Have to follow this build! Great job so far.
Gilroy 425g Build Thread (All Apex, all the time)
- Monster Build
- Thread starter Terence
- Start date
- Tagged users None
OP
OP
A little update. A week or so ago I noticed that the second "chamber" of my calcium reactor already had 4" of grey sludge in it and needed to be cleaned out.
I have a Deltec fluidized calcium reactor and both Brad Syphus (who runs one) and I have noticed that the media is much darker now and also that it was putting a fines into the sump with the effluent. To test how bad this might be I connected a bottom up NextReef reactor in line to the effluent so that it could trap it. Well it turned out to be WAY more material than I had expected.
I am curious to hear from anyone who might know what this byproduct actually is. It is the consistency of clay.
I think I may just convert this over to a standard calcium reactor and use TLF ReBorn in it after my current media supply runs out.
Here are some pics.
I have a Deltec fluidized calcium reactor and both Brad Syphus (who runs one) and I have noticed that the media is much darker now and also that it was putting a fines into the sump with the effluent. To test how bad this might be I connected a bottom up NextReef reactor in line to the effluent so that it could trap it. Well it turned out to be WAY more material than I had expected.
I am curious to hear from anyone who might know what this byproduct actually is. It is the consistency of clay.
I think I may just convert this over to a standard calcium reactor and use TLF ReBorn in it after my current media supply runs out.
Here are some pics.
Looks like the slurry I use to see when a worked at a tile factory. The calcium pieces is breaking down to a fine power. That would mess up and impeller pump for sure. They use to run a large fire hose pump to pump that type of slurry as a and impeller motor would lock up.
OP
OP
But why would it not continue to break down into fluidized calcium while in the low pH? And, why would it be gray?
I think this is some other byproduct.
I think this is some other byproduct.
ReeferMadness80G
Valuable Member
Definitely buying one of these!
OP
OP
Home from seven-day vacation. Tank did great. Had a little help from friends Paul and Russ to change the filter sock and check a potential issue. Thanks guys!
Did the Fab-5 tests today. Results look good.
DKh (Hanna) - 10.1 and 10.0
DKh (AMI) - 9.58
Ca (Red Sea) - 440
Mg (Red Sea) - 1400
Phosphate (Hanna 713) - 0.0
Nitrate (NYOS) - 8 (somewhere between 5-10)
Hanna is notoriously biased high at higher DKh so that's the deviation from the AMI.
Noticeable growth on various frags for sure.
Amazing that I was able to take down the algae on 32 square feet of glass in just five minutes with the Flipper. Amazing scraper.
Did the Fab-5 tests today. Results look good.
DKh (Hanna) - 10.1 and 10.0
DKh (AMI) - 9.58
Ca (Red Sea) - 440
Mg (Red Sea) - 1400
Phosphate (Hanna 713) - 0.0
Nitrate (NYOS) - 8 (somewhere between 5-10)
Hanna is notoriously biased high at higher DKh so that's the deviation from the AMI.
Noticeable growth on various frags for sure.
Amazing that I was able to take down the algae on 32 square feet of glass in just five minutes with the Flipper. Amazing scraper.
Chris155hp
Well-Known Member
regarding the numbers of the AMI, what accuracy/precision do you think it is capable of?
mwilk19
Well-Known Member
I'm completely flummoxed about ALK. I use a Hanna checker and it's always lower than what the Salifert tests show.
OP
OP
Can't comment at this time other than it will be better than you can do with standard hobbyist test kits by the average hobbyist.
OP
OP
This is the problem with color change tests and the human eye. For me, especially with my slight color blindness, there is about .75dkh of range at least for the entire color "change". So, at what point someone calls it has a huge influence on the number. However, if they do it the same every time, then their ongoing precision might be pretty good. For me I could never be consistent so I use the Hanna. Much easier too.
Damion
Community Member
It's obviously keeping the expected parameters up to par, but that seems like a whole lot of "extra" stuff there, dare I say contaminates.A little update. A week or so ago I noticed that the second "chamber" of my calcium reactor already had 4" of grey sludge in it and needed to be cleaned out.
I have a Deltec fluidized calcium reactor and both Brad Syphus (who runs one) and I have noticed that the media is much darker now and also that it was putting a fines into the sump with the effluent. To test how bad this might be I connected a bottom up NextReef reactor in line to the effluent so that it could trap it. Well it turned out to be WAY more material than I had expected.
I am curious to hear from anyone who might know what this byproduct actually is. It is the consistency of clay.
I think I may just convert this over to a standard calcium reactor and use TLF ReBorn in it after my current media supply runs out.
Here are some pics.
mwilk19
Well-Known Member
I would certainly agree. I'm looking for trends as much as anything. Especially with alkalinity. A spike can destroy SPS in no time.
OP
OP
That is exactly how I feel. Once this media is done, I am going to use TLF Reborn I think. It melts at a higher pH so less CO2 use.
OP
OP
A few quick pics tonight:
OP
OP
Still not bringing down the internal ORP much (but beginning to trend down) so it doesn't have much of a colony working in it yet. I expect it will begin working in two or three weeks.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2016
- Messages
- 5,348
- Reaction score
- 6,710
How are the reefbrite metal halides treating ya?
Stylo328
Active Member
I'm considering swapping my lighting over to those reefbrite metal halide's and I'm interested in knowing how happy you are as well.
OP
OP
They are great fixtures for sure. High quality, compact, and nice ballasts.
My only disappointment is in the dimmability. I was hoping for at least 50% but they do about 30%
I have to say though that the Philips CoralCare are amazing. I am running them on the SPS side of the tank at about 60% peak and they light the tank well and the corals are growing nicely.
Ultimately it will be hard for me not to make the entire tank lit with these as they have so much going for them and at 60% they are pulling about 120w at peak. That would mean four would be less than 500w at peak and an average of about 280 across the light cycle. Even though I am not recapturing that energy with needed heat, it is so low that the net would be a savings - and no bulbs to change. The Philips light is the only true metal-halide imitator I have yet to see from LED.
Similar threads
