KAL and CA reactors

[JMsAquarium]

Now, seriously, let's take into account the design of another major brand, Deltec. Check the following doc and you will see what I mean by retrofiting a fluidisized chamber.

Thoughts?

 

Deltec Model 509 - rated for 120g

 

For example, based on a quick search on That Fish Place in PA. Both examples exclude the cost of CO2 bottle and tubing, ok?

 

One Chamber

 

Phosban reactor $33.99

Milwaukee regulator with bubble counter and solenoid valve $85.99

Eheim 1048 recirculating pump $56.99

Maxijet 1200 $21.99

Total $113.97

 

Dual chamber

Same as above plus additional Phosban reactor $33.99

Total $148.96

 

Now, the Deltec design has a 5" or so chamber, the Phosban has a 4'ish one. Not a biggie if going for a dual chamber right? Or am I getting this wrong?

[JMsAquarium]

DIY????

 

Here's the easiest & one of the cheapest ways to DIY a CA reactor (I think the Phosban chamber is a bit small???? - really have no idea).

 

RC Ca Reactor DIY - using parts from Lowes

 

One of the slickest DIY designs I've seen is this one:

RC Ca Reactor DIY - GreenEyedBlackCat's Design

46670[/snapback]

 

 

Yup, saw both already. True, very nice DIYs. I was basing the Phosban according to what the specs of the Knopp C are.

 

The other reason I was taking into account retrofitting a phosban, was that there is no DIY involved, except plugging the pieces together, no glueing and such.

[ErikS]

Sounds like a pretty cool DIY - trying to make a fluidized reactor.

 

I would think that the smaller size would be just about right for this type of reactor, I doubt you'd even need the 2nd chamber. I have no experience but it's my understanding that FR's are very good at delivering HIGH amounts of CA in short periods of time (the effluent runs in the 30 - 40DKH range). I do know they require very high turnover rates & in general you can't just use any old media (it mushes). They run the PH @ a very low 6.4(ish) & keep the media in suspension w/ turnover.

 

In truth I don't really see what they bring to the table - but I haven't really studied their usage or benefits.

[Lee Stearns]

Where is Chip when you need him-

He would basically tell you that the CA reactor is really an Alk stability platform- and periferally gives a bump in calcuium. Makes a lot of sense as I believe Alk stability is a culprit for many folks lack of success with SPS.

Kalk on the other hand is balanced and adds ALk and calcium- but ALk will drop slowly over time, kind of like PH drops over time, but without the daily swings of PH- so one needs to bump alk manually with a KAL reactor- Some systems require so much calcium that Kalk replacement of evap water can not keep up- That would be the only time I would jump on adding a calcium reactor- A CA reactor just does not fit into my KISS mantra. And JM from what I see in your tank- you can do just fine with adding Kalk for now. One can also bump just CA manually with Calcium chloride- Dow Flake deicer-

[JMsAquarium]

Erik,

 

What I was having in mind was running a phosban with ARM or any other CA media, rather than using the stuff they are designed for.

 

Lee,

I completely agree with you as far as my current state of things is in my tank. I have made a DIY Kalk reactor out of pretzel container and that will do fine for a long time.

I am just fooling around with possibilities for the future. Guess I have too much free time on my hands :P . Either that or I am not in a mood for work at the office :idea2:

[ErikS]

He would basically tell you that the CA reactor is really an Alk stability platform- and periferally gives a bump in calcuium.

 

hence my comment earlier (it does take a bit of getting used to )

 

Once you "get it" with regards to the fact that they're really ALK reactors (thanks Chip laugh.gif ).

 

Now on the other end I find the CA reactor (once Chip beat the process into my thick skull ) to be simple, about as simple as anything around.

 

#1 - I refill nothing, nada, zip, zero, zilch - guessing by usage I may have to change the media once every 6 - 8 months as demand goes up (crosses fingers that it does)

 

#2 - Once set I check tank parms once a week

 

#3 - Ca, Alk, and PH stay right where I want come H-E-double hocky sticks or high water (i.e. alk is 8-9, PH is 8.0 - 8.2, and CA is 440..............all the time)

 

#4 - All I check is the effluent PH - this tells me everything I need to watch = under 2secs/day (as in when I hit feed mode)

 

They are a bit of work to setup - requires a bit of tinkering.....but....once you get the idea that ALK is the measure & Ca is really irrelevant it's much easier.

 

Factor in I'm lazy - the less I have to do w/ the tank the better (seems to be better for the tank too ) I.E. - I hit a button to feed....the CONTROLLER turns stuff back on as I can't be bothered (also I suffer from terminal CRS ).

[Caribbean Jake]

Guess I have too much free time on my hands

[JMsAquarium]

I feel your pain brother....

and relate to that... :D

46698[/snapback]

 

Thanks. But I can't complain much. Friday next week I am going home to the City of Lights for a couple of days, since it's business, the office puts the greenbacks on the table B) (leaving on the 16th and be back on the 20th), then vacation time, I won't be back to the office til Jan 9. :77: Hehehe, my poor tank, I'll be messing with it all day long

[Caribbean Jake]

Bonjour' Monsieur JM, Bon Voyage...

Have fun and enjoy Cabaret

[JMsAquarium]

Buon yur'  Messier JM, Bon Voyage...

Have fun and enjoy Cabaret

46705[/snapback]

 

 

Bonjour Monsieur Jaques Cabaret :o ? Oui Oui :D

[Caribbean Jake]

D

[JMsAquarium]

a la defant de la patrie et' te

vino y'et madmuaselles

46711[/snapback]

 

 

Yup! All of that and croissants chauds Not sure I'll be in the best of shapes on Mon 19th when going to our Headquarters . I'll blame it on the jetlag.

[Caribbean Jake]

Je le bl

[JMsAquarium]

Je le bl

[rioreef]

LOL that's for sure, and for the DIY types that are not that good at DIY :P

[JMsAquarium]

Chris,

 

As a matter of fact, with regards to adding a second chamber, this is exactly what the Knopp model is based upon. Both chambers are 4" in diam. ant thus the onlly drawback is less media. The manufacturer rates it for 120 g, and I think we should read this as the very upper tank size. I'd rather believe that this would be a perfect reactor for a medium demanding system or small tanks. Basically, it is just a matter of a container holding media with saturaed CO2 flowing through. The larger the reactor, the larger the supply.

As for the fittings on a phosban one, it will be very easy to all a couple of Ts for the tank water and CO2 supply , as well as for the final product outflow. I guess that the key factors, here, as far as chamber sizes are concerned, is how much supplementation is required by our system. This, IMO, will determine which reactor size to get, taking into account that such reactor will have also to be able to supply more and more

to sustain the growth. What do you all think? Am i correct in assuming this or am I still dreaming? :D

[ErikS]

Weeeelllll...........really there's only one way to know & that's to give it a shot.

 

Yep, the phosban reactor matches the Deltec size.....but......the Deltec is a fluidized reactor which requires special media. My questions are:

 

#1 - Is the size large enough to provide the required contact time?

 

#2 - Given the size would it need to be run as a fluidized reactor?

 

#3 - Can the unit handle pressure? (ideal is a bit of pressure for Ca reactors)

 

Not sure I can see the unit running ARM type media, I have suspicions that the volume just isn't sufficient to provide enough contact time. I also don't believe that adding a second unit would serve much purpose - in order in get any reasonable amount of media dissolving in the 2nd chamber the 1st would have to be run too low & the risk of media mushing would be high. It would be skating on thin ice & one twitch would mean a chamber of media wasted................but..............

 

I can see the unit being successful using either a fluidized approach or using the "schuran style" media. Fluidized has been proven by Deltec using the very same dimensions so it should work. I also think the chunk media might make it work also (ala the Schuran Pico). You could run the unit at a nice low PH without risk of turning the media to mush, the low PH would compensate for the limited contact time & allow the media to dissolve (again, ala the Schuran Pico).

 

It's definately interesting - might be able to creat a "mini" instead of a "pico". In either case I can't see much benefit in running a 2nd chamber - neither Deltec nor Schuran do this (also I'm very dubious of the benefit of a 2nd chamber in any reactor)

 

As for the fittings? It has an in & an out, right? I can't see that you need much more My only "concern" would be pressure, can the unit hold a tad of pressure? But then that's ideal & some units function very well without it (mine runs under the barest amount & I'm pretty certain it would run the same w/o any pressure). Put the effluent control on the input & you eliminate the pressure so it's simple to solve.

 

As a matter of fact, with regards to adding a second chamber, this is exactly what the Knopp model is based upon. Both chambers are 4" in diam. ant thus the onlly drawback is less media.

Yeah, except the Knop is notorious as a poor performer Personally I think this is due to the media. Given the size I think that the contact time is too low (with ARM type media) & to boost the output/compensate for size the PH has to be to low = dangerous to media life (& to a certain extent the tank).

 

I think the unit would make a great clone of either a Deltec or Schuran reactor.

[JMsAquarium]

Erik,

What you just described makes a lot of sense and does clarify a lot the processus involved in producing the targeted "final product".

 

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that a less risky approach, as in using a more standard size unit (such as the ones you linked earlier in this thread) would be better. Very interesting.

[ErikS]

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that a less risky approach, as in using a more standard size unit (such as the ones you linked earlier in this thread) would be better. Very interesting.

ROTFLMAO - and here I sit thinking that using a phosban reactor could make a very cool Schuran style reactor! (I was interested in getting a PICO but the thought of filling it all the time put me off - see "lazy" above).

 

This comes from someone who's a big fan of Deltec skimmers:

 

$400 for a reactor? Excuse me, for a tube w/ a pump? I don't think so! (I understand the fluidized reactor even less - $200!!!! for a tube - it's different from the TLF one how? )

[JMsAquarium]

You know, you just nailed it. The cost of building one using a phos reactor is absolutely appealing. The lazy approach of using a conventional, well, Me very lazy so me no arguing. :D

Geez, you gotta love this hobby when you see the prices we pay for such things. Now if you factor the cost of my "other" hobby, no wonder my wife has serious doubts about my health of mind. :P Ahhhh.... specialty items carry specialty prices <_<

[rioreef]

I can see the unit being successful using either a fluidized approach or using the "schuran style" media.

46823[/snapback]

 

First, what is the difference in the above statement?

 

Secondly, from my responses on RC, members say the TLF reactor is actually 3.25 inches and compared to the 'lowes' version there is a lot less media. From the lowes version I wonder if the diffusion method some commercial versions use and the phosphate reactors could be incorporated into the filter chamber, ie, a round piece of acrylic with holes drilled with foam on top. The acrylic plate could be held in place by sizing the diameter to the filter housing (tapered) so it can't go below a point. Drill some holes in the center PVC input pipe so the water exits below this acrylic plate. Do the same for top plate and foam if added. A neater design and possibly better diffusion (companies think so by their designs).

 

Do this instead of the many methods employeed on the DIY $200 calcium reactor thread.

 

The rest of the DIY, fittings, CO2 input, pumps, Probe holders, etc are the same. The cost of the single filter housing from lowes would make up the cost of two phosphate reactors discussed here. In the end no difference?

 

Chris

[ErikS]

First, what is the difference in the above statement?

 

Technically they're all fluidized reactors - they have water running through them, but in practical terms.

 

Deltec - uses a small chamber with a relatively high turnover rate, so high that the top 1" or so actually moves in the water. They also use RowaLith C+ media, this media does not dissolve well at higher PH (6.7 - 6.8), this allows the reactor to run at a much lower PH. It would be/is tough with such a small volume of water to keep the PH in the ARM range - Deltec's solution is to run the reactor lower w/ a special media.

 

Schuran - Again, a smaller reaction chamber with a relatively high turnover rate....but...different media. The media is large & again doesn't dissolve well at high PH. The media however doesn't move in the water as with a Deltec.

 

"Standard" - the most common reactors use a relatively low flow through the media & run at a PH in the range of 6.8. The slow flow allows the media optimum contact time with the water - it dissolves. If the PH goes too low the media will turn to mush & be pumped out of the reactor - this can have adverse effects on the livestock. The higher PH also requires less CO2 for a given load.

 

Very similar approaches, just different media - mostly (though the Schuran has a different method or scavaging the CO2).

 

Would the diffuser plate help the "lowes DIY" - can't say, best guess would be "couldn't hurt". Both the reverse flow & the diffuser plate are used to counter act media compaction and channeling - both will negatively impact the delivery of Ca/trace elements to the tank. High flow reactors have the advantage in that the high turnover helps alleviate both problems (& the Schuran type media goes further as it's almost impossible to compact or channel).

 

I have no data or evidence but just a gut reaction - I can't see such a small chamber functioning very well with ARM type media, it's just not enough contact time to do much. IMHO a small reactor will require a high turnover & a low PH to function effectively.

[fishface]

JM:

I have the Knop-C, considered to be a classic by some, and many people swear by them - only 'cause they bought them. I found that the effluent output control (it's like a screw-on spray nozzle) clogged all the time. I finally switched to a Guest ball valve and that will just clog later probably. I had a lot of trial and error in finally dialing it in, but we've now had a meeting of minds and it's fine. I think that any type that you buy or make will have a period like this in that you might get frustrated getting it dialed in. I also teed a 1/4" line off my in-sump skimmer pump to force feed it because the passive syphon method kept stopping. Why it kept happening to me - no idea.

 

I bought the Knop because of the many positive opinions. I saw your setup, and since you are capable, you probably should do a DYI unit when time permits. In that regard, if I chose to do one, I would also make it with like the Knop with a tall column to keep the co2 in contact with the media longer, rather than a wide column. The reason bought a unit is because with all of the different designs and opinions I didn't want to find myself re-inventing the wheel last in Feb.

 

One notable difference in the various designs is how efficient they are with CO2, and I didn't wish to DIY and create an "inefficient design". The Knops are recongnised for their efficiency. And any reactor must be selected for the calcium draw on it. For one Acro, you probably don't need a Deltec. For a 120 heavily stocked with Monti capps, my Knop wouldn't keep up by itself.

FF

[JMsAquarium]

Thank you for the vote of confidence FF and thank you for your feedback on the Knop-C. That is definitely interesting to read. I would love to see it in action one of these days.