Stauro and Mc melt

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
I don't have anything unusual than other hobbyist , Eheim 2071 filter , 2 x24 w lighting , glass lily pipe , standard co2 bottle and ADA CO2 diffuser . As i said the flow is important .


In the picture marked with green you can see the actual lily pipe position and in the other picture with red you can see "bad" position of the lily pipe , this position (with red) is not good to my tank . The flow is different , the lily pipe is pointed up to the water surface . Last picture is with the tank from this summer , thats why i have that fan there to chill the water .




1.jpg


2.jpg


3.jpg
 

ZeroFish

Member
Nov 13, 2012
39
0
6
United Kingdom
Interesting, I always point my filter output slightly diagonal to the surface for agitation. I wonder if that was "bad" for me too.


Was that a surface skimmer in the back? I see that you don't have it in the first 2 photos.

skija said:
If you say you had hair algae than this is another sign of CO2 problem.

What I did is increasing my flow. I did not have hair algae before the adjustment.


I also raised my CO2 after I increased the flow, in case the flow sped up the degas process of CO2.


Then shouldn't that sugess it was not a CO2 related problem?


It looks more like the plants did not like the high current (1000l/h in just a 35l tank), so algae took over the place.


I guess more does not equal better. Instead of increasing flow, I should pay more attention at the direction and position of the flow.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
Can be that very high flow degases co2 , Thats a skimmer in the left back corner and it runs on a timer , 3 minutes every 2 hours on my photo period
 

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
I did water change today , and for the next 2 weeks i'm gonna try 0.5 ppm Fe prom Profito dosing , 3 times per week .


Will see what happens
 

ZeroFish

Member
Nov 13, 2012
39
0
6
United Kingdom
I still think that moving the light away from the tank played a huge role there.


Your light was 5cm away from the surface before you raise the height, is the correct?


Yesterday, I was playing with the light calculator in rotalabutterfly.com.


I realised that when the light source is 5cm away from the surface, the change in level of light is really dramatic.


Say your substrate is 30cm away from the surface, then you would have 21par at the substrate level.


10cm tall stem plants would be exposed to 42par on their tips.


20cm tall stem plants would be exposed to 116par on their tips.


When the light source is 20cm away from the surface, the change in level of light becomes more consistence.


Say your substrate is 30cm away from the surface, then you would have 10par at the substrate level.


10cm tall stem plants would be exposed to 16par on their tips.


20cm tall stem plants would be exposed to 29par on their tips.


If we raise the distance of light, then overall par would decrease, but the level of light would be more consistence at different level of height.


We can always add more light by adding more bulbs.


Of course, please keep in mind that these values are only based on the calculator. Please point me out if you see mistakes.


PS: I will be very interested in your results, please keep it up. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
I played with that calculator , it helps a little but the reflector type (poor , fair , good ) changes the parameters a lot , and you cannot know exactly what type of reflector you have in you light fixture . I don't have a PAR meter .


I had the lights aprox to 10 cm away from the tank surface (when i switched from Aquasky 601 to Odyseea 2x24 w) then raised them to 15 cm and now they are at aprox 25 cm .


So yes , raising the lights also lovers the plants demand in CO2 and nutrients .


In post [HASHTAG]#155[/HASHTAG] i also said that i increased macro and iron dosage , over flow and raising the lights
 

ZeroFish

Member
Nov 13, 2012
39
0
6
United Kingdom
From my understanding, the consistency of par is determined by the light distance, regardless of the reflector used.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
One more thing i observed this week , i had some problems with the plants , for some reason they stopped growing .....BBA started to grow on wood .... i didn't change anything but the drop checker was always yellow (even when CO2 was not running)


After i started to run the Eheim skin 350 all night (after CO2 stopped) to degas CO2


The drop checker was blue in the morning (before CO2 starts) and lime green after 1-2 hours after CO2 started .


So i guess this Ph drop from night to day also help plants .
 

fablau

rotalabutterfly.com
Staff member
Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
2,942
637
113
50
Laguna Niguel, CA
www.fablauplants.com
skija said:
One more thing i observed this week , i had some problems with the plants , for some reason they stopped growing .....BBA started to grow on wood .... i didn't change anything but the drop checker was always yellow (even when CO2 was not running)

After i started to run the Eheim skin 350 all night (after CO2 stopped) to degas CO2


The drop checker was blue in the morning (before CO2 starts) and lime green after 1-2 hours after CO2 started .


