C02 - rate

[Gerryd]

Hi all,

One of the most difficult things regarding c02, at least for me, is that I have read in many places and for many size tanks, regardless of size, that the c02 rate is 3-5 bps. It never seems to vary much despite scape, flora, size, etc.

I realize that bubble size is different all over but still, unless that bubble is the size of a basketball, there is no way it could supply a large tank fully planted

Let's assume a lot of folks use the same approx size of tubing and a decent dual stage reg and good NV. Can there be THAT much difference in the size of the bubble or the amount of c02 per bubble? Does that make sense?

So, over the years I have read this in Amano books and various publications that it is stuck in my head. When I compare that image to my REAL and ACTUAL bubble rates, it seems ludicrous to me that enough c02 is supplied at least WHEN COMPARED TO MY USAGE!

To compare I now have TWO c02 regs on my 220. One is at each end of the tank and blows lengthwise the tank. The vortech on lagoon mode helps distribute this around. The NW is a rio 1000 so adds a bit of flow as well as the c02.

1. They are both high quality brand new victor dual stage, ideal NV, burkert solenoid, swagelok post body, etc. All brand new components.

2. The one reg feeds an UP AQUA co2 16 mm atomizer inline with one of my Eheim canisters. PSI here is set to almost 30 to feed it properly. Even if the PSI were turned to say 10, the bubble rate would be best described as 'turbulent' if the end of the tube is placed in a glass of water.

3. The second feeds a DIY rio 1k needle wheel. Here the PSI is set to 10-12 and the bubble rate was set to a single bps (as near as I could tell) and then I started increasing this rate every 2 days and watching the fish and plants.

This rate is also much more than 3-5 bps Not 'turbulent' but not like you can count the rate either....at least I cannot

So far the addition of the second c02 supply seems to be helping. The plants seem larger and the growth rate seems better. The fish and shrimps all seem fine and no issue with the extra c02.

This has been ongoing for several weeks to adjust/increase c02. I am only increasing c02 now via the RIO NW.

***************

Tom has been encouraging me to ignore the bubble rate and concentrate on the fish and plants as I have been doing all along.

I do this anyway, but still sometimes look at the amount of c02 I am pushing for my tank, and think, well compared to Amano or Knott, etc that I am doing something wrong since my rate is so much higher than the published rate.

I have trouble I guess with the amount of c02 I 'see' going into the atomizer or NW and think, my goodness, that is a lot of c02, and SHOULD be sufficient.

But, the reality is that it is NOT enough for the plants, at least in my setup.

So, this is my own personal demon myth apparently....

Just wanted to get others thoughts and experiences.

 

[maknwar]

I really dont even pay attention to bubble count. If you would ask me what bubble rate i run on my tanks i would tell you i dont know. I just put a drop checker in the tank, turn on the co2 and keep an eye on it. I have piranha in all my tanks, which seem to be quite hardy when it comes to co2, meds and everything else i have screwed up on. I almost gassed one fish the other week, but put in a powerhead, got the co2 level down and adjusted it slower than what i did at first. I think tank size, plant density, and how much light you use determines the bubble rate and not what everyone else does.

 

[Gerryd]

Results to date

I should have posted this in the original but....

Since the introduction of the additional NW, I see the following:

1. NO fish or shrimp stress. NO fish or shrimp loss that I can see or count...

2. Overall better plant size and health on all species esp those areas of concern such as the downoi and stauro.

3. NO algae on the plants that I can see. No gsa, bba, thread, etc, etc. New growth is clean and stays that way.

4. Plant color and health seems good and expansion rate is improving. New leaves all over for all species.

So, I will continue to monitor and adjust.

PH.

Ph is about 6-5 or so at beginning of c02 day and is as low as 5.4ish at the lowest point so far. I am home a lot and during the week at lunch so can keep a good eye on it. The low ph previously was 5,7 than 5.6, etc. I want to go slowly and ensure good fish and critter health as well as supply enough c02 for the plants.

Later.

So far so good it seems.

