So it's 2010 now. Who still uses a calcium reactor and who's all on 2-part dosing?

[Myka]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

hmm... I don't know how you can disagree with what I had to do because I designed and built my reactor to be stable, but Ok

Steve

I was disagreeing with:

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

a Ca reactor is truly set and forget.

Kind of self explanitory, no? I think telling everyone that a calcium reactor is set and forget is misleading as most are not set and forget, although lots of people treat them that way, and don't check their parameters until a crash is visually imminent. Is it ok to disagree with you?

In your case, why didn't you have to throttle it up every couple weeks? Why would your demand stay the same?

[gobytron]

assuming you have a controller, a ca reactor SHOULD be set and forget aside from the odd testing.

I can see how without a controller, it might get tedious to keep things in line but I would take a controller before just about any other piece of equipment I have so to me having one is a no brainer.

I wasn't implying anything about dosing pumps other than the only reason they are so widely in use RIGHT now is that they are currently in vogue and not neccesarily a better system than a ca reactor...just different and considered progressive at this point in time.

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by Myka

Is it ok to disagree with you?

I'll think about it and let you know

Originally Posted by Myka

In your case, why didn't you have to throttle it up every couple weeks? Why would your demand stay the same?

well I account the consistancy of the bubbles to a few things, the first being a large CO2 tank. smaller ones run out faster and you pressure starts to drop a while befor you run out so you end up getting more variation. a larger tank that stays at pretty much its full volume and will give you 1.5 to 2 years worth will be a lot more constant.

the second thing which may have more of an impact than the bottle is the regulator you are using. most of the ones being used in this hobby are true garbage. the cheepest offshore thing they could find as a good regulator would cost more than the reactor. for example a new version of my regulator would be about 350 to 450.00 retail.

as for keeping up with demand in the tank, pure size matters, most places were touting reactors that held 1 jug of media for tanks up to 200 or even 300 gal tanks, with a add on stage up to 4 or 500 gal. they had small pumps, most had no recirc for trapped gas, ect.. the one I designed was big, 4 jugs of media when full, 500 gph recirc with in the unit, gas bubble evacuation, plus a built in water reserve. I used a combanation of high flow and acidic water to desolve minerals. it was big, had a 12 X 20 foot print for the box with two 6" wide towers on the top that were about 12" tall so overall high was about 18".

Steve

[lastlight]

The regulator reliability was the big reason I've never liked reactors. Which do you use? I know the aquariumplants.com is supposed to be one of the better hobby ones but I'm guessing yours is not hobby marketed.

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by lastlight

The regulator reliability was the big reason I've never liked reactors. Which do you use? I know the aquariumplants.com is supposed to be one of the better hobby ones but I'm guessing yours is not hobby marketed.

mine is a full sized one from a welding setup for shielding gas. it is rated in CuFt/min so it is an actualy flow meter not a pressure regulator.

sounds like a small differance but depending on your set up a pressure regulator (which is what is used on most CO2 reactors) will let in more or less CO2 as long as the pressure is the same, causing your bubble count to change. all it take to change this is a little change in the internal pressure of the reactor or even water evaporating out of the bubbler.

with mine it couldn't care what the pressure is as it will always let the same volume/time into the reactor so I get no changes. you can get a cheep flow meter for about 100 bucks but the deicent ones start at 200 and up.

I also made both chambers in my reactor upflow which got rid of the problems Tony was mentioning.

Steve

[Delphinus]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

I also made both chambers in my reactor upflow which got rid of the problems Tony was mentioning.

You know, I tried that too on a couple different units I had. I can't remember what the issue was but it wasn't a complete slam dunk either. Upflow does make more sense, for one you can do away with the CO2 recirc line. I wonder if it was I was losing too much CO2 into the tank and I was noticing a depressed pH. Might have been something else. I can't actually remember now.

[Delphinus]

I remember why the upflow mods failed for me - it was too hard on the pumps as it must have been just a little too restrictive on the intake side. They would get super hot, one got so hot the casing of the pump melted (warped and started leaking water all over).

I guess definitely something you want the reactor to be designed for rather than arbitrarily switching the input/output lines on the pump.

Originally Posted by Delphinus

You know, I tried that too on a couple different units I had. I can't remember what the issue was but it wasn't a complete slam dunk either. Upflow does make more sense, for one you can do away with the CO2 recirc line. I wonder if it was I was losing too much CO2 into the tank and I was noticing a depressed pH. Might have been something else. I can't actually remember now.

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by Delphinus

I remember why the upflow mods failed for me - it was too hard on the pumps as it must have been just a little too restrictive on the intake side. They would get super hot, one got so hot the casing of the pump melted (warped and started leaking water all over).

I guess definitely something you want the reactor to be designed for rather than arbitrarily switching the input/output lines on the pump.

, um dude, you had something else going on there, what kind of pumps?

Steve

[MitchM]

gobytron mentioned that dosing setups are in vogue at this point.

I actually think that controllers and dosing pumps have improved a lot in recent years, and that is the reason for their increasing popularity.

How have calcium reactors improved?

Mitch

[gobytron]

How can you improve on something that already works perfectly...

and not to say that being in vogue makes it an inferior technology, just that from my point of view this is why the lopsided usage between the two systems.

The other thing I like about my CA reactor that I forgot about until now is the fact that you can add a little extra media like zeo mag or carbon and reduce your maintenance even more...