different Ro degasier design

  • Thread starter Thread starter jelly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None

jelly

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
587
Reaction score
61
Location
Wisconsin
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
anyone ever try a DYI forced draft or an induced draft co2 degasifier. after some reading they sound to be more effective at removing co2 then using a air pump and stone in a degassing tube. here is what a forced draft looks like with fan on bottom, a induced would have a fan on top to draw air up with vents at the bottom. they both work the same for effectiveness and would work. force is used mostly used when you have corrosion causing gas in the water. so induced would work best for this application and giving a smaller foot print as it dont need to have a fan on the side. i have also read that putting the degasifier after the cation and before the anion would be best. i will be running a split resin bed system so it will be placed between the cation and anion, here is some more reading and explains to place it between the cation and anion. http://dardel.info/IX/processes/degasser.html. whats your thoughts?

ImageDownload4.jpg
 
Last edited:
That's an interesting idea. My gut reaction is I would be concerned about keeping the packing material clean. If I just spent all this effort going through the RO, I don't want to then add stuff back in. Also, would the TDS of the water coming through this slowly creep up as a result?
 
I don't know yet. I'm waiting my my co2 test kit to test my water before and after. If need be im sure I can add a filter to keep dust out of the water. Also. Red to find a better way yo get the water to pass though my last 2 chambers of resin. More then Likely be a booster pump.
 
It would have to be one heck of a filter to keep from introducing any dust that would ultimately accumulate.

Have you seen the continuous degasser designs? Essentially it is a tall column that the water drips into and then comes out a small section of pipe and either through DI resin or into a holding bin.
 
I have high CO2, although I've not quantified the level with a test kit, and need to degas before my DI stage. Running through the continuous version was enough to stop the rapid DI depletion for me. I think it would be worth running a quick test before building that complex system which would likely require a fair bit of maintenance.
 
You do habe a good point. The only problem now is i don't flow through my 2 resin changers fast enough.
 
What is making you need to increase the flow? The flow doesn't need to be (and shouldn't be) fast through the DI stage.
 
My ro unit puts put 4g an hour. gravity throw my 2 chambers of di wont flow that much. It don't even flow half that much.
 
I see. It depends on how tightly the DI is packed partially. I can get about 8g an hour through my DI and it is only gravity fed.
 
I see. It depends on how tightly the DI is packed partially. I can get about 8g an hour through my DI and it is only gravity fed.
When you made your degasser did you run a ri line all the way to the bottom or did you just let it drip in on top
 
I just let it drop from the top. The air line needs to go all the way to the bottom though. That creates more contact time between the water and the bubble.
 
With just dripping it in at the top wont that allow water to run out with out bring degassed?
 
Nope. The actual exit is lower. I think the rate at which the CO2 gets distributed within the water is pretty fast and much faster than the rate at which the water is leaving.
 
Built a standard co2 degas chamber. Water going in about 20, coming out at about 2.5. I think that's a good savings. Just wish I could get it to 0.
 
It's 80 inches call to give it as much time to degas as possible. Using 2 wood diffusers on a 1300 commercial ait pump. Pump is located outside for clean air
9e85489ba7659d2a89244801d1e0872b.jpg
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top