DIY Sulfur Denitrator

[CHSUB]

It is very simple: if your daily nitrate production is 0.5ppm each day and the nitrate level to maintain is 1ppm, the total system volume has to pass the reactor every 2 days, otherwise the reactor will not be able to remove 0.5ppm daily. If the nitrate level to maintain is 0.5ppm the total system volume has to pass the reactor daily! How the reactor will remove the quantity of nitrate when it is not entered? How can a sulfurreactor maintain a low nitrate level when there is not enough water containing nitrate entered to remove the production?; In 20 day's? Than one has a very low daily nitrate production. To maintain 1ppm with a flow of the total volume/ 20 days the maximum nitrate production daily can be only 0.05ppm/day which means that after 100 days your level will build up to 6 ppm when no denitrator is used. Why using a denitrator? If you want to maintain 0.5ppm the daily production can be only 0.025ppm on a 20 day basis. One does not need a sulpur-denitrator for nutriënt poor systems!! But it will reduce nitrate.
Using 1% reactor flow will be +- 4.2l/h/ liter sulfur to pass the total volume daily. A flow between 2l/h/ liter S and 5l/h/lS is normal flow when operating a correct sized sulfurdenitrator for a natural reefaquarium system.

Why do you process less water when the level increases? The level increases because the daily production is not removed. Maybe there is not enough space to increase the flow. Is this a 1% reactor?

I can understand your methodology and calculation, and it seems ideal in an abstract sense. Nitrate X is created daily, and the sulfur reactor removes that daily nitrate production X by having the system's total volume pass through the filter daily. However, ime, it is impossible; the reactor would need be many times larger than 1%, maybe 15%.
I have a large reactor, controlled with an ORP controller and a dosing pump. When the ORP inside the reactor gets to -200 the dosing pump turns on, I processes about 15 gallons of water per day. The dosing pump turns on and off several times in a 24 hour period depending on ORP levels. Currently, daily nitrate production exceeds total denitrating capacity; over time nitrates rise and less water is processed through the reactor. High nitrate input slows the reactor. This only makes sense, as higher no3 needs more dwell time to reduce no3. I will agree that lower no3 input allows more DT water to be processed, but because the dwell time is reduced; not for the simple reason of the "œarmy" needing more no3 to stay alive. I would like to see ORP readings in your reactors and no3 input and effluent levels. I can't image water passing through the reactor, as quickly as you claim, and it reducing the no3 to zero; regardless how low the input no3 level is.


sulfur reactor....~.75% or +2 gallons of sulfur
[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/imagejpg1_zpsb396951e.jpg.html][/URL]

ORP controller....note the negitive value -218

http://[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/imagejpg2_zps3e97f455.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[tmz]

More flow is an obvious step ,which I and others have noted , when nitrate levels are lower more flow brings in more nitrate A full turnover of tank volume daily seems impractical to me . Isuspect 15% sufur may sound good to some folks who say you can't have too much sulfur but not to me.

Reciruclation can help clogging but won't necessarily stop it; I don't know anyone who doesn't incorporate a recircualting pump in their reactor. It's basic .
Reducing the sulfur along with increased flow can also be helpful since you need less of it for less nitrate. Less of it produces less SO4 and uses less alkalinity.

When using organic C in the reactor or dosing the aquarium with organic C with a sulfur denitirator in play ,I think H 2S production is more likely from sulfate reducing bacteria which are heterotrophic and are more get going when organic C is present and free oxygen and nitrate are absent . The heterotrophic denitifiers also produce a large biomass relatively quickly which can contribute to clogging and may outcompete the sulfur bacteria.

 

[tmz]

. Please tell me If I am wrong!

OK,you are wrong; junk math and junk science are a waste of time.Misreprestation of opposing viewpoints to preserve your jaundiced comments are all of that with a twist of dishonesty. Folks who want to know more may want to take a long trip through the OPs design and the experience of others starting on post # 1 or review the issues arising in the 1200 and 1300 range of posts to wash away some of the nonsense.

 

[BROTHERSPIZZERIA]

I can understand your methodology and calculation, and it seems ideal in an abstract sense. Nitrate X is created daily, and the sulfur reactor removes that daily nitrate production X by having the system's total volume pass through the filter daily. However, ime, it is impossible; the reactor would need be many times larger than 1%, maybe 15%.
I have a large reactor, controlled with an ORP controller and a dosing pump. When the ORP inside the reactor gets to -200 the dosing pump turns on, I processes about 15 gallons of water per day. The dosing pump turns on and off several times in a 24 hour period depending on ORP levels. Currently, daily nitrate production exceeds total denitrating capacity; over time nitrates rise and less water is processed through the reactor. High nitrate input slows the reactor. This only makes sense, as higher no3 needs more dwell time to reduce no3. I will agree that lower no3 input allows more DT water to be processed, but because the dwell time is reduced; not for the simple reason of the "œarmy" needing more no3 to stay alive. I would like to see ORP readings in your reactors and no3 input and effluent levels. I can't image water passing through the reactor, as quickly as you claim, and it reducing the no3 to zero; regardless how low the input no3 level is.
Is that the aqua medic kr1000 being used as a Sulphur reactor? If so any advice on using it as a Sulphur reactor. I have a homemade recirculating reactor now with 2 gallons of media producing 0 effluent but it's not dropping dt nitrates at all. So I'm gonna add an additional 2 gallons in the kr1000 reactor and see if that helps. Also doubling the size of my skimmer. So I'm trying everything to get them down



sulfur reactor....~.75% or +2 gallons of sulfur
[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/imagejpg1_zpsb396951e.jpg.html][/URL]

ORP controller....note the negitive value -218

http://[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/imagejpg2_zps3e97f455.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I can understand your methodology and calculation, and it seems ideal in an abstract sense. Nitrate X is created daily, and the sulfur reactor removes that daily nitrate production X by having the system’s total volume pass through the filter daily. However, ime, it is impossible; the reactor would need be many times larger than 1%, maybe 15%.
I have a large reactor, controlled with an ORP controller and a dosing pump. When the ORP inside the reactor gets to -200 the dosing pump turns on, I processes about 15 gallons of water per day. The dosing pump turns on and off several times in a 24 hour period depending on ORP levels. Currently, daily nitrate production exceeds total denitrating capacity; over time nitrates rise and less water is processed through the reactor. High nitrate input slows the reactor. This only makes sense, as higher no3 needs more dwell time to reduce no3. I will agree that lower no3 input allows more DT water to be processed, but because the dwell time is reduced; not for the simple reason of the “army” needing more no3 to stay alive. I would like to see ORP readings in your reactors and no3 input and effluent levels. I can’t image water passing through the reactor, as quickly as you claim, and it reducing the no3 to zero; regardless how low the input no3 level is.


sulfur reactor....~.75% or +2 gallons of sulfur
[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/imagejpg1_zpsb396951e.jpg.html][/URL]

ORP controller....note the negitive value -218

http://[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/imagejpg2_zps3e97f455.jpg.html][/URL]

You are running the reactor as it was a carbon reactor. A sulfur reactor is capable to treat 5l/h/liter sulfur at low nitrate levels if there is enough room to deplete the oxygen entered. So, it must be big enough! Your reactor is removing practical nothing but it seems to work satisfactory for you.
I can imagine that you can not belief what I am saying because i also can not believe sulfur reactors are used the way yours is functioning. Not continuously fed and fed by a dosing pump!?
We do not use ORP because it thus not work for us. Our systems are removing +-0.5ppm daily to keep a level of +- 1ppm and the total system volume passes true it +- every 2 days.
1 liter of sulfur is enough for removing 800 mg nitrate daily at 100% ( 0 nitrates in effluent) and max +- 3gr = 3000 mg at +- 30% removal. So, most of the space we need is for depleting the oxygen.

