are out there to do that?

Offline Ezekial

  • Senior Member
  • Dovii
  • *****
  • Posts: 3272
  • Fishy Rating 161
  • Gender: Male
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2005, 06:03:43 AM »
Your power filters will do that just fine.  You don't need anything else.  How many GPH does your Aqua Clear filter run through it?    Filter will say they are for a certain size tank but they should always tell you how much they filter in terms of GPH.  If you are going to have a community tank you don't need quite as much filtration but 100-150 GPH would be more than enough. 

1 EBJD (Cichlasoma Octofasciatum)
1 Salvini Cichlid (Cichlasoma/Nandopsis Salvini)
1 Royal Pleco (Panaque Nigrolineatus)
4 Clown Loaches (Chromobotia Macracanthus)
6 Bleheri Rainbowfish (Chilatherina bleheri)
8 Boesmani Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia Boesemani)


<a href="http://www.aquarank.com/in.php?id=worldcic" target="0">
Vote for us" width="88" height="31" border="0[/url]

Dmitry Beryozkin

  • Guest
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2005, 06:08:03 AM »
The one for 100 gallons circulates 300gph.  The one for 30 gallons does 150gph.  Don't forget this is a 15 gallons high aquarium, so there's a greater distance to get to the bottom of it.  >:::

Offline Ezekial

  • Senior Member
  • Dovii
  • *****
  • Posts: 3272
  • Fishy Rating 161
  • Gender: Male
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2005, 07:47:45 AM »
Are you sure it will fit on the back of the tank? ???.  The 150 gallon per hour is plenty for a 15 gallon tank.  Especially is all the fish are small.  And no matter how high your 15 gallon is, it's not that high.  Good luck.

1 EBJD (Cichlasoma Octofasciatum)
1 Salvini Cichlid (Cichlasoma/Nandopsis Salvini)
1 Royal Pleco (Panaque Nigrolineatus)
4 Clown Loaches (Chromobotia Macracanthus)
6 Bleheri Rainbowfish (Chilatherina bleheri)
8 Boesmani Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia Boesemani)


<a href="http://www.aquarank.com/in.php?id=worldcic" target="0">
Vote for us" width="88" height="31" border="0[/url]

Offline wullie

  • Apistogramma
  • *
  • Posts: 193
  • Fishy Rating 10
  • Gender: Male
  • thats my side boob!!!!!!!!
    • wills cichlids
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2005, 08:15:38 AM »
Read my post in oscars "sick oscars".......i cant stress enough to you that ugf either conventional or reverse are absolute ****.
imho all they do is hide a problem away. i ran them for months without much problem but when i went to change my filtration you dont want to see whats under those plates.....eeuuuucchhhhhh.
Tang tank
1 x brichardi, 2 x julies, 3 x lelupi, 2 x calvus
15 x multifasciatus, 10 x leptosoma

Saltie reef tank
1 x pyjama wrasse, 2 x clowns, 1 x banded goby
1 x firefish, 1 x Pseudochromis aldabraensis
1 x blood shrimp

Offline fnesr

  • beer-a-cuda
  • Administrator
  • Dovii
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
  • Fishy Rating 236
  • Gender: Male
  • Queensland Australia
    • Recichlidus Forums
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #9 on: February 20, 2005, 12:37:27 PM »
i cant stress enough to you that ugf either conventional or reverse are absolute ****.

that's a big statement, you've fully set up and ran a reverse?  i only know of one person that has run one, he had to custom design all fittings etc. because it is not very commonly done at all. his works outstandingly.





Offline wullie

  • Apistogramma
  • *
  • Posts: 193
  • Fishy Rating 10
  • Gender: Male
  • thats my side boob!!!!!!!!
    • wills cichlids
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #10 on: February 21, 2005, 02:32:39 AM »
you say he had to adapt and custom his fittings? i never had to do that.................the biggest problem i had when i ran my ugf in reverse is the old problem of water (like electricity) always wants to take the easiest path and it was a nightmare to get an even flow up through the gravel thoughout the tank therefore allowing Dead spots which will allow bad bacteria to grow. Never had to adapt fittings though. I take it you mean that you  have to rig up your own hose adaptors to connect the output hose to the uplift tube ?            however in my experience no matter how well pre-filtered the water appeared to be and when using standard plates solid waste accumualted in the gravel, and it was very difficult to achieve a relatively even water flow throughout the bed ,(im sure im not alone, lol).  although In theory, this looks like an ideal filtration system i found that it fell way short. well done to your friend who obviously managed to get it to work perfectly, im sure you will agree though that he is in the minority, and thought it prudent to warn off dmitri with a "bold statement" as i said it was only my opinion.
Tang tank
1 x brichardi, 2 x julies, 3 x lelupi, 2 x calvus
15 x multifasciatus, 10 x leptosoma

Saltie reef tank
1 x pyjama wrasse, 2 x clowns, 1 x banded goby
1 x firefish, 1 x Pseudochromis aldabraensis
1 x blood shrimp

Offline Tony

  • tony no shirt
  • Founder
  • World Cichlid God
  • *******
  • Posts: 7281
  • Fishy Rating 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2005, 03:16:50 AM »
I guess basicly that running a ugf in reverse is something that should not be done by the novice. I know a few African nuts who run them quite well but they are highly experienced.
Help World Cichlids Online with its quest for World Domination!&nbsp; Do your part and Vote For Us On AquaRank!



<a href="http://www.aquarank.com/in.php?id=worldcic" target="0">
Vote for us" width="88" height="31" border="0[/url]

complaint dept

 http://www.facebook.com/tony.snell

Offline fnesr

  • beer-a-cuda
  • Administrator
  • Dovii
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
  • Fishy Rating 236
  • Gender: Male
  • Queensland Australia
    • Recichlidus Forums
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2005, 12:57:22 PM »
as Tony said, i would probally agree that they may be too difficult for a novice to set-up. the fittings needed to be designed to get even water flow through the plate intakes (6) and along the tray to give even pressure pushing the air from the tray up through the gravel, there is no "dead spots" as water flow is even through out the tray and the powerheads for intake are constantly cycling water throughout the tank anyway (just like when you use no UGF at all).

you are intitled to your opinion 'wullie d' and it is correct to warn off someone from attempting it if you beleive they will not have success, but because you yourself couldn't manage to set it up correctly does not mean it's "absolute **** " in general. From seeing it correctly set up i would say the opposite and descibe it as absolutely ideal. 




Offline wullie

  • Apistogramma
  • *
  • Posts: 193
  • Fishy Rating 10
  • Gender: Male
  • thats my side boob!!!!!!!!
    • wills cichlids
Re: To "undergravel filter" or not to "undergravel filter"
« Reply #13 on: February 22, 2005, 07:22:37 AM »
I respect what your saying "Fnesr" but im afraid ill have to exercise that "my opinion" stance, and disagree.
The debate on ugf has roared for longer than ive been around probably and i imagine its not going to get sorted out by a scot and a aussie arguing about it either..............lol
Tang tank
1 x brichardi, 2 x julies, 3 x lelupi, 2 x calvus
15 x multifasciatus, 10 x leptosoma

Saltie reef tank
1 x pyjama wrasse, 2 x clowns, 1 x banded goby
1 x firefish, 1 x Pseudochromis aldabraensis
1 x blood shrimp