DIY Sulfur Denitrator

[Belgian Anthias]

Most of that is off the point,which is nitrate is not used as food but the oxygen from it is .

I disagree with most of the technical interpretations as well.

Anoxia is simply a more severe form of hypoxia and generally means a severe depletion of oxygen to a point where other sources ,ie, nitrate are accessed for oxygen.
When the nitrate is gone and organic carbon is available sulfate reduction occurs. There is plenty of sulfate(SO4) in saltwater and sulfate reducing bacteria are ubiquitous ,so, there is plenty of opportunity for sulfate reducing bacteria to grow in anoxic areas within a sufur reactor.

Rules where made for official publications of research results. Also for the terminology used. This to avoid differences in interpretation of certain terminology used.
In Hongkong waste water is treated using the SANI system which is based on sulphate reduction. In Hongkong seawater is used for sanitary purposes as flushing the toilets. This process is completely different although it is based on sulphur.

There where NO sulphate reducing bacteria found in the bio-film on elemental sulfhur.

http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=makazi:bio-chemie:biofilm

 

[tmz]

Off point , irrelevant , misguided and unduly pedantic ,IMO.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Pendatic?

Pendatic?

I had to look it up, the word " pendatic". Am I pendatic because I tried to know where the word "pendatic" stands for?
More than two decades ago a nitrate removal system was made based on a very simple rule published by some scientists (HIGNETTE, Michel, Benoit LAMORT, Marc LANGOUET, Sébastien LEROY, en Guy MARTIN. “Elimination des nitrates par filtration biologique autotrophe sur soufre en aquariologie marine”. Mémoire Institut Océanographique Paul Ricard, 1997, 7–13.) who did years of research and tested there findings in practice. One of these experimental systems installed more than 2 decades ago contains 850 kg sulphur and is still in working order doing what it was made fore.
We did not know why it worked so well because nobody could explain us why a BADES system worked fine at high flow rates, flow can easily be managed and the nitrate level in the system can be controlled on the desired level. We have complete control over the nitrate removal rate. So we tried to find the answers.
We found out that a lot of wrong and/or misleading information could be found on the internet which may result in failure or very poor results. Why a very simple BADES system works so well, can remove a lot of nitrate while maintaining a constant low nitrate level, the level desired by the user, without any troubles for several decades and other systems fail or work with very poor results ? We tried to find out why. Pendatic!

Our findings and research we have bundled in the "Makazi Baharini dokuwiki" which means as much as Home in the Sea in Swahili. Ubuntu style!?
It is not a book and written in Dutch. We are occupied trying to translate most information in English. We opened a few interesting pages for public use, read only. Most references are in English because official research results are mostly published in English, some in French and Dutch. When translated we will open the wiki for registered users only and for BADESS users who are willing to support us in our pendatic search for correct information.

The publication of the reference used can be consulted: Hignette1997
http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=badess:theorie

 

[tmz]

It's pedantic ;not pendatic. Don't know what pendatic is .

The post was pedantic ,ie off point(it had nothing to do with whether or not NO3 is food ) and making something sound more important than it was and suggesting once again that arbitrary rules be applied even if they make no sense in context.

I don't know whether you are a personally a pedant or not ; I'm not interested in your personality. However, many of your posts throughout the thread are pedantic and inaccurate.

A pedant is a person who puts stress on minor or trivial points lacking in judgement or proportion often in an ostentacious display of presumed not always accurate knowledge . Pedantry often involves closed mindedness and an adherence to and promulgation of arbitrary rules and forms.

To be clear it is my opinion that many of your posts are pedantic . In many cases they are detrimental to the discussion often sidetracking it off point into a morass of invalid rules and extrapolations without clear context . Since I don't know you personally, I don't know if you should be characterized as a pedant or not as you seem to claim in your last post.

