PDA

View Full Version : Activated Carbon


SnowboardKid26
11/01/2004, 08:16 PM
Dr. Ron,

What are the side-effects (if any) of running Kent's Reef Carbon, or any activated carbon for that matter? I usually run it in my 45 gallon 2 times a month for 2 days, but a fellow reefkeeping friend of mine said that he runs it 24/7, and he's tank is beautiful.

rshimek
11/02/2004, 02:46 AM
[moved]

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/02/2004, 07:11 AM
What kind of side efects are you thinking of?

It can make water clearer so more light penetrates.

It binds organic materials, so reduces the organic load in the aquarium.

If those organics are removed rather than being allowed to decay, the carbon may reduce inorganic nutrients as well.

If those organics were reducing calcification rates, or driving algae, then calcification may increase and algae may decrease.

If the organics were being used as food by corals and other organisms, that food source may be reduces.

If those organics were toxins, then the tank inhabitants may be less exposed to toxins.

If those organics have metals bound to them, then some metals may be decreased in the water.

For years I have believed that carbon was a good idea, but just didn't bother to use it heaviliy. Now I use it 24/7.

daveandcole
11/02/2004, 09:12 AM
Does carbon trap any ions? Or does it just absorb hydrophobic molecules.
Would you expect it to absorb fatty acids? Have you seen any work done on skimmer effectiveness at removing fatty acids with different length carbon chains. How about alcohols?

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/02/2004, 11:41 AM
A very few maybe. It does not really have much ion exchange capacity, however. It "traps" many ions that are themselves bound to charged (or even neutral) organics.

There are many studies of how well fatty acids and alcohols adsorb to air water interfaces, and I expect taht trranslates fairly well to skimmability. Longer is generally better. Short acids and alcohols (ethanol, acetic acid, etc) won't be skimmed.

SnowboardKid26
11/02/2004, 03:51 PM
I feed my corals DTs and Phytoplex, so I'm not worried about the organics/food issue, I was wondering more about issues of stripping vital elements; eg calcium, strontium, mag. others.

This isn't an issue?

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/03/2004, 06:34 AM
It won't strip any significant amount of calcium, magnesium, or strontium. It may reduce other metals (copper, iron, cobalt, nickel, chromium, etc) but I don't know how exensive that is, or even whether it is good or bad.

SnowboardKid26
11/03/2004, 05:26 PM
How often do you change your carbon? I'm running about 1/4 - 1/2 cup of Kent Reef Carbon that I put in at the beginning of this thread.

Bugger
11/03/2004, 07:33 PM
Stupid question will carbon remove phyto plankton could oganics particles lodged in the carbon still contribute to water problem's.

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/04/2004, 07:00 AM
I change my carbon every 2-4 weeks.

Could particulates lodge there? Yes, depending on the setup that could be a factor. That's one reason to not leave it in for very long periods.

MGT
11/05/2004, 06:43 AM
Randy,

What type(s) of carbon are you using? Are the typical aquarium activated carbons the most practical for the $ or is there something better out there for less? Is there anything special about any one type, like say chemi-pure, that might make it better than something else?

Marc

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/05/2004, 07:05 AM
I use Marineland Black Diamond. I've not seen good evidence that others are better, but I also wouldn't necessarily claim it to be the best.

Any comments on brands or types, Boomer?

Marc Euschen
11/05/2004, 03:52 PM
Hi @all,

I did a great deal of "research" on activated carbon a year or so agoe...

I found a lot of carbons to be "useless" for aquaria purpose, once for their absorbenc profile or because some do release substances like PO4, sulfur or silicates.

Some carbons, at leats here in Europe have adsorbers mixed in to the carbon to adsorb PO4, but these do contain sometimes aluminia or Iron which may find their way back in to the water if left for longer times in the water...

I've had some realy "dramatic" side effects while using a carbon that was releasing to much sulfur in the water, most of my corals died back then !

On the other hand, I found activated carbons containing little amounts of sulfur realy good Nitrat reducers, since there is a almost anaerobic invirement inside the carbon particles.

One good advice is to rinse/soak the carbon for 24h in RO water before using it.I found that sulfur and PO4 levels drop down to about 5% when changing the water twice in 24 houres.
Another one is to use 3 bags of carbon and to change one every week, since activated carbon looses its "powers" after 2 or 3 days.

