Fluidized Media Chamber

[Liam]

i think running carbon 24/7 in the appropriate amount is tried and tested.I have read many different theories on how long different carbons last and some say carbon becomes next to useless after about 48 hours.
My opinion is every system is different and over time you should be able to judge what is best for your system but i prefer regular changes of carbon over trying to make it last long periods.Even if your system fares well with a large amount of carbon for 6 months,who is to say the water quality and load on the same amount of carbon in the next 6 months would be similar.Therefore i say regular changes are best.Some also say some carbons can leach what they have absorbed back into the system after they reach capacity so even if after 3 months half your carbon is still good whats to say that the other 1/2 that is fully saturated is not releasing pollutants back into the system.
I agree Gregs thoughts would be welcome because i am not scentifically trained on carbon and am making these assumptions from what i have picked up along the way.

Have you seen the new Kent phosban reactors,they have a screw off top eliminating those pesky thumbscrews.I may try one of these and go with weekly carbon changes of lesser amounts.

just my 02 or maybe 03 cents

 

[littlep93056]

I'm going to wait ,not sure about running it now

Aquaman you have me thinking twice about it now

 

[Aquaman_68]

Mike, My thoughts are not a stab in the dark from how my system reacts to it. The only people I know who have had success with using lots of carbon (24/7) do lots of water changes. The water changes help to make up for all the trace elements being removed thru the carbon use.
If you need to use carbon 24/7 you need a new skimmer or one that is sized correct for your system. (or your feeding way too much!!!!!) I'm not saying to not use carbon once in a while for things the skimmer can't pull out & what water changes don't get. (but that is like every 5 or 6 months for like a day or 2.)

Don't go down that road....You'll be sorry

 

[reefdude]

i only started using it about a month ago. i haven't changed it yet. But i think i will only do it for a few days once a month. I to read else where running carbon 24/7 is not the way to go...

 

[Liam]

Mike, My thoughts are not a stab in the dark from how my system reacts to it. The only people I know who have had success with using lots of carbon (24/7) do lots of water changes. The water changes help to make up for all the trace elements being removed thru the carbon use.
If you need to use carbon 24/7 you need a new skimmer or one that is sized correct for your system. (or your feeding way too much!!!!!) I'm not saying to not use carbon once in a while for things the skimmer can't pull out & what water changes don't get. (but that is like every 5 or 6 months for like a day or 2.)

Don't go down that road....You'll be sorry

As i understand it a skimmer is only able to remove DOC's it is not able to remove other forms of chemicals

 

[Greg Hiller]

Mike emailed me and asked my opinion. I don't have any strong opinions on carbon.

I like to have carbon on a system 24 hours a day for the following reason. If something dies, or a funky spawn, or something happened (toxin released by fish or cucumber, who knows?) I like to know that some carbon is there to help out. Do I think you can overdose/use carbon....well, maybe. I think it's probably pretty hard to over use carbon in the way I use it. IF, however, you hooked some really big, really efficient carbon reactor, or filter of some type that then very efficiently stripped all the organics out of your water, I supposed your corals could be shocked by that. I've never bothered with any type of reactor or anything, not to say that it's not worthwhile on a really big system. Certainly having carbon in a reactor might make more efficient use of it, but it's always pretty hard knowing when the carbon should be changed.

I would not worry about carbon removing trace elements. It will remove some copper, but by and large I believe it removes mostly organics. I think our tanks tend to have plenty of trace elements as long as you feed your fish reasonably well.

I've pretty much always just used a 1/2 cup or so of carbon per 50 gallons in a carbon bag in a high flow area of my sump. Quite often I forget it for months at a time and then change it out. I've never really noticed a big difference, but it does get the yellow out of the water.

Whatever you do, start out slow. Hooking up big efficient pieces of equipment and running them max out is sure to get you into trouble. Recall the problems that Spyro had when he ran his phosphate removal reactor too hard....lost a LOT of corals due to the shock.

 

[littlep93056]

Thanks Greg for your opinion

I'm just trying to way all the pros & cons

 

[Aquaman_68]

Thanks for your take Greg.
In regards to your use of carbon 24/7, In a mesh bag, floating in the sump. I can't see a problem with that & I have used it in the past that way. As far as how many & how much trace elements are removed that way.....I'm sure it isn't much. My concerns & points I made above are using carbon in a reactor. It's bad & it removes too much good with the bad & it does it too quickly.

Mike, I really think you should hex the reactor idea & stick with the floating mesh bag If you feel a need or would like to run carbon.

 

[Aquaman_68]

As i understand it a skimmer is only able to remove DOC's it is not able to remove other forms of chemicals

Sorry I didn't respond to your comment earlier.

Disolved organic compounds are indeed the majority of what a skimmer removes. Some stubborn compounds will not be removed by skimmer alone. Some people use ozone to break up the stubborn compounds so that the skimmer can remove them & some use carbon. Others remove stubborn compounds by doing monthly or weekly water changes. Any one of these methods can prove to be successful.
And....
Using carbon in a reactor most be done with great caution. (much more than most reefers even understand) Flow rates are a big issue & this is where it can become a disaster. If you are using carbon in a reactor what are you using for a pump? Do you have it full throttle or cut back with a ball valve?

