Boomer..Two Carbon Quesions
- Thread starter Craig Lambert
- Start date
bytheway
Gem coconut carbon block filters
This is not a good choice grade of carbon for tanks as it is mostly a VPC and not a LPC but is fine for TW for removing Chloramine and Chlorine. In short, the pores are to small and get plugged up fast with tank water particles and organics.
kyley
SeaChem SeaGel and Purigen in it (the Purigen is too fine, so it's in a bag at the top of the reactor).
Well, I would dump the SeaGel and get a GFO instead. The Purigen is fine.
I'm really curious about what you know on SeaGel (which is SeaChem Matrix + SeaChem PhosGuard), Purigen, and even Chemi-Pure Elite though I'm no longer using it.
We would rather see reefers use a GFO rather than PhosGuard but if you see no issue with soft corals then it is fine as would SeaGel be. Chemi-Pure is partly useless, as it has ion exchange resins in it, which just really can't work in seawater. Imagine taking some of the resin from your RO/DI and using it for your reef tank and think how long it is going to last in seawater @ ~35,000 ppm TDS
. Lastly, Purigen should be sued with GAC as the two compliment each other. Purigen just can not do the job as good as GAC by itself where GAC can do a really good job by itself. The BRS Lignite is fine to use and is then next best to ROX. Purigen is NOT a ion exchange resin but a organic binder resin.
Almsot
I was adviced by a local reefer to boil water to 90 degrees and let the BD soak in there till it cools down, I do this 2 times, and then soak it in RO water for a day and use it, is this any helpfull ?
That is a trick that even God can not do, when I asked him last Boil water at 90 degrees YOU know better than that, it is 212 F and 100C. If this reefer thinks he is some how reactivating the GAC he is talking gibberish nonsense. Would it help if you did this ? Well, yes, as you would boil out some of the organics and trapped particles. If you did this and then stuck it in a microwave, very wet, in small quantities, spread out, it would even be better. You may get about 1/3 - 1/2 back as reactivated GAC. A 1 shot deal, then file the GAC in the circular file. IMHO this is all just a waste of time and effort.
HCl washing ?
See Randy's post below Or rinse in RO/DI water, soak in soda ash or baking soda, re-rinse, put GAC in container filled with new RO/DI and check pH after 15 min. pH 6- 9 is fine as a final pH.
Black Diamond
It use to be a good choice but now there are so many out there that are a better chocie. So, now it is just a OK/fair choice. A few years ago it use to be about # 5 on my GAC list for top 10 GAC's in this hobby and now it is not even top 10.
Tom
Tanks buddy form me and Randy
Gem coconut carbon block filters
This is not a good choice grade of carbon for tanks as it is mostly a VPC and not a LPC but is fine for TW for removing Chloramine and Chlorine. In short, the pores are to small and get plugged up fast with tank water particles and organics.
kyley
SeaChem SeaGel and Purigen in it (the Purigen is too fine, so it's in a bag at the top of the reactor).
Well, I would dump the SeaGel and get a GFO instead. The Purigen is fine.
I'm really curious about what you know on SeaGel (which is SeaChem Matrix + SeaChem PhosGuard), Purigen, and even Chemi-Pure Elite though I'm no longer using it.
We would rather see reefers use a GFO rather than PhosGuard but if you see no issue with soft corals then it is fine as would SeaGel be. Chemi-Pure is partly useless, as it has ion exchange resins in it, which just really can't work in seawater. Imagine taking some of the resin from your RO/DI and using it for your reef tank and think how long it is going to last in seawater @ ~35,000 ppm TDS
. Lastly, Purigen should be sued with GAC as the two compliment each other. Purigen just can not do the job as good as GAC by itself where GAC can do a really good job by itself. The BRS Lignite is fine to use and is then next best to ROX. Purigen is NOT a ion exchange resin but a organic binder resin.Almsot
I was adviced by a local reefer to boil water to 90 degrees and let the BD soak in there till it cools down, I do this 2 times, and then soak it in RO water for a day and use it, is this any helpfull ?
That is a trick that even God can not do, when I asked him last
Boil water at 90 degrees YOU know better than that, it is 212 F and 100C. If this reefer thinks he is some how reactivating the GAC he is talking gibberish nonsense. Would it help if you did this ? Well, yes, as you would boil out some of the organics and trapped particles. If you did this and then stuck it in a microwave, very wet, in small quantities, spread out, it would even be better. You may get about 1/3 - 1/2 back as reactivated GAC. A 1 shot deal, then file the GAC in the circular file. IMHO this is all just a waste of time and effort.HCl washing ?
See Randy's post below
Or rinse in RO/DI water, soak in soda ash or baking soda, re-rinse, put GAC in container filled with new RO/DI and check pH after 15 min. pH 6- 9 is fine as a final pH.Black Diamond
It use to be a good choice but now there are so many out there that are a better chocie. So, now it is just a OK/fair choice. A few years ago it use to be about # 5 on my GAC list for top 10 GAC's in this hobby and now it is not even top 10.
