Odyssea CFS 500 Can-filter review and circumference modification
- Thread starter CWO4GUNNER
- Start date
Your statement above about the air powered use of submerged sponges is correct, its your misconception on the use and application of pump driven circumference filters that is completely flawed (right war, wrong enemy). Make a note of this: "circumference filter tecnology uses low bulk-high density media and is intended for the farthest outer orbit of the filter surface area, and high bulk-low density media is used for the inner orbits progressively. Place your submersible high bulk-high density sponge inside the CFS500 and you will be defeating the whole premise and purpose of circumference filter technology and it will degradate flow, endurance, efficiency and capability. I can say this confidently without need for testing just based on the design premise."
One additional important point for those not used to tightening down a multi-lug lid like on the FX5 or CFS500:
FX5/CFS500 canister lid warping. This issue is very common especially on the FX5 which has a larger lid an is more prone to warping due to operator mishandling and over-tightening. Because the lid O-ring and canister body knife edge provides all the sealing needed, only a small amount of tightening force is required on the lid lugs to make this seal happen. Lid lugs are tightened evenly finger tight using only the weight of your hand about 1 to 2 foot pound of torque. You start with all lugs loose, makeing sure the canister "out-flow-PVC tube" is aligned with the canister lid "Out-flow-Port marked "Out". Then pick a lug and twist it until the slack is out (NO tightening yet!) then do the same with the lug directly across (NOT next to) from the one you just took the slack out of and repeat (slack out only!), pick another lug and repeat the process until all lugs have slack out. Then start over again and pick a lug and give it some turns until you feel SLIGHT resistance then do the same to the lug directly across and repeat this slight-tight process until all the lugs are barely snug with the force of a plastic lid on your water conditioner bottle SLIGHT-TIGHT. If you bare down to much or repeat the tightening process too much you will warp the lid and strip the orange nylon finger bolts on the top of the steel bolts or crack the little orange retainer lugs on the bottom of the canister body lock-down rim. This is why basket canisters have people proof no-thought latches to make it easier but not necessarily better. For most this is common knowledge but for some it is all new. But that is the proper way to tighten a multi-lug hatch lid.
FX5/CFS500 canister lid warping. This issue is very common especially on the FX5 which has a larger lid an is more prone to warping due to operator mishandling and over-tightening. Because the lid O-ring and canister body knife edge provides all the sealing needed, only a small amount of tightening force is required on the lid lugs to make this seal happen. Lid lugs are tightened evenly finger tight using only the weight of your hand about 1 to 2 foot pound of torque. You start with all lugs loose, makeing sure the canister "out-flow-PVC tube" is aligned with the canister lid "Out-flow-Port marked "Out". Then pick a lug and twist it until the slack is out (NO tightening yet!) then do the same with the lug directly across (NOT next to) from the one you just took the slack out of and repeat (slack out only!), pick another lug and repeat the process until all lugs have slack out. Then start over again and pick a lug and give it some turns until you feel SLIGHT resistance then do the same to the lug directly across and repeat this slight-tight process until all the lugs are barely snug with the force of a plastic lid on your water conditioner bottle SLIGHT-TIGHT. If you bare down to much or repeat the tightening process too much you will warp the lid and strip the orange nylon finger bolts on the top of the steel bolts or crack the little orange retainer lugs on the bottom of the canister body lock-down rim. This is why basket canisters have people proof no-thought latches to make it easier but not necessarily better. For most this is common knowledge but for some it is all new. But that is the proper way to tighten a multi-lug hatch lid.
Same can be said about wrapping your low density sponge in poly batting as well. My intent was not to improve bio-capability using high density foam, it was to increase mechanical filtration and use the filter as a water polisher. The high density foam would substitue for a cart in this case.
My reply that you last responded too was not to you, but to the gentleman that said sponges in general make poor bio-media. He obvisouly had no clue what he was talking about.
Everything must be tested, including your mod vs. the stock design, otherwise it is nothing more than a theory.
Hardly .... I'll repeat it ... compared with alternatives sponges make poor biomedia. And I know what I'm talking about. The surface area of a average 30 ppi medium pore density sponge is over 50 times less then the surface area of a sintered glass media like Seachem matrix or Fluval Biomax.
When it comes to biomedia its all about total surface area and sponges don't cut it against modern alternatives.
When it comes to biomedia its all about total surface area and sponges don't cut it against modern alternatives.