A 1 % reactor is able to pass the total volume of the system every day at a nitrate level of 1ppm having 0 nitrate output.
We do this for many years. The rest is pure and simple mathematics. One can not remove what is not entered.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

. Please tell me If I am wrong!

OK,you are wrong; junk math and junk science are a waste of time.Misreprestation of opposing viewpoints to preserve your jaundiced comments are all of that with a twist of dishonesty. Folks who want to know more may want to take a long trip through the OPs design and the experience of others starting on post # 1 or review the issues arising in the 1200 and 1300 range of posts to wash away some of the nonsense.

I hope honestly that they will not follow the advice of someone who can not accept simple mathematics and can not answer simple questions to prove his point.

The nonsens you are talking about have been applied in many public aquaria and have proven to work satisfactory for years.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Guideline for estimating the volume of a sulfur-reactor

Guideline for estimating the volume of a sulfur-reactor

After years of practical experience a simple basic rule was developed.
Starting with the basic rule to use as a guideline for reducing high nitrate levels a 1% reactors till a nitrate level of 50 ppm and 2% above 50ppm
It is not difficult to understand that one can not remove what is not entered in the reactor. At high nitrate levels a little flow will enter a lot of nitrate but when a low level is reached a lot more flow is needed to enter enough nitrate to remove the production. If the production is not removed the level will increase.
Reactors have to be matched to the daily to remove quantity of nitrate and the nitrate available in the water otherwise they will not be able to remove the production! One simple rule to know how big a reactor should be is calculating how much water is needed to remove the daily production at the desired nitrate level, not the level when started.

To make it easy, If a level of 1 ppm has to be maintained and the production is only 0.1ppm daily only 1/10 of the total system volume has to pass the reactor daily for removing enough nitrate to keep the level on 1ppm. For this example we need a reactor of 1/10 of the systems volume or 0.1%. For a 1000 liter system this means only one liter sulfur because only 100mg nitrate has to be removed daily. The full capacity of this reactor may be estimated to be 500mg daily at high nitrate levels. At low nitrate levels a lot of space is taken to remove the oxygen. I can advice to use in this case a 0.2% reactor to be able for the reactor to grow with the system.
Take in mind that doubling the volume of the reactor is needed to decrease the level by half for removing the same production.

Using this simple no nonsens calculation results in a very good working reactor that is very easy to manage and is able to close the nitrogen cycle completely!

Any size of reactor is able to reduce and remove nitrate but only a reactor that is big enough for the system and managed correctly can control the nitrate level and close the nitrogen-cycle.

All information about BADESS and more accurate calculations are available on the Makazi Baharini wiki. Also how to: manage, start up, reduce high nitrate levels, closing the nitrogencycle end so on. All information is referenced and a bibliography is added.

 

[tmz]

Same old ......... dozens of the same post over and over. More sulfur ..more sulfur.. Less nitrate = more sulfur. More nitrate =more sulfur. All of your questions have been adequately answered to no avail ;it takes a listener not a teller for reawsonable dialgue.



I doubt successful public aquariums including those using sulfur reactors rely on the junk science and convoluted interpretations of reactions and activity propagated throughout your posts.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

More flow is an obvious step ,which I and others have noted , when nitrate levels are lower more flow brings in more nitrate A full turnover of tank volume daily seems impractical to me . Isuspect 15% sufur may sound good to some folks who say you can't have too much sulfur but not to me.

Reciruclation can help clogging but won't necessarily stop it; I don't know anyone who doesn't incorporate a recircualting pump in their reactor. It's basic .
Reducing the sulfur along with increased flow can also be helpful since you need less of it for less nitrate. Less of it produces less SO4 and uses less alkalinity.

.

15% sulfur ??

A full turnover of tank volume daily seems impractical to me : please explain how you will remove a production of 0.5ppm daily at a nitrate level of 0.5ppm;. What will be the practical flow true the reactor?

Reducing the sulfur Less of it produces less SO4 and uses less alkalinity.

The reactor is now processing practical nothing and the effect is minimal because there is very little processed. Reducing sulfur will not change a thing because still to much anaerobic room will be available when the flow is not increased. Also without sulfur it may start reducing sulphate. It is the quantity of nitrate, CO2, oxygen processed that has most influence, not the quantity of sulfur! (if there is enough!)

The effect on the SO4 level by this reactor by reducing the sulfur quantity may be noticeable within 100 years!? 200 years if a commercial salt mix is used? I may be wrong with a few 100 years because I am not so good in mathematics and calculations; As big systems compensate for alkalinity and have no noticeable influence I can not possible see how a change of sulfur quantity in this reactor may effect the water quality.
SO4 is produced by reducing nitrate and oxidizing sulfur. Today the same small quantity of nitrate has to be processed as yesterday and probably the same tomorrow;
Will there be any change in SO4 production ? The same for alkalinity!?

 

[tmz]

Opinion as fact again. Convoluted interpretations of reactions. Same old poor information.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Same old ......... dozens of the same post over and over. More sulfur ..more sulfur.. Less nitrate = more sulfur. More nitrate =more sulfur. All of your questions have been adequately answered to no avail ;it takes a listener not a teller for reawsonable dialgue.



I doubt successful public aquariums including those using sulfur reactors rely on the junk science and convoluted interpretations of reactions and activity propagated throughout your posts.

That is true! They have not! It is the opposite. The posts are based on a lot of experience and practical use. As you call it, Junk science! Most junk science is bundled in the Makazi Baharini wiki with references.
So, all I have posted can be referenced. The system I propagate works and closes the nitrogen cycle following some very basic simple rules. Most systems are to small, sometimes mismanaged and can only reduce a little bit of nitrate.
Try it out!

 

[tmz]

On a lighter note. I just came home and my house smells like a hundred elephants farted simultaneously in it. My wife is none too happy. Turns out my denitrator was clogged for a bit and I just unclogged it. Nice H2S plume. LOL...

Yuk. To avoid the stench and H2S entering the tank in case of accident ,passing the effluent through a samll course of GFO as a safety might be something you may want to consider as you continue your experiment. The ferric oxide accelerates the H2S oxidation.

I had some H2S years ago; turns the effluent port was too small to accommodate enough flow through which I reasoned was needed to limit the anoxia. Randy H Farley suggested the gfo. It worked extremely well. Even when the effluent smelled the water exiting the small plastic coffe can with gfo in it had no odor.

 

[1fishkeeper]

Yahoo I'm starting to see a drop of No3 coming out of the reactor. It started at 25ppm and yesterday I tested it and it read 10ppm. So it's starting to get there I hope by next week I will have 0ppm and I can start to increase the drip rate.

 

[tmz]

Most junk science is bundled in the Makazi Baharini wiki.

:lol:
Do I have to go to Makaazi ,a province in Iran to read it? If you are citing a written work to claim authority for your posts ;it's common courtesy to provide a useable link. It may just be that the interpretations put forth are poor .Without context it's meaningless.

 

[kegogut]

. So many pages of wasted time having to pick thru the useful information...

 

[CHSUB]

You are running the reactor as it was a carbon reactor. A sulfur reactor is capable to treat 5l/h/liter sulfur at low nitrate levels if there is enough room to deplete the oxygen entered. So, it must be big enough! Your reactor is removing practical nothing but it seems to work satisfactory for you.
I can imagine that you can not belief what I am saying because i also can not believe sulfur reactors are used the way yours is functioning. Not continuously fed and fed by a dosing pump!?
We do not use ORP because it thus not work for us. Our systems are removing +-0.5ppm daily to keep a level of +- 1ppm and the total system volume passes true it +- every 2 days.
1 liter of sulfur is enough for removing 800 mg nitrate daily at 100% ( 0 nitrates in effluent) and max +- 3gr = 3000 mg at +- 30% removal. So, most of the space we need is for depleting the oxygen.

