DIY mini skimmer

MarkS · 08-21-2001, 02:06 PM

I am going skimmerless on my 5 gallon dwarf seahorse tank, but there is so much DOC right now that water changes and carbon just wont cut it. So I created this skimmer.

The total height is around 14" tall and uses 4" PVC for the skimmer body. The pump that I am using is a Maxijet 1200 with the venturi adaptor. The output tube's height can be adjusted with the slip union to control the water height in the skimmer body.

I tested this for about an hour and it produced some very nice dark, foam. There were no bubbles from the output at all. I have a little more work to do on it, so it will be out of service for a few days. It will eventually go on my 10 gallon nano reef and will be powered by a Mag 2 with a venturi from Savko pipe fittings.

icemark · 08-22-2001, 01:42 PM

Looks good, the only thing I might play with would be the size of the input inside the skimmer. I think it would be fine going in as 1/2, but on the down put (listed as inlet on your picture) tube (that fits into the Rizer on the bottom of the skimmer) I might go up to a 1 inch ID tube. That and I might change that lower rizer up to a 2.5x 5. That would just give you more surface area, if the pump could keep up.

MarkS · 08-22-2001, 05:20 PM

Thanks for the input, but it is already built.

What exactly would the larger input do? I think I have an idea, but I am not sure.

Also, I am going to use a Mag 3 instead of a Mag 2 as I stated above. I did not realize that the Maxijet 1200 is 295 GPH. The Mag 2 is only 250 GPH! Just how small is the Mag 2? I tried using my Mag 5, but it WAY overpowered the skimmer.

Mark

icemark · 08-22-2001, 06:00 PM

In theory it would allow more surface area, and would start the stripping process in the inlet tube rather than the lower rizer. More surface area= more organics removed.

Again this is only in theory as I have not built your skimmer and played with it yet. You may have it already perfect. Just the tinker in me that suggests that change.

MarkS · 08-22-2001, 06:21 PM

Yeah, you are probably right. Oh well.

It was very cheap to build, so building a replacment would not be expensive. In fact, I have almost all of the pipes needed. All I would need to buy are the fittings.

All I can say is that it does work right now, but it does not work as well as I had hoped. I think that is mostly due to using an underpowered pump with a near worthless venturi and not to design flaws.

I am going to let it "break in" for awhile and we will see how it goes.

Mark

icemark · 08-22-2001, 06:30 PM

Cool, keep us posted!

MarkS · 08-23-2001, 08:49 PM

Well, it's done. Now I am just letting it dry.

The design is the same, with some modifications/improvements.

First off, the skimmer body, minus the 4" coupling, is 12" tall. An increase of 2".

Second, I increased the height of the inner riser to 6".

Third, while the inlet from the pump is 1/2" (pointless to increase this since the Magdrive's output is 1/2"), the inner tube (inlet?) is 1".

Also, I got rid of the knock out plug and closet flange base. Instead, I used a piece of 8"x10"x1/8" acrylic and epoxied both the inner riser and the skimmer body to this. This was done because the knock out plug is made of the plastic used in milk bottles and does not bond well to the PVC. It is also very flimsy and would be the first part to fail. Also the rather large, flat base provides a solid footing for the skimmer.

Mark

08-21-2001, 02:06 PM	#1
MarkS Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: San Antonio, Tx Posts: 1,799	DIY mini skimmer I am going skimmerless on my 5 gallon dwarf seahorse tank, but there is so much DOC right now that water changes and carbon just wont cut it. So I created this skimmer. The total height is around 14" tall and uses 4" PVC for the skimmer body. The pump that I am using is a Maxijet 1200 with the venturi adaptor. The output tube's height can be adjusted with the slip union to control the water height in the skimmer body. I tested this for about an hour and it produced some very nice dark, foam. There were no bubbles from the output at all. I have a little more work to do on it, so it will be out of service for a few days. It will eventually go on my 10 gallon nano reef and will be powered by a Mag 2 with a venturi from Savko pipe fittings. __________________ 2 + 2 != 4 Two is only loosely associated with two by a plus sign and therefore doesn't enter the equation at all since it is only there by mere complicity. We shouldn't count it and leave well enough alone. Last edited by MarkS; 08-21-2001 at 02:10 PM.

