Biopellet Reactor: Tuning

[gdemos]

so here's a quick re-cap:
the BPR (RD500) has been up and running since September, thats 6 months.
60 oz of Pellets (sold by RD)
I have seeded the pellets with MB7 at daily for 2 weeks and then once per week for 3 months.
I have run it at varying flow rates: from Wide Open at 680-700 gallons per day, to 25% open at 150 gallons per day.

BPR is effluent plumbed to Skimmer (RO 6000SSS) and while I have gone through some skimmer overflows, I am now running drier as a result and no longer have overflow issues. skimmer is running efficiently, validated with air flow meter.

water vol is 275g, Asthetic sandbed, Substantial premium live rock.
System is 2.5 years running as fish only with Heavy Fishstock.
Feeding is 9-12 cubes misys & spirulina mix daily.

I am back to running at Wide Open, 700 gal per day and will run like this for 2 weeks while testing.

I am currently testing 50ppm NO3 (salifert), .08 PO4 (Hanna ULR)

If after 2 weeks of this I am not seeing a drop in N03, PO4 I have to assume the pellets are no good and believe at that point I will have to trash the current media and add new (of a different brand).

While i have noticed what seemed to be brief moments of cloudy water some time ago I cannot confirm that I've had any bac bloom. While fish look vibrant and super healthy, I cannot risk adding my SPS with such high nitrates. Let's hope the next couple weeks reveals a bacterial miracle!

 

[gdemos]

for what its worth, an updated video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDeHygRYUYs&sns=em

and some dialogue with a vendor of note along with my response:

"That's lot of flow going through the sump. Too fast for the skimmer and BPR to get good contact from the water that passes though.

Does the UV run all day or all the time? Might be doing more harm than good if it is. I would have the UV on only when New fish are added to the system or there's and algae outbreak.

As for the skimmer I wish it was doing more. There would be no doubt that you would get better skimmate out of one of our Skimmers. Does the water level in that sump stay consistent? If it rises and lowers even an inch that would make it very difficult for you to tune in the skimmer properly.

I saw the video, thank you. I noticed a couple things about the reactor that can be improved. First I noticed that the tumbling of the pellets was not even in the bottom. That needs to be adjusted. The nozzle pointing down that is tumbling the pellets is off center. That is usually caused when the union is screwed on too tight. You can see Jeff adjust it in this video here. The other thing I noticed is that the tumbling could be a little more violent. But adjust the spray nozzle first and then tweak the red valve for a little more flow.

Try those things and let me know how it goes. Also if you haven't done a vinegar bath on the skimmer pumps in a while it might be a good time to do so. "

My response:
i clean all my pumps every 6 months and just did the skimmer a couple months ago, but thank you.
I like your skimmers and there is reason to believe they would be better but too expensive... and in all seriousness and not to be a jerk, if you are convinced the skimmer is the issue, lend me your recommended skimmer for my system, if it proves to be better I will buy it.
I really can't see how decreasing flow through the system would be advisable just to boost contact time.
UV on/off period - seems to be very subjective suggestion with no meaningful way of evaluating

I have adjusted the nozzle position several times and will do so again, is there any reason why it would not stay put?

I will reduce tumble slightly in order to adjust nozzle, then will increase tumble beyond current setting slightly as suggested.

beyond all these suggestions, which little have to do with BPR adjustments, how can you confirm that the media itself is effective?

