Jump to content

The Maroon Lagoon V2.0


Recommended Posts

Thanks Peter! Yes everyone tells me it's what's in the tank that is important and beautiful, but I would love to finally cover all the plumbing and drown out some of the noise to be less distracting. Maybe I'll have the stand completed before the 2nd year birthday [emoji51]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jimbo662 said:

I like what looks like the nem forest.

Ah yes, Anemone Island, although they have grown so thick that you can't even see that they're on their own rock island now. I have two more magnificas in my QT system at the moment, but I don't think I will be able to cram another into that space now. I'll probably have to get rid of one or two of them in the future :bye:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other news, it's official, I have a problem. I am too addicted to H. magnifica anemones and have purchased yet another one. It is currently going through my QT/treatment process and I'm hopeful it will survive acclimation into captivity. I'm also hopeful it will color up nicely, the base has already developed a beautiful purple color and I'm waiting for the tentacles to start developing color back.
db4d05ca998a5610bfefd19fcb840b30.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you aiming to maintain 10 dKH? You must not be carbon dosing, eh? If not, how are you exporting? I've always had trouble with my CaRx effluent drip rate. I probably have to reset it every 2-3 days when the drip slows or stops. My reactor came with a ball valve, but I installed a small needle valve to control the drip and leave the ball open. It could also be because my drip rate is 2 drops a second. I've tried to increase the pH in the chamber and increase the drip rate but had trouble tuning it in. What yours looks like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sascha D. said:

Are you aiming to maintain 10 dKH? You must not be carbon dosing, eh? If not, how are you exporting? I've always had trouble with my CaRx effluent drip rate. I probably have to reset it every 2-3 days when the drip slows or stops. My reactor came with a ball valve, but I installed a small needle valve to control the drip and leave the ball open. It could also be because my drip rate is 2 drops a second. I've tried to increase the pH in the chamber and increase the drip rate but had trouble tuning it in. What yours looks like?

I wasn't aiming for any particular alk level to be honest, I was just aiming for consistency. The major problems I was having was maintaining a consistent effluent drip rate out of the reactor and also with the Apex controlling the CO2 by pH. I was having the same issue you're having with the flow rate slowing and ceasing over time, which was especially harmful considering how often I travel for work. When I was home, no big deal I could just increase the flow every day and no problem. When I was out of state for a week on the other hand.... That's when you see those big swings in alk in the graph I posted above. It was a nightmare! I ended up opening the effluent flow to the point that it was a light continuous stream and wouldn't clog up as quickly. It still needs to be adjusted and purged from time to time, but it's at a point where that's only required every week or two instead of every day like before.

 

The other strategy I changed with my CaRX was to completely abandon my reliance on pH of the reactor. Given my scientific background, I have very little faith in the continuing accuracy of pH probes without constant calibration and checks. Instead I adopted the timer method with my CO2. I just programmed my Apex to turn the CO2 solenoid off and on at specific intervals throughout the day and fine tuned the bubble rate of the CO2. The CO2 injection is no longer chasing a pH value that has been sporadic and untrustworthy in the past, but a nice predictable consistency. It's a crude method, but I can't argue with the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a visual example, here's the graph of my CaRX pH. Keep in mind that my alk has been consistent for the past month, but the pH has been all over the place. If I had been controlling my CO2 based on the pH, my alk levels would equally be all over the place. I'm faced with either having a nice consistent pH graph, or a nice consistent alk graph. I'll take the consistent alk over the pH any day! I just use the pH as an indicator to know when the flow is starting to slow down now. Working pretty well for me.

2235b5bf69de8a37334d3c766d54fe0f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an interesting way of working it. I have a Reef Angel controlling my C02 with a pH probe and it would be easier for me to manipulate the effluent flow or gas input. I think that I may try to increase the flow to a light stream like you suggested and increase the pH switch to somewhere around 7.0 to start. If this doesn't work then there is always dosing! Thanks for explaining your system. It's nice to have a glimpse into how other people are having success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sascha D. said:

That's an interesting way of working it. I have a Reef Angel controlling my C02 with a pH probe and it would be easier for me to manipulate the effluent flow or gas input. I think that I may try to increase the flow to a light stream like you suggested and increase the pH switch to somewhere around 7.0 to start. If this doesn't work then there is always dosing! Thanks for explaining your system. It's nice to have a glimpse into how other people are having success.

Give it a try Sascha. I honestly don't trust the consistency of pH readings over time in the application of a CaRX anymore. I suggest finding an effluent flow rate that is just stable enough to not stop up over time, put your CO2 input at an invariable rate, and then fine tune with the bubble count.

 

If you think of the elements we can control in a CaRX as parts of a triangle; Flow rate of effluent, pH of the reactor, and input rate of CO2 into the reactor, I find that the most stable part of the triangle over time is the input rate of CO2. So if you can find a way to "lock in" the effluent flow rate, whether at a higher flow or a drip, then you simply have to control the CO2 input rate to keep the pH stable. I find either keeping the CO2 on constantly or keeping the CO2 input on a repetitive timer is a great way to maintain consistency and all you need to really control is the bubble rate, which IME doesn't change much until the pressure of your CO2 starts to drop as the cylinder becomes empty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gig 'em @ NDstructible said:

Give it a try Sascha. I honestly don't trust the consistency of pH readings over time in the application of a CaRX anymore. I suggest finding an effluent flow rate that is just stable enough to not stop up over time, put your CO2 input at an invariable rate, and then fine tune with the bubble count.

 

If you think of the elements we can control in a CaRX as parts of a triangle; Flow rate of effluent, pH of the reactor, and input rate of CO2 into the reactor, I find that the most stable part of the triangle over time is the input rate of CO2. So if you can find a way to "lock in" the effluent flow rate, whether at a higher flow or a drip, then you simply have to control the CO2 input rate to keep the pH stable. I find either keeping the CO2 on constantly or keeping the CO2 input on a repetitive timer is a great way to maintain consistency and all you need to really control is the bubble rate, which IME doesn't change much until the pressure of your CO2 starts to drop as the cylinder becomes empty.

My initial thought is that you would go through gas at an accelerated rate using this method. If you increase the effluent to a steady stream, then it would reduce the contact time the lower pH water has with the media. I'm guessing that if you increased your effluent rate 100% then it would take 100% more CO2 to achieve the same dKH output.  How much has your usage increased between the two methods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Sascha D. said:

My initial thought is that you would go through gas at an accelerated rate using this method. If you increase the effluent to a steady stream, then it would reduce the contact time the lower pH water has with the media. I'm guessing that if you increased your effluent rate 100% then it would take 100% more CO2 to achieve the same dKH output.  How much has your usage increased between the two methods?

Yeah you'll probably go through more CO2 with a higher flow rate, but CO2 is cheap, especially in comparison to your coral growth and health. I'd rather swap out my CO2 cylinder a couple months early and have better growth due to the stable alk from using more CO2. But honestly I haven't had to swap out my cylinder yet and it still has a good amount of pressure left in it. It's been over a year and still going strong! I haven't recorded pressure changes, but I can't say it's been dramatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gig 'em @ NDstructible said:

Yeah you'll probably go through more CO2 with a higher flow rate, but CO2 is cheap, especially in comparison to your coral growth and health. I'd rather swap out my CO2 cylinder a couple months early and have better growth due to the stable alk from using more CO2. But honestly I haven't had to swap out my cylinder yet and it still has a good amount of pressure left in it. It's been over a year and still going strong! I haven't recorded pressure changes, but I can't say it's been dramatic.

It's good to know that it's a negligible increase. The 150g that I was running in 2013 was going through 5lbs every 6 months using a similar system. I would set the bubble count on the CO2 and adjust the bubble count based on Alk/Ca/Mg test results. Unfortunately, I ran the effluent out below the water line and lost nearly everything. That was a pretty horrible day! 

Your tank is looking great at one year. Congrats bro!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Juiceman said:

I have my effluent running as a steady stream. I've had trouble with swings or changes in flow when I do otherwise.

I tune the gate valve until a stream comes and then go back to make it as small as possible.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's essentially what I do to. I try to keep it at the lowest flow rate before it starts dripping and clogging, which for my system is a slow stream/rapid drip. I have a gate valve on the supply side of my CaRX to reduce the pressure from my manifold and then a needle valve on the effluent side to further reduce the flow rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Sascha D. said:

It's good to know that it's a negligible increase. The 150g that I was running in 2013 was going through 5lbs every 6 months using a similar system. I would set the bubble count on the CO2 and adjust the bubble count based on Alk/Ca/Mg test results. Unfortunately, I ran the effluent out below the water line and lost nearly everything. That was a pretty horrible day! 

Your tank is looking great at one year. Congrats bro!

That's crazy. My tank is 120 gallons, so it's not that much smaller and my CO2 cylinder will last at least 3 times longer than yours did. I wonder if there was a small leak somewhere on that cylinder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jolt said:

Right side of the tank is NOT keeping up with the left side for growth.  Just sayin ....

Depends on what corals you're looking at! Some species are growing faster than others and it just happens that some of my fast growers are on the left. The northern lights stags were 1 inch frags less than a year ago and they grew so quickly on the right side of the tank that I had to split them up and put one in the back corner of the tank to give it more growing room. Coloration certainly is better on the left though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gig 'em @ NDstructible said:

Depends on what corals you're looking at! Some species are growing faster than others and it just happens that some of my fast growers are on the left. The northern lights stags were 1 inch frags less than a year ago and they grew so quickly on the right side of the tank that I had to split them up and put one in the back corner of the tank to give it more growing room. Coloration certainly is better on the left though.

 Hah - I was looking at those gorgeous anemones when I said that :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...