Kalk at night for pH? Or during the day for Alk?

Discussion in 'Reef Chemistry' started by sfsuphysics, Jul 7, 2019.

  1. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    So often people say run kalk mostly at night because the pH drops a bit, however the corals don't grow at night so they don't use alk and that remains relatively constant throughout the night, so wouldn't dosing during the day be more beneficial since that's when your Alk is going to decline and the double benefit is with an elevated pH the corals will grow faster (within reason).

    Thoughts?
     
  2. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Supporting Member

    I was more concerned about alk being stable so I dosed it similar to two part. The ph being increased was just an added benefit.
     
  3. Rostato

    Rostato Supporting Member

    Better to just constantly dose to keep levels stable. Way better than swinging up and down


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  4. Mozby

    Mozby Supporting Member

    I've been wondering about this since I wanted to experiment with dosing kalk separately instead of via ATO (before going to 2 part). But since I'm not Randy Holmes-Farley, its kinda hard to figure out how much to dose to bring kalk up and to make sure the dosing rate does not spike ph too fast. From what I've gathered, you need to dose a whole lot of kalk solution to get alk at target levels, which explains why most ppl with midsize to large tanks just go two part for efficiency.
     
  5. RandyC

    RandyC Supporting Member

    Corals do grow at night using respiration vs photosynthesis to generate the energy to grow. Interesting sidebar, there actually is a difference seen in the calcification structure of night versus day growth (see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1047847713001196). I personally definitely see an uptake of alk during the night otherwise my calcium reactor would cause huge differences in alk reading at the end of my photoperiod and before my photoperiod, which isn't the case (usually only 0.2 dkh or less).

    I think the answer really depends on your tank because it really depends on what your day pH reading is versus the night when you drip kalk. If your day pH is already hitting 8.2 or higher, not sure it'll make that much of a difference. If I was playing the pH game with kalk, I think I'd shoot for getting my diurnal swing to be less and increasing my min pH my tank sees at any given point.
     
    JVU likes this.
  6. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    Good point about the calcium reactor, didn't think about those of you who dose around the clock. seeing an increase of 0.2dkH though makes me wonder how much the consumption is night versus day. I'd guess you have your reactor dialed in such that it may be up in the morning but that gets used up by night time, maybe even beyond used up so that over night you make an excess at night?

    Either way, just was idly thinking about it, I don't have a way to graph pH yet, at least one hooked up I have an old AquaController but don't feel like running ethernet to my tank... at least not yet. Plus more importantly I'm still trying to nail down how much kalk per day I should be aiming for. Just found out the other day that my lovely Red Sea test kit syringe does allow for the ink to come off the outside if I have something on my fingers (water? reagent? dunno). So I think I'll be throwing a +/- about 0.2 dkH to my values until I get some new syringes, luckily 1mL syringes are dirt cheap
     
  7. RandyC

    RandyC Supporting Member

    Don't run the Ethernet cable if you're lazy, just use a WiFi/Ethernet bridge.

    TP-Link N300 Wireless Portable Nano Travel Router - WiFi Bridge/Range Extender/Access Point/Client Modes, Mobile in Pocket(TL-WR802N) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TQEX8BO/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_pq5iDbE9EYM2A
     
  8. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    Nah, don't want to run the ethernet cable because the squacontroller will only let me see ph and temp over time and IMO thats a waste of cable. That said I am happy that it has a built in webserver instead of everything being cloud based but that in itself is probably limiting
     
  9. rygh

    rygh BOD

    I added Kalk partly to try to bring PH up. Made almost no difference.

    There were really only two things that made a real PH difference:

    1) I added a CO2 scrubber on my Skimmer.
    But the media goes so fast it is too expensive and a big hassle.

    2) Opened all doors and windows, and put an air stone under a powerhead
    Maximum air exchange at surface and with micro-bubbles.
    I kind of tested that by accident, when our oven stuck on full and scorched things.
     
  10. Rostato

    Rostato Supporting Member

    My co2 scrubber media lasts 5 weeks on my tank. But it’s only about 67 gallons of water.
     
  11. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    the BRS guys showed a pretty innovative system for using the CO2 scrubber, by recycling the air that goes through the skimmer. Not sure how effective it would be in general but something worth looking into

    I think this was one of their "live" episodes (there's a chat box) but you don't have to watch the whole thing to get an idea of what they're doing.
     
  12. rygh

    rygh BOD

    Yes, I had heard about the recirculating scrubber as well.
    Several things that can go wrong though.

    If I ever decide to spend some time on it, the plan is to add a better ventilation system to pull in outside air.
    Fairly large 3" pipe or so with a simple efficient computer fan, feeding sump, skimmer, and maybe an air stone in fuge producing micro-bubbles.
    As a bonus, keeps garage sawdust out of things.
     
  13. grizfyrfyter

    grizfyrfyter Guest

    I have been using a recirculating co2 scrubber for months. It doubled my media lifespan (especially in conjunction with a solenoid) but I also had to use one chamber just for moisture collection.

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
     
  14. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Supporting Member

    Bathroom exhaust fans typically use 4” ducting (sometimes 3”). I wonder if you could rig one to work in reverse to draw air in instead of out. Then you have quite a few option for cfm and noise and they’re already rated for damp environments.
     
  15. rygh

    rygh BOD

    I do use a bathroom fan for outgoing air. But incoming will not be damp, and computer fans are very quiet and efficient.
     
  16. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    Such is where you live... here incoming air most definitely would be damp, my car is proof positive of that every morning :D
     
  17. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Supporting Member

    The air that is being brought in may not be damp but the environment where the fan is (if it’s in your sump area) will be. I just didn’t think computer fans had the kind of cfm that a bathroom fan would. The minimum for code is 50 cfm but the last one I installed was 120. I’d have to look up its wattage to know how efficient is to compare it to a computer fan though.
     
  18. rygh

    rygh BOD

    A key difference - computer fans are much lower pressure.
    Not good for quickly dumping air out of a bathroom through a long tube.
    But if done right, fine for bringing plenty of outside fresh are in.
     

Share This Page