Hmmmm... ahhh!!! Attach of po4

[seth the wine guy]

Ripped Tide;722023 wrote: Seth, where are your phosphates, according to the meter?

Yesterday, .10
They have ranged from .04 to .14 in the last month. I removed my DSB about a week ago bc I think it was leaching PO4 into the water

 

[dawgface]

I would say run weekly until your at .03 or below. That's atleast the number I'm looking for. However the problem with that is Hanna has a margin of error of something like .03 so...... "Don't go chasing waterfalls"

 

[seth the wine guy]

DawgFace;722025 wrote: "Don't go chasing waterfalls"

That's a bootylicious quote

 

[ripped tide]

DawgFace;722025 wrote: I would say run weekly until your at .03 or below. That's atleast the number I'm looking for. However the problem with that is Hanna has a margin of error of something like .03 so...... "Don't go chasing waterfalls"

I hear ya! Im sure that after I get my RO unit upgraded and boosted up, this will be much easier to resolve.

Seth,

How are the corals responding to the sway?



This makes me want to get a bio pellet reactor more and more...

 

[dawgface]

Seth The Wine Guy;722026 wrote: That's a bootylicious quote

Just finished watching "The Other Guys", had to incorporate it somewhere.

This makes me want to get a bio pellet reactor more and more...

Going on 9 days with mine, so far so good.

 

[ripped tide]

Still running gfo? Do you vodka dose or carbon dose?

 

[dawgface]

Reduced GFO to about half dose. The pellets need a small bit of both Po4 and No3 to colonize bacteria. I choose pellets opposed to the other carbon doseing methods due to my travel schedule. Seems to be the best set it and forget it out of them all.

 

[ripped tide]

Good news: changing the gfo helped. This morning I am down to .02ppm. I can live with that

 

[rdnelson]

Ripped Tide;722023 wrote: Seth, where are your phosphates, according to the meter?

In the water dummy. :smashfreakB: Ok, so I couldn't resist. I will shut up now.

 

[nholderried65]

rdnelson99;722072 wrote: In the water dummy. :smashfreakB: Ok, so I couldn't resist. I will shut up now.

lol

 

[schwaggs]

Ripped Tide;721946 wrote:
Stage one: sediment filter
Stage two: carbon block
Stage there:sediment filter
Stage four/five: 50 gpd membrane (waste water will be fed into a 24gpd membrane)
Stage six: carbon block
Stage seven: DI resin

Why would you run carbon after the RO stage? Are you doing that now? Also, I don't think you should run waste water from one membrane into a second membrane. I think you typically run multiple membranes in parallel.

 

[Jaycen B.]

The carbon block after may be adding PO4 back to the water. I do not think two different gpd ro membranes will work together either.

 

[dawgface]

Schwaggs;722211 wrote: Why would you run carbon after the RO stage? Are you doing that now? Also, I don't think you should run waste water from one membrane into a second membrane. I think you typically run multiple membranes in parallel.

http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/store/products/reverse-osmosis-filters-and-systems/ro-di-accessories/150-gpd-water-saving-upgrade-kit.html">http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/store/products/reverse-osmosis-filters-and-systems/ro-di-accessories/150-gpd-water-saving-upgrade-kit.html</a>

This is how I run mine, 0 tds.

 

[dawgface]

Jaycen B.;722213 wrote: The carbon block after may be adding PO4 back to the water. I do not think two different gpd ro membranes will work together either.

You can run two different membranes but the lowest membrain needs to be your units max out put. I agree with the carbon, although I'm not 100% sure.

 

[Jaycen B.]

DawgFace;722217 wrote: You can run two different membranes but the lowest membrain needs to be your units max out put. I agree with the carbon, although I'm not 100% sure.

For some reason this would seem counterproductive to me. I do not underestand why you would want to run to different ones. Why would you just not run the 50 and skip the 24? If it is set up right it will work better (more water). But as we bolth know I have been wrong before.

Edit: If you run 2 membranes it should increase your output and lower your flush/waste water. JME

 

[dawgface]

Not advocating it whatsoever, just saying its plausible. I for instance broke one of my two 75 gpd membranes while trying to install. I needed to get some salt made up and the fish store i went to didn't have anything on hand but 100 gpd. Larger membranes merely allow more water to flow though, less water, as long as its not significantly less, has no impact on performance.

 

[Jaycen B.]

I got ya

 

[dawgface]

Sorry for the jumbled mess, I'm driving and typing again.

 

[dawgface]

And to tell you the truth, after thinking about how these membranes work, I believe the flow as long as its not above the daily allowance of the membrane should have zero effect on performance.....

Obviously clearly not the most cost effective move but theoretically I don't see a problem.

 

[ripped tide]

My current RO set up is sediment, carbon, membrane. I was just toying around with possibilities. I don't know enough about RO efficency to make a factual statement about what would be the best way to do it. I voted for Marc to talk about RO units at the meeting, but naturally the masses are more concerned with their parasites.