08-22-2001, 01:42 PM	#2
icemark Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Rohnert Park, CA, USA Posts: 1,102	Looks good, the only thing I might play with would be the size of the input inside the skimmer. I think it would be fine going in as 1/2, but on the down put (listed as inlet on your picture) tube (that fits into the Rizer on the bottom of the skimmer) I might go up to a 1 inch ID tube. That and I might change that lower rizer up to a 2.5x 5. That would just give you more surface area, if the pump could keep up. __________________ Play well Mark www.mazdamark.com Last edited by icemark; 08-22-2001 at 01:47 PM.

08-22-2001, 05:20 PM	#3
MarkS Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: San Antonio, Tx Posts: 1,799	Thanks for the input, but it is already built. What exactly would the larger input do? I think I have an idea, but I am not sure. Also, I am going to use a Mag 3 instead of a Mag 2 as I stated above. I did not realize that the Maxijet 1200 is 295 GPH. The Mag 2 is only 250 GPH! Just how small is the Mag 2? I tried using my Mag 5, but it WAY overpowered the skimmer. Mark __________________ 2 + 2 != 4 Two is only loosely associated with two by a plus sign and therefore doesn't enter the equation at all since it is only there by mere complicity. We shouldn't count it and leave well enough alone.

08-22-2001, 06:00 PM	#4
icemark Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Rohnert Park, CA, USA Posts: 1,102	In theory it would allow more surface area, and would start the stripping process in the inlet tube rather than the lower rizer. More surface area= more organics removed. Again this is only in theory as I have not built your skimmer and played with it yet. You may have it already perfect. Just the tinker in me that suggests that change. __________________ Play well Mark www.mazdamark.com

08-22-2001, 06:21 PM	#5
MarkS Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: San Antonio, Tx Posts: 1,799	Yeah, you are probably right. Oh well. It was very cheap to build, so building a replacment would not be expensive. In fact, I have almost all of the pipes needed. All I would need to buy are the fittings. All I can say is that it does work right now, but it does not work as well as I had hoped. I think that is mostly due to using an underpowered pump with a near worthless venturi and not to design flaws. I am going to let it "break in" for awhile and we will see how it goes. Mark __________________ 2 + 2 != 4 Two is only loosely associated with two by a plus sign and therefore doesn't enter the equation at all since it is only there by mere complicity. We shouldn't count it and leave well enough alone.

08-22-2001, 06:30 PM	#6
icemark Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Rohnert Park, CA, USA Posts: 1,102	Cool, keep us posted! __________________ Play well Mark www.mazdamark.com

08-23-2001, 08:49 PM	#7
MarkS Governor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: San Antonio, Tx Posts: 1,799	Well, it's done. Now I am just letting it dry. The design is the same, with some modifications/improvements. First off, the skimmer body, minus the 4" coupling, is 12" tall. An increase of 2". Second, I increased the height of the inner riser to 6". Third, while the inlet from the pump is 1/2" (pointless to increase this since the Magdrive's output is 1/2"), the inner tube (inlet?) is 1". Also, I got rid of the knock out plug and closet flange base. Instead, I used a piece of 8"x10"x1/8" acrylic and epoxied both the inner riser and the skimmer body to this. This was done because the knock out plug is made of the plastic used in milk bottles and does not bond well to the PVC. It is also very flimsy and would be the first part to fail. Also the rather large, flat base provides a solid footing for the skimmer. Mark __________________ 2 + 2 != 4 Two is only loosely associated with two by a plus sign and therefore doesn't enter the equation at all since it is only there by mere complicity. We shouldn't count it and leave well enough alone.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode