Hello everyone, I am looking for some opinions. I am in the process of buying a couple uv units to run in parallel off my return pump. Goal, to decrease parasites in system. System: 350 gallon display reeftank (mostly sps), 100 gal water in sump, 90 gallon plumbed fragtank totalling about 550 gallon system. Presently I may have ich, unsure. Haven't added anything to tank in two years. Every once and a while I see spots on tangs. Especially if I stress them out with my hands in tank moving pumps around or other stressors. I would like to add more fish, but want to be preventative of an ich catastrophy. I haven't lost anything to ich. Presently have only 12 fish in tank. All new fish will go through quarantine. The added benefit of uv for water clarity, lower redox, etc... will be a bonus of course.
Going to run low flow through uv units, about 180 000 to 336 000 µW/cm2. Running two units in parallel to increase amount of water sterilized per hour. I will have small pump in main tank on bottom, pumping water over the overflow, to try to pull water from bottom, where ich settles to get it into sump and through sterilizers.
I am intrigued by the "new" Lifegard pro-max 90 watt uv. Has anyone used these? What is the quality of them? Watt for watt are they as efficient as the aqua uv?
I looked at the flow charts for both companies and they are different for similar watt units. I made this chart to compare.
Looking at their charts, I think the Lifegard is using their max flow for 30 000 µW/cm2??? They say for parasites run 1/6 max flow, unsure of 1/6 of their max flow or 1/6 max flow of their UVC 30,000 µW/cm2 flow rate.
Anyway, if looking at the charts... it looks like the aqua uv is more efficient. I am assuming that if I run two of the 57 watt or 90 watt in parallel then I can run the 180 000 µW/cm2 flow rate through each resulting in double the water volume per hour when run in parallel (i.e., 90 watt: 466.7 gal/h x 2 = 933.4 gal/h; 57 watt: 650 x 2 = 1 300 gal/h).
I can get the 90 watt pro max for cheaper than the the aqua uv 57 watt... so if quality is similar, and sterilization is more for the 90 watt versus the 57 watt, then it would be a no brainer... BUUUT the data in the chart shows that the aqua uv is more efficient... thoughts? Experience?
I was also looking at the pentair 150 watt, however this company seems to less available in Canada and I am unsure of long term availability of parts, bulbs, sleeves, etc on these large units.
The Aqua uv seems to have more available parts than pentair. I am unsure about the lifegard part availability long term. I am hesitant on new pro max from lifegard due to little online consumer information on them.
Thank you everyone in advance for your opinions and experience.
Going to run low flow through uv units, about 180 000 to 336 000 µW/cm2. Running two units in parallel to increase amount of water sterilized per hour. I will have small pump in main tank on bottom, pumping water over the overflow, to try to pull water from bottom, where ich settles to get it into sump and through sterilizers.
I am intrigued by the "new" Lifegard pro-max 90 watt uv. Has anyone used these? What is the quality of them? Watt for watt are they as efficient as the aqua uv?
I looked at the flow charts for both companies and they are different for similar watt units. I made this chart to compare.
| Max flow? | UVC 30,000 µW/cm2 | UVC 90,000 µW/cm2 | UVC 180,000 µW/cm2 | UVC 336,000 µW/cm2 | |
| 57 watt aqua uv | ? | 3 200gal/h (from manufacturers chart) | 1066 (from manufacturers chart) | 533 (my calculations) | 285.5 (my calculations) |
| 114 watt aqua uv | ? | 3 900 (from manufacturers chart) | 1300 (from manufacturers chart) | 650 (my calculations) | 348.2 (my calculations) |
| 55 watt Lifegard Pro Max | 3 600 gal/h | 2 100 gal/h (from manufacturers chart) | |||
| 90 Lifegard pro max | 4 600 gal/h | 2 800gal/h (from manufacturers chart) | 2 800/3= 933 (my calculations) | 2800/2= 466.7 (my calculations) | 250.02 (my calculations) |
| 150 watt pentair | 5 400 (from manufacturers chart) | 840 (from manufacturers chart) |
Looking at their charts, I think the Lifegard is using their max flow for 30 000 µW/cm2??? They say for parasites run 1/6 max flow, unsure of 1/6 of their max flow or 1/6 max flow of their UVC 30,000 µW/cm2 flow rate.
Anyway, if looking at the charts... it looks like the aqua uv is more efficient. I am assuming that if I run two of the 57 watt or 90 watt in parallel then I can run the 180 000 µW/cm2 flow rate through each resulting in double the water volume per hour when run in parallel (i.e., 90 watt: 466.7 gal/h x 2 = 933.4 gal/h; 57 watt: 650 x 2 = 1 300 gal/h).
I can get the 90 watt pro max for cheaper than the the aqua uv 57 watt... so if quality is similar, and sterilization is more for the 90 watt versus the 57 watt, then it would be a no brainer... BUUUT the data in the chart shows that the aqua uv is more efficient... thoughts? Experience?
I was also looking at the pentair 150 watt, however this company seems to less available in Canada and I am unsure of long term availability of parts, bulbs, sleeves, etc on these large units.
The Aqua uv seems to have more available parts than pentair. I am unsure about the lifegard part availability long term. I am hesitant on new pro max from lifegard due to little online consumer information on them.
Thank you everyone in advance for your opinions and experience.
