[karnivor]

Hi guys,
I'm fast approaching a point where my shuran calcium reactor is reaching it's limits in terms of what it Supply to my tank. I've come to the point where pushing the reactor any harder produces higher levels of co2 compared to the amount of calcium it produces.

Therefore, now is a good time to reconsider the way I supply calcium and alkalinity to my system.
I can either buy a much bigger reactor, build one or invest in the pumps required to run the balling method.

Balling seems to have gained in popularity lately, but is it just fashion, or does it have advantages over a reactor in terms of stability and ph control.

What is your opinion and why?

Let's have a real good debate on it, it will benefit us all in the end.

Tony.

[karnivor]

Anyone?

[gobyboy]

I could be wrong, but for a bigger tank like yours , surely in terms of costs the calcium reactor has an advantage.

[grunt]

gobyboy, on Jul 26 2010, 07:48 PM, said:

I could be wrong, but for a bigger tank like yours , surely in terms of costs the calcium reactor has an advantage.

i have also looked into costs for larger tank assuming you already have a reactor,the extra costs for peristatics etc and a place to put the storage containers,i reinstalled an old deltec stirrer(now hand stirred a couple of times a day)supplied by ro top off and put 4 spoons of tm bio calc in each week this seems to even out kh and ph swings quite well also if packet is to be believed puts some trace in as well!
if i notice any more swings i will up calc additions as evaporation in this weather is suprisingly quick.
regards graham.

[karnivor]

With regards to cost, I don't really see that as an issue. Looking at the cost of bulk buying the chemicals, it's really quite cheap, with the possible exception of any traces I might add to compensate for the fact that the reactor isn't adding any.

The initial outlay is very comparable to a mid market calcium reactor, and there is no CO2 to buy.

I've fairly well convinced myself that it's a very acceptable cost, provided that the results are better than is achieved using a calcium reactor. Better that is, from the point of stability of alk calc and ph.

[chriss]

Whilst both methods are quite capable of matching your calcium/alk requirements, I feel a calcium reactor adds more to the system than just plain calcium by virtue of the media used ie coral branch etc.

Chris

[Matt G]

If you are running balling lite (FM version) though you add Strontium-Barium, Iodine-Fluorine and a heavy metal complex, so trace elements are also being dosed.

My tank is 1000l and that is supposed to be the tipping point on price between a reactor and balling. However, I think if you look at Mo's tank on UR he is going the balling route.

Why did I choose balling? I have never run a CA reactor and looked into both options when setting up the tank. I admit I liked the simplicity of the balling method once I had got my head around it. Although the tank is looking pants I don't think it is down to balling alone (might be a contributor as I haven't kept up with the 10% weekly water changes). The mag, ca and alk levels have remained pretty stable throughout though, as I have only found time to test every 4 or 5 weeks at the moment, but there is hardly any drift.

[lindsay]

Hi Tony,what do you have the reactor running at?.Not used the balling method but many do and have great success with it,not sure but i think Dave I tank is running on the Balling method.

[grunt]

karnivor, on Jul 27 2010, 01:03 AM, said:

With regards to cost, I don't really see that as an issue. Looking at the cost of bulk buying the chemicals, it's really quite cheap, with the possible exception of any traces I might add to compensate for the fact that the reactor isn't adding any.

The initial outlay is very comparable to a mid market calcium reactor, and there is no CO2 to buy.

I've fairly well convinced myself that it's a very acceptable cost, provided that the results are better than is achieved using a calcium reactor. Better that is, from the point of stability of alk calc and ph.

maybe i have not understood but outlay for three peristatic pumps/chemicals and storage and learning curve if you already have a reactor and are pretty experienced with its use would seem a bit risky if balling does not improve the situation think i will look at swopping reactor up or adding a second media chamber-my overall results with branching media have been good over the last few years and feel relaxed with the simplicity of the method its easy to ass more trace or calc occasionaly by hand if it seems to be needed.

[karnivor]

lindsay, on Jul 27 2010, 10:49 AM, said:

Hi Tony,what do you have the reactor running at?.Not used the balling method but many do and have great success with it,not sure but i think Dave I tank is running on the Balling method.

its a long story that will require a cup of tea in a 50 cup.