Tom
Tanks buddy form me and Randy
Last edited:
Newreeflady
New member
On the acid washing, if they are letting it overflow then returning it to the column again from the bottom, why not just leave it all in one vat with propeller mixing?
I'm with ya Randy- see no reason to spend more since I'm going to rinse it anyhow and already have HCl on hand
Thanks for all of the research, Boomer!
-A
I'm with ya Randy- see no reason to spend more since I'm going to rinse it anyhow and already have HCl on hand
Thanks for all of the research, Boomer!
-A
Newreeflady
New member
"That is a trick that even God can not do, when I asked him last Boil water at 90 degrees"
Well, I could do it... just lower the pressure, eh.
Well, I could do it... just lower the pressure, eh.
Thanks Boomer - you're a bit over my head, but I appreciate the info I'm slowly getting this... Why GFO over SeaChem PhosGuard? Isn't GFO a bit dangerous to use?
In my single media reactor (TLF Phosban Reactor) in my 65 gallon, would it be best to use:
1. BRS ROX (I guess it's not that expensive), maybe Lignite) - how does Matrix measure up?
2. BRS GFO?
3. Purigen at the top (or you think it's not even beneficial to use when I have the ROX / Lignite?)
Can the ROX and BRS GFO be used in the reactor at a relatively high flow? The thing I liked about SeaGel is it supposedly will be okay with a higher flow in the reactor (not turning to dust). Isn't that the problem with GFO? Would the BRS High Capacity GFO be best to run in my reactor with the ROX?
I've been battling zoa pox and not too sure what I can do to get rid of it (Furan-2 dips aren't doing much good) - not sure if any changes here (media) can help that... Also have a bit of red cyano growth in my sand... Thanks for your help,
--Kyle
I'm slowly getting this... Why GFO over SeaChem PhosGuard? Isn't GFO a bit dangerous to use? In my single media reactor (TLF Phosban Reactor) in my 65 gallon, would it be best to use:
1. BRS ROX (I guess it's not that expensive), maybe Lignite) - how does Matrix measure up?
2. BRS GFO?
3. Purigen at the top (or you think it's not even beneficial to use when I have the ROX / Lignite?)
Can the ROX and BRS GFO be used in the reactor at a relatively high flow? The thing I liked about SeaGel is it supposedly will be okay with a higher flow in the reactor (not turning to dust). Isn't that the problem with GFO? Would the BRS High Capacity GFO be best to run in my reactor with the ROX?
I've been battling zoa pox and not too sure what I can do to get rid of it (Furan-2 dips aren't doing much good) - not sure if any changes here (media) can help that... Also have a bit of red cyano growth in my sand... Thanks for your help,
--Kyle
Newreeflady
New member
reeflady
On the acid washing, if they are letting it overflow then returning it to the column again from the bottom, why not just leave it all in one vat with propeller mixing?
Because they still have to keep the same vol of water in the column/vat. Acid is added to keep a constant pH, as the pH is rising during the process. So, some of the water has to be bled-off from system as new acid is added.
Well, I could do it... just lower the pressure, eh.
You were not suppose to catch that.... I was hoping Almost would
kyley
In my single media reactor (TLF Phosban Reactor) in my 65 gallon, would it be best to use:
1. BRS ROX (I guess it's not that expensive), maybe Lignite) - how does Matrix measure up?
2. BRS GFO?
3. Purigen at the top (or you think it's not even beneficial to use when I have the ROX / Lignite?)
Can the ROX and BRS GFO be used in the reactor at a relatively high flow?
No, reactors are suppose to have low flow. You do not want the flow to high. The grains should hardly be moving at all
The thing I liked about SeaGel is it supposedly will be okay with a higher flow in the reactor (not turning to dust). Isn't that the problem with GFO? Would the BRS High Capacity GFO be best to run in my reactor with the ROX?
Any GFO is fine. What I would do is to put or mix the GFO with the Purigen as GFO needs "spacers" to keep if form turning into wad of packed GFO. Many use some GAC with the GFO as a spacer. So, Water Influent===>GAC ===>GFO & Purigen===> Effluent to tank.The SeaChem Matrix is a great carbon for reactors but is more expensive than ROX itself
On the acid washing, if they are letting it overflow then returning it to the column again from the bottom, why not just leave it all in one vat with propeller mixing?
Because they still have to keep the same vol of water in the column/vat. Acid is added to keep a constant pH, as the pH is rising during the process. So, some of the water has to be bled-off from system as new acid is added.
Well, I could do it... just lower the pressure, eh.
