Micro and nano bubble tank treatment

Attached is an image why nanobubbles act in ways that Boyle's law cannot address... Because the IDEAL GAS LAW doesn't apply as you shrink smaller and smaller... In this case this is why nanobubbles stay suspended in solution longer than regular microbubbles... and why they do not rise to the surface because as the bubble gets smaller and smaller, the buoyancy calculation become negligible.


Balance of Energy Forces in Nanobubbles and Colloidal Suspension.jpg
 
Ok I will try to move the air stone and see what happens. When I put the air stone under a powerhead my tank was a white cloud as if I had just poured in a calcium supplement. But many bubbles became trapped under a nearby rock ledge. I assume these bubbles were too large and that's why they didn't float around but got stuck joined together and created a large bubble under the ledge. You can see large bubbles escaping and floating to the surface. I was just worried the large bubble would cause troubles
 
Ok I will try to move the air stone and see what happens. When I put the air stone under a powerhead my tank was a white cloud as if I had just poured in a calcium supplement. But many bubbles became trapped under a nearby rock ledge. I assume these bubbles were too large and that's why they didn't float around but got stuck joined together and created a large bubble under the ledge. You can see large bubbles escaping and floating to the surface. I was just worried the large bubble would cause troubles

That's correct... it's not high powered jet injection lift off action... it's a fog... a mist... a cloud...
Moves like one too... You'll see... :)

https://staff.aist.go.jp/m.taka/nano-bubble.pdf

In this pdf it shows how they're using dynamic light scattering to determine number of "bubble refraction occurrences"
 
I had done this years ago but never really for an extended period.

I have a few questions for anyone who can answer. When you run the bubbles do you notice a water level increase in your sump do to the fact that your return isn't carrying as much water? I tried this in my sump last night and my sump level rose by about two gallons. So I stopped as I wasn't sure if it would continue to rise while I was asleep.

Also if I were to do this in a tank without a sump would it be better for me to add the bubblers to a powerhead near the top of the tank and let it move them around or would I be able to run the air stone to a powerhead on the back bottom and run the bubble out of that one. Tried both and the bottom choice seems to create smaller bubbles and push them around better but I was curious if all the bubbles accumulating under rock ledges would cause die off if they stayed there and didn't find there way to the surface. Thanks


Oh... yes... Back Bottom is the better...
 
https://staff.aist.go.jp/m.taka/nano-bubble.pdf

In this pdf it shows how they're using dynamic light scattering to determine number of "bubble refraction occurrences"[/QUOTE]

Good stuff Cruz! Im with you 100% on the scrubbing bubbles idea. I was on a remodel of a waste water treatment plant a few years back they use it and have been using it for sometime now. I see nothing but positive about what its doing in my tank. The system I'm running now is a fairly new system with a sand bed and live rock from a friends system that's been running for years. Everything is thriving if I had one complaintit is that his rock had vermitid snails and they seem to be taking over the rock work. Other than everything seems to be flourishing!

Im running a wooden airstone under 2 of my 4 powerheads and looking into other means of getting more of the nano bubbles than just bubbles and micro bubbles.
 
https://staff.aist.go.jp/m.taka/nano-bubble.pdf

In this pdf it shows how they're using dynamic light scattering to determine number of "bubble refraction occurrences"

Good stuff Cruz! Im with you 100% on the scrubbing bubbles idea. I was on a remodel of a waste water treatment plant a few years back they use it and have been using it for sometime now. I see nothing but positive about what its doing in my tank. The system I'm running now is a fairly new system with a sand bed and live rock from a friends system that's been running for years. Everything is thriving if I had one complaintit is that his rock had vermitid snails and they seem to be taking over the rock work. Other than everything seems to be flourishing!

Im running a wooden airstone under 2 of my 4 powerheads and looking into other means of getting more of the nano bubbles than just bubbles and micro bubbles.[/QUOTE]

Hence the "claimed observation" that this method promotes invertebrate population is also being confirmed yet again.
 
I'm really curious to see your results @Reefahholic ! I feel my bubbles are fairly small and of various sizes, but not nearly the amount you are considering pushing through! Keep us updated :)

Thanks for your research and persistent positive attitude Tony! I know it's just bubbles and so much still to know and understand, but it's very exciting to me, lol! :D

Thanks! I'll be playing with various methods and ideas until I feel I've found the perfect one for me. Of course as always, I document my findings and explain how I've built it or post pictures and videos.
 
I'm looking into getting a new return pump which might help me get better bubbles into tank without having to go the powerhead route. I don't want to hijack the thread or go off topic but I am looking for a better submersible return pump. I currently have 12 ft of head pressure and my current return isn't cutting it for flow and turnover. Not sure how I would actually calculate what gph is getting to my tank but I don't believe it to be anywhere near what the head loss calculator suggests I should get with my pump
 
Pressurization causes a lot of problems such as mentioned before, GBD, the Bends, etc

I would be cautious here!

Yes I believe our little wooden airstone method and even the bubble choppers/shearers/shredders you see being tested don't add considerably to the O2 saturation levels, at least not past 110% like you see mentioned in the aquaculture literature (once again I have not tested this with the required sensors e.t.c.) but, that's my speculation!

However, it would seem pressurised systems are now being procured or will be in the near future by home hobbyists and therein lies my concern that we might start seeing those ill effects.

I might be barking up the wrong tree here and the negative effects we see in fish would only start manifesting itself with a pressurised system utilizing medical grade O2 and not atmospheric air? I don't know!
 
I posted this on the other bubble scrubbing site, but I will repeat it here, of course :)

These small bubbles have amazing properties :)

From reading the literature we know that true nanobubbles (<200nm in size) exhibit an ionic shell that is negatively charged, thereby attracting positively charged ions.
These bubbles become very stable and have a high oxidising/sterilizing capacity when these bubbles eventually collapse in the water column.

I quote from the interview by Dr Masoyoshi Takahashi in 2010 in the Nanotech Japan bulletin.
http://mnbtechthailand.com/file/Introduction/Nanotech Japan bullettin.docx

'The rapid increase in the pressure of bubbles during shrinkage is due to adiabatic compression when the rate of increase is high, which also causes the temperature in the bubbles to rapidly increase. This results in the formation of a region with a temperature of several thousand centigrade under a pressure of several thousand atm at the point where the bubble disappears. This ultimate reaction site (hot spot) is limited to a very small region but the reaction is sufficiently strong to decompose internal gas molecules, generating free radicals such as •OH with strong oxidizing power. Free radicals are also generated in the course of natural collapse of microbubbles by hydrodynamic engineering, although its mechanism is different from that of the collapse from ultrasonic engineering'

Masatoshi Takahashi, 2005. “The Potential of Microbubbles in Aqueous Solutions –-Electrical property of the gas-water interface”,J.Phys.Chem. B,109- ,pp.21858 -21864,
Masatoshi Takahashi, Kaneo Chiba and Pan Li, 2007.“Formation of Hydroxyl Radicals by Collapsing Ozone Microbubbles under Strongly Acidic Conditions”.J.Phys.Chem. B,111-39,pp.11443-11446
Masatoshi Takahashi, Kaneo Chiba and Pan Li, 2007. “Free-Radical Generation from Collapsing Microbubbles in the Absence of a Dynamic Stimulus”,J.Phys.Chem.B,111-6, pp.1343 -1347,
 
Can you tell us more about the condition of the tank pre-application and have you considered whether the progress you are observing could be the result of other factors
It would be my pleasure to explain 'my journey' to you :)
I set up this tank 2 years ago, primarily to grow and appreciate Acropora corals as well as to learn something new.
I decided, after much research and discussion to try GlennF's DSR method! I used Glenn's calculator to make my own salt water from scratch and started from there, incidently, I think Glenn's recipe is similar to Randy's,which I have attached here: http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-11/rhf/index.php

Then I stopped the water changes and have not done one, other than to top up that which was lost to bagging of frags or when I had my 'troubles', which I will get to shortly.

After one year the frags, which had become colonies, as well as some original colonies saved from another tank had begun to grow out of the water :)..then...I found AEFW!!!
To cut a long story short I had to remove all my sps corals and leave my tank fallow for 40 days, this is documented here: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/radical-new-treatment-for-aefw.209416/
I moved all my sps including montis to a separate holding tank, but eventually lost almost 90% of the colonies, I was able to save many little frags from almost all of my colonies.

During this time I dropped my Radion intensity and dosing in the DT and kept on going, I never shut it down, just rearranged the old rock and because I had the chance, added new (dead) rock to make another landscape.

I had no new cycle or none that I would call of any significance (tested continuously) and started adding frags back after ~50 days.

This was also my chance to get frags in, that are considered or at least by me to be, for "expert" level only :)
This system ran perfectly fine for 7 months,but as we are constantly tweaking to get the best growth or colour from our corals we decided to give the bubbles a go, after much research again.
The maintenance aspects are:
Liquid carbon dosing, vodka now, but before it was vinegar and glucose(might go back to that again,then switch back).
Addition of strontium
Potassium
Potassium iodide
Boron
Magnesium sulfate (occasionally,as my sulfate levels drop)
Sodium nitrate
Iron chelated with citrate
Aquavitro fuel for AA's and the microelements I miss dosing (another product I can't do without)
Aggressive GFO use, in the form of Rowaphos
A calcium reactor with dolomite to take care of the rest.

It has run like this, with all the additives for 7 months or one year and 7 months, depends on how you look at it :)
I know the growth rates and health of the corals I have in my tank, so when the bubbling started and I started seeing enhanced growth and vitality, I was shocked!!


In my experience, it takes a tank a good year or two

In my experience, 6 months, however, the tank, especially mine is always in flux:)

without changing much at all

a good test of the hypothesis would be to stop bubbling for a month record your observations that start again
Maybe, but your tank won't revert to being a cesspit if it was pristine to start with. I'm not saying your tank is anything other than wonderful :)
I also think once the corals have been stimulated to start growing they won't necessarily just stop,if all other conditions are being met
I did drop the hours I bubble, down by half and noticed after a few days a drop in vibrancy,this is hard to quantify, but those acro keepers now what I'm talking about.
I also see a little boost in growth 3-4 days after replacing my GFO

you didn't want to risk upsetting the acro cart, but science!

Too much to ask of me mate, when it's going well don't go there :)
However, others here are going down that road and I look forward to what they come up with :)

There in a nutshell,
Cheers
 
So what I've noticed in my 4 days, clearer water, smell of the ocean, and I did a scratch test on my coralline and that is grew in faster then when I wasn't running the bubbles. My sand has never looked this clean. Haven't seen any ill effects on livestock, other than the spa treatment sends them off to bed! I run it for 10 hours, I don't have any build up in the am of bubbles accumulating on my rock. Going to be adding new corals in the rebuild in two weeks so I'll let you know how it goes. Science aside, it at least improves water quality and a nice smell, as well as keeping my pH stable. Swings of 0.2 where without the bubbles night swing was 0.8 from day total. Now they are 8.0-8.2. I'm sticking with it!
 
I don't see why a limited amount of bubbling (compared to skimming) would result in significant effect on O2 levels. Not arguing the benefits of actual contact of bubbles in rocks and corals which although happens in nature still has to have controlled comparison studies to prove if it's really the reason behind added growth or improved colors.
 

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