 

[Gbark]

I too have noticed that every tank has about 3bps listed in ADA magazines and such. My bubble rate is too fast to count, and if i turn it down to the recommended circa 3bps i start to get BBA.

Now i guess that my bubble rate is high as i am not efficiantly dissolving the co2. But i can live with a bit of wastage

I too watch my fish, and the SAE's are my early warning system as they lose their colour if the CO2 is on the high side.

 

[Gerryd]

I really dont even pay attention to bubble count. If you would ask me what bubble rate i run on my tanks i would tell you i dont know. I just put a drop checker in the tank, turn on the co2 and keep an eye on it. I have piranha in all my tanks, which seem to be quite hardy when it comes to co2, meds and everything else i have screwed up on. I almost gassed one fish the other week, but put in a powerhead, got the co2 level down and adjusted it slower than what i did at first. I think tank size, plant density, and how much light you use determines the bubble rate and not what everyone else does.

Hi,

Thanks for the reply. I don't use bubble count anymore but the myth of 2-3 is still running in my head....

 

[Biollante]

Not Sure If This Fits

Hi Gerry,


The only thing I can see is that it is the amount of CO[SUB]2[/SUB] that makes it into solution, everything else is only of use to your potted plants and adding to Dutchy’s global warming.


To maintain 30-ppm in your 180-gallon aquarium means that at any given time you need approximately 19 grams ([SUP]2[/SUP]⁄[SUB]3 [/SUB] ounce) of CO[SUB]2[/SUB] in solution above-and-beyond uptake.

• This is equivalent to 7 [SUP]1[/SUP]⁄[SUB]2[/SUB], 2-liter bottles of Soda pop (before opening).

This isn’t anything to do with bubble rate, we are using mass flow controllers and some rather precise measuring techniques.

• I have noticed that in well planted high growth aquariums when CO[SUB]2(Aq)[/SUB] is brought to 30-ppm shortly before lights on,
  
  • that it is necessary to increase CO[SUB]2(Aq)[/SUB] injection 30-60% above first-hour-after-lights-on rates
    
  • to maintain constant aqueous CO[SUB]2[/SUB] rates throughout what appears to my uneducated-self as the “lights-on, high growth period.”
    
• This “lights-on, high growth period” seems to peak in the 4-6 hour range of a 10-hour lighting period and
  
• backs off a bit from there, that is to say, the CO[SUB]2[/SUB] injection rate required to maintain 30-ppm decreases, substantially.
  
• I do not know if this as a result of some nutrient limitation or normal functions of growth.
  
• I am seeing this in several heavily planted aquariums, each with different plants, lighting, and water and filtration systems and
  
  • though the actual amounts vary, the patterns are nearly identical.
    

I do not know if this means anything, I know the Guru Team and intelligentsia here frowns on observation, but I thought it sort-of fit the topic, no offense intended.


Biollante

 

[Biollante]

Opps... Forgot

Hi Gerry,


Sorry I forgot to note that what attracted my attention was the 3-5 bubbles-per-second thing that is a 40% range. I wondered if the 3-5 bps indicates a daily range.



In and of itself, bubbles-per-second are not relevant since the feeds required for different size aquariums and the devices themselves would determine required flow rates.

Biollante

 

[dutchy]

I'm happy that I only live less than one foot below sea level and on the third floor Anyway I'm contributing just as much, since as some of you know I have a double CO2 system on my tank using two 10 lbs bottles. Bubble rate, for whatever it's worth, is high.

The way CO2 is distributed might make a difference though. Big reactors still seem to be the most efficient.

 

[Gerryd]

I too have noticed that every tank has about 3bps listed in ADA magazines and such. My bubble rate is too fast to count, and if i turn it down to the recommended circa 3bps i start to get BBA.

Now i guess that my bubble rate is high as i am not efficiantly dissolving the co2. But i can live with a bit of wastage

I too watch my fish, and the SAE's are my early warning system as they lose their colour if the CO2 is on the high side.

Hi and thanks for the confirmation on the prevalance of the 2-3 bps thing....

