Additive Block in Sump

[tangir1]

FWIW, the way I read it is the concentration in the block.... :?

 

[shr00m]

i dont know how you would accurately release more by increasing flow, what if you increase it too much this product is just too unpredictable imo

 

[Anonymous]

And what do you measure to determine the speed of the dissolution of the block?

 

[Anonymous]

i looked for the sheet of paper that comes with the blocks.. i was saving it for future reference but it seems to be missing. i don't recall the meaning of those numbers but i believe them to be the parameters that the blocks will maintain.

i did look at some other message boards and searched the product but didn't find a lot of threads on it.
the geneeral consensus seems to be "WTF are those?" but there are some responses claiming that the blocks will plummet ph values and i read a remark claiming that the blocks killed xenia and yet another guy blames a tank crash on them. other than that, people seem to be steering clear of the product based on cryptic responses from people saying things like "i was gonna use them until i did a search on them".
kinda funny that so few have actually used the product making it difficult to find an experienced opinion.

what i can say, after refreshing my mind reading my own posts somewhere else, i now remember that buffering became a constant chore with these.

so to respond to Righty,
would you suppose that if the blocks were kept in a high enough flow and were adding calcium (dissolving) quicker than it was being used, couldn't the constantly rising calcium saturation be kept in check by adding buffer?

boy, i just can't seem to clean that paragraph up.

 

[tangir1]

This is going to be an expensive experiment, but can some kind soul get a little block, put it in some seawater, and beat the he11 out of it to get it to dissolve as much as possible, and find the pH, Ca, and other parameters before and after the block was added?

I suggest the people who swear by the block (and those who feel that there is some merit to the product) do this for their own sake, and post the results.

We just stay quiet and learn from you folks when the number are posted.

>... claiming that the blocks killed xenia and yet another guy blames a tank crash on them. ..

I am very skeptical about these "observations"... but let's wait and see.

 

[Anonymous]

i looked for the sheet of paper that comes with the blocks.. i was saving it for future reference but it seems to be missing. i don't recall the meaning of those numbers but i believe them to be the parameters that the blocks will maintain.

i did look at some other message boards and searched the product but didn't find a lot of threads on it.
the geneeral consensus seems to be "WTF are those?" but there are some responses claiming that the blocks will plummet ph values and i read a remark claiming that the blocks killed xenia and yet another guy blames a tank crash on them. other than that, people seem to be steering clear of the product based on cryptic responses from people saying things like "i was gonna use them until i did a search on them".
kinda funny that so few have actually used the product making it difficult to find an experienced opinion.

what i can say, after refreshing my mind reading my own posts somewhere else, i now remember that buffering became a constant chore with these.

so to respond to Righty,
would you suppose that if the blocks were kept in a high enough flow and were adding calcium (dissolving) quicker than it was being used, couldn't the constantly rising calcium saturation be kept in check by adding buffer?
boy, i just can't seem to clean that paragraph up.

you don't even have to consider flow-there's something far more basic involved, for consideration-flow only contributes most to aiding the initial physical breakup of the 'rock'-the rate at which the rocks consituents can dissolve into solution is dependent on the water chemistry more than the flow in a sump

the chemistry of the water, especially the parameters that affect dissolution of all these minerals, like alk, pH, etc.,changes all the time, and sometimes quickly-just this alone is enough to change the dosage speed-and i doubt that the 'feedback loop' for the dissolution responds quickly enough to keep things stable

my bet is your system will continually oscillate between levels that are too low, to levels that are too high, with the intermediate passage through the middle'

with 2 part additives, kalk drips, or Ca reactors, you know exactly the amount you're dosing, and you control it completely (barring equipment failure, like a pump, or CO2 bottle, goin south)-with the block, you really have no control at all-that is what makes that method more dangerous, and even more so to those less experienced in 'damage control' measures :wink:

whether or not it contains what it should is less of an issue, imo, considering the above

 

[Anonymous]

This is going to be an expensive experiment, but can some kind soul get a little block, put it in some seawater, and beat the he11 out of it to get it to dissolve as much as possible, and find the pH, Ca, and other parameters before and after the block was added?

I suggest the people who swear by the block (and those who feel that there is some merit to the product) do this for their own sake, and post the results.

We just stay quiet and learn from you folks when the number are posted.

>... claiming that the blocks killed xenia and yet another guy blames a tank crash on them. ..

I am very skeptical about these "observations"... but let's wait and see.

well, those who swear by it could also test their own water to back up their claims, too :wink:

seems to me that the typical person who would advocate this stuff isn't likely to be one who's pro testing, though :wink:

 

[tangir1]

>... well, those who swear by it could also test their own water to back up their claims, too...

The problem with using the parameters of the tank water (instead of the "experiment in a cup" above) is that they may also hack the tank with a gazillion other additives, like Am, Tc, U, Jq, Qo, and Dw, for example.

 

[Anonymous]

>... well, those who swear by it could also test their own water to back up their claims, too...

The problem with using the parameters of the tank water (instead of the "experiment in a cup" above) is that they may also hack the tank with a gazillion other additives, like Am, Tc, U, Jq, Qo, and Dw, for example.

those who use liquid additives have that very same situation-i'll guarantee that no 2 persons salt mix samples are identical, either :wink:

granted it wouldn't be a very scientific backup, but i think it would do more to bolster the claim all the more objectively, and i'm not sure that so exact a method would be necessary, for a 'preliminary evaluation'


anyone remember the 'anti-ich' pouch that was marketed in the late '70's?

it contained a penny in an opaque seive structured pouch :wink:

fama exposed it in one of there 'buyer beware' type product review columns


testing may also find an 'unexpected' property the block causes that has a positive effect, as well, i don't know

my point is the people who use it don't know, either :wink:

 

[tangir1]

I thought copper is so expensive nowadays that penny is not made of copper anymore.... :?

Anyway, I will not comment on this thread until someone do the "experiment" above...

 

[Anonymous]

This is going to be an expensive experiment, but can some kind soul get a little block, put it in some seawater, and beat the he11 out of it to get it to dissolve as much as possible, and find the pH, Ca, and other parameters before and after the block was added?

it would be a very cheap experiment but a very labor intensive one.

i don't know that i could shake a cup long enough to dissolve one of those and i don't know that it could be done given the block is not designed to, nor is it likely to, dissolve in a saturated solution.

 

[Anonymous]

i looked for the sheet of paper that comes with the blocks.. i was saving it for future reference but it seems to be missing. i don't recall the meaning of those numbers but i believe them to be the parameters that the blocks will maintain.

i did look at some other message boards and searched the product but didn't find a lot of threads on it.
the geneeral consensus seems to be "WTF are those?" but there are some responses claiming that the blocks will plummet ph values and i read a remark claiming that the blocks killed xenia and yet another guy blames a tank crash on them. other than that, people seem to be steering clear of the product based on cryptic responses from people saying things like "i was gonna use them until i did a search on them".
kinda funny that so few have actually used the product making it difficult to find an experienced opinion.

what i can say, after refreshing my mind reading my own posts somewhere else, i now remember that buffering became a constant chore with these.

so to respond to Righty,
would you suppose that if the blocks were kept in a high enough flow and were adding calcium (dissolving) quicker than it was being used, couldn't the constantly rising calcium saturation be kept in check by adding buffer?
boy, i just can't seem to clean that paragraph up.

you don't even have to consider flow-there's something far more basic involved, for consideration-flow only contributes most to aiding the initial physical breakup of the 'rock'-the rate at which the rocks consituents can dissolve into solution is dependent on the water chemistry more than the flow in a sump

the chemistry of the water, especially the parameters that affect dissolution of all these minerals, like alk, pH, etc.,changes all the time, and sometimes quickly-just this alone is enough to change the dosage speed-and i doubt that the 'feedback loop' for the dissolution responds quickly enough to keep things stable

my bet is your system will continually oscillate between levels that are too low, to levels that are too high, with the intermediate passage through the middle'

with 2 part additives, kalk drips, or Ca reactors, you know exactly the amount you're dosing, and you control it completely (barring equipment failure, like a pump, or CO2 bottle, goin south)-with the block, you really have no control at all-that is what makes that method more dangerous, and even more so to those less experienced in 'damage control' measures :wink:

whether or not it contains what it should is less of an issue, imo, considering the above

believe it or not, that was my inkling on the dissolution process but i didn't want to talk out of my butt as i have only a vague idea of the chemistry involved here. i was pretty sure there would be validity in my original statement but i will follow your lead in this area.
my worry is the added trace elements that don't require a deficiency to be released.
is this an issue?

 

[Anonymous]

believe it or not, that was my inkling on the dissolution process but i didn't want to talk out of my butt as i have only a vague idea of the chemistry involved here. i was pretty sure there would be validity in my original statement but i will follow your lead in this area.
my worry is the added trace elements that don't require a deficiency to be released.
is this an issue?

Every one of those elements/ions has a unique dissociation/equilibrium constant at any given temperature.

 

[Anonymous]

believe it or not, that was my inkling on the dissolution process but i didn't want to talk out of my butt as i have only a vague idea of the chemistry involved here. i was pretty sure there would be validity in my original statement but i will follow your lead in this area.
my worry is the added trace elements that don't require a deficiency to be released.
is this an issue?

Every one of those elements/ions has a unique dissociation/equilibrium constant at any given temperature.

oh.


well, isn't that a good little tidbit of info... thanks

 

[jsbradbury]

I'm watching this thread.

 

[Anonymous]

here is a good thread on these....

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthrea ... adid=76168

 

[Anonymous]

here's a question i posted there for RHF just as food for thought:

"how low would the pH of the system drop to start dissolving the block?

i recall many manufacturers making great claims about aragonite substrate buffering one's tank, but iirc, in order to start dissolving the aragonite, one's pH would 1st have to drop to around 7.6-which would indicate some already bad mojo goin on in the system


would the pH level needed to dissolve the block's additives be lower than what is desired for in a reef tank?

if the block does than buffer the pH back up, wouldn't these swings be undesireable, regardless of how 'small' they may be?"

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz, I think the claims about aragonite substrate stem from possible lower ph lower in the sandbed.

 

[Anonymous]

I thought copper is so expensive nowadays that penny is not made of copper anymore.... :?

Anyway, I will not comment on this thread until someone do the "experiment" above...

hehe you're right

this was back in the late '70s-and the point was more to what was contained in the 'remedy'

it actually worked for some folks too, or appeared to, anyway :wink:

funny thing was how easy it was to determine what it contained, but took a magazine column to do it for folks :wink: