OK, I've been using an upturned bell in my 55gallon as my diffuser for quite
some time, with 2 2L bottles of yeast solution. Well, this method works good
and my plants are doing good, but I can't break the 15ppm mark. My goal is
25-30, so I'm going to try something new, and today I went out and bought an
aquaclear 201 powerhead. I also got some new, sturdier 2L rubbermaid bottles
that will fit behind my tank, where pop bottles wouldn't. Anyways, I don't
know what the best way to tackle the solution is. Should I:
a) Put the CO2 output into the airline input of the powerhead
b) Have the CO2 bubble into the water intake of the powerhead
c) http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua/diy_reactor.htm

That reactor looks good, but if one of the simpler methods will work, of
course I'll go that route. So, what are other people's experiences? Also, my
201 has a sticker on it that says "do not submerge" but I think that it's
actually submersible, and just not CSA approved for it. I have a heater
like this. Can someone verify that it is submersible? I don't have the
manual for it.

__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

Hey, check out what I did. I kinda started out like you with what to do. I
have some pictures and an interesting how-to you could read. You'll get a
kick out of it, I'm sure.

http://www.leetsauce.net/~liquid/DIY-CO2/

jesse

"redled" wrote in message
...
OK, I've been using an upturned bell in my 55gallon as my diffuser for
quite
some time, with 2 2L bottles of yeast solution. Well, this method works
good
and my plants are doing good, but I can't break the 15ppm mark. My goal
is
25-30, so I'm going to try something new, and today I went out and bought
an
aquaclear 201 powerhead. I also got some new, sturdier 2L rubbermaid
bottles
that will fit behind my tank, where pop bottles wouldn't. Anyways, I
don't
know what the best way to tackle the solution is. Should I:
a) Put the CO2 output into the airline input of the powerhead
b) Have the CO2 bubble into the water intake of the powerhead
c) http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua/diy_reactor.htm

That reactor looks good, but if one of the simpler methods will work, of
course I'll go that route. So, what are other people's experiences?
Also, my
201 has a sticker on it that says "do not submerge" but I think that it's
actually submersible, and just not CSA approved for it. I have a heater
like this. Can someone verify that it is submersible? I don't have the
manual for it.

__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

Well - a powerhead thats not submergable would be pretty useless - however
my "submergible" powerhead also has this sticker. I submerged it without a
problem.
On the route I would take .. I find that putting the tubing into the water
intake side of the powerhead results in a lot finer bubbles - and a better
PPM count - if I'm not carefull I can easily achieve 50 PPM in my 90 gallon
with 2 2L bottles using this method.


"redled" wrote in message
...
OK, I've been using an upturned bell in my 55gallon as my diffuser for
quite
some time, with 2 2L bottles of yeast solution. Well, this method works
good
and my plants are doing good, but I can't break the 15ppm mark. My goal
is
25-30, so I'm going to try something new, and today I went out and bought
an
aquaclear 201 powerhead. I also got some new, sturdier 2L rubbermaid
bottles
that will fit behind my tank, where pop bottles wouldn't. Anyways, I
don't
know what the best way to tackle the solution is. Should I:
a) Put the CO2 output into the airline input of the powerhead
b) Have the CO2 bubble into the water intake of the powerhead
c) http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua/diy_reactor.htm

That reactor looks good, but if one of the simpler methods will work, of
course I'll go that route. So, what are other people's experiences?
Also, my
201 has a sticker on it that says "do not submerge" but I think that it's
actually submersible, and just not CSA approved for it. I have a heater
like this. Can someone verify that it is submersible? I don't have the
manual for it.

__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

In article , "Mentaloid" wrote:
Well - a powerhead thats not submergable would be pretty useless - however
my "submergible" powerhead also has this sticker. I submerged it without a
problem.
On the route I would take .. I find that putting the tubing into the water
intake side of the powerhead results in a lot finer bubbles - and a better
PPM count - if I'm not carefull I can easily achieve 50 PPM in my 90 gallon
with 2 2L bottles using this method.

Yeah, it is pretty useless. If I go by what the sticker says, I would have
about 1/4" to work with (1/4" between the min water line for the powerhead
output to be below water and the max line stated on the sticker). Anyways, in
Canada, I understand that completely submersible (submergable?) devices are
much harder to get CSA approval, so many companies just put a max water line
on thier products so they don't have difficulty selling them.

__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

When I first built my reactor, I tried using an Aquaclear 301, but it wasn't
near strong enough and also required too much tubing in the tank. I now use
an extra Magnum 350 I had as the pump. This works out great. This gives my
Magnum new life. I can now run it all the time and use whatever media I
want to filter with and then the filtered water is injected with CO2. The
force of the water coming out of the filter is also slowed down some since
it goes through the reactor and doesn't create any additional current in the
tank.

Here are pictures of my reactor, based in whole off of several designs I saw
on the net.

http://www.leetsauce.net/~liquid/DIY-CO2/reactor/

Before I built this reactor, I was using the venturi port on a Aquaclear
201. That seemed to work ok, but I ended up with a bunch of tiny CO2
bubbles all in the tank and a bunch of them collected on the surface and
just rode the current. With the reactor, there are no more bubbles in the
tank and my CO2 levels have risen to where they should be, as well as my PH
falling from 7.5 to 7.0 over the course of about a week.

jesse

The 301 wasn't enough? I was thinking that the 201 I just got might now be
enough. Oh well, I'll give it a try without a reactor first.

In article W_qT9.499516$pN3.55158@sccrnsc03, "SlimFlem"
wrote:
When I first built my reactor, I tried using an Aquaclear 301, but it wasn't
near strong enough and also required too much tubing in the tank. I now use
an extra Magnum 350 I had as the pump. This works out great. This gives my
Magnum new life. I can now run it all the time and use whatever media I
want to filter with and then the filtered water is injected with CO2. The
force of the water coming out of the filter is also slowed down some since
it goes through the reactor and doesn't create any additional current in the
tank.

Here are pictures of my reactor, based in whole off of several designs I saw
on the net.

http://www.leetsauce.net/~liquid/DIY-CO2/reactor/

Before I built this reactor, I was using the venturi port on a Aquaclear
201. That seemed to work ok, but I ended up with a bunch of tiny CO2
bubbles all in the tank and a bunch of them collected on the surface and
just rode the current. With the reactor, there are no more bubbles in the
tank and my CO2 levels have risen to where they should be, as well as my PH
falling from 7.5 to 7.0 over the course of about a week.

jesse



__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

I have found the gravel vac based reactor is working great.

The reason I say the 301 wasn't strong enough is because the force of water
it could produce through the large gravel vac tube and through the sponge
cap did not "tumble" the CO2 bubbles fast enough and burst them. What ended
up happening was the CO2 bubbles start collecting on the inside top part of
the sponge and just sitting there. When I hooked up the Magnum, these
problems went away. Also, the link you pointed to uses a powehead that
pushes WAY more gph than the 301 does.

jesse

"redled" wrote in message
.. .
The 301 wasn't enough? I was thinking that the 201 I just got might now
be
enough. Oh well, I'll give it a try without a reactor first.

In article W_qT9.499516$pN3.55158@sccrnsc03, "SlimFlem"

wrote:
When I first built my reactor, I tried using an Aquaclear 301, but it
wasn't
near strong enough and also required too much tubing in the tank. I now
use
an extra Magnum 350 I had as the pump. This works out great. This gives
my
Magnum new life. I can now run it all the time and use whatever media I
want to filter with and then the filtered water is injected with CO2.
The
force of the water coming out of the filter is also slowed down some
since
it goes through the reactor and doesn't create any additional current in
the
tank.

Here are pictures of my reactor, based in whole off of several designs I
saw
on the net.

http://www.leetsauce.net/~liquid/DIY-CO2/reactor/

Before I built this reactor, I was using the venturi port on a Aquaclear
201. That seemed to work ok, but I ended up with a bunch of tiny CO2
bubbles all in the tank and a bunch of them collected on the surface and
just rode the current. With the reactor, there are no more bubbles in
the
tank and my CO2 levels have risen to where they should be, as well as my
PH
falling from 7.5 to 7.0 over the course of about a week.

jesse



__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

I used the small stones that I've collected on the ocean beach and put it in
the gravel based reactor with 301 powerhead. I didn't use any spounge. I
observe complete dissolving of co2 with the bubble rate of 3 bubbles per
second.
This set up works nicely for me. I don't think that those expansive reactors
would do much better than mine. Perhaps if I put some bioballs instead the
stones, it will work a little better since there would be some more
turbulence.

Anton.

"SlimFlem" wrote in message
news:2eAT9.503764$pN3.55674@sccrnsc03...
I have found the gravel vac based reactor is working great.

The reason I say the 301 wasn't strong enough is because the force of
water
it could produce through the large gravel vac tube and through the sponge
cap did not "tumble" the CO2 bubbles fast enough and burst them. What
ended
up happening was the CO2 bubbles start collecting on the inside top part
of
the sponge and just sitting there. When I hooked up the Magnum, these
problems went away. Also, the link you pointed to uses a powehead that
pushes WAY more gph than the 301 does.

jesse

"redled" wrote in message
.. .
The 301 wasn't enough? I was thinking that the 201 I just got might now
be
enough. Oh well, I'll give it a try without a reactor first.

In article W_qT9.499516$pN3.55158@sccrnsc03, "SlimFlem"

wrote:
When I first built my reactor, I tried using an Aquaclear 301, but it
wasn't
near strong enough and also required too much tubing in the tank. I
now
use
an extra Magnum 350 I had as the pump. This works out great. This
gives
my
Magnum new life. I can now run it all the time and use whatever media
I
want to filter with and then the filtered water is injected with CO2.
The
force of the water coming out of the filter is also slowed down some
since
it goes through the reactor and doesn't create any additional current
in
the
tank.

Here are pictures of my reactor, based in whole off of several designs
I
saw
on the net.

http://www.leetsauce.net/~liquid/DIY-CO2/reactor/

Before I built this reactor, I was using the venturi port on a
Aquaclear
201. That seemed to work ok, but I ended up with a bunch of tiny CO2
bubbles all in the tank and a bunch of them collected on the surface
and
just rode the current. With the reactor, there are no more bubbles in
the
tank and my CO2 levels have risen to where they should be, as well as
my
PH
falling from 7.5 to 7.0 over the course of about a week.

jesse



__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

Perhaps if I put some bioballs instead the
stones, it will work a little better since there would be some more
turbulence.

That's just my point, the 301 didn't provide enough turbulence. I have an
empty gravel vac, suction cup holding the hose in teh middle of the vac
tube, a 2" sponge piece in the bottom and the Magnum providing water flow.
The turbulence is so good I don't need anything in the tube to create more.

In article 5IHT9.12963$%n.3066@sccrnsc02, "SlimFlem" wrote:
Perhaps if I put some bioballs instead the
stones, it will work a little better since there would be some more
turbulence.

That's just my point, the 301 didn't provide enough turbulence. I have an
empty gravel vac, suction cup holding the hose in teh middle of the vac
tube, a 2" sponge piece in the bottom and the Magnum providing water flow.
The turbulence is so good I don't need anything in the tube to create more.



Since I'm getting ALMOST enough CO2 diffused with just the cup method, I'm
hoping I can get by with the 201. I got it cheap because the package was
opened, and it came with 301 instructions. I will give it a try. I'm going
to try using biomax rings in a tube. Might as well get some filtering action
while we're at it right? It would be good to have a backup should my whisper
power filter fail. Sometimes I'm not home for a weekend or something.

__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

One other thing I noticed. When I had media in the tube with the 301, many
air bubbles formed around/in/on the media and never dissolved. I tried
rock, ceramic tubes, and plastic balls...same on all of them. Maybe you
will have better luck.

"redled" wrote in message
. ..
In article 5IHT9.12963$%n.3066@sccrnsc02, "SlimFlem"
wrote:
Perhaps if I put some bioballs instead the
stones, it will work a little better since there would be some more
turbulence.

That's just my point, the 301 didn't provide enough turbulence. I have
an
empty gravel vac, suction cup holding the hose in teh middle of the vac
tube, a 2" sponge piece in the bottom and the Magnum providing water
flow.
The turbulence is so good I don't need anything in the tube to create
more.



Since I'm getting ALMOST enough CO2 diffused with just the cup method, I'm
hoping I can get by with the 201. I got it cheap because the package was
opened, and it came with 301 instructions. I will give it a try. I'm
going
to try using biomax rings in a tube. Might as well get some filtering
action
while we're at it right? It would be good to have a backup should my
whisper
power filter fail. Sometimes I'm not home for a weekend or something.

__
"Insert witty comment here."
-John

"SlimFlem" wrote in message
news:QAIT9.3459$Dn.305@sccrnsc03...
One other thing I noticed. When I had media in the tube with the 301,
many
air bubbles formed around/in/on the media and never dissolved. I tried
rock, ceramic tubes, and plastic balls...same on all of them. Maybe you
will have better luck.

I have the same effect in my reactor. This happens because there might be
collecting some other gas (other than CO2) that doesn't so readily dissolve
in water as CO2. My guess is the effect is more drammatic if you use yeast
produced CO2 since there might be some side metabolic products.

This problem no longer exists with the Magnum running it.


I have the same effect in my reactor. This happens because there might be
collecting some other gas (other than CO2) that doesn't so readily
dissolve
in water as CO2. My guess is the effect is more drammatic if you use yeast
produced CO2 since there might be some side metabolic products.