Yes I realized later you were correcting taksan, however the promise for circumference design is the same as I have pointed out and as fundamental in principal as your frig water filter, car oil filter, vacuum canister filter, exc, exc. The batting represents the high density you seek but it is relatively thin without depth to take advantage of the large largest orbital circumference surface area not compromised by thick-density,filters designed this way allow dirt absorption without early clogging. Conversely the over-porous inner sponge as taskan unknowingly-correctly points out, represents the low density porous orbits which is normally hollow like in a vacuum or cart filter, that is the trade mark workings of every circumference filter. Even the FX5 when users are smart enough to only place porous media (balls/rings) in the baskets understand this concept. So when I say I know for a fact filling the the center with hi-density foam is a degradation it is based on a simple and self evident principal and no testing is needed to come to that conclusion, like trying to convince me that wearing sun-glasses during the day should also help me see better at night needs no test proofing, it simply isn't true.
taksan the amount of bio mass anyone can improve upon in an established aquarium and filter even using toilet paper, by adding a particular so called commercialized "bio media" is minuscule and almost insignificant like maybe an improvement of 1/10 of 1% . All your doing is supporting an expensive product line when almost anything you can buy at a grocery store is just as good for pennies on the dollar, something you as a retailer should take serious stock in.
But please by all means try anything you think will work better just be sure to OBJECTIVELY record the comparable findings so that you can share the improvement if realized.
Last edited:
Were to start with this.....it's almost too easy. First of all, with sponges, it's not all about surface area. Seeing how water flows through the pores of the sponge, the area that bacteria in propagate exists throughout the entire sponge, not just on the surface as you try to imply. With largers pores, complete pentration and flow through can be achieved with a sponge, unlike with your highly overpriced bio-media, in which initially yes, they have a huge amount of surface area, but as the bacteria lives multiplys and dies leaving a biofilm over the entire surface, you might just as well through pea gravel in the basket.
And I never said anything about 30 PPI sponge material. I SPECIFICALLY have always refered to sponge material as used on the hydro line of spnge filters.
http://www.thatpetplace.com/pet/prod/203832/product.web
That filter can handle up to 125 gallons, so go on and tell me how poor a bio media it is. The problem with sponge filters is there is no profit margin, so stop drinking the kool-aid.
Last edited:
I have to take issue with this statement. First, once again let me re-iterate I was only talking about using a higher density foam for a means of better mechanical filtration with no regards to bio filtration as I would want to use the filter as a water polisher. If it clogs great, that means it is doing its job and I simply take the sponge out and wash it out and replace.
And gunner, when push comes to shove, all you have designed is a basic sponge filter wrapped in poly batting and placed it within a canister. Sponge fitlers are the original circumference filter. You could have essentially done the same thing even cheaper if you took a sponge filter like I linked above and used a small powerhead instead of an airline and installed it like you would a UGF (the powerhead) and placed it directly in the tank.
Your also missing some key elements in your explanation by making the assumption that water will draw through your sponge equally at its entire surface area, when in practice quite the opposite will be true. This is exactly why you need testing. Water will draw down the input tube and fill the canister around the perimeter of the sponge. The sponge will draw the majority of its water in at the point of least resistance and highest suction. This will be the bottom 1/4 of your sponge nearest the motor. Only when this area starts to accumulate blockage will it then draw a larger percentage of its draw further up the sponge and farther away from the motor.
Every filter that is designed to perform both mechanical and bio-logical filtration is a compromise on both. What you have done is to actually reduce the amount of material that can be populated by good bacteria. What you have gained is a filter less likely to clog and lose flow. Not saying it is good/bad/ or indifferent, just a modified design with a different set of compromises than that of the original.
Now, as to what density foam would provide the best overall performance for you re-design, I can't tell. It could be the sponge supplied with the filter as you have used, it could be any measure of material slighty denser or slight less dense. However, when the filter was originally designed, I think its a pretty good bet a third variable was part of the equation, and that is cost. In other words, they put the cheapest sponge in the filter that would get the job done satisfactory.
Hmmm, I just re-read what you had posted. What do you mean by filling the center with high density foam? Maybe you just don't understand what I was talking about. I never said to fill the center with high density foam, I said to replace the supplied sponge that comes with the filter with a sponge that has higher density. The draw down tube remains hollow of coarse.
I want to thank gunner first for doing his review and his thoughts on making this filter better.
Now...nc0gnet0 if you want to pick up one of these and do your own mods to make your version...then do so, Gunner's just trying to help.
