Dennis,
You have described nutrient recycling perfectly. Let your nutrient sink be something desirable. When you export it, you make money.
Donovan's Nitrate Destroyer
- Thread starter djbon
- Start date
Dennis,
You have described nutrient recycling perfectly. Let your nutrient sink be something desirable. When you export it, you make money.
Hi,
I run a skimerless reef, and have install a diy reactor 7lt capacity,filled with seachem denitrator =pumice small
, since January. The flow at the beginning was 450l/h and now reduced gradually to 150l/h, but I still can read no3 values at the reactor outlet,smaller than the DT, which is currently 5-8ppm. I wonder if the secret to your success , is the addition of carbon source in your denitrator or the use of bioballs and bio rings? Can I ask, since you would like to achieve no3 reduction through denitrification, why you use bio balls and bio rings? Also in the second chamber,why didn't you use just pumice but also crushed corals? Can you elaborately, why did you use the specific material layering?
Thanks in advance, Greg.
I run a skimerless reef, and have install a diy reactor 7lt capacity,filled with seachem denitrator =pumice small
, since January. The flow at the beginning was 450l/h and now reduced gradually to 150l/h, but I still can read no3 values at the reactor outlet,smaller than the DT, which is currently 5-8ppm. I wonder if the secret to your success , is the addition of carbon source in your denitrator or the use of bioballs and bio rings? Can I ask, since you would like to achieve no3 reduction through denitrification, why you use bio balls and bio rings? Also in the second chamber,why didn't you use just pumice but also crushed corals? Can you elaborately, why did you use the specific material layering?Thanks in advance, Greg.
Last edited:
djbon
New member
Hi Greg,
Glad to know somebody is using almost identical setup as mine. I used bio ring and bio balls in the first chamber to create aerobic zone. Rings and balls will ensure proper flow as my feed pump is small. Bacteria in very dense capacity will restrict flow as they slime quite a bit. Second chamber lowest layer of crushed corals is more to flow management as well, and the porosity will ensure more bacteria will call it home and consume more oxygen so that those living in the pumice stones will have less or maybe no oxygen for denitrifying to occur. The addition of vodka is simply to feed those bacteria, without carbon dosing the process is too slow. Longer path (hence the twin tower design) will strip oxygen along the way.
Glad to know somebody is using almost identical setup as mine. I used bio ring and bio balls in the first chamber to create aerobic zone. Rings and balls will ensure proper flow as my feed pump is small. Bacteria in very dense capacity will restrict flow as they slime quite a bit. Second chamber lowest layer of crushed corals is more to flow management as well, and the porosity will ensure more bacteria will call it home and consume more oxygen so that those living in the pumice stones will have less or maybe no oxygen for denitrifying to occur. The addition of vodka is simply to feed those bacteria, without carbon dosing the process is too slow. Longer path (hence the twin tower design) will strip oxygen along the way.
Hi Donovan, interesting your idea of layering. I thought that since denitrifying bacteria are facultative , will consume at the first layers of pumice, in my reactor, the oxygen and at the rest layers of pumice will "consume" just no3. My reactor is rectangular, 12.5*50 cm the flow is from bottom to top. In order to take the most out of it, as far as denitrification, do you thing I should do similar layering to you, or just inject some vodka, in it? Because I'm running skimmerless, I am afraid for a bacterial bloom, if any vodka, get to the DT.
djbon
New member
The problem (in my opinion) with high flow thru pumice stones as recommended by manufacturer is contact time. As you can see on my drawing, the input and output tube are on different level, about 2" to be exact. The water is not being force, instead it flow freely by gravity. The bacteria have enough time to do their job. No pressure build up in the chamber, if it clogged it will overflow at the dosing tube. Your flow rate is much higher than mine, maybe you can reduce the flow to see some improvement. Carbon dosing is essential in my design. I'm not worry about cyno outbreak as the vodka is consume internally, proper amount will ensure none come out from the outlet tube. Another important aspect for proper denitrification should be the absent of light. I can't explain the science behind it but I think it is crucial that the chamber to be totally light proof.
My flow rate now is 150ml/h. I think you mention, yours is 1ml/sec=3600ml/h or my math are too bad?
As far light, since I use small pumice 6-12mm, I thing that even if the outer layers get some light, most of the volume inside, will be at total darkness. Do you think that it will better to find a black Acrylic, and totally cover all the 4 sides of my reactor?
djbon
New member
Greg, post #42 your flow is 150 liter per hour . Currently my effluent output is 2 ml/second or 7.2liter per hour. Such low flow will give the bacteria enough time to consume nutrients from the water. About lights, I do feel total darkness is another key contribution to my success. Let somebody with the knowledge to chime in
. Currently my effluent output is 2 ml/second or 7.2liter per hour. Such low flow will give the bacteria enough time to consume nutrients from the water. About lights, I do feel total darkness is another key contribution to my success. Let somebody with the knowledge to chime in
djbon
New member
Any carbon source or commercial bacteria food will do the job. With cost in mind, vodka will do the job without punching a hole on my wallet.
djbon
New member
Better drink it for ourselves, let the bacteria enjoy the cheap one. Spoilt bacteria is bad bacteria
... or the DIY NOPOX from the thread on here. Much cheaper than the name brand. :lol:
About lights, I do feel total darkness is another key contribution to my success. Let somebody with the knowledge to chime in
The bacteria do not care if it is dark or light. However, keeping it dark will keep the cyano from growing inside your filter. So dark is better in this regard.
Dennis
djbon
New member
:beer:.
I was sure some where ,I was wrongGreg, post #42 your flow is 150 liter per hour
As I can see inside my reactor, the first layers of pumice, I don't have any cyano, just some diatoms at the beginning, but not now. Never the less, I have some spare black acrylic, so I can try to limit the light.
So I will reduce the flow, limit as I can the light and I will probably try diy nopox. Thanks both of you.
djbon
New member
Another good reading about light and nitrate processing factors by certain bacteria.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC106331/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC106331/
It is an open top reactor. I never thought that oxygen diffusion ,contribute such a big proportion at total oxygen in the water!"¦... I am now thinking to just make your design and take out my diy reactor
That is interesting. So it would appear that light can slow down the conversion to nitrite for the bacteria used in this study. I am wondering if this photo inhibition applies to all the bacterial strains or just the ones they used.
Dennis
djbon
New member
It is an open top reactor. I never thought that oxygen diffusion ,contribute such a big proportion at total oxygen in the water!"¦... I am now thinking to just make your design and take out my diy reactor
Looking forward to your reactor build and results. I am eager to know whether my design works for others as well.
