|11-08-2013 11:18 PM|
Cerges 20" with 2217
JUST TO UPDATE:
I receive the 20" canister last weekend and has been using it for couple of days. The added air release button is a requirement for 20" as i will not be able to turn it upside down inside the stand.
I add the bypass line with valve, and leave the one to the cerges line without valve as limited on space to manouver the tubing.
with 2217, I don't seem a need to open the valve on bypass line (or use the bypass line at all) as i really see less/unnoticeable micro bubble return into the tank. Perhaps later if i use bigger filter flow (or if the bubble noticeable after filter maintenance), i might use the bypass line valve. So i decide to leave the valve as it is.
Performance wise compared to ISTA max mix large, is much better.
I can push more CO2 faster (my fish showed a little stress with the cerges in place, so i backed out on BPS) and giving a rest to the solenoid to operate less time (monitored through PH controller).
The DC (4dKH+Bromo) showing YELLOW at 6.1/6.2 mark on PH controller within an hour or less (using ISTA, i have to turned on 2 hour prior light on -- and not even got the YELLOW).
I will monitor for a while using the cerges setup to see if i need further improvement to dissolve CO2.
Thanks Guys for the advice ... !!!
This thread is really helpful ...
|10-17-2013 06:39 PM|
|geesantoz||I just receive my canister for 10" ... unfortunately it come with 1/2" port ... will this work ?|
|10-12-2013 12:49 AM|
|fishyboy||I really doubt you'll need a bypass line with only a 2217.|
|10-11-2013 07:02 PM|
You could always grab one of these bad boys for $55 shipped:
They move a lot of water and you can modify the sponges in them to your heart's content. There are threads here and elsewhere to do it and since it's not your primary filter you could even get creative with the canister contents. Just a thought.
|10-11-2013 06:52 PM|
At the moment, the flow for 2217 seems not enough to give proper circulation that i need ( I use a koralia to help this out ). But this does not mean that cerges will not produce micro bubble. Reducing the 2217 output flow is not an option in my case.
To add another stronger canister filter or a second canister filter as suggested by m00se may be an option, but i try to defer it as a last option (still need to channel the money to other tanks).
I really hope that i can use this bypass method for now. I am planning to use a 10" canister due to tight space i have.
|10-11-2013 02:37 AM|
|fishyboy||For what you want, place a gate valve on the bypass line. If you want to be sure, but a gate valve on both sides. The idea of having a BV before and after the cerges is nice for cleaning but not needed. That said, I highly doubt you need to restrict the system with a simple cannister. What are you running? Back in the day I had one on a 2028 and it was not enough flow.|
|10-10-2013 11:10 PM|
|10-10-2013 11:03 PM|
|10-10-2013 09:01 PM|
|10-10-2013 08:58 PM|
|m00se||I would use a Y on both ends. T's add too much additional flow restriction and you might have to choke off the bypass more than you want, to get satisfactory flow to the cerges. Capishe?|
|10-10-2013 08:51 PM|
I still like the alternative with diverter valve though as it will evenly divert the flow properly without adding a back pressure such on the left solution. Perhaps the check valve is unnecessary.
But as i have no experience using a diverter valve, perhaps something else might become as an issue that i fail to capture.
|10-10-2013 01:48 AM|
|m00se||Go with the option on the left. The design of the cerges reactor makes a check valve unnecessary. Water can't backflow into it plumbed the way your diagram on the left is laid out.|
|10-10-2013 01:17 AM|
On the right, I might found another alternative that divert the flow (using pond diverter valve, i found there is 3/4" threaded that seems can be used for this application).
I am currently collecting the part and will try m00se suggestion, and if it does not work will try the alternative using a diverter valve.
|10-10-2013 12:44 AM|
i am looking at following water heater concept, and it seems consistent with your thought on the ball valve #1 on bypass line.
Also there is a check valve involved on this approach, to prevent back flow to the water heater.
|10-10-2013 12:32 AM|
|m00se||I'm no hydraulics engineer here, but I suspect that everything in that "circuit" will flow right through the bypass hose and ignore the cerges reactor completely. If it were me I would put the ball valve #1 on the bypass hose after the Y to the reactor, and contol the bypass flow that way. That would eliminate the need for ball valve #2 and assuming all the tubing is the same diameter would give you what you're after.|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|