As stated, I used MUCH more than that and ALWAYS have, but for some reason that range is stuck in my head....

Fish and plants are the best and only measurement IMO....

 

[Gerryd]

Hi Gerry,


Sorry I forgot to note that what attracted my attention was the 3-5 bubbles-per-second thing that is a 40% range. I wondered if the 3-5 bps indicates a daily range.



In and of itself, bubbles-per-second are not relevant since the feeds required for different size aquariums and the devices themselves would determine required flow rates.

Biollante

Hi Bio,

Thanks for chiming in! Not sure how that could be a daily rate? You confused me with that one, sorry. Can you please elaborate?

I completely agree with your last statement. As stated, I was struggling as the 2-3 bps range was a negative tape loop running in my brain....

Thanks.

 

[Gerryd]

I do not know if this means anything, I know the Guru Team and intelligentsia here frowns on observation, but I thought it sort-of fit the topic, no offense intended.

Hi Bio,

IMO/IME it is UNSUPPORTED CONCLUSIONS based on observation that would be frowned on..not observation in and of itself if that makes sense....

All I EVER do is 'observe' the tank by sitting my butt in front of it for several hours each day Questions are asked and answered due to observation and questioning 'how' or 'why'.

As an example of something earning a frowny face

1. I 'observe' that my cories laid eggs on the glass.
2. I 'conclude' as fact that cories need glass to breed

We are always advising each other to change things, watch, and wait, so observation is a key tool for aqaurists.

Sorry, but you will have to provide examples of a simple observation being frowned on as IME I don't see this at all on this forum. At least not by me...

Thanks as always for posting.

 

[nazrm]

I also have a bubble rate much faster than 3-5 bps. My PH seems to be swinging the same range as yours, and at 5.2-5.3 my fish start behaving differently. Got mine set now so I never go below 5.35, and fish are fine. (Of course can't be compared directly with yours) Total swing is from 6.6 to 5.35 each day, bubble rate not countable.

 

[Gerryd]

I also have a bubble rate much faster than 3-5 bps. My PH seems to be swinging the same range as yours, and at 5.2-5.3 my fish start behaving differently. Got mine set now so I never go below 5.35, and fish are fine. (Of course can't be compared directly with yours) Total swing is from 6.6 to 5.35 each day, bubble rate not countable.

Hi nazrm,

Appreciate the reply and the info on your rate and ph ranges. This is good info.

I am NOT trying to compare my rate with a SPECIFIC benchmark, just want to kill the myth of

'1-5 bps is sufficient c02'....I don't care HOW it is diffused esp for anything over say 100 gal of water.

It is helpful to me to understand the experiences of others and compare mine to those.

I especially like to hear that bubble rates are 'not countable' by others...

 

[nipat]

[Heck, I typed long reply but an error here destroyed it. So upset, the system used to
allow me to retrieve it by clicking the back button.

So keep it short, very short. And my answer might not be so important anyway.
(Heck, I admit, I'm still upset! Sorry.)]

To be fair, this tank http://www.aquajournal.net/suikei_data/002/gallery_04.html
has 6 BPS. Some other tanks use 4.

The open scape may dictate that because there is probably more flow.

Anyway, I think ADA still use less BPS overall because they seems to be
so cautious about losing CO2 by surface agitation, unlike us here.

I see many beautiful tanks use less bubble. I don't think they're lying
Here is Jason Baliban mention about his BPS
http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=2975

Tom's sugestion long ago even less than those.
http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/...ag-amano-article-04-06-issue-2.html#post13895

 

[nipat]

FWIW about bubble size, I find 1 BPS from the regular silicone air hose (about 1/8" ID) = 2.2 BPS from
Saline IV drip counter.

 

[Biollante]

Snake Oil Salesman

Hi Bio,

Thanks for chiming in! Not sure how that could be a daily rate? You confused me with that one, sorry. Can you please elaborate?

I completely agree with your last statement. As stated, I was struggling as the 2-3 bps range was a negative tape loop running in my brain....

Thanks.

Hi Gerry,

That should have been part of my post #6, I am not sure why I didn’t edit it, late at night I guess.

I was just a thought that since I had noticed a swing in the amount of CO2(Aq) required to maintain a given dosing rate and since 3 to 5 bubbles per second is a rather large (40% PER SECOND) range.

Personally, I think that Mr. Amano is not only a creative genius, but also one of the truly great snake oil salesman of our hobby, perhaps of our time.

The George Farmer interview with Jason Baliban that Nipat cites is interesting in part because it tells a cold hard truth, there really are no set and forget systems even for the best in this hobby.

I think Nipat makes another excellent point with the “bubbles-per-second,”

• there are standards and
  
  • there are standards that are not standards…
    
• That should wipe the 3-5 bubbles per second out of your brain!

Biollante

 

[inkslinger]

I've just added a new 2 stage regulator for my new Eheim 2262 filter that has a in-line Atomic Diffuser for my 110g tank, I've always thought of 3-5 BPS was where it was suppose to be using but I used it as a starting point, buy the time I got my DC to change green and my plants to start to pearl like crazy, I can't count my bubble rate . I got to just keep an eye on fish and plants to tell me


:gw

 

[shoggoth43]

There's some possibilities. Most of us might be running things on the "hot" side and looking for more growth. ADA might be quoting the 3-5 BPS as a "safe" number. If you were to say 10-20BPS you might scare people or they might kill their fish if for some reason they had a more efficient setup that you had. Some of it might be historic. 3-5BPS using an old bubbled method vs. misting vs. a reactor, etc. Silicone line, at least the stuff I found, tends to stretch a bit and I've read that diffuses CO2 along its length leading to losses. In theory this shouldn't affect BPS, but it might affect how long your tank lasts and could be part of the "my tank runs out of CO2 in 3 week" threadwars I've read.

ATM, I'm running about 3 BPS @15PSI with a straight bubbling into the bottom of the biotower, no diffuser. Not sure what that contributes to this discussion other than it seems a safe value to start with on a different method of CO2 infusion from what I've used in the past and nothing in my tank has been dealing with CO2 for a while now so....

-
S

 

[nipat]

>>>Silicone line, at least the stuff I found, tends to stretch a bit and I've read that diffuses CO2 along its length leading to losses. In theory this shouldn't affect BPS, but it might affect how long your tank lasts and could be part of the "my tank runs out of CO2 in 3 week" threadwars I've read.
>>>
S

I'm not serious about that. My 3KG cylinder lasted about 5 months for a 20 gallon tank.
My tubing is short and my working pressure is not high (around 20 PSI). A little loss is OK.

An interesting thread about CO2 loss in silicone tubing.
http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/4843-co2-tubing?p=30012#post30012

 

[shoggoth43]

And in all fairness there's likely other issues involved. Such as my recent O ring issue. Not a damned thing wrong and no leak I could find until we pulled off the solenoid coil and used a cup of water. Wouldn't take much of a leak there to dump the tank in a few weeks or faster. So was it the O ring or more CO2 usage that dumped my last next to last tank in 6 weeks? I was just pointing out that it really doesn't take much of anything to cause a variable you didn't account for to throw all the BPS stuff into question.

What happens to that silicon tubing when you aren't running at 10 PSI but are instead up to 25 PSI because of a particularly fine grained diffuser? Still at 10% loss, 20%, more? I don't care about the the CO2 as a function of cost, but if the tank runs out a week or two early when I'm not expecting it, that's a problem. Our CO2 use may not be a global warming crisis, and the cost of the refill might not be all that much, but when the only "local" place I can find is a half hour drive on the highway, now I'm tacking another 10$ on for mileage. It adds up. If I can get that down to "only" 6 times a year or less, that's "only" 35$ a whack after gas for the car. So 6 weeks vs. 8 weeks makes a heck of a difference at that point. Would be less of an issue if the place I got my refills was still only 5 minutes from where I work, and on the way there.

Anyway, I think I rambled off topic enough. Sorry about that.

-
S