# EW 604 External Canister Filter With Atomizer Combo



## Nigel95 (5 Dec 2020)

Saw some threads about using this external filter with an atomizer to avoid co2 mist in your tank. I personally just want to limit the heavy co2 mist areas since it can be a trigger for BBA.

My question is does anyone have personal experience with using the following setup
Filter with 16 / 22 connections > Co2 art atomizer / Qanvee > EW 604 External Canister Filter

Is the EW 604 External Canister Filter a true 16mm connection? Because when it turns into a 12mm, it's going to cut hard on the flow..

If it's a true 16mm connection how much flow can I expect to lose with this setup? 50%, 25% 10%? I do have some overcapacity on my filters as I turn the valves a bit down on the output. So a bit of loss is not a big issue.. just wondering how big the effect can be.

Or skip this idea as a whole and just buy a reactor... However I already have several 16/22 atomizers at home so I guess it would be cheaper to go with the EW 604 route. I heard if running big tanks it can be an issue to get enough co2 dissolved through a reactor as well. This might depend on the build of the reactor of course..

There is also a LW 603 variant. Smaller than EW 604. I guess bigger is better for dissolving the co2 optimal but it will cut harder on the flow. What the sweet spot when you use it as a reactor. Any personal experience?


----------



## Zeus. (5 Dec 2020)

Well the APS EF2 and all its descendants as far as I am aware are all the same and just rebranded with different names and numbers. If my memory serves me correct the true 'bottleneck' is the fittings themselves which doesn't change regardless of what size hoes you fit, the two fittings for the hoses have a smallest diameter of 12mm, which when going from 16mm to 12mm does sound much it does make a big difference - I don't have the maths handy


----------



## Nigel95 (5 Dec 2020)

Zeus. said:


> Well the APS EF2 and all its descendants as far as I am aware are all the same and just rebranded with different names and numbers. If my memory serves me correct the true 'bottleneck' is the fittings themselves which doesn't change regardless of what size hoes you fit, the two fittings for the hoses have a smallest diameter of 12mm, which when going from 16mm to 12mm does sound much it does make a big difference - I don't have the maths handy


Do you know any other good options for this purpose that not have this 12mm diameter limitation ?


----------



## Nigel95 (5 Dec 2020)

An *interesting option* maybe what do you guys think? @Zeus.

With* this connector I believe.* Male, 16mm and 3/4 (because I have 16/22 filter)


----------



## DeepMetropolis (6 Dec 2020)

Nigel95 said:


> I personally just want to limit the heavy co2 mist areas since it can be a trigger for BBA.


Is this true was thinking about using an inline atomizer vs reactor on my new setup but I did not know about it.. Would this be some of a problem in a 100l set up?

Personally I have an Aquamedic reactor in my 300L+sump tank and I don't have any problems with getting enough co2 in the tank.. It is a bit more expensive then a diy reactor tough..


----------



## Nigel95 (6 Dec 2020)

DeepMetropolis said:


> Is this true was thinking about using an inline atomizer vs reactor on my new setup but I did not know about it.. Would this be some of a problem in a 100l set up?
> 
> Personally I have an Aquamedic reactor in my 300L+sump tank and I don't have any problems with getting enough co2 in the tank.. It is a bit more expensive then a diy reactor tough..


I wouldn't say it's impossible to use an atomizer. I used it on several setups with success.  Every layout is different as well but overall yes it is pretty safe to assume that heavy flow areas with co2 mist can be more vulnerable to BBA. Ofc BBA has many other triggers. Let's say your tank has quite some organic waste in combination with a heavy co2 mist area this could lead to BBA growing faster I think.

My farm tank has a problem in the co2 mist areas and no matter if I do 2 water changes a week + turkey baster it's still a problem. I have to admit that my filter is doing weird things and not stable which can also be a problem for BBA. Overall I have seen it several times in my layout. The flow mist areas seem more vulnerable to BBA. If you read on Wong his site he also mentions about this issue with co2 mist areas.

After a discussion with Wong it seems that if you have hard plants you might benefit from an atomizer with co2 mist. Some plants seem to benefit from the tiny bubbles that touch their leaves. With an atomizer it is possible to bring more co2 too the plants. However when using easy plants which most of us use, completely dissolved co2 with a reactor setup should be sufficient. The good thing about a reactor that works well, is that you rule out that heavy co2 mist areas, well more compared to an atomizer. Also no 7 up look in your tank if that bothers you. It really depends on the atomizer as well. When I used the 12/16 co2 art the co2 was really smoke like making it very cloudy. The 16/22 co2 art / qanvee atomizer (I tested 4 different membranes) have much larger bubbles and don't cloud up the tank that much.

