balling vs calcium reactor for sps?
- Thread starter The_Wonderboy
- Start date
I think the NaCl-free salt of Balling plays an important role. WC will not correct the ion displacement, unless it is 100% WC 
Also, using Magnesium Sulfate in Balling-light is a little problematic. The principle works like this: because sulfur is the most abundant element after Cl in the seawater, so instead of creating Cl ion displacement, it is changed to a Sulfur ion displacement. Bottom line, the ion displacement still exists in Balling-light. Only the classic Balling completely solves the problem.
Also, using Magnesium Sulfate in Balling-light is a little problematic. The principle works like this: because sulfur is the most abundant element after Cl in the seawater, so instead of creating Cl ion displacement, it is changed to a Sulfur ion displacement. Bottom line, the ion displacement still exists in Balling-light. Only the classic Balling completely solves the problem.
Todd March
Premium Member
I use the same recipe put out there by Randy Homes Farley or Bulkreeefsupply.com, which is 2 cups of soda ash, or 2 cups of calcium chloride, to one gallon of RO/Di water. I though about altering the concentration of the Ca mix for equal 2-part dosing, but didn't want to fiddle with figuring out the concentration levelsâ€"I went to balling for use of use. It would, however, be nice to have them both dosed by one outlet of my controller, but on the other hand I don't like to dose them at the same time, as they both dose in the final chamber of my sump and I don't want any precipitation. When dosing in the main sump chamber where my ATB skimmer is, I've found that the soda ash component can upset the bubble surface tension in the skimmer and temporarily stop skimming at times.
Yeah, I use the NaCl mineral salt by Fauna Marine from Todd at Cherrycorals.com. I figure the one kilogram bag should last me close to a year or so, depending on coral growth.
Todd March
Premium Member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13832387#post13832387 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jingyinan
I think the NaCl-free salt of Balling plays an important role. WC will not correct the ion displacement, unless it is 100% WC
Also, using Magnesium Sulfate in Balling-light is a little problematic. The principle works like this: because sulfur is the most abundant element after Cl in the seawater, so instead of creating Cl ion displacement, it is changed to a Sulfur ion displacement. Bottom line, the ion displacement still exists in Balling-light. Only the classic Balling completely solves the problem.
Very good point about the sulfates, and it is an issue that is talked about and debated in Europe a lot...
jdieck
New member
It is using a supplement that has everything a salt mix has but wihout the salt. A product like the Concentrate by ProLine.
http://www.aquaticeco.com/subcategories/2556/Super-Salt-Concentrate-by-ProLine
Balling is some times confused with the addition of two part supplements but two part supplements do not contain all the other elements present in a salt mix but contain chloride and sodium ions usiually present in lower quantity in a true Balling supplementation.
At the end of the day, result wise the difference is not a big deal when making regular water changes.
tonyespinoza
Premium Member
jdieck - so just to make sure i understand:
do you recommend using 2-part (a la bionic) with Concentrate (above) for water changes? or are you saying regular water changes with regular salt mix are fine for those of us who use 2-part?
do you recommend using 2-part (a la bionic) with Concentrate (above) for water changes? or are you saying regular water changes with regular salt mix are fine for those of us who use 2-part?
jdieck
New member
Usually a powerhead self adjust the ouput flow limited to the restriction you put on it, in other words you can limit the ouput to 50 ml/min and the powerhead will provide the 50 ml/min. Having said that, when restricted that much, the water flow trough the powerhead may not be enough to provide it with proper cooling and the increased localized temperature will promote precipitation of calcium carbonate which sooner or late forces you to clean the powerhead as it is rendered inoperable. The simple solution to this is to provide a bleed hole in the feed line so part of the powerhead flow returns back to the sump and part goes to the reactor.
jdieck
New member
For water changes I would recommend to use a whole regular salt mix regardless of your supplementation methodology but specially when using calcium chloride and baking soda as supplements.
