Activated Carbon in a reactor

OK i am just trying to get some more information on this because i find it is lacking on this particular subject. Lots of info on using it passively(toss it in the sump). So I know turnover rate is supposed to be enough that the carbon doesn't move and allows stuff to sit and not move.

I have read some places saying hook up gfo or phosphate or something before the carbon to remove most stuff before it hits the carbon.
*is this true? what about if you have carbon in a reactor alone?

Next is there a specific type of carbon that is better to use in a reactor, I've seen lots of people use brs carbon but also seen stuff like brightwell aquatics carbonit-p. Would the brightwells be safe to use in a reactor? Yes, no, Why? Also what would be a good time frame for changing. The bottles say different things like use for 2 hours, or 24 hours or discard at end of month or should i change it every 6 weeks or so like the gfo?

Thanks in advance for anyones insight/ help.
Nick

 

I change my carbon every month or so. It needs enough flow to tumble so that it does not clump. It should not be sitting, or it will become a brick. There is no difference between being behind gfo or not, it will do its job regardless. And yes, a reactor makes a huge difference.

 

Hmm so it should be tumbling? from what i read, the tumbling will cause the carbon to break up and dissolve against each other.

"Long contact time and slow flow rate is ideal for carbon" i got that from the brs video explaining their reactors. To me that would explain a low passive flow through the carbon. or should it be tumbling like my gfo

 

You never want carbon to tumble. Tumbling carbon breaks up into small pieces and will eventually make it into your sump or DT. This is why most people run GFO and carbon in seperate reactors as you want GFO to gently tumble.If your carbon is turning into a brick then you have something precipitating in your water or you are not changing it often enough. I have run carbon for years either in the sump in a bag or in a reactor with a very slow flow and have never had a clumping issue. I use the BRS Rox carbon in a reactor.It is fairly small so in addition to the sponges in my reactor I also use a filter sock over the return to ensure no carbon reaches my sump. Replacement time of the carbon will be dependent on how large your bioload is. I like to change mine every three weeks.

 

Also I have seen people who have used the GFO and carbon in the same reactor and have placed the GFO first just to get the desired water flow for tumbling. Then the carbon is added to the top layer pressed between two sponges so that it doesn't tumble.

 

Vinny pretty much said everything that needs to be said. lol Using a reactor is generally a more efficient way of running carbon. The BRS reactors are a good, low cost way to incorporate a reactor into your system.

 

^^+1 never allow the carbo to tumble. GFO should have a slight tumble but never carbon. And I love the BRS rox, but have been hearing about another brand that I'm wanting to try....the clear fx. Sounds like it gets good reviews and some folks here use it.

 

I actually use the clear fx pro as well as carbon and gfo. Have zero phosphates and nitrates which is good. Water quality is great. I couldn't get my phos and nitrates down to zero using just the clear fx pro so I added carbon and gfo. I bought a couple of tlf reactors off a fellow reefer so I actually hooked two of them up in parallel off one pump. I actually have the carbon first and then the gfo but was reading to try them reversed for better use of the carbon.

Thanks for the clarification on proper flow.

Is there a big difference to using any particular brand or style in a reactor for this type of use. Or just the cheapest because of frequent changes?
Thanks

 

I researched the different brands for both the reactor and the carbon recently. I settled on the PhosBan Reactor 150 and Two Little Fishies HydroCarbon 2. I do think any reactor should work though. And for the carbon, I went with the brand that I could not find one complaint with, but was a good value as well. I am just about to actually run it, so I can't actually recommend either, just giving you a place to start

 

Different manufacturers use different types of carbon as well as different methods of activation. For that reason, cheap carbon may have a tendency to leach phosphate into saltwater, which would be counter-productive. You'll need to ensure that you're getting a good reef-grade carbon, and that it's granular, not pelleted.