dingodan87
New member
Yea im not sure why they give you the option to throttle back the pump. Figured time would tell.
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
Nutrient Pulse Reactor (DIY DyMiCo filter)
- Thread starter dartier
- Start date
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
In the BETA units they had a ball valve and flow meter on both pumps (process and flush). I am guessing that they were still deciding on the sizing of the process pump and wanted to be able to adjust the flow incase it was too much. In the release versions they no longer seem to have a meter on the process pump. Not sure about the ball valve. They have settled on a small pump and larger pump for the model 700 and 2 large pumps for the model 2000.
I included it in my design or the same reason, but I chose pumps that matched the flow of the Tunze ones they use. After seeing how cramped the process chamber will be for plumbing, I may just eliminate both of them on the process side as well. Ditto for the flush side. If I incorporate a stand pipe like Dan, then I can use level sensors and no longer need to set the flow of the pump.
I may still include the flow meter on the return line though just for informational purposes. I probably should calculate what the volume of water returned would be at the suggested flow rate in the manual just to make sure that my plan to use the volume of the flush chamber is going to line up with the amount I believe a timed cycle would have pumped.
Dennis
I am sure their program relies on some constants, one probably being flow through the system. Since they would not be able to adjust or customize the programming for each application, this was the probably solution. Since ours is all custom, I don't know if the valves are necessary.
ravi197699
Member
You can use 1/2" John J 1/2" threaded fitting and ph probe will fit in the fitting,
dingodan87
New member
Already ordered 2 from avast marine $4 each
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
That is an awesome idea. I will have to try that.
My best guess is that it has to do with the amount of water they are trying to displace in the sand bed. Since they know the volume of the sand bed, and they have the on time predetermined, the only variable they need to solve for is the flow rate of the pump. You are right though. In our version we control everything so we should be able to account for it by tweaking to the specific situation.
Dennis
They run the return into a Tee with 2 side pipes to spread it around. You could also put 2 Tee's on the end of the pipes to have 4 exits. Might need a 90 before the first Tee depending on if the return comes from the side of the filter or over the end.
GlennF, who has a really awesome SPS tank, made a DIY pipe with slits to spread the flow along the sand bed for his DyMiCo tank(s).
Basically you want to slow it down and get it flowing horizontal rather than vertical.
Dennis
I made the trip down to Niagara Falls yesterday and picked up the BRS order. No issues at the border, which was good. However I now have a good idea of the volume that the boxes of Reborn media contain. I calculate them at 1200 cubic inches of media per box. To fill the coarse layer of my filter with Reborn, I will require 5.67 boxes less the volume the circulation pipes take up. I ordered 3 boxes from BRS and thought I would have left over media. Ya, not so much. I now have to decide if I am going to 2 more boxes from BRS, or just order 10 - 12 bags from the online suppliers this side of the border. If I can find a LFS that will match the online price, I will probably just go that route.
Dennis
Dennis
I had a little setback this weekend. I believe I mentioned earlier that I was seeing a buildup in the second reaction chamber. Well, over the weekend it reached the point were it was almost clogged with this slime and I was picking up a slight "skunk water" smell coming from the third (buffer) chamber. None of the inhabitants seemed to be affected and the water parameters in the tank were normal.
I decided to stop all carbon and see if I could flush it out. I am cycling the flush pump on for 20 seconds, every 5 minutes now. I started with 10 seconds every 8 minutes so it seems to be clearing. I will let this cycle until I can pump straight through it continuously and then try to restart things, with a carbon cycle that decreases over time. If that doesn't work, I may have to change the media.
Aaron
I decided to stop all carbon and see if I could flush it out. I am cycling the flush pump on for 20 seconds, every 5 minutes now. I started with 10 seconds every 8 minutes so it seems to be clearing. I will let this cycle until I can pump straight through it continuously and then try to restart things, with a carbon cycle that decreases over time. If that doesn't work, I may have to change the media.
Aaron
Attachments
That sounds like too much carbon being added too quickly. Somewhere on here is a thread about a bacteria plankton reactor that I had setup on a previous tank. A couple times per day it would spin back and forth to flush out the bacteria. It was a built from a Zeovit reactor with magnetic bearings with a stepper motor mounted to the top of the reactor. Anyway, one day I cranked the flow through the reactor and a huge plug of bacteria the size of my thumb came flying out of the drain from the reactor and landed in the fuge holding the reactor. That bacteria plug was then swarmed with Amphipods and Isopods almost immediately. By the next morning the plug had been consumed by the pods. That is what is supposed to happen in the coarse bed of our filters, lots of pods thriving on the bacteria the filter contains. Well that and the carbon is supposed to be feeding anaerobic bacteria for denitrification to occur. The carbon dose in your filter sounds like it is growing heterotrophic bacteria, the typical kind you get from aerobic carbon dosing. I would suggest trying less carbon and lower flow/ORP to encourage dentrifying bacteria to populate the media.
The skunky smell from your sand bed after the filter is hydrogen sulfide. This would be caused by too low of a flow due to the bacteria sludge and the ORP is so low in this area that the bacteria are reducing sulfate as there is no oxygen or nitrate available. The bacteria prefer oxygen, and if that is unavailable, they will reduce nitrate and eventually move onto sulfate. This creates hydrogen sulfide and gives off a rotten egg smell. Fairly toxic stuff, so best avoided. The smell is easily detectable long before it typically can harm tank inhabitants. Some people flow water from reactors that may contain H2SO4 over GFO to precipitate elemental sulfur and neutralize the hydrogen sulfide.
Dennis
The skunky smell from your sand bed after the filter is hydrogen sulfide. This would be caused by too low of a flow due to the bacteria sludge and the ORP is so low in this area that the bacteria are reducing sulfate as there is no oxygen or nitrate available. The bacteria prefer oxygen, and if that is unavailable, they will reduce nitrate and eventually move onto sulfate. This creates hydrogen sulfide and gives off a rotten egg smell. Fairly toxic stuff, so best avoided. The smell is easily detectable long before it typically can harm tank inhabitants. Some people flow water from reactors that may contain H2SO4 over GFO to precipitate elemental sulfur and neutralize the hydrogen sulfide.
Dennis
The ORP was cycling, very consistently, at roughly-215 to 0 mV, as you can see from the graph. If the filter is producing hydrogen sulfide because the ORP or flow is too low (not sure I buy that it was hydrogen sulfide) then why should I lower either of them further? Lowering carbon, I can see but it is going to limit my ability to control the ORP cycle, I believe.
If the favorable to less favorable electron exchange goes(redox cascade):
Oxygen, Nitrate then, if any organic material is left to break down, Iron then Sulfate. I don't see how we ever get to sulfate, unless there is very little iron. I’m not saying it can’t happen, just that it would seem unlikely and there are a lot of things that can produce a stinky smell. What is in skimmate? That smells about the same or my armpits, when I sweat.
All we are measuring is ORP, while driving the ORP over a 500 mV range, down from ~+300 to ~-200mV range. This means the material in the chamber is going from an oxidizer to a reducer, at least from a measurement standpoint (from needing electrons to being able to provide electrons), yet by the time the water exits that chamber and reaches the second ORP probe in the buffer (third) chamber, the ORP has already shifted positive again. Where did that exchange potential go and how is ORP an indication of the reaction we are trying to drive? Unfortunately, I don’t really understand how the ORP relates to the reaction, I am just trying to duplicate the readings suggested in the manual. My assumption is that the ORP is an indication of the status of that favorable to less favorable electron exchange.
I thought the idea was to allow the fine sand bed to reduce ammonia to nitrite then nitrate, through normal aerobic nitrification processes. Then, have that feed into another layer (or chamber in my case) where heterotrophic bacteria is produced, by dosing carbon. Since there is minimal oxygen in that layer or compartment, the bacteria bloom, starts to work it's way down the redox cascade, breaking down the nitrate. Once this occurs, the excess bacteria and nitrogen gas are flushed out into the main tank where the bacteria can be consumed by corals and pods and the N2 gassed off?
Sorry. It may seem like I am trying to argue here but I am really just trying to run through the logic and see if I am understanding things correctly.
I think I have talked myself into replacing the media with something more course to allow better flow when it’s time to restart the cycle.
Aaron
If the favorable to less favorable electron exchange goes(redox cascade):
Oxygen, Nitrate then, if any organic material is left to break down, Iron then Sulfate. I don't see how we ever get to sulfate, unless there is very little iron. I’m not saying it can’t happen, just that it would seem unlikely and there are a lot of things that can produce a stinky smell. What is in skimmate? That smells about the same or my armpits, when I sweat.
All we are measuring is ORP, while driving the ORP over a 500 mV range, down from ~+300 to ~-200mV range. This means the material in the chamber is going from an oxidizer to a reducer, at least from a measurement standpoint (from needing electrons to being able to provide electrons), yet by the time the water exits that chamber and reaches the second ORP probe in the buffer (third) chamber, the ORP has already shifted positive again. Where did that exchange potential go and how is ORP an indication of the reaction we are trying to drive? Unfortunately, I don’t really understand how the ORP relates to the reaction, I am just trying to duplicate the readings suggested in the manual. My assumption is that the ORP is an indication of the status of that favorable to less favorable electron exchange.
I thought the idea was to allow the fine sand bed to reduce ammonia to nitrite then nitrate, through normal aerobic nitrification processes. Then, have that feed into another layer (or chamber in my case) where heterotrophic bacteria is produced, by dosing carbon. Since there is minimal oxygen in that layer or compartment, the bacteria bloom, starts to work it's way down the redox cascade, breaking down the nitrate. Once this occurs, the excess bacteria and nitrogen gas are flushed out into the main tank where the bacteria can be consumed by corals and pods and the N2 gassed off?
Sorry. It may seem like I am trying to argue here but I am really just trying to run through the logic and see if I am understanding things correctly.
I think I have talked myself into replacing the media with something more course to allow better flow when it’s time to restart the cycle.
Aaron
I think you are on the right track, but at this point it is all just conjecture. You are in uncharted waters as my filter is still a collection of parts and is not even wet yet
I think your understanding of what is supposed to occur in each layer is spot on, it is just that you have an overpopulation of bacteria in your coarse layer. Zeroing in on what caused the over population is key to getting this working in a fashion similar to the original. The only suggestion that I can offer, is that the bacteria population should be directly related to the amount of food available, in this case carbon, and the nutrients in the water column. The nitrate phosphate, potassium and whatever else are required for the bacteria to multiply will be readily available in the water column, the only element that we have a direct control over is carbon and the flow rate through the filter.
My belief is that the key to getting the desired effect is to provide just enough carbon to grow and sustain a bacteria population slightly larger than the recirculation through the coarse layer will provide in oxygen, resulting in the bacteria using nitrate when the oxygen is eventually depleted. There is probably a fine line between just enough carbon (or bacteria) and too much. Growing the bacteria population larger is probably desirable, but only up to a point. I expect that the original filter has a sweetspot where it attempts to keep the ratio between flow, carbon, bacteria and filter size in a safe zone of some sort. With the filter size most likely being the basis for deriving the rest of the parameters. That is why I am attempting to reproduce the physical characteristics of the original filter, size, layer depth and design as close as possible to try to reduce the variables that could (will) impact the operation of the filter. I will still need to figure out the two main variables though, carbon and flow rate, even with the similar filter configuration.
Perhaps your control loop is too unconstrained? I think you are flushing based on ORP and you keep the flush pump running until an ORP level is attained? I would suggest that using a timed flush period that is tied to the volume of water that will be flushed may be helpful as your filter's volume can only process a finite amount of water in a given period. That will at least constrain 1 variable within your process.
I agree that using a coarser media might help in this regard. I am planning on using Reborn as that seems to be the perfect media for this application. Though I am also planning to use CO2 as well, which I belive you are not running.
I am unclear as to what the 3rd layer in your filter does? Is this to buffer the PH? Also you mention that water entering the 3rd layer is already at an elevated ORP, why is that? Should it not be still low in oxygen?
Dennis
My intent was to use carbon to drive the ORP down and the Flush to drive it back up. Which appeared to be happening. There is definitely a good chance that I am using too much carbon. It seems like it took a lot to get things started and what I probably needed to account for is a reduction, over time, as that bacteria became more established. I believe you will find the same thing and plan to have the reaction start slowly, over several days before the bacteria population reaches a level where it can cycle more in line with the way you are suggesting.
I still haven't completely flushed all of the slime out but it has cleared substantially. As another test, I stopped flushing this morning, just to see if the ORP would start to dip back down on it's own, with out carbon, with just the process pump cycling normally. After about two hours of no flush activity, the ORP had dropped about 20 points from +278 to +266 mV. I reset the Flush cycle to pump once, about 4 gallons every hour, just to see what would happen. This is similar to the cycle I was getting before things got clogged.
As to my program, the cycle was time driven but triggered on ORP. By that, I mean that the time and amount that was flushed, was consistent each time but triggered once the ORP reached a certain value. The same is true for the carbon, somewhat in that the dosing was consistent each time but it was broken into small doses that occurred during certain points on the ORP cycle.
