This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Unfortunately for Photobucket users, things have changed in a big way as of June 26th they are rolling out a $399 per year subscription fee for those who want to hotlink images from Photobucket’s servers to display elsewhere.
    This does not mean it only affects this site, It now means that billions of images across the Web now display an error message instead of the image in question. :(
    https://barrreport.com/threads/attention-photobucket-users.14377/
    Dismiss Notice

Another stinking reactor question

Discussion in 'General Plant Topics' started by AZFish1, May 27, 2005.

  1. AZFish1

    AZFish1 Junior Poster

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok ... so I want to try this reactor http://www.gwapa.org/articles/inline_co2_reactor/
    The article says it is used on the input side of the filter and that sounds good to me since any bubbles that get through will get chewed up by the impeller in the canister. My concern is that it might be less efficient than the in tank venturi design I am using now. Anyone have any experience with this type design? Can you get a 30 ppm co2 level with it? My tank is 50 gallons and probably holds only 40 gallons of water. I emailed the author and he said he has no problems with it clogging up or with airlocking the canister. Also said the he takes it off every six months or so and runs a garden hose through just to be on the safe side. I will be adding a clean out to it.
    Once again, thanks to all in advance
     
  2. hadog

    hadog Prolific Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    This looks interesting.....does he have a how to file? I hate trying to build things from pictures.

    Could the Magum 350 do the same job I wonder?
     
  3. AZFish1

    AZFish1 Junior Poster

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
  4. Greg Watson

    Greg Watson Administrator
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    In my 180 gallon tank, I switched from a "commercial" reactor almost identical to this DIY one above -->> to a slightly modified in tank Venturi Reactor built by our own Cornhusker modeled after Tom's Venturi design ...

    I think I have been using it for almost a month now ...

    1. I was sure that one internal venturi would not be enough, this is handling my 180 gallon tank just fine ...

    2. I used to go through about one CO2 tank every three weeks, I'm on week five now ... so I know I'm using a LOT less CO2 ...

    I suspect that its not quite as simple as a question about how "efficient" a design is, I suspect that a lot of it has to do with flow rate of the water through the reactor ...

    I suspect that at least in my case, that the higher "dedicated" flow rate of the powerhead performs better than the flow rate of my Eheim 2028 canister filter did through the inline style reactor ...

    Whether one "design" is more efficient than another, I don't know ... I just suspect that there are a lot of variables to take into account that may change from one person's setup to another ...

    At least in my case, the Cornhusker variation of Tom Barr's Venturi Design sure is working wonderfully for me ...

    Greg

    P.S. Thanks to Cornhusker, he sent me a venturi reactor to test ...
     
  5. AZFish1

    AZFish1 Junior Poster

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    Greg
    Can you let us in on the adjustments that were made?

    Anyone,

    Have a good external venturi design to share?
     
  6. PeterGwee

    PeterGwee Lifetime Charter Member
    Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I think Tom said he is coming up with one. We just have to be a bit patient I guess. :D

    I'm still pondering over the response time issue as yet till now.. :D Tom always seem to get it(It takes about an hour or so to hit the good CO2 range.). He shuts the powerhead driving the reactor off during the night, meaning the pH will rise due to off gassing but the pH will fall into the good range again said 6.4 for a KH of 3 within and hour or so. I can hit the good range within an hour or so but the CO2 seems to keep rising pass the good range into higher unsafe zones which actually meant my CO2 rate is higher than needed I guess. I just couldn't figure it out why Tom's reactors can do it... :confused: . AZfish1, what was your max CO2 level that you got with Ghazanfar Ghori's designed reactor? How fast did the CO2 level stablized?

    I sure hope Tom go into detail on this reactor use topic and perhaps an article on it since quite a bit of folks still couldn't figure it out. Detailed pictures of the reactor while it is running would be best... :D

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
     
  7. PeterGwee

    PeterGwee Lifetime Charter Member
    Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I did a chat with GsMollin of AB quite sometime back while Tom was still around at that time with that forum regarding reactor responsiveness issue and that is what he came out with. What do you guys think? Is 1 hour responsiveness really impossible?

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
     
  8. Greg Watson

    Greg Watson Administrator
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I really can't ... it uses a side mount powerhead rather than a top mounted powerhead with a venturi loop, primarily because that was the equipment that was available/ordered. Without the venturi loop, it uses a rigid input tube as a substitute ... the construction is high quality and its working incredibly well.

    When you work with the materials you have available, necessity is the mother of invention, and just because something is physically put together slightly differently doesn't mean that the function is any different ...

    I would encourage you to build one ... you will not be disappointed ...

    The only downside is the visibility ... often one of our goals is to remove as much equipment from the tank as possible ... so one of the BIG upsides of the external inline reactor is that it is one less piece of equipment in the tank ...

    In my case, I have my aquarium to enjoy ... it may not ever win any design contests, so I am slightly less concerned about the visibility of the equipment in my aquarium ... And right at the moment, the venturi is installed in the front of my aquarium so I could easily watch it function while I was testing it ... its almost a centerpiece right at the moment ...

    Greg
     
  9. imatrout

    imatrout Prolific Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I think DIY is great and a fun part of the hobby. That said, I use an AquaMedic 1000 reactor on my 150 gal. tank. It's an external ractor that I have plumbed in-line with one of my return lines. The tank is soft plumbed with 3/4" hose, but the Reator 1000 only has in/outputs at 1/2" that I had to reduce. At first I didn't like it as it REALLY slowed down the return through the reactor, but as I've learned, the slower the better so it's a good aspect.

    When I do a water change, the reactor will drop my Ph from 7.7 to 7.2 in a couple of hours hence I assume it's very effecient. I got it online for about $52.00. I realize that for some this is a lot, but considering multiple trips to Home Depot and the LFS for materials, material waste, searching for, ordering and waiting for specialty parts, I think you might just come out ahead buying one. I suppose that the design for the AquaMedic 1000, specifically designed for larger tanks, may have much different characteristics than other models and designs for different applications so what I say regarding the tradeoffs may not hold true for all applications.
     
  10. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator Social Group Admin

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,462
    Likes Received:
    325
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    Apparently not.
    24 hours?
    I don't think so, I have grpahing data that shows my weekly water changes on a huge 350 gal tank(70% water changes) and it drops down rather quick(3-4 hours, I have high flow and good mixing, little cross flow).

    A 20 gal with a good cO2 reactor should drop rather fast.

    Also, see the here for some graphing:

    http://193.12.137.241/bluesboy/pHplott.php?t=2004-12-26

    Certainly about 5 hours for this particular tank. Not 24 hours as GsMollin suggested. This data does not lie. Unless GsMollin has a data logger, he may not see this. I have many months of data to suport my contention.

    The DIY CO2 reactor pruges the gas after it reaches good saturation levels and spits out mist that escapes and off gasses. So it should not build up too much near the end of the day. I typically do the water change in the morning.

    Other factors: timing of the water change during the day/evening. Water CO2 content, CO2 might be high as well as pH. Or CO2 might be low and the pH high.

    If you look on the APC thread, you will see a large range of CO2 consumption rates. This is very difficult to measure with the testing equipment they are using and the methods chosen with any accuracy and the data is all over the place.

    I think CO2 consumption rates need a labeled CO2 14C.
    They make gas exchange equipment for Terestrial plants but adapting these for aquatic systems is not done from what I know.

    This is tough stuff to measure accurately and perhaps beyond the realm of the hobbyists.

    any other factors influence CO2 consumption as well..........unless those are accounted for, hard to say much.........you'll need a standard light unit/measurement as well. No one does that in the hobby except a few reef folks with LiCor light meters. These run 600-1200$.


    Regards,
    Tom Barr
     
  11. Tom Barr

    Tom Barr Founder
    Staff Member Administrator Social Group Admin

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    18,462
    Likes Received:
    325
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    You'll note Blueboy did a water change at 15:00.
    The solenoid kicked on about 18:00 and dropped the pH back in about 3-4 hours.

    regards, '
    Tom Barr
     
  12. Greg Watson

    Greg Watson Administrator
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I just got a message from Cornhusker, he has $14.25 in parts plus shipping costs in the Venturi Reactor he built for me to test ...

    Of course, that doesn't count his time ...

    Greg
     
  13. PeterGwee

    PeterGwee Lifetime Charter Member
    Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    Tom, so its not always within an hour? :D What if the lights were switched back "on" during that period and the CO2 levels are low? Does that cause BBA issues?

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
     
  14. PeterGwee

    PeterGwee Lifetime Charter Member
    Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    Ok, I just went through blueboy's entire site and found that the reason behind the drop was a CO2 rate cranked pretty high (look at the rate of the CO2 in a movie clip) and a pH controller to shut off once the pH is attained. With no pH controller setup and at that rate, the pH is definitely going to drop further. Running the CO2 at a lower rate I doubt is going to return the pH back to the good ranges within 5 hrs isn't it?

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
     
  15. srozell

    srozell Guru Class Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I've been playing with my pH controller and found that it could take all day before the pH would reach a "good" range if I did gradual dosing. (30 bubbles a mintute in a 20 gallon tank.)

    Finally I just cranked the CO2 to 60 bubbles a minute and I usually hit my target pH by 11:00 a.m.

    Of course the higher KH, the longer this may take from what I understand.
     
  16. AZFish1

    AZFish1 Junior Poster

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Another stinking reactor question

    I built it yesterday and set it up last night. I did it durring water change and cleaning time. I did not check co2 after water change because I leave the filter running and I am sure most is off gassed. After everyting was filled and running for three hours I tested and had 20ppm co2 (by the chart) by this morning (about 9 hours later) there is 30ppm co2. Exactly what I was able to get in those times with the venturi reactor. I made a couple small mods to the reactor that I will try to take pics of and post durring the week. Also I put it on the output side of the canister and not the intake. There is a bit of flow loss in the tank but I think I can live with it.
     
Loading...

Share This Page