A 1 % reactor is able to pass the total volume of the system every day at a nitrate level of 1ppm having 0 nitrate output.
We do this for many years. The rest is pure and simple mathematics. One can not remove what is not entered.

I could easily run my reactor how you suggest. I have a manifold that runs my calcium reactor, chiller, etc; and for a short time ran my sulfur reactor off it. However, I could never hope to process the amount of water you suggest. If a 1% reactor is used, you are suggesting turning the reactor over 100 times a day. DT water will simply pour through the reactor with no effect. At best, I can turn my reactor over maybe 8 times per day; on a reactor that is fully seeded and running well. All advice I have read and ime this is ideal. Your Makazi Baharini wiki is the only example I've seen that suggests this much flow is possible. I've used many different kinds of denitrators including: methanol, solid carbon polymers, coil style; methanol being the most effective could not even do 1/10 the volume of water you are suggesting. Your flow rates would be more appropriate for a GAC reactor. I will agree that ime people fail with sulfur because the reactors are undersized, and throughout this thread are examples of this. With your method you basically turn your reactor over every 14 minutes. With my methanol reactor, which I found to be the most effective and which is the most widely used in wastewater treatments plants; a similar process took several hours.

Early sulfur reactors design and advice suggested 1% reactors were properly sized, when recirculating reactor became the norm, people suggested using a small reactor would work. I found this advice false; recirculating only prevents channeling and fouling, it doesn't increase the filters denitrating capacity; which is based on surface area.

Here is my manifold, however running a sulfur reactor this way is tedious and mistake prone.
Running a sulfur reactor with an ORP controller and high volume peristaltic pump is the easiest and most effective way to run a sulfur reactor. No worries about controlling flow and testing effluents.

http://[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/image.jpg1_zpsuzaa9ilq.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Opinion as fact again. Convoluted interpretations of reactions. Same old poor information.

Is new enriched information that is not correct, leads to mismanagement and poor working reactors better than old and poor information which has been applied for many years and has proven to work satisfactory without any caveats during years?
Is it modern science to make it difficult and technical when it can be done much better in a simple and more reliable way? A way for which can be answered for!
Fact or opinion?

As I am Dutch speaking I do not know the word convoluted, I look it up.

 

[CHSUB]

Is that the aqua medic kr1000 being used as a Sulphur reactor? If so any advice on using it as a Sulphur reactor. I have a homemade recirculating reactor now with 2 gallons of media producing 0 effluent but it's not dropping dt nitrates at all. So I'm gonna add an additional 2 gallons in the kr1000 reactor and see if that helps. Also doubling the size of my skimmer. So I'm trying everything to get them down

yes it is....i used it with Deniballs for some time, but imo it would only work for about a 20 gallon tank. with sulfur the same sized reactor will work for about 250 g. you will need to make a plate with holes and coarse floss to hold the sulfur and allow for recirculation within the reactor. i extended the recirculating tube to the very bottom of the reactor; cover the holes near the bottom of the tube, so flow comes from the very bottom of the reactor. i also extended the dt input tube about a quarter way down the reactor. easy conversion!!!

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I could easily run my reactor how you suggest. I have a manifold that runs my calcium reactor, chiller, etc; and for a short time ran my sulfur reactor off it. However, I could never hope to process the amount of water you suggest. If a 1% reactor is used, you are suggesting turning the reactor over 100 times a day. DT water will simply pour through the reactor with no effect. At best, I can turn my reactor over maybe 8 times per day; on a reactor that is fully seeded and running well. All advice I have read and ime this is ideal. Your Makazi Baharini wiki is the only example I've seen that suggests this much flow is possible. I've used many different kinds of denitrators including: methanol, solid carbon polymers, coil style; methanol being the most effective could not even do 1/10 the volume of water you are suggesting. Your flow rates would be more appropriate for a GAC reactor. I will agree that ime people fail with sulfur because the reactors are undersized, and throughout this thread are examples of this. With your method you basically turn your reactor over every 14 minutes. With my methanol reactor, which I found to be the most effective and which is the most widely used in wastewater treatments plants; a similar process took several hours.

