Ozone use

Want2BS8ed,

So the second chamber prevents burping? Does it do anything else?

Are you running GAC downstream from the ozone? How?

cherubfish pair, the second chamber has about 4-6 cups of GAC in it an it's there for that purpose only.

There is a constant flow of air and water exiting the reactors. Burping implies, IMO, an intermittent release of air (read: loud). That's just not the case here.

Sorry if my earlier post wasn't clear.
 
Does ozone effect GFO? Id like to run the output of my ozone reactor through my BRS GFO/carbon reactor to make things simple.
 
That's a complex question. Here's a cut and paste from the same question a few days ago:

I expect the problems will be minimal, but do not know for sure.

Some organics that bind to GFO won't do so if continually exposed to ozone, but that might be a plus or a minus depending on what they are.

Inorganic phosphate is fully oxidized, so that's not a concern.

I think the surface of GFO is fully oxidized (that is, all Fe+++ and no Fe++), but I'm not 100% sure on that.

The GFO might possibly catalyze the breakdown of the ozone and OPO's as fast or faster than GAC, but if you are wanting that to happen, then of course it is not a concern.

Will any of the highly oxidizing species bind to GFO, taking up phosphate binding sites? Things like hypobromite? That's a possibility that I do not know the answer to. Certain oxidized organics (like oxalate) might bind and take up binding sites.
 
well based on that, it seems like the best bet would be to run the GFO after the carbon to allow the carbon to take up the ozone and hopefully allow those organics to bind while not exposed to the ozone.

Sound right?
 
If you are using the GAC to bind organics, then I'd do it away from the ozone. If you are using it to only break down the ozone and oxidizing species, then directly in the ozone reactor effluent is the place.

When I was using GFO and ozone at the same time (I've now stopped using ozone), I ran the GFO in a separate canister filter that was used downstream from the carbon treated ozone reactor effluent. :)
 
There is a constant flow of air and water exiting the reactors. Burping implies, IMO, an intermittent release of air (read: loud). That's just not the case here.

Sorry if my earlier post wasn't clear.
Sorry but this post isn't clear either.

You say it implies [burping]; that's not the case here?

I take this to mean there is burping, but not loud burping?
 
What is the optimal air flow through an ozone generator?

I have no exact way of measuring it, other than placing the air hose in the water and counting the bubbles.

Do i want 1 bubble a second / 5 a second / constant blast of air? :)
 
Are you dosing ozone through a reactor or skimmer? If it's a skimmer with a venturi, the air/ozone will be drawn through the venturi automatically and usually won't need an air pump.

With commercially made reactors, they usually recommend a certain amount of air flow produced by an air pump which can be measured with an air meter.
 
Last edited:
Are you dosing ozone through a reactor or skimmer? If it's a skimmer with a venturi, the air/ozone will be drawn through the venturi automatically and usually won't need an air pump.

With commercially made reactors, they usually recommend a certain amount of air flow produced by an air pump which can be measured with an air meter.

I have an H&S A150 Skimmer, I have a the larger skimmer air hoes meeting up with the standard size ozone safe airline hose via a T adapter. (one end of the T is unrestricted so the skimmer can always pull max air)

The skimmer sucks in the ozone air at that point. But the skimmer is not strong enough to suck/draw the air past drier beads + through ozone generator + hose... and then into skimmer chamber.

So I use an airpump to get the ozone filled air to where the skimmer can suck it in :)

Is this not standard method??

I guess i'm trying to determine how fast that air needs to be forced through the generator, it is my understanding that ozone has a very sort half life and if I do not get the ozone air into the skimmer quick enough it will not be very effective. But also I assume that I do not want to rush air through the generator so quickly that the skimmer can not draw it in and it gets blown into the room.
 
Has anyone had any experience with the Ultralife Ultrazone Ozonizer? I've been weighing the pros and cons of a reactor based ozone unit and a UV based unit, what do you guys think of UV based units? From what I've seen, it seems much simpler to set up a UV becuase that's the only piece of equipment you need to purchase (besides an ORP meter and silicone tubing) if you want to hook it up inline with the venturi on your skimmer. The life span on the bulbs can be anywhere from over 6 months to a year depending on how much the bulb is being used. I just haven't seen a lot of publicity on UV ozonizers and I've been wondering why.
 
Corona discharge units need less maintenance, but drier air. UV bulb based units are cheaper initially for a given size, tolerate humid air better, but have higher maintenance needs and costs. IMO, a Corona discharge ozonize is better value for the money.
 
Hi,

I have yes I have the aqua 57 watt twist UV. I am thinking to buy the UltraLife Ultrazone 360 Ozonizer and running to my skimmer which is Precision Marine Bullet Two (it is Ozone ready, so I am guessing that is should handle the Ozone). So I want to know if I can have both on the system and if that's the best way or there is better way? I know you are recommending Avast solution or similar option, but I have a limited space. My question is does it worth to make the space and get this solution or go with the Ultrazone 360?

Thanks in advance
 
Hi,

I have yes I have the aqua 57 watt twist UV. I am thinking to buy the UltraLife Ultrazone 360 Ozonizer and running to my skimmer which is Precision Marine Bullet Two (it is Ozone ready, so I am guessing that is should handle the Ozone). So I want to know if I can have both on the system and if that's the best way or there is better way? I know you are recommending Avast solution or similar option, but I have a limited space. My question is does it worth to make the space and get this solution or go with the Ultrazone 360?

Thanks in advance

The Aqua 57 watt twist UV is an ultraviolet sterilizer. IMO they are not really worth running on the typical single tank set up. Running ozone in a skimmer or ozone reactor is something I find worthwhile and do myself. While there is no reason that both a UV sterilizer and skimmer with ozone can't be used at the same time, if space is limited I'd go with the ozone. And yes, if your skimmer is sold as "ozone ready" it will handle ozone ;)
 
Ozone to prevent disease

Ozone to prevent disease

I know Ozone can help prevent disease, but what kind of levels does ozone need to be at inside a pressurized reactor to actually cause damage to the parasite/virus/etc.? I guess what I'm really asking is, if the levels of ozone are 390-400mv in the tank, then wouldn't it be much higher inside the reactor? (like above 650+ or something)
 
I know Ozone can help prevent disease, but what kind of levels does ozone need to be at inside a pressurized reactor to actually cause damage to the parasite/virus/etc.? I guess what I'm really asking is, if the levels of ozone are 390-400mv in the tank, then wouldn't it be much higher inside the reactor? (like above 650+ or something)


You are quoting an ORP level in the aquarium, not a level of ozone. Yes, the ORP in a reactor will be much higher, close to 700 mV.

In order to kill organisms, you need a lot of ozone for a long period of time in a reactor. Use in a skimmer or other methods with a short contact time will not work.

I discuss pathogen killing with ozone here (especially the first one):


Ozone and the Reef Aquarium, Part 1: Chemistry and Biochemistry
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-03/rhf/index.php

Ozone and the Reef Aquarium, Part 2: Equipment and Safety
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-04/rhf/index.php

Ozone and the Reef Aquarium, Part 3: Changes in a Reef Aquarium upon Initiating Ozone
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-05/rhf/index.php

from it:

Reducing Bacteria When Using Ozone
Bacteria and other organisms suspended in water can be killed by adequate exposure to ozone. That process is widely used to disinfect drinking water and wastewater in a variety of applications. The doses and exposures of ozone required for disinfection, however, are quite high. They are higher than are used in reef aquarium applications, where typical doses of ozone range up to about 0.3 ppm in typical contact chambers, and last for only a few seconds. Consequently, aquarists must be careful when translating disinfection literature to reef aquarium effects.

In a recent study of a recirculating seawater system,35 the dosing of 0.52 ppm of ozone was tested for its ability to decrease the system's bacterial load. That dose is similar to a 300 mg/hr ozone unit applied to a typical small skimmer flow rate of 150 gallons per hour (568 L/h). In this experiment, the levels of suspended bacteria (both Vibrio and coliform) were analyzed in a variety of locations (intake, pre-ozone, post-ozone, pre-tank, and post-tank). In no case was there a statistically significant reduction in bacteria. Even the addition of a venturi injector to the contact chamber did not adequately help (although it trended toward fewer bacteria, the result was not statistically significant). For comparison purposes, at higher ozone concentrations and contact times (5.3 ppm ozone for 240 minutes), Vibrio vulnificus is easily killed, with fewer than one in a hundred million of the initial bacteria remaining.36

How much ozone, and for how long, is required to kill suspended organisms in seawater? In one study of a suspended dinoflagellate algae (Amphidinium sp. isolated from Australia's Great Barrier Reef), it was found that 5-11 ppm ozone for six hours of exposure was required to kill 99.99% of the organisms.37 While that kill rate is impressive, that exposure is far higher than is ever achieved in a reef aquarium application. Lower doses and shorter contact times had smaller effects. A dose of 2 ppm and a short contact time (with the time not stated in the paper) showed a reduction in bacteria of abut 98% (which is still quite significant, but would not be referred to as disinfection).

Similar results were found for the spores of the bacterium Bacillus subtilis.38 In this case, doses of 14 ppm ozone for 24 hours were required to kill 99.99 percent of the spores. In another study 99.9% of fecal coliforms, fecal streptococci and total coliforms were killed with 10 ppm ozone and a contact time of 10 minutes.39 The exposure of Vibrio species and Fusarium solani (bacteria that are pathogenic to shrimp) to 3 ppm ozone for five minutes killed 99.9% of the bacteria.40 Water from a seawater swimming pool was effectively sterilized using 0.5-1.0 ppm ozone in a contact tower.41

The data for the disinfection of freshwater systems are much more extensive, and so include more data at lower contact times and concentrations. In one experiment at a Rainbow trout hatchery, the addition of 1-1.3 ppm of ozone with a contact time of 35 seconds reduced heterotrophic bacteria in the aquarium water itself by about 40-90%.42

Does the ozone used in a typical reef aquarium application reduce bacteria? Maybe, but certainly not to the extent required for disinfection. Still, a reduction of 50% of the living bacteria could have significant effects. The above study in the trout hatchery showed that the use of ozone at several times the typical reef aquarium rate and for about five to ten times the typical contact time results in such a drop. While the data are unavailable, I expect that the bacteria in the water exiting a normal reef aquarium's ozone application are not decreased by as much as 50%.

It seem reasonable to conclude from such literature studies that most bacteria that enter the ozone reaction chamber in a typical reef aquarium application will not be killed by ozone or its byproducts. If killing bacteria in the water column is a goal, then a UV (ultraviolet) sterilizer may be more useful.

Reducing Other Pathogens When Using Ozone
There has been extensive analysis of the amount of ozone needed to kill the human pathogen Cryptosporidia parvum in freshwater. Most such studies are looking for significant disinfection, but some data points show the effects at lower doses and contact times, and some researchers have developed models that suggest the amount of killing at any dose/time combination.43 For example, at 22° C approximately 63% of the organisms would be expected to be killed at 1 ppm ozone with a contact time of one minute. The contact times and concentrations are inversely related, so at a contact time of six seconds, the required dose to kill 63% is on the order of 10 ppm ozone. At 0.3 ppm ozone and a six second contact time, typical for the high end of reef ozone applications, less than 5% of the organisms would be expected to be killed.

Many viruses are much easier to inactivate with ozone than are other pathogens.44 Enteric adenovirus, for example, is inactivated to the extent of 99.8% after exposure to 0.5 ppm for 15 seconds.44 Feline calicivirus is inactivated to the extent of 98.6% after exposure to 0.06 ppm for 15 seconds.44 Poliovirus type 1 was inactivated to 99% within 30 seconds of contact time at 0.15 ppm ozone.45 Hepatitis A virus was inactivated to the extent of 99.999% within one minute at 1 ppm ozone.46 Norwalk virus was inactivated by 99.9% in 10 seconds of contact at 0.37 ppm ozone.47 Adenovirus type 2 was inactivated by 99.99% by 0.2 ppm ozone with a contact time of about one minute.48

The eggs of a pathogenic helminth (Ascaris suum) were killed to the extent of 90% by exposure to 3.5-4.7 ppm ozone for one hour. One additional hour of exposure killed the remainder.49

It seems reasonable to conclude from such literature studies that many viruses that enter the ozone reaction chamber in a typical reef aquarium application may be killed by ozone or its byproducts. Larger pathogens, however, are likely much more resistant to ozone, and are unlikely to be killed. For such ends, a UV sterilizer may be more useful, but still may not be completely effective.
 
Avast Reactor Users - I stopped both the burping and the smell very easily. I am set up as instructed by Avast (Ozone Reactor to Carbon Reactor). However, instead of having the water that exits the carbon going directly to my sump, I have it going into some PVC pipe to separate the air (which is what smells) and water.

I have some 2 inch PVC pipe standing vertically with a Tee fitting on both ends (it looks similar to an Aqua UV). The water enters the top T fitting exits the bottom T fitting which is below the surface of sump water level. The air which is what smells will naturally rise where it is filtered with carbon. Trust me this works great and its a simple fix. I got the idea becasue every morning I will smell ozone at the top of the stairs. I just wanted to capture the ozone air and filter it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top