By the way, I'm using activated carbon 24/7.

Marc

Bugger
11/05/2004, 08:11 PM
Can carbon remove phyto Plankton???

Bugger
11/05/2004, 10:14 PM
If carbon is only good for 2 to 3 days what about our the carbon in our RO's

Marc Euschen
11/06/2004, 10:46 AM
Hi,

1. any particle can get traped in the carbon, nomather if its phyto, zoo or other particultate matter. But the amount that is "filtered"depends on the setup.
I normale us two stage filters, I us a normal medium to fast flowing filter that contains LS and other Subtrates. The second stage is feed after the first one, but at a much lower flowrate and here I add the carbon or other adsorbers.

2. The carbon in the RO is saturated within a short time as well, normaly some few hundret litres to a bit more as a tausend, depending on the tipe an the load of the water.
But the load of the normal tap water is much lower than the load of the aquariawater.

Marc

Boomer
11/06/2004, 11:06 AM
Deleted

Marc Euschen
11/06/2004, 11:12 AM
@Boomer: I do not have a clue about brand, since I'm european :)

I'm using a Norit Type Carbon and since nobody was able to give me Infos about their products I started to sell it here in Europ as my own Brand :) but just arround my friends since I'm not a good busieness guy !

Marc

Boomer
11/06/2004, 11:20 AM
Any comments on brands or types, Boomer?

You already gave it Marineland Black Diamond, along with SeaChem Labs Matrix.

There are better carbons such as American Norit ROW .8, but this and a number of others are not seen in this hobby.

Here is a recent thread we have had on GAC

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=433358&highlight=GAC

One good advice is to rinse/soak the carbon for 24h in RO water before using it.I found that sulfur and PO4 levels drop down to about 5% when changing the water twice in 24 houres.
Another one is to use 3 bags of carbon and to change one every week, since activated carbon looses its "powers" after 2 or 3 days.

Who's carbon and what kind are you using to get high sulfur and PO4 and silicate ?

Carbon doe not loose its "powers" in 2-3 days, although its capacity has diminished. Rinsing the carbon in a bag a "beating " it to beak loose new surface areas will make it last longer. A simple Methylene Blue test will tell if the GAC is spent or not

Boomer
11/06/2004, 11:27 AM
Marc

OK, I just say this, so which AN GAC are you using. I can help you pick one, maybe you have a good choice already. Ron Litton, USA director of American Norit is someone I know well. I can get you all the info you want :D GAC is like a pet hobby of mine :lol:

Marc Euschen
11/06/2004, 11:34 AM
@Boomer: I/We tested a lot of different brands that are available here in europe. I was not saing that one single product had a problem with PO4,Si,and sulfur at the same time... each one had its own problems, Norit for example had the Sulfur problem as I remeber.

By the way, we used a Iodine to test the remaing capacities and a ICP OES/MS to get the values, Sulfur and PO4 were mesured with a IC.

The AC I'm using right now is one of the many variations of Norit, but these one has a sligth sulfur prblem too... but these is washed out when properly rinsed.

Marc

Marc Euschen
11/06/2004, 11:35 AM
@Boomer: It would be cool to "double" check my GAC... but I've got to goe to my lab to check in the Norit type, since I do not remeber it just like that !

Marc

Marc Euschen
11/06/2004, 11:41 AM
@Boomer: So I got the type of carbon I'm using... its Norit PK 1-3.

Marc

Boomer
11/06/2004, 12:01 PM
I had just typed you some stuff and my buddies pc had crashed....deleted. No need now :D PK 1-3 is a good GAC for the price and what it gives you. If you go back to the above links there are a number for carbons, by aquarium compaines, tested, that are that exact GAC, PK 1-3. Look for Lignite GAC's on those tests and 3 mm grain size, which is PK 1-3. If you look at the other lignite's 4mm, those are AN PK 3-5. The 1-3, means 1-3 mm grain size and the 3-5, means 3-5 mm grain size. Iodine value is not the greatest thing for GAC, for our application. Molasses # or Methylene Blue # is more in order for us. There are std procedures for testing GAC, I I have the book at home. I'll see if I can find it somwhere for you on-line when I get home.

