co2 diffuser right underneath the filter intake? good idea?

[sepehr]

I decided to place my CO2 diffuser under the filter intake so every single bubble could be sucked up into the intake. I've read on the net that some ppl say this might kill some BB living inside the filter. Aren't they exaggerating just a bit?

I also have a doubt about something else. It's a fact that excess surface agitation will lead to CO2 being wasted into the air. This is true when you have a diffuser that produces many micro bubbles but what if you have a 100% efficient reactor that you don't even see the tiniest bubble? Would some surface agitation gas out the CO2 into air in this case also?

 

[67chevelle]

What kind of filter do you have?

Running airstones, or having a HOB filter with the water level in the tank low enough that the water is splashing back into the tank will gas off the CO2. You can compensate for this by putting more CO2 into the tank,but it is a waste IMO. Fill your tank up to the top if you have a HOB,and don't run airstones.

You need to have some water movement on the top so proteins from food do not build up,and oxygen can get into the water. But no so much movement that there are bubbles. A nice ripple along the top is what you want to have.

 

[sepehr]

What kind of filter do you have?

Running airstones, or having a HOB filter with the water level in the tank low enough that the water is splashing back into the tank will gas off the CO2. You can compensate for this by putting more CO2 into the tank,but it is a waste IMO. Fill your tank up to the top if you have a HOB,and don't run airstones.

You need to have some water movement on the top so proteins from food do not build up,and oxygen can get into the water. But no so much movement that there are bubbles. A nice ripple along the top is what you want to have.

For a 90 gallon tank my only choice would be a canister filter so that's what I got (400G/H). What I'm trying to get acrossed is that a diffuser produces micro bubbles and a reactor shoots out dissolved, rich CO2 water into tank and thus strong surface agitation does not waste the CO2 since the CO2 is already dissolved in the water. Excess surface agitation only comes into play when you are using a regular difuser that produces bubbles. I might be right or wrong, do you or anyone else know this for a fact?

 

[67chevelle]

I see what your saying. The surface agitation lets in more oxygen. So no matter how you are injecting it,with too much surface movement, you would be wasting CO2.

I'm no expert,but that is how I understand it.

 

[dundadundun]

no matter how well it's dissolved it's still going to want to escape.
reaching atmospheric equilibrium (which it will do sitting still under any conditions except sealed completely air tight) brings co2 concentrations ~3ppm.

think of it this way. in a wine cellar theres a bottle of champagne that's been sitting for 30yrs. no detectable bubbles anywhere. but grab that bottle and run up the stares and co2 bubbles are everywhere... you've disturbed the surface.

or... take 2 10 gallon fire-proof vessels and some smoldering, moist kindling. watch them both fill up with smoke (open tops on both) and then turn a fan to blow across one of them. the smoke is going to dissipate in both of them eventually... but the one with the fan on it is going to dissipate at a much faster rate.

in the first example your surface agitation is just that... moving the bottle and agitating the surface. in the second example surface agitation would be wind... and even without it the smoke (co2) is going to dissipate regardless.

 

[DJDrZ]

For a 90 gallon tank my only choice would be a canister filter so that's what I got (400G/H). What I'm trying to get acrossed is that a diffuser produces micro bubbles and a reactor shoots out dissolved, rich CO2 water into tank and thus strong surface agitation does not waste the CO2 since the CO2 is already dissolved in the water. Excess surface agitation only comes into play when you are using a regular difuser that produces bubbles. I might be right or wrong, do you or anyone else know this for a fact?

I have DIY CO2 and I take the output tube and stick it right into my XP3 intake. That seems to be working well for me.

 

[coach_z]

i might have missed it, but is this a canister filter? if yes, just run it right through the canister, or make a DIY co2 reactor that is inline with the output of your filter. If it is an HOB your results may be varied but it is worth the experiment.

I currently have my co2 tubing rubberbanded to my canister intake right at the inlet....i can hear the bubble going through the tube, but that doesnt bother me for now.

 

[wesleydnunder]

TwoTankAmin has always injected his co2 into the intake of his canister with no adverse effects.

When I had my discus tank set up hi-tech I had the DIY reactor in line with the output of the canister.

Mark

 

[DGC]

It will work, its simple and easy, surface movement does need to be addressed

 

[DGC]

no matter how well it's dissolved it's still going to want to escape.
reaching atmospheric equilibrium (which it will do sitting still under any conditions except sealed completely air tight) brings co2 concentrations ~3ppm.

think of it this way. in a wine cellar theres a bottle of champagne that's been sitting for 30yrs. no detectable bubbles anywhere. but grab that bottle and run up the stares and co2 bubbles are everywhere... you've disturbed the surface.

I Love the way this was put, Perfect