Eheim 2213 suitable for 3 ft tank?

[dx]

I am currently using Eheim 2213 for my 3 ft tank. Also connected to an internal CO2 reactor. I find that the CO2 gap in the reactor getting bigger and bigger from the beginning I fill it full with water.

Is Eheim 2213 not strong enough to dissolve the CO2. Besides using another power head, I am thinking of Eheim 2215. Will it be too strong?

Also thinking of changing to external reactor too.

Please advice.

[Encriptic]

i'm using 2213 for a 2ft tank and after it gets clogged by dirt after probably 1 month, the flow tends to drop. Its just nice for a 2ft tank though. Probably u need something bigger for a 3ft tank. I dont think the 2215 will be too powerful.

[dx]

i see. Looks like the maximum tank capacity stated by Eheim is not so practical here.

[Cacatuoides]

yea...agree that eheim's stated capacity aren't practical...

for my 3ft tank i'm using eheim 2222 and jebo 803....one mech filter n the other as bio filter.....quite good performance

[CT]

I used 2213 for my 3ft tank. so far not much problem. able to obtain the desired CO2 level using a internal reactor.

[dx]

CT, good to hear that you have no problem with 2213. What is the CO2 level you are getting (pH=? kH=?). I am using internal reactor with 3 bioballs inside and CO2 3 bps, the CO2 pocket in the reactor become bigger within a day. My 2213 outlet is connected to the reactor. Can't get the pH at desired 6.5.
Hope to get guidance from you.

[CT]

my kH is around 2 and pH around 6.4~6.6. how big is you CO2 pocket? as long as it does become so bigger that bubbles start coming out of the reactor, I think it is ok

[dx]

last night the CO2 pocket reached the top of the 1st bio-ball, I reduced the CO2 rate a little and this morning the pocket reduced to about 2 mm height. pH 6.7 and kH 3. I wish to achieve pH 6.5 by increasing CO2 injection so as to achieve CO2 20-30ppm as always mentioned by PeterGwee. Since there is CO2 pocket I think there is no point to increase the bubble rate.
I think add power head can increas the CO2 concentration but I hate to use it.
(Note: the CO2 pocket ever reached the top of 2nd bio-ball preveiously when the pump rate got slow down.)
In my opinion, at this point of time, increase the flow rate might not improve in dissolving CO2 for my case. Before CO2 got dissolved some already purge out from the reactor.

[Sleepy_lancs]

My 3 ft tank also uses ehiem 2213. Works fine for me. for co2 I just attached a powerhead to an internal reactor. This method works.

[CT]

dx, you just increase you CO2 injection rate. the column in the reactor should not be a problem unless the CO2 occupied the whole reactor. my CO2 column is normally 2cm to half of the reactor(as using manual regulator so the bps will change)

[chua]

I think CT is using a bigger internal reactor. The one with 5 balls. so there are more room for undissolved CO2.

[dx]

after reducing the CO2 bps, I still notices the CO2 pocket is bigger as compared in the morning. So I will just follow CT's advice not to adjust the CO2 injection rate anymore.
Seems not only me using 2213 for 3 ft, that's good news for me.

I might consider a solenoid, so even at the end of the day, the CO2 pocket increase, it will be reduced over night due to CO2 shut off. Better this way? Save on CO2 also.

[CT]

dx, may i ask if you are using a surface skimmer?

[ckll]

Just want to share my experience with you guys ..

My tank is a 3 footer, and I was using internal reactor (1 ball) and Atman 3335. Bubble rate ~3bps. CO2 on from 11am - 6:30pm with abt 3-4 siestas in between. Each siesta lasted 15mins. This was to prevent too much CO2 build-up in the reactor to improve dissolution rate. Lights on from 1pm - 10:15pm. Just before lights off, I have abt 3 inches of CO2 staying on top of the reactor which could not be dissolved. This would be gone the next morning.

I just switched to Eheim 2028, which has a higher flow rate, on Sunday. At the same time, I removed the centre shaft of the reactor so that the ball stays right at the top of the reactor. The siesta and bps remained.

When I came back from work on Monday, the amt of undissolved CO2 in the reactor was only abt 0.5-1 inch.

I removed one of the siesta today (Tuesday) and it's still 0.5-1 inch CO2 left. I figure that this is "dead space" where the cyclone takes place and I am assuming that there's really no CO2 there. I will remove another siesta tomorrow. It should still be alright.

Higher flow definitely helps to dissolve CO2. I believe removing the reactor shaft so that the reactor ball spins at the cyclone helps too.

Cheers!

[dx]

CT,
I do not have a surface skimmer.

ckll,
so your new pump with higher flow rate had obviously increase the dissolving rate of CO2. Btw, is there any excess tiny CO2 bubbles purge out from the reactor?
Perhaps you can let us know the CO2 ppm you gained now (pH=? kH=?)

[ckll]

I have not been measuring pH/kH for a long time. I dont see any tiny bubbles getting purged out from the reactor too