I thought about the CO2 (or lack thereof in my case). I am guessing it may contribute to the process by reducing the amount of oxygen available and may quicken the cycles. I am curious to see how quickly you can get your ORP to cycle within the target range.
The third compartment value is, like everything else, an unknown. I had thought it might buffer the pH some. Honestly, it was where my skimmer was located. I had extra media and decided to put it there. Out of curiosity, I built a tube to hold a probe and put another ORP probe in, to monitor it. I would say that it did allow me to turn off one level of carbon dosing. I started noticing the ORP was falling in that third chamber so I turned off the carbon that was dosed just prior to the flush cycle and the ORP in the third compartment climbed and stayed between 175 and 75 mV. It had been as low as -200 mV when I was dosing just prior to the flush cycle.
It is still interesting to me that ORP level goes from -200 mV to +150mV, just by being pushed over a 2 to 3 inch drop. Remember, we are measuring ORP, not dissolved oxygen so I am not sure what is happening to the oxygen level. The third compartment is exposed to air, unlike the second and third compartments, which have low clearance lids to minimize the exposure to air. Is the N2 being gassed off, causing the increase in ORP?
Aaron
I still haven't completely flushed all of the slime out but it has cleared substantially. As another test, I stopped flushing this morning, just to see if the ORP would start to dip back down on it's own, with out carbon, with just the process pump cycling normally. After about two hours of no flush activity, the ORP had dropped about 20 points from +278 to +266 mV. I reset the Flush cycle to pump once, about 4 gallons every hour, just to see what would happen. This is similar to the cycle I was getting before things got clogged.
As to my program, the cycle was time driven but triggered on ORP. By that, I mean that the time and amount that was flushed, was consistent each time but triggered once the ORP reached a certain value. The same is true for the carbon, somewhat in that the dosing was consistent each time but it was broken into small doses that occurred during certain points on the ORP cycle.
I thought about the CO2 (or lack thereof in my case). I am guessing it may contribute to the process by reducing the amount of oxygen available and may quicken the cycles. I am curious to see how quickly you can get your ORP to cycle within the target range.
The third compartment value is, like everything else, an unknown. I had thought it might buffer the pH some. Honestly, it was where my skimmer was located. I had extra media and decided to put it there. Out of curiosity, I built a tube to hold a probe and put another ORP probe in, to monitor it. I would say that it did allow me to turn off one level of carbon dosing. I started noticing the ORP was falling in that third chamber so I turned off the carbon that was dosed just prior to the flush cycle and the ORP in the third compartment climbed and stayed between 175 and 75 mV. It had been as low as -200 mV when I was dosing just prior to the flush cycle.
It is still interesting to me that ORP level goes from -200 mV to +150mV, just by being pushed over a 2 to 3 inch drop. Remember, we are measuring ORP, not dissolved oxygen so I am not sure what is happening to the oxygen level. The third compartment is exposed to air, unlike the second and third compartments, which have low clearance lids to minimize the exposure to air. Is the N2 being gassed off, causing the increase in ORP?
Aaron
I think the use of CO2 is completely optional. They mention that it can be ignored if you do not have stony corals. So it most likely does not have an impact on the filter cycle.
Ahh, the third chamber is open at the top. This could explain the increase in ORP in this chamber. Correct we are measuring ORP, but oxygen does play a big role in ORP. I am not sure if N2 is an oxidizer or reducer, I do know that Nitrate (NO3) is definitely an oxidizer, and that as it is being reduced to NO2 and (potentially) N2, that the ORP does decline. This is what allows the Nitrate knee effect to be observable, so I would not be surprised if N was a reducer, and off gassing of N caused an increase in ORP.
Dennis
Ahh, the third chamber is open at the top. This could explain the increase in ORP in this chamber. Correct we are measuring ORP, but oxygen does play a big role in ORP. I am not sure if N2 is an oxidizer or reducer, I do know that Nitrate (NO3) is definitely an oxidizer, and that as it is being reduced to NO2 and (potentially) N2, that the ORP does decline. This is what allows the Nitrate knee effect to be observable, so I would not be surprised if N was a reducer, and off gassing of N caused an increase in ORP.
Dennis
My Reef Angel system for the filter arrived yesterday. So I now have everything I need for the filter except for a bit more Reborn media. Now I just need my home renovations to be complete. Tiles are supposed to be done this weekend. Then HVAC and ventilation is next and finally I can see about getting the tank that his is all for delivered.
Dennis
Dennis