 

[CHSUB]

An update on my 2.5 gallon ORP controlled sulfur reactor"¦

Nearly 3.5 years of use the reactor is still working well. About 15% of the sulfur media has been used and ORP is currently at -281. The small Eheim pump runs full time now, no on/off, and processes about 1.5 gph of no3 free effluent (full stream flow and completely clear on Salifert test). DT no3 is about 2.5 ppm with 30 fish, many large, fed 4 times per day with auto feeder and 1 time manually. Reactor is maintenance free except for cleaning the pump and lines every few months.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

It's pedantic ;not pendatic. Don't know what pendatic is .

The post was pedantic ,ie off point(it had nothing to do with whether or not NO3 is food ) and making something sound more important than it was and suggesting once again that arbitrary rules be applied even if they make no sense in context.

I don't know whether you are a personally a pedant or not ; I'm not interested in your personality. However, many of your posts throughout the thread are pedantic and inaccurate.

A pedant is a person who puts stress on minor or trivial points lacking in judgement or proportion often in an ostentacious display of presumed not always accurate knowledge . Pedantry often involves closed mindedness and an adherence to and promulgation of arbitrary rules and forms.

To be clear it is my opinion that many of your posts are pedantic . In many cases they are detrimental to the discussion often sidetracking it off point into a morass of invalid rules and extrapolations without clear context . Since I don't know you personally, I don't know if you should be characterized as a pedant or not as you seem to claim in your last post.

I am Belgian and my native language is Dutch. So I had a pedantic lesson in English now!

In the past I have asked you a few very simple basic questions. I aim still waiting for you to answer them. Do not bother, I can assure you I already know the answers.
To know if someone knows what he or she is talking about just ask some questions which he ore she should be able to answer if he or she knows what they are talking about. It was obvious that some work had to be done. So I did. Did You?
Managing a BADES system is really a very simple task for which no special knowledge is necessary. If the reactor is big enough!
A BADESS is able to remove 800mg nitrate for each litre of sulphur every day and a lot more and more important, it keeps the nitrate level on the desired level, the level decided by the user. We know how and why it does what it does. Do You?
What are the reasons why some systems fail or have very poor results.? There is still some work to be done. Here somebody with experience could help us!
And believe it or not, the answers are given by the structure of the bio-film which depends of the given substrate and the way the reactor is managed. And of course, the reactor must be big enough. How big?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

An update on my 2.5 gallon ORP controlled sulfur reactor"¦

Nearly 3.5 years of use the reactor is still working well. About 15% of the sulfur media has been used and ORP is currently at -281. The small Eheim pump runs full time now, no on/off, and processes about 1.5 gph of no3 free effluent (full stream flow and completely clear on Salifert test). DT no3 is about 2.5 ppm with 30 fish, many large, fed 4 times per day with auto feeder and 1 time manually. Reactor is maintenance free except for cleaning the pump and lines every few months.

Nice result.
For +-1.5litre sulfur ( 15% of 2.5 gal) +-14,25mg nitrate is removed each hour or +- 342mg daily or +- 228mg/day/l S Total system volume =?
There is still potential left for a 9.5 l reactor, flow is only +- 1/2 of the reactors volume.

ORP is very low. We know that ORP reading reacts very slow on DO changes but here we have a steady flow of 5.7lit/h with 6ppm O. Was the probe calibrated recently and cleaned?

 

[CHSUB]

Nice result.
For +-1.5litre sulfur ( 15% of 2.5 gal) +-14,25mg nitrate is removed each hour or +- 342mg daily or +- 228mg/day/l S Total system volume =?
There is still potential left for a 9.5 l reactor, flow is only +- 1/2 of the reactors volume.

ORP is very low. We know that ORP reading reacts very slow on DO changes but here we have a steady flow of 5.7lit/h with 6ppm O. Was the probe calibrated recently and cleaned?

15% of the sulfur media is gone or used up, of the 2.5 gallons of sulfur media in reactor....orp has drifted downward over many months, probe is cleaned only. flow is at max, increasing flow would require a larger pump and larger pipes and i don't believe turning the dt over once per day would be beneficial. my goal is no3 free effluent.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Managing BADESS

Managing BADESS

We base the flow on the desired nitrate level and the daily amount of nitrate to remove. This means when the daily produced quantity of nitrate is removed the nitrate level stays on the desired level. Flow is limited to 4 lit/ lit reactor volume ( only sulphur reactor, calciumreactor not included) Max 5l/h
For example the desired level was set at 1ppm.
For a 1000 litre system with a daily nitrate production of 1.5ppm +- 1500 litre is passed true the reactor daily when the effluent is kept at O nitrate. Once the balance is found at a level of 1ppm, the reactor is self-regulating. More production, level increases a bit and by the same flow more nitrate is entered and removed causing the level to decrease again. When the production decreases the level decreases and with the same flow less nitrate is entered in the reactor which causes the level to increase again. Nothing has to be done except when there are big changes in the bio-load. More fishes etc. Than the flow must be corrected manually. Managing a BADESS is very simple. When the reactor is big enough. No high tech, only a small flow regulating valve.
For a 1% reactor ( 10 litre) this means that the flow needed is 62.5 Litr/h or 6.25 L/litre Sulphur which is not impossible but it will make the reactor difficult to manage. The reactor will lose his self-regulating capacity. In this case it is better to use a 2% reactor although 1.5% would be enough.

Information about some chemical processes involved : http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=badess:theorie

This threat is about a DIY project and not about how to manage a sulphur denitrator.

Those who want more information about a BADESS ( Biological Autotrophe Denitrification on Elemental Sulphur System) can always contact me.

 

[CHSUB]

We base the flow on the desired nitrate level and the daily amount of nitrate to remove. This means when the daily produced quantity of nitrate is removed the nitrate level stays on the desired level. Flow is limited to 4 lit/ lit reactor volume ( only sulphur reactor, calciumreactor not included) Max 5l/h
For example the desired level was set at 1ppm.
For a 1000 litre system with a daily nitrate production of 1.5ppm +- 1500 litre is passed true the reactor daily when the effluent is kept at O nitrate. Once the balance is found at a level of 1ppm, the reactor is self-regulating. More production, level increases a bit and by the same flow more nitrate is entered and removed causing the level to decrease again. When the production decreases the level decreases and with the same flow less nitrate is entered in the reactor which causes the level to increase again. Nothing has to be done except when there are big changes in the bio-load. More fishes etc. Than the flow must be corrected manually. Managing a BADESS is very simple. When the reactor is big enough. No high tech, only a small flow regulating valve.
For a 1% reactor ( 10 litre) this means that the flow needed is 62.5 Litr/h or 6.25 L/litre Sulphur which is not impossible but it will make the reactor difficult to manage. The reactor will lose his self-regulating capacity. In this case it is better to use a 2% reactor although 1.5% would be enough.

Information about some chemical processes involved : http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=badess:theorie

This threat is about a DIY project and not about how to manage a sulphur denitrator.

Those who want more information about a BADESS ( Biological Autotrophe Denitrification on Elemental Sulphur System) can always contact me.

you ask a question and i give you an answer; then you tell me, again, how to do it "right"....next time i would prefer just a "thank you", because "you cannot handle the truth".

 

[Belgian Anthias]

15% of the sulfur media is gone or used up, of the 2.5 gallons of sulfur media in reactor....orp has drifted downward over many months, probe is cleaned only. flow is at max, increasing flow would require a larger pump and larger pipes and i don't believe turning the dt over once per day would be beneficial. my goal is no3 free effluent.