You were not suppose to catch that
.... I was hoping Almost would kyley
In my single media reactor (TLF Phosban Reactor) in my 65 gallon, would it be best to use:
1. BRS ROX (I guess it's not that expensive), maybe Lignite) - how does Matrix measure up?
2. BRS GFO?
3. Purigen at the top (or you think it's not even beneficial to use when I have the ROX / Lignite?)
Can the ROX and BRS GFO be used in the reactor at a relatively high flow?
No, reactors are suppose to have low flow. You do not want the flow to high. The grains should hardly be moving at all
The thing I liked about SeaGel is it supposedly will be okay with a higher flow in the reactor (not turning to dust). Isn't that the problem with GFO? Would the BRS High Capacity GFO be best to run in my reactor with the ROX?
Any GFO is fine. What I would do is to put or mix the GFO with the Purigen as GFO needs "spacers" to keep if form turning into wad of packed GFO. Many use some GAC with the GFO as a spacer. So, Water Influent===>GAC ===>GFO & Purigen===> Effluent to tank.The SeaChem Matrix is a great carbon for reactors but is more expensive than ROX itself
Hey Boomer, thanks again - a few follow-up questions:
1. Just curious what it is you prefer about GFO over the PhosGuard? Some people have issues with it and soft corals?
2. I can certainly slow down the flow - so would a low flow (not enough to "boil" the granules - though I liked how that keeps them mixed up) be fine for all 3 - ROX, GFO, and Purigen? If I did it like you said (Purigen and GFO mixed together in the second part of the reactor) it may work at a low flow - at a high flow the Purigen would float away, heh heh.
3. How often do you think those 3 would need to be replaced in the reactor? 3 months?
Sounds like we're talking about relatively small differences between these? I'll probably run my SeaGel until I run out then likely switch to the ROX / GFO (and Purigen).
BTW, is it a bad idea to be running my SeaGel at a high flow (it's enough to gently "boil" the granules)? Thanks for your help,
--Kyle
1. Just curious what it is you prefer about GFO over the PhosGuard? Some people have issues with it and soft corals?
2. I can certainly slow down the flow - so would a low flow (not enough to "boil" the granules - though I liked how that keeps them mixed up) be fine for all 3 - ROX, GFO, and Purigen? If I did it like you said (Purigen and GFO mixed together in the second part of the reactor) it may work at a low flow - at a high flow the Purigen would float away, heh heh.
3. How often do you think those 3 would need to be replaced in the reactor? 3 months?
Sounds like we're talking about relatively small differences between these? I'll probably run my SeaGel until I run out then likely switch to the ROX / GFO (and Purigen).
BTW, is it a bad idea to be running my SeaGel at a high flow (it's enough to gently "boil" the granules)? Thanks for your help,
--Kyle
The ultimate is ROX, period by far followed by Lignite. The TFG is a the best bitum I have ever seen but can not adsorb as much as ROX or Lignite.
Boomer - I could swear you once stated that TFG was second to ROX. I think I decided to start using TFG after that. Is there an advantage of BRS Lignite over TFG? BRS lignite is cheaper. I guess I dont know what "bitum" is.
Finished my acid washing of BD today. I ran my canister filter with HCl (maybe 1 cup muriatic acid in 1-2 gallons of tap water) for about 2 h, then a couple of single pass DI rinses, then added washing soda to the DI and circulated it for a couple of hours, then single pass DI again for 24 h, circulated DI for 24 h, than another single pass DI rinse, and then off to the tank.
I do a lot of things because it makes the hobby fun, but that is a bunch of trouble for some GAC!
Boomer - I could swear you once stated that TFG was second to ROX. I think I decided to start using TFG after that. Is there an advantage of BRS Lignite over TFG? BRS lignite is cheaper. I guess I dont know what "bitum" is.
Finished my acid washing of BD today. I ran my canister filter with HCl (maybe 1 cup muriatic acid in 1-2 gallons of tap water) for about 2 h, then a couple of single pass DI rinses, then added washing soda to the DI and circulated it for a couple of hours, then single pass DI again for 24 h, circulated DI for 24 h, than another single pass DI rinse, and then off to the tank.
I do a lot of things because it makes the hobby fun, but that is a bunch of trouble for some GAC!
The thing I like most about rox8 is the lack of dust and it doesn't breakup with flow. Matrix is good that way too but more expensive. Purigen may attract some organics that carbon doesn't and vice versa. I use them both. HC gfo from brs is quite sturdy with very low dust. It holds up well to regeneration as well.
Orr2003
New member
Some very good info in this thread. Thanks guys
Boomer
I have been using BRS Lignite (large) carbon and it has a huge amount of dust IMO. Since it has so much dust I just rinse it with tap water ( I think i asked Randy once and he said he does the same). Is it fine to rinse with tap water?
What would be the best way to rinse the dust off? After I rinse it for quite some time with tap water I still have to let the reactor output run into a bucket for another 10g of tank water rinsing before the water runs clear. This is such a headache and I would like a better method.
Any suggestion other than switching carbons since I still have a 5g bucket of Lignite left.
Boomer
I have been using BRS Lignite (large) carbon and it has a huge amount of dust IMO. Since it has so much dust I just rinse it with tap water ( I think i asked Randy once and he said he does the same). Is it fine to rinse with tap water?
What would be the best way to rinse the dust off? After I rinse it for quite some time with tap water I still have to let the reactor output run into a bucket for another 10g of tank water rinsing before the water runs clear. This is such a headache and I would like a better method.
Any suggestion other than switching carbons since I still have a 5g bucket of Lignite left.
Newreeflady
New member
Hmmm... I want to keep it at pH 1 for 30 minutes and it will appreciably rise during this time. I guess I didn't think it would rise that much- do you think that would be true even if I rinsed the media first, getting (hopefully) most of the ash off, just leaving what is stuck in the pores? Do you think there is a such think as good enough here? I mean, if I were to put it in with a fair bit of pH 1 solution and allow it to mix, even if it rose to pH 3 I have still gotten quite a bit off, yes?
"You were not suppose to catch that
.... I was hoping Almost would "Man, I'd be in a heck a bit of trouble if I didn't catch that
thx,
Angela
kyle
1. Just curious what it is you prefer about GFO over the PhosGuard? Some people have issues with it and soft corals?
Yes, you can read about it here
Aluminum and aluminum-based phosphate binders
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/july2003/chem.htm
2. I can certainly slow down the flow - so would a low flow (not enough to "boil" the granules - though I liked how that keeps them mixed up) be fine for all 3 - ROX, GFO, and Purigen?
Yes, you are NOT suppose to boil the grains, as it causes impact of the grains which grinds them up creating dust.
If I did it like you said (Purigen and GFO mixed together in the second part of the reactor) it may work at a low flow - at a high flow the Purigen would float away, heh heh.
Low flow, just barely moving at all
3. How often do you think those 3 would need to be replaced in the reactor? 3 months?
1 / month
BTW, is it a bad idea to be running my SeaGel at a high flow (it's enough to gently "boil" the granules)? Thanks for your help,
If it has its own SEPARATE reactor go ahead
rishma
Boomer - I could swear you once stated that TFG was second to ROX.
Yes, in purity, hardness, dust but not adsorption, Lignite is better. I may have said it is about the next best thing to ROX, which is really what I meant above.
Orr2003
I have been using BRS Lignite (large) carbon and it has a huge amount of dust IMO. Since it has so much dust I just rinse it with tap water ( I think i asked Randy once and he said he does the same). Is it fine to rinse with tap water?
Yes, it will have more dust than ROX or many Bitums as Ligntie is a softer GAC. Yes, rinsing it will help allot. ALL GAC should be rinsed before use. I used TW for 3 decades but we have very clean TW. For others RO or RO/DI may be best.
What would be the best way to rinse the dust off? After I rinse it for quite some time with tap water I still have to let the reactor output run into a bucket for another 10g of tank water rinsing before the water runs clear. This is such a headache and I would like a better method.
I just stuck it in a mesh bag and tumbled and squeezed the bag under the Faucet. What you could do is put the GAC in container or a reactor with the top off and put a mesh bag over the top and then run steady FW through it so the GAC is tumbling a little and all the fines should rise to the top and over flow out the top through the mesh bag cover.
Any suggestion other than switching carbons since I still have a 5g bucket of Lignite left.
If the fines bother you then go to thefilterguys (TFG) or ROX. And if cost is an issue, along with the dust you do not like, then only TFG. SeaChem Matrix is another great choice but it cost more than ROX and is not as good as the TFG Matrix is probably the best user friendly GAC for reactors.
Angela
I guess I didn't think it would rise that much-
This is how GAC has been Acid Washed for a century, I think they know what they are doing Remember something here Angela, this is how new virgin GAC is acid washed where pH control may be a bigger issue
do you think that would be true even if I rinsed the media first, getting (hopefully) most of the ash off, just leaving what is stuck in the pores?
Do you mean rinsing in Water first? That does about zippo for what is called Ash. It is the acid that takes out most of the Ash. But, yes, it would be best to rinse it first to remove any trapped gases or fines. I take it you are talking about new GAC you want to Acid Wash and not spent GAC, correct ?
Do you think there is a such think as good enough here? I mean, if I were to put it in with a fair bit of pH 1 solution and allow it to mix, even if it rose to pH 3 I have still gotten quite a bit off, yes?
