Daisy chaining reactors: Wouldn't it be better to have GFO first? (managing flow)

smartwater101 · 05/16/2018, 05:02 PM

I notice a lot of people say they run Carbon FIRST while daisy chaining reactors. But I don't see a lot of explanations for this. Considering GFO needs a more specific flow rate, wouldn't it be better to have that first... then run to the carbon in a second chamber?

I've split off my return pump (w/ gate valve) to run to a couple reactors and wanted to see what other people are doing and why.

Thanks

josephxsxn · 05/16/2018, 06:18 PM

I would wonder if the GFO effluent would have something in it that would use the carbon up *shrug*. With that line if thinking carbon first absorbs stuff from the tank and not all the GFO stuff. This is 100% speculation on my part but is the only reason I could think to do Carbon first.

smartwater101 · 05/16/2018, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josephxsxn

I would wonder if the GFO effluent would have something in it that would use the carbon up *shrug*. With that line if thinking carbon first absorbs stuff from the tank and not all the GFO stuff. This is 100% speculation on my part but is the only reason I could think to do Carbon first.

Do you think the flow needed for GFO movement would churn the Carbon too much? Carbon doesn't need a ton of flow correct?

LobsterOfJustice · 05/16/2018, 09:46 PM

If you daisy chain them, they’re going to see the same flow rate regardless of what order you put them in.

Sometimes people recommend carbon first because cheap or lower quality carbon can leach phosphate. I think that was more of a problem a while ago and not so much any more but maybe a habit that stuck.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bertoni · 05/16/2018, 09:50 PM

I agree that the amount of flow for GFO might be a bit too much for carbon. I'd be very careful about that. The flow rate through both filters will be the same if they are feeding from the same pump and don't have a T somewhere.

RobZilla04 · 05/17/2018, 05:33 AM

Daisy chaining these two together is sure to lead to problems IMO. Flow too high for either media (no matter which is first) is going to create over tumbling and breakdown of the particles. After that the small dusty breakdown is going to end up escaping the reactors and flowing through the entire system. That's bad.

Understanding the pain in replumbing the return to include two "T" offs that option is still better than daisy chaining IMHO. The only other solution I see are two small pumps, one for each reactor as a stand alone.

Best of luck.

tmz · 05/17/2018, 10:36 AM

I think the carbon helps remove the organics, putting cleaner water to the GFO leaving more clean surface area. However, overall I prefer to run them separately for flow control and media changes based on the specific exhaustion of one or the other . If the pump is the issue you can tee one off with separate flow controls for each reactor.

05/16/2018, 05:02 PM	#1
smartwater101 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 382	Daisy chaining reactors: Wouldn't it be better to have GFO first? (managing flow) I notice a lot of people say they run Carbon FIRST while daisy chaining reactors. But I don't see a lot of explanations for this. Considering GFO needs a more specific flow rate, wouldn't it be better to have that first... then run to the carbon in a second chamber? I've split off my return pump (w/ gate valve) to run to a couple reactors and wanted to see what other people are doing and why. Thanks __________________ 160 mixed reef: Hippo tang, Foxface, clownfish, 25+ nano gobies/blennies/cardinals

05/16/2018, 09:46 PM	#4
LobsterOfJustice Recovering Detritophobe Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cary, NC Posts: 7,443	If you daisy chain them, they’re going to see the same flow rate regardless of what order you put them in. Sometimes people recommend carbon first because cheap or lower quality carbon can leach phosphate. I think that was more of a problem a while ago and not so much any more but maybe a habit that stuck. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk __________________ If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. I remember when zoanthids were called things like "green" and "orange" and not "reverse gorilla nipple." Current Tank Info: 180g reef with all the bells and whistles

05/16/2018, 09:50 PM	#5
bertoni RC Mod Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA, USA Posts: 88,616	I agree that the amount of flow for GFO might be a bit too much for carbon. I'd be very careful about that. The flow rate through both filters will be the same if they are feeding from the same pump and don't have a T somewhere. __________________ Jonathan Bertoni

05/17/2018, 05:33 AM	#6
RobZilla04 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: St. Augustine, FL Posts: 1,857	Daisy chaining these two together is sure to lead to problems IMO. Flow too high for either media (no matter which is first) is going to create over tumbling and breakdown of the particles. After that the small dusty breakdown is going to end up escaping the reactors and flowing through the entire system. That's bad. Understanding the pain in replumbing the return to include two "T" offs that option is still better than daisy chaining IMHO. The only other solution I see are two small pumps, one for each reactor as a stand alone. Best of luck. __________________ 90g Mixed Reef

05/17/2018, 10:36 AM	#7
tmz ReefKeeping Mag staff Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: West Seneca NY Posts: 27,691	I think the carbon helps remove the organics, putting cleaner water to the GFO leaving more clean surface area. However, overall I prefer to run them separately for flow control and media changes based on the specific exhaustion of one or the other . If the pump is the issue you can tee one off with separate flow controls for each reactor. __________________ Tom Current Tank Info: Tank of the Month , November 2011 : 600gal integrated system: 3 display tanks (120 g, 90g, 89g),several frag/grow out tanks, macroalgae refugia, cryptic zones. 40+ fish, seahorses, sps,lps,leathers, zoanthidae and non photosynthetic corals.

05/16/2018, 06:18 PM	#2
josephxsxn Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: DTW, Michigan Posts: 122	I would wonder if the GFO effluent would have something in it that would use the carbon up shrug. With that line if thinking carbon first absorbs stuff from the tank and not all the GFO stuff. This is 100% speculation on my part but is the only reason I could think to do Carbon first.