Early sulfur reactors design and advice suggested 1% reactors were properly sized, when recirculating reactor became the norm, people suggested using a small reactor would work. I found this advice false; recirculating only prevents channeling and fouling, it doesn't increase the filters denitrating capacity; which is based on surface area.

Here is my manifold, however running a sulfur reactor this way is tedious and mistake prone.
Running a sulfur reactor with an ORP controller and high volume peristaltic pump is the easiest and most effective way to run a sulfur reactor. No worries about controlling flow and testing effluents.

http://[URL=http://s1294.photobucket.com/user/CHSUB/media/image.jpg1_zpsuzaa9ilq.jpg.html][/URL]

Small reactors do work! They can reduce and remove nitrate. What I am talking about is a denitrator system that has the capacity to close the nitrogen cycle completely so it must be able to control the nitrate level at the level you desire at high daily production of nitrate. The denitrationsystem must be matched with the aquariumsystem in a way to make this possible.
This is not possible with other denitration methods. Autotrofe denitration on sulfur will start at a much higher oxygen level as heterotrophe denitration. The reactor is much less sensitive for oxygen fluctuations and the bacteria will start to work at a positive ORP (+- 50mv I think) ..so a lot more flow is possible if the reactor is big enough. Big enough to give time and space to deplete the oxygen entered.
Passing the total volume true the reactor is not the max. Tests have proven that a sulfur-denitrator still can remove some nitrate at a flow of 10liter/h/liter. This is 240 x This test was made with tube reactors by Hignette.
Michel Hignette, Benoît Lamort, Marc Langouet, Sebastien Leroy and Guy Martin used and tested sulfur reactors for years. The system I use is based on their invention and their work.

I do not use high tech because I find it not necessary. When used as part of the system there is no need for measuring the effluent frequently. Once in balance it will be self regulating within its limits. We just relay on our regular nitrate measurement of the system water. We have PH reading in the reactor and one after the skimmer., From time to time we have to adjust the flow a bit but not every month.
We where making tests to automate the system but as it stays steady there is nothing to adjust, so why automation of flow regulation? if nitrate increases unsuspectingly we have day's to adjust.

At high flow, which means low nitrate levels and high production, only +- 20% of the reactors capacity will be used for denitration, +- 80% for removing oxygen. The reactor must be big enough to remove the oxygen entered and keep enough space for removing the daily nitrate production...

My point of view, ORP can be used to keep reactors anaerobic when they are used just to reduce some nitrate at low flow, but how to manage the nitrate level with ORP readings, I have no clue. We have tried it but we were not able to manage our reactors based on ORP. But why using ORP when it can be managed easily without?

The maximum flow you can achieve is 8x the reactors volume each day..
Is this the max to keep ORP negative or is nitrate or/and nitrite present in the effluent? As I can remember you have a large reactor. How big is large and how large is the total system? Also the present nitrate level of the system water is needed to make an evaluation.

 

[BROTHERSPIZZERIA]

Is that the aqua medic kr1000 being used as a Sulphur reactor? If so any advice on using it as a Sulphur reactor. I have a homemade recirculating reactor now with 2 gallons of media producing 0 effluent but it's not dropping dt nitrates at all. So I'm gonna add an additional 2 gallons in the kr1000 reactor and see if that helps. Also doubling the size of my skimmer. So I'm trying everything to get them down

yes it is....i used it with Deniballs for some time, but imo it would only work for about a 20 gallon tank. with sulfur the same sized reactor will work for about 250 g. you will need to make a plate with holes and coarse floss to hold the sulfur and allow for recirculation within the reactor. i extended the recirculating tube to the very bottom of the reactor; cover the holes near the bottom of the tube, so flow comes from the very bottom of the reactor. i also extended the dt input tube about a quarter way down the reactor. easy conversion!!!

Do you have any pics or anything of the conversion or mods you did? I picked it up used and haven't even touched it since I got it.