Matrix Chamber?

[johniii]

I am currently in the process of building a sump for my 220. I am going to build a chamber with forced flow to fill with matrix. I have two questions.
1. What is the size of the Matrix? I need to drill some holes and do not want it to fall through.
2. Would you recommend the matrix chamber go before or after the skimmer? Or does it even matter?

Thank You in Advance

 

[jef4y]

Matrix after the skimmer and 1/4" holes should work fine.


iPhone, Tapatalk, Tpyos

 

[johniii]

JeF4y;812045 wrote: Matrix after the skimmer and 1/4" holes should work fine.


iPhone, Tapatalk, Tpyos

Jeff you are the man.
P.s. I may actually get this tank up without selling it

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

 

[sewer urchin]

I'm sure that the Seachem Rep will chime in quickly, they are pretty good about that.

But if you are like me, when there is a project that needs to get done it's difficult to think about anything else.

From what I understand there are different size for different products, the Pond Matrix is a larger size ( I don't have any so I can't talk about that). I have the regular Matrix and I used a 1/4 inch bit ( 3/8 might be a tad large) and nothing fell through. That or the thickness of a table saw blade for slots in the bottom of a basket would be fine.
I installed mine before the skimmer so that if any bacteria sloughs off the skimmer will catch it ( like most Bio filters).

If it is OK to piggy back on your question... Seachem could you talk a little about your de*nitrate product line. Does it absorb the nitrate (is it likely release ), or is it entirely biological (anaerobic nitrogen fixation). What are the differences between the two products.
Thanks

 

[johniii]

I would like to know about de-nitrate also

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

 

[seachem]

Thanks for all of the posts!

The Matrix and de*nitrate are very similar. De*nitrate is a smaller size and requires lower flow through it, in order to function as a nitrifying (remove ammonia and nitrite) and denitrifying filter (remove nitrate). The flow rate should be less than 50 gph through De*nitrate.

The Matrix is larger (a little less than 1/2" diameter) and does not require a specific flow rate, as it will function as a nitrifying and denitrifying filter at any flow rate. We also have the Pond Matrix which is the same, but larger in diameter (~1") and is ideal for use in large sumps. Either will work.

Both media's are entirely biological and will not release anything back into the tank. They both provide an ideal environment for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria colonization.

As for the placement of the Matrix, I would recommend after the skimmer so that any excess "junk" is removed before it reaches the Matrix.

I hope this helps!

 

[johniii]

Seachem;812348 wrote: Thanks for all of the posts!

The Matrix and de*nitrate are very similar. De*nitrate is a smaller size and requires lower flow through it, in order to function as a nitrifying (remove ammonia and nitrite) and denitrifying filter (remove nitrate). The flow rate should be less than 50 gph through De*nitrate.

The Matrix is larger (a little less than 1/2" diameter) and does not require a specific flow rate, as it will function as a nitrifying and denitrifying filter at any flow rate. We also have the Pond Matrix which is the same, but larger in diameter (~1") and is ideal for use in large sumps. Either will work.

Both media's are entirely biological and will not release anything back into the tank. They both provide an ideal environment for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria colonization.

As for the placement of the Matrix, I would recommend after the skimmer so that any excess "junk" is removed before it reaches the Matrix.

I hope this helps!

When you say 50gph for the de-nitrate. Is that gph x surface area As a 3" tube has a surface area of 7.065 sq/in but a sump with a flow through chamber 18"x10" has a surface area of 180 sq/in. I guess what I am asking is how do you calculate the flow through? Or is the de-nitrate best suited for a reactor where flow can be controlled more efficiently?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jef4y]

John, just use regular matrix. Cheap, easy & all the cool-kids are doing it =)

 

[johniii]

JeF4y;812358 wrote: John, just use regular matrix. Cheap, easy & all the cool-kids are doing it =)

That's what I am planning on. About 6 liters worth. Just wanted the info for future use. And I I tend to over think things a little too

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

 

[seachem]

The de-nitrate is best placed where you can control the flow such as in a reactor or in a trickle filter. The flow should be 50 gph or less...no need to calculate the surface area!

 

[kirkwood]

Is Matrix more beneficial to the system than running Carbon and GFO? I'm assuming that Matrix becomes more beneficial the more you increase your bioload?

 

[acroholic]

Kirkwood;812609 wrote: Is Matrix more beneficial to the system than running Carbon and GFO? I'm assuming that Matrix becomes more beneficial the more you increase your bioload?

I would look at GFO and Carbon as supplemental to the bio filter of the tank, and Matrix as the biofilter of the tank, in addition to the LR, etc. Matrix is used in reef tanks as a substitute for the biofilter you would lose with a minimalist type aquascape. Or you might just use it for the nitrate removing properties. I have it to remove nitrates primarily. You might not need Matrix if you have enough LR or don't have elevated Nitrate levels to start with.

GFO reduces phosphates either added or released in the tank, and Carbon likewise removes organics.

They are all part of a multi prong approach to remove nutrients from the water column, which also includes skimming, mechanical filtration, macro algae growth, etc., and one is not necessarily better than the other, IMO.

 

[seachem]

Thanks for the posts!

The Matrix is not necessarily more beneficial when ran in conjunction with carbons or GFO, but it may function more effectively when pre-filtration is in place. We recommend placing filter media in the following order when possible:

mechanical (sponge, wool) --> chemical (carbon, Purigen) --> biological (Matrix)

This will ensure that the mechanical and chemical filters are picking up all of the large undissolved and dissolved particulate matter, before the water reaches the Matrix. This will prevent the pores from becoming clogged over time by unnecessary debris.

 

[kirkwood]

So it sounds like it would be best for the Matrix to daisy chain a pair of reactors so that the first reactor was for carbon which then ran directly to the second reactor for Matrix. In this example assume that the reactor pump is in the return portion of the sump after the water has run through a filter sock, skimmer, and macroalgae.

Thanks for the posts!


mechanical (sponge, wool) --> chemical (carbon, Purigen) --> biological (Matrix)

QUOTE]

 

[johniii]

I am going to dump the refugium and use the matrix instead. I have enough room where I can always add the refugium in later if it turns out I need it. I get tired of having to clean and prune macro. Trying to put the new setup into easy mode

If the matrix is processing nitrates. Then the only macro algae needed will be for tang food. I would believe the copepods will colonize on the matrix just as they would on lr rubble.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

 

[seachem]

That sounds like a plan!
:up: