Tunze wavebox

[Emac909]

So I’ve heard myths that a Tunze wavebox is not good to use on glass aquariums. They say (don’t ask me how they are) that they cause the silicone to weaken over time and cause the seams to burst.

So my question is how old is your tank and how many years have you ran a Tunze wavebox on the tank?

Also why do you think the waveboxes aren’t as big as they were 10 or so years ago?

I ran a wavebox that I made using a jebao wp something or nother on a 150 for a year or so and had no issues and the tank was like 10 years old and had a few chips on the edges.

 

[joseserrano]

The wave is added stress. And it’s the wave motion not the wave box specifically that causes the issues over time. Wave boxes are just very efficient at making the wave through water displacement.

 

[Dvon0605]

So I’ve heard myths that a Tunze wavebox is not good to use on glass aquariums. They say (don’t ask me how they are) that they cause the silicone to weaken over time and cause the seams to burst.

So my question is how old is your tank and how many years have you ran a Tunze wavebox on the tank?

Also why do you think the waveboxes aren’t as big as they were 10 or so years ago?

I ran a wavebox that I made using a jebao wp something or nother on a 150 for a year or so and had no issues and the tank was like 10 years old and had a few chips on the edges.

I don't see how a wavebox would cause any more stress than any other wavemaker on wave mode. I've seen glass tanks with mp60's rocking that water back and forth just as much as a wavebox

 

[sharkbait]

I don't see how a wavebox would cause any more stress than any other wavemaker on wave mode. I've seen glass tanks with mp60's rocking that water back and forth just as much as a wavebox

Yes good point !

 

[Emac909]

The wave is added stress. And it’s the wave motion not the wave box specifically that causes the issues over time. Wave boxes are just very efficient at making the wave through water displacement.

This is why I’m asking. I’d like to hear for someone that had a wavebox eff up there glass tank.

I’ve heard for years that they cause tanks to burst. But I’ve yet to meet or actually heard a person say that there tank bursted from a wave motion. I’d like to see if we can get people to actually give feedback.

 

[joseserrano]

I don't think many reefers have tanks for the time it would take for this to happen. No many hitting the 10 year mark. I myself have never owned a tank more than a few years.

 

[Dvon0605]

This is why I’m asking. I’d like to hear for someone that had a wavebox eff up there glass tank.

I’ve heard for years that they cause tanks to burst. But I’ve yet to meet or actually heard a person say that there tank bursted from a wave motion. I’d like to see if we can get people to actually give feedback.

I think its all just theoretical. Never been proven in any kind of controlled environment. I've known plenty of people who have run a wavebox on 10+ year old tanks without failures. Never heard of it happening either. There wouldn't be any way to discern between the tank failing due to manufacturer defects or the wavebox causing it

 

[Emac909]

I think its all just theoretical. Never been proven in any kind of controlled environment. I've known plenty of people who have run a wavebox on 10+ year old tanks without failures. Never heard of it happening either. There wouldn't be any way to discern between the tank failing due to manufacturer defects or the wavebox causing it

But if there where multiple people saying I had a tank fail and it had a wavebox in it then maybe that would have some cred behind it.
And again this is why I posted this topic to see if we can get some sort of numbers of tank fails and if they ran a wavebox.

I’m thinking tho my next project it to build another wavebox for a mp40 wet side. Something about 10”X4”X the depth of a mp40 wet side. I made a large one about 10 years ago for my 180g and it worked great. It was just way to big for any other tank then that 180. It was 10” X12” X 3” and it only displaced about an inch of water in the box. But created a massive wave in the tank. So I’m thinking a little smaller could handle the displacement of water in the box.

 

[joseserrano]

I think it’s common sense. It’s x of hundreds of pounds swaying back and forth. That adds stress

 

[Dvon0605]

But if there where multiple people saying I had a tank fail and it had a wavebox in it then maybe that would have some cred behind it.
And again this is why I posted this topic to see if we can get some sort of numbers of tank fails and if they ran a wavebox.

I’m thinking tho my next project it to build another wavebox for a mp40 wet side. Something about 10”X4”X the depth of a mp40 wet side. I made a large one about 10 years ago for my 180g and it worked great. It was just way to big for any other tank then that 180. It was 10” X12” X 3” and it only displaced about an inch of water in the box. But created a massive wave in the tank. So I’m thinking a little smaller could handle the displacement of water in the box.

I say go for it. I've yet to see any proof that it can cause a tank failure

I think it’s common sense. It’s x of hundreds of pounds swaying back and forth. That adds stress

Any examples to prove this "common sense"? Of course it adds stress. A tank full of water is a box of stress and anything other than stagnant water creates stress. Are you suggesting that people not run powerheads on wave mode as well if they have glass tanks? Because the motion created by those is added stress as well. I think Eric is looking for any actual examples or proof. Not just an idea. I think the only person qualified to determine whether the stress would likely cause a tank to fail would be an engineer. Im sure there's one on this forum who can do the math. Id just like to see some kind of proof before making blanket statements

 

[Dvon0605]

So with little research I found that tunze says as long as the tank follows the timoshenko formula there will not be issues

 

[joseserrano]

I say go for it. I've yet to see any proof that it can cause a tank failure


Any examples to prove this "common sense"? Of course it adds stress. A tank full of water is a box of stress and anything other than stagnant water creates stress. Are you suggesting that people not run powerheads on wave mode as well if they have glass tanks? Because the motion created by those is added stress as well. I think Eric is looking for any actual examples or proof. Not just an idea. I think the only person qualified to determine whether the stress would likely cause a tank to fail would be an engineer. Im sure there's one on this forum who can do the math. Id just like to see some kind of proof before making blanket statements

i think you completely get what I’m saying and the suggestion to not run powerheads because of the added stress is a poor attempt to degrade the point I made. But enjoy the conversation guys. Good topic.

 

[Dvon0605]

i think you completely get what I’m saying and the suggestion to not run powerheads because of the added stress is a poor attempt to degrade the point I made. But enjoy the conversation guys. Good topic.

I do completely get what you're saying. Im just saying that the water motion from powerheads making a wave and the motion from a wavebox can be identical. I don't think the source of the wave is what will determine whether the tank will fail or not