 

[skatezen]

Using carbon in a reactor most be done with great caution. (much more than most reefers even understand) Flow rates are a big issue & this is where it can become a disaster.

What kind of disaster?

If you are using carbon in a reactor what are you using for a pump? Do you have it full throttle or cut back with a ball valve?

I have mine T-ed off my return line with 1/4" polyethylene tubing. I reduce the flow a ton with a John Guest ball valve to get it at 1 gph.

 

[Aquaman_68]

What kind of disaster?

A possible tank crash due to stripping the water too much & too fast!!


I have mine T-ed off my return line with 1/4" polyethylene tubing. I reduce the flow a ton with a John Guest ball valve to get it at 1 gph.

That's not a problem. That is a very slow flow rate.

My concerns for example:
When someone hooks up a huge reactor to a maxi jet 1200 & has it cut back in half. That is still over 100 GPH & way too much flow. (I was suggested to do this way back from someone I considered to have a little weight in the hobby)

I'm glad you rang in. How have you been? Hows NY? still there?
Anyway.......
Pretty much like I've heard before... The proof is in the pudding. (what does ones tank look like & what are their claims?) It's not how smart someone sounds or presents themself online.
You've seen my tank first hand...What are your thoughts?

I hope that anyone reading this does not take this as arrogance...It's just a point I was making from what I heard from a fellow reefer in the past.
I've taken advice from someone I didn't know online years ago. Turns out the reefer was an absolute idiot & his tank was a mess. (but he sounded pretty smart!!!!!) LOL

You know....we all have our little misfortunes in this hobby & not one person is safe from that. (from equipment error or just plain stupidity)

If there is any lesson to be said....Take everything you hear with a grain of salt. Weigh out the pros & cons & also don't jump into anything too quickly.

I use this measure......what are you saying.......& what does your tank look like?

 

[skatezen]

I'm glad you rang in. How have you been? Hows NY? still there?
Anyway.......
Pretty much like I've heard before... The proof is in the pudding. (what does ones tank look like & what are their claims?) It's not how smart someone sounds or presents themself online.
You've seen my tank first hand...What are your thoughts?

Brian, NY is good I like it so far aside from its hard as hell to find a good reef store with sps and local clubs aren't half as good as the BRS. I love your tank, I think it is awesome. I don't have my 75 setup yet, I have to re-pour and level a new basement floor, tile, and frame and sheet-rock my fish room. I have a 37 gallon frag tank set up in my dining room which is freekin' awesome I have 40x flow and my sps love it.

(Please do take this as a flame as it is not directed towards you, I'm just having a hard time expressing what I feel.)

I also don't think that there are a set of rules of what you have to have running on your tank for it to be successful, for each reefer this is different, and for each individual system the requirements are different. Reefing is kind of like a belief. What does the individual reefer belief and what goals do he/she wish to accomplish and through what means. With/without ozone, skimmer, dsb, bb, ssb ect. there are tons of options out there. To each his own. I myself value opinions, but I am not the type of person to jump on the bandwagon just because some one says this product is great or you have to do this, change that. I like the proof is in the pudding. I also like hard concrete evidence. I will say, as others have said before me, nothing good happens quickly.

Anyways enough rambling, back to carbon.

 

[littlep93056]

If I set it up , it will be on a ball valve so I can controll the flow , looks like very slow is the best This unit is very big , there will be 3-4 lbs of carbon in it ,they do have a small unit 2-3 lbs I'm not sure if I should setup the big unit or bring it back & get the smaller one

 

[nitrofish]

I think I like gregs idea of simply adding a bag of carbon to the sump. sounds so much simpler than special reactors.

 

[Liam]

If I set it up , it will be on a ball valve so I can controll the flow , looks like very slow is the best This unit is very big , there will be 3-4 lbs of carbon in it ,they do have a small unit 2-3 lbs I'm not sure if I should setup the big unit or bring it back & get the smaller one

that does seem like a lot of carbon,even 2-3 lbs

 

[littlep93056]

i have the largest one. I run about 45 ounces in there. I run it off my return pump. I dial it in so the carbon moves around but doesn't go to the top of the sponge. So far it has worked and my water is clear. Just a note that MRC stuff is not the greatest for that price. I bought three things from them and everything I got had a leak. I spent over $1500 dollars on them. Would i go back. Not anymore. Try Barr Aquatics. There stuff I have seen and is made very well.

How do your tank run with the reactor

 

[Moe_K]

Mike, did you see this DIY project? It looks awesome to me.

 

[littlep93056]

Thanks Moe thats simple to build & a lot cheaper that the reator I have but have not hooked up

 

[skatezen]

Mike, did you see this DIY project? It looks awesome to me.

Thats basically what I made, but with some modifications.

 

[littlep93056]

Scott Merrill how about you input , I know you run a large amount of carbon because you bought that O.C. can from me to use for carbon