# CO2 thru a canister filter



## alaskajeff (Jan 9, 2014)

When I first started with co2 I used the DIY yeast and sugar method. I ran the line from the co2 bottle directly into the intake of my canister filter; it actually worked very well. The only downside I have heard about doing this is that in can prematurely wear out the impeller in your filter. I never had that problem though.


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

CO2 and bio-bacteria don't play well together. Though this seems to be more of an issue with small filters, not so much with canisters.

In some canisters with rubber seals and gaskets, the carbonic acid formed from dissolved CO2 will make them brittle over time. Silicone and neoprene seem to be less affected, or not affected at all.

And in some rare cases, I've heard CO2 can accumulate until the impeller is surrounded by it, and can therefore no longer move water or re-establish priming by itself. Whether this can occur would depend heavily on filter construction, and probably other specific circumstances also.

That's about all I can think of. Haven't tried it with an Eheim yet, but will soon. Been doing it a long time with a Magnum 350, which is subject to none of the conditions I listed. In fact it's built more like a CO2 reactor than any other canister design I'm aware of.


----------



## alaskajeff (Jan 9, 2014)

DarkCobra said:


> CO2 and bio-bacteria don't play well together. Though this seems to be more of an issue with small filters, not so much with canisters.
> 
> In some canisters with rubber seals and gaskets, the carbonic acid formed from dissolved CO2 will make them brittle over time. Silicone and neoprene seem to be less affected, or not affected at all.
> 
> ...


 The filter I ran my co2 into was an Eheim 2213.


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

alaskajeff said:


> The filter I ran my co2 into was an Eheim 2213.


That's one of the two Eheims I just bought. The other is an Ecco 2234. Didn't bother to look up in advance whether CO2 on intake was an option, was just going to try it and see. But good to hear it works well on one of them.


----------



## gSTiTcH (Feb 21, 2013)

I've been running CO2 into a Griggs reactor then into my canister for about 8 months now. No problems to report here.


----------



## tipsy mcstager (Feb 3, 2013)

DarkCobra said:


> CO2 and bio-bacteria don't play well together. Though this seems to be more of an issue with small filters, not so much with canisters.
> 
> In some canisters with rubber seals and gaskets, the carbonic acid formed from dissolved CO2 will make them brittle over time. Silicone and neoprene seem to be less affected, or not affected at all.
> 
> ...


 


lol, thats just what i've been useing over two years now! (mag350)
and a 3/4 line tap like this on the intake hose. 




had one of these "reactors" for the outflow side hose but it was just plain junk!! it leaked, and the noise was unbearable.






thats an old pic up top,before i got a 5# tank










i clean the filter tank about every month, month and a half. and see very little yellowing (carbonic acid build up) and other then the O ring on the rim of lid, the two other gaskets inside are infact neoprene!

just my 2cents:icon_redf


----------



## HUNTER (Sep 4, 2012)

I put a disc diffusser under the two of my canisters intake for about a year, never had a problem besides the canisters burp every once in a while.


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

*set up pic*

Here's a pic of my set up. Been about 2 weeks running and no issues have surfaced so far. Have not touched the CO2 regulator needle valve or the canister filter outflow double tap since the initial setting and the frequency and intensity of "burping" have either greatly decreased or is non existent. The swirling micro bubbles are difficult to see unless your inches from the tank. In fact, the "pearling" bubbles from the HC in the tank are more noticeable then the CO2 mist.

The CO2 is synced to the lighting and they both switch on twice a day. The presence of the micro bubbles is not evident for almost an hour after the CO2 is solenoid open. This is my first experience with inline diffusers so, is this normal? I know that this type of diffuser requires 30-40 psi to operate so, the pressure needs time to build up but, that seems like a long time.

Also, the orientation of the diffuser is different from the way the instruction sheet has it positioned with the CO2 line on the top. I have mine on the bottom to prevent tube kinking. Any forseeable problems with this diffuser position?

Thanks again for everybody chiming in. Your imput is so greatly appreciated! :bounce:


----------



## Jeff5614 (Dec 29, 2005)

I've been running an inline Atomic atomizer on the inlet of an Eheim 2075. No burps, no leaks, etc. It works as well as any reactor I've used without the usual flow reduction caused by placing a reactor on the outlet of the canister.

I was concerned about the effect it might have on the bacteria in the filter, but if there's not a build up of CO2 in the filter, which I don't think there is in mine, then I can see no difference injecting the CO2 directly into the canister versus CO2 enriched water flowing through the filter.


----------



## bostoneric (Sep 7, 2011)

looks great to me! i ran one of those inline diffusers for years without a problem ever.

roud:



BeastMaster said:


> Here's a pic of my set up. Been about 2 weeks running and no issues have surfaced so far. Have not touched the CO2 regulator needle valve or the canister filter outflow double tap since the initial setting and the frequency and intensity of "burping" have either greatly decreased or is non existent. The swirling micro bubbles are difficult to see unless your inches from the tank. In fact, the "pearling" bubbles from the HC in the tank are more noticeable then the CO2 mist.
> 
> The CO2 is synced to the lighting and they both switch on twice a day. The presence of the micro bubbles is not evident for almost an hour after the CO2 is solenoid open. This is my first experience with inline diffusers so, is this normal? I know that this type of diffuser requires 30-40 psi to operate so, the pressure needs time to build up but, that seems like a long time.
> 
> ...


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

bostoneric said:


> looks great to me! i ran one of those inline diffusers for years without a problem ever.
> 
> roud:


Thanks bostoneric. I hope I have as much success with this set up. Reactors seem like an efficent method of CO2 saturation but loss of flow rate in a long tank would not work in my tank set up. :bounce:


----------



## Spiffyfish (Jan 30, 2014)

You can always flip the diffuser around and zip tie the co2 line to the canister tubing so it won't kink.


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

Spiffyfish said:


> You can always flip the diffuser around and zip tie the co2 line to the canister tubing so it won't kink.


Thanks Spiffy. Will do that if this diffuser orientation creates a problem. :bounce:


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

*Set up Theories*


contact time is maximized for atomized CO2 micro bubbles as they enter thru the intake line, passing thru the filter media (causing turbulence currents) and further agitation and final atomization by the filter's impeller
increased operating pressure by atomizer (<30psi) forces CO2 to go into solution, pressure remains constant thru filter canister and is boosted further by the filter impeller; as CO2 saturated water enters the tank, the decrease in pressure allows CO2 to come out of solution in the form of micro bubbles (analogy- opening a can of soda)
CO2 micro bubble formation in the tank can be controlled by adjusting the needle valve on the CO2 regulator to maintain needed CO2 concentration levels and throttling the canister's outflow valve to control water flow rate and back pressure

Pros

more efficient CO2 absorption, less CO2 needed to achieve dissolved levels
decreased CO2 loss due to reducing/eliminating bubbles reaching surface
removes need for in-tank CO2 diffuser, cleaner look

Possible Cons

formation of carbonic acid has an effect on the canister filter o-ring seals
CO2 bubbles in the pump chamber causes damage to impeller 
trapped CO2 bubbles causes noisy and disturbing "burping" in the tank
excessive micro CO2 bubbles form a distractive effervescence in the tank

So with these points made, are there any open discussions that can disprove theories or any actual long term experiences with this set up that support these points or discredit them? Any points additional points I missed? All comments welcome. :bounce:


----------



## scape (Nov 27, 2010)

HUNTER said:


> I put a disc diffusser under the two of my canisters intake for about a year, never had a problem besides the canisters burp every once in a while.


Me too but for 2.5 years, no problems.


Fyi Marineland C-220


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

scape said:


> Me too but for 2.5 years, no problems.
> Fyi Marineland C-220



Wow. Your having good success with your set up. Can I ask what size tank is being used and a little info about CO2 gas rate (bps) and are canisters running at full speed (any outflow throttle valves)? Any equipment pics? Thanks again for participating! :bounce:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

alaskajeff said:


> When I first started with co2 I used the DIY yeast and sugar method. I ran the line from the co2 bottle directly into the intake of my canister filter; it actually worked very well. The only downside I have heard about doing this is that in can prematurely wear out the impeller in your filter. I never had that problem though.



Thanks Jeff for participating. I know that you operated this set up w/ a Ehiem 2213 and was just wondering if you had noticed any pitting (small dimples) on the impeller, the impeller cover or wobbling (excessive wear) of the impeller shaft? Any leaking, stiffness or cracking of the o ring seal?

Was there any "burping" of bubbles and if your still running this set up, were the CO2 bubbles coming out of the canister and through the tubing/outflow pipe visible or did the bubbles form as the water entered the tank? Mahalo for you input! :bounce:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

DarkCobra said:


> CO2 and bio-bacteria don't play well together. Though this seems to be more of an issue with small filters, not so much with canisters.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks DarkCobra for participating. I thought I was starting something new with this set up but it appears a lot of forum members have or are operating with CO2 injection into a canister filter.

I was just if you have any references for adverse effects of CO2 on nitrifying bacteria? You mentioned that you've been injecting CO2 into a Magnum 350 & was wondering if you throttle your water outflow and do you know what you CO2 injecting rate is set @ (bps)? Lastly, what kind of CO2 injection are are you using (inline atomizer, reactor, direct T line)?
Any pics of your equipment set up?
Thanks again. :bounce:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

BeastMaster said:


> I was just if you have any references for adverse effects of CO2 on nitrifying bacteria? You mentioned that you've been injecting CO2 into a Magnum 350 & was wondering if you throttle your water outflow and do you know what you CO2 injecting rate is set @ (bps)? Lastly, what kind of CO2 injection are are you using (inline atomizer, reactor, direct T line)?


Nitrifying bacteria have pH preferences. Which vary according to species, and who you ask. It's not a stretch to at least believe that at some portion of a filter where CO2 is being injected will be low pH - lower than the tank water in general - and capable of slowing bacteria down. The question is how much, and given the conflicting info out there, I believe my own eyes.

I have injected CO2 into four different filters. In ascending order of size, a Red Sea Nano, Aquaclear 20, Aquaclear 70, and Magnum canister. Usually by running an airline into the intake strainer, sometimes with a non-biodegradable cigarette filter in the end of the airline to act as a pre-diffuser. On the Magnum, for a while I used an Atomic inline diffuser on the intake side. I don't use bubble counters, never found I needed one. And I never throttle flow. Simple setups, no pictures needed.

In doing this, on the smallest two filters (Red Sea & AC20) I found the media never gets dirty. Zero accumulation of the gunk that you normally expect. I interpret this as a lack of bacteria proliferation.

I also ran two AC20's side by side in the same tank, one being used to diffuse CO2 and the other not, identical flow rates and media. CO2 stayed clean, non-CO2 got dirty.

As for the effect on the AC70 or Magnum, if there is one, it's too small to notice by inspecting the media.

And as for the effect of CO2 on actual nitrification, well, that's hard to measure in a planted tank. That dual AC20 setup accidentally ran for three weeks _without media_, providing flow only in a heavily stocked and planted tank. The water got cloudy and the substrate got mulmy (due to lack of mechanical filtration I think), but there was no measurable ammonia/nitrite; the plants took care of it alone.

So that's why I don't worry about injecting CO2 into large filters like canisters.


----------



## scape (Nov 27, 2010)

BeastMaster said:


> Wow. Your having good success with your set up. Can I ask what size tank is being used and a little info about CO2 gas rate (bps) and are canisters running at full speed (any outflow throttle valves)? Any equipment pics? Thanks again for participating! :bounce:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Sure it is a 29 gallon with the filter at full speed. The co2 bps are faster than I can count.. maybe 9-11? I set the pressure at 18 psi and the bubbles come out of the disc diffuser nice and micro tiny. The intake inhales most all the bubbles except for a random few. I have a a p.h controller that I have set to a drop checker in the avocado yellow range. 

I have some equipment pics somewhere around here..


----------



## zemnar (Sep 6, 2013)

I haven't used an inline diffuser but I have been using an atomic in-tank diffuser and running that just underneath the intake to further chop up the co2 and diffuse it further. This setup has been working great for me for the past 3 months.

I barely have any effervescence visible in the tank and the canister (magnum 350) just requires burping about once a month, which is no big deal for me.

I plan to proactively change out the o-ring at the lid twice a year just to keep up with any corrosion of the o-ring material. Though I have heard mixed feedback in this area but am going to do so to be safe anyways...

Re: the time it takes to have the diffuser start pushing bubbles. I have seen this with my atomic diffuser as well. It takes time for the pressure to build up in the lines before the bubbles will be visible. This seems to be normal from what I've read of others experiences.

Brian


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

zemnar said:


> I haven't used an inline diffuser but I have been using an atomic in-tank diffuser and running that just underneath the intake to further chop up the co2 and diffuse it further. This setup has been working great for me for the past 3 months.
> 
> I barely have any effervescence visible in the tank and the canister (magnum 350) just requires burping about once a month, which is no big deal for me.
> 
> ...


