Questions for ditching a cannister filter

[reely989]

Hey guys, as the thread title implies, I”m looking to ditch my fx4 canister filter on my 75g reef tank. I have a Tunze 9012 DC skimmer in the display. My canister is currently running mechanical sponge filtration and houses some carbon, GFO, and seachem matrix. I’m not worried much about the mechanical aspect because I think I could build a power filter to run as needed that would be much easier to maintain. My primary questions would be—

What would be the best way to run the seachem matrix? I know putting it in the display is an option, but I’d rather avoid that. Could I just run it through a basic BRS reactor?

Is there any detriment to running carbon and GFO in a standalone reactor versus a canister filter?

Has anyone else done this with success? I know there are many tanks run without much mechanical filtration, but this is still a big change for me and I”m still in the newbie mindset of being scared of blowing the whole tank up.

 

[DanyL]

I've never used a canister filter myself, however as long as you're able to maintain your nutrient levels stable I don't see it a show stopper, or something to be afraid of.

GFO and Carbon can easily be used in a reactor, I'm not sure how effective they are in a canister filter setup, but they are very efficient when used with a reactor. Just make sure you're able to increase or decrease the flow to control its efficiency.

I've seen people use matrix and other denitrifying media inside reactors before, can't comment much about the effectiveness of doing so, however you might want to consider using something like Maxspect's small bricks instead, they are small and compact and supposed to be highly effective.
I do own these bricks, but apart from seeding them inside my well established 206g main system as a preparation for a future frag tank I can't tell much yet.

 

[reely989]

I've never used a canister filter myself, however as long as you're able to maintain your nutrient levels stable I don't see it a show stopper, or something to be afraid of.

GFO and Carbon can easily be used in a reactor, I'm not sure how effective they are in a canister filter setup, but they are very efficient when used with a reactor. Just make sure you're able to increase or decrease the flow to control its efficiency.

I've seen people use matrix and other denitrifying media inside reactors before, can't comment much about the effectiveness of doing so, however you might want to consider using something like Maxspect's small bricks instead, they are small and compact and supposed to be highly effective.
I do own these bricks, but apart from seeding them inside my well established 206g main system as a preparation for a future frag tank I can't tell much yet.

I appreciate the response. I think I’m going to move forward with this. I think I’m going to run three reactor cannisters from BRS— two with seachem matrix or something similar, and one with mixed GFO and carbon. Do you think one Sicce 1.5 would run that?

 

[dedragon]

Why run seachem matrix at all? It is only needed if you need more biological filtration, usually if you dont have much live rock. Extra wont hurt it just isnt really necessary at all. Also if you arent running the media reactor after some sort of mechanical filter media, particulates can clog the filter fast as well as become a source for nitrates as detritus (fish food, poop, etc) will get stuck in the biological filter media (seachem matrix)

Media reactor will actually be a better way to run carbon and gfo as it will be much more efficient, so start with less carbon and gfo than you were running previously as gfo in a reactor can bottom out phosphates fast. What are your phosphates at currently?

 

[reely989]

Why run seachem matrix at all? It is only needed if you need more biological filtration, usually if you dont have much live rock. Extra wont hurt it just isnt really necessary at all. Also if you arent running the media reactor after some sort of mechanical filter media, particulates can clog the filter fast as well as become a source for nitrates as detritus (fish food, poop, etc) will get stuck in the biological filter media (seachem matrix)

Media reactor will actually be a better way to run carbon and gfo as it will be much more efficient, so start with less carbon and gfo than you were running previously as gfo in a reactor can bottom out phosphates fast. What are your phosphates at currently?

I guess I”m just not 100% confident in my biological filtration without it. I’ve got a 75 gallon tank with 40 pounds of rock. I’m going to use the BRS reactor which has some foam in front of the media. I’ll just have to be careful about clogs.

My phosphates are at .18 now. I don’t run much GFO. Like you said, I’m kind of scared of bottoming it out but I could stand to decrease them a bit.

 

[DanyL]

I appreciate the response. I think I’m going to move forward with this. I think I’m going to run three reactor cannisters from BRS— two with seachem matrix or something similar, and one with mixed GFO and carbon. Do you think one Sicce 1.5 would run that?

As a good measure, I wouldn't run both off the same pump.
Sometimes when the GFO/Carbon are too effective you might want to decrease the flow down to a dripping rate, or turn if off completely. You would want to maintain full controllably on flow.

I guess I”m just not 100% confident in my biological filtration without it. I’ve got a 75 gallon tank with 40 pounds of rock. I’m going to use the BRS reactor which has some foam in front of the media. I’ll just have to be careful about clogs.

My phosphates are at .18 now. I don’t run much GFO. Like you said, I’m kind of scared of bottoming it out but I could stand to decrease them a bit.

I do like to have as much rock as I possibly can, but 40 pounds on a 75 gallon system should be enough.
As was already mentioned earlier however, running more media alongside it won't hurt either.

0.18ppm of PO4 is a bit higher to my taste, but as long as your coral and fish are happy you don't have to chase it, just make sure to at least maintain it around the same numbers.

 

[bushdoc]

"Is there any detriment to running carbon and GFO in a standalone reactor versus a canister filter?"
No, on the contrary it is probably more efficient to run them in reactor.
Typical GFO ( with an notable exception of RowaPhos) needs to be tumbled in reactor, but not activated carbon.
You would than need 3 reactors. There is a product Called "Chemi-Pure Elite" which contains both GFO and Carbon and it can be run in media reactor, without tumbling. I have not use it, so no personal experience.
I think that Sachem matrix probably should be run in separate reactor.

 

[reely989]

As a good measure, I wouldn't run both off the same pump.
Sometimes when the GFO/Carbon are too effective you might want to decrease the flow down to a dripping rate, or turn if off completely. You would want to maintain full controllably on flow.


I do like to have as much rock as I possibly can, but 40 pounds on a 75 gallon system should be enough.
As was already mentioned earlier however, running more media alongside it won't hurt either.

0.18ppm of PO4 is a bit higher to my taste, but as long as your coral and fish are happy you don't have to chase it, just make sure to at least maintain it around the same numbers.

That’s a good point on flow control. I wonder if I could run a bigger pump and run a T and control each line individually… though I’m probably just making a problem out of thin air. Even two small sicce pumps will probably take up less room in the display than the intake and outtake on my fx4.

 

[reely989]

"Is there any detriment to running carbon and GFO in a standalone reactor versus a canister filter?"
No, on the contrary it is probably more efficient to run them in reactor.
Typical GFO ( with an notable exception of RowaPhos) needs to be tumbled in reactor, but not activated carbon.
You would than need 3 reactors. There is a product Called "Chemi-Pure Elite" which contains both GFO and Carbon and it can be run in media reactor, without tumbling. I have not use it, so no personal experience.
I think that Sachem matrix probably should be run in separate reactor.

I was under the impression GFO could be run alongside carbon as long as it was mixed well to prevent the GFO from clumping. I thought that was the primary reason for tumbling. I’ve used chemipure blue in the past but I feel like it’s overpriced.

Thanks for the input!

 

[DanyL]

That’s a good point on flow control. I wonder if I could run a bigger pump and run a T and control each line individually… though I’m probably just making a problem out of thin air. Even two small sicce pumps will probably take up less room in the display than the intake and outtake on my fx4.

It is possible, but the problem with using a T to split and control flow is that changing the flow for one reactor would also affect the other.

I was under the impression GFO could be run alongside carbon as long as it was mixed well to prevent the GFO from clumping. I thought that was the primary reason for tumbling. I’ve used chemipure blue in the past but I feel like it’s overpriced.

Thanks for the input!

This is correct, you'll slightly loose the high efficiency and the carbon would deplete faster but its complexly fine to run both without the need to tumble.

 

[bushdoc]

I was under the impression GFO could be run alongside carbon as long as it was mixed well to prevent the GFO from clumping. I thought that was the primary reason for tumbling. I’ve used chemipure blue in the past but I feel like it’s overpriced.

Thanks for the input!

You don't want carbon to tumble as it is soft and it would be released into water with possible negative effects or at minimum it would be depleted fast.
You can run them separately in one reactor, but if GFO doesn't tumble it will cake sonner or later. It is possible to set pump the way that GFO tumbles but not Carbon, but it needs constant tweaking ( I 've done it). If you want to try, you should separate them into different layers with sponge between them.

 

[reely989]

It is possible, but the problem with using a T to split and control flow is that changing the flow for one reactor would also affect the other.

This is correct, you'll slightly loose the high efficiency and the carbon would deplete faster but its complexly fine to run both without the need to tumble.

great point about the T, thanks!