OK, hardcore idiot question here. "Fluidized" Calcium Reactor? Is there another kind? I have never heard of a calcium reactor being described this way.

good question bud.

Besides the "coined" aspect of the word, there is actually a science behind it.
Basicly older systems were static beds. water passed though the base plates & agitation of the media was somewhat lacking & often uneven. Hence abit wasteful when looking at the cost of materials vs rewards.

Today technology & more to the point designs are far better.
Manufacturers like to provide optomised products for their customers so its a given that the market is now flooded with coined terms. Technical within the realm of simple terms ok, the principle is an eqation. its called the Ergun Equation. When drag coefficents on a particle equal that of the net gravitational force - it allows the particle to remain semi-suspended. More to the point of reefkeeping, a particle affected by these forces will be thrust into an agitated state, allowing for the a better effulent solution & optimisation.
To explain it even simpler, you know when you go sky diving in a verticle wind tunnel, untill the updrafted velocity equals that of your body mass & the natral force of gravity, you can hover over the fan. same principle.

Does this answer your question?

Good explanation, I presume it holds true no matter the media, right?

with modification of equipment, in theory yes carmie, but companies dont spend millions on R&D for nothing, so following close to the guide lines outlined should always give predictable results within a pre determined margin.

But a fluidized Phosban reactor works on the same principal, right?

oh i see your context of media now, sorry.
ive never seen a working P04 unit in this way carmie. But if its labeled the same, then id prob say yes.
PO4 or nitrate sponge should be ok in this manor, i guess it all depends on the unit, id want a semi-course pre screen or settling tank before the return though. Constant agitation & frictional rubbing would produce fragmented particles that are lighter that the bulk media, the flow put would elevate it out of the reaction chamber & its got to go somewhere if you know what i mean.
Carbon i wouldn't even consider. Reasonably tightly packed & pushed though the carbon matrix is the only way to contain & run it in my opinion. Someone might prove me wrong, however its old school thinking that i predominantly work off. & i do live pretty remotely from all these new fan-dangle products you guys get.

But a fluidized Phosban reactor works on the same principal, right?

I do not think so. The documentation for PhosBan has you set the flow so only the top 1/2 inch or so is suspended. That is to prevent the grinding. The tuning procedure seems to be to maximize flow without grinding. So I would classify PhosBan as a static bed as opposed to a fluidized bed.

Oh, I see.

"Fluidized" simply means that the Aragonite media is suspended in the effluent when the recirc pump is on, and yes the media has a lot to do with it. For instance, Coarse ARM cannot be used in a fluidized Ca Reactor media as it is heavy and does not "float" inside the chamber.

Most fluidized setup are reverse flow reactors, simply because the mud will end up clogging the outlet IF used with a regular flow. (where the water is thrusted from the top to bottom)

Hope that answers your question.

take a look at this
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a388/thesaent14/my%20frag%20system/shoppictures001.jpg

Manny, this is my ignorance again but where does the water go in and out?

hey carmi here is a beter pic hope you understend
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a388/thesaent14/my%20frag%20system/reactor1.jpg

Got it! Thanks. See this is how you can tell I am a transit planner, give me a map and I see how it works!