biomax

[hle_81]

do you replace the biomax rings every 6 months or do you rinse & reuse it?

[Hydro]

I would like to know about this as well.

The instructions for my Fluval 304 (I just got it for less than a month) say that the biomax should be replaced every 6 months, but only replace half at a time (presumably to preserve the bacteria). While this make sense, it also means that the media could last much longer, at least a year by their recommended replacement schedule.

Manufacturers would of course like to see us buy their stuff as frequently as possible. So I'm wondering what the typical practice is out there.

Perhaps others with more experience with this media could help.

[DIYMatt]

Are the biomax rings the little ceramic noodle thingy's? If so, I use those as well as other brands of similar stuff. I use it as a bio media after some sort of sponge prefiltering in my canisters and HOB filters. The oldest being four years now. The Fluvals come with decent prefiltering via those weird vertical sponges. I have never replaced the rings in any filter. Unless, you are using it as the prefilter media and it gets really jammed full of crud, I wouldn't replace it. I just take out the media baskets and run some tank water through the baskets backwards to rinse it and put it back into the canister. I would never use tap water to rinse it, however, because you run the risk of killing the bacteria that is colonizing the rings.

BTW- Is it just Fluval that suggest repalcing biomedia? Or do the others like Ehiem, Rena, etc recommend replacing it also?

Hydro - I would have sold you my 304 last month for half of what you paid for it:)

[Hydro]

Yes, they are ceramic noodles about half inch long and they came with the filter. The recommended replacement schedule is in the Fluval instructions. I have a feeling that they last much longer than 6 months or a year provided that they are rinsed occasionally as you suggested.

I have no experience with other brands of filter and media type though.

[JSchmidt]

Aren't Biomax rings a sintered glass product (with a kind of rough, almost sandy surface)? If so, they sound a lot like a product that used to be called Siporax. Sintered glass products have a phenomenal surface area because they are loaded with micropores. The pores clog and become closed as the bacteria that inhabit them die. They aren't easily cleaned, certainly not with rinsing, so after about six months the colonizable surface area is greatly reduced. That's why they suggest replacement.

I use ceramic noodles (Ehfimech) that probably have about the same colonizable surface area as 6 month-old Biomax. The difference is that the smoother ceramic rings shed old biofilms easier, so they require a bit less rinsing. I would think that Biomax or similar sintered glass rings could be used indefinitely, if you don't need all the original surface area and if you don't mind extra rinsing. If your ammonia/nitrite levels are OK after 6 or 8 months, I'd just keep the old stuff.

HTH,
Jim

[Hydro]

Hi Jim, how are you?

Biomax does have a rough surface and it is ceramic. The rings do look like noodles so I thought they are the same as "ceramic noodles". But if ceramic noddles actually refer to another product then I stand corrected (all these different varieties of media is at times confusing). It sounds like the ceramic noodles will last longer than biomax. I'll have to look into this when it comes time to replenish the biomax.

By the way, thanks for your help on my cyling question in another thread. It's not complete but seems to be going well. I'll post an update on that thread.

[JSchmidt]

Hi, Hydro, glad things are going well with your cycle.

Biomax does sound like sintered glass noodles. Ceramic noodles (if your LFS carries Ehfimech, see if they'll let you inspect a piece) are smoother. The thing I like about ceramic noodles, rather than sintered glass noodles, is that ceramic noodles don't give off 'fines' like sintered glass products to. 'Fines' are tiny pieces of glass that break off as the noodles abrade against one another. If you run your filter in bio-only mode (like I do, a la RTR's technique), there is no fine filter pad that rests on top of the media that the water must pass thru after it journeys thru the noodles to the pump head, where it is expelled. This is handy, because as biofilms are sloughed off by the noodles, they are expelled from the filter. (A fine filter pad would trap those films and necessitate more frequent cleanings of the canister.) Unfortunately, the 'fines' given off by sintered glass media can get hung up in the impeller of the canister's pump head, and cause excessive wear on the impeller and/or impeller well.

If you stock your canister conventially and clean it regularly, this isn't much of a problem. But with canisters packed for bio-only duty, six months is not an uncommon interval for maintenance, and having to use an upper filter pad in such a filter would be counter productive.

I wouldn't be in rush to get rid of the Biomax, esp. if it continues to perform OK.

Jim

[ewok]

i'm pretty sure bio-max is sintered glass like you said.

mines been in for a year now, i might have had to rinse it once. no plans to change it in the near future (or distant).

bacteria grows everywhere, putting strictly biological media in the filter is a nod in the direction that it likes to grow there because of the ready source of nutrients. however, trying to force or contain it in one spot would be foolhardy at best and cause major problems at worst. sort of like putting all your eggs in one basket. i believe the best approach for me is to encourage it to grow everywhere so no one change will have that great of an impact. optimizing the canister for it's growth would be encouraging a mini cycle possibly when you have to clean it. in keeping with that theory i have biowheels on one filter, bio-max in another filter and of course there is the area and substrate of the tank. so by rights or in theory you could totally lose one of these sources and hopefully have very little impact on the others and still have a fully operational tank or one that's very close to capacity still.

JMHO

[JSchmidt]

Originally posted by ewok
sort of like putting all your eggs in one basket.

JMHO

A good argument for redundancy in filtration, no?

Most of all, I think a canister packed with biomedia provides a preferential site for colonization: lots of oxygenated and food-laden water passing by continuously. My canisters are cleaned rarely (except for the prefilters) and when I do clean them, the biomedia are carefully rinsed to preserve any bacteria. Shouldn't be a problem if one is careful.

I agree that restricting bacterial growth to any single spot is impossible. I just want to make sure that each of my tanks has a couple really nice, protected places for ammonia-oxidizing bacteria to hang out.

Jim