 

[Aquarist007]

Is your carbon reactor emptying into the same part of the sump as the skimmer? If it is rerout the line so it returns directly to the tank. The skimmer could be removing both the carbon source and the bacteria and thus not reducing nitrates and phosphates

 

[gdemos]

It is plumbed directly to the skimmer intake. Difficult if not impossible to know if 100% of the BPR is truly 'sucked into' the skimmer. This setup is the recommendation of the reactor manufacturer (and could be generalized as the best practice from all I have read). I would be inclined to keep the effluent running direct to the skimmer intake for these reasons

 

[Aquarist007]

It is plumbed directly to the skimmer intake. Difficult if not impossible to know if 100% of the BPR is truly 'sucked into' the skimmer. This setup is the recommendation of the reactor manufacturer (and could be generalized as the best practice from all I have read). I would be inclined to keep the effluent running direct to the skimmer intake for these reasons

I disagree with that practise. What's the harm in trying it the way the majority of us have had success with carbon dosing. You should see a big drop in nitrates very quickly directing the reactor back into the tank
The fact that you have high nitrates after running the pellets so long is evidence IMO that the reactor is not set up properly

 

[gdemos]

007, thanks for the input. how long have you been running your BPR with effluent to tank/sump as opposed to skimmer? what were your results before and after the change? would you agree that the common suggestion is to run direct to skimmer as it seems to be everywhere in everything i have read! what made you go counter to this practice?

 

[Aquarist007]

007, thanks for the input. how long have you been running your BPR with effluent to tank/sump as opposed to skimmer? what were your results before and after the change? would you agree that the common suggestion is to run direct to skimmer as it seems to be everywhere in everything i have read! what made you go counter to this practice?

For years. Very knowledgeable people with regards to carbon dosing do it this way. A lot of reefers dose vodka or vinegar or combination of both directly to the tank.
A lot of other bacteria benifet from a carbon source besides the denitrifiers and these bacteria benifet corals
With an increase in bacteria you also get an increase in dead bacteria which are directly removed by skimming along with the phosphates they have absorbed.
This is usually noticed by increased skimmate
This is why I don't think your system is set up effeciently

 

[gdemos]

It seems you are referring more to vinegar or vodka carbon dosing and less to a BPR application. What kind of reactor and what type of pellets are you running?

 

[Aquarist007]

It seems you are referring more to vinegar or vodka carbon dosing and less to a BPR application. What kind of reactor and what type of pellets are you running?

I look after 20 tanks not including my own
I run pellet reactors in 6 of them
In another 7 of them I run Nitroguard cubes which are in a bag in the sump aerated with a pump.
In three of the them I dose with vinegar
I run Nitroguard cubes and dose vodka in my system

 

[DamonG]

Demos, quick shot in the dark here and i, or someone else may have asked.. Your nitrate kit, have you double checked it with another? I am just questioning all this time and everything is remaining exactly "the same".. I may be wrong, but i just went back through the thread and isn't it the exact same level that it had been as far as nutrients?

Also, how do things look in the tank? Algea, coral color and growth, etc? All those things. And water clarity? And your skim? Dark, clear, etc? I know you set it to dry on the skimmer..

I also know you mentioned like me, you were going to "try" the zeobak. Did that do anything as far as your skim? There a reason I'm asking specific about that product. Also, the bacter7, same thing. How did your skimmer react to those additives?

And I'm curious also, if you pulled your hose out of the bpr, ran a cup of it into a jar or something, and, bear with me here, poured it into your skimmer area, what would your skimmer do?

When you get a chance, so me a favor and answer those to the best of your ability for me.

And also, this goes without saying, your reactor, when you pump the fluid out into the cup, let me know how adjustable the flow goes?

I have some theories dude.. May be all wet, but worth a try.

 

[gdemos]

Hey Damon,
Thanks for sticking with me through this!

I have not tried the Zeobak, and have been continuing with MB7 per directions: First 2 weeks a daily dose, then a weekly dose. I feel it 'did' something, as the skimm has a sludge/green film to it and the suds are shiny. pardon the lack of science here in my language. I have several weeks of MB7 additive left so i'll likely exhaust it before trying something else...begs the question, when/why stop bacterial dosing?

The effluent measures 0ml at OFF, to equivalent of 750 gallons per day at WOT (beaker measured/timed) Eff is plumbed directly to skimmer intake.