I think that *may be be fine for our needs. Meaning, our simple Acid Washing. Only Isotherms would really tell us how good we did if we tested it against another Isotherm of GAC x , y or z that is Acid Washed. However, a home chemist would not have to do that. She, could just run some MB#, M# , I # and Ash tests and note the difference in those numbers of Acid Washed vs Non-Acid Washed. Acid Washing does not always give better adsorption rates but more often than not slightly lowering it vs a Non-Acid Washed. Its real purpose is to make the GAC more pure, with much less Ash and to give a a neutral pH. Acid Washing also makes the GAC harder in many cases and with much less dust. Non Acid Washed GAC 's can have pH all over the place. It is not a big deal for us at all but in many GAC applications not being pH neural is a big deal.
1. Just curious what it is you prefer about GFO over the PhosGuard? Some people have issues with it and soft corals?
Yes, you can read about it here
Aluminum and aluminum-based phosphate binders
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/july2003/chem.htm
2. I can certainly slow down the flow - so would a low flow (not enough to "boil" the granules - though I liked how that keeps them mixed up) be fine for all 3 - ROX, GFO, and Purigen?
Yes, you are NOT suppose to boil the grains, as it causes impact of the grains which grinds them up creating dust.
If I did it like you said (Purigen and GFO mixed together in the second part of the reactor) it may work at a low flow - at a high flow the Purigen would float away, heh heh.
Low flow, just barely moving at all
3. How often do you think those 3 would need to be replaced in the reactor? 3 months?
1 / month
BTW, is it a bad idea to be running my SeaGel at a high flow (it's enough to gently "boil" the granules)? Thanks for your help,
If it has its own SEPARATE reactor go ahead
rishma
Boomer - I could swear you once stated that TFG was second to ROX.
Yes, in purity, hardness, dust but not adsorption, Lignite is better. I may have said it is about the next best thing to ROX, which is really what I meant above.
Orr2003
I have been using BRS Lignite (large) carbon and it has a huge amount of dust IMO. Since it has so much dust I just rinse it with tap water ( I think i asked Randy once and he said he does the same). Is it fine to rinse with tap water?
Yes, it will have more dust than ROX or many Bitums as Ligntie is a softer GAC. Yes, rinsing it will help allot. ALL GAC should be rinsed before use. I used TW for 3 decades but we have very clean TW. For others RO or RO/DI may be best.
What would be the best way to rinse the dust off? After I rinse it for quite some time with tap water I still have to let the reactor output run into a bucket for another 10g of tank water rinsing before the water runs clear. This is such a headache and I would like a better method.
I just stuck it in a mesh bag and tumbled and squeezed the bag under the Faucet. What you could do is put the GAC in container or a reactor with the top off and put a mesh bag over the top and then run steady FW through it so the GAC is tumbling a little and all the fines should rise to the top and over flow out the top through the mesh bag cover.
Any suggestion other than switching carbons since I still have a 5g bucket of Lignite left.
If the fines bother you then go to thefilterguys (TFG) or ROX. And if cost is an issue, along with the dust you do not like, then only TFG. SeaChem Matrix is another great choice but it cost more than ROX and is not as good as the TFG
Matrix is probably the best user friendly GAC for reactors.Angela
I guess I didn't think it would rise that much-
This is how GAC has been Acid Washed for a century, I think they know what they are doing
Remember something here Angela, this is how new virgin GAC is acid washed where pH control may be a bigger issuedo you think that would be true even if I rinsed the media first, getting (hopefully) most of the ash off, just leaving what is stuck in the pores?
Do you mean rinsing in Water first? That does about zippo for what is called Ash. It is the acid that takes out most of the Ash. But, yes, it would be best to rinse it first to remove any trapped gases or fines. I take it you are talking about new GAC you want to Acid Wash and not spent GAC, correct ?
Do you think there is a such think as good enough here? I mean, if I were to put it in with a fair bit of pH 1 solution and allow it to mix, even if it rose to pH 3 I have still gotten quite a bit off, yes?
I think that *may be be fine for our needs. Meaning, our simple Acid Washing. Only Isotherms would really tell us how good we did if we tested it against another Isotherm of GAC x , y or z that is Acid Washed. However, a home chemist would not have to do that. She
, could just run some MB#, M# , I # and Ash tests and note the difference in those numbers of Acid Washed vs Non-Acid Washed. Acid Washing does not always give better adsorption rates but more often than not slightly lowering it vs a Non-Acid Washed. Its real purpose is to make the GAC more pure, with much less Ash and to give a a neutral pH. Acid Washing also makes the GAC harder in many cases and with much less dust. Non Acid Washed GAC 's can have pH all over the place. It is not a big deal for us at all but in many GAC applications not being pH neural is a big deal.Newreeflady
New member
Angela
I guess I didn't think it would rise that much-
This is how GAC has been Acid Washed for a century, I think they know what they are doing Remember something here Angela, this is how new virgin GAC is acid washed where pH control may be a bigger issue
I'm not sure if you are telling me 1) that this is the process for virgin GAC and what I have is not virgin, or 2) that this process is mainly done for applications that require pH control
do you think that would be true even if I rinsed the media first, getting (hopefully) most of the ash off, just leaving what is stuck in the pores?
Do you mean rinsing in Water first? That does about zippo for what is called Ash. It is the acid that takes out most of the Ash. But, yes, it would be best to rinse it first to remove any trapped gases or fines. I take it you are talking about new GAC you want to Acid Wash and not spent GAC, correct ?
Yes, I meant water. hrmph. Oh, and yes, I am talking about new GAC, not used.
Do you think there is a such think as good enough here? I mean, if I were to put it in with a fair bit of pH 1 solution and allow it to mix, even if it rose to pH 3 I have still gotten quite a bit off, yes?
I think that *may be be fine for our needs. Meaning, our simple Acid Washing. Only Isotherms would really tell us how good we did if we tested it against another Isotherm of GAC x , y or z that is Acid Washed.
I clearly have no clue what you're talking about:/ So, we're looking for temperature stability when the gac is exposed to neutral water, right? I assume there is some exotherm if the gac has some ash in it that partially neutralizes giving a higher pH solution. If that isn't what you're saying, pls explain.
However, a home chemist would not have to do that. She, could just run some MB#, M# , I # and Ash tests and note the difference in those numbers of Acid Washed vs Non-Acid Washed.
Ach aye! What is MB? M? I? And, is an ash test just a pH titration? (I suppose I never mentioned I'm a kineticist),
Acid Washing does not always give better adsorption rates but more often than not slightly lowering it vs a Non-Acid Washed. Its real purpose is to make the GAC more pure, with much less Ash and to give a a neutral pH. Acid Washing also makes the GAC harder in many cases and with much less dust. Non Acid Washed GAC 's can have pH all over the place. It is not a big deal for us at all but in many GAC applications not being pH neural is a big deal.
Isn't HLLE something that is mainly a concern with tangs? So, if I'm not keeping tangs, should I be concerned? (yeah, I'm a little lazy with the aquarium stuff:/ )
I've been using Black Diamond for a very long time. Just run water through the reactor until I get clear effluent then I toss it in the tank.
Thanks again!
Angela
I guess I didn't think it would rise that much-
This is how GAC has been Acid Washed for a century, I think they know what they are doing
Remember something here Angela, this is how new virgin GAC is acid washed where pH control may be a bigger issueI'm not sure if you are telling me 1) that this is the process for virgin GAC and what I have is not virgin, or 2) that this process is mainly done for applications that require pH control
do you think that would be true even if I rinsed the media first, getting (hopefully) most of the ash off, just leaving what is stuck in the pores?
Do you mean rinsing in Water first? That does about zippo for what is called Ash. It is the acid that takes out most of the Ash. But, yes, it would be best to rinse it first to remove any trapped gases or fines. I take it you are talking about new GAC you want to Acid Wash and not spent GAC, correct ?
Yes, I meant water. hrmph. Oh, and yes, I am talking about new GAC, not used.
Do you think there is a such think as good enough here? I mean, if I were to put it in with a fair bit of pH 1 solution and allow it to mix, even if it rose to pH 3 I have still gotten quite a bit off, yes?
I think that *may be be fine for our needs. Meaning, our simple Acid Washing. Only Isotherms would really tell us how good we did if we tested it against another Isotherm of GAC x , y or z that is Acid Washed.
I clearly have no clue what you're talking about:/ So, we're looking for temperature stability when the gac is exposed to neutral water, right? I assume there is some exotherm if the gac has some ash in it that partially neutralizes giving a higher pH solution. If that isn't what you're saying, pls explain.
However, a home chemist would not have to do that. She
, could just run some MB#, M# , I # and Ash tests and note the difference in those numbers of Acid Washed vs Non-Acid Washed. Ach aye! What is MB? M? I? And, is an ash test just a pH titration? (I suppose I never mentioned I'm a kineticist
), Acid Washing does not always give better adsorption rates but more often than not slightly lowering it vs a Non-Acid Washed. Its real purpose is to make the GAC more pure, with much less Ash and to give a a neutral pH. Acid Washing also makes the GAC harder in many cases and with much less dust. Non Acid Washed GAC 's can have pH all over the place. It is not a big deal for us at all but in many GAC applications not being pH neural is a big deal.
Isn't HLLE something that is mainly a concern with tangs? So, if I'm not keeping tangs, should I be concerned? (yeah, I'm a little lazy with the aquarium stuff:/ )
I've been using Black Diamond for a very long time. Just run water through the reactor until I get clear effluent then I toss it in the tank.
Thanks again!
Angela
tozzi
New member
Great carbon thread! I been using 1 2/3 cups of rox in my 250 for a few months now, all i can say is its worth the extra money. Tank is real clear. It was clear before but the rox was one of those things where i can actually see the difference. I ordered the high capacity gfo from brs and can't wait to try it. Hope it works great like the rox.
