• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Reactors - separate up or inline ?

It would work but you will be producing a mist

I'm not sure i fully agree with this.. Because the very same principle is already in use.. As said, that big amano scape in portugal uses a venturi system to add co2.. And in swimming pools it is the most durable technique available any other way creates more waste than effect.

Looking at such a power head with a venturi, this indeed creates a mist.. It should do that it's in size designed for it the outlet is rather emidiate behind the venturi.

Looking at the bigger systems and how they are setup looking at the diagrams. It is build inline in a shunt. I guess the longer the water travels a line behind the venturi only makes it disolve even beter.. If it was installed directly at the water outlet, than it might indeed only create a mist same as the powerheads air disperse venturies do.

And also these air venturies come in different designs, some create larger bubbles others create a fine mist.. I yet didn't get my hands on the different versions out there.. They are not easily for sale as spare part. SInce i'm not into it anymore, i'm reluctand to by me a collection of powerheads only to look at the venturi designs.. :)

But i think with building in a shunt, actualy just sizing down the big boys in use for bigger systems.. It can be done.. Might need to DIY the venturi with the proper equipment.. That's also an issue for me at the moment, would need a Lathe to play, i don't have (yet).. :)
 
Interesting.. I wonder how that works?
Every Venturi I have seen or built or used produces billions of micro bubbles?
Perhaps the Venturi is just a first stage followed by a reactor?
Most skimmers have a dedicated hight performance pump to compensate for the loss of flow.

 
As far as i understood the explaination it's mainly the pressure drop in the tube behind the ventiry responsible for sucking in the co² mulecules into the water. So there is a co² bubble sucked into the venturi, the vortex shreds it the pressure drop sucks it in. Along teh way through the tubing it dissolves even more before it hits the outlet..

Than my assumption placing a venturi behind a simple inline difuser can only be very beneficial regarding dissolving the microbubble even further.. :)

As seen in the video, it's not realy a microbubble that is shreded, i also see some rather large bubles beeing spit out. I guess it comes down the the starting bubble size.

And it also seems to work in a rather low flow system, in the diagram it was placed in a shunt line (By pass)

Naamloos.jpg


With partialy closing the main inline valve a portion of the flow will go over the venturi and a portion of the flow will go straight on. A also assume that the flow in teh main tube should be greater. Than the diffused Co² will hit a increasing flow again coming from the shunt, again a possitive effect on further dissolving.

This is simply how it is adviced and installed by poolbuilders as the most sufficient ph nutralizer for swiming pools with the use of co² and a ph controler.. Any other way will cost you more if not to much co².. I have a hunge it is such a same swimming pool diffuser they use in lisbon..

And in mini version this should be awfully simple to DIY.. Theoreticaly.. If the pump can handle it... :)
 
Here is actualy the full explaination. :) Maybe not where you expected it to find. And maybe something you still use every day or have used it. But even if the mediums are switched from shreding fluid into air to make a gass into shreding gass into fluid. In general the physical principle is the excact same.

Read CO² instead of Fuell and Water instead of Air..
How does a carburetor work?
Carburetors vary quite a bit in design and complexity. The simplest possible one is essentially a large vertical air pipe above the engine cylinders with a horizontal fuel pipe joined onto one side. As the air flows down the pipe, it has to pass through a narrow kink in the middle, which makes it speed up and causes its pressure to fall. This kinked section is called a venturi. The falling pressure of the air creates a sucking effect that draws fuel in through the fuel pipe at the side.

https://www.explainthatstuff.com/how-carburetors-work.html

It actualy is a CO² carburator in a water line..
 
Last edited:
However the basic principle is ..... to maintain a contact time between the gas bubbles and the tank water that is long enough to completely dissolve the C02.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plcp&v=vgt3COKNIqg

The goal is not necessary to get 100% CO2 dissolved to achieve the the greatest impact. Barr has demonstrated that plants can uptake misty CO2 that attached to leaves more efficiently than dissolved CO2. The theory I recalled is that plants have to expend energy to convert carbonic acid back to free gas so as to uptake CO2. Amano tanks use diffusers to create mostly CO2 mist rather than dissolved.
 
Barr has demonstrated that plants can uptake misty CO2 that attached to leaves more efficiently than dissolved CO2

Also logicaly this would makes a lot of sense. It's a simple sum.. Given that the co2 bubble actualy attaches to a leaf. The thing i'm rather sceptic about is how did the demonstration show the difference in "What's an oxygen bubble and what is a co2 bubble?. Since it's the stomata responsible and at the leaves under side.. It would make this differenciation rather difficult. Terrestrial plants also benefit from CO² saturated water uptake via its roots, i guess this also goes for submersed growing plants, but for that it needs to be dissolved rather thoroughly, i don't see mist bubbles end up in the substrate at the roots.

Not so sure what to make of that demonstrative statement!?..
 
I don’t think aquatic plants breath through stomata which are non existent, poorly developed or degenerated. I think Barr conducted control experiments to compare growth rate based on CO2 injection methods, so there is no need to distinguish O2 versus CO2 bubbles. You can do a search to verify the methodology.

There is a balance of how much mist versus dessolved CO2 to optimize growth, because too much mist means more outgassing.
 
Ok, looking it up, had to do that before i made assumptions.. Submersed form morphology indeed seems to change for most plants and use surface cells to absorb and secret gasses from the water. Than my simple brain says it still is a stomatous functionality, plant does the same thing using a different organ.. And badly dissolved co² resides in the water as a bubble, if the plant wants this gasious co² bubble, it needs to attacht to the surface of the leaf to make cell contact. In that case it is only logical that a pure co² bubble attached to a leaf results in more sufficient uptake by the cells its attached to.

Using logics i can only agree with the idea, it's obvious. As it is obvious that it would be a mater of chance that a co² bubble attaches to a leaf or any other plant part. Since the bubble wants the surface, pop out and dissolve into the atmosphere and is not going to travel around alot to look for a leaf to atach to first.

What throws me off the most and what ever method is used adding co² is how does one determine it's a co2 bubble that is attached to the leaf.. After all there is no visual difference in a co.2 and a oxygen bubble. :) Than you also must be pretty good to be able to say that the beter results in this method are partialy related to bad dissolved co²..
 
Last edited:
The function of stomata is the ability to open and close to regulate gas exchange and moisture loss, critical for terrestrial plant survival but not aquatic. Terrestrial plants have waxy cover on surface cells to limit gas exchange which is lacking in aquatic plants. Gas exchange can occur every where on aquatic plant surface cells which function differently from stomata.

I can’t find Barr’s experiments on CO2 mist, but found this that cited his findings.

https://www.advancedplantedtank.com/diffuser_or_reactor.html
 
Back
Top