Carbon in very high flow area or in reactor question

Spare time

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 12, 2019
Messages
12,039
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Here
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So I have a fiji 20 or 24 sump and I previously ran carbon in the area with the incoming drain pipes where it would float to the top before the floss/sock section. I got a reactor for cheap but its nano and the pump only goes up to 90gph (without resistance) and so the water turnover for carbon when in the reactor is probably low (less than my tank which is 75g plus 20 ish sump). I originally did this because I wanted the carbon to be as effective as possible but now I am thinking the old spot is probably better. I was also thinking if a brs reactor for carbon but honestly I am not sure if it would actually be that different than the drain spot. What do you all think? Here is a side pic of the sump design for reference (again not sure if its this or the 24 sump from fiji but this part is the same design).

1609016092849.png
 

Reef.

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 12, 2019
Messages
4,599
Reaction score
3,441
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yes, my bad. I forgot to clarify that.

I would stick with the reactor then, as carbon is best not tumbled too much, so a slow flow would be fine and probably beat the media bag, even if the flow is just 1x per hour, that would beat the media bag every time.
 
OP
OP
Spare time

Spare time

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 12, 2019
Messages
12,039
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Here
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I would stick with the reactor then, as carbon is best not tumbled too much, so a slow flow would be fine and probably beat the media bag, even if the flow is just 1x per hour, that would beat the media bag every time.

It doesn't seem to tumble all that much in the bag. My concern is more of which will be faster to remove a pollutant or a contaminant if something happens. I know that reactors are supposed to be better to remove pollutants faster but the carbon in the spot before the socks just appears that it would have more contact with the tank's total water volume than the reactor.
 

Reef.

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 12, 2019
Messages
4,599
Reaction score
3,441
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
It doesn't seem to tumble all that much in the bag. My concern is more of which will be faster to remove a pollutant or a contaminant if something happens. I know that reactors are supposed to be better to remove pollutants faster but the carbon in the spot before the socks just appears that it would have more contact with the tank's total water volume than the reactor.

think you misunderstood me, with the media bag the carbon will more than likely not be moving at all, with the reactor some movement is good but you don’t want it moving so fast it breaks up into dust, so a slow tumble is good, chances are even with a slow flow going through the reactor you will know that at least once per hour all the water has come into contact with all the carbon, you can not say the same for a media bag, where the media clumps up, who knows how much of your tank water will ever see the carbon.
 
OP
OP
Spare time

Spare time

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 12, 2019
Messages
12,039
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Here
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
think you misunderstood me, with the media bag the carbon will more than likely not be moving at all, with the reactor some movement is good but you don’t want it moving so fast it breaks up into dust, so a slow tumble is good, chances are even with a slow flow going through the reactor you will know that at least once per hour all the water has come into contact with all the carbon, you can not say the same for a media bag, where the media clumps up, who knows how much of your tank water will ever see the carbon.


Ah ok. I would be packing the carbon between the sponges so it would not be able to tumble.
 

Mastering the art of locking and unlocking water pathways: What type of valves do you have on your aquarium plumbing?

  • Ball valves.

    Votes: 52 48.6%
  • Gate valves.

    Votes: 60 56.1%
  • Check valves.

    Votes: 25 23.4%
  • None.

    Votes: 27 25.2%
  • Other.

    Votes: 9 8.4%
Back
Top