DIY Sulfur Denitrator

[tmz]

I read another article length post concerning carbon-dosing. I read for less than a minute, and noted that the author considered Ammonia (NH₄) an organic compound...it isn't, it is an inorganic byproduct of decomposition. I did not bother reading the rest...

Wish you had said something earlier. That error in naming convention is over two years old. I just corrected it. That thread is a discussion and learning effort. Any helpful comments you'd like to make there are welcome.

 

[tmz]

I do not agree, there should never be a reason to remove sulfur.

Obviously that speaks for itself if there is no concern about H2S potential, alkalinity depletion ,sulfate production and excessive non beneficial bacterial activity.

 

[tmz]

In one post you say 10l for 50ppm nitrate; in another 5l. Which do you mean?

 

[tmz]

As nitrate nitrogen can be measured by electronic devices, flow regulation can be automated for bigger systems.

What system do you use to do this?

 

[shifty51008]

wow this is like watching a tennis match, back and fourth :lol:

anyway all jokes aside, I just have a quick question about degassing, do you only have to degass the system for a few days when starting it up or do you have to do it every day?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I know how to manage denitrators. H2S occurred years ago (near the time when the thread started) when the nitrate dropped . Increasing the flow and reducing the amount of sulfur took away the odor in the effluent . I had to modify the diy reactor to allow more flow as part of that fix.Reducing the sulfur along with increasing the flow enabled an acceptable balance in the hypoxic range( nitrate but low oxygen). More oxidation reduces H2S faster and can be accelerated by passing through gfo. It's a simple safety device or add on when and if H2S production becomes an issue for users.

you say you know how to manage sulfur de-nitrators but you put in GFO as a safety device against H2S production. A well managed reactor will never produce H2S during normal operation. And you reduced the sulfur of a reactor that already was operating at its limits. What will you do when nitrate builds up again? You can not decrease the flow because you will kill the beast. This is NOT good management!

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I still did not get an answer from you how many sulfur you are going to use for a simple question: a 500l aquarium with 20 ppm


I did answer it. Read the post again ,more carefully.

Ok discussion closed.
I still did not get an answer from you how many sulfur you are going to use for a simple question: a 500l aquarium with 20 ppm. How many sulhpur to use based on the nitrate?
Next question: how many sulhpur do you use in a 500l aquarium system with a daily over production of 1ppm.
Next geustion: how many sulphur do you need in a 500l aquarium system with 20 ppm, a known daily over production of 1ppm and you want reduce the 20ppm to 2 ppm in a month.

My answer on all questions: 5l; when 50ppm or more in the system 10 l

Based on the nitrate in the system you would use how many sulphur?

No I did not find the answers. I must have missed it. Is there any formula
available to calculate this? How much sulfur would you use and what parameters where used for the results?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

In one post you say 10l for 50ppm nitrate; in another 5l. Which do you mean?

This must be a joke.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Just to clarify the science a bit, you (uncleof6 and Belgian Anthias) may both be correct on the S and P comparison since you were claiming different things (in organic molecules vs elements needed for life). Potassium is in the latter category, but never the former in a living creature. Phosphorus is in both (e.g., bones as an inorganic ion, phospholipids as an organic). Sulfur mostly in the former (organics such as taurine).

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I use 2 liters. for 20ppm.and manage the flow accordingly.

Do you see it yet?

I found your answer. As, in your point of view, the amount of sulfur must be based on the amount of nitrate to remove must I conclude that it is that simple; 1l/10ppm
And when 1 ppm has to be removed only 1/10l or 10cc? And when I have to remove 1ppm/day?

No I still do not see it!

 

[tmz]

This must be a joke'


This must be a joke. :lolspin:

Ok I got it.:lol2: You said 50ppm or more for 10liters of sulfur vs the source article which said 50 or lessfor 5 l.
So with 49ppm you would use 5l and with 50ppm you would use 10 liters.

Wow quite a difference for 1ppm of nitrate assuming you could measure it that accurately which is doubtful for hobby grade tests. I forgot you use some sort of electronic monitoring which you haven't identified for the rest of us.
As I recall you also said you would use 5 liters of sulfur for 0.5ppm nitrate. So it's always 5 liters or 10 liters per 500 liters irrespective of feeding or nitrate level Makes no sense to me at all as a rigid rule for all tanks in any case. 1% may be a good guideline for tanks with a good portion of nitrate to start but adjustments to the sulfur based on performance are reasonalbe and prudent to minimize the downsides.:lol::uhoh2:

I answered your question in post 1304. Look again.

 

[tmz]

you say you know how to manage sulfur de-nitrators but you put in GFO as a safety device against H2S production. A well managed reactor will never produce H2S during normal operation. And you reduced the sulfur of a reactor that already was operating at its limits. What will you do when nitrate builds up again? You can not decrease the flow because you will kill the beast. This is NOT good management!

Following the tennis match analogy offered by another poster I call FAULT.

I think my practices are good management . My post explains it; you're restatement misrepresents it. I never reduced the flow for example, I increased it. I do not accept your judgement in regard to my aquariums . Do what you like for your own for better or worse.
H2S is always a potential concern. If it occurs running the effluent over gfo will help until and adjustment can be made.

What will you do when nitrate builds up again?

Why do you think it will? Have you ever tried less sulfur in yours? You never had H2S even in the initial cycle?

I took the denitrator off my main system over 5 years ago in a heavily fed system mixed reef and still haven't seen nitrate over 1 ppm unless I choose to actually dose it.

I also would not recommend using a sulfur denitrator on a new tank in favor of allowing the heterotrophioc dentirifying bacteria to establish themselves and use the nitrate. Often that's all that's needed to keep it near natural seawater levels.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Ok,to be sure I understand and don't misrepresent :

you'd use :
5 liters of sufur for 5ppm ,

10liters for 50ppm, even though the paper you cite recommends 5 liters for 50 and below.Why don't you follow the recommended amount in the paper you cited,.btw?

The same 10liters for 80ppm. Why not 8 or 16 ?



What do you do when your denitrator is shut down for relpensihment, power outage etc.? Let's say you were using 10liters for 500 liters of water volume with 80 ppm initially but on restart the nitrate in the aquarium is only 5 or 10ppm ,Do you still use the same 10 liters?

Do you see it yet?

The reactor is used as a part of the system, not as a problem solver. I do not know how to calculate the amount of sulfur needed so I based my self on the experience and tests of some people who can know including my father. The aim is to cope with any condition possible so, when a big animal dies, the system must stay as balanced possible. We want that the volume of the system pases at least once a day during normal operation so a reactor that is big enough to handle that volume is needed. When a volume of 10l/h for a 200l aquarium system will pass true a reactor of 2 liter the reactor may become complete aerobic which must be avoided. So, some clever guys have tested how big the reactor should be to pass this flow true the reactor and still stay anaerobic. These clever guys had a reason to base the amount of sulphur on the amount of water in the system. They tested also how big the reactor should be working at maximum capacity with 0 nitrate in the effluent and still have sufficient flow to prevent the possibility for anoxic conditions They found out that a 1% reactor gives the results they want. When 50 ppm and more has to be removed they advise to use a 2% reactor for the same reasons.They tested their systems during many years and shared their findings. What I did is following their advise and now I have the experience that it works fine for years without the problems which are encountered by some people who want to do it differently.
When I have a 2% reactor in use there is no reason why I should reduce it to a 1% reactor even when nitrate drops to 1ppm.

And yes, I still do not see the light!

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I also would not recommend using a sulfur denitrator on a new tank in favor of allowing the heterotrophioc dentirifying bacteria to establish themselves and use the nitrate. Often that's all that's needed to keep it near natural seawater levels.

As the reactor is a part of the system, it will not prevent the bacteria to establish. The reactor will be in balance from start up. It is a choice to make. This way the system is kept stable between 1 and 2 ppm which is the level we want. Have you ever used a sulfur de-nitrator for a long period of time? Did you ever managed a sulfur de-nitrator on a new system?
You use the de-nitrator as a problem solver for high nitrate build up, we never had a nitrate build up due to the use of the reactor by start up of the system.
I certainly will not follow your recommendation the next time I start a new system.