I have not ran the Eff to the skimmer body, but could do that and will let you know what I observe. Are you saying experimentally let eff run inside skimmer body (collection cup off?) well i imagine the foam will go down to water level and diminish, like Dawn on Grease! if i took eff off of skimmer intake and just put it "in the vacinity of skimmer" I imagine the bacteria would enter the system and cycle to death, therefore repopulating NO3, Carbon, Phosphate.

No coral in the tank and there won't be till i get this nutrient level fixed. Algae is normal, rock in tank has great coraline, no hair, no cyano, etc. glass algae is manageable every few days. water clarity is super clear, fish are super healthy.

Skim is between tea/whiskey color, again running dry to prevent overflow.

NO3 measured 25+ppm day one on salifert. there was a time some 3 weeks after BPR went online that I saw 5ppm but that was one test on one day. Todays NO3 is still 25+ppm. this is a new salifert kit.

I also have an American Marine NO3 Monitor which reads 13 NO3-N (equiv to approx 60ppm NO3).

-Greg Demos

 

[DamonG]

Hey Damon,
Thanks for sticking with me through this!

I have not tried the Zeobak, and have been continuing with MB7 per directions: First 2 weeks a daily dose, then a weekly dose. I feel it 'did' something, as the skimm has a sludge/green film to it and the suds are shiny. pardon the lack of science here in my language. I have several weeks of MB7 additive left so i'll likely exhaust it before trying something else...begs the question, when/why stop bacterial dosing?

The effluent measures 0ml at OFF, to equivalent of 750 gallons per day at WOT (beaker measured/timed) Eff is plumbed directly to skimmer intake.

I have not ran the Eff to the skimmer body, but could do that and will let you know what I observe. Are you saying experimentally let eff run inside skimmer body (collection cup off?) well i imagine the foam will go down to water level and diminish, like Dawn on Grease! if i took eff off of skimmer intake and just put it "in the vacinity of skimmer" I imagine the bacteria would enter the system and cycle to death, therefore repopulating NO3, Carbon, Phosphate.

No coral in the tank and there won't be till i get this nutrient level fixed. Algae is normal, rock in tank has great coraline, no hair, no cyano, etc. glass algae is manageable every few days. water clarity is super clear, fish are super healthy.

Skim is between tea/whiskey color, again running dry to prevent overflow.

NO3 measured 25+ppm day one on salifert. there was a time some 3 weeks after BPR went online that I saw 5ppm but that was one test on one day. Todays NO3 is still 25+ppm. this is a new salifert kit.

I also have an American Marine NO3 Monitor which reads 13 NO3-N (equiv to approx 60ppm NO3).

-Greg Demos

Ok, bear with me on this. I meant gather some effluent from the bpr into say , a beaker. Then take a syringe and squirt some into the skimmer pump mouth and watch the bubbles and what happens.

My thought was, I am wondering if, something is clogged and your not getting good suction into, and consequently out of the bpr. You answered my two questions , in that the bpr isn't clogged, and the line can't be clogged. I wonder if the fitting that goes into your skimmer body, from the bpr is clogged? That's why i mentioned to try and run the tube from the bpr(if need be, grab a soft piece of hose) to the mouth of the pump(skimmer pump volute) and watch your skim.

It should react quick and possibly begin overflowing a little if say you open the bpr lever on the top (blue one). My other thought is your ball valve setup on the line "into" the bpr. Is there a way for you to take the valve off and remove the pumped line, so that the bpr is only drawing water(just on its own, and non throttled) from say, your skimmer or another area? Just the standard vacuum that would be stock? And then, see if the water flow changed at all? If it does, try and run it that way, seeing what happens.

I know it's a lot of steps, but something is definately of whack.. Way off..

And to be honest, I haven't dosed any bacteria in a while. Like at least a month or two. I mentioned the zeobak simply because in my experience with it, it is two things; first, much more concentrated and stronger than mb7 and 2nd, it has a very, very pronounced effect on skimming. It makes my skim much more concentrated without touching the skimmer at all. And as a side note mb7 does have the effect of making water clear (just thinking as writing) also. But i prefer the zeobak myself. And actually, it's funny because I switched out my rd pellets to try the all in one pellets about 2 to 3 weeks ago and they are fully active already(just fyi, i don't like them personally as i think they are far too messy and too much shedding, even at low tumble).

My point in bringing them up, is simply thinking something isn't getting through the bpr system it seems like. I'm saying this because, if it's wide open on the top(blue valve) , and your running a slow tumble(red ball valve almost horizontal) , that means, with that reactor, your pulling maximum water from the system through the reactor. The more you open the red valve(going vertically) , increasing the tumble, the less water pull through the reactor( I am laying down thinking this through.. Lol).

But something sounds like it's not pulling and running water through your reactor enough. As, with it running full blast, it should be eating nitrate like crazy!

Just wondering also, and stabbing in the dark here.. As you have a remote control room, have you tried testing water at various points in the system? And yes, i know it sounds goofy, but you never know. Like water in the DT, then water in the skimmer area, etc? Separate..

Try these things and I am wondering if something will appear?

I know I'm holding on to see what happens..

 

[DamonG]

Wait! Just thought of something dude.. You said wide open its 750gpd? That's only 31gph which really isn't anything(that is almost a drip to trickle even on my system)! I'm thinking you need it to be more like 750gph flowing unrestricted.. What pump is on there? My Sicce 1.5 that's on my bpr, I think is 200gph, just as a comparison..

Something, if that gpd measure is accurate, is heavily, heavily throttling your pass through

 

[gdemos]

It's an eheim compact 3000+
Occasionally I pull the effluent line off the skimmer intake tee to validate effluent flow rate. I let it run into a beaker and calculate flow this way. Yes 700 gpd or 1800 ML per minute Wide open effluent and it is not clogged

Essentially in feeding the reactor off manifold. This technically pushes water to the pump which may or may not make the pump more efficient but certainly would not slow down the flow

I could bypass the manifold feed and just let the eheim suck from sump but if anything this would decrease flow through

I've never tried Testing from the tank but certainly could. But is of course a closed system.

 

[DamonG]

It's an eheim compact 3000+
Occasionally I pull the effluent line off the skimmer intake tee to validate effluent flow rate. I let it run into a beaker and calculate flow this way. Yes 700 gpd or 1800 ML per minute Wide open effluent and it is not clogged

Essentially in feeding the reactor off manifold. This technically pushes water to the pump which may or may not make the pump more efficient but certainly would not slow down the flow

I could bypass the manifold feed and just let the eheim suck from sump but if anything this would decrease flow through

I've never tried Testing from the tank but certainly could. But is of course a closed system.

Ok, here is the thing because i looked at those pumps for a return. I strongly think your problem is somewhere in the manifold system somehow. The compact 3000+ is rated at 792gph, which, is almost 20000gpd. Get what I'm saying? Your not getting the flow through your supposed to, no matter whether your fully open or not, so no, your nutrients aren't going to drop.

Something is massively restricting that flow through "that pump" . My 200gph pump(on the reactor) if running wide open, will run 4800 gpd and your getting no where near that on a much larger tank. My hypotheses : that is why nutrient is staying at the same place and has been. First, pull the tube of of the skimmer, so you will see what I'm about to illustrate..

Trust me on this one: Remove the manifold system and turn the pump fully open on the reactor (if I'm understanding, it's the compact 3K). Let that thing run wide open.. Then, set your tumble, and I'm sure, it's probably going to be like mine in that you only have to open the red valve very little to get a good amount of tumbling. Then, turn the blue top lever so that it's maybe half way open only. You should still have a good amount of water(effluent) running out.

