Micro Scrubbing Bubbles.

Status
Not open for further replies.

TrPPnN

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
84
Reaction score
35
Location
Chicago, IL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
No one of the scientific articles about nano bubbles has describe such a method like yours in order to create nano-bubbles. Your last link state.



If your simple methode works - I think it should be a sensation in the academic world - so for your own sake - prove that you can create nanobubbles with help of a wodden air stone and a simple aquarium pump.

I do not doubt that bubbling in the DT help the degassing, I do not doubt that you sometimes can flocculate organic matter with the method – but all of these things can be explained by well-known principles and you do not need nano-bubbles in order to explain this. After reading a little about real nano-bubbles properties I start thinking that – maybe it is our luck that the bubble method does not create real nano-bubbles!

This part of your link is also interesting. I have not access to the original article but it looks like nano-bubbles not works well in saltwater


Link to the original article.

I'm no chemist, but it seems that nano-bubbles are not particularly stable in saltwater. The scientist tested 80 nM (NaCl) saltwater and I think that you normally calculate that sea water contain between 500 and 600 nM NaCl

Sincerely Lasse

If saltwater ions have an adverse effect on bubbles, why is the surface tension (hence bubble surface tension) stronger than that of freshwater?

Debunking this will be debunking the premise of a protein skimmer. Ahhh... that's the ticket. The saltwater that's being micro-nanobubbled is not pure but rather littered with dissolved organics and proteins and protein particulates.

Nor does the article mention at which specific gravity they were testing their observation (theoretical speculation) on. Maybe that's the key, a threshold sg and organics in the water.
 

Waterjockey

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
646
Reaction score
561
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@Lasse, I am linking further SCIENTIFIC studies being done concurrently or have been done in the recent past... I have posted up Apex pH graphs as well.

You're statements are speculation of skepticism, however, I'm ok with that.

You are familiar with the physical science behind bubbles, yes?

If you are, then you would understand that bubbles CAN dissolve into water... generating the atmospheric (low pressure) bubbles in the sump and getting the smallest size possible to start is a good basis for us...

As the very very small bubble travels through the return pipe (slightly under head pressure the return pump is pushing against) this creates an increase in dissolution of gas into the water column... meaning, the bubble starts to shrink... even to the unbelievable nano size... hence we call this the Micro-Nano Bubble method...

Starts off Micro... Shrinks down to Nano... :) at least a few of them... :)

Also if you are familiar with freshwater planted tanks, you would be able to understand the very very similar principle on how we dissolve CO2 into water.

In our application it is adding atmospheric back in and driving CO2 out.

Considering the relatively minor "head pressures" we are talking about, is there really a significant difference between putting an airstone at the bottom of the tank (tank head pressure), and at the return pump in an in-stand sump? If the velocity of the water being pumped up is faster than the natural rate of rise of the bubbles, you could possibly get longer contact times in tank vs pumped, no?

I just don't understand why you would put the airstone in front of the return pump inlet (reducing return pump flow and therefore lowering the system turnover rate), vs. putting an airstone at the bottom of the tank and letting a circulating pump blow the bubbles around.
Can you please explain what the advantages of pumping the bubbles via the return pump? I can think of several disadvantages, but can't see my way to why that would be advantagous. Thanks.

Cheers!
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
10,830
Reaction score
29,794
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Cruz actually made sense with the pressurization in the return pipe. It acts as a gas dissolution chamber.

It forces gas to dissolve from microbubbles into even smaller bubbles.

Check out some planted tank forums in regards to dissolving co2 into the water column. Add enough head pressure and you get smaller bubbles.
But what the heck do I know. LOL

The only problem with this is that it is needed a much higher pressure in the return pipe compared with the pressure an aquarium pump deliver. And if you put in air in a system with higher pressure you will directly get bubble disease. You can´t compare a single gas (without nitrogen gas) and air (with 80 % Nitrogen gas)

If saltwater ions have an adverse effect on bubbles, why is the surface tension (hence bubble surface tension) stronger than that of freshwater?

