What is the best way to feed a Calcium Reactor

[Anonymous]

I added another tee of my main return line to feed my reactor. I reduced the feed down to 1/4" line and added a John Guest needle valve to reduce the flow down to a trickle. I also put a little air control type valve in the effluent return for further control.

This is not working out well for me. I lose prime alot and the flow rate seems to vary alot. I can't get it dialed in.

Any ideas?

Louey

 

[ChrisRD]

Maybe you don't have enough positive pressure on the feed?

I use a Maxi-Jet 900 to feed mine with a needle valve on the outlet for flow control. I thought this might be a little overkill at first, but I haven't had any problems with this setup since I got it up and running...

How far from your return pump is the Ca reactor? Is it a lot higher than the return pump?

 

[Anonymous]

How far from your return pump is the Ca reactor? Is it a lot higher than the return pump?

It is about two feet from the pump. The reactor is over two feet tall and the feed enters the top of it. The pump is on the floor, so there is a couple feet of head.

Can maxijets really handle the backpressure created by the needle valve?

Louey

 

[GSchiemer]

I added another tee of my main return line to feed my reactor. I reduced the feed down to 1/4" line and added a John Guest needle valve to reduce the flow down to a trickle. I also put a little air control type valve in the effluent return for further control.

This is not working out well for me. I lose prime alot and the flow rate seems to vary alot. I can't get it dialed in.

Any ideas?

Louey

Don't control or reduce the flow on the input side. That's the problem. Control the flow with a needle valve on the output side only.

Greg

 

[Robin Goodfellow]

hi.
If you control the output, make sure you use a needle valve. Regular ball valve will be damage quickly when the aragonite particles get caught around the ball, and make it very difficult to turn.

 

[ChrisRD]

Don't control or reduce the flow on the input side. That's the problem. Control the flow with a needle valve on the output side only.

Louey, just to clarify - I have mine setup as Greg is suggesting above. My needle valve is on the output of the reactor. There is nothing restricting the input side between the MJ and the reactor. This seems to work well.

HTH

 

[Anonymous]

Fergy suggested setting it up with a valve on each side. The feed side was refered to as "course control" and the effluent side was refered to as "fine control". Since this is my first reactor I really don't have any experience in this type flow. We are only trying to get a trickle to flow through the reactor since my current tank is only 75G.

I think I'll move the needle valve to the effluent side and give it a try as you all have suggested.

Thanks!

Louey

 

[Modo]

Louey,
I was thinking about this as well. I haven't got my reactor totally together yet though.

Maybe try opening up the needle valve on the input side as wide open as you can and using the output adjustment to dial it in. Then slowly start throttling back the input. Maybe you have just restricted the input too much. Kinda in reverse as to Fergy's suggestion. Using the ouput as course and the needle on the input as fine adjustment.

I would do this before tearing into your setup. I saw your post over on the Class Boards so I'm sure Fergy will answer somtime this weekend.

Have a good one and let us know how it's going.

 

[Anonymous]

I use an Aqualift pump to feed mine, it works quite well, no need to deal with the reductions, and it was only $12, cheaper than most MaxiJets. On the output side, I use a pinch valve. They are a little more expensive than needle valves, but they are on the outside fo the tubing they can't clog.

 

[Anonymous]

Modo said:

Maybe try opening up the needle valve on the input side as wide open as you can and using the output adjustment to dial it in. Then slowly start throttling back the input. Maybe you have just restricted the input too much.

That wont work Modo. I tried that and the pressure inside the reactor to more than the gasket can handle. You get a leaky gasket.

I moved the needle valve to the effleunt side and it works fine. I see no reason to have a valve on each side. That just created problems for me. I would be interested to hear Fergy's reasoning for not doing it with one valve on the effluent side.

Louey

 

[golfish]

Louey,
I've helped setup a few reactors and its always the same problems. If you don't use a dedicated pump to STUFF the reactor the effluent drip rate just wont stay consistent. The MJ 1200's seem to fit thebill here. This may or may not help but its worth a try. The pumps only about 20.00 and uses about 14 watts. Maybe you can ask a local fellow reefer to loan you one just to see if it corrects the problem.

 

[fergy]

Well, here's the reason I keep a valve on the input side:

I use several large pumps feeding a central manifold, which then has several returns to the tank as well as other devices, including the reactor. The problem occured when shutting off the returns to the tank, inadvertently trying to run several Iwaki pumps' worth of pressure directly into the reactor. Since then, I always put a valve on the input side as well, to reduce my pressure and flow a bit.

When you're running alot of flow through a reactor, using a valve only on the outlet can be problematic because it can clog. When that happens, now you've got no sort of safety outlet for the pressure coming into the reactor. I've known people with broken reactors for this reason. And these weren't ones I've built, so no pointing to that reason ;-) Something else to consider is a failed CO2 regulator. In this scenario, you'll pressurize more severely if you are restricting that outlet. I watched a person run their reactor up to a couple hundred PSI before it exploded once. I would consider this, especially in a LFS situation where people/kids tend to mess with things.

I still stand by the use of the main return pump T, a coarse valve on that side, and a fine valve on the output. You'll want that coarse valve on the input side if you ever want to remove the reactor from the system for cleaning, as well.

I've honestly never used a dedicated feed pump for a reactor. Seems like overkill, especially for those people who run a very low throughput rate.

BRIAN
_________________
simmering Forum

 

[Robf]

Louey,
I've helped setup a few reactors and its always the same problems. If you don't use a dedicated pump to STUFF the reactor the effluent drip rate just wont stay consistent. The MJ 1200's seem to fit thebill here. This may or may not help but its worth a try. The pumps only about 20.00 and uses about 14 watts. Maybe you can ask a local fellow reefer to loan you one just to see if it corrects the problem.

That was my experience. I had a very erratic drip rate when I tee'd off my return line. A dedicated maxi-jet has helped immensely. I used to check my effluent drip twice a day. As you can imagine, it wsa very difficult to dial in the reactor with the drip always changing.

After adding the maxijet 900 to mine, it's been stable for months.

It your gasket can't handle a full input, then perhaps you should go after that problem. Mine leaked like a sieve. After I cleaned out the groove and reseated the o-ring, I tightened it down very hard (hand-tight only). It has not leaked since.

Although, I'm now apprehensive to top up my media for that very reason

jm$.02

R.

 

[GSchiemer]

I still stand by the use of the main return pump T, a coarse valve on that side, and a fine valve on the output. You'll want that coarse valve on the input side if you ever want to remove the reactor from the system for cleaning, as well. BRIAN

IME, this is the best arrangement for feeding a Ca reactor. I rarely have to fiddle with my settings.

Greg

 

[Anonymous]

GSchiemer said:

Don't control or reduce the flow on the input side. That's the problem. Control the flow with a needle valve on the output side only.

and

fergy wrote:
I still stand by the use of the main return pump T, a coarse valve on that side, and a fine valve on the output. You'll want that coarse valve on the input side if you ever want to remove the reactor from the system for cleaning, as well. BRIAN


IME, this is the best arrangement for feeding a Ca reactor. I rarely have to fiddle with my settings.

So, you change your mind and decided that you should have a valve on both sides?

Louey

 

[GSchiemer]

GSchiemer said:

Don't control or reduce the flow on the input side. That's the problem. Control the flow with a needle valve on the output side only.

and

fergy wrote:
I still stand by the use of the main return pump T, a coarse valve on that side, and a fine valve on the output. You'll want that coarse valve on the input side if you ever want to remove the reactor from the system for cleaning, as well. BRIAN


IME, this is the best arrangement for feeding a Ca reactor. I rarely have to fiddle with my settings.

So, you change your mind and decided that you should have a valve on both sides?

Louey

Nope, I haven't changed my mind at all. I never said don't place a valve on the input side. I said don't use it to control the effluent rate. My quotes aren't contradictory.

I use a valve on both sides but control the effluent with a needle valve on the output side only. If you're going to use a tee from the main pump to feed the reactor, then you need a valve on the input side in order to shut off the flow when servicing the reactor. If you're going to feed the reactor with a powerhead, then you don't need a valve on the input side at all.

Greg

 

[Anonymous]

Oh I see. So the valve you have on the input side is left wide open? And it's there strictly as a shut-off for servicing?

Louey

 

[GSchiemer]

Oh I see. So the valve you have on the input side is left wide open? And it's there strictly as a shut-off for servicing?

Louey

That's correct. I have a tee from my main pump that I've bushed down to accept a 1/4" valve. I feed the reactor from the output of this valve. The valve is normally wide open and I control the effluent with a plastic Knop needle valve located at the end of the effluent line in my sump. I close the input valve completely when I need to remove the reactor to replace the media. If I had the time, I'd take a picture. It's a lot easier to see than to explain.

Greg

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks Greg. A picture isn't needed. I understand what you saying.

I wonder if having that valve wide open could put too much PSI inside your reactor thus causing it to leak or explode?

Louey

 

[GSchiemer]

Thanks Greg. A picture isn't needed. I understand what you saying.

I wonder if having that valve wide open could put too much PSI inside your reactor thus causing it to leak or explode?

Louey

It could cause leaks, depending upon the reactor, the pump and the rest of the plumbing setup. If you're feeding the reactor with a tee fitting from any pump that's 1/2 HP or larger, then it's prudent to reduce the input pressure somewhat.

Greg