Marc Euschen
11/06/2004, 12:34 PM
Hi Boomer,

I do know the Mathylenblue Test, its a standart test, but of the guys at the lab sugested to the test via Iodine, since the Molecularsize of Methylenblue is rather large.
But I do not remeber all the details, why we ended up with Iodine, to do it with Mb would have been much cheaper, since no expensive equipment like ICP's are needed... but since I got my own one I didn't realy care :D

I like the grain size of the 1-3, since it gives much more suface and displayed better results than the 3-5, or some compresses GAC's that I "played" arround with.

In europe most of the products are made out of the compressed pellets, but IMO they are too expensive and didn't had an as good performance as the PK 1-3 for my "needs".

I've found some other GAC's that did have bigger adsobtion rates, but did adsorb a lot of the trace elements as well. I found that PK 1-3 doesn't do these that much because of its pore size, and that was one of the reasons we used Iodine for testing and we where able to Test it with same equipment we where using for the other tests.

Marc

Boomer
11/06/2004, 04:04 PM
Well, Marc then you are happy and in good shape.

pellets

Most of these are for APC (Air Phase Carbon)

Molecularsize of Methylenblue is rather large

That is the reason behind it :D Iodine is to small, you want a pore size structue that is more on the order of Molasses or Mb. High Iodine # carbons are not all that good for LPC (Liquid Phase Carbon). They almost always yield to tight of a pore structure and just get all plugged up really quick. However, no need for you to worry, I have all that data at home on your GAC, which is an excellent GAC choice :D The one you picked is among the top 5 IMHO, for LPC in this hobby

Boomer
11/06/2004, 07:35 PM
Marc, have you seen this ?

http://www.norit-americas.com/pdf/PK1-3_rev2.pdf

You may want to look at DARCO 12X20 Acid Washed Lignite Granular Activated Carbon and HYDRODARCO 3000 Acid Washed Lignite Granular Activated Carbon. Then there is my favorite and about the best there is for this hobby NORIT RO 0.8 Acid Washed Lignite Activated Carbon. The word "Powdered" appears on their website and that is incorrect "NORIT RO 0.8 Acid Washed Lignite Powdered Activated Carbon." This GAC looks like mechanical pencil lead. It was the one Ron told me to use if I wanted the best.

Marc Euschen
11/07/2004, 04:34 AM
Hi Boomer,

I'll have a look at it, since I'm awake now :D

I selected a "awarage" GAC on purpos, then on one side it was cheap, on the other I din't want to have a "aggresive" GAC that removes everithing, e.g. having a to high adsorbtion level. These is also why I use I carbon with a medium Iodine number, so it shoulb be less successible for the "pure" elements.

The Datasheet is the one I was allready having, exept mine has the Norit Europe Logo on it :D !

Did you read the thing about oxigen on page 2 ? My sheet doesent show these... The resulting question would be now wether the GAC adsorbes disolved oxigen also or not !?
It could be a advantage, since it would enhance the anaerob inveriement these way.

What are the specs of the GAC you're using ?

Thanx again Marc

Boomer
11/07/2004, 11:18 AM
Marc :wavehand:

then on one side it was cheap, on the other I din't want to have a "aggresive" GAC

Yes, those I gave are more expensive and agressive :D


Did you read the thing about oxigen on page 2 ?

No need to, it is on all MSDS on GAC. It is for your protection to know, in case you get stuck in a closed room, with poor ventilation and opened or exposed GAC. It will suck all the O2 out of the air. It has little meaning in a liquid

The info and PDF's are here

http://www.norit-americas.com/default.htm

What are the specs of the GAC you're using ?

Go here and scroll down to Boomer and you will see a mess of links. The bottom ones show data on aquarium grade GAC. I used the Matrix, Maineland and the ones I mentioned above post, direct from Norit.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=433358&highlight=GAC

jfinch
11/07/2004, 11:45 AM
Boomer, I've always looked for bituminous AC, but everything you've referenced above is lignite. I know the lignite has better pore structure but don't they dust pretty bad (soft)? Just curious...

Boomer
11/08/2004, 09:07 AM
Jon ............and Marc, just in case :D

Yes, that is all correct. The issue behind Bit-AC is that is more user friendly, for the reason you gave (less dust, as it is harder). Two of the carbons I mentioned are not Li-Ac but Bi-AC, those would be the Marineland Black Diamond and SeaChem Matrix.

