Matrix (and siporax) questions, to keep from derailing Sahin's thread.....

[fessoclown]

When I first got my Siporax I couldn't be buggered to stack it and I just threw 5 Litres into an eggcrate box.

I decided to clean up the sump today and came up with a nifty little method for stacking.

in the background you can see my messy box!!!

And the end result only about 1/2 an hour later!

Takes up waaaay less space too!

 

[Electrobes]

That's awesome!

 

[Ontheway]

There is nothing like having a large sump

 

[DrBoxedWine]

Is there such a thing as too much flow for Matrix? In my sump, the most convenient place for me to put it is in the same chamber as the returns. There'd be about 1500 gph flowing through this chamber.

It wouldn't be forced directly through the matrix, but this chamber does see a lot of water flow.

Thoughts?

 

[MichaelW]

I just added some matrix rocks to my sump.I made a box from egg crate and lined it with mesh screen ( for screen tops) I only have 2 litres in the box for now but there is loads of room for more if I want to add more. Tank is 200 Gallons and I have low nitrate (0.5) anyway, but from my understanding more surface area couldn't hurt and I plan to increase my bioload by 8 fish. The matrix is in the 2nd section of my sump after a filter sock in the first section. One problem is some of the rocks float so came out the box I made.

 

[slavetonet]

Update on my siporax mini.
I have added a total of 7.2 litres - 9 bags of 800ml.
Equally that should be enough for 1440 liters aquarium, but my tank is 400 liters net volume.
So I have plenty of spare capacity to process nutrients.
Currently still running AIO bio pellets but it is being used up and I will stop using it all together and let siporax take over.

 

[MichaelW]

Could siporax take over biopellets? Wiithout the carbon wouldn't the bacteria be limited anyway? Sopirax would act as more surface area but I would think biopellets still have a use? Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Reefvet]

Is there such a thing as too much flow for Matrix? In my sump, the most convenient place for me to put it is in the same chamber as the returns. There'd be about 1500 gph flowing through this chamber.

It wouldn't be forced directly through the matrix, but this chamber does see a lot of water flow.

Thoughts?

Matrix and all sintered glass media are optimized when there is very low velocity water movement over it. The high flow rate of your sump will limit the aerobic bacteria that populate the surface. Since the anaerobic bacteria in the pores of the media, the good bacteria that break down nitrates, feed primarily on the surface bacteria your media will be limited by the high flow.

Matrix will be more efficient than live rock would be in the same sump conditions by a large margin so unless you're still struggling with high nitrates it's the best media to use even though it's not optimized.

If you are trying to optimize the Matrix you could run a reactor packed with it and limit the water velocity. Velocity doesn't translate directly to flow, hydrodynamics play too big a role for it to be simple math, but to give you a very broad idea, flow rates found in canister filters are ideal, typically no more than 100 gph.

Note: Seachem's suggestion of 500ml of Matrix per 50 gals of water is based on using it in a cannister filter with low velocity.

 

[Reefvet]

Could siporax take over biopellets? Wiithout the carbon wouldn't the bacteria be limited anyway? Sopirax would act as more surface area but I would think biopellets still have a use? Maybe I'm wrong.

You can't compare the two as biopellets are designed to adsorb phosphates and dose carbon to support denitrifying bacteria. Siporax/Matrix/Substrat Pro etc., are hosts for denitrifying bacteria and have no effect on phosphates.

 

[DrBoxedWine]

Reply from Seachem:

Matrix will still be capable of removing nitrate even at a high flow rate in well-oxygenated water. However, a slower flow rate could potentially up the size of the denitrifying bacteria colonies, but usually not by a significant enough margin to merit utilizing a separate filter. I believe the setup you have described will work just fine to grow anaerobic denitrifying bacteria colonies.

 

[Reefvet]

Reply from Seachem:

Matrix will still be capable of removing nitrate even at a high flow rate in well-oxygenated water. However, a slower flow rate could potentially up the size of the denitrifying bacteria colonies, but usually not by a significant enough margin to merit utilizing a separate filter. I believe the setup you have described will work just fine to grow anaerobic denitrifying bacteria colonies.

