The Planted Tank Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,907 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello all,

I'd like to pick your brains about the best co2 injection methods for a planted tank that is running an overflow and a wet dry.

Here's some specs on the equipment I'm using for some background.

The tank is a 60H that has been drilled for an overflow. I'm using a glass holes super nano overflow kit . There's about a 1 inch drop for the water. The box has a lid but it is not sealed.

The water flows into a CPR style wet/dry filter with the wet/dry section sealed.

The return pump is a sicce 1.0 silent syncra pump that runs at about 230gph.

I have several methods of injection at my disposal and would like to know what would work best.

Method 1: My current method. I'm running a phosban 150 reactor for purigen, so I have one of those atomic inline co2 diffusers on the pump side. It injects co2 into the purigen reactor, then the co2 infused water is pumped back into the wet/dry near the return pump.

The issue with this is that I can't run the reactor pump at a high GPH since it'll shoot all the purigen into the sump. because of this, I get a lot of larger bubbles that collect near the top and eventually get pushed out of the reactor. These bubbles are probably the size of a large pea.

Method 2. I ran the atomic inline reactor on the return pump. it worked well, the only problem was the co2 mist. I hate the look, it makes the tank look very cloudy.

Method 3. I had a regular atomic diffuser that was placed in the sump. It was plumbed into the wet dry section that was sealed off. I only had it running for a day or so so not too sure how well this worked.

I don't have room in my stand to build another stand alone reactor like a rex grigg so that is out of the question.

I was thinking about maybe running the atomic diffuser on the drain pipe so it shoots the co2 straight into the wetdry chamber that is already sealed off, but don't know if this will actualy work in practice

Thanks for reading and for any input!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,907 Posts
The On 230 gph I'd let sicce mist it up but u don't like the mist look. The only way around that is a reactor.. Diffusing into the wet dry is wasteful as its not 100% air tight or U'd have what happened to me which was massive bubbles that came out from underneath the baffle. The mist only works for me if it's injected into the tank as that's where it does most of its dissolving.. I was actually considering a phosban reactor for my 75 build..

Right now I'm atomizing with an inline atomic. I dunk it in hydrogen peroxide monthly for 10 minutes so it stays clean and the bubbles stay small. Mist is not noticeable 10 feet away. I probably have 5-7 bps on my 29 gallon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,907 Posts
hmm, do you think running the needle wheel into the phosban reactor would work out ok
And yes it would but will have similar results. To what ur doing now, the reactors return could face the intake of the main pump so the larger bubbles get sucked up and misted into the tank, it would save some co2 and give u a nice slight mist effect as well
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
I tee off the return line from the pump and back to the sump to a medium sized gravel vac.Half inch ball valve inline to control flow.I then place the co2 line in/under the vac tube.This creates a down flow of water and an up flow of co2 mixing in the gravel vac...no loss of co2...works good.Oh and the gravel vac tube is filled with bio balls....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
With so much water agitation over the bio-balls/medium doesn't the C02 get "off-gassed"
more rapidly? Do W->D filters inherently require more C02?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,907 Posts
With so much water agitation over the bio-balls/medium doesn't the C02 get "off-gassed"
more rapidly? Do W->D filters inherently require more C02?
Yes the inherently use more co2

His reactor is not part of the wet dry system so having agitation in there does not decrease co2 levels. He just has bio balls in his reactor
 

·
Algae Grower
Joined
·
6,444 Posts
With so much water agitation over the bio-balls/medium doesn't the C02 get "off-gassed"
more rapidly? Do W->D filters inherently require more C02?
Not enough to seriously alter the cost of co2. What it does do however is get a lot more o2 into the water column. The o2 there is, the more co2 can be added without harming your livestock. Or something to that extent. I didn't word that very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,907 Posts
Not enough to seriously alter the cost of co2. What it does do however is get a lot more o2 into the water column. The o2 there is, the more co2 can be added without harming your livestock. Or something to that extent. I didn't word that very well.
u did perfect.. its a simple theory and its true

more o2, = safer co2 injection at higher levels
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
With so much water agitation over the bio-balls/medium doesn't the C02 get "off-gassed"
more rapidly? Do W->D filters inherently require more C02?
No.

Several aquarist myself included verified this independently via pH change.

You need to seal the dry section*(eg tape etc to block the vents), and minimize the spill over in the prefilter. Use lids on the prefilter etc.

Otherwise, it's not different than a tank's surface.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,609 Posts
Cutting and fraying the impeller works, but the NW specific impellers are the best way to go really.

You can also minimize the orifice for the CO2 tubing coming into the NW pump also, this will produce smaller bubbles. This works at lower rates of CO2, but at higher rates, the hole breaks and the bubbles stay larger.

The other thing you can do is add say 2-4ft worth of tubing between the NW and the reactor chamber.

I use a separate NW pump and do not use the Return pump as the NW. I also just recirculate the water in the sump from the NW near the Return pump so I end up with about 4-8 ft worth of travel. I also use a large UV in some cases as a chamber. Some folks use an empty canister filter.

The smaller clean water filter housing work very well, no modification is really needed other than a PCV pipe inside to pull water from the very bottom if you use the NW approach. Want to count the bubble rate? Turn the NW off for a second.

The issue with crippling your return pump is this: when you modify those impellers, sometimes they get unbalanced and lock/seize up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,907 Posts
Cutting and fraying the impeller works, but the NW specific impellers are the best way to go really.

You can also minimize the orifice for the CO2 tubing coming into the NW pump also, this will produce smaller bubbles. This works at lower rates of CO2, but at higher rates, the hole breaks and the bubbles stay larger.

The other thing you can do is add say 2-4ft worth of tubing between the NW and the reactor chamber.

I use a separate NW pump and do not use the Return pump as the NW. I also just recirculate the water in the sump from the NW near the Return pump so I end up with about 4-8 ft worth of travel. I also use a large UV in some cases as a chamber. Some folks use an empty canister filter.

The smaller clean water filter housing work very well, no modification is really needed other than a PCV pipe inside to pull water from the very bottom if you use the NW approach. Want to count the bubble rate? Turn the NW off for a second.

The issue with crippling your return pump is this: when you modify those impellers, sometimes they get unbalanced and lock/seize up.
What is ur preffered needle wheel?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,907 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I'm going to be running the needle wheel on my reactor pump, but due to limited size in the stand, I won't be able to have much more tubing than the 1 foot that's already there.

my question is this, where exactly do I put the co2 tubing? Do I stick it into the intake side or do I add it to the little thing that sticks up the top? I've drawn up a picture to help explain what I'm talking about. I'm using a rio+ 50 btw
http://www.amazon.com/Rio-Plus-50-Aqua-Pump/dp/B0027J67GS

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,907 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
alright, so. it didn't work. The flow isn't high enough to chop up the bubbles and keep the purigen in the reactor. I went back to my first method of running an atomic inline diffuser, but I added 4 more feet of tubing before it reaches the reactor. Diffusion rate is much much higher now.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top