Thanks Brian. If you can remember, when you do your O-ring replacement, can you post on the condition of the old seal (brittle, material hardening or discoloration, corrosion or pitting of the seal) and any observations on the impeller when you do your canister cleaning. With regards to the time delay of visual bubbles of CO2, I can see a delay of 5-7 min to occur for a in tank diffuser and up to 10 min for an inline diffuser that requires a higher pressure to operate but a 60 min delay means there are other factors involved. What they are, I have yet to find an explanation. Thanks again! :bounce:


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

BeastMaster said:


> With regards to the time delay of visual bubbles of CO2, I can see a delay of 5-7 min to occur for a in tank diffuser and up to 10 min for an inline diffuser that requires a higher pressure to operate but a 60 min delay means there are other factors involved. What they are, I have yet to find an explanation.


One reason this can happen is if the CO2 is turned off at night. The water continues to absorb the CO2 in the diffuser, and the airline, and so on. As it does it creates a vacuum that draws the water progressively further inside the CO2 system. The check valve is the only impassable barrier (assuming it's working properly), which keeps water from reaching things it would ruin, like the needle valve.

When you turn the system back on, water is harder to push through the tiny holes in the diffuser than gas, so there can be an extended delay before the water is purged and you see bubbles again. The longer the CO2 was off, the longer the delay.


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

gSTiTcH said:


> I've been running CO2 into a Griggs reactor then into my canister for about 8 months now. No problems to report here.


Thanks gSTITch, happy to see no problems. Just wondering if you had a chance to examine your canister (what kind?) while doing a cleaning of the media/pump impeller. What I'm looking for is any long term effects on the canister in the form of changes in the O-ring/seal (corrosion or pitting, brittleness, hardening or discoloration of the material) & condition of the impeller (any wobbling or noise from the shaft, pitting of the blades or chamber). If you haven't performed a cleaning recently, could you remember for the next canister cleaning to post your findings. Any pics of your set up? I wish you continued success with your tank and thanks again for participating. :bounce:


----------



## Saverio (Nov 26, 2006)

I'm running two CO2 lines (via a manifold off a 20# cylinder), one into each of my Fluval FX5 intakes on my 125g planted discus tank. 

I've been doing this for about a year now and have yet to run into any issue with component failure in either filter. 

With the FX5 auto shut off for 2min every 24hrs to "burp" air, coupled with the fact that the motor impeller is in the bottom of the canister, I don't worry about it air locking. My bubble rate is pretty high as well; almost too fast to count in fact. 

I probably have a good bit of CO2 offgassing, as I have quite a bit of surface agitation in order to keep my O2 levels up, since my tank is at 84F.

Plants are happy, discus are happy. No complaints.


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

Saverio said:


> I'm running two CO2 lines (via a manifold off a 20# cylinder), one into each of my Fluval FX5 intakes on my 125g planted discus tank.
> 
> I've been doing this for about a year now and have yet to run into any issue with component failure in either filter.
> 
> ...


Wow Saverio, beautiful tank! Kinda looks like CO2 into your canisters is not detrimental to the equipment. Have a couple of questions though. When you burp your canisters, do you rock them? The other question is how do you inject the CO2 into the canister intakes? Thanks again for your input and would love to see pics of your set up. Mahalo! :bounce:


----------



## Saverio (Nov 26, 2006)

BeastMaster said:


> Wow Saverio, beautiful tank! Kinda looks like CO2 into your canisters is not detrimental to the equipment. Have a couple of questions though. When you burp your canisters, do you rock them? The other question is how do you inject the CO2 into the canister intakes? Thanks again for your input and would love to see pics of your set up. Mahalo! :bounce:


Thanks! 
To answer your questions, I do not rock the canisters to burp them. The Fluval FX5 shuts itself off for 2 min every 24 hours automatically. And when it does, I don't see excessive bubble burping. 