 

[tmz]

Well ,we disagree.
You are lucky to have your father to share your interest. My father has passed and was my hero in many ways.
Yes, clever guys set up the early guidelines over 15 years ago. There is nothing "incorrect" or "wrong thinking" as you assert about refining the approach to minimize the downsides and get the benefits using what we know and can learn about how the sulfur bacteria function and likely reactions. Good luck to you both.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Well ,we disagree.
You are lucky to have your father to share your interest. My father has passed and was my hero in many ways.
Yes, clever guys set up the early guidelines over 15 years ago. There is nothing "incorrect" or "wrong thinking" as you assert about refining the approach to minimize the downsides and get the benefits using what we know and can learn about how the sulfur bacteria function and likely reactions. Good luck to you both.

You disagree but you have no idea of how much sulphur to use in the reactor!? It is NOT possible to calculate the amount sulphur needed based only at the level of nitrate in the system. Managing sulfhur de-nitrators only for nitrate problem solving needs a lot more attention. Not waiting till it is to late as you did and than say that the reactor was well managed because the flow of a critical reactor was increased and sulfhur was removed to solve the problem of H2S production. It should, may and can not happen when managed the way it should!.Why are people afraid for using using sulphur de-nitrators? Why are they afraid of the gost H2S? Because a small or to small reactor is not more difficult to manage when done the right way but it needs more attention and corrections and when mismanaged becomes critical fast. Because people who tried it have had bad experiences due to mismanagement.
Although it is very simple: increase the flow when the level of nitrate decreases. Do not wait till nitrate is removed. If for example 20ppm has to be removed, take a sample regularly and increase the flow for example every drop of 5 ppm. If the level does not drop or increases, please be shore the reactor is big enough and is able to remove every day more than the daily nitrate production in the system before decreasing the flow. That is why we want the reactor to be big enough and have a minimum daily flow of the total aquarium volume. For easy and safe management!
You do not have to agree with me but please try to do it the right way!
I will not go in discussion any more. In my country they have a saying:" Wie niet horen wil moet voelen."

 

[tmz]

Sure I do and said what I would do for my aquariums . Stop misrepresenting my position.

The amount of sulfur to use varies based on the flow ,the amount of nitrate in the water,and the nitrogen inputs to the system. It makes no sense to to ignore sulfur volume and just regulate flow. Some will need more ;some less. A general rigidly prescribed rule is pointless and ignores the effects of sulfur oxidation.

Excess sulfate production, excess bacterial activity,alkalinity depletion, and the potential for H2S are issues many have concerns about. Dismissing them or trying to make the science fit your rigidly prescribed method and your prescribed sulfur levels is not "right";seems more in the interest of looking right . We can do better.

It makes no sense to use 5l of sulfur for 0.05ppm of nitrate and that same amount for 49ppm with 500l of water volume for example.nor to jump to 10l with 51ppm. Seems like you choose not to hear/horen and prefer to feel/volen your way through it. I think the saying from at the end of your post is something you should consider carefully.

I haven't visited your country in over 40 years so I may have misinterpreted it.I think it means ;those who don't hear/listen must feel. Not nice to end a friendly discussion with yet another attempt at insult. I have heard every word you said ; I don't agree with much of it.and don't accept your insistence that variation from your" right way" method is "wrong thinking" "mismanagement" etc . I think it's closed minded . We have a syaing "My way or the highway" which seems apt here.

 

[tmz]

Sure I do and said what I would do for my aquariums . Stop misrepresenting my position.

The amount of sulfur to use varies based on the flow ,the amount of nitrate in the water,and the nitrogen inputs to the system. It makes no sense to to ignore sulfur volume and just regulate flow. Some will need more ;some less. A general rigidly prescribed rule is pointless and ignores the effects of sulfur oxidation.

Excess sulfate production, excess bacterial activity,alkalinity depletion, and the potential for H2S are issues many have concerns about. Dismissing them or trying to make the science fit your rigidly prescribed method and your prescribed sulfur levels is not "right";seems more in the interest of looking right . We can do better.

It makes no sense to use 5l of sulfur for 0.05ppm of nitrate and that same amount for 49ppm with 500l of water volume for example.nor to jump to 10l with 51ppm. Seems like you choose not to hear/horen and prefer to feel/volen your way through it. I think the saying from at the end of your post is something you should consider carefully.

