Advertisements
Aquatic Avenue Banner Tropica Shop Banner Fishy Business Banner
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49

Thread: Tom Barr's DIY Internal Reactor w/venturi

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Ang Mo Kio
    Posts
    4,531
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Images
    81
    Country
    Singapore
    Advertisements
    Fresh n Marine aQuarium Banner

    Advertise here

    Advertise here
    Thanks dc88! Good work!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    Quote Originally Posted by coolbucks
    Hi All,

    Is this work effective for a big tank like 6 ft??
    I think you can increase the CO2 injection rate (more bubbles per sec) to meet the tank size requirement.
    The reactor simply mix the CO2 with water and the dissolve rate is quite high with the venturi design even at it's small size. I shake the DIY bottle to give it a maximum dose of CO2 bubble rate and it seems to hold on quite well.
    Or you can always go for the next larger powerhead and tubes (use those 2" gravel vacuum tube)

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Wherever KNO3 is available!
    Posts
    1,297
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    19
    Country
    Singapore
    For larger tanks this can be achieved, just that you'll need a more powerful powerhead (and bigger container?) to help drive the flow through out the tank. However, just wondering, shouldn't the bottom of your model be an open base?

    PS: Good job dc88.
    Last edited by grey_fox; 13th Jun 2006 at 14:04.
    visit my photo albums @ flickr!

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,088
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    The point is not to keep the mist in the reactor but let it get to the plants.

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
    Plant Physiology by Taiz and Zeiger

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Woodlands
    Posts
    3,938
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    54
    Country
    Singapore
    Nice work, Dennis!

    What is the rating of the powerhead used -- how many gallon/hour?
    koah fong
    Juggler's tanks

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    Hi Grey Fox,
    It is not an open base simply because (being lazy) I found it easier to drill a hole at the side near the base than having to saw the whole base away : )

    Hi Peter,
    Point noted ! Actually it ends up that the smaller bubbles did escape the coarse filter wool and circulate in the tank and only the larger bubbles trapped inside.

    Hi Juggler,
    The rating stated as 250 L/H probably 65 gallon/hour.

    Thanks for the all comments.

    I test run it in a 1.5 ft (30L) experimental tank able to bring PH to 6.6 measured with a PH meter, at a KH = 5 with one DIY CO2 bottle. (CO2 ~= 38ppm)

    But I think it is still fall short to the original one, mine is not as sleek.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Wherever KNO3 is available!
    Posts
    1,297
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    19
    Country
    Singapore
    dc, want a 2,400 l/hr pump for a bigger model?
    visit my photo albums @ flickr!

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    2400 L/H can perhaps power a 5ft tank ?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    I just found more info regarding the "burp tube" in the APD archive that Tom found that the gas built up in the reactor actually correlated with the O2 saturation in the water, and by putting an upper bound to purge excess gass buildup actually help CO2 dissolve rate. I guess hence he invented the "burp tube" feature in the design.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,088
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    Quote Originally Posted by dc88
    I just found more info regarding the "burp tube" in the APD archive that Tom found that the gas built up in the reactor actually correlated with the O2 saturation in the water, and by putting an upper bound to purge excess gass buildup actually help CO2 dissolve rate. I guess hence he invented the "burp tube" feature in the design.
    That's old info...should be CO2 and maybe some other gases mixed.

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
    Plant Physiology by Taiz and Zeiger

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    586
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Country
    Singapore
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterGwee
    That's old info...should be CO2 and maybe some other gases mixed.

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
    Questions on effectiveness :

    a) How is this design vs the powerhead+Co2+ rainbar method
    b) What if the variation of this design by putting the CO2 directly into the powerhead suction , the rest remain like burp hole and return tube from the container to the powerhead suction
    c) The mist output from this design comes out from the container and rise up and does not spread out

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    Hi neon

    These are good questions, let me try to answer :

    (a) Do you refer to CO2 direct to powerhead inlet then to rainbar ? If yes pls see (b).

    (b) If your CO2 is pressurized cylinder system you can connect directly to the powerhead inlet with no difference.
    For those using DIY CO2 system, connect direct to the powerhead inlet has the risk of sucking the yeast mix into the tank when the CO2 pressure runs out. This design the pressure inside the container is always higher due to the water pumping out from the power head hence no risk of sucking in the yeast mix. Instead yYou need a check valve to prevent the tank water getting into the CO2 bottle which is quite easily done with a simple check valve from LFS.

    In addition, the venturi loop allow those larger bubbles to recycle back to the powerhead to further reduce to fine mist. If you connect from powerhead to rainbar without the venturi loop back, any larger bubbles will just push out and wasted.


    (c) The mist output from this design is very fine and get circulated around the tank for a while before rising up. In fact very little bubbles were left rising up. Many had dissipated/dissolved.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,088
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    Quote Originally Posted by neon
    Questions on effectiveness :

    a) How is this design vs the powerhead+Co2+ rainbar method
    b) What if the variation of this design by putting the CO2 directly into the powerhead suction , the rest remain like burp hole and return tube from the container to the powerhead suction
    c) The mist output from this design comes out from the container and rise up and does not spread out
    a) Generally saying, a reactor would be more responsive in getting the CO2 levels up faster in terms of measurements since the CO2 cannot escape to the surface as compared to the direct mist method either using a powerhead/diffuser or limewood stones. However, the mist method theory asssumes that the CO2 bubble which is very much higher concentration than the aquaeous CO2 when coming in contact with the plant stomata even in rapid pulses will make CO2 uptake easier and hence better growth. (Think prandlt layer)

    b) See above...you should have the idea.

    c) You need a seperate form of water current once the reactor starts purging mist so as to get the mist around the tank well.

    Regards
    Peter Gwee
    Plant Physiology by Taiz and Zeiger

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    586
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Country
    Singapore
    Quote Originally Posted by dc88
    Hi neon

    These are good questions, let me try to answer :

    (a) Do you refer to CO2 direct to powerhead inlet then to rainbar ? If yes pls see (b).

    (b) If your CO2 is pressurized cylinder system you can connect directly to the powerhead inlet with no difference.
    For those using DIY CO2 system, connect direct to the powerhead inlet has the risk of sucking the yeast mix into the tank when the CO2 pressure runs out. This design the pressure inside the container is always higher due to the water pumping out from the power head hence no risk of sucking in the yeast mix. Instead yYou need a check valve to prevent the tank water getting into the CO2 bottle which is quite easily done with a simple check valve from LFS.

    In addition, the venturi loop allow those larger bubbles to recycle back to the powerhead to further reduce to fine mist. If you connect from powerhead to rainbar without the venturi loop back, any larger bubbles will just push out and wasted.


    (c) The mist output from this design is very fine and get circulated around the tank for a while before rising up. In fact very little bubbles were left rising up. Many had dissipated/dissolved.
    For Item (c), what is the CO2 bubble rate and the powerhead flowrate in order to achieve this slow rising mist ? Currently for my 6' tank, my bubble rate is roughly 5-7 per sec per powerhead+c02+rainbar, one for left side and another similar setup on the right hand side, as I want to ensure CO2 dissolve rate and mist is enough, but mist is visible and rise up , not like what you mentioned.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,198
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    United_States
    dc88, the sponge can be omitted if you use a elbow to blast the water to spiral down the tube and out, this is simpler and more efficient, win-win.

    Regards,
    Tom Barr

    www.BarrReport.com

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    Thanks Tom,

    Heres the refinement :

    Last edited by dc88; 25th Jun 2006 at 19:01.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Perth, Australia / Bishan, Singapore
    Posts
    159
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Australia
    Neat setup, Can anyone posta picture of a working model in action?
    I've been seeing the blueprints and always wondered how the gases are circulated. From Tom's blueprints it looks like the outflow is pointed downwards?
    All Men Die . . . . Few Actually Live.

  18. #38
    bro...
    the output of the fpower head goes into back into the reactor isit??
    LoOkInG 4 a SpEcIaL SoMeOnE 2 FiLL My EmPtY HeArT....

  19. #39
    and also wads a venturi tube?
    LoOkInG 4 a SpEcIaL SoMeOnE 2 FiLL My EmPtY HeArT....

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    104
    Country
    Singapore
    Output of powerhead goes into the top of the reactor.
    "venturi tube" cycle the CO2 gass accumulates in the reactor back to the inlet of the power head. The CO2 bubbles are chopped into fine mist and out with the powerhead outlet.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •