Is it inadvisable to use a single Phosphate Reactor to run both Phosban(or similar) AND carbon at the same time? I was thinking of doing this on my 55g, since the reactor is rated (when filled with 150-200gr Phosban) for a much larger aquarium.
The only downside that I can think of is that I may wish to replace my carbon on a different schedule than my Phosban...
The two little fishies phosban reactor has sponge disks to seperate the media, so I am guessing they think it's okay...
__________________ "Knowledge is power. Power corrupts. Study Hard. Be evil."
The Palouse Region Aquarium Society is now PALOUSE REEFERS - http://www.palousereefers.com/
Abolish the IRS! Bring transparency and accountability to tax policy - close all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation. Support the Fair Tax plan... visit http://www.fairtax.org
Really? Both of mine came with 2 sponges. one for the top, and one for the bottom. You can order additional ones from them though if you wanted to keep them separated.
ONE THING... I was talking to one of the pros at Seachem today and he said the phosban reactor idea is a really good one. Just make sure to pack it when you load up, you apparently don't want the carbon swirling around as it will cause dust, which is apparently bad thing.
__________________ "Knowledge is power. Power corrupts. Study Hard. Be evil."
The Palouse Region Aquarium Society is now PALOUSE REEFERS - http://www.palousereefers.com/
Abolish the IRS! Bring transparency and accountability to tax policy - close all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation. Support the Fair Tax plan... visit http://www.fairtax.org
ONE THING... I was talking to one of the pros at Seachem today and he said the phosban reactor idea is a really good one. Just make sure to pack it when you load up, you apparently don't want the carbon swirling around as it will cause dust, which is apparently bad thing.
i thought the phosphate remover had to be suspended in the tube to be fully effective? if you pack carbon tight in there two i don't see how the phosphate media will be able to be suspended. i do think the charcoal will break down tumbling around in the chamber though. i was going to run two reactors so one with the phosphate remover can be loosely packed and the one with carbon can be packed so it is not moving around and breaking apart. any other thoughts on this?
The more I read about it, the more I think that is a good idea.
__________________ "Knowledge is power. Power corrupts. Study Hard. Be evil."
The Palouse Region Aquarium Society is now PALOUSE REEFERS - http://www.palousereefers.com/
Abolish the IRS! Bring transparency and accountability to tax policy - close all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation. Support the Fair Tax plan... visit http://www.fairtax.org
I have a couple problems with running carbon and phosphate media in one reactor. I use two phosban reactors, one for carbon and one for phosban.
First, the flow through the phosphate reactor should be minimal. According to the manufacturer - 30-50 gal/hr. "Adjust the flow rate with the valve so that only the upper 1/2 inch (1.3 cm) of granules tumbles, looking like water beginning to boil". For the carbon filter I want to maximize the flow.
Second, the carbon media needs to be changed more often than the phosphate media. I like to change the carbon every six weeks. The phosban lasts much longer, usually six months. I think it would be a problem changing the carbon in a reactor where there is also phosban. I understand that the initial cost of setting up two reactors is twice as expensive as one, but in the long run the cost of the phosban will be much more if it is changed more often than necessary.
what do these reactors go for in the states?
whats the typical flow rates on units such as these?
do you guys stray from the manufacturers R&D tested advice, & if so why?
everytime i hear the word "reactor" i smile, definately a coined name thats stuck big time! why didn't pistal pipes or stir pots take off ..lol
I think you can get the reactor, pump, valve and hoses for less than $50. I got one of mine from a local, used and the other on ebay, so I'm not sure about LFS prices. I think they reccomend <100GPH when using GFO, or as fast as you want through other media. They really are great tools. You can put whatever you want in them.
I think you can get the reactor, pump, valve and hoses for less than $50. I got one of mine from a local, used and the other on ebay, so I'm not sure about LFS prices. I think they reccomend <100GPH when using GFO, or as fast as you want through other media. They really are great tools. You can put whatever you want in them.
The TLF instructions recommends a Maxijet 500(?), but goes on to say that 50gph is optimum (at least for Phosban). The Phosban reactor comes with a valve fitting to restrict flow. I think many people stick a Maxijet 400 on the reactor...
My understanding for the slow flow rate with GFO is twofold: increased contact time with the media and to prevent the media from grinding itself to dust. Packing GFO should not be an issue. Following the manufacturer's instructions, the majority of the GFO media is essentially packed- it is not suspended in the flow like a fluidized bed filter. I have used several different media in my PhosBan reactor and I would use a different material as a separator between the GFO and carbon. I use 2 reactors- one for phosphate control and one for carbon- inline with each other supplied by a MaxiJet 400.
I have 2 Two Little Fishes Phosban reactors daisey chained together. The first has phosban and the second has carbon. It is working great for me this way. I do hpwever replace the carbon much more frequently than the phosban. You also want to rinse the phosban first or the dust left in the container will turn the tank orange for a time. HTH
Peace
Lynn
V-series Productions 