N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)

[rguyler]

What about flow rate through the pellets? I'm now running just under 1.75L of Vertex pellets (Vertex reactor too) in ~300G water and have noticed varied results based on reducing the rate through the reactor versus increasing it. I don't have test kits worth a darn (API for nitrate, nothing for phosphate) so have no way to actually quantify the differences but anecdotal observations, such as bacterial blooms, GHA activity, etc. lead me to believe that a slower flow through the pellets increases the biological activity.

Soooo...maybe increasing the flow through the pellets as the levels come down would reduce the impact on pH while allowing for the pellets to continue to support the bacterial population albeit more sparsely.

[Scej12]

That's a good suggestion... will have to give it a whirl... I'm using API for nitrates; phosphates; calcium; and alk for what it's worth. I use a pinpoint monitor for pH - btw, I just changed the battery and the pH was reading at 7.81.... YIKES!!! Can't wait to get that aragonite contraption built...

Sheldon

[Scej12]

Ok - here goes the beginning of a new experiment. I just serviced my pellet reactor again since I was there today adding a few more fish to the tank. So as it is now the pH was at 7.81 tonight about three hours before the end of the photoperiod. I put in about 5/8 the total capacity of pellets, going to leave it for a week to see if the pH rises above 8.2 again. The dKH will remain at 11-12 for the time being. If the same thing happens... i.e. the pH ends up high again while the pellet reactor is half full, then I think we will be able to conclude my suspicion that the more bacteria laden pellets, the bigger the draw-down on pH...

Also - I happened to run into my nutrition buddy again today and popped a quick question about the possibility of bacteria running the way we are running them, drawing down pH due to respiration???? He didn't spend much time but he said it is possible for carbon dioxide to be the draw-down but also bacterial processes can produce many secondary metabolites such as lactic acid, and who know what else... this can also bring down pH.... In any event it was all but a really brief exchange, and he did mention that he has to find his micro[??bacteria??] texts to refresh on some of the many factors that are involved.... Just an fyi for now, I'll let you know how the mini experiment goes, and if I can't duplicate the same result that occurred when I was away from the tank for 8-9 days a couple of weeks ago...

Regards,

Sheldon

[daveonbass]

as some of you may remember I had a hard time getting the pellets to work, and finally did after 6+ months of tinkering.

well here I am after many months of ULNS and successful pellet application...and now finally my NO3 has started to come back up...from undetectable to 5ppm now. PO4 is still undetectable, and all other params are similar to NSW. I also just recently REMOVED a HOB refuge from the side of my tank that held a batch os baby banggai cardinal fish...now they are in a dedicated nano.

so anyone got any guesses as to why/how the NO3 has creeped up? My pellets are lower now...so there are less of them. Skimmer is still rocking a full cup twice a week of black nog (ever since pellets started working). And I slowly keep adding new coral (sps).

I'm not flipping out...in fact I'm only going to monitor this and not worry till after 10ppm (and maybe fix that with a simple WC). The tank still looks good and I've seen great colors lately and now wonder if it's due to a little extra NO3 in the tank.

I will also probably look into adding a few more pellets in the future...maybe that's all it needs.

[Scej12]

Originally Posted by daveonbass

as some of you may remember I had a hard time getting the pellets to work, and finally did after 6+ months of tinkering.

well here I am after many months of ULNS and successful pellet application...and now finally my NO3 has started to come back up...from undetectable to 5ppm now. PO4 is still undetectable, and all other params are similar to NSW. I also just recently REMOVED a HOB refuge from the side of my tank that held a batch os baby banggai cardinal fish...now they are in a dedicated nano.

so anyone got any guesses as to why/how the NO3 has creeped up? My pellets are lower now...so there are less of them. Skimmer is still rocking a full cup twice a week of black nog (ever since pellets started working). And I slowly keep adding new coral (sps).

I'm not flipping out...in fact I'm only going to monitor this and not worry till after 10ppm (and maybe fix that with a simple WC). The tank still looks good and I've seen great colors lately and now wonder if it's due to a little extra NO3 in the tank.

I will also probably look into adding a few more pellets in the future...maybe that's all it needs.

Don't those bangais just love refugiums....!! I had one in one of my systems slip through the external overflow and bulkhead strainer... so must have been a hatchling of only hours - it survived the rapids of the sump intake; was fortunate enough to by-pass at least 3 powerful pressure rated pump intakes; and picked the correct of 3 possible mag 3 pumps.... the only one that lead to a pair of stacked refugiums he then managed to swim over the overflow of the top chaeto fuge, and finally made it past the baffles of the lower caulerpa /miracle mud /rubble fuge where he has grown from a hatchling to a full adult.... and all he was ever fed was what he found in the refugium - copius amounts of antropods, copepods, and I think I saw mysids in that system as well. His only other competition in there is a large mithrax; a rock boring urchin; and a few apthasia... recently some indo peppermint (kuekenthali) shrimp were added as well... But he has been one extremely happy (and even more lucky) character who absolutely wants for nothing in there... each refugium is about 75 gallons... so he's set for life!

Now to the matter at hand ...

I think it was an accepted factor of this discussion that the whole nutrient production can be limited by one of the utilized nutrients.... It therefore is possible that your undetectable phosphate, could actually be zero phosphates which is in fact limiting the process of the bacteria using nitrates. Are you running GFO by any chance... if so perhaps you can consider pulling it offline for a little while and feed lots of frozen foods .

You could be right however in that the pellets need to be topped up, as the other possibility is that you could have trace levels of phosphate which are still undetectable but your nitrates just happen to be the first parameter to become detectable as the population of bacteria become small enough to loose some of their efficacy.

Thirdly (in terms of possible causes) it could be that you simply need a slightly higher volume of pellets to take up the slack of your newly absent refugium.

Sheldon

[daveonbass]

I never had a refugium...i had a HOB (on the side) strictly as a holding tank for the babies. It only had water from the DT, the babies, a fake urchin, and one snail. It was so that I didn't have to keep changing the tank water for the babies and so they could benefit from the stable DT water. So the tank never had a working fuge.

I have never run GFO. I have never had any detectable PO4 so I never needed any export of it.

the pellets may very well just be too few to maintain the reduction of N and P levels. And I am guessing this because after "removing" the baby fish to a dedicated tank I would assume there would be "less" pollution in the tank. And yet now my NO3 level has gone up. Nit a lot...but a little.

also since the babies are gone the feeding level has gone down...so again less pollution...

so that's where I'm at right now. Though I'm tempted to add sugar again to see if my pellets just need a second jump start. Who knows?

[Scej12]

Okay - so I just visited my experimental 500g tank to see how things were going....

After 24hrs of running with more or less half - 5/8 my regular running volume, the pH monitor read 7.93 at the end of the photo-period (KH is still sitting at 11-12 degrees). At the time when the pellet reactor was running at full capacity (yesterday) the pH read 7.82 at the close of the photo-period. So far it seems as though the level has risen 1/10 on the monitor... will see if I can get down there tomorrow evening as Friday will be a little tough.

So far things seem to be going as predicted. Will keep y'all posted.

Regards,

Sheldon

[Scej12]

Okay so after roughly 48 hrs of operating half the capacity of pellets regularly used. the pH has remained the same as it was after day 1. At the end of the photoperiod, the pH registered in at 7.92.

Unfortunately I will not be able to get to the system until Sunday afternoon. Will report any changes at that time. It will be day 5....

Keeping y'all posted,
Sheldon

[DarkXerox]

Originally Posted by Scej12

Ok - here goes the beginning of a new experiment. I just serviced my pellet reactor again since I was there today adding a few more fish to the tank. So as it is now the pH was at 7.81 tonight about three hours before the end of the photoperiod. I put in about 5/8 the total capacity of pellets, going to leave it for a week to see if the pH rises above 8.2 again. The dKH will remain at 11-12 for the time being. If the same thing happens... i.e. the pH ends up high again while the pellet reactor is half full, then I think we will be able to conclude my suspicion that the more bacteria laden pellets, the bigger the draw-down on pH...

Also - I happened to run into my nutrition buddy again today and popped a quick question about the possibility of bacteria running the way we are running them, drawing down pH due to respiration???? He didn't spend much time but he said it is possible for carbon dioxide to be the draw-down but also bacterial processes can produce many secondary metabolites such as lactic acid, and who know what else... this can also bring down pH.... In any event it was all but a really brief exchange, and he did mention that he has to find his micro[??bacteria??] texts to refresh on some of the many factors that are involved.... Just an fyi for now, I'll let you know how the mini experiment goes, and if I can't duplicate the same result that occurred when I was away from the tank for 8-9 days a couple of weeks ago...

Regards,

Sheldon

Sheldon this is why I keep saying over and over again run some chaetomorphia to drop your CO2 levels. In short, photosynthesis converts the CO2 into sugars, releases O2, pH rises due to lower partial pressure of CO2 and pure O2 bubbles strip dissolved CO2 as well. CO2 turns into carbonic acid in solution and will drop pH so you have to counteract it if you are that concerned.

As for secondary metabolites, if glucose was involved, bacteria in excess levels of it will skip going through the TCA cycle in lieu of turning pyruvate from glycolysis anaerobically into acetate (a weak acid) and CO2 via pyruvate oxidase. However since our plastics here are polymers of possibly PHA or PCL and not glucose, we don't know if they are back converting it into pyruvate. PHA is definitely an intermediate but I wouldn't be able to say exactly what happens.

So in short, if you want higher pH, drop your CO2 levels and also calibrate your probe to make sure it is reading correctly.

[Scej12]

Originally Posted by DarkXerox

Sheldon this is why I keep saying over and over again run some chaetomorphia to drop your CO2 levels. In short, photosynthesis converts the CO2 into sugars, releases O2, pH rises due to lower partial pressure of CO2 and pure O2 bubbles strip dissolved CO2 as well. CO2 turns into carbonic acid in solution and will drop pH so you have to counteract it if you are that concerned.

As for secondary metabolites, if glucose was involved, bacteria in excess levels of it will skip going through the TCA cycle in lieu of turning pyruvate from glycolysis anaerobically into acetate (a weak acid) and CO2 via pyruvate oxidase. However since our plastics here are polymers of possibly PHA or PCL and not glucose, we don't know if they are back converting it into pyruvate. PHA is definitely an intermediate but I wouldn't be able to say exactly what happens.

So in short, if you want higher pH, drop your CO2 levels and also calibrate your probe to make sure it is reading correctly.

Thanks Xerox - Don't get me wrong, I do agree with you regarding the implementation of a macro algae refugium... but keep in mind that I'm also prototyping a filtration system of my own invention with certain objectives in mind...

So firstly, I was trying to confirm that the biopellet process does in fact produce CO2 or some other pH draw-down. I was not aware that this factor was already accepted as a known side-effect - so the major intent of documenting this experiment of mine publicly was to verify that there is indeed a direct relationship between the pellets (and quantity thereof) and pH stability;

Secondly, and because of my prototyping process, I'm trying to isolate the steps enough that the causes/effects are clearly verifiable. I think I did mention to your earliest suggestion that I will likely consider some type of refugium [probably critters], but am a little constrained by space at the time being. Also, inline with the objectives of my prototyping process as a whole, I'm considering a solution that readily mates with the filtration system I am developing, which is to employ a similar approach, for example, as a calcium reactor which appends an ancillary media chamber for gfo or additional aragonite.

I do currently use both chaeto and caulerpa in various other tanks that I currently manage and found that the caulerpa grows much, much faster and fortunately I have not had any go asexual as yet. I have to say that in one particular system that I had sub 8 level pH; neither the caulerpa nor chaeto (two separate fuges) were able to raise it up... perhaps this could be related to the fact that I light these refugiums 24/7; or perhaps the kH was too low on the system (6-7 dKH). In any case the eventual solution was to dose Pro Buffer, and once the dKH got to above 8 the problem sorta corrected itself...

I do appreciate your suggestion and see it as a possible aid/fix, but as mentioned I'm simply trying to isolate causes; and source solutions in line with a very focused prototyping process underway in this particular system... The biopellets are adding a significant dynamic to the resolution of my filter design, i.e. once the pH/dKH issue can be dealt with/polished off, the result will be that a 450-500 gallon reef is being maintained by a 24" x 16" sump filtration system.... I sincerely believe this is largely due to the amazing ability of the pellets to harness bacterial filtration.

With regard to the microbiology comments... WOW! totally over my head, but Thanks for letting me know where I should start educating myself... I will look up some of those processes so that I have a better understanding... I just started learning about this whole bacterial driven filtration phenomenon about a couple of years ago, so most of this stuff is relatively new, but intriguing to me.

My background is in architecture not biology, which is why I appreciate the input from you and others who help to broaden my portrait of understanding a little. So Pls understand that I'm not ignoring your suggestion, just rolling it into the whole, while benefiting from the added input.

P.S. - I would provide more information about my invention, but I fear that this is not the right thread for it. I would really like to invite fellow hobbyists along for the ride who may want to offer some tweaking notes in addition to the considerations that I already have - so if it comes down to it I may start a new thread under the filtration forum... but until then, I'm trying to understand and make use of the biopellet phenomenon right here in this N/P thread!!!

Regards,
Sheldon

[rguyler]

Sheldon, I'd be interested to see what you've done there. It doesn't take a marine biologist to have a great idea for our aquariums.

Daveonbass, would you be willing to summarize your 6-month experience so maybe the rest of us could benefit? This thread has become so large that it's hard to follow a single experience. I'm running the pellets based on a lot of comments by others and personal anecdotal observations but a short synopsis from what you believe to be the best way to run these would be great IMHO.

[Scej12]

Originally Posted by rguyler

Sheldon, I'd be interested to see what you've done there. It doesn't take a marine biologist to have a great idea for our aquariums.

Daveonbass, would you be willing to summarize your 6-month experience so maybe the rest of us could benefit? This thread has become so large that it's hard to follow a single experience. I'm running the pellets based on a lot of comments by others and personal anecdotal observations but a short synopsis from what you believe to be the best way to run these would be great IMHO.

Hey Rik - thanks for the encouragement.. I guess this is as good a place as any to introduce the idea to the reefing community at large.... and besides, it just became publicly searchable on the World Intellectual Property Organization website... I'll save you the search, here's the link:

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.j...DISPLAY=STATUS

I'll post some pictures of the prototype that's running on my 500g system at the moment when I have a little more time... preparing for a little UFC shindig tonight so I'd better get outside and shovel some snow

In a nutshell; here's a quick summary of the invention. It is a system that connects standard reactor to a sump via a plenum and standard pattern of holes. The plenum is used to control all of the circulation needs of any given reactor... including a protein skimmer which I've also described as a type of reactor. From the neck down all of the reactors are standard with the ability to manipulate the internal configuration to accommodate functions of, for example, a calc reactor; protein skimmer; pellet reactor; (this is the current setup); a refugium; media reactor; biotower; cooling system; etc. It's up the user how and which combination of reactors are going to be used. In effect the system puts to control in the hobbyist's hands to switch on the fly between reactor types, by simply switching the head-type and/or pump arrangement. Any pump can be used... i.e. once you have a reactor body, you can create a skimmer by using the skimmer collection cup head; and employing an aspirating pump (venturi or becket or mazzi); a skimmer drain; and manipulating the internal perforated pvc plates to allow for easy passage of the foam. All of the above components connect through the plenum. Alternatively, you can create a calcium reactor, by employing a circulation pump; a 'tall-head' which includes a probe holder, and if you don't have one of those fancy CO2 regulators that have an integral bubble-counter (Milwaukee), you can also opt for a 'bubble-head'; the internal perforated pvc plates will be arranged to contain calcareous media... the list goes on to accommodate all types of filtration required to manage either freshwater aquariums; planted aquariums; marine aquarium; reef aquariums; etc. Said another way... the design is for a sump filtration system that accommodates a wide variety of solutions, by isolating every aspect of any given reactor type; each isolated component is then united through the plenum system... this means that you can use any pump you can fit into the provided area, to make a filtration strategy of your choice.

Basically my system is internationally patent pending; and is a solution to afford hobbyists the greatest flexibility between aquarium types and filtration stategies... in a nutshell. If you want a more detailed description feel free to follow the link above to view the entire patent submission.... it was filed through the Patent Cooperation Treaty which means that the concept is currently Patent Pending in 144 countries around the world.

If you do take the time to browse through please feed free to offer your comments... I may have to find a separate thread for this at that point but so be it... All in all the solution is intended to satisfy all of us hobbyists by the time I'm through with the prototyping process - so all comments are welcome both good and bad.... I have thick skin so don't worry.

P.S. I'm not proof reading this time so hopefully there are no errors that make me look like a three-year-old so long... gotta get ready for UFC!

Sheldon

[tntneon]

whauw sceij12 looks very impressive ,
although i rather be building my own sump , i do like your idea !

greetingzz tntneon

[Scej12]

Thanks tntneon! As it turns out, I was planning an installation/upgrade for a client of mine when I first started thinking of a way to make my filtration strategy interchangeable... I.e. I wanted to be able to easily swap things out or even double things up... i.e. two skimmers if I thought it was necessary. This is when I started concocting a 'plug n play' model. Unfortunately the client decided that the upgrade was too expensive as influenced by a couple of financial factors... not least of which was the recession of 2008. So I decided to continue to develop the idea and came up with what you saw as my patent submission. The funny thing is (perhaps karma) that my prototype is now running on that same client's tank, and the rehabilitation that was too expensive almost three years ago is now in full swing... thanks to the pellets of course - and my modest R&D budget.....!

Regards,

Sheldon

[MedRed]

I'm wondering when someone will build a skimmer with a built in reactor. That seems like it'd be super easy to implement.

[Scej12]

If you're thinking of a pellet reactor within the foam chamber of the skimmer, I don't think that will work out too well only because the air within the reaction chamber will float the pellets right out of the skimmer into the collection cup in no time flat. Were you thinking of another type of reactor, or one positioned just outside of the skimmer either on the intake or exit side...? Pls clarify so that we can have a better visual of your proposal. Thanks.

SJ

[cjilge]

I think it would be cool to see the output of the pellet reactor feed the skimmer, but it would have to be a recirc skimmer to work. I'm not the smartest out there but I would think it would help as the pellets "shed" bacteria films. similar to the efluent line on your calc reactor. Just my 2cents

[Scej12]

You're exactly right Chris.. that idea has been a theme of the whole biopellet efficiency discussion. You want your output from the pellets discharging either near to or directly into your skimmer intake. I've actually had it set up both ways (with the skimmer in recirc mode; and pass-thru mode). In pass-thru mode I fed the pellet effluent in through the two venturi pumps... the only issue I had is that depending on the throughput of your pellet setup, you can end up starving the skimmer pumps for flow and therefore negatively affect its efficiency. When I went down to a smaller pump for my pellet reactor, I feed its effluent through one of the skimmer venturi pumps, while the other pump was arranged to operate on recirculation mode. That way, the skimmer efficiency is less affected by the throughput of the pellet reactor.

[tntneon]

Originally Posted by MedRed

I'm wondering when someone will build a skimmer with a built in reactor. That seems like it'd be super easy to implement.

I've once played with the idea to put some bp's inside of the bubble chamber of my skimmer , but i didn't procede because it could clog the holes in the bubble plate.
Some of my reaktor BP's have already maked there own way to the bubble chamber via the skimmerpump
That's the downfall on an open type reactor , when you get some turbelence in the drain flow , pellets can float over the top to the skimmer.

greetingzz tntneon

[cjilge]

Originally Posted by Scej12

You're exactly right Chris.. that idea has been a theme of the whole biopellet efficiency discussion. You want your output from the pellets discharging either near to or directly into your skimmer intake. I've actually had it set up both ways (with the skimmer in recirc mode; and pass-thru mode). In pass-thru mode I fed the pellet effluent in through the two venturi pumps... the only issue I had is that depending on the throughput of your pellet setup, you can end up starving the skimmer pumps for flow and therefore negatively affect its efficiency. When I went down to a smaller pump for my pellet reactor, I feed its effluent through one of the skimmer venturi pumps, while the other pump was arranged to operate on recirculation mode. That way, the skimmer efficiency is less affected by the throughput of the pellet reactor.

That was my fear is starving the skimmer, but I experimentd a few years ago with a DIY skimmer off one of the diy threads here on rc. it didn't take much off a flow rate to feed it. If it wasn't so dang big or I had a fish room I would be trying it right now. It was a 50" reaction chamber 4" dia downdraft using an air pump for bubbles, but I always wanted to put a sedra 9000 on it as a recirc and venturi it. It skimmed like a beast as it was and only ran on a mag 3 feed pump. I think it would be easier to do on the bigger skimmers, but worth a shot. Maybe I pull that beastly thing out of the closet and do some mods! If it worked you could make it out of acrylic or whatever you wanted, which is the main reason I took it off line, you couldn't see when it was dirty and it was a PITA to make the air stones since you couldn't find them locally.

By the way I ran that thing on a 65! lol

[redrdwolf]

No offense intended to the folks that put a lot of hard work into this site; however, here is my feedback on Bio Pellets. I have an Elos 70, Vertex UF15 media reactor, Maxi -Jet 1200 and now 500 ml of bio pellets running. Stable Magnesium 1350, Calcium 450, KH 8, NO2 and N3 both 0. All of the pellets suspended and exit sitting next to my skimmer pump intake. I started using a Hanna Phosphorus test kit on day one and it displayed 102ppb. I tested twice a week for the past 5 weeks. I am now at 124ppb. I lost over 5k worth of SPS coral in one week at once. "Snake Oil” Anyone want a reactor?

[Pro X]

Spoke with Julian today and he informed me they have a universal screen for Phosban 150 and 550 reactors. Cutting them out of hobby mat is fairly easy but TLF screen is concentric instead of square mesh so it leaves no jagged edges.

Originally Posted by luisgo

I am in the process of adding biopellets to my 125 gallon reef aquarium. As part of a photo contest I got a TLF 550 reactor that will use for this project. I will start with 250ml and will add the rest in the bag until I have the 500ml. I will post the progress of this. I am not going to remove the GFO for the moment. I am planning to use a MaxiJet 1200 I have to see how the pellets move in the reactor.

Here are some photos of the mesh mod to the 550.

[lunar]

Here are some Polish tanks using NP reducing biopellets. Some of them have been running the pellets for over a year, others for several months. The younger tanks got off to a good start with the pellets. All these tanks keep the pellets in reactors, have a very good flow through the whole system, strong skimmers, alkalinity around 7-8.


Krzysztof Tryc


Andrzej N.


Grzegorz B.


Ireneusz H.


Piotr Z.


Dariusz L.


Andrzej K. - from the beginning setup with NP biopellets


Rafał O.


Krzysztof K.- from the beginning setup with NP biopellets


and Marcin's movie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKa0-...embedded#at=13

[Aquarist007]

Originally Posted by lunar

Here are some Polish tanks using NP reducing biopellets. Some of them have been running the pellets for over a year, others for several months. The younger tanks got off to a good start with the pellets. All these tanks keep the pellets in reactors, have a very good flow through the whole system, strong skimmers, alkalinity around 7-8.


Krzysztof Tryc


Andrzej N.


Grzegorz B.


Ireneusz H.


Piotr Z.


Dariusz L.


Andrzej K. - from the beginning setup with NP biopellets


Rafał O.


Krzysztof K.- from the beginning setup with NP biopellets


and Marcin's movie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKa0-...embedded#at=13

wow---great results
Is it possible for to post the lighting used for each tank

[Scej12]

Originally Posted by lunar

Here are some Polish tanks using NP reducing biopellets. Some of them have been running the pellets for over a year, others for several months. The younger tanks got off to a good start with the pellets. All these tanks keep the pellets in reactors, have a very good flow through the whole system, strong skimmers, alkalinity around 7-8.

WOW - Great Post Lunar. Thanks for sharing that. Those tanks are amazing. Do you have links as to where these tanks might be detailed in terms of equipment used... i.e. ozone or not; as well as params in addition to dkh. Even if in Polish, I'm sure google can translate easy enough... let me know if you have any links to some details.

Thanks.

Sheldon