This gives a complete other view which is not so positive.
Sulphur consumption is very high and not in balance with the amount nitrate removed.
Normally flow can increase till 4lit/h per litre Sulphur which is +-8 x more as the actual flow with 0 nitrate effluent. When the same amount nitrate has to be removed daily the level can be lowered till 0.5ppm. This level is enough for a good working reactor.
For the amount sulphur in the reactor only a small amount of nitrate is removed for the moment or the level kept to high. ( removing the same amount daily at a level of 0.5 ppm would increase the flow 5x entering a lot of oxygen which has to be removed. This amount of oxygen will give nitrifying bacteria and AOA's ( archaea) the opportunity to grow as part of the outer layer of the bio-film.)

I am afraid that the sulphur is consumed to remove the oxygen entered producing sulphate without removing nitrate. This is because the reactor is kept anoxic and the bio-film has no or a limited outer layer. The sulphur bacteria are consuming the DO. I gave an explanation about how the bio-film works in a previous post. Normally the outer layers (other bacteria) consume the DO this way making the inner layers OMZ ( oxygen minimum zone) for the sulphur bacteria this way limiting the sulphate production and sulphur consumption to the amount nitrate removed. ( this is not correct but close)

A sulphur denitrator must be managed differently as would be acceptable for a carbon based reactor.

The benefit will be better control over the nitrate removal rate, a lower nitrate level and less sulphate production and sulphur consumption.

Any pump can be used for the reactor. Just plump it in a closed loop with a regulating valve for easy flow regulation.

If the amount of nitrate removed for the moment is enough or equal to the daily production and the level of 2.5 ppm is acceptable for you than I would use only 1.5litre sulphur because the reactor seems to be to big for the actual flow. You can use the same reactor but you have to put the sulphur between two patches so it does not move around causing a lot of erosion to the bio-film. This way it would not take so long to develop a normal bio-film. ( although it could take between 2 and 4 weeks) assuming a reactor with a closed loop is used ( internal circulation).

I have not a lot of experience with ORP reading and the use of sulfhur denitrators but here are my conclusions over what I know so far.
http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:makazi:het_water:filtratie:bades#my_conclusions
These conclusions are not definitive and will be adapted when more tests are done. I assume that BADES works fine at standard ORP + 150mv.


The total system volume =?

I hope I could help you. I just tried to picture the problem, that is if there is any.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

you ask a question and i give you an answer; then you tell me, again, how to do it "right"....next time i would prefer just a "thank you", because "you cannot handle the truth".

I am sorry but my previous post was not an answer on your question. Our posts must have been posted about the same time. It was not directed to you or anyone else. I have the intention to stop following this DIY threat because what I have to tell has nothing to do with a DIY project. A BADESS can really make a big difference in managing a mixed reef seawater aquarium.

I was busy answering your question not knowing about this one.

I hope the answer was satisfactory.

Do not hesitate to contact me.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Thiobacillus denitrificans

Thiobacillus denitrificans

If a lot more sulphur is consumed in relation to the nitrate removal rate ( 90mg sulfur is consumed to reduce 240 mg NO3-N) it was assumed that Thiobacillus denitrificans consumes part of the DO available to oxidise sulphur to sulphate without reducing nitrate this way producing a lot more sulphate .

T. denitrificans grows aerobically on thiosulfate, tetrathionate and thiocyanate and grows anaerobically on thiosulfate, tetrathionate, thiocyanate, sulfide or elemental sulfur.

https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Thiobacillus_denitrificans

Other bacteria must be responsible or sulphur beats are simply reduced to powder this way reducing the volume giving the wrong idea that to much sulphur is consumed.

If a BADESS is used to reduce nitrate, in most cases less sulphate is produced and sulphur consumed because part of the nitrate reduction is done heterotropic and nitrite from partial nitrification is reduced eliminating the step to nitrate and back to nitrite.


.

 

[CHSUB]

If a lot more sulphur is consumed in relation to the nitrate removal rate ( 90mg sulfur is consumed to reduce 240 mg NO3-N) it was assumed that Thiobacillus denitrificans consumes part of the DO available to oxidise sulphur to sulphate without reducing nitrate this way producing a lot more sulphate .

T. denitrificans grows aerobically on thiosulfate, tetrathionate and thiocyanate and grows anaerobically on thiosulfate, tetrathionate, thiocyanate, sulfide or elemental sulfur.

https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Thiobacillus_denitrificans

Other bacteria must be responsible or sulphur beats are simply reduced to powder this way reducing the volume giving the wrong idea that to much sulphur is consumed.

If a BADESS is used to reduce nitrate, in most cases less sulphate is produced and sulphur consumed because part of the nitrate reduction is done heterotropic and nitrite from partial nitrification is reduced eliminating the step to nitrate and back to nitrite.


.

no this is not the case!!! effluent is no3, no2 free. not much sulfur has been used in 3 years. reactor is working perfectly, no3 goes in, none comes out. turning the tank over daily is useless, i'm at 12-15 days. you said early effluent may have no3 present in a BADESS method, imo you should slow the flow to prevent this. i have heard from you over and over, i don't agree with your method, it is outdated and largely false, imo. do it your way, i will do it my way!!!

 

[tmz]

In the past I have asked you a few very simple basic questions. I aim still waiting for you to answer them. Do not bother, I can assure you I already know the answers.




Every real question was answered repeatedly throughout the thread .An exhaustive effort was made to correct every bit of misinformation and to challenge every invalid and sometimes seemingly absurd pedantic rule put out there. . Anyone interested can go back in the thread and see. No need to do it all over and over again. Stop the personal attacks .

 

[tmz]

An update on my 2.5 gallon ORP controlled sulfur reactor"¦

Nearly 3.5 years of use the reactor is still working well. About 15% of the sulfur media has been used and ORP is currently at -281. The small Eheim pump runs full time now, no on/off, and processes about 1.5 gph of no3 free effluent (full stream flow and completely clear on Salifert test). DT no3 is about 2.5 ppm with 30 fish, many large, fed 4 times per day with auto feeder and 1 time manually. Reactor is maintenance free except for cleaning the pump and lines every few months.

I think the efforts to use ORP to control flow are interesting and promising. I don't know if standard ORP set points would translate to every system but your experience seems to offer a good starting point for those inclined to try ORP control.

Thanks for updating your results .

I think managing the flow to an optimal point to minimize aerobic activity vs anaerobic activity is important . I also think the size of the sulfur bed can be varied to even much lower volumes than the 1%/ 2% rules depending on nitrate levels in the system and at lesser volume might be effective at lower effluent flow rates.

 

[tmz]

I am Belgian and my native language is Dutch. So I had a pedantic lesson in English now!

I wanted to calrify my meaning since it seemed misunderstood or misconstrued. I really can't think of a better word to describe a many of the posts.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

no this is not the case!!! effluent is no3, no2 free. not much sulfur has been used in 3 years. reactor is working perfectly, no3 goes in, none comes out. turning the tank over daily is useless, i'm at 12-15 days. you said early effluent may have no3 present in a BADESS method, imo you should slow the flow to prevent this. i have heard from you over and over, i don't agree with your method, it is outdated and largely false, imo. do it your way, i will do it my way!!!

I just look at the facts. 15% of 2.5 gal = 0.375 gal or +- 1.5 litre of sulphur used in 3 years. This high tech denitrator is removing 0.13ppm daily when the level is 2ppm ( 2ppm/15 days) which is practically nothing, certainly for a denitrator of this size, Do you need a denitrator? I do not know the total system volume but suppose it is 1000litre than 130 mg nitrate is reduced daily and normally 48mg sulphur consumed. +-1500gr sulfur consumption / 0,048gr/day = 31250 days = the normal sulfhur consumption during 86 years. It is just an example but I doubt your reactor is working perfectly. I just look at the facts.
These are certainly not the results one should hope fore when starting using a BADESS.
A BADES reactor of 2.5 gal = +- 9.5 litre easily removes 1000 mg or 1gram nitrate daily and more.-while keeping the level at 1ppm.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I think the efforts to use ORP to control flow are interesting and promising. I don't know if standard ORP set points would translate to every system but your experience seems to offer a good starting point for those inclined to try ORP control.

