![]() |
![]() |
dragonhart |
![]()
Post
#1
|
![]() Ordinary ![]() Member No.: 219 Group: Member Posts: 70 Topics Started: 15 Joined: 19-Apr-04 Last seen online: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 1:43 pm User's local time: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 8:08 am Green Water: Yes Country: Singapore ![]() |
hi,
is 50% twice weekly Equivalent to 100% weekly? what are the pros and cons? thanks, jason. |
![]() ![]() |
CP |
![]()
Post
#2
|
![]() Moderator ![]() ![]() Member No.: 309 Group: Super Moderator Posts: 2,836 Topics Started: 59 Joined: 22-Jun-04 Last seen online: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 10:37 pm User's local time: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 8:08 am Green Water: Yes Country: Singapore ![]() |
d_golem's theory is right.Its all about nitrates management.Throughlly understand this link and you will get a clearer picture:
http://www.goldfishconnection.com/articles...d=67&parentId=8 In short,100% weekly is better than 50% twice a week. And,50% twice a week is better than 20% daily. To keep nitrates in check without growing linearly without limits, the minimum water change required, irrespective of the time frame, is 50%.That is to say that whether you change weekly,monthly or even yearly so long as your water changes are 50% or more, there is a maximum limit to the amount of nitrates that can be built up. But,if you change 20% daily,the nitrate levels are going to build up continuosly without a maximum limit and that is bad. Hard to believe?Pluck in some figures based on the link provided and you will get what I mean. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18-Apr-25 8:08 am |