Exactly what I said, just in fewer words and with less information :bounce3:

I work in Aquaculture research and have been testing all these media as they've come into the market over the last 30 years. FYI.

 

[MichaelW]

You can't compare the two as biopellets are designed to adsorb phosphates and dose carbon to support denitrifying bacteria. Siporax/Matrix/Substrat Pro etc., are hosts for denitrifying bacteria and have no effect on phosphates.

Yeah that's what I was saying in response to replacing biopellets with Sopirax. They are not the same thing.

 

[Reefvet]

Yeah that's what I was saying in response to replacing biopellets with Sopirax. They are not the same thing.

Ah, I see.

Well at least we agree :lol:

 

[DrBoxedWine]

Exactly what I said, just in fewer words and with less information :bounce3:

I work in Aquaculture research and have been testing all these media as they've come into the market over the last 30 years. FYI.

Yup pretty much the same thing, thanks for your help!

 

[Volcom698]

Anybody just running Matrix in a mesh bag, in a slow flow part of the sump?

Also are you guys adding some kind of liquid bacteria to your tank monthly?

 

[nemodan]

Anybody just running Matrix in a mesh bag, in a slow flow part of the sump?

Also are you guys adding some kind of liquid bacteria to your tank monthly?

I did rum Matrix in a mesh bag for 6 months. Look first 2-3 pages if this thread for my posting. This Last Nov-Dec I switched to Media Reactors.

 

[Big E]

Matrix and all sintered glass media are optimized when there is very low velocity water movement over it. The high flow rate of your sump will limit the aerobic bacteria that populate the surface. Since the anaerobic bacteria in the pores of the media, the good bacteria that break down nitrates, feed primarily on the surface bacteria your media will be limited by the high flow.

Matrix will be more efficient than live rock would be in the same sump conditions by a large margin so unless you're still struggling with high nitrates it's the best media to use even though it's not optimized.

If you are trying to optimize the Matrix you could run a reactor packed with it and limit the water velocity. Velocity doesn't translate directly to flow, hydrodynamics play too big a role for it to be simple math, but to give you a very broad idea, flow rates found in canister filters are ideal, typically no more than 100 gph.

Note: Seachem's suggestion of 500ml of Matrix per 50 gals of water is based on using it in a cannister filter with low velocity.

Matrix has more pore capacity than the sintered glass products when it comes to nitrate reducing anoxic bacteria? Yes?

Sooo, since it also has more surface area there will be more more nitrifying bacteria to feed on also?

SeaChem claims it has 10 times the surface are of the glass products......they mention Eheim substrate pro and MicorMec.

 

[Volcom698]

So everybody wants to use the Sera Siporax, what's the difference between that and say a Fluval Biomax? They are both the ceramic rings and look the same. I can't find Siporax anywhere around, but my LFS carries the Fluval brand. Just curious if anybody uses a different brand or ceramic rings or not?

 

[Giovanni]

So everybody wants to use the Sera Siporax, what's the difference between that and say a Fluval Biomax? They are both the ceramic rings and look the same. I can't find Siporax anywhere around, but my LFS carries the Fluval brand. Just curious if anybody uses a different brand or ceramic rings or not?

The difference is posted on back in the thread.

 

[tripdad]

Matrix has more pore capacity than the sintered glass products when it comes to nitrate reducing anoxic bacteria? Yes?

Sooo, since it also has more surface area there will be more more nitrifying bacteria to feed on also?

SeaChem claims it has 10 times the surface are of the glass products......they mention Eheim substrate pro and MicorMec.

I would disagree with your first statement as far as Siporax goes, cannot speak on other brands. Siporax is so porous that you can block off one end and breath thru the product without much effort. If it's that porous and even half of them get colonized then I think it beats Matrix hands down. I think maybe ReefVet has eluded to this earlier in this thread.