So i guess this Ph drop from night to day also help plants .


So...do you still have BBA now?
 

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
From my knowledge BBA is not disappearing, it stops growing (if you fix the problem) i used Excell on it on a few spots.


But where i didn't use excell it stopped growing .


I see that in my tank BBA is related somehow to the fact the plants are not doing ok , not growing
 

fablau

rotalabutterfly.com
Staff member
Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
2,942
637
113
50
Laguna Niguel, CA
www.fablauplants.com
skija said:
From my knowledge BBA is not disappearing, it stops growing (if you fix the problem) i used Excell on it on a few spots.

But where i didn't use excell it stopped growing .


I see that in my tank BBA is related somehow to the fact the plants are not doing ok , not growing

Yes, for sure until all you plants grow well, hard to understand what's the cause. Try to focus on make all plants growing well first, and then, if BBA is persisting, you can think to other solutions. That's exactly what I am doing with my own tank right now:


http://www.barrreport.com/forum/barr-report/journals/244074-fablau-75-gallon-tank?p=244296#post244296
 

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
edelry.junior said:
[*]There is a Barr Report on the ADA AS, check it and it will explain a lot more than what you asked. It is available to subscribers. This issue alone is worth more than the subscription price.


[


Hello , can someone send me the link about ADA AS that Ederly is talking about ?


Thanks
 

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
Hello , i want to ask about Cerges CO2 DIY reactor , i don't want to open a new topic because there a lot of topics around the internet .


Currently i have an ADA co2 diffuser and i want to make a cerges co2 reactor ,


but how big is the difference between the co2 diffuser and the cerges reactor ?


Is the difference noticeable or not ? Is it true that the CO2 diffuser is dissolving the co2 about 50 % and the cerges reactor 100 % ?


Thanks
 

rajkm

Article Editor
Staff member
Lifetime Member
Article Editor
Sep 16, 2015
677
218
43
Hillsboro, OR
A CO2 reactor will be a step up from the ADA CO2 diffuser. If you had the atomic type then I would say the difference was minimal.


I used to run the atomic diffuser, directly into my return pump which spread the bubbles everywhere and tank looked like a sprite bottle but due to the volume of tank water and fine bubbles the dissolution was pretty good and I could drop my PH rapidly. The only issue with that is you also need very good circulation to ensure each area of the tank is getting turned over and obviously good percent of gas just goes to the surface to that's wasted.


I went with the rex griggs after that. The issue with reactors is that it depends on dwell time and you also need a good amount of flow and volume to pass thru, else you develop a pocket of gas which will eventually dissolve but not when you want it. You could use a inline diffuser to go with it but if the bubbles are fine, they will just not get as much dwell time because the water pressure will push it thru.


I also have a ISTA mix-max after it to handle any left over bubbles.


I find the fine bubbles help you drop PH faster with a reactor and not have much pocket of gas but also some of it does get wasted with the flow just pushing it out, even with a dual reactor.


If I go just using as designed, the PH drop is slower, a pocket of gas does develop, but its just as stable.


Gas wise I am not saving much either, because if I inject at a slower rate (assuming 50% wastage, if I was going at 3 bps, drop it to 1.5 bps) but the gas does not just dissolve as fast, so you will need to up the rate and be close to 3. And the remaining pocket will get dissolved once you turn the CO2 off which is what you dont care for, so your waste is getting dissolved later but still a waste. That just my experience BTW.


I am thinking of how to optimize it better. Fine bubbles with higher dwell time and higher volume of water seem to be the solution but will need to think about it.
 

skija

Lifetime Members
Lifetime Member
Nov 16, 2015
352
83
28
Romania
I made another tank ,it has 75 liters ,. same filter Eheim 2071 + one water pump so flow is ok .


This is the CO2 diffuser i have now ADA pollen glass beetle 30


I want to make a reactor because i want to dissolve CO2 better . I don't care about the usage of CO2 or other stuff, if plants will be happier with the reactor instead of CO2 diffuser I'll build a reactor
 
Last edited by a moderator: