Fuge and flow, lets talk options

[YHSublime]

ps i have a couple reactors floating around in the garage or closets you can have one to do this proper. like tom mentioned ROX is great but i wouldn't begin at "full dose" per the BRS calculator with a tank full of SPS. i would begin at 1/4 dose and work up from there. it's very efficient and effective in my experience in a reactor with proper flow.

You're a gentleman and a scholar.

 

I found the best way to rinse GFO and Carbon in a reactor is to change it out during one of your water changes. Dispose of old media, put new media in, screw the container back onto the reactor, take the outflow line and place it into a 5g bucket, and then turn your reactor on. This method rinses the media while also taking 5 gallons of your tank water out.

How long do you rinse for?

[Orion]

You're a gentleman and a scholar.

 

How long do you rinse for?

I use both Granular GFO and Carbon in the same reactor so I rinse with a full 5g. It's overboard, but I only change 5g at a time when I do water changes. Better than using more RO water.

 

For just ROX 0.8 Carbon a half a gallon would be fine... Maybe even less than that.

[Crob5965]

off topic Isaac, my wife saw your living room and said she loves how you decorated lol, and she wants me to get rid of my canopy and suspend my lights.

[YHSublime]

off topic Isaac, my wife saw your living room and said she loves how you decorated lol, and she wants me to get rid of my canopy and suspend my lights.

I don't have much of a say with anything except the tank. Suspending is super easy, and convenient, but you may want to keep a canopy unless you're going rimless!

[Origami]

ROX rinses easily and quickly. I like the way one member rinses it while performing a water change. That's a perfectly legitimate way to do it. The amount of time it takes to rinse really depends upon the type, manufacturer, etc. The key is to rinse it until the water runs clear. For most GAC, it'll take you just a moment to see why. The water will run black like oil for a ten seconds or more before starting to clear out. 

 

Wet GAC is a pain (messy) to handle. That's one of the benefits of rinsing it in the reactor that you'll be using: You won't have to make the transfer.

[WheresTheReef]

I run carbon in a media bag and swap out every 2 weeks. I used the carbon calculator on BRS's website to figure out how much to use.

 

http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/reef-calculator

[Jesse]

ps i have a couple reactors floating around in the garage or closets you can have one to do this proper. like tom mentioned ROX is great but i wouldn't begin at "full dose" per the BRS calculator with a tank full of SPS. i would begin at 1/4 dose and work up from there. it's very efficient and effective in my experience in a reactor with proper flow.

 

I have a few spare MJ1200s that you are welcome to one if it fits this reactor.  I stronger suggest the reactor method, if you start using activated carbon.  

 

This is getting a little off topic, but the high nutrients might also be helped by a little GFO.  Maybe you run both in a single reactor or get two reactors, but either way, GFO is helpful to keep your nutrients in check.  Someone mentioned that you shouldn't start with the BRS suggested doses for carbon.  The same is DEFINITELY true for GFO, if you aren't running this now.  

 

I run both in my system and have been happy.  I don't run the full BRS recommended amounts.  I use the BRS ROX .8 Carbon and the standard (not high capacity) BRS GFO.  My personal opinion is the high capacity GFO is a little too aggressive at cleaning the water.

 

As another aside, I recently heard Julian Sprung speak about cyano issues in the reef tank.  While I don't think most people will argue that the root cause of cyano issues is a high nutrient level in the tank, he mentioned that a higher alkalinity level helps combat the growth of cyano.  I do not know (and he didn't expand upon) the reason why this is, but it is worth looking into a little more.

 

You also asked about changing the carbon.  I like to change mine every 2 weeks (during a water change - for the same reasons already mentioned) and I change my GFO monthly (also during a water change).  I put a reminder on my calendar for the same day of the week I normally do my water changes and it helps me remember.

 

Jesse

[AlanM]

So I normally put floss above and below the carbon in my reactor. Below to trap organic gunk before it messes up the surface of the carbon. Above to trap th fine that wash out of the carbon and to keep it from floating so much. Particularly the BRS rox carbon seems to never ever sink for me. If I try to rinse it at all in a reactor it all goes right out the top. Does my floss sandwich make sense or am I defeating myself somehow? It sure makes it quick to fill the reactor, so I hope it is fine.

[zygote2k]

I use carbon in a mesh bag placed in a high flow area of the sump. I change it out every 2-3 months or whenever I notice a tinge in the water.

[YHSublime]

I have a few spare MJ1200s that you are welcome to one if it fits this reactor.  I stronger suggest the reactor method, if you start using activated carbon. 

 

That would be super helpful, thanks so much!

 

This is getting a little off topic, but the high nutrients might also be helped by a little GFO.  Maybe you run both in a single reactor or get two reactors, but either way, GFO is helpful to keep your nutrients in check.  Someone mentioned that you shouldn't start with the BRS suggested doses for carbon.  The same is DEFINITELY true for GFO, if you aren't running this now.  

 

I've thought about GFO, but like I mentioned at the start, it is another thing to worry about. I would think the best thing to do in order to keep my nutrients in check would be to feed less and water change more, perhaps a more natural method, like growing cheato?

 

 

I run both in my system and have been happy.  I don't run the full BRS recommended amounts.  I use the BRS ROX .8 Carbon and the standard (not high capacity) BRS GFO.  My personal opinion is the high capacity GFO is a little too aggressive at cleaning the water.

 

Do you run them together? I have to admit, the concept of aggressively cleaning water intrigues me (hello feeding all I want!) but the chemistry doesn't make sense to me, and I'm sure it never will.

 

 

As another aside, I recently heard Julian Sprung speak about cyano issues in the reef tank.  While I don't think most people will argue that the root cause of cyano issues is a high nutrient level in the tank, he mentioned that a higher alkalinity level helps combat the growth of cyano.  I do not know (and he didn't expand upon) the reason why this is, but it is worth looking into a little more.

 

That is an interesting theory, I do run a lower alk level than the "norm."

 

 

You also asked about changing the carbon.  I like to change mine every 2 weeks (during a water change - for the same reasons already mentioned) and I change my GFO monthly (also during a water change).  I put a reminder on my calendar for the same day of the week I normally do my water changes and it helps me remember.

 

Thanks, I do a water change every two weeks, so I could certainly emulate this.

 

 

I use carbon in a mesh bag placed in a high flow area of the sump. I change it out every 2-3 months or whenever I notice a tinge in the water.

 

That sounds super simple, and I enjoy that. I also did the paper test, and it looks pretty white to me through 6'. Like I mentioned, my water is pretty clear!

[Tracy G]

I have run about everything at one point.  Carbon, GFO, and now I use the P04 GFO (not sure exactly what one but it is rechargeable) and biopellets.  I found this combo to be the least in maintenance and benefits the most.  I have been getting lower and lower nutrients and I don't have much algae buildup at all.  My Macro's have slowed a ton in growth and I clean my glass no more than every month and even then it is more for random snails then buildup.  To me Carbon was just to much effort changing it out all the time.  When you first start biopellets you will get an outbreak but as things progress it really does a great job.  You never need to change them out just keep adding more.  

 

Just my 2 cents 

[GraffitiSpotCorals]

How do you guys who run carbon in a reactor tell the difference between a mesh bag and reactor? I always hear suggestions about using one and it's so much better than a bag. I have seen no difference ime and am not sure how I would measure the difference in the first please besides "oh well it seems to look cleaner". Imo if your going to setup a reactor run high capacity gfo in it or biopellets and use a mesh bag for carbon in high flow areas of your sump like Rob said.

 

Have we even begun to talk about flow through a refugium in this thread?

[Origami]

Carbon in a tumbling reactor should exhaust the carbon grains more completely, even if there's some channeling in the reactor, because all of the grains have equal contact time with the incoming dirty water. In a bag, there grains are often locked in place and, if there's any channeling going on, some grains will exhaust before others. The way that you'd objectively  tell the difference in the two approaches is to measure the rate of uptake and the total amount of organics picked up in a controlled experiment. For example, using the BRS video as an example, set up two buckets of dirty water from a large water change and flow them through two similarly sized sumps. In one, put a bag of carbon in a high flow area. In the other, use a fluidized reactor. Both should have the same amount of carbon in them. Light each bucket with a lamp. Take PAR readings at the bottom of the bucket at the start and throughout the experiment. 

 

In Isaac's original thread, he mentioned that the reason he was seeking information was a cyano outbreak. We got onto carbon because of that.

[sen5241b]

Rinse carbon well before using to remove any carbon dust or carbon fines. The fines have been implicated in HLLE. Don't tumble soft carbon too aggressively or it will create it's own dust. Some carbon's are harder than others. BRS's Rox 0.8 has high surface area and is pretty hard. It rinses quickly, too. The only issue that I've had with ROX is that it's pretty small and requires a smaller mechanical filter to block it from getting out of the reactor than larger, granular carbon requires.

 

If you don't like the expense of a reactor, you can build one.  I Googled "pvc reactor site:reefcentral.com" and came up with this:

 

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1243026

 

It's not clear, but it's cheap.

 

Here's one built from a gatorade bottle:

 

http://www.nano-reef.com/topic/77999-gatorade-bottle-cheapest-phosban-reactor-ever/

 

 

More than "implicated"

 

http://www.coralmagazine-us.com/content/activated-carbon-hlle-smoking-gun-found

[monkiboy]

How do you guys who run carbon in a reactor tell the difference between a mesh bag and reactor? I always hear suggestions about using one and it's so much better than a bag. I have seen no difference ime and am not sure how I would measure the difference in the first please besides "oh well it seems to look cleaner". Imo if your going to setup a reactor run high capacity gfo in it or biopellets and use a mesh bag for carbon in high flow areas of your sump like Rob said.

 

Have we even begun to talk about flow through a refugium in this thread?

i've tried both for extended periods of time and in a reactor i get a more efficient and effective result based on simple assessments like tom and i described above. not the most controlled test but the difference in "performance" was readily evident in my experimentation.

 

jason replied on isaac's query on flow but i think most folks jumped on the major topic of helping isaac figure out his cyano issue with a bit more gusto.

[AlanM]

so Isaac, do the white bucket test and let us all know if you're water is icky yellow. 8)

[Jason Rhoads]

I too rinse my carbon with discard water after water changes (I am all about saving the extra water and few cents it would cost to use RO). 

 

Since we are steering back to the flow discussion I will expound a bit on my reasoning behind a low flow fuge:

 

1. Less power consumption.  This is enough of a reason for me, I try to save on electricity where I can, and use only my main pump to drive all the turnover through my tanks. 
2. From personal observation, pods tend to like the low flow areas better.  I have seen a huge increase in pod life since I set up my refugium remote from my sump. There are a number of reasons I am seeing more pods, but one of them is the low flow environment I have created. My philosophy with a refugium is to create an environment that is distinct from a reef to, hopefully, closer replicate more of the biological system that helps drive life on the reef. 
3. Detritus settling area.  A low flow refugium helps with maintenance in that you will have an easy place from which to siphon out gunk. 

[AlanM]

Some who argue for low flow through the sump/fuge (like the guy named uncleof6 on reef central DIY forums, for instance, who is a vocal proponent) also use some reasoning a in addition to what Jason posted above that I think I understand, but never knew how true it was.  It was basically

 

1) Everyone knows how important surface skimming in the main tank is.  The proteins form a film on the surface of the water and if you're renewing this surface and draining the protein-richer water to your sump you're getting it out of the display.

2) Once it's in the sump, you want to skim that stuff out before returning the water back to the display.

3) If you are firing water through your sump, you are probably not skimming the protein out of that water.

4) When the water gets returned it gets injected down into the water column of the display by the return nozzles.  So now you've essentially taken that protein that you could have skimmed out if you'd been running a flow tuned to your skimmer throughput and stirred it back up into the water column instead of removing it when it stuck to the surface of your display tank water.

 

Does that make sense?

 

I also vote for a slow-flow fuge.  I know everyone says you have to spin cheato like crazy, but I grow fantastic amounts of a mixed mass of chaeto, ulva, and hair algae and it doesn't spin and it grows and grows.  It forms a mat over my refugium that soaks up all of the D120 grow light power and ends up being pretty easy to remove.  Any time I tried to spin it I ended up with lots of little fragments.

[monkiboy]

another advocate of slow flow and a manual gentle rotation once a week once things really start getting dense and affecting how much light gets to the other sections of the fuge has always worked very well for me.

Edited June 24, 2014 by monkiboy

[YHSublime]

So thanks for all the good information here. Here is a question: Is a fuge needed if I plan to run GFO and Carbon?

[Jesse]

So thanks for all the good information here. Here is a question: Is a fuge needed if I plan to run GFO and Carbon?

I don't think it is needed, but i like a fuge. It is fun to see a good assortment of algae and pods growing. I have all 3 on my tank (which is another reason I don't use a full brs recommended dose of gfo.

 

I have found the fuge and gfo to accomplish closer to the same thing (in terms of cleaning the water) and carbon cleans the water differently. A fuge is definitely not as effective as gfo, but is theoretically more natural. You need a really big fuge to accomplish what a little gfo can do in terms of bringing nutrients down. I imagine there are a lot of currently unknown benefits to a fuge beyond the reasons so many folks have them. Carbon and gfo require routine maintenance, but it is easy. The fuge doesn't take a whole lot, but there are things you need to do here, also.

 

I would suggest you start slowly with whatever path you pick and ramp it up from there based on how your tank reacts.

[icsparks]

I also run the BRS Rox 0.8 and it works well in a MR1 reactor.

[GraffitiSpotCorals]

As long as I keep the carbon in a high flow area in my sump I get great results. I put it in a section 1/3 the size of a 40 breeder with a korilia 8 pushing water in it. The bag stays loose and never clumps or channels. To me this method is easier, cheaper and less time consuming than running a reactor. Since there is no way to tell when the media is exhausted and no way to measure what it's pulling out I don't worry about setting up a reactor. The water stays just as clear as it does when I run one. I would like to see if someone can run a test like Tom suggested in order to see if there is a measurable difference in the two methods. But to me it's not worth the small gain I would get by running a reactor.

 

I also run a 40 breeder refugium with no extra flow in it other than the return right now. Mainly because all the detritus settles in it for me to siphon out. Pods seemed just as happy in my high flow fuge as they do in his one.

[AlanM]

On the carbon side of this thread.  How does anyone running BRS Rox 0.8 get it to not float out of the reactor?  I have it in an MR5 and it just floats right at the top if I'm not shoving floss in above it.

[monkiboy]

On the carbon side of this thread.  How does anyone running BRS Rox 0.8 get it to not float out of the reactor?  I have it in an MR5 and it just floats right at the top if I'm not shoving floss in above it.

you run it compacted at the top. place your bottom plate appropriately for the amount you want to hold in the reactor, then the mesh, then the media all the way to the top leaving room for a tight fit with just the top mesh and/or plate, screw on, et voila. rinse for a few seconds in a spare bucket or to drain and you're done.