PDA

View Full Version : GFO Questions


Neptune777
12/08/2006, 12:10 PM
Is there a difference between RowaPhos, Phospure without the carbon and other stuff mixed in (Dr.Foster and Smith), Warner Marine Phosar, and Phosban? Are they all the same GFO material at different prices? Does being wet make Rowaphos any more effective?

Of the group Phospure is way cheaper. Looks like a copy of Phosban..

Curious minds want to know! There is an interesting thread in the SPS forum on this but I would like for Randy to give his expert opinion....

Neptune777
12/08/2006, 12:12 PM
here is a link to the phospure stuff:

http://www.drsfostersmith.com/Product/Prod_Display.cfm?pcatid=13963&N=2004+113810

Randy Holmes-Farley
12/08/2006, 12:24 PM
There are differences that are readily apparent by just looking at them, but I do not know whether these differences translate into important potency or impurity differences or not. I'm slowly testing them, but won't have any data for a while.

Neptune777
12/08/2006, 12:40 PM
Thanks Randy...I look forward to your analysis. Is thios a question you are prepared to answer now: Does GFO in a wet state (Rowa) work any better than Dry stored GFO(Phosban/Phospure)?

Randy Holmes-Farley
12/08/2006, 12:46 PM
I do not see such a correlation yet. :)

palmerc
12/09/2006, 02:11 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8707805#post8707805 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Neptune777
Thanks Randy...I look forward to your analysis. Is thios a question you are prepared to answer now: Does GFO in a wet state (Rowa) work any better than Dry stored GFO(Phosban/Phospure)?

From what I've read there should be no difference.

However I have an observation. Being wet the ROWAphos actually has less active (GFO) per unit mass/volume i.e 100g of ROWAphso will contain less GFO than 100g of Phosban.

So theoretically Phosban will be more economical for the same mass/volume.

Anyone care to comment?

Boomer
12/09/2006, 02:34 PM
Form a mass/volume rating you may want to look at Warner Marine PhoSar. This is a granular GFO, that is porous like GAC and has much greater absorbency.

Randy Holmes-Farley
12/10/2006, 09:41 AM
From what I've read there should be no difference.

I've never seen any useful comparative test. I have seen some published that were not done correctly.