Purigen + Fluidized bed filter?

Spiritofthesoul;5098685; said:

Hey I was wondering if I could purchase a fluidized bed filter and place it in my sump. But instead of adding sand, could I dump in purigen?

My reasoning is that since purigen and sand are about the same size, it should not escape from the filter just like how sand would.

Anybody tried this before?

Click to expand...

A reactor, driven by a slo-flow filter, may be a better choice.

drdrewr;5107889; said:

A reactor, driven by a slo-flow filter, may be a better choice.

Click to expand...

That looks great, But that's about $250.00 worth of reactors, and how much Purigen?

Mike

Should work as long as the flow is right. I'm setting up a phosban 550 with purigen on my new tank. Same concept, upflow design and all. If you don't have the fluidized filter yet, you might have a hard time finding anything other than the 300 model(lifeguard aquatics). They discontinued the 600 and 900.

Phosban reactor was bigger and cheaper than the 300....

Mavrick813;5108015; said:

That looks great, But that's about $250.00 worth of reactors, and how much Purigen?

Mike

Click to expand...

I'm using a total of 4L worth of Purigen amongst all the reactors. I drive both of them with Eheim 2228 (I had these lying around) filled with denitrate and adjust the outtakes so that my flow is slow and I don't blow the Purigen out of the reactors. It works great for the Purigen and I get the benefit of using the denitrate at less than 50gph (I run more like 20gph), so, I get two for one.

Purigen works either in reactors or filters . it depends on size of tank and what you are trying to achieve. If the tank is less than 100 gallons aquaclear filters with purigen might be less expensive then hugh reactors. Personally I use reactors on my 180 w sump but use aquaclear w purigen and po4 remover on my smaller tanks both work well. Good luck.

Spiritofthesoul;5108693; said:

Wow! Thats alot of purigen.

So basically I should look for reactors instead?
Since they are cheaper and allow better contact time with the purigen

Click to expand...

The nice thing about the phosban reactors(Two Little Fishes) is they have sponges and screens on the top and the bottom to keep media in in case you use a bit too much flow. That being said I'd also recommend getting an NPX screen for it as well. Much smaller screen openings since purigen is so small. Only a couple of bucks.

Spiritofthesoul;5108693; said:

Wow! Thats alot of purigen.

So basically I should look for reactors instead?
Since they are cheaper and allow better contact time with the purigen

Click to expand...

Yes, it is alot of Purigen, but, it last a loooonnnnnnggggggg time before it needs to be recharged!!! IN addition to the benefits of Purigen, the extended recharging interval is something I appreciate very much about this setup.

As JC1119 points out:

"The nice thing about the phosban reactors(Two Little Fishes) is they have sponges and screens on the top and the bottom to keep media in in case you use a bit too much flow."

This is very important and, IMHO, is what makes a reactor more suitable for Purigen than a fluidized bed filter. The importance of flow control cannot be understated when it comes to using Purigen in a reactor. The sponges help to keep the Purigen in the reactor, but, too much flow will easily defeat this. You can try using additional sponges, NPX screens, etc, however, IMHO, too much flow will defeat all of these measures. Still, a reactor with sponges should be better than a fluidized bed filter without them.

With my next reef "dual reactor" setup, an additional benefit is (because they are connected "serially") that the Purigen exhausts in the first chamber and changes color -- while the Purigen in the second chamber does not. Only after the Purigen in the first chamber is completely exhausted, does the Purigen in the second chamber begin to change color. It is, therefore, very easy to identify when the Purigen needs to be recharged.