Norit bought out AtoChem a few years ago for their Bit-GAC manufacturing and Calgon bought Barnebey & Sutcliffe, for their CS- GAC (coconut shell). AutoChem, now part of Norit, makes their Bit-AC, "Norit GAC"

Go here and look at NORIT GAC 830 Bituminous Granular Activated Carbon and other "NORIT GAC" = Bit-GAC.

http://www.norit-americas.com/1.2.cfm


PDF on Norit GAC 830

http://www.norit-americas.com/pdf/GAC830_rev3.pdf

For testing GAC the std ref is;

Agency Technology Transfer, Oct 1973.
Process Design Manual for Carbon Adsorption
EPA 625/1-71-002a

I can't find it on line

Jon read and look at the tables on these;

http://web.archive.org/web/20030624143848/www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1997/jul/product/default.asp

http://web.archive.org/web/20010211125618/www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1998/may/features/1/default.asp

http://web.archive.org/web/20000918065819/http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1998/june/features/1/default.asp

jfinch
11/08/2004, 04:14 PM
:thumbsup:

Thanks!

Marc Euschen
11/08/2004, 04:47 PM
Thanx again Boomer for the Links !

One article gave me some nice ideas :D... I never tought about using my specrophotometer actively to messure the content of "yellow substances" in the aquarium...

These is really a cool and easy way to check for the remaining capacity of the GAC and to determine the flowrate trough my second filter containing the GAC.

Its interesting that nobody is mentioning the Sulfates, just the Phosphates... ?
I must say I stumble over the eleveted levels of Sulfate by mistake... when I was
doing Ionchromatogprahig Test t get the PO4 levels, because then I've gotten a second peak in the reading that was much higher then the PO4 one... and it turned out to be a Sulfate Peak. These would have gone unnoticed if I would have tested the PO4 photomotricaly.

Marc

Boomer
11/08/2004, 05:59 PM
Sulfates

I wouldn't' worry about that, NSW has about 2,700 mg / l. Only Na+ and Cl- are higher. I would worry more about the Silica (quartz), where some GAC's are 2 %. But the stuff is very unsoluble, so it is no real issue :D


specrophotometer

We had a long thread on this. It got a little heated at times.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=236477&perpage=25&highlight=yellowing%20card&pagenumber=1


These is really a cool and easy way to check for the remaining capacity of the GAC and to determine the flowrate trough my second filter containing the GAC..

I memtioned it before some what but you misunderstood :D Methylene Blue test, not Methylene #. You add a known amount of Mb from a container to the input of the pump and look for a loss of intensity of the blue water color at the output. Spent GAC will not retain much of the Mb. New GAC will such almost all of it up :D For flow rate just get a flow meter. You can also use passive testing. x Mb in container with y amount of GAC, just let it sit for z hrs. It will be rapidly adsorbed in new GAC and spent GAC the water just stays blue

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 12:37 AM
@Boomer: According to my Sources the Sulfate Levels in NSW are about 900ppm not 2700 ! I was having arround 2000ppm at one point, and my corals where developing severe problems, after I lowered it to abut 1200ppm the corals started to look much better again...

About the Methylenblue, I think now you missunderstood me :D I ment to check the water it self for it yellow colorants, before and after a change of the GAC, or againt a blind sample with fresh ASW.

I'm also having a process photometer, that could be used to trak the changes over time, tougheter with a printer... I could be a cool thing to even see if the water chanes over the period of a day !? Maybe there is a bildup of substances that change the turbidity related to the amount of light, or simple linked to the methabolism of the corals ??

Marc

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 12:52 AM
@Boomer: You're also having some knowledge about Zeolithes ? You mentioned it in one of the other threads... and thats a real interesting topic that I do know little about !

BTW The Norit had only a slight adsrobands of Metalls, according to the ICP ananlysis I made... but the lodine Levels I used as a reference is not realy accurate, since Iodine is one of the trickiest Elements to detect... it might have even reacted with the walls of the glas vial we used... Other Elements dind't show a noticeable change.
But our method was a screening or scan more than a quantitative analysis of a single element, so we where some where in the ppm's and not ppb's where most of the trace elements are...

Marc

Boomer
11/09/2004, 03:24 AM
According to my Sources the Sulfate Levels in NSW are about 900ppm not 2700 !

This appears to be a major mistake both on the net and in some books. Here is an example, look at the two tables and compare. One is ~900 and the other is ~2700. By the same author on his own web page :lol:

http://www.delloyd.50megs.com/moreinfo/seawater.html#Top

I don't know where this 900 comes from :confused: I have 6 seawater chemistry books and 4 oceanography textbooks and they all say ~2700 but one which says ~900.


Here are some better ones
http://www.biosbcc.net/ocean/marinesci/02ocean/swcomposition.htm

http://plaza.ufl.edu/mrosenme/Seawater_Chemistry.htm


and

http://www.indiana.edu/~g131/chem4.gif









You're also having some knowledge about Zeolithes ?[

You might say that :D Here is a search on me on Zeolites here at RC

Clinoptilolite (http://reefcentral.com/forums/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=3910848&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending)


Zeolites (http://reefcentral.com/forums/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=3910849&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending)

Boomer
11/09/2004, 03:45 AM
adsrobands of Metalls

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 04:41 AM
@Boomer: I'm frustrated.... you where right again... well I to be honest, I do know whats right anymore, regarding sulfur ans Sulfates. I googled a little bit and found your figures of 2680/2700ppm !

But I'm having a list that states the content of Sulfur (S) in the NSW at a level of 904ppm. The levels I got back trought ICP where 1300/1700/2200 (tree different tanks of three different owners). The levels I've got are as mentioned elementar Sulfur, SO4 was "cracked" prior to the analysis, so the total levels of S should be even higher.

The tank with the 2000++ S levels was the tank I mentioned before, that had troubles with corals, after some waterchanges, the levels sunk to the levels of my own tank, arround 1300ppm anb the prblems with the corals started to fade...

The big question is now, wether my readings are accurate or not !? But some of them where tested in different Labs and showed simmilar results.

What does Randy say about Sulfur/Sulfate levels ?

I save the Zeolith thing for the evening, allways save the best for end !!! :D

Marc

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/09/2004, 07:26 AM
Sulfate should be about 2,700 ppm in normal (35 ppt) seawater. In terms of sulfur alone, that is 900 ppm.

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 07:31 AM
@Randy: now we're getting somewhere !!
But if seawater is (what ever the aporpriate term is) "cracked", then even the sulfur from the sulfates should add to the level. I'm wondering why these dind't show up in my readings... since I've got 1300ppm of S, after cracking it... shouldn't it be arround 3600ppm then ?

Marc

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/09/2004, 07:37 AM
There is no significant sulfur in seawater besides that which is contained in sulfate. That's what I meant above. The 900 ppm is the weight of the sulfur atom in the sulfate ion.

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 07:54 AM
@Randy: Now your info has found its way even to switzerland :D !

I was a bit too confused... or I din't look properly at it.

Thanx

Habib
11/09/2004, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by Marc Euschen
@Randy: Now your info has found its way even to switzerland :D !



I can hear you "Jodeln". :D :)

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 08:17 AM
@Habib: Is it also so freezing cold up there in the flat lands of the Netherlands ?

Habib
11/09/2004, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Marc Euschen
@Habib: Is it also so freezing cold up there in the flat lands of the Netherlands ?

It did freeze slightly last night and is now something like plus 6 Celcius. It will get colder.

Marc Euschen
11/09/2004, 09:11 AM
@Habib: same here... winter gets closer ! Where in the Netherlands are you from ?

So I'm going to have a look in the aquarium and feed the fish... these will warm me up !

Boomer
11/09/2004, 09:16 AM
Marc

I should have paid more attention and wasn't thinkin' :( That website I gave gives one as Sulfur and one as sulfate. I should be kicking myself in the butt end :lol: Im surprise Randy isn't scolding me for such an error. I always think ions and not atoms for seawater. It goes like this, as I'm sure you know;

Sulfate SO4- has 4 O ea ( 15.99), with 16, and 1 S (32.055), so the MW of sulfate is 32.066 ( 4 x 15.99) = 96.026 . So, sulfur makes up 33.393 % and the O4 makes up 66.607. So, 33.393 % x 2700 = 901.61 S. Or if 901 = 33.39% then 100 % = (100 % / 33.393 % ) x 901.61 = 2700

Is it also so freezing cold up there in the flat lands of the Netherlands ?

Well Marc, it is the same in Northern Minnesota. Is was - 7 C this morning. Right now it is 0 C.

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/09/2004, 01:22 PM
Im surprise Randy isn't scolding me for such an error.

I knew you'd scold yourself better than I could. :D

wstellwagen
11/10/2004, 01:39 PM
Randy or Boomer
Since so many people use kent and ESV products, do you know of any problems with them?

Walt

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/10/2004, 02:04 PM
I don't know of any problems with them. :)

RasBobre
11/12/2004, 08:56 AM
Randy - I find this thread interesting, yet over ny head in some instances. I am a member of MARS (avatar) and am looking for some carbon for a group buy. I have found a good deal, $$ wise, but not too sure of the quality. Could you possibly give me an opinion on this carbon? Thanks. -Robert

http://www.activatedcarbon.com/AquariumCarbon.html

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/12/2004, 11:00 AM
Sorry, I can't tell anything about it that you don't already know.

samsfishnchips
11/12/2004, 07:28 PM
guys,

can you please tell me which is the best way to use carbon, in a bag in the sump, HOB filter, ect, thx

sam

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/12/2004, 08:33 PM
IMO, there is no single best way. It certainly takes up organics faster in something like a cannister filter where water is pushed strongly over it. If you want that, then that is a good way. That is how I do it. But it also works more slowly (lasting longer), passively in a bag.

samsfishnchips
11/13/2004, 02:15 PM
I had a canister but I heard so much degative on them, that I decide not to put one on the reef tank,

by the way, if a put the canister with carbon, would I see any gains by putting also fine filter polyester sheets? any degative?

do you think I can changes them monthly or should be remove weekly and the carbon monthy,

thx and have a good day,

sam

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/13/2004, 02:50 PM
I do not think it desirable to put floss in it unless you really do change it very frequently (every couple of days, if stuff is collecting).

samsfishnchips
11/13/2004, 04:01 PM
nah, that seems like too much, will just leave it with carbon them, so mechanical filtration is a no go them,

I just though that I might help the water, by catching all those small particles,

I currently don't have any mechanical filtration, oh well leave it alone them on that department,

thx again randy,

sam

Randy Holmes-Farley
11/13/2004, 07:24 PM
You're welcome.

Good luck! :)

Snarkys
02/20/2007, 10:35 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=3724304#post3724304 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Boomer
Marc, have you seen this ?

http://www.norit-americas.com/pdf/PK1-3_rev2.pdf

You may want to look at DARCO 12X20 Acid Washed Lignite Granular Activated Carbon and HYDRODARCO 3000 Acid Washed Lignite Granular Activated Carbon. Then there is my favorite and about the best there is for this hobby NORIT RO 0.8 Acid Washed Lignite Activated Carbon. The word "Powdered" appears on their website and that is incorrect "NORIT RO 0.8 Acid Washed Lignite Powdered Activated Carbon." This GAC looks like mechanical pencil lead. It was the one Ron told me to use if I wanted the best.

there a big difference between the RO and the ROX? I have seen you recomend both.

NORIT RO 0.8 Acid Washed Lignite Powdered Activated Carbon.

NORIT RO 0.8 is an extruded carbon, suitable for a wide range of applications in the food, chemical and bulk pharmaceutical industries. NORIT RO 0.8 has a particle shape, which gives an extremely low hydrodynamic pressure drop in liquid phase applications. Its unique pore size distribution and superior hardness make NORIT RO 0.8 particularly suitable for decolorization of cane sugar syrup. NORIT RO 0.8 can be thermally reactivated.
http://www.norit-americas.com/pdf/RO_08_rev5.pdf

NORIT ROX 0.8 Acid Washed Lignite Powdered Activated Carbon.

NORIT ROX 0.8 is an acid washed extruded carbon, which offers both superior adsorption properties and an ultra high purity level. NORIT ROX 0.8 is used for the purification of ultra-pure water, and in the purification of condensate water, organic and inorganic fine chemicals and pharmaceutical intermediates. NORIT ROX 0.8 has an extremely low mineral content and is used to purify demineralised starch based sweeteners. NORIT ROX 0.8 is a steam activated carbon that can be thermally reactivated.

http://www.norit-americas.com/pdf/ROX_08_rev4.pdf

Snarkys
03/01/2007, 09:56 AM
for anyone who might also be interested in this i found the answer.

The RO family is a specialty type carbon and used primarily in high purity applications like food and pharmaceutical.

RO 0.8 is an unwashed steam activated carbon

ROX 0.8 is acid washed has a lot less ash

Boomer
03/01/2007, 03:00 PM
I see you have found the answer Snarkys. I have been gone for a month and just returned. As far as the two Norit's go the ROX 0.8 is a better choice, as it is acid washed.

