DIY reactor for pump with too much flow - The Planted Tank Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-25-2015, 03:29 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: arlington, texas
Posts: 4
DIY reactor for pump with too much flow

ok i have an idea for a bypass line on a co2 reactor but wan't some feedback before i glue it all together, so far i'm $30 invested in the actual reactor pictured here. now this is a rough fit and it will look much better and glued obviously when i'm done.

i'm using a FX5 filter for my supply line.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3419.jpg
Views:	228
Size:	115.3 KB
ID:	420018  

kevinh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-25-2015, 03:59 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
dcutl002's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Smithfield, Va.
Posts: 687
I really like the clear PVC. One thing that I wish I had done was to put the heater in the bypass tube. That would be one less distraction inside the tank.

But, what you have looks good.
dcutl002 is offline  
post #3 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-25-2015, 04:07 AM Thread Starter
Newbie
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: arlington, texas
Posts: 4
thanks dcutl002 the heater idea never occurred to me. if i did that i'd put it in with unions because i'd hate to have to cut this all up and replumb if the heater went bad.

I got the clear pvc from a pool supplier. i get it in 10' sections. its used for backwash pipe sections.
kevinh is offline  
 
post #4 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-25-2015, 11:44 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PlantedRich's Avatar
 
PTrader: (2/100%)
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 12,108
Pool supply is not one I had thought about for clear. May have to write that down.
Looks like a massive piece but the FX5 is a massive filter.
I don't see the brass fitting and the fitting ,etc. it requires as being needed. I run my tubing directly into the side of the piping through an undersized hole and it works well without leaks.
But then that is a coulda , woulda, shoulda thing again?
PlantedRich is offline  
post #5 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 12:00 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Dead2fall's Avatar
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,137
Shouldn't the CO2 input be at the bottom of the reactor chamber and not the top? Also I'd move the ball valve to the right side of the T and another in the same position at the bottom as I think you'll get water in both paths the way it is now. Like it'll work with the ball valve closed, but when you open it up to bypass I don't think you'll really be bypassing. I'd also put a threaded T at the bottom of the reactor itself with a clean out plug for ease of draining or any potential maintenance.
Dead2fall is offline  
post #6 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 12:18 AM
Banned
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Near Ashville, North Carolina
Posts: 1,866
I think dead is correct. The co2 feed usually goes at the bottom so it fights the water current that tries to force it down. That increases exposure time and dissolves more co2,
jrill is offline  
post #7 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 12:37 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Dead2fall's Avatar
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,137
I mean in theory this setup should still push it downward I guess, but it could end up doing the dissolving further up the line with the input where it is.
Dead2fall is offline  
post #8 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:00 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
dcutl002's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Smithfield, Va.
Posts: 687
He's fine. Turbulence will be right at the 90 degree elbow and should quickly dissolve the CO2. There is also a "U" shape at the top of the reactor preventing gas from climbing up the hose. I would actually put the inlet about 2-3 inches from the top on the clear pipe vice the bottom. It really depends on your flow.

Kevinh, if you start to see small bubbles in your water coming from the out let pipe, you may want to restrict your bypass a bit forcing the CO2 towards the reactor.

Last edited by dcutl002; 01-26-2015 at 01:08 AM. Reason: clarification
dcutl002 is offline  
post #9 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:09 AM
Planted Tanker
 
burr740's Avatar
 
PTrader: (130/100%)
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bama
Posts: 5,848
How tall is it?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




burr740 is online now  
post #10 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:13 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Dead2fall's Avatar
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcutl002 View Post
He's fine. Turbulence will be right at the 90 degree elbow and should quickly dissolve the CO2. There is also a "U" shape at the top of the reactor preventing gas from climbing up the hose. I would actually put the inlet about 2-3 inches from the top on the clear pipe vice the bottom. It really depends on your flow.

Kevinh, if you start to see small bubbles in your water coming from the out let pipe, you may want to restrict your bypass a bit forcing the CO2 towards the reactor.
If it's fine this way, why are we using reactors and not just a 90 creating turbulence and some tubing? Plus he loses out on the cool bubbles visible through that nice clear pipe! Lol
Dead2fall is offline  
post #11 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:16 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
dcutl002's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Smithfield, Va.
Posts: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead2fall View Post
If it's fine this way, why are we using reactors and not just a 90 creating turbulence and some tubing? Plus he loses out on the cool bubbles visible through that nice clear pipe! Lol
True. I had to look at it a second time to see what you were talking about. He definitely doesn't want the CO2 backing into the bypass. He should have put it lower, but he can adjust the flow and should be OK. But hey, that was a good catch!
dcutl002 is offline  
post #12 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:18 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Dead2fall's Avatar
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,137
I may be out of the loop here, but is this some different reactor that relies on a bypass to work? Or is this just op trying to create a bypass to skip the reactor?
Dead2fall is offline  
post #13 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:26 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
dcutl002's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Smithfield, Va.
Posts: 687
dcutl002 is offline  
post #14 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:30 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Dead2fall's Avatar
 
PTrader: (4/100%)
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,137
I run a cerges myself, just wasn't sure if this was some new style dependent on a bypass system for some reason. Op will need to isolate the reactor itself with two ball valves for the bypass to work imo.
Dead2fall is offline  
post #15 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-26-2015, 01:46 AM
Planted Tank Enthusiast
 
dcutl002's Avatar
 
PTrader: (1/100%)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Smithfield, Va.
Posts: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead2fall View Post
I may be out of the loop here, but is this some different reactor that relies on a bypass to work? Or is this just op trying to create a bypass to skip the reactor?
The idea of the bypass is to lower the flow in the reactor if the pump is too strong right? Which should have allowed for the OP to put the CO2 lower as you suggested. but now the OP is going to need the flow strong enough in the reactor inlet to push the CO2 into the reactor, else it may back up into the bypass undissolved.

A typical Rex Grigg has the inlet at the top at least all of the ones that i have seen.

Bump:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead2fall View Post
I run a cerges myself, just wasn't sure if this was some new style dependent on a bypass system for some reason. Op will need to isolate the reactor itself with two ball valves for the bypass to work imo.
Yeah, I actually like the Cerges over the Rex Grigg that i built. I will say that I will never go back to a diffuser. They are so inefficient. As far as the bypass goes, the OP says that his filter was too strong.

Last edited by dcutl002; 01-26-2015 at 01:57 AM. Reason: clarification
dcutl002 is offline  
Reply

Tags
None

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The Planted Tank Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome