Hey Everyone! While I'm a new member to the community I've been a longtime guest reader & deem the credibility of the members here as the most knowledgeable of the current hobbyist forums which pragmatically seems directly proportional to your investment in the hobby lol. Anyway, to the subject...
In regard to external, canister filtration, I've routinely read rationale backing the application of ceramic media (I.e., ehfi mech, etc.) as the initial, most coarse mechanical layer as well as open cell foams that are waffle/ridge cut vs. flat as the subsequent mechanical filtration layers (layered in order of porosity of coarse) in order to prevent the water from channeling as it flows through the media. I had accepted this rationale as factual as my comprehension of what I'd percieved as channelling seemed logical.
However, I'd recently come across an article which refuted the existence of channelling in reference to canister filters, claiming it to be, as we all know is the unfortunate case with many things in this hobby, a major misconception maintained among members ot the aquarist community. The rationale was that the term channelling had been derived from wet/dry filters in which when the water flows over the dry media channels, forming little rivulets (akin how rain streams down your vehicle's windshield) as it searches for the least path of resitance on the media's surface; a surface, surrounded by air, & permeated with microscopic inconsistencies. Therefore, claiming that this does NOT occur in a canister filled with water, media & no air.
Now my potential refute to the latter rationale would be to state that by stating a lack of presence of "air" in a canister, while true in the sense of defining air in the normal sense as is present in the atmosphere, would be technically false, on a molecular level, as it is lacking taking into account the presence of oxygen molecules as air is composed of which we all know if were not present in a canister filter would negate the existence of any autotrophic, hetertrophic bacteria, thus negating the nitrification properties of the filter entirely & the significant majority of any benefits it would serve the aquarist.
To support channelling as a myth within a canister, the oxygen saturation within the water to whatever degree it is as is different in every scenario of course, would have to attribute such a neglible effect on the potential of the water channelling in contrast to on a "dry" surface with direct contact with the air saturation in the atmosphere that one could deem it in effect, "absent."
The final statement in support of channelling as a misconception claimed that a canister employing a consistent size media with consistent void (gap) size will not channel.
Now, this statement could be easily refuted for the author's mere lack of expounding on the constraints classifying a respective filtration medium as of "a consistent size) & even more so the constraints classifying a filter medium as possesssing "a consistent void size" aka porosity. To support the claim, solely contingent on the supplied rationae, one would have to be under the assumption that by "consistent" in the latter 2 cases in regard to filtration media would merely be encompassing the entire feasible gamut of filtration media applicable within the hobby, from as fine as D.E. to as coarse as the least porous nylon mesh screening, etc.
So, my thanks to anyone who bothered to read this lengthy post but I would appreciate any enlightment/input on this phenonmenon of channelling within a canister filter specifically as my search on this subject has yielded no information aside from the artice refuting its existence referenced via this post & I am always craving info from all you members far more knowledgeable/ experienced than myself!
In regard to external, canister filtration, I've routinely read rationale backing the application of ceramic media (I.e., ehfi mech, etc.) as the initial, most coarse mechanical layer as well as open cell foams that are waffle/ridge cut vs. flat as the subsequent mechanical filtration layers (layered in order of porosity of coarse) in order to prevent the water from channeling as it flows through the media. I had accepted this rationale as factual as my comprehension of what I'd percieved as channelling seemed logical.
However, I'd recently come across an article which refuted the existence of channelling in reference to canister filters, claiming it to be, as we all know is the unfortunate case with many things in this hobby, a major misconception maintained among members ot the aquarist community. The rationale was that the term channelling had been derived from wet/dry filters in which when the water flows over the dry media channels, forming little rivulets (akin how rain streams down your vehicle's windshield) as it searches for the least path of resitance on the media's surface; a surface, surrounded by air, & permeated with microscopic inconsistencies. Therefore, claiming that this does NOT occur in a canister filled with water, media & no air.
Now my potential refute to the latter rationale would be to state that by stating a lack of presence of "air" in a canister, while true in the sense of defining air in the normal sense as is present in the atmosphere, would be technically false, on a molecular level, as it is lacking taking into account the presence of oxygen molecules as air is composed of which we all know if were not present in a canister filter would negate the existence of any autotrophic, hetertrophic bacteria, thus negating the nitrification properties of the filter entirely & the significant majority of any benefits it would serve the aquarist.
To support channelling as a myth within a canister, the oxygen saturation within the water to whatever degree it is as is different in every scenario of course, would have to attribute such a neglible effect on the potential of the water channelling in contrast to on a "dry" surface with direct contact with the air saturation in the atmosphere that one could deem it in effect, "absent."
The final statement in support of channelling as a misconception claimed that a canister employing a consistent size media with consistent void (gap) size will not channel.
Now, this statement could be easily refuted for the author's mere lack of expounding on the constraints classifying a respective filtration medium as of "a consistent size) & even more so the constraints classifying a filter medium as possesssing "a consistent void size" aka porosity. To support the claim, solely contingent on the supplied rationae, one would have to be under the assumption that by "consistent" in the latter 2 cases in regard to filtration media would merely be encompassing the entire feasible gamut of filtration media applicable within the hobby, from as fine as D.E. to as coarse as the least porous nylon mesh screening, etc.
So, my thanks to anyone who bothered to read this lengthy post but I would appreciate any enlightment/input on this phenonmenon of channelling within a canister filter specifically as my search on this subject has yielded no information aside from the artice refuting its existence referenced via this post & I am always craving info from all you members far more knowledgeable/ experienced than myself!