I run the CO2 tubing right into the intake strainer. The tubing fits between the intake strainer bars (with a little bit of squeezing) lol


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

DarkCobra said:


> Nitrifying bacteria have pH preferences. Which vary according to species, and who you ask. It's not a stretch to at least believe that at some portion of a filter where CO2 is being injected will be low pH - lower than the tank water in general - and capable of slowing bacteria down. The question is how much, and given the conflicting info out there, I believe my own eyes.
> 
> I have injected CO2 into four different filters. In ascending order of size, a Red Sea Nano, Aquaclear 20, Aquaclear 70, and Magnum canister. Usually by running an airline into the intake strainer, sometimes with a non-biodegradable cigarette filter in the end of the airline to act as a pre-diffuser. On the Magnum, for a while I used an Atomic inline diffuser on the intake side. I don't use bubble counters, never found I needed one. And I never throttle flow. Simple setups, no pictures needed.
> 
> ...





DarkCobra said:


> One reason this can happen is if the CO2 is turned off at night. The water continues to absorb the CO2 in the diffuser, and the airline, and so on. As it does it creates a vacuum that draws the water progressively further inside the CO2 system. The check valve is the only impassable barrier (assuming it's working properly), which keeps water from reaching things it would ruin, like the needle valve.
> 
> When you turn the system back on, water is harder to push through the tiny holes in the diffuser than gas, so there can be an extended delay before the water is purged and you see bubbles again. The longer the CO2 was off, the longer the delay.


Thank you so much DarkCobra for your insightful input. While researching some of these points to find the answers to these questions, I'd find partial clues but nothing clear cut. The issue of CO2 effect on nitrifying bacteria found most of the background info dealing with marine and not freshwater environments. It was cited that nitrifying bacteria will function through a fairly wide pH range (7.0 to 8.7) provided they are given time to adjust. But even more significant, nitrification stopped completed at pH 5.5. There is a pH buffer though, that keeps the pH high. Plant photosynthesis involves free CO2 uptake and nitrate ions. If photosynthetic activity is intense enough, the effects of free CO2 causing acidic conditions that effect nitrification over the long run may not be an issue.

With regard to water infiltrating the CO2 diffuser and tubing down to the check valve, I have examined these two pieces of equipment and the air side of the diffuser and the air gap in the check valve/bubble counter remained unchanged in appearance from when the solenoid shut off the CO2 flow to when the CO2 was turned back on. From this, I think some other factor(s) are involved in the delay of CO2 micro bubbles becoming visible in the tank. I do have some theories that may be shed some light dealing with gas supersaturation and partial pressures of dissolved gasses. So, looking forward to more of your valuable input and help to us planted tank enthusiasts. :bounce:


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

BeastMaster said:


> While researching some of these points to find the answers to these questions, I'd find partial clues but nothing clear cut. The issue of CO2 effect on nitrifying bacteria found most of the background info dealing with marine and not freshwater environments. It was cited that nitrifying bacteria will function through a fairly wide pH range (7.0 to 8.7) provided they are given time to adjust. But even more significant, nitrification stopped completed at pH 5.5.


You'll find much of the information applicable to our hobby was derived from wastewater treatment. 

Traditionally, the nitrifying bactera are believed to be nitrobacter and nitrosomonas, and those do have pH limits similar to what you posted. Simple enough.

However, recently it was brought to my attention by [Diana] that nitrospira and nitrosospira are also significant, perhaps more so. And there may be more yet to be identified. Which may have different optimal pH ranges as well, so the filter ends up colonized primarily by whatever finds the pH favorable.  And which makes it hard to guess what's really going on in a filter...


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

I've done some tweaking of my CO2 injection and I think have eliminated the slight burping that infrequently occurred. The injection rate is now @ 1 bubble every 7 sec or 0.15bps. The water flow is throttled by one of my outflow double taps @ 40% closed. The HC in the tank is pearling like crazy and the wild Neo (biomonitor) is behaving normally.

Concerning the delay in micro bubbles becoming visible with the start of CO2 injection (for my set up-1 hr), what I was fishing for was CO2 supersaturation time. I agree with that it requires a short period to see bubbles in the water while the pressure behind the diffuser's porous barrier is building and forcing it across to the water interface. When the micro bubbles form, they start saturating the passing water. The longer the micro bubbles are in contact with the water (turbulence currents thru the filter media), the closer the water reaches a saturation point (were no more CO2 can go into solution at that temperature & pressure). The canister impeller and the output valve (when partially closed) will impart additional pressures that should allow even more CO2 gas to become dissolved into the water (this would then become a "supersaturated" solution). Based on the higher than normal amount of CO2 in the water under pressure, if the pressure is released, the CO2 would come out of solution in the form of micro bubbles. I think that is what is happening in my system. The "supersaturated" CO2 water will release the excess CO2 in the formation of micro bubbles when the water exits the fluted section of my output lily pipe. The fact that there are no visible micro bubbles passing thru the tubing or the glass pipe helps to support this. With that said, minus the time it takes for CO2 gas (estimate to reach 30 psi >5 min) with my system it takes about 50-55 min to obtain supersaturation micro bubbles. 