A quote *from Wong his site*
"
The upside is that plants can use CO2 mist directly for photosynthesis according to data in controlled experiments published by Barr report. _*This allows us to give plants CO2 above and beyond the max saturation rates of dissolved carbon dioxide that may impact livestock respiration - this is the main advantage of having CO2 mist.*_ Barr report reported an increment of 25% Oxygen production (used as a proxy for photosynthesis) in sample that had access to CO2 mist - compared to sample that did not; even as the two test samples had equal levels of dissolved CO2 in the water column.


Misting is not a necessity in most tanks but we find it gives an edge with difficult species or plants weakened by poor transport etc. For most tanks, reaching a good rate of dissolved CO2 is sufficient to grow most species."

Both have pros and cons pick your poison I guess.


----------



## Zeus. (6 Dec 2020)

Nigel95 said:


> An *interesting option* maybe what do you guys think? @Zeus.
> 
> With* this connector I believe.* Male, 16mm and 3/4 (because I have 16/22 filter)
> 
> View attachment 157435



Well I bought one and never used it had two tight 90 degree right angles which would much reduce the flow, Plus the centre of the top has a real bottle neck (semi circle) which would need grinding out IMO also.
Plus at the time I was using FX6 tubing which was 25mm internal on a 500l tank. Going down the twin reactors with bypass just had sense at the time. Glad I did have the bypass as CO2 reactors can be quite noisy on full flow, I have the bypass fully open all the time and they still work fine, probably use more CO2 that way. In its peak pH drop days I was able to get a well over 1.0pH ( DC going nearly clear) with twin CO2 injectors in under 30 mins ( one injector switching off once target pH was reached - not for the faint hearted)


----------



## DeepMetropolis (6 Dec 2020)

Nigel95 said:


> I wouldn't say it's impossible to use an atomizer. I used it on several setups with success. Every layout is different as well but overall yes it is pretty safe to assume that heavy flow areas with co2 mist can be more vulnerable to BBA. Ofc BBA has many other triggers. Let's say your tank has quite some organic waste in combination with a heavy co2 mist area this could lead to BBA growing faster I think.
> 
> My farm tank has a problem in the co2 mist areas and no matter if I do 2 water changes a week + turkey baster it's still a problem. I have to admit that my filter is doing weird things and not stable which can also be a problem for BBA. Overall I have seen it several times in my layout. The flow mist areas seem more vulnerable to BBA. If you read on Wong his site he also mentions about this issue with co2 mist areas.


Thanks for the explanation I just thought that co2 mist was superior and the only downside was the 7up effect.. I'm really a fan of reactors because I find the mist clouding a tank really a downside also I see sometimes bubbles get attached to fish I always wonder if it doesn't bother them (tried asking).. But now you've given me enough reason to pick a reactor for my new scape as i'm not going to use hard plant anyway.


Nigel95 said:


> A quote *from Wong his site*


Really like his site it is quite informative, if people ask me about starting an scape I always point them to this site first..


----------



## Zeus. (6 Dec 2020)

DeepMetropolis said:


> downside was the 7up effect.. I'm really a fan of reactors because I find the mist clouding a tank really a downside


Agree 100%, having low flow though the CO2 reactor prevents small bubbles getting back to tank, but nano bubbles is another story, Hence avoiding nano bubbles improves your tank *not* having the '7up' effect. May be prudent to plan to have a bypass so you can adjust the flow though the reactor


----------



## Zeus. (6 Dec 2020)

Heres pic of top of early reactor, showing bottle neck of centre


----------



## DeepMetropolis (6 Dec 2020)

Zeus. said:


> May be prudent to plan to have a bypass so you can adjust the flow though the reactor


Yes I've done this with my main tank. It really helps out keeping the co2 longer in the reactor. Having quite a strong pump would blow a lot of bubbles out.. With a bypass you also keep a stronger flow at your outlet in my experience.


----------



## DeepMetropolis (6 Dec 2020)

Zeus. said:


> Heres pic of top of early reactor, showing bottle neck of centre


I think you can cut or dril that part out that would help a lot.


----------



## Nigel95 (6 Dec 2020)

Zeus. said:


> Well I bought one and never used it had two tight 90 degree right angles which would much reduce the flow, Plus the centre of the top has a real bottle neck (semi circle) which would need grinding out IMO also.


lol I thought I was close to making one and call it a day. This is a rabbit hole haha!



Zeus. said:


> Agree 100%, having low flow though the CO2 reactor prevents small bubbles getting back to tank, but nano bubbles is another story, Hence avoiding nano bubbles improves your tank *not* having the '7up' effect. May be prudent to plan to have a bypass so you can adjust the flow though the reactor


So what means low flow exactly in a co2 reactor? 250lph? 500? 1000?



Zeus. said:


> Heres pic of top of early reactor, showing bottle neck of centre
> View attachment 157451


This is yours unit or do all units of this share the same bottleneck problem?


----------