Snarkys
03/01/2007, 03:02 PM
ya he said the RO is rather dusty .

Snarkys
03/01/2007, 04:33 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9368269#post9368269 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Boomer
I see you have found the answer Snarkys. I have been gone for a month and just returned. As far as the two Norit's go the ROX 0.8 is a better choice, as it is acid washed.

Just out of curiosity , what carbon do you use? I have read all of the articles you have recommended and countless posts you have made on the subject , it would be interesting to know what you currently use at home : )

BTW how was your vacation ?

Warner Marine
03/01/2007, 09:52 PM
Hmmmm... ROX 0.8

Never heard of it ;)

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/48494betarox.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/48494rox.JPG

BLockamon
03/01/2007, 10:46 PM
I just got in some KNOP activated carbon. I'd never seen any before, but I thought I'd give it a try.

Well, the carbon is a large pellet, similar to the Kent Marine. I have always though that the grannular media works better.

So, would it be worth it to break it up a little to get more surface area? Would there be any problem with that?

Snarkys
03/02/2007, 08:43 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9371811#post9371811 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Warner Marine
Hmmmm... ROX 0.8

Never heard of it ;)


http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/48494rox.JPG

forgive me if this is a silly question, is that brown one pure iron oxide or GAC impregnated with iron oxide ?

Boomer
03/02/2007, 09:15 AM
I used mostly SeaChem Labs Matrix.

That stuff Jon posted is just a tease it is really dog chow :D

Jon

What is that 1.2 for, 1.2 mm dia ? The .8 in Norit ROW, RO or ROX is .8 mm dia. I still have a container full of Norit and it is smaller than yours. Since it is extruded GAC, is it Peat or Lignite or is it Bitum. Norit uses Peat or Lignite in their "pencil lead" carbons. That does look like nice GAC you have. Any specs on it ?

Warner Marine
03/02/2007, 09:59 AM
Hey Boomer,

Yeah, that's ROX 0.8...

Fantastic stuff. Performing very well in my own testing. 1.2 is just indicating our "third" GAC we have in-house. 1.0 is our granular 12 x 20 lignite, 1.1 is our granular bituminous (for the anti-silica dust folks) and 1.2 is the ROX 0.8 as an upcoming product.
PHOSaR PLUS is an upcoming blend of our original PHOSaR GFO and ROX 0.8...

Boomer
03/02/2007, 10:43 AM
Ok Jon, it just seems to [email protected]@k bigger thn mine. Maybe it's just the photo. It is great stuff. Norit use to have only ROW .8 and now they have like 4 or 5 versions. They are my favorite GAC's :D

Warner Marine
03/02/2007, 11:51 AM
Boomer=GAC connoisseur :D

Snarkys
03/02/2007, 03:18 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9365611#post9365611 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Snarkys
for anyone who might also be interested in this i found the answer.

The RO family is a specialty type carbon and used primarily in high purity applications like food and pharmaceutical.

RO 0.8 is an unwashed steam activated carbon

ROX 0.8 is acid washed has a lot less ash

I forgot to add the other one : )

ROY 0.8 is acid washed and then caustic washed to neutralize the acid

BLockamon
03/02/2007, 06:18 PM
Acid washed with what? Typically phosphoric acid is used; are they using something else to get low phosphate?

Snarkys
03/02/2007, 07:20 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9378742#post9378742 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by BLockamon
Acid washed with what? Typically phosphoric acid is used; are they using something else to get low phosphate?

This is a common misconception . there is acid activated and acid washed.

This is just my understanding of it , someone correct me if i am wrong : )

The first step is carbonization . They heat the coal/wood/peat/coconut at 400–600°C in an oxygen-deficient atmosphere that won't support combustion. they then activate the carbonized particles with either chemicals or steam. The activation removes the decomposition products from the carbonization phase and develops a more porous structure.

acid activated is where they use an acid to activate the carbon, typically phosphoric acid. All of the carbons we use are steam activated.

acid washing is different. after it is activated it is washed with acid to open up more surface area/pore space and remove a large portion of the ash. The ash is what contains most of the P04 that could be released into the tank so acid washing actually reduces PO4 leaching . I belive they use nitric or hydrochloric acid for this.