There is also another factor that may come into play dealing with partial pressures. When the light comes on in the tank, the amount of "pearling" by my HC appears to increase. The pearling or oxygen output by the plants will exert another gas pressure in the tank. As the oxygen levels increase over time, the saturation point is quickly reached and excess gas comes out of solution, hence pearling. The pressure exerted by the maxed level of O2 in solution, now limits the amount of CO2 that can be absorbed and forcing an amount of each gas to come out of solution to reach equilibrium (rampant pearling and the formation of visible CO2 micro bubbles).

So, it appears that at least with my system, CO2 absorption is complete and now with an injection rate >1 bps I've found an afforable ($23 UpAqua inline diffuser) & efficent solution for pressurized CO2 use. No reactors to build or additional equipment to add on. I like! :bounce:


----------



## rezco (Jan 25, 2012)

I have run 2 bps Co2 into the intake of my magnum 250 HOT on a 10 gal.

Observations:

-no effect on impeller, o rings etc
- filter occasionally purges air out (purge tube is part of the magnum design)
- very few microbubbles keep coming out of the discharge 
- pH is un affected, pH going in = pH coming out. Co2 is being absorbed but it is very slow compared to flow rate hence no effect on pH.


----------



## alaskajeff (Jan 9, 2014)

BeastMaster said:


> Thanks Jeff for participating. I know that you operated this set up w/ a Ehiem 2213 and was just wondering if you had noticed any pitting (small dimples) on the impeller, the impeller cover or wobbling (excessive wear) of the impeller shaft? Any leaking, stiffness or cracking of the o ring seal?
> 
> Was there any "burping" of bubbles and if your still running this set up, were the CO2 bubbles coming out of the canister and through the tubing/outflow pipe visible or did the bubbles form as the water entered the tank? Mahalo for you input! :bounce:
> 
> ...


 Sorry it took me awhile to get to this. It was several years ago when I ran it through the Ehiem there was the occasional burping and bubbles from the outflow but I don't remember if they formed as they entered the water.

As far as wear an tear the only thing I can remember is some drying of the o ring seal . I would just rub Vaseline on it each time I cleaned the filter and I never had any issues. As far as any other wear and tear I never noticed anything or ever had any problems with leaking.

I did test my water and I always had plenty of co2 and this was with a DIY yeast and sugar system.


----------



## bwagner (Apr 18, 2007)

I've been running my CO2 directly in the input of my Eheim 2028 for 5+ years now, I've never had a problem. I just split the line about 1 year ago and started to feed it into my Eheim 2075, I've had no promblems with that either. 
I used to have a DIY inline reactor and purchased a reactor online too, neither of them work as effective as just putting the end of the hose into the inlet.


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

alaskajeff said:


> Sorry it took me awhile to get to this. It was several years ago when I ran it through the Ehiem there was the occasional burping and bubbles from the outflow but I don't remember if they formed as they entered the water.
> 
> As far as wear an tear the only thing I can remember is some drying of the o ring seal . I would just rub Vaseline on it each time I cleaned the filter and I never had any issues. As far as any other wear and tear I never noticed anything or ever had any problems with leaking.
> 
> I did test my water and I always had plenty of co2 and this was with a DIY yeast and sugar system.



Thanks for your input. Your comments are extremely valuable to me and to others who are trying this type of set up. :bounce:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

bwagner said:


> I've been running my CO2 directly in the input of my Eheim 2028 for 5+ years now, I've never had a problem. I just split the line about 1 year ago and started to feed it into my Eheim 2075, I've had no promblems with that either.
> 
> I used to have a DIY inline reactor and purchased a reactor online too, neither of them work as effective as just putting the end of the hose into the inlet.



Thanks! Using atomizers or reactors seemed like popular gas mixing tools but, I guess this would be a third option in running this method of CO2 injection. Truly appreciate your comments. :bounce:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

