Biopellet Reactor: Tuning
- Thread starter gdemos
- Start date
gdemos
New member
Cool, such a great opportunity to watch a frustrated situation turn into a positive learning experience for the best. This hobby is great
Indeed. Three things in life that keep me humble, wife, customers, and tank! That said, not out of the woods yet... But at least I found a trail!
Aqualund
New member
weekly shot..the bacterial population you want is now in the range you need it...anything you add has diminishing returns as adding something to something that is already 100% will just give you 100%.
gdemos
New member
Still overflowing so now I'll just continue to discard. My only guess is that given the oversized nature of the skimmer it transitions from standby idle time to heavy or in my case over-production mode. And perhaps I'm making my adjustments at a time when it's idling so I'm bumping water level up at idle, she kicks into over production when I'm gone and the result is overflow. My other hope of course is that by continuing to discard the overflow I will eventually get it out if the system. This all has to be a result of the stuff the BPR is pushing out and once all my bacteria balance is reached things will settle down
gdemos
New member
gdemos
New member
With the ongoing overflow issues I've had with the skimmer I have opted to keep the skimmer water level at the absolute lowest. Maybe once daily I'll juice it up just to get some skimmate into the cup but for the most part gunk is left to fractionizing in the body. I'm hoping to be able to resume normal skimming in a week .. My hope is that before too long the BPR will settle in as the bacteria colonies reach a level of stability. My only thought is the skimmer overflow has everything to do with the BPR coming of age.
Any setting with a normal skimmer tune water level has resulted in sporadic overflowing.
Still keeping effluent at 350 gpd
Any setting with a normal skimmer tune water level has resulted in sporadic overflowing.
Still keeping effluent at 350 gpd
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
Just a couple thoughts of my own experience with biopellets and a recirculating reactor.
If I notice levels rising, I find slowing the tumble (not the effluent) works well. Slowing it so far that one side of the pellets sits there, and is only tumbled every now and then. Not a standstill, but a very slow falling down one side until the flow picks it up. This seems to let the pellets collect more bacteria on the surface, but usually after a few days I might bump it back up flow-wise just a little to be sure pellets are being broken up.
I would think the overflowing skimmer is your system catching up. Since all calcium carbonate holds phosphates (max absorption at 8.3) then LR/sand will leach for awhile heavily, and then transition to a lower absorption/leach rate, resulting in less skimmate as levels fall.
If I notice levels rising, I find slowing the tumble (not the effluent) works well. Slowing it so far that one side of the pellets sits there, and is only tumbled every now and then. Not a standstill, but a very slow falling down one side until the flow picks it up. This seems to let the pellets collect more bacteria on the surface, but usually after a few days I might bump it back up flow-wise just a little to be sure pellets are being broken up.
I would think the overflowing skimmer is your system catching up. Since all calcium carbonate holds phosphates (max absorption at 8.3) then LR/sand will leach for awhile heavily, and then transition to a lower absorption/leach rate, resulting in less skimmate as levels fall.
doctorwhoreefer
In Memoriam
I kinda think though. I mean, it never "ends", but I've run tests over multiple days/weeks, recording each parameter everyday. Just a tidbit:
I was cooking some rocks in a bucket. I never fed the bucket to force the bacteria and waste to decompose/die and be consumed by it's peers, allowing a balance to be found amongst the bacterial communities. (nitrifiers/denitrifiers) All the while pushing the bacterial amount down.
After a number of weekly 75%-100% wc's, the phosphates were down to 90ppb. Each weekly water change resulted in about a 3 ppb fall in phosphate levels.
After a couple weeks, I decided to just add 1 decently sized rock to the tank. The tank was about .02-.05 ppm phosphate, has been for awhile.
The levels went to about .1, then .14, held around there for a good few days to a week, and then fell back to the .04 area.
The same has been true for a number of other rocks introduced. It seems to take some time to rise and fall, but much shorter than foodless cooking, or feeding to speed up the cooking process but unfortunately you introduce a rock with a fairly large bioload into the tank that could die off, let alone introduce a good amount of nutrients in the form of bacteria.
These are at least my loosely formed observations.
I was cooking some rocks in a bucket. I never fed the bucket to force the bacteria and waste to decompose/die and be consumed by it's peers, allowing a balance to be found amongst the bacterial communities. (nitrifiers/denitrifiers) All the while pushing the bacterial amount down.
After a number of weekly 75%-100% wc's, the phosphates were down to 90ppb. Each weekly water change resulted in about a 3 ppb fall in phosphate levels.
After a couple weeks, I decided to just add 1 decently sized rock to the tank. The tank was about .02-.05 ppm phosphate, has been for awhile.
The levels went to about .1, then .14, held around there for a good few days to a week, and then fell back to the .04 area.
The same has been true for a number of other rocks introduced. It seems to take some time to rise and fall, but much shorter than foodless cooking, or feeding to speed up the cooking process but unfortunately you introduce a rock with a fairly large bioload into the tank that could die off, let alone introduce a good amount of nutrients in the form of bacteria.
These are at least my loosely formed observations.
Last edited:
gdemos
New member
it has been a while and figured i would update...i have still not seen a consistent reduction in NO3.
My feeding continues at 9-12 cubes daily, and fish load remains the same.
My skimmer is productive as it should be.
Tumble rate is same and call it the 'fair tumble it should be'
I had the effluent dialed down to 500 Gallons Per Day for 8-10 weeks and am still consistently testing 25-50ppm on Salifert (and as high as 70ppm converting NO3-N to NO3 using my American Marine Pinpoint NO3-N Monitor).
So....I have just recently increased the effluent to "almost wide open" which is roughly 12 Gallons Per Hour.
If this doesn't do it, I am questioning the Amount And/Or Type of Biopellet I am using as the culprit. At present I am using the NOPO pellets sold by RD and have approximately 60 oz of pellets in the Reactor (RD 500 reactor).
Has anyone had better results with a different pellet? I've read much on the "All-In-One Pellet" but must say I do not like the sounds of running the effluent through a filter sock to rid GFO output, and then to the skimmer.
I should add that my PO4 tests at .08ppm (Hanna ULR)
All the bad reviews I have read on BP have revolved around too fast and too much stripping of nutrients. Cyano, etc. Very rare to hear about the biopellets not kicking in, especially after 6 months in a High NO3 environment. Since I am still in Fish Only mode while SPS remain in QT/Grow out in a separate non-Biopellet system; I am perfectly okay with stripping nutrients too fast!
Any failproof pellets out there that are universally effective?
-Greg
My feeding continues at 9-12 cubes daily, and fish load remains the same.
My skimmer is productive as it should be.
Tumble rate is same and call it the 'fair tumble it should be'
I had the effluent dialed down to 500 Gallons Per Day for 8-10 weeks and am still consistently testing 25-50ppm on Salifert (and as high as 70ppm converting NO3-N to NO3 using my American Marine Pinpoint NO3-N Monitor).
So....I have just recently increased the effluent to "almost wide open" which is roughly 12 Gallons Per Hour.
If this doesn't do it, I am questioning the Amount And/Or Type of Biopellet I am using as the culprit. At present I am using the NOPO pellets sold by RD and have approximately 60 oz of pellets in the Reactor (RD 500 reactor).
Has anyone had better results with a different pellet? I've read much on the "All-In-One Pellet" but must say I do not like the sounds of running the effluent through a filter sock to rid GFO output, and then to the skimmer.
I should add that my PO4 tests at .08ppm (Hanna ULR)
All the bad reviews I have read on BP have revolved around too fast and too much stripping of nutrients. Cyano, etc. Very rare to hear about the biopellets not kicking in, especially after 6 months in a High NO3 environment. Since I am still in Fish Only mode while SPS remain in QT/Grow out in a separate non-Biopellet system; I am perfectly okay with stripping nutrients too fast!
Any failproof pellets out there that are universally effective?
-Greg
gdemos
New member
I've been running half throttle or less for 10 weeks. Just now went WOT
reason I had it throttled back was mainly due to Jeff at RD recommendations; I recall his suggestion that the 500d is designed to run at something like 75 gpd (10x less than my WOT setup) yet this clearly has not proven effective so I'm going with aqualund on this one.
I have been wondering if I simply was not growing the Bacteria on the pellets regardless of effluent rate. Therefore doubting the media, doubting the MB7 dose; so it is logical to run now at WOT and let it rip. Of course while keeping an eye on skimmer issues as a potential issue of overflow due to increased effluent.
I will run WOT for a bit, Test and update
reason I had it throttled back was mainly due to Jeff at RD recommendations; I recall his suggestion that the 500d is designed to run at something like 75 gpd (10x less than my WOT setup) yet this clearly has not proven effective so I'm going with aqualund on this one.
I have been wondering if I simply was not growing the Bacteria on the pellets regardless of effluent rate. Therefore doubting the media, doubting the MB7 dose; so it is logical to run now at WOT and let it rip. Of course while keeping an eye on skimmer issues as a potential issue of overflow due to increased effluent.
I will run WOT for a bit, Test and update
Aqualund
New member
Yes, everything DamonG says is correct. Just remember your main goal is to intruduce sloughed carbon from the pellets into the water column and rocks of our tank...the amount of bacteria on the pellets isnt such a big deal (right now).
But like DamonG said, keep an eye on this. If you reach a point where your water starts to become cloudy, that is just simply a bacterial bloom. *If* that happens, simply dial back your effluent to 500 like you had it, and continue good aeration with water movement and your protein skimmer. It will subside in about 12-24 hours and everything will start to change for the better...including a drastic drop in nitrates and a lot of skimmate production.
A potential hazard of a bacterial bloom is oxygen stripping from the water which can suffocate your fish. But since you are keeping an eye on it and maintaining aeration if this happens...you have nothing to worry about.
This is the only thing you need to worry about!
But like DamonG said, keep an eye on this. If you reach a point where your water starts to become cloudy, that is just simply a bacterial bloom. *If* that happens, simply dial back your effluent to 500 like you had it, and continue good aeration with water movement and your protein skimmer. It will subside in about 12-24 hours and everything will start to change for the better...including a drastic drop in nitrates and a lot of skimmate production.
A potential hazard of a bacterial bloom is oxygen stripping from the water which can suffocate your fish. But since you are keeping an eye on it and maintaining aeration if this happens...you have nothing to worry about.
This is the only thing you need to worry about!