Thanks for updating your results .

I think managing the flow to an optimal point to minimize aerobic activity vs anaerobic activity is important . I also think the size of the sulfur bed can be varied to even much lower volumes than the 1%/ 2% rules depending on nitrate levels in the system and at lesser volume might be effective at lower effluent flow rates.

How one can minimize aerobic activity by ORP and the same time entering enough nitrate in the reactor to remove the production of nitrate at low nitrate levels? The nitrate removal rate depends of the flow true the reactor and the nitrate level of the influent wich contains a lot of oxygen.
In modern recirculating fish culture systems with heavy bioload even the heterotropic fixed bed and moving bed denitrator systems are kept at 2ppm DO or DO of the effluent is kept at 1ppm DO, this for a good reason.
A good working sulphur denitrator which is able to handle enough flow at low nitrate levels must have a very efficient oxygen consuming outer layer of the biofilm. How this can be achieved if the setup minimizes aerobic activity? A lot more oxygen as nitrate may have to be removed from the influent (+- 6ppm O for 1ppm NO3).?

The volume of the reactor thus not depend of the nitrate level of the system although it is related to.
If the quantity of sulhur can be based on the nitrate level, please tell the readers how much sulphur has to be used at a nitrate level of 50ppm or 10ppm and how much at a level of 1ppm? This question was asked previously in this threat but was never answered by you..
Using a to small reactor is mostly the cause of a bad working reactor! To big for the by set-up limited flow makes managing difficult and gives very poor results.
Determining the correct volume is not needed when the general rhule is used.

To remove the same quantity of nitrate daily the flow must increase when the nitrate level descents. The minimum quantity sulphur needed to reduce the nitrate level stays the same. When the flow increases more oxygen is entered and has to be removed. more room is needed. These flow corrections are difficult when the setup of the reactor is set to limit the amount of oxygen entered which makes managing the nitrate removal rate impossible. At some point, when lowering a high nitrate level, more oxygen as nitrate has to be removed. Easy when a BADESS is used. How can this be accomplished when setup limits the flow and the amount oxygen entered?
BADESS users have full control over the nitrate removal rate and the desired nitrate level.
The reactor must be big enough to handle the flow needed to remove the daily nitrate production and the oxygen entered. The nitrate removal rate depends of the flow true the reactor needed and the nitrate level and reactor efficiency ( 100% removal?). The same time there has to be enough room to consume the oxygen entered to make denitrification possible.

 

[CHSUB]

I just look at the facts. 15% of 2.5 gal = 0.375 gal or +- 1.5 litre of sulphur used in 3 years. This high tech denitrator is removing 0.13ppm daily when the level is 2ppm ( 2ppm/15 days) which is practically nothing, certainly for a denitrator of this size, Do you need a denitrator? I do not know the total system volume but suppose it is 1000litre than 130 mg nitrate is reduced daily and normally 48mg sulphur consumed. +-1500gr sulfur consumption / 0,048gr/day = 31250 days = the normal sulfhur consumption during 86 years. It is just an example but I doubt your reactor is working perfectly. I just look at the facts.
These are certainly not the results one should hope fore when starting using a BADESS.
A BADES reactor of 2.5 gal = +- 9.5 litre easily removes 1000 mg or 1gram nitrate daily and more.-while keeping the level at 1ppm.

thanks, however garbage!!!!! 15% was an estimate to convey some sulfur is being used, maybe much less, i really do not know? before starting my reactor my no3 was....nevermind, we have been through this over and over. i have nothing more to comment!!!:headwalls: