Phosban Reactor for Carbon

[Sculpin]

Thinking about getting a phosban reactor, and looking through old posts I noticed a few people mention using a phosban reactor for storing their carbon. I currently keep my carbon in a sock, and was curious how much difference this would make. Anyone have success with this and would recommend?

Also, would it be possible to run a single pump through both systems, or would that reduce or nullify the benefit?

Thanks, Sculpin

 

[returnofsid]

It's going to be a huge difference.

In a sock, water will find it's "path of least resistance." This usually ends up causing the water to create paths, through paths or around the carbon ball, resulting in low efficiency of the carbon. In a reactor, the water is forced through the carbon, allowing the carbon to be used much more efficiently.

 

[mojoreef]

Yea I would have to agree with Mike on this one. Sounds more effecient


Mojo

 

[Krish]

Boomer just made a post on this recently and agreed that this would be a more preferred method over just using a sock. Just make sure not to set the flow too high to cause the carbon to tumble in there. This is somthing you really want to avoid.

 

[Sculpin]

And linking the phosban reactor line directly to the carbon reactor (just using one pump)? Sounds like they may need a diffrent amount of flow to be most effective.

 

[Krish]

And linking the phosban reactor line directly to the carbon reactor (just using one pump)? Sounds like they may need a diffrent amount of flow to be most effective.

No, I think they both require the same flow or should I say, can operate off of the same flow. Most important thing is the media doesnt tumble which goes for both the phosban media and carbon so the same flow would work for both. When the media tumbles a lot, the grains bump into each other which can turn it into powder like.

 

[MrGone]

check out the bulk reef supply dual reactor, I have a phosban 150 and 550 and two of the BRS duals and the BRS reactor is my favorite, quite a bargain, very complete and easy to setup. Phosban reactors are better for hanging on the side of tanks/sumps though.

Technically GFO has a tendency to need to be run run at a lower rate, as Krish and others said you really don't want it to tumble. I run the two BRS reactors (4 chambers) off one maxijet 900, the first two are full of GFO and the last two are carbon. I have the included ball valve on there but I run it wide open.

I have in the past but wouldn't recommend stacking GFO and carbon in the same reactor, its just a pain to clean/change and keep them separate. I read the study where they show the effective life of carbon is really about 3-4 days and typically exhausted after a week. GFO typically lasts months. I change out the GFO when phosphates start creeping up (normally it lasts around 4-6 months) and the carbon I change one canister out every two weeks or so. I leave it on the system longer than it says is useful but I don't rely on the carbon for filtration and use it more as a supplemental thing.

Prior to using reactors I would lay bags across a bubble trap in a sump to try and maximize the water passing through it. On my nano I would leave a bag in a HOB power filter.