Carbon and GFO Reactor

Sacohen · Jan 1, 2013

I'm getting BRS's Dual reactor.

Trying to decide if I want to T off my quiet one 3000 return pump and then have the return of the reactors dump back into the sump or T off the sump and have the return of the reactors T back into pump return back to the tank.

I don't want to use a separate pump for the reactors because I have a very small return section of the sump (only about 6" x &.5") and it's kind of full with the quiet one 3000 and another pump for my NatuReef DeNitrification chamber.

It's already getting hard to get in there and remove the sponge separating the wet/dry section from the return section for cleaning, and as we all know the harder it is to do something the less likely we are going to do it, so I don't want to make it any harder.

Here are my two options...

Return to Main Line

Or Return to Sump

strange33w · Jan 1, 2013

I connected mine to my return line and it worked well

Singlefin · Jan 1, 2013

Not sure if the first option would work. I have mine setup the second way with the return from the reactor dumping in front of the intake of the return pump.

Sacohen · Jan 2, 2013

Thanks for the input.

Do both of you have the dual reactor or is it a single?

I got a response from someone on another forum saying they had the dual and they could never get the both of them to tumble right.

Singlefin · Jan 2, 2013

I have the two separate ones hooked in line. I have a shut off valve on both intakes. The carbon one is always wide open. The GFO, the 1st one, I adjust it to tumble good. As the gfo gets older I open the valve more to get it to tumble better. Seems the longer it is being used, it gets packed down so I have to open the valve more. I don't think you have to worry about the carbon. It's packed between sponges. I bought them used.

johntran216 · Jan 2, 2013

It doesn't look like the first option would work. Ur reactors' output will probably be back pressured from the return pump. You would need a separate return line for the reactor.

Zack · Jan 2, 2013

the first option might work if you had a lot of flow going through your reactors but since you will most likely have the water passing through slowly im not sure. You should try it anyway that way it will save me the trouble if it doesnt work!!! :xd: LOL!

Sacohen · Jan 3, 2013

johntran216 said:
It doesn't look like the first option would work. Ur reactors' output will probably be back pressured from the return pump. You would need a separate return line for the reactor.

I was actually thinking the same thing about the back pressure and was going to put a check valve right before the T back into the return line so the return water would not flow backwards into the reactors. I was also thinking of using a y instead of a T to return back into the main line, thinking it may act to pull the water from the reactor back into the main return.

Zack · Jan 3, 2013

Now there's an idea, check valve should do it

Sent from my VS950 4G using Forum Runner

Zoacoral · Jan 3, 2013

I asked the BRS guys, and they said you dont want the carbon to tumble.. Only the GFO...

Singlefin · Jan 3, 2013

Carbon should be packed between two sponges.

AZDesertRat · Jan 3, 2013

Take a look at the Spectrapure dual reactor on sale in the flyer at the top of their web page. It uses a wye and individual ball valves so you can control each chamber separately or shut one or the other off completely for maintenance without affecting the other. That way you can have GFO tumble and carbon not without having to pack them full of sponges which trap detritus.

guichi1210 · Jan 3, 2013

johntran216 said:
It doesn't look like the first option would work. Ur reactors' output will probably be back pressured from the return pump. You would need a separate return line for the reactor.

True, you will get some back pressure. I was able to divert enough flow into the reactors to overcome the back pressure by using Y unions for inlet and outlet.

Sacohen · Jan 4, 2013

guichi1210 said:
True, you will get some back pressure. I was able to divert enough flow into the reactors to overcome the back pressure by using Y unions for inlet and outlet.

Did you use the BRS Reactor?
The reason I ask is I got mine yesterday and it has these stupid little Mur-Lok fittings that I an't figure out how to get off to use really PVC fittings.

Sacohen · Jan 4, 2013

Zoacoral said:
I asked the BRS guys, and they said you dont want the carbon to tumble.. Only the GFO...

Yeah I spoke to them too yesterday and below is a copy of my chat with them...

you: Thank you. Basically I just got my order and apparently I ordered the wrong thing. I thought I was ordering the dual model, but I'm not sure what happened. I want to now set this delux unit up to handle both GFO and Carbon. Would placing a pad in between the 2 be the right way to do it?
Reid: that or you can use a less amount of the GFO, mix it with the carbon so it is Not tumbling and change it out every 2 weeks
you: Really. I'm just learning about reactors adn have read differing things. Should both the GFO and carbon tumble or should the carbon be compact, almost like a solid block filter in an RO/DI system?
Reid: If GFO is ran separate, you want it to tumble it. When mixed with carbon you do not need to tumble
Reid: with carbon you never want to tumble
you: Great. Thanks for the info.

AZDesertRat · Jan 4, 2013

I would leave the Mur lok fittings in place and use tubing. The reactors with carbon and GFO will only require 60-80 GPH and I'm sure your return pump is larger than that so with option 2 you add a ball valve in the branch circuit and only feed what the reactors need while sending the rest to the display tank. Too much flow grinds the media to dust.

ahvrivera · Jan 4, 2013

I have the BRS dual reactor. I have ran it like you have it in your first diagram. Backpressure was a problem at first. So i added some check valves. This increased the pressure in the reactors because of the flow trying to push on the check valve. I had to open the valve to the GFO almost all the way before it started tumbling. Also noticed the GFO started getting packed over the course of a week becasue of the flow restriction. I have the reactors running of a manifold from the main pump. I have an EHEIM 1262. I redesigned it to the simple diagram. Both lines from the reactor dump right into the return pump area. The good thing i have seen from this is i can adjust the flow with out having to open the valve wide open to get the GFO to tumble. I run the rox carbon wide open. It is squeezed between the sponges and does not move with the flow. Also i would guess it is better this way becasue the water gets more exposure to the media. I also like to move the dump lines from the reactors to different areas of the sump when ditritus gets accumulated. Hope this shelps. GL

Sacohen · Jan 4, 2013

ahvrivera said:
I run the rox carbon wide open. It is squeezed between the sponges and does not move with the flow. Also i would guess it is better this way becasue the water gets more exposure to the media.

Thanks for the info. As I said in another post I accidentally ordered the single model instead of the dual. So I was going to 1 stack the GFO and Carbon with another sponge in between, but BRS suggested mixed the GFO and carbon and don't tumble them.

This lead to the question of how to set the flow if I mix them together (which is the way I'm leaning)
1) Pack it loose between the sponges and set it to the point where it starts to tumble and then back it down a bit.
2) Pack it tight between the sponges and set it to wide open.

AZDesertRat · Jan 4, 2013

You should only be running a maximum of about 1 spoonfull of GFO per 10 gallons so unless you have a large system you will not have much media. Same with carbon as there are numerous articles on HLLE problems from too much carbon in a system. The reactors are pretty big so you would have a lot of sponges filling up all the dead space inside the cartridges if you want them packed snugly. I would use as little media as you can get away with, especially for the first couple months as things acclimate so pack loosely and reduce the flows to 60 GPH or less so the media slightly boils but does not really tumble. The carbon and GFO will stratify and separate but that is OK or as I have done in the past place the carbon on the bottom with a sponge between it and the GFO on top so it can fluidize.

Again I question their advice, no other vendors recommend mixing the medias due to the different useful lifespans and change out timeframes and the different flow requirements. I thing what they are telling you warrants further investigation and advice from many others maybe with greater knowledge and experience, they are relative newcomers in the grand scheme of things. I do buy and use many of their supplements and medias but I don't necessarily follow their guidelines as they are out in left field sometimes compared to others in the industry for decades.