The concentrate would be an alternative for salt free mix used for the balling method. In any case it is my experience that at least in the US, those not using reactors or Kalk, use the typical two part supplementation "a la bionic" either commercial or DIY without any problems.
IMO balling shall be most benefical only when water changes are made sporadically to replace many of the other trace elements but at the end there are more benefits to water changes (like diluting nutrients) than just trying to maintain the ionic balance.
tonyespinoza
Premium Member
makes sense. thank you.
jdieck
New member
Re: balling vs calcium reactor for sps?
Of course one big variation is the cost and design of equipment, a rector can go for as low as $150 DIY up to $750 for large full featured ones and similarly happens when comparing dosers and even commercial vs DIY supplements.
The comparison include initial equipment cost assuming a pay back in 5 years and all consumables like media, CO2, Power, freight etc.
In the charts the steeper the line the more expensive the consumables are. The higher the starting point, the more expensive the initial equipment is.
Also although the charts span alkalinity consumption from 0 to 4 dKh, a typical consumption is between 1.5 and 2.5 dKh although I have seen some heavy loaded with large sps coral systems with consumption up to 4 dKh per day.
Also notice that the chart for Kalk reactor ends up at the 2 dKh per day. Because Kalk addition is limited by the amount of evaporation then as a result the amount of alkalinity that can be added is also limited. Although the chart terminates at 2 dKh depending on the tank evaporation can terminate any where between as low as 1.5 or as high as 2.5 dKh.
(see the chart on how much alkalinity can be added depending on your evaporation as a % of the total system volume).
Settling in some typical median costs in general there are consistent results pointing toward:
a) In very small systems like nanos, manual supplementation of either a commercial or a DIY two part (about 1/3 of the commercial) will be not only the logical choice but the less costly also. (See chart for 24 gal system)
b) As system size increases automation of the chore is more attractive given the increase work load. At 55 gallons, although manual supplementation with DIY will be the cheapest, the cheaper of the automated ones given the variability of cost could be either the automated two part or The Kalk reactor but given the potential limit range of typical consumption between 1.5 and 2.5 dKh the alternative will be the automated DIY two part specially if you are targeting sps and heavy consumers of calcium and alkalinity.
c) At around 120 gallons an automated two part still a good contender for the typical range but a calcium reactor starts making sense specially in a system with heavy consumers and consumption will exceed 2 dKh per day. If the consumption stay below the 2 dKh, Kalk reactor is the option.
d) Finally at 225 gallons (or higher), a calcium reactor will be the choice for heavy consumers but a Kalk reactor will still be the cheaper option if the consumption will stay below the 2 dKh although at this point you will be tempted to have both the Kalk reactor and the calcium reactor given the complementation for PH that they provide each other.
All this can have much variation depending on the system you look for, what equipment you chose and where and how you acquire or prepare your supplements so I suggest that you make a comparison for your particular situation.
This chart below can help you determine what will be the maximum alkalinity consumption you can support by the addition of saturated limewater depending on your evaporation. This will help determine your break point between the Kalk reactor and the other alternatives.
Enjoy!
Bringing the thread to your original question and setting aside some personal preferences or limitations like space etc, I have been making some advances toward a calculator that can help with supplementation costs comparisons.
Of course one big variation is the cost and design of equipment, a rector can go for as low as $150 DIY up to $750 for large full featured ones and similarly happens when comparing dosers and even commercial vs DIY supplements.
The comparison include initial equipment cost assuming a pay back in 5 years and all consumables like media, CO2, Power, freight etc.
In the charts the steeper the line the more expensive the consumables are. The higher the starting point, the more expensive the initial equipment is.
Also although the charts span alkalinity consumption from 0 to 4 dKh, a typical consumption is between 1.5 and 2.5 dKh although I have seen some heavy loaded with large sps coral systems with consumption up to 4 dKh per day.
Also notice that the chart for Kalk reactor ends up at the 2 dKh per day. Because Kalk addition is limited by the amount of evaporation then as a result the amount of alkalinity that can be added is also limited. Although the chart terminates at 2 dKh depending on the tank evaporation can terminate any where between as low as 1.5 or as high as 2.5 dKh.
(see the chart on how much alkalinity can be added depending on your evaporation as a % of the total system volume).
Settling in some typical median costs in general there are consistent results pointing toward:
a) In very small systems like nanos, manual supplementation of either a commercial or a DIY two part (about 1/3 of the commercial) will be not only the logical choice but the less costly also. (See chart for 24 gal system)
b) As system size increases automation of the chore is more attractive given the increase work load. At 55 gallons, although manual supplementation with DIY will be the cheapest, the cheaper of the automated ones given the variability of cost could be either the automated two part or The Kalk reactor but given the potential limit range of typical consumption between 1.5 and 2.5 dKh the alternative will be the automated DIY two part specially if you are targeting sps and heavy consumers of calcium and alkalinity.
c) At around 120 gallons an automated two part still a good contender for the typical range but a calcium reactor starts making sense specially in a system with heavy consumers and consumption will exceed 2 dKh per day. If the consumption stay below the 2 dKh, Kalk reactor is the option.
d) Finally at 225 gallons (or higher), a calcium reactor will be the choice for heavy consumers but a Kalk reactor will still be the cheaper option if the consumption will stay below the 2 dKh although at this point you will be tempted to have both the Kalk reactor and the calcium reactor given the complementation for PH that they provide each other.
All this can have much variation depending on the system you look for, what equipment you chose and where and how you acquire or prepare your supplements so I suggest that you make a comparison for your particular situation.
This chart below can help you determine what will be the maximum alkalinity consumption you can support by the addition of saturated limewater depending on your evaporation. This will help determine your break point between the Kalk reactor and the other alternatives.
Enjoy!
Heya jdieck,
Did you include the cost of electricity in your charts? Something like a fluidized calcium reactor is going to use a /lot/ more juice than a LiterMeter, and a simple Rubbermaid trash can filled with kalk for topping off will use no power at all beyond what the ATO itself uses.
Did you include the cost of electricity in your charts? Something like a fluidized calcium reactor is going to use a /lot/ more juice than a LiterMeter, and a simple Rubbermaid trash can filled with kalk for topping off will use no power at all beyond what the ATO itself uses.
jdieck
New member
Yes I included the electricity. In the case of Kalk reactor and two part auto dosing it is neglegible, so really the one that counts is the one for the calcium reactor.
If you want to include the Kalk drum just reduce the graph for the Kalk reactor by $50.00 per year which will be approx difference in initial cost (about $250 over 5 years) between the Kalk reactor and the tub.
That in general will be cheaper than automating the Two Part which require two dosers and the supplement (Ca Chloride and b soda) will be a bit more expensive than Kalk but keep in mind that the upper limit on how much you can add depending on your evaporation still exists.
jdieck
New member
Rather than mix and match everything IMO it will be a lot easier to start with a good unit and add to it only if necessary, say if you are getting problems with effluent flow stability then replacing the ball valve for a needle one will be easy and only about $20.00<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13852816#post13852816 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Ty1e
jdieck, do find it better to mix and match parts for a Ca Rx then to get a whole unit with mid to low end needle valves and so- so pumps?
i'm so between the dosing 2-part and running a Ca Rx for my future 125gal sps tank, just looking for you thoughts personaly.
On the other hand if you like a feature that almost no reactor has (like and effluent flow meter) that will cost more (Like 120.00 for a good one).
Most other mods I can think off will be possibly just change the location of effluent lines or so that might not be complicated.
jdieck
New member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13853093#post13853093 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Leonardo_
jdieck, interesting graphs
If anyone needs German translation for a balling website in German, I can help
Leonardo
Thanks. Sure someone will be interested in the translation.
Similar threads
