GFO hard as a rock

law086

Premium Member
Hi folks,

I went to change my GFO today in my reactor and it is literally hard as a rock. So two questions:

1. What caused it to get hard and what can I do in the future to prevent this from happening?

2. How the heck should I get it out of my reactor? Right now I'm thinking I'll need a hammer :hammer: The only thing I came up with was soaking it with vinegar.

Thanks!
 
I am kind of new to GFO myself but it is my understanding that if there is not enough flow to at keep the grains moving just a little it will solidify.

Not sure of a good way to get it our of the reactor though.
 
GFO is cheap and effective, but that is the reason why I use Rowaphos or Brightwell Phosphat R. If you are having trouble getting it out of there, and can't break it up with a screwdriver or hammer, try pouring a can of Coke in there and let it sit for a day or two. It may be just enough acid to break it up...
 
Vinegar will work if you let it sit overnight Had this happen to me the first time I tried GFO and didn't have enough flow. Still won't be easy to remove and you may have to use a screwdriver, but it will come out. Never tried the Coke trick so that might help too?
 
Thanks folks. I was in vinegar overnight, I'll see what it looks like today. I'll be sure to up to the flow too!
 
GFO is cheap and effective, but that is the reason why I use Rowaphos or Brightwell Phosphat R.

Those are all GFO. I've not seen any evidence that the deposition effect changes with brand. You have?
 
The reason it solidified is that GFO (all brands) encourages deposition of calcium carbonate. I address that here:

Iron Oxide Hydroxide (GFO) Phosphate Binders
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-11/rhf/index.htm

from it:

What else might iron oxide hydroxide do? Precipitation of CaCO3

Many aquarists using GFO have reported unusually extensive precipitation of carbonates on the solid GFO, and elsewhere in the system. Such precipitation can, for example, be a contributing factor in the caking of such materials, and can coat other surfaces in the aquarium. This precipitation can also contribute to a drop in alkalinity and possibly pH as it removes carbonate from the water column. The effect of calcium will be similar, but smaller on a percentage basis, with a drop of only 20 ppm calcium for every 1 meq/L (2.8 dkH) drop in alkalinity. Increased calcification by corals and coralline algae (possibly spurred by reduced phosphate) can also cause similar drops in calcium, alkalinity, and pH.

Dissolution of these precipitates with acid, accompanied by bubbling, indicates that these deposits are carbonates, and are most likely calcium carbonate since it is supersaturated in most reef aquaria (and in the ocean). Several factors may contribute to this precipitation. Many of these are rather straightforward. It is known, for example, that phosphate inhibits the precipitation of calcium carbonate. Much like the role that magnesium plays in seawater, phosphate binds to the growing calcium carbonate crystals, poisoning their surface against further precipitation of calcium carbonate. Many organic materials are also known to inhibit this precipitation. Near the surface of the GFO, and downstream from it, the organics and phosphate are expected to be lower in concentration than upstream from it. The reduction in concentration of these inhibitors may well permit increased abiotic precipitation of calcium carbonate on such surfaces.

Two more esoteric events may, however, be equally important. The first is that the local pH near the GFO surfaces may be higher than in the bulk solution. This effect arises as phosphate and other inorganic and organic ions displace hydroxide from the surface. Figure 2, for example, shows phosphate displacing two hydroxide ions. The net swap of HPO4-- for 2 OH- will raise the local pH. The supersaturation of calcium carbonate increases as the pH rises, driving the precipitation of calcium carbonate.

Another possible role may be played by the iron itself. GFO is not completely insoluble. The solubility of iron hydroxide in natural seawater is small, but still significant (0.02 - 2 ppb), although it is largely controlled by the availability of organic ligands.11-13 One interesting possibility lies in the way that soluble iron actually impacts the precipitation of calcium carbonate.

At high concentrations, iron inhibits the precipitation of calcium carbonate. While different researchers find different threshold concentrations for this inhibition (>25 ppm in one case,14>7ppm in another case15), it is a well established and studied phenomenon. The mechanism is believed to be the same as for magnesium, phosphate, and organics, which all poison the growing calcium carbonate surface.

At much lower concentrations, however, iron actually increases the precipitation of calcium carbonate by acting as a site for nucleation of new crystals. In one case this happened at 100 ppb dissolved iron, increasing the rate of scaling (the precipitation of calcium carbonate on surfaces) by about 60%.14 In another case, the induction time for precipitation (that is, the time it takes for precipitation to begin once the water becomes supersaturated) was reduced by 40% at 1.4 ppm iron and the overall precipitation rate was increased by 32% at 560 ppb (lower iron levels were not tested).15 These studies were carried out in freshwater, and I have not seen similar studies in seawater.

Is the natural dissolution of GFO important in the nucleation of calcium carbonate precipitation? I am not sure. But it is clearly one possible explanation that fits the observations of aquarists as well as known phenomena involving iron.
 
TLF's PhosBan Reactor 150 spec says a flow rate of 25 gal/hr but doesn't say if that's for GFO or carbor. Should we be running that flow rate for both mediums? Thanks, Jim
 
You should tailor the flow to whatever media you are planning on running. For instance, activated carbon should be fluidized, but not tumbling as the friction of the pieces will create dust. For a phosphate media, most need to be at a slight tumble to avoid solidifying, Brightwell and Seachem media is a little different, where you only want the top layer of the media at a very slight boil. Other media, for example deNitrate, need a nice slow flow for maximum effectiveness.
 
Chris, thanks for your reply. From ;what your saying, I should plumb the two reactors in parallel so the flows can be individually controlled.
I'm a 'newbie' who has all the hardware in place and have just run the system (125g display, 29 gal sump, & 29 gal fuge (with lots of base rock) for the past three weeks (also to test out the hardware). Just drained everything and will now fill with RO/DI water & add the salt. Jim
 
Jim

TLF's PhosBan Reactor 150 spec says a flow rate of 25 gal/hr but doesn't say if that's for GFO or carbon.

That is for TLF Phosban.



We are also throwing around media names without saying what they are which is a difference in how you approach flow or tumbling vs fluidized.

SeaChem = Activated Alumina what is harder than anything we use. Can tumbled or fluidized.


Brightwell = A Phosphate resin that can be regenerated. Can tumbled or fluidized but should be fluidized. But I do not know how well this stuff works or if it works as claimed.

Carbons = Varies depending on the carbon being used, its shape, hardness and particle size. Can tumbled or fluidized depending on the above but best off with fluidization.

ROWAPhos = Is a GFO and all GFO are subject to solidification issues. Can tumbled or fluidized but tumbling can also break it up on tumbling.

deNitrate = Is the Zeolite mineral Clinoptilolite that that used in Zeovit systems and is also very hard. Can tumbled or fluidized.

Flow rates for any of these is a whole different matter and more of a choice as to which works best for you.
 
Brightwell = A Phosphate resin that can be regenerated. Can tumbled or fluidized but should be fluidized. But I do not know how well this stuff works or if it works as claimed.

My API Phosphate kit registered 0.25 the other evening so I put some new Brightwell media in the reactor that night, checked phosphate 24 hrs later, and the API kit read 0. Granted I'm not using a photometer, but the product seems to work pretty well. My LFS uses it in all their tanks that have inverts or coral.
 
Chris, thanks for your reply. From ;what your saying, I should plumb the two reactors in parallel so the flows can be individually controlled.
I'm a 'newbie' who has all the hardware in place and have just run the system (125g display, 29 gal sump, & 29 gal fuge (with lots of base rock) for the past three weeks (also to test out the hardware). Just drained everything and will now fill with RO/DI water & add the salt. Jim

Ideally, that is the way it should be done, but if you're short on space or pumps you can run them in series. Run the carbon first, as it's rumored to leach phosphate, then pipe it into the phosphate media. I have a line off my manifold that is controlled by a ball valve that feeds two 4" reactors, one with Marineland Carbon, the other with Brightwell Phos R, it works pretty well and I don't have another pump in the sump that needs to be cleaned.
 
Chris:

What color is the Brightwell Phospahte-R?

I do not believe that a pure organic polymer can bind much phosphate from seawater. Such a material would be clear or whitish.

But some companies now sell GFO contained in a resin, which would look much darker, redish or brownish or even black. Which likely works similar to the GFO it contains.

For example, polyplab sells such a product:

http://www.polyplab.com/optiphos.html

and, fwiw, stole my phosphate picture from an article for their product label. :lol:

Opti-Phoss.jpg




Thanks. :)
 
Chris, I'll leave the reactors in series (for now) and put the carbon in the first one & start with the flow rate (25g/hr) recommended by TLF. I'll adjust the flow, if needed, for the GFO to 'slightly tumble' & check how the carbon is behaving. If it needs a different flow rate I'll plumb both reactors thru a tee with seperate valves. Thanks for your help, Jim
 
I've always had problems with GFO caking/clumping and being difficult to keep fluidized. I currently run a BRS dual reactor. On my recent GFO/GAC change, I did it differently. I mixed the GFO and GAC together in both cartridges. The GFO wont cake up this way.
 
Back
Top