Meanwhile, ive been doing some reading:-
http://reefkeeping.c...ature/index.php
well worth digesting.

Tony

[grunt]

karnivor, on Jul 27 2010, 07:17 PM, said:

its a long story that will require a cup of tea in a 50 cup.

Meanwhile, ive been doing some reading:-
http://reefkeeping.c...ature/index.php
well worth digesting.

Tony

hi tony,as lindsey said what you running jet stream at?thought you wanted an in depth discussion i was looking forward to same as i run a jet stream also and any story long or not helps us all.
link was interesting not sure about restricting outflow schuran advise not,restrict input only as blockage on output co2 pressure builds up might pop a pipe or two.
regards graham.

[karnivor]

grunt, on Jul 27 2010, 09:51 PM, said:

hi tony,as lindsey said what you running jet stream at?thought you wanted an in depth discussion i was looking forward to same as i run a jet stream also and any story long or not helps us all.
link was interesting not sure about restricting outflow schuran advise not,restrict input only as blockage on output co2 pressure builds up might pop a pipe or two.
regards graham.

Hi m8,

i'm sorry, I was not tying to be rude in not sticking it up on here, its just that i'm in the middle of messing with my reactor to overcome the problems ive been having by effectively overdriving it.

Ok, so here goes.

Of late, ive had to push my reactor harder and harder to try and supply sufficient Alk and calc to keep my parameters in check. The wake up call came when I installed a V2 controller/PH meter onto the system so that I could constantly monitor PH as well as control my CO2. It was at this point that I noticed my PH had dropped to 7.6 overnight which rang alarm bells for me. After checking the Alk and Calc, which were ok, I came to the conclusion that it was a CO2 issue.

I have been running my reactor at 150ml and PH 6.3 24/7, to get the most out of it. Even so, I only just hold on to my parameters. I decided to kill the CO2 overnight, but that resulted in a drop in Alk/Calc and i'm now having to supplement it.
i then read the article on setting up a reactor, that I have put the link up for. One piece of information struck me, and that was to run at a PH of 6.5 to 6.7. I have long been an advocate of running reactors with high PH and flow, but somehow ended up convincing myself that I needed to go lower.

Now this is where the story comes to an abrupt end. having reset my reactor to 6.5 PH and upped the flow even more ( the tap is now 3/4 open) my PH has started to show signs of coming back and was at 7.8 this morning. Alk/Calc appear to be holding steady, but it will require a few days of running to be sure.

I'm not sure what that adds to the debate regarding reactors versus balling, but there you have it, my reasons for reassessing the way forward.

Tony.

[grunt]

karnivor, on Jul 27 2010, 10:16 PM, said:

Hi m8,

i'm sorry, I was not tying to be rude in not sticking it up on here, its just that i'm in the middle of messing with my reactor to overcome the problems ive been having by effectively overdriving it.

Ok, so here goes.

Of late, ive had to push my reactor harder and harder to try and supply sufficient Alk and calc to keep my parameters in check. The wake up call came when I installed a V2 controller/PH meter onto the system so that I could constantly monitor PH as well as control my CO2. It was at this point that I noticed my PH had dropped to 7.6 overnight which rang alarm bells for me. After checking the Alk and Calc, which were ok, I came to the conclusion that it was a CO2 issue.

I have been running my reactor at 150ml and PH 6.3 24/7, to get the most out of it. Even so, I only just hold on to my parameters. I decided to kill the CO2 overnight, but that resulted in a drop in Alk/Calc and i'm now having to supplement it.
i then read the article on setting up a reactor, that I have put the link up for. One piece of information struck me, and that was to run at a PH of 6.5 to 6.7. I have long been an advocate of running reactors with high PH and flow, but somehow ended up convincing myself that I needed to go lower.

Now this is where the story comes to an abrupt end. having reset my reactor to 6.5 PH and upped the flow even more ( the tap is now 3/4 open) my PH has started to show signs of coming back and was at 7.8 this morning. Alk/Calc appear to be holding steady, but it will require a few days of running to be sure.

I'm not sure what that adds to the debate regarding reactors versus balling, but there you have it, my reasons for reassessing the way forward.

