two little fishes phosban reactor 150

JN Reef

JN Reef

Member
I have one, but have to get a pump for it. I want to use it for carbon filtration.

The recommended flow for it is:
Recommended flow rate: 80 gph for 130 grams PhosBan, 90 gph for 200 grams.

How much carbon do you guys put in yours and what pump do you use?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7683173#post7683173 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Bebo77
i used a mj 1200.. that really got the carbon moving in there...
Click to expand...

Do you really want the carbon to move that much? because if the flow is too high, then wouldn't that make it more difficult for the particles in the water to get lodged into the pores of the carbon? Isnt' that the purpose of chemical carbon filtration?
 
I just set mine up last night coincidentally. I had some extra maxijets but they got thrown away w/out me knowing it! :mad:

So I went ahead and bought a Via Aqua 80 gph pump. That thing is tiny! But it does the job. I also just filled 3/4ths of the way. Not too much movement w/ the carbon considering how weak the pump is.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7683705#post7683705 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by JN Reef
Do you really want the carbon to move that much? because if the flow is too high, then wouldn't that make it more difficult for the particles in the water to get lodged into the pores of the carbon? Isnt' that the purpose of chemical carbon filtration?
Click to expand...

i filled the reactor 80-90% full.. only the very top danced...
 
i would say first tell us how much tubing your running (head pressure) then a pump which is rated at that size can be decided upon.

second for you guys using larger pumps with more media in the reactor watch out these things will leak if water starts to back up into them. So check them daily :)
 
TMU you don't want too high of a flow when using a phosphate remover; too much agitation and they particles will grind each other into a powder and go back into your tank. Which is not good...

FWIW
 
Using carbon in a phosban reactor requires you to discard the instructions that came with it. Running phosban requires low flow, like kernelangus stated. However, running carbon requires high flow and heavy surface agitation.

You do not want particulate matter to become lodged in the GAC. The most efficient way to run carbon is aggressively with replacement every 3-4 weeks.

I only use about 2 cups of GAC in my fluidized media chamber (which is all a Phosban Reactor is). I'd say this is about 1/5th - 1/4 full. Remember, you WANT the tumbling action.
 
I used a maxijet 1200, and linked two tlf 150's together, carbon in first one, phosban in the second one, after adjusting the valve that they come with a bit the flow was fine
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7688767#post7688767 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ReefMeister2
Does anyone have any experience with the Kent Phos-Reactor?

http://fishsupply.com/seckm-k0884.html

I was going to get one to run carbon through, just for kicks and giggles
Click to expand...

Same concept as the TLF Phosban Reactor. It's just an inexpensive fluidized media chamber.
 
Kevin I personaly like the Kent version only becuase its a real quick release and its already has the tubing facing downward. I looked at the new TLF's and did not like that fact that I have to unscrew the whole thing out. The older version was worse. As far as the kents version. Verry easy to use, just twist it alittle and it of. I have two of them T on to a MJ1200. One runs carbon the other Denitrator.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7686579#post7686579 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWfan
Using carbon in a phosban reactor requires you to discard the instructions that came with it. Running phosban requires low flow, like kernelangus stated. However, running carbon requires high flow and heavy surface agitation.

You do not want particulate matter to become lodged in the GAC. The most efficient way to run carbon is aggressively with replacement every 3-4 weeks.

I only use about 2 cups of GAC in my fluidized media chamber (which is all a Phosban Reactor is). I'd say this is about 1/5th - 1/4 full. Remember, you WANT the tumbling action.
Click to expand...

eh?.so.what.happens.if.you.use.low.flow?.carbon.won't.be.fully.utilized?.excuse.the.periods.as.my.freakin'.space.button.doesn't.work.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7689333#post7689333 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tamphuong
Phosban reactor vs. filter canister(say Eheim brand)? Which one get more efficiency?
Click to expand...

A Canister seems like it would be an easy solution.

Problems I se there, touh to run a canister with a sump, they need to be below the tank level, as they rely on gravity and water pressure to run. Second media, the reactors make it easy to add, remove and clean the media, canisters are a little mpre trouble, not much though.

in theory I can not see why one would perform any better than the other.
 
Canister filters would use 3 - 4 times more electricity, depending on the model, since the motors are designed to run at 250 gph or more
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7689041#post7689041 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Mchava
Kevin I personaly like the Kent version only becuase its a real quick release and its already has the tubing facing downward. I looked at the new TLF's and did not like that fact that I have to unscrew the whole thing out. The older version was worse. As far as the kents version. Verry easy to use, just twist it alittle and it of. I have two of them T on to a MJ1200. One runs carbon the other Denitrator.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mario,
I suspected that the Kent unit may be a little more user-friendly

I hope you can make the SCMAS Workshop at my house this Saturday. The rest of you guys should all come as well; plenty of food, ideas, and a chance to meet local reefers in the area:

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=877595

Kevin
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7689845#post7689845 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ReefMeister2
Canister filters would use 3 - 4 times more electricity, depending on the model, since the motors are designed to run at 250 gph or more
Click to expand...

Not really the case...

The Fluval 305 uses 15W / 205 uses 9W
http://www.marinedepot.com/aquarium_filters_hagen_fluval_canister_external.asp?CartId=


The Maxi 1200 uses 20W / 900 uses 9.5W
http://www.marinedepot.com/aquarium...stems_maxi-jet_mini-jet_micro-jet.asp?CartId=

The canisters get away with low power because they leverage gravity/water pressure. It is basically a closed loop, because of that head pressure is a small factor in the flow.
 
The canister filters are also a more "true" 250 or 350 gph flow then the maxi-jets on a phosban reactor................I'm sure a 900 doesn't push 230 gph w/ the loss that would come from a 3/4 full chamber of carbon.

Wow those fluvals really would be more efficient as a "carbon canister"....................get rid of a powerhead or two in the tank too!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

griss
Sicce Pump Question
Replies
13
Views
675
ironwill723
ironwill723
S
Flow questions
Replies
5
Views
537
Sermanley
S
Guygettnby
Nyos 220 on a 120g?
Replies
8
Views
567
Guygettnby
Guygettnby
C
Coral placement and water flow
Replies
5
Views
451
wvned
wvned
K
Carbon Dosing causes STN/RTN?
Replies
13
Views
899
Timfish
Timfish
Back
Top