The Planted Tank Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a CO2 system on a planted thirty gallon, and, despite the fact that I have a check-valve, the water still back flows down through the tubing, through the bubble counter, through the check-valve, and, finally starts to enter the actual regulator when I leave the CO2 flow off for a few days (e.g. the tank runs out and I can't refill it for a while). Why is this happening? Should the check-valve be the last thing the CO2 flows through other than the diffuser (currently the order is regulator, check-valve, bubble counter, and then diffuser) so after the bubble counter? I am so confused why this is happening :confused1:! Shouldn't the check-valve prevent back flow any where it is positioned?

The bubble counter is the regular Fluval one and the check-valve is just a little cheap one I got from Petco.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
it prevents backflow in order, try a new check valve. i doubt the location that makes much of a difference. You can always test it by trying to push water through with a syringe.

This might be a stupid question, but are you sure the check valve is turned the right way :p?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,528 Posts
Doesn't really matter where your heck valve is IF it works. Yours def isn't. I've had good luck w/ ISTA check valves. There are others others will recommend..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
618 Posts
You know whats funny and might sounds just a little crazy.. I got three check valves on my single co2 system...it doesn't effect any thing or make the system work harder its more of just peace of mind for myself hahah!! I bought a 10 pack off of ebay for 75 cents which I use two and then on my bubble counter I have one built in so tht makes it 3...but ya sounds like your check valve took a crap on you..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
This might be a stupid question, but are you sure the check valve is turned the right way :p?
This isn't a stupid question at all given I am totally the person who would do this...:grin2:. The check-valve is facing the right way though. Do some check-valves (such as a low quality Petco one) just not work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
This isn't a stupid question at all given I am totally the person who would do this...:grin2:. The check-valve is facing the right way though. Do some check-valves (such as a low quality Petco one) just not work?
even high quality ones have a failrate, I've had a 10$ checkvalve fail on me in the past, while the 30 cent one's havent :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
The only check valve I have in my CO2 line is the one built in to the bubble counter

If I didn't have a built in check valve then I would put one between the bubble counter and the regulator.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Tapatalk
 

·
Plant Clown
Joined
·
4,729 Posts
1) If it was cheap, it's a crappy check valve, and won't last very long
2) Even crappy check valves will do their job for a while
3) Regardless of how much it cost, every check valve will eventually fail
4) Direct contact with liquid will cause any check valve to fail more quickly
5) Multiple check valves, not necessarily expensive ones, regularly replaced, is the safest bet.

Addendum: Those integral check valves in bubble counters? They're garbage. Assume you need an extra cv just to start at zero.

To answer your initial question, I recommend that you install a cv before the bc to be safe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,862 Posts
1) To answer your initial question, I recommend that you install a cv before the bc to be safe.
Just to clarify, Kevmo, you mean: regulator/needle valve - check valve - bubble counter

How do you feel about using multiple check valves as extra safety measures in case one fails?

If you would advise multiple, in what order would you install them? (example NV-CV-CV-BC or NV-CV-BC-CV)

Pretty sure NV-CV-CV-BC makes more sense incase BC fluid leaks toward NV/REG, it would be wise to have 2 CV in case one fails. Just want to verify.

Would the extra CV(s) before the BC require increasing working pressure to make up for added back pressure?
 

·
Plant Clown
Joined
·
4,729 Posts
Just to clarify, Kevmo, you mean: regulator/needle valve - check valve - bubble counter

How do you feel about using multiple check valves as extra safety measures in case one fails?

If you would advise multiple, in what order would you install them? (example NV-CV-CV-BC or NV-CV-BC-CV)

Pretty sure NV-CV-CV-BC makes more sense incase BC fluid leaks toward NV/REG, it would be wise to have 2 CV in case one fails. Just want to verify.

Would the extra CV(s) before the BC require increasing working pressure to make up for added back pressure?
I prefer not to have bubble counters mounted to the post body to keep some separation between fluid and the important parts, as well as actually being able to see if fluid is creeping back down the line. I keep a bubble counter just before the reactor and one or two check valves before the bubble counter. Doubling up is never a bad idea. There's no harm in overkill.

It's unlikely that an extra check valve, with a low cracking pressure (they're usually in the 1-ish range, sometimes less), will have much effect on flow. If it does, opening the needle valve a bit wider should fix it, and increasing working pressure is always an option. It's something you'll have to figure out once you change anything.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top