One must distinguish between bubbles and nano bubbles. There are two different things, and the link is about nano bubbles.

Sincerely Lasse
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
66,555
Reaction score
62,861
Location
Arlington, Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The probability is clearly evident jyst based on the pH increases. This shows dissolution of gas coming from the vet fine bubbles.

We also showed a photo of micron sized bubbles using an LED flashlight and what was demonstrated using a laser pointer in Anzai Kantesu's video.

On the contrary, a pH rise shows CO2 going into the bubble and, if anything, increasing its size. :)
 

anit77

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
405
Reaction score
606
Location
Flowery Branch
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I proposed a test quite a few pages back and offered to pony up some money to help get it done.

Two 20 gallon tanks filled with the same batch of fresh made saltwater. One bubbling one not. A laser pointer and a video camera...
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
On the contrary, a pH rise shows CO2 going into the bubble and, if anything, increasing its size. :)
There are two opposing thoughts to this, Randy... very similar to particle or string theory...

This argument will and can go on for a very long time.

Gas dissolves (very fine bubbles) in water and can force out another. That is a scientific fact...

Degassing of CO2 can also migrate from the water to a larger bubble... that is also a scientific fact...
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The only problem with this is that it is needed a much higher pressure in the return pipe compared with the pressure an aquarium pump deliver. And if you put in air in a system with higher pressure you will directly get bubble disease. You can´t compare a single gas (without nitrogen gas) and air (with 80 % Nitrogen gas)



One must distinguish between bubbles and nano bubbles. There are two different things, and the link is about nano bubbles.

Sincerely Lasse

You do NOT need high pressure, Lasse. We're not comparing one gas... we're dissolving atmospheric.

Microbubbles can and have shrunk down to nanobubble size...

id10T.jpg
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Just a friendly thought, perhaps a little more digging for information is needed for better understanding of the generation of bubbles of all sizes?


http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=10960.php
http://www.azonano.com/news.aspx?NewsID=12226


Helen Czerski's lecture on bubbles:





(Bursting bubbles creating "even smaller daughter bubbles upon bursting at the surface)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10278284



Microbubbles tend to gradually decrease in size and subsequently collapse due to long stagnation and dissolution of interior gases into the surrounding water, whereas nanobubble remains as such for a long time and do not burst out at once (from Takahashi, 2009). - See more at: http://advocate.gaalliance.org/test...at-different-salinities/#sthash.yHK18wWa.dpuf

Abdelrahman-Fig-1.jpg
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
How to detect bubbles either by sound... or light. :)

Credit to the Bubble Physicist, Helen Czerski. :)

 

anit77

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
405
Reaction score
606
Location
Flowery Branch
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am not able to watch videos at work...

I have read more about bubbles in the last month than I ever thought I would. I, like Lasse, am unconvinced that there aren't any significant amount of nanobubbles created with the methods described on this forum, if any at all. Any nanobubble generators I've been able to find in my searching are using proprietorially made devices, most of which are quite expensive. The internal components of these devices seem to be closely held secrets. So unless someone does a stand alone test with the common products we're using I don't see how it can be stated as fact that they do happen in our aquariums.
That's not to say that I don't believe there are benefits of fine Macro/Micro bubbling during non-photosynthetic periods. Just that nothing is coming for the nano side of this as they're not there to begin with. I would love to be proven wrong.

"There are some methods of generating bubbles in water such as supplying gas through small pores or shearing gas by rotating blades; however, it is difficult to generate Microbubbles smaller than 50µm in diameter efficiently"

"One efficient generator of Micro-bubbles is shown in Fig.4, in which liquid introduced into the apparatus by a pump is spiraled along the wall, where the centrifugal force caused by the circulation introduces a gas from the gas-inlet and a vortex of gas is formed along the center axis. The gas body is separated into fine bubbles at the outlet to form Microbubbles."

"Another example of efficient generator is shown in Fig.5, where gas is introduced from the gas-inlet into the circulating liquid inside of vortex pump, and is dissolved into supersaturated level by a high-pressure caused in the spew-nozzle. Micro-bubbles are produced from the supersaturated gas-liquid by the pressure reduction at the outside of the nozzle enhanced by the turbulent caused also in the spew-nozzle. Other than these two examples there are a lot of generating method and devices. Generally an engineer would select an appropriate one on its cost-performance."

http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/9SA618ZZ.pdf
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
10,830
Reaction score
29,794
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
In spite of all excellent videos and links - I can´t find anything that prove that a wooden air stone and an aquarium pump can create Nano-bubbles neither micro bubbles in this material.

One standpoint has been that the method create bubbles of all sizes and therefore the method must produce nano-bubbles. Can someone – cleverer than me – explain for me why ( If this is valid - the method produce bubbles of all sizes) – this not is valid for bubbles from skimmers, ceramic ait stones, diffusors and so one. Why is it only a wooden air stone placed before the return intake that have this revolutionary capability to produce micro bubble that shrinks to nano bubbles?

Another question that can´t leave my head is how the nano bubbles can help to oxygenate the water? On important thing is that they are stable for weeks – in my head it means that they had trap the gas in the bubble for weeks and do not let it out. The Japanese scientist that succeeded to hold saltwater species in brackish water with help of nano bubbles concluded that it was necessary to aerate the water probably because the oxygen was trapped inside the nano bubbles. If they not aerate – the fishes die because lack of oxygen. I have a link to this in one of my earlier posts – so do not ask for the link.

From the link in post 1228. My bold

Due to the supposed very high pressure within bubbles of such small size and radius of curvature and thus high surface tension, conventional calculations show that the gas should be ‘pressed out’ of the nanobubbles within microseconds. However, it is now clear that under the right conditions such bubbles can both form freely and remain stable of extended time periods, sometimes many months. Explanations as to just why such structures are so stable are focussing on the role of counter-ions forming layers at the nanobubbles surface, which helps explain claims that they apparently form only in the presence of salts. Kaneo Chiba and Masayoshi Takahashi of Japan’s famous AIST research centre have shown that in the presence of electrolytes and with the correct physical stimulus, stable nanobubbles can be formed from conventional microbubbles. The latter tend to either to coalesce to large buoyant bubbles which float away or which collapse under intense surface tension-derived pressure to the point they vanish as predicted by theory. The addition of salt (electrolytes) however, is thought to cause the formation of a counter-ion screen around nanobubbles which effectively blocks the ability of gases within the nanobubbles to diffuse out. This was confirmed by electrophoresis studies in which the zeta potential of nanobubbles was shown to be related to nanobubbles stability.

Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:

reef_ranch

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
886
Reaction score
1,178
Location
Los Angeles
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
anit77, I took a look at the article you link to. Interestingly, it states that the mucus secretion in corals to be a negative effect of micro/nano bubble use:

"Referring to the biological applications, two types of their effects on lives are used. One is a negative effect which can ether break the cell walls by the radicals or be observed in refusing reaction like “mucin secretion” as shown in Fig.7. Fig.7. Corals’ “mucin secretion” reaction against Micro/Nano-bubbles [see the Acknowledgements]"

This brings back to the question whether we want our corals to be producing mucus. The anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the coral mucus generated by the size bubbles hobbyists are creating with airstones and pumps (which may have very few micro and nano bubbles) is not harming the corals. (There's no evidence that it helps them either). But we should consider whether based on this article, true nano bubbles will harm corals.
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
In spite of all excellent videos and links - I can´t find anything that prove that a wooden air stone and an aquarium pump can create Nano-bubbles neither micro bubbles in this material.

One standpoint has been that the method create bubbles of all sizes and therefore the method must produce nano-bubbles. Can someone – cleverer than me – explain for me why ( If this is valid - the method produce bubbles of all sizes) – this not is valid for bubbles from skimmers, ceramic ait stones, diffusors and so one. Why is it only a wooden air stone placed before the return intake that have this revolutionary capability to produce micro bubble that shrinks to nano bubbles?

Another question that can´t leave my head is how the nano bubbles can help to oxygenate the water? On important thing is that they are stable for weeks – in my head it means that they had trap the gas in the bubble for weeks and do not let it out. The Japanese scientist that succeeded to hold saltwater species in brackish water with help of nano bubbles concluded that it was necessary to aerate the water probably because the oxygen was trapped inside the nano bubbles. If they not aerate – the fishes die because lack of oxygen. I have a link to this in one of my earlier posts – so do not ask for the link.

From the link in post 1228. My bold



Sincerely Lasse
Thank you Lasse for your honesty in not understanding how we can produce bubbles of a very small size. :)

Sincerely,

Cruz Arias
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
anit77, I took a look at the article you link to. Interestingly, it states that the mucus secretion in corals to be a negative effect of micro/nano bubble use:

"Referring to the biological applications, two types of their effects on lives are used. One is a negative effect which can ether break the cell walls by the radicals or be observed in refusing reaction like “mucin secretion” as shown in Fig.7. Fig.7. Corals’ “mucin secretion” reaction against Micro/Nano-bubbles [see the Acknowledgements]"

This brings back to the question whether we want our corals to be producing mucus. The anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the coral mucus generated by the size bubbles hobbyists are creating with airstones and pumps (which may have very few micro and nano bubbles) is not harming the corals. (There's no evidence that it helps them either). But we should consider whether based on this article, true nano bubbles will harm corals.
That there is an assumptive study under certain conditions. It does not apply to all stressor stimuli...

If a human was locked up in a room free from all stressors or stimuli, we would go crazy (physiologically break down and mentally break down).

2 hours of very very very light aeration is not a "health risk".
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
anit77, I took a look at the article you link to. Interestingly, it states that the mucus secretion in corals to be a negative effect of micro/nano bubble use:

"Referring to the biological applications, two types of their effects on lives are used. One is a negative effect which can ether break the cell walls by the radicals or be observed in refusing reaction like “mucin secretion” as shown in Fig.7. Fig.7. Corals’ “mucin secretion” reaction against Micro/Nano-bubbles [see the Acknowledgements]"

This brings back to the question whether we want our corals to be producing mucus. The anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the coral mucus generated by the size bubbles hobbyists are creating with airstones and pumps (which may have very few micro and nano bubbles) is not harming the corals. (There's no evidence that it helps them either). But we should consider whether based on this article, true nano bubbles will harm corals.

Ok... to any stimuli there is a "rejection response (-) or a acception response (+)" this is not SUBJECTIVE.

A rejection response is one in which the stimuli causes an ejection response or a removal response or a "moving away from" response. This is called behavorial quantification. Negative in this connotation is not the speculative "Good or Bad"

An Acceptance response is one in which the stimuli cause an engulfing (eating) or motion toward a stimuli... Positive in this connotation is not connotatively Good in this case...


Very similarly look at power and voltage with electrical devices.

You have a positive terminal and a negative terminal... Positive and negative determine path of flow "to or from" not "good or bad".
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
In spite of all excellent videos and links - I can´t find anything that prove that a wooden air stone and an aquarium pump can create Nano-bubbles neither micro bubbles in this material.

One standpoint has been that the method create bubbles of all sizes and therefore the method must produce nano-bubbles. Can someone – cleverer than me – explain for me why ( If this is valid - the method produce bubbles of all sizes) – this not is valid for bubbles from skimmers, ceramic ait stones, diffusors and so one. Why is it only a wooden air stone placed before the return intake that have this revolutionary capability to produce micro bubble that shrinks to nano bubbles?

Another question that can´t leave my head is how the nano bubbles can help to oxygenate the water? On important thing is that they are stable for weeks – in my head it means that they had trap the gas in the bubble for weeks and do not let it out. The Japanese scientist that succeeded to hold saltwater species in brackish water with help of nano bubbles concluded that it was necessary to aerate the water probably because the oxygen was trapped inside the nano bubbles. If they not aerate – the fishes die because lack of oxygen. I have a link to this in one of my earlier posts – so do not ask for the link.

From the link in post 1228. My bold



Sincerely Lasse

You didn't see this one... right?
(Bursting bubbles creating "even smaller daughter bubbles upon bursting at the surface) Milli and microbubbles popping and creating smaller bubbles... what's smaller than micro?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10278284
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Taken from the IIISCI article as well:

"Micro/Nano-bubbles give various effects to lives, roughly speaking, positive effect to large lives, and negative damages to small lives. That is because of their different durance against radicals, typically against active oxygen.
The effects vary from life to life, are influenced by the radius distribution and the amount of the bubbles, and inevitably affected by environmental factors including liquid temperature, liquid contents, flow rate, flow pattern, and so forth. It is so complicated that the biological applications should be prepared with great care."

http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/9SA618ZZ.pdf
 

reef_ranch

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
886
Reaction score
1,178
Location
Los Angeles
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Ok... to any stimuli there is a "rejection response (-) or a acception response (+)" this is not SUBJECTIVE.

A rejection response is one in which the stimuli causes an ejection response or a removal response or a "moving away from" response. This is called behavorial quantification. Negative in this connotation is not the speculative "Good or Bad"

An Acceptance response is one in which the stimuli cause an engulfing (eating) or motion toward a stimuli... Positive in this connotation is not connotatively Good in this case...


Very similarly look at power and voltage with electrical devices.

You have a positive terminal and a negative terminal... Positive and negative determine path of flow "to or from" not "good or bad".

Sorry, that makes no sense to me. :)

The article says micro/nano bubbles have been shown to have a "negative effect" on corals. That negative effect was the "refusing reaction like mucin secretion".
Not sure why you want to walk back the conclusions of one of the scientists studying nano bubbles, but if we are going to take an honest look at the technology, we have to take all of the studies into account.
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
anit77, I took a look at the article you link to. Interestingly, it states that the mucus secretion in corals to be a negative effect of micro/nano bubble use:

"Referring to the biological applications, two types of their effects on lives are used. One is a negative effect which can ether break the cell walls by the radicals or be observed in refusing reaction like “mucin secretion” as shown in Fig.7. Fig.7. Corals’ “mucin secretion” reaction against Micro/Nano-bubbles [see the Acknowledgements]"

This brings back to the question whether we want our corals to be producing mucus. The anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the coral mucus generated by the size bubbles hobbyists are creating with airstones and pumps (which may have very few micro and nano bubbles) is not harming the corals. (There's no evidence that it helps them either). But we should consider whether based on this article, true nano bubbles will harm corals.

The anecdote I see here is that keeping the particulate ladened mucus (in excess) is beneficial.

http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v307/p69-84/
 

Cruz_Arias

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
789
Reaction score
433
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sorry, that makes no sense to me. :)

The article says micro/nano bubbles have been shown to have a "negative effect" on corals. That negative effect was the "refusing reaction like mucin secretion".
Not sure why you want to walk back the conclusions of one of the scientists studying nano bubbles, but if we are going to take an honest look at the technology, we have to take all of the studies into account.

Thank you for admitting lack of understanding. That means I didn't explain it clearly enough. Thank you for that valuable feedback.

The utilization of words "Positive and Negative" does not mean GOOD or BAD in this context.


Negative means - moving away from or secretion.
Positive means - moving towards or absorbing (eating, ingesting etc. )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Mastering the art of locking and unlocking water pathways: What type of valves do you have on your aquarium plumbing?

  • Ball valves.

    Votes: 73 51.8%
  • Gate valves.

    Votes: 72 51.1%
  • Check valves.

    Votes: 36 25.5%
  • None.

    Votes: 31 22.0%
  • Other.

    Votes: 9 6.4%

New Posts

Back
Top