Boomer whats your thoughts about korallen-zucht, the zeovit carbon?
Boomer whats your thoughts about korallen-zucht, the zeovit carbon?
murraycamp
Member
Why should we sue them? I think it raises serious jurisdictional issues. What cause of action?
I know!! Conspiracy to tortiously interfere with dissolved nutrient export!
Sorry Boomer - I just couldn't help it. I got beat upside the head with a smart *** stick this morning. My apologies.
Angela
Yes, I meant water. hrmph. Oh, and yes, I am talking about new GAC, not used.
OK, just wanted to be sure as I'm/we taking about new.
I clearly have no clue what you're talking about:/ So, we're looking for temperature stability when the gac is exposed to neutral water, right? I assume there is some exotherm if the gac has some ash in it that partially neutralizes giving a higher pH solution. If that isn't what you're saying, pls explain.
We are looking for pH stability. If you took some types of new GAC and did a pH test in neutral water the pH may crash or get some what high. We should try for a neural pH. Did you read Randy's post on what he did and how he did it ? He is a PhD chemist
I was talking about Adsorption Isotherm tests. These show the adsorption rates of different GAC's all adsorbing the same substance as a function of the concentration of that substance. There are also Adsorption Kinetic Isotherms, which are a function of adsorption over time.
The final pH of GAC's and how it effects neutral water varies with the activation process or the final acid washed process. Not all Acid Washed GAC are pH neutral. The pH of a final GAC, ready for sale, may have a pH of mid 3's to mid 9's. Certain GAC, ready for sale, have pH of 7 and cost extra. They are often called Acid Washed Water Rinsed pH Neutral GAC. Such GAC is used in Dialyzes treatment. The pH of a GAC is tested by filling the GAC with water and measuring the water extract pH.
Ach aye! What is MB? M? I? And, is an ash test just a pH titration?
MB = Methylene Blue Number
M = Molasses Number
I = Iodine Number
These are the adsorption rates of a GAC often found on a GAC data sheet. For example, the Iodine Number is the gram weight of Iodine adsorbed / gram of GAC. Numbers are often form 600 - 1,000, i.e., 1 gram of GAC will adsorb 600 mg - 1,000 mg gram of Iodine. (ASTM D28 Standard Method test). The I # is almost the same thing as the SA (Surface Area). So, if a GAC has a I # of 1,000 the SA is about 1,000 meter^2 /gram. The I # is the ability to remover very small molecules. The MB #, medium molecule and the M #, large molecules. The M # also tells us what the PA (Pore Volume ) is, just like the I # gives us the SA. No, the I # and M # do not give us the exact SA or PV but close enough. We like to have high M # and MB # but not all data sheets give all three of these important numbers for us. And some of these numbers are converted to a different number, like the M# being converted to a Molasses Decolorization Index/Efficiency given in %.
sn't HLLE something that is mainly a concern with tangs? So, if I'm not keeping tangs, should I be concerned? (yeah, I'm a little lazy with the aquarium stuff:/ )
I've been using Black Diamond for a very long time. Just run water through the reactor until I get clear effluent then I toss it in the tank.
Some of the latest and on going research on this subject I posted here. So far, it is almost to the point were these researches can tell you when a tested fish species, sensitive to GAC dust, is going to get HLLE ie., it is predictable. It is by far mostly a Tang issue and maybe followed by Angle fish. I have seen Lion-fish and Groupers with HLLE but have know way of knowing it was form GAC dust.
That is the way to rinse ANY GAC no matter what the brand
tozzi
Great carbon thread! I been using 1 2/3 cups of rox in my 250 for a few months now,
ROX is 1/3 cup / 50 gal and most others are 1/2 cup / 50 gal. So, you are right on @ 250 gal net water 1 2/3 cups
Boomer whats your thoughts about korallen-zucht, the zeovit carbon?
Waaaaaaaaaay over priced for what they are and what they do ~$25.00 / l is absolutely NUTS and is no where near as good as ROX or others, like BRS other Lignite, TFG, TLF, WM or Matrix.
Here is an old rundown
Seachem - $15.49 per liter
Black Diamond - $3.83 per liter
ROX 0.8 - $9.24 per liter
TFG - $8.45 per liter
add
zeovit carbon -$25.00 per liter
:rollface: :rollface: :rollface:
recife
When i test rowa carbon i found that it had higher po4 than other carbons i was using,
Any idea if Tunze carbon is any good.
None of these Euro's are very good GAC and waaaaaaaay over priced for what they are. Most of them are crap GAC meant to be used as VPC and LPC , which we should be using and are in most cases, with the exception of Kent which is also a VPC and not good.
murraycamp
That is fine I get crap all the time about my typo errors :lol:
Yes, I meant water. hrmph. Oh, and yes, I am talking about new GAC, not used.
OK, just wanted to be sure as I'm/we taking about new.
I clearly have no clue what you're talking about:/ So, we're looking for temperature stability when the gac is exposed to neutral water, right? I assume there is some exotherm if the gac has some ash in it that partially neutralizes giving a higher pH solution. If that isn't what you're saying, pls explain.
We are looking for pH stability. If you took some types of new GAC and did a pH test in neutral water the pH may crash or get some what high. We should try for a neural pH. Did you read Randy's post on what he did and how he did it ? He is a PhD chemist
I was talking about Adsorption Isotherm tests. These show the adsorption rates of different GAC's all adsorbing the same substance as a function of the concentration of that substance. There are also Adsorption Kinetic Isotherms, which are a function of adsorption over time.
The final pH of GAC's and how it effects neutral water varies with the activation process or the final acid washed process. Not all Acid Washed GAC are pH neutral. The pH of a final GAC, ready for sale, may have a pH of mid 3's to mid 9's. Certain GAC, ready for sale, have pH of 7 and cost extra. They are often called Acid Washed Water Rinsed pH Neutral GAC. Such GAC is used in Dialyzes treatment. The pH of a GAC is tested by filling the GAC with water and measuring the water extract pH.
Ach aye! What is MB? M? I? And, is an ash test just a pH titration?
MB = Methylene Blue Number
M = Molasses Number
I = Iodine Number
These are the adsorption rates of a GAC often found on a GAC data sheet. For example, the Iodine Number is the gram weight of Iodine adsorbed / gram of GAC. Numbers are often form 600 - 1,000, i.e., 1 gram of GAC will adsorb 600 mg - 1,000 mg gram of Iodine. (ASTM D28 Standard Method test). The I # is almost the same thing as the SA (Surface Area). So, if a GAC has a I # of 1,000 the SA is about 1,000 meter^2 /gram. The I # is the ability to remover very small molecules. The MB #, medium molecule and the M #, large molecules. The M # also tells us what the PA (Pore Volume ) is, just like the I # gives us the SA. No, the I # and M # do not give us the exact SA or PV but close enough. We like to have high M # and MB # but not all data sheets give all three of these important numbers for us. And some of these numbers are converted to a different number, like the M# being converted to a Molasses Decolorization Index/Efficiency given in %.
sn't HLLE something that is mainly a concern with tangs? So, if I'm not keeping tangs, should I be concerned? (yeah, I'm a little lazy with the aquarium stuff:/ )
I've been using Black Diamond for a very long time. Just run water through the reactor until I get clear effluent then I toss it in the tank.
Some of the latest and on going research on this subject I posted here. So far, it is almost to the point were these researches can tell you when a tested fish species, sensitive to GAC dust, is going to get HLLE ie., it is predictable. It is by far mostly a Tang issue and maybe followed by Angle fish. I have seen Lion-fish and Groupers with HLLE but have know way of knowing it was form GAC dust.
That is the way to rinse ANY GAC no matter what the brand
tozzi
Great carbon thread! I been using 1 2/3 cups of rox in my 250 for a few months now,
ROX is 1/3 cup / 50 gal and most others are 1/2 cup / 50 gal. So, you are right on @ 250 gal net water 1 2/3 cups
Boomer whats your thoughts about korallen-zucht, the zeovit carbon?
Waaaaaaaaaay over priced for what they are and what they do
~$25.00 / l is absolutely NUTS and is no where near as good as ROX or others, like BRS other Lignite, TFG, TLF, WM or Matrix. Here is an old rundown
Seachem - $15.49 per liter
Black Diamond - $3.83 per liter
ROX 0.8 - $9.24 per liter
TFG - $8.45 per liter
add
zeovit carbon -$25.00 per liter
:rollface: :rollface: :rollface:
recife
When i test rowa carbon i found that it had higher po4 than other carbons i was using,
Any idea if Tunze carbon is any good.
None of these Euro's are very good GAC and waaaaaaaay over priced for what they are. Most of them are crap GAC meant to be used as VPC and LPC , which we should be using and are in most cases, with the exception of Kent which is also a VPC and not good.
murraycamp
That is fine I get crap all the time about my typo errors :lol:
Last edited:
Hi Boomer:
It looks like BRS added a special grade bituminous aquarium carbon (Iodine number of 1000) to its line up. Cost is $63.99 for a 5 gallon bucket.
Where would this rate on your list in terms of performance - before or after TFG? In terms of cost, it's certainly less expensive.
Thanks in advance!
It looks like BRS added a special grade bituminous aquarium carbon (Iodine number of 1000) to its line up. Cost is $63.99 for a 5 gallon bucket.
Where would this rate on your list in terms of performance - before or after TFG? In terms of cost, it's certainly less expensive.
Thanks in advance!