Tony.

thanks tony perhaps not much to this debate myfault for hijacking but info/other peoples experience is very interesting(well for me)
i also run js manualy as schuran suggest,100/120 bub per min with100ml per min output,ph is 6.4/5,kh is 30/35,holds tank at 9/10kh(1250l fairly heavily stocked with sps and a few lps-no clams)i do use stirrer as mentioned before,tank ph is 8.15/2 day 8.1 night,i run reactor continously output into skimmer bubble catching sock.
ph in sump is same as tank so as calc demand increases think next step is controlling ph and upping flow!
again sorry for diversion but i am a fan of reactors and did try balling when he published his original paper(no salt salt)without much success and was so relieved when a decent reactor came my way and i found branching media.
regards graham.

[karnivor]

Thanks Graham,

I think you may well be running your reactor at the best PH. i am going to see what the next few days bring in terms of stability and balance that against the remarks made in this thread re- reactor V balling.
I'm running more like 160- 180 bubbles at present, and still fighting to keep the parameters where I want them.

Ive even considered going over to chalk granules instead of skeletons. apparently its very effective. if I can find a decent supplier, I might give it a blast.

BTW, i'm feeding my reactor effluent into the input of the skimmer to help degass it.

Tony.

[lindsay]

I have never used the Balling method,the question i have on this system is why the 10% water changes,if to remove build up of some chemicals and not just to add missing minerals then is it not going to become expensive on the salt side of things on a big tank.I dont think that a calcium reactor alone can maintain minerals and that a 5% weekly water change is a good idea,if a tank needs more than 5% then it normally means the tank is a little out of balance,normally over stocked and under filtered so say 10% is needed to keep things good.This said if 10% is a must on the Balling method instead of the normal 5% you would normally do on your tank,then is it not miss management of the tank?.
Please understand i know little about the longterm process of balling and i am not having a go at it,but just asking a few questions about it lol.

[ChrisR]

Seamingly the 10% weekly change is to keep salinity in check and not for adding minerals!! I have run balling (Full Balling to begin then changed to Balling Lite)for a couple of years now and find that i dont need to water change weekly. i go through about 1kg Bicarbontate a month, on a 5x3x2, calcium and mag last a lot longer. On the whole it suits me better than a calcium reactor, as when im away its easier for anyone to keep the canisters full, rather than telling them how a ca reactor works. Once you get going its quitre easy to dial in what the system requires, and adjust as necassary when needed.

[lindsay]

Hi Chris,sounds good,could you explain for the purposes for the above thread,what the differences between Balling lite and ful Balling?,was talking to a guy about the process the other day who gave me the impression that the water changes were to add minerals and to remove build ups in some chemicals,from what you say above this may not be the case.I am not trying to catch any body out lol,but would rather get info about subjects like this from guys who have tried tested and run different processes first hand.

[Marcus Watts]

is it too simple to put 2 calcium reactors side by side?

Each with co2 feed, (could be T'ed of one bottle) no need to overdrive either one, option for different media as well if required

[lindsay]

Marcus Watts, on Jul 31 2010, 10:02 AM, said:

is it too simple to put 2 calcium reactors side by side?

Each with co2 feed, (could be T'ed of one bottle) no need to overdrive either one, option for different media as well if required

Yes its possible,or one bigger one run slower with more contact time with a larger volume of media,but in this case would either option be better than going over to Balling?.

[Marcus Watts]

lindsay, on Jul 31 2010, 10:09 AM, said:

Yes its possible,or one bigger one run slower with more contact time with a larger volume of media,but in this case would either option be better than going over to Balling?.

I must admit for me, the devil you know and all that - I really cant see a better method than coral stalks/reef bones in a reactor as the bones contain calcium, mag, strontium etc and i'm guessing all are released back into suspension by the lower ph?. With the stalks appearing very hard is it fair to say that a lower ph than the oft quoted 6.4 - 6.5 would get better results. I had noticed falling levels in my fledgling reef tank (6 month old) when set to 6.5 so I set controler to 6.00 as an experiment for 2 weeks. output dkh was around 30 which didnt strike me as very high, but calcium levels are stable.

from reading up it seems there can be no universal optimum reactor ph setting as the media contained inside will dictate the levels needed. Then do we know if all the elements we want to release from the coral stalks come out at the same ph? or does the calcium release at a different ph to the trace elements?

cheers for any further hints

Marcus