I haven't visited your country in over 40 years so I may have misinterpreted it.I think it means ;those who don't hear/listen must feel. Not nice to end a friendly discussion with yet another attempt at insult. I have heard every word you said ; I don't agree with much of it.and don't accept your insistence that variation from your" right way" method is "wrong thinking" "mismanagement" etc . I think it's closed minded . We have a syaing "My way or the highway" which seems apt here.

Anyway , a lot of information is in the thread and folks should have enough to make informed decisions on when and if they choose to use a sulfur denitrator and how to manage it . Continued repetition and claims of rightness and twisting meanings isn't very helpful.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

The sulhpur de-nitrator is a part of the system.

The sulhpur de-nitrator is a part of the system.

Those who have followed my posts must know that the use of a 1% reactor is a guideline. Of coarse the amount of Sulfhur has influence on the working of the reactor. A very big influence when there is not enough. As the amount of sulphur needed is difficult to determine, using 1% gives the assurance that the reactor will do what he has to do. Removing minimum the amount nitrate produced every day and keep a flow big enough to pass the system water true the reactor each day. Because that is the goal, removing enough nitrate so it can not build up and is easily managed at a constant level.
When the reactor is used as a problem solver and is not a part of the system one should know before use why the nitrate build up has taken place and make the necessary corrections because the use of the reactor will only solve the problem for the time used. A 1% reactor is advised to remove nitrate till a level of 50ppm and when more has to be removed one should use a 2% reactor. A 1 % reactor can easily remove 100 ppm when the necessary corrections where made before use. When correction are not made or can not be made because of the setting ( big fish aqua) it may be that flow has to be reduced that much that the daily production can NOT be removed any more. That is why a 2% reactor is advised for high levels, it will work in any circumstances. For some it may make no sense and they would want to use 0.5%, 1.1% or 1.5% of sulphur. It may work fine. It can be tested how much nitrate is produced every day and make some test to define how much sulphur has to be used. But tomorrow some big fish will spawn, how much will be needed than? Following the guideline gives a workable easy manageable system. If concerns are made about the production of H2S, the reactor is probably managed the wrong way. Be sure the reactor is big enough to remove the daily production and big enough to have a minimal flow of the system volume once a day. Use it as a part of the system. Once in balance it will not have more influence on the water quality than when using other methods to achieve the same results. And nitrate management lies in your hands! Using it only as a problem solver is not advisable as it solves nothing.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

The sulhpur de-nitrator is a part of the system.

The sulhpur de-nitrator is a part of the system.

Those who have followed my posts must know that the use of a 1% reactor is a guideline. Of coarse the amount of Sulfhur has influence on the working of the reactor. A very big influence when there is not enough. As the amount of sulphur needed is difficult to determine, using 1% gives the assurance that the reactor will do what he has to do. Removing minimum the amount nitrate produced every day and keep a flow big enough to pass the system water true the reactor each day. Because that is the goal, removing enough nitrate so it can not build up and is easily managed at a constant level.
When the reactor is used as a problem solver and is not a part of the system one should know before use why the nitrate build up has taken place and make the necessary corrections because the use of the reactor will only solve the problem for the time used. A 1% reactor is advised to remove nitrate till a level of 50ppm and when more has to be removed one should use a 2% reactor. A 1 % reactor can easily remove 100 ppm when the necessary corrections where made before use. When correction are not made or can not be made because of the setting ( big fish aqua) it may be that flow has to be reduced that much that the daily production can NOT be removed any more. That is why a 2% reactor is advised for high levels, it will work in any circumstances. For some it may make no sense and they would want to use 0.5%, 1.1% or 1.5% of sulphur. It may work fine. It can be tested how much nitrate is produced every day and make some test to define how much sulphur has to be used. But tomorrow some big fish will spawn, how much will be needed than? Following the guideline gives a workable easy manageable system. If concerns are made about the production of H2S, the reactor is probably managed the wrong way. Be sure the reactor is big enough to remove the daily production and big enough to have a minimal flow of the system volume once a day. Use it as a part of the system. Once in balance it will not have more influence on the water quality than when using other methods to achieve the same results. And nitrate management lies in your hands! Using it only as a problem solver is not advisable as it solves nothing.