Vid of my new CO2 reactor

pat w

Member
Nov 4, 2009
462
0
16
Daphne, AL (east Mobile Bay)
Just a quick 39 sec vid of my new ext. CO2 reactor.

[video=youtube;_E2JlrwU5Hc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E2JlrwU5Hc[/video]

Did the test outside by the pool to check for leaks ... NONE.:cool:

Blew through the CO2 feed tube to supply the bubbles for the test.

Guess I should have turned down the radio.

Thoughts?

Pat
 
C

csmith

Guest
I thought these reactors dissolved close to 100% before entering the column? Either way, it looks really effective.
 

pat w

Member
Nov 4, 2009
462
0
16
Daphne, AL (east Mobile Bay)
csmith;51010 said:
I thought these reactors dissolved close to 100% before entering the column? Either way, it looks really effective.

I was going to wait till someone else chimed in.

The mist has been shown to be beneficial, according to some reports. The micro fine bubbles are carried on the tank currents and most tend to dissolve before they reach the surface. As they are swept around they can show you where the tank currents are and, more importantly, are not carrying the CO2.

Pat
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
I +1 the bubbles for flow efficiency, but -1 for aesthetics in most tanks. Having a system that allows the bubbles to be visible or not with a slight modification that doesn't impact flow much would be nice. I realize that the bubbles are supposed to penetrate the boundary layer a little better or some such thing, but most of us don't run light high enough for that to be a requirement.
 

pat w

Member
Nov 4, 2009
462
0
16
Daphne, AL (east Mobile Bay)
Philosophos;51137 said:
I +1 the bubbles for flow efficiency, but -1 for aesthetics in most tanks. Having a system that allows the bubbles to be visible or not with a slight modification that doesn't impact flow much would be nice. ....

I left access at the top so I could add a sponge or something in hopes of reducing or eliminating the mist for that very reason. The vid doesn't show it but the reactor is right at 2 feet long. I could easily put 6 inches of something at the bottom without interfering with the operation up where the action is. I just have to find something coarse enough to not restrict flow and at the same time block the fine bubbles. … Ideas welcome;)

Pat
 

Philosophos

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,346
0
36
Reactors aren't something I've done; needle wheels have been the most effective tool for my budget and objectives for other reasons. I'll have to deffer to those who use reactors more.
 

pat w

Member
Nov 4, 2009
462
0
16
Daphne, AL (east Mobile Bay)
Like yours, too.

Gotta be carfull about the size of what ever I might go with. The bio balls for sure, though I don't know if they would really stop the fine mist. The sera siporax 15mm would work but the mini might get sucked into the outlet tube. That's why I was looking at coarse filter sponges. The great thing about the re-seal feature is you're not stuck, if the first thing you try is a bust. Just yank it out and try again.

I took my outlet off the side at the bottom to allow for a flat surface to rest on the floor. Just placed it in operation and the only issue is that the scavenge tube will get vapor lock and loose flow. All I have to do is pull the line from the pump, and add a little suction to get it started again. Place it back in the pump and I'm back in business. Other wise I'm looking good at a feed rate of about 3 b per sec. Green dropchecker; light pearling under 108 w of T5HO.

Later,
Pat