The Planted Tank Forum banner
21 - 32 of 32 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,924 Posts
Not to pick at your design here but it is not what I like to see called a Grigg's style as it has some pretty big changes that do matter.

When I add gas at the side it is out of the main flow of the water and it can create problems. When I push/pull the tubing through an undersized hole and let the gas come out in the center of the water flow, it mixes without creating a large bubble at the top where it can make noise. Just small details that Rex had worked out over his testing and use. When I make changes to a plan, I have to accept any trouble that I create.
Kind of seems wrong to call something a Cadillac if we swap in a VW engine?
I do not have hands on experience testing this, but I have done loads of research. (mostly from threads on this forum). What I've gleaned from everyone else's research is bringing the CO2 in to the reactor this way makes a huge difference. Bio balls do little if anything.
As far as the connection. Has anyone heard of one coming apart? It seems like it's as secure as a hose pushed over a plastic barbed fitting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
I do not have hands on experience testing this, but I have done loads of research. (mostly from threads on this forum). What I've gleaned from everyone else's research is bringing the CO2 in to the reactor this way makes a huge difference. Bio balls do little if anything.
As far as the connection. Has anyone heard of one coming apart? It seems like it's as secure as a hose pushed over a plastic barbed fitting.
Most people use hose clamps on the barb fittings to make sure the connection is secured.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,617 Posts
Please, those who make griggs reactors. do NOT use the undersized hole method. I did that and I pulled the tube accidentally and water went spraying everywhere, It also started leaking. This is a system that is under pressure. Water always will find a weak point and leak. I had to put my thumb over the hole that was spraying water and disconnect everything with one hand. Not fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
Please, those who make griggs reactors. do NOT use the undersized hole method. I did that and I pulled the tube accidentally and water went spraying everywhere, It also started leaking. This is a system that is under pressure. Water always will find a weak point and leak. I had to put my thumb over the hole that was spraying water and disconnect everything with one hand. Not fun.
This is why I refuse to do it that way no matter what people say. You can achieve the same thing with a barb fitting with a piece of tubing on the back side to put the bubbles in the middle of the flow.
 

·
Planted Tanker
Joined
·
6,028 Posts
I do not have hands on experience testing this, but I have done loads of research. (mostly from threads on this forum). What I've gleaned from everyone else's research is bringing the CO2 in to the reactor this way makes a huge difference. Bio balls do little if anything.
As far as the connection. Has anyone heard of one coming apart? It seems like it's as secure as a hose pushed over a plastic barbed fitting.
I can tell you for a fact, from hands on experience with the same reactor both with and without, bio balls make a tremendous difference.

Whether it is from helping to hold the CO2 in longer, or from the added turbulence they create, or from the increase in pressure due to added resistance......I cannot say exactly why they help, but they certainly do.

That's not to say every reactor needs them, because they dont.

Ive also seen reports where bio balls can begin to pack up and clog to some degree after a while. Seems likely, though Ive never broken one down after a year or two to find out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
You are going to be SO VERY glad to have clear pipe!

If you can spare the flow, adding a cutoff valve after the reactor can help tremendously. Closing it just a little will increase the internal pressure. Pressure dissolves CO2 faster than anything.

Bio balls help a lot too, but they will cost you some flow. Not very much ime, but some

]
Burr, that is almost how i run m 3 DIY reactors, they all have a valve on the output, giving me the ability to adjust dwell time + i have them on an independent loop driven by dedicated pump.
No bio balls, have done this fore the last umteen years with no issues :laugh2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
Thanks for the comments. Just one person has commented on what I was intially asking about the volume inside the reactor.

So basically 3/4" ID pipe? (sorry I cant think in metric)

No idea how or if that will work. Not very well if I had to guess. Most reactors use a 2" pipe, or maybe 1 1/2" for smaller ones (ID).

Not sure because Ive never tried it, but with a pipe that small bubbles are probably going to shoot right through. There needs to be a certain amount of dwell time to give the co2 a chance to dissolve. With a pipe that small you will have high velocity, not necessarily high pressure.
Lol @ 3/4". You are no good with metric, sorry. 36mm ID is just under 1 1/2". Not sure whether to use the bio balls i have (32mm) or get smaller ones.
 

·
Planted Tanker
Joined
·
6,028 Posts
Thanks for the comments. Just one person has commented on what I was intially asking about the volume inside the reactor.


Lol @ 3/4". You are no good with metric, sorry. 36mm ID is just under 1 1/2". Not sure whether to use the bio balls i have (32mm) or get smaller ones.
You're right, haha. The little comparison graph I looked at was 2" instead of 1"

Seems like having more smaller balls would be better than having less big ones. The difference could minimal though, not sure.

More volume should equal more dwell time, which is a good thing, but it shouldnt affect pressure. The pressure will equal out regardless of volume, up to a point obviously.

Pressure is determined by the amount of flow is going in vs. any restriction going out. Head height plays a big role. That's also the advantage of having a cut off valve after the reactor. The more you close it, the more pressure inside the reactor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 · (Edited)
Thanks for the feedback. Pressure = force x area (obviously minus any restriction), not force vs restriction. I'll need to write an equation based on 32mm bio balls and smaller ones to work out the best size to go for.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,924 Posts
I can tell you for a fact, from hands on experience with the same reactor both with and without, bio balls make a tremendous difference.
I understand that from the previous post but that is the modified reactor with the air coming in the side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
So, I finally got around to building my own reactor about a month ago. Just installed it tonight and im frustrated. The flow rate is almost next to nothing. I don't know if I done something wrong but it is nowhere near as good as it was before I installed it. See image.

Can anyone shed some light on what could be the cause? I run a sump with a 3600 lph submersible pump. The reactor chamber is 600mm long with 3/4" barb fittings for 16/22 pipe.
 

Attachments

21 - 32 of 32 Posts
Top