BHM - Why?

[Duncan]

Chris there is no science behind BHM however there is a lot of logic. but i dont think we will ever come to an accord on this subject

look forget the FIR (far infra red) thats just smoke, why they bought this into the equation in the first place is beyond me since most materials will give off FIR , this is just stored heat, so concentrate on the media

BHM, grog, pumice sintered glass etc has one major difference to *all* plastic media's and that is its supports an internal structure/ matrix that can be colonised by bacteria, but while this may seem a good thing, this can be a double edged sword

first plastic unless poorly maintained can only support anaerobic bacteria , in other words the normal bugs that convert ammonia to nitrite to nitrate and nothing else really . where as porus media can support the same with the addition of bacteria that convert Nitrate to N2O and NO but here the two edged bit:

To do the latter BHM and sintered glass has to block to form anaerobic pockets, (this is how anoxic convertors work) lack of O2. this has two effects the first and obvious one is when it blocks you loose surface area for aerobic bacteria to live on and the not so obvious one is you may well be supporting pahtogenic bacteria in the anoxic area's ?

think about it, if you put grog or BHM in a submreged chamber its would quickly become coated in a fine dust of mulm this would very quickly become quite thick if not cleaned and with this comes the usual pathogenic problems and you would loose the advantage of the porous system of the grog, where as in a shower system this would be self cleaning but in a sort of controlled manner in so much as the tiny pores would block but not to the extent that you get a huge build up

IMHO plastic will never do this and visa versa but my question would be would you want it to? i have never been a fan of anoxic systems because of what they are potentially promoting i would rather stick to my tried and trusted

Now we come to nexus chambers these can't be compared because they just dont perform as intended they are well below par, so how much of what maurice reports is due entirly to the fact that nexus and not other convetional systems does not performs as it should and in fact this is the reason for his observations not because of a direct comparison with BHM or any other system

At the end of the day showers were designed not to be prefiltered, so all those running settlement prior to the shower while i dont blame them are not getting a true representation of the shower , if you go to mikeys you will see what i mean his water is crap for viewing fish

next if you are running showers with a constant loss RO system why would you need the shower ?

example: i run a 16 ton pond with conventional Japanese matting and an RO system kicking out 300 us gallons per day, my tds is circa 80ppm sometime lower, nitrate <20ppm this is not due to some mystical tricks of the filter its totally due to the fact i am runing 300us gallons per day through as system to waste , it would make little difference while running RO what i had for a filter. i could have hair crlers in there and get the same, becuase the sectret is donw to the amount of RO water racing through. so i say again IF you run RO why would you want to go to all the considerable expence of BHM and a shower when you could get the same from grog?

[Gazza]

Hi Dunc,

This is a great thread just what this site is for

I run a shower and also a vortex system and you know what my water is like so i also run RO so are you saying i could stuff my shower with grog and the system will run the same as it does with the BHM

Would I still be able to feed heavy

Would the condition of the fish be the same

Would the fish grow the same (this is not an easy one i know due to genetics) ?

The reason i say this is as i did mess about with other media in my tank and BM was by far the best as i found it kept the condition of the water much better than any others in the same conditions.

[boogatee]

Dunc, you've made my point more eloquently than I ever could. Unfortunately I don't run RO because I can't afford the wastage ... that's wastage due to RO and wastage due to water changes. So I've decided that I'll stick with the water changes ... as I get through about 20% every week.

But more importantly, I agree, most BHM showered ponds (that I know of) also run RO and use a total loss system (of one sort or another) - so I've always been unclear as to how much the Nitrate reduction was due to anaerobic activity and how much was due to simple water changes. I think about now I should add, that I'm not anti-showers just unclear how much we are really comparing apples with apples.

... as for the issue with the Nexus and performance - can you expand?

[Duncan]

I run a shower and also a vortex system and you know what my water is like so i also run RO so are you saying i could stuff my shower with grog and the system will run the same as it does with the BHM

what im saying is with the amount of RO water thats going through your system as with mine you could stuff your shower full of empty macdonalds cartons and get the same result its the total loss of the RO system thats the most dynamic factor here. If you have time, you can work out how much nitrogen you are producing by your current feeding rates , then taking it to extremes, if you assumed there is no filter at all on your pond ( nothing) , knowing the input of RO water to the volume of your pond you could if you wanted work out how much nitrogen you would expect to see in your pond in its various guises. im willing to bet with a constant loss it would not be that great, this is how comercial farms work and of course mud ponds of course you have paid for you BHM so you would be a nutter to dump it now after all that money!

Would I still be able to feed heavy

well i can feed 60-80 kg per season and i ain't got a shower neither do a work hard at cleaning the system

Would the condition of the fish be the same

yes

Would the fish grow the same (this is not an easy one i know due to genetics) ?

of course, what on earth could a mechanical device such as shower add to growth ? growth is down to in this order A) genetics) B) food of the right quality, right make up at exaclty the right amount at the correct times. C) environment in so much as there are no polutants and the last time i heard salmon and trout comercial farmers dont use bakki showers

Look at the end of the day, all makers of filtration systems the world over are going to make wild claims of their product bakki showers in this respect are no different from EA and the rest, they are not going to say they are an average system that converts nitrogen, in this case i have never heard so many wild claims im not saying its crap im mearly saying it does a job and at the top end of the scale no better no worse than anything else , where it does score is the fact even a retard cant get it wrong, whats to get wrong? you stack /rack anf plug the pump in and as long as its near the pond your on a winner as a by word i actually think in all their forms stainless and fibre glass good god they are butt ugly!! and should be hidden away

... as for the issue with the Nexus and performance - can you expand?

only in so much as its long been known that nexus as good as it is can't handle the stocking levels claimed and that where a hobbyist though he could get away with one has had to employ two, and the fact K1 takes eons to get matured , im not talking about doing the usual 6 weeks cycle from new to handling ammoinia- nitrite im talking about matured to the point it will handle sudden increases in feeding and supporting an eco system

dunc

[boogatee]

only in so much as its long been known that nexus as good as it is can't handle the stocking levels claimed and that where a hobbyist though he could get away with one has had to employ two, and the fact K1 takes eons to get matured , im not talking about doing the usual 6 weeks cycle from new to handling ammonia- nitrite im talking about matured to the point it will handle sudden increases in feeding and supporting an eco system

thinking back now.... mine did take two summers to really settle down and not get the odd nitrite spike even though it was heated through the winter to a minimum of 16°C.

[Gazza]

Hi Dunc

where it does score is the fact even a retard cant get it wrong, whats to get wrong?

Thanks you said you wasn't going to call me names

Yes i do agree they are very ugly and i don't like mine on the back of the pond but unfortunately have no choice My wife actually like the look of the s/s shower and when i was enclosing it asked why as she liked the look of it and i did say i would leave it not enclosed but only if she paid the gas bill

[eds]

I've got the pumice samples today.

Here are the photos.




Dusty before washing.


Floating in the water! Definitely not for submerged filtration!


After washing.


My initial thoughts are that the most porous piece looks a lot like BHM but another piece has a lot finer pores so I'm not sure whether this will be a good or a bad thing. Water does track slowly through the pieces. Size wise these three pieces are all about 90mm (3.5") long. Will it be as good as BHM? Probably not but I reckon it's about 1/10th the price!

[StuW]

looks remarkably like Ogata bio crystal.

[eds]

Anyone else got any thoughts about this stuff's potential as a shower media?

Stuart i agree; i almost did a double take when it arrived! For those who have used or seen it is the ago crystal stuff about the same size or smaller/larger?

My initial thoughts are that the most open pored piece looks like a perfect shower media. Not as sure about the other two pieces but then maybe a range of sore size might give you a mix of flow rates and might work well. Any opinions?

[Duncan]

i suppose the obvious question or request would be to split one of these and the same with BHM and how trhey stack up in a cross section?

[eds]

i suppose the obvious question or request would be to split one of these and the same with BHM and how trhey stack up in a cross section?

Yeah, good idea Duncan. Would be nice to compare it to the Ogata stuff too. Can see a request to a couple of dealers for small samples of new media so i can compare like with like.

[carlejo]

how much is it to buy from your source ?
is it in UK ?

[eds]

how much is it to buy from your source ?
is it in UK ?

£390 per cubic metre (plus £45 delivery cost) and it is a UK company yeah.

From my maths (assuming 1m3 is 1000l - which it probably will not be but it gives me a guide to how the costs compare) these are how the costs compare per m3.

Pumice - £390
Crystal Bio - £1700 (Taking 100l @ £170 - though they do have cheaper bulk bags apparently)
BHM - £3920 (taking a box as 35l @ £140 and needing 28 boxes)

So I don't think I'll need 1m3 but it might be that I ask for the whole bag and then can cherry pick the pieces. Or go halves with some other people maybe.

[oldgit]

Hi
It also looks very similar to the media im using,Bio Pore.At £23 for a 10kg.Ive got six bags in two tier shower box returning via a 4inch pipe,8in below surface.
Since installed the water test results have reduced,not got them to hand at moment but could post later if needed.
Darren