Plumb it back into your skimmer and watch it for just a little bit. I bet you that you are going to see a massive difference.. But watch the bubble level as you may need to drop it.. But if it's anything like mine, almost instantly, your gonna see it rise..

Dude Lol, let that run overnight and test tomorrow. If you see nothing, as far as nitrate drop, let it keep running another day. I would say, at most, in a few days, it is going to drop once you have full power running through.

 

[blueramSeattle]

+1 for culturing beads to get some funk going. Somebody above mentioned incubating in skimmate.

The beads are made of a variety of different materials. Is mixing generally considered ok?

Can you run the reactor in/on a bucket with dirty fish water and flake food to get a colony going?

 

[Aqualund]

oh man 700gpd? You should be AT LEAST doing like 300gph. Ive been reading it wrong all this time as well.

 

[gdemos]

Yes 700 g per day at wide open
Let's assume that the feed off the manifold is what is restricting the flow;
So if I were to eliminate the manifold as the feed and let the pump draw out of the sump.... What would one say is a "normal" flow through rate for this BPR?

I have no problem going through a process of elimination and starting with eliminating the Manifold to find out... But give this a thought first from a plumbing perspective:

Let's say one setup the BPR on a shelf high above the sump and he was drawing source water from the sump; the variant of head pressure would impact the flow rate right? Regardless of feed rate just consider flow through, is there a general range of flow that the BPR ought to run? If you measure your BPR Effluent rate what do you get? Does it vary and therefore would you need to regularly adjust your effluent based on nutrient reduction?

And from a biological perspective: let's say that the manifold setup in my case was restricting flow; and here I have been operating under these conditions for 6 months, seeding the pellets as I have, etc.,... Would one expect to have seen the pellets break down somewhat by now?

 

[gdemos]

Ok it's 3am but I had to, reefers get it:

I wanted to see if the manifold feed setup I have is what may be restricting my flow.
It was suggested that this eheim would do 3000gph. Granted it is serving dual purposes on the BPR, one is to feed the reactor, the other is provide churn or tumble and effluent, so a bit less than 3000gph expected

Measured current effluent again and confirmed: effluent = 1860mL/min = 29.5 gph = 707 gpd

So I take the feed line off my manifold and put it directly in the sump, premise being the manifold is the culprit that eliminating the manifold would allow me to see the flow rate

Effluent rate with manifold eliminated?
1000 mL/min = 15.85gph = 380 gpd

We were expecting more right? So what gives, is the flow really resrticted to get 29.5 gph? Should I inspect the pump?

 

[DamonG]

Yes 700 g per day at wide open
Let's assume that the feed off the manifold is what is restricting the flow;
So if I were to eliminate the manifold as the feed and let the pump draw out of the sump.... What would one say is a "normal" flow through rate for this BPR?

I have no problem going through a process of elimination and starting with eliminating the Manifold to find out... But give this a thought first from a plumbing perspective:

Let's say one setup the BPR on a shelf high above the sump and he was drawing source water from the sump; the variant of head pressure would impact the flow rate right? Regardless of feed rate just consider flow through, is there a general range of flow that the BPR ought to run? If you measure your BPR Effluent rate what do you get? Does it vary and therefore would you need to regularly adjust your effluent based on nutrient reduction?

And from a biological perspective: let's say that the manifold setup in my case was restricting flow; and here I have been operating under these conditions for 6 months, seeding the pellets as I have, etc.,... Would one expect to have seen the pellets break down somewhat by now?

Actually, to be honest, it's not that easy with the flow. It's really a thing that you try to adjust it. And to answer your question, there should for sure, if the pump is fully wide open, more flow than what your seeing. Something is wrong and yes, I'd inspect the pump.

And not necessarily a lot of break down in the pellets, simply because they haven't been eating and processing much. Basically, they are probably ready to go, but only eating a small amount of nutrient. So you may not see a ton of breakdown. And those pellets actually are really good in that they last a long time, even under normal use.