Filter media for Ehiem 2080

Joined
26 Oct 2008
Messages
1,647
Location
Cheshire
Gang@Ukaps

Just taken dilivery of an 2080 filter Exc. media, any surgestion on which media to purchase. Going to use my old media from my tetratec 1200 to start off with - just while the bacteria get going on the new media - then the 1200 up for sale.


Regards
paul
 

Ed Seeley

Member
Joined
3 Jul 2007
Messages
3,261
Location
Nottingham
I agree with Steve. I use sintered glass in every filter I can. You can also get a version from JBL too.
 

Dolly Sprint 16v

Member
Thread starter
Joined
26 Oct 2008
Messages
1,647
Location
Cheshire
Thx for the reply I am considering buy a mixture of the following:

Total media capacity = 12 Ltr

Bottom layer = EHEIM SUBSTRAT PRO
Middle layer = EHEIM MECH pro Mechanical
Top layer = EHEIM EHFIMECH

Any thoughts.

Regards
Paul.
 

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
Staff member
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
8,993
Location
Chicago, USA
Flyfisherman said:
Thx for the reply I am considering buy a mixture of the following:

Total media capacity = 12 Ltr

Bottom layer = EHEIM SUBSTRAT PRO
Middle layer = EHEIM MECH pro Mechanical
Top layer = EHEIM EHFIMECH

Any thoughts.

Regards
Paul.
You've got this upside down. The Effimech (noodles) belongs on the bottom tray. These tend to slow the flow so that particles fall out. This helps to keep the biomedia above from clogging. The middle and top trays should have the bio media (Substrat pro) or chemical media such as Zeolite or Purigen. If no chemical media is used then more Substrat pro should be used in that tray.

Cheers,
 

Dolly Sprint 16v

Member
Thread starter
Joined
26 Oct 2008
Messages
1,647
Location
Cheshire
Ehiem filter media order will be arriving next week - 4ltr of ehfinmech (noodles) & 8 ltr of substrat pro.

Paul.
 

Themuleous

Member
Joined
6 Jul 2007
Messages
4,124
Location
Aston, Oxfordshire
Is there anything the eheim media does that sponges cant? Save yourself a fortune and just fill it with sponge. That's what I've got in my 2080. If you get pond sponge its even cheaper :)

I take it the filter is over-sized for the tank? If so there is (in my humble opinion :)) little point using media to maximise biological filtration as you will have more sponge than you would ever need for the size of tank and it is therefore more than adequate for the biological needs of the tank.

Unless someone can point me in the direction of some research/article that shows eheim media being more efficient at breaking down NH3/NO2, i.e. does it quicker? The quicker the better I guess.

Sam
 

a1Matt

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2008
Messages
2,497
Location
Bromley
just to add something from a different tact... I am a big fan of having a tray filled with filter floss. Not for its biological capabilites, but for removing fine particulates from the tank and helping keep crystal clear water. ('polyester stuffing' off ebay is cheaper than the same stuff labelled as filter wool for aquariums in the LFS.)
 

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
Staff member
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
8,993
Location
Chicago, USA
Well, this filter already uses a floss layer as well as the course pre-filter sponge layer, and this does an excellent job of particulate removal. As Ed pointed out, sintered glass media does a better job as a result of it's (theoretically) higher "specific surface area". Specific surface area is simply the ratio of the media's surface area to it's volume. More surface area means more colonization space for bacteria and a higher nitrification capacity. You can test this yourself by doing an ammonia pull down experiment. Fill each of the test filters (same model) with competing media of choice and in each test tank add equal measures of ammonia. Measure the residual ammonia values each day and plot them for each tank. There are some variables to account for such as difference in flow between the two filters once they are filled with competing media, but the plots should more or less reveal the performance of each media type. There were some tests done by K. R Reddy comparing the nitrification capabilities and hydraulic resistance properties of gravel substrate versus plastic media Domestic Wastewater Treatment Using Emergent Plants Cultured in Gravel and Plastic Substrates The high specific surface area gravel substrate beat the living daylights out of the lower surface area plastic media in terms of nitrification. The comparison wasn't done against foam though since this was a substrate test not a filter test. Sintered glass takes this to a higher level supposedly. I caveat that because I have no way of confirming whether in fact x liters of sintered glass media has much more surface area than x liters of foam.

One then has to compare cost versus effectiveness, and the benefits of one weighed against the need for extra performance. If the bio-load is low or medium relative to filter capacity, then as Sam suggests, the cost/benefit ratio may not be worth it for sintered glass, and it would be better to go with foam. If you're running a very high light, high bio-load though you'll likely see a difference, so it really depends on the tanks operating regime.

Cheers,
 

Ed Seeley

Member
Joined
3 Jul 2007
Messages
3,261
Location
Nottingham
To further what Clive said I also think that sintered glass of other materials also allow more variety in the niches that bacteria and other micro-organisms can occupy meaning you have a more diverse, resilient filter. One media for koi ponds, called K1 (based on media used in some sewage treatment works), actually is designed to have different areas within the media with faster and slower flows and different areas on the inside and outside of the media. They even market another type of media called Bio-chips to offer further niches.

Sintered glass media have areas out in the open, tucked away within the media, inside the tube etc. and I think this is key in their efficiency. Foam doesn't have this - it's a much more uniform media.

This is all idle speculation though - I know of no direct research done to back this up.
 

Themuleous

Member
Joined
6 Jul 2007
Messages
4,124
Location
Aston, Oxfordshire
ceg4048 said:
More surface area means more colonization space for bacteria and a higher nitrification capacity.

I guess this is my point, does any filter ever get to the point at which the bacteria actually run out of space? I would hope not! :lol: Given that there is a finite amount of NH3 from the fish and other sources there must be a finite bacterial colony that can be achieved. Once the bacteria have reached the size supportable by this it doesn't, to my mind, matter if the bacteria are on sintered glass or sponge, especially given that we over-size the filter which means there is a huge surface area anyway regardless of the media type, especially if you use fine sponge, this to my mind negates any benefit that sintered glass has over other potential media.

But that's just me, my wallet hasn't seen the light of day for several years.

Sam
 

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
Staff member
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
8,993
Location
Chicago, USA
Themuleous said:
ceg4048 said:
More surface area means more colonization space for bacteria and a higher nitrification capacity.

I guess this is my point, does any filter ever get to the point at which the bacteria actually run out of space? I would hope not! :lol:
Well, if that's true then there would be no such thing as overstocking. But we know that overstocking is a real issue. As mentioned before it's not just the total amount, but the production rate of ammonia that can be problematic. More space supports a more efficient and flexible bacterial population growth rate to counter the NH4 production rate. Again, if a tank is no where near the limits in terms of bio-mass then there's the benefits may be marginal. Also, detritus can and does clog filter media. This is why dirty filters decline in effectiveness which often leads to BGA for example. Having more surface area mitigates this tendency to completely clog and gives you a greater margin for error.

Cheers,
 

Similar threads

Top