Mains Pressure Water Filter (tap water)

[GERMAN]

Just a quick one is anyone using a main pressure water filters on their water changes?? 

 

if you are what cartridges are you using? 

 

sorry if this has been covered befor dont get on here much also had a quick search and couldn't find an answer 

 

thanks.

[mjoconr]

Yes, I run a system which was installed February this year. I wanted to filter both Chlorine and Chloramine and not not slow the my refills.

Standard charcoal media will not filter Chloramine very well, so after a lot of research I went with a system which had 1x5micron and 2x charcoal which had been special process so it could filter Chloramine.

Total water per min is 40L and this allow me to refill my 600l after a 200L water change short time.

The product I purchased was from PSI Water Filters (https://www.psifilters.com.au/iron-removal-systems/10248-wh002b-rfi.html) I had them replace the last two filters in this unit with the charcoal.

Since the purchase I’ve been told that maybe I should have gotten the shorter 10” but in the large diameter a this would force more of the water though the media. I’m not 100% sure about this.

Its been great not to have to condition my water, and I think my fish a much better for it.

 

[humbug]

Filters on their own aren’t a good option if your water supply is treated with chloramine, or ever contains ammonia.  Chloramines in the water supply are produced by reacting chlorine and ammonia, meaning residual ammonia is often present, and the breakdown of the chloramines in the system results in the release of additional ammonia into the supply.  In a domestic situation, its only reverse osmosis filtration systems which will reliably remove ammonia.

 

Manufacturer’s claims of complete removal of chloramines via carbon filters are questionable.  Generally the contact time as the water passes through these filters is insufficient to completely remove the persistent chloramine.  Carbon’s capacity to remove chloramines is also relatively low, so carbon filters subjected to chloramine need to be replaced on a very regular basis to serve any benefit.

 

These in-line filters are also generally poor at removing heavy metals which are also a significant concern in many domestic water supplies.

 

It really comes down to what you are trying to achieve with an in-line filter.  If it’s for a continuous flow, auto water change system where water turnover is a relatively small percentage of system volume, then ammonia in your supply probably isn’t too much of a concern as your tank biological filtration should be able to accommodate it.  Providing you replace carbon frequently, these filters will remove damaging chlorine, and for low flow conditions, possibly a good percentage of chloramines.  Periodic dosing with a complexed hydrosulfite water conditioner (ie Seachem Prime / Safe or Continuum Fraction) should remove any build-up of heavy metals etc which get through the filtration.  Its worth doing your homework though, and working out if the risks outweigh the benefits for your particular set-up.

If your goal is to remove the need for using a water conditioner for regular larger water changes, and there is any risk of either chloramines or ammonia in your supply, then reverse osmosis is really a far safer bet. 

[GERMAN]

awesome, thank you for such detailed replies....

I was unsure on what the carbon cartridges would do to the waters Ph levels? I have been using a sediment and particle filter on my tap water for some time but also using PRIME every water change..

Im currently rebuilding my tank and filter set up after my 6 footer let go around 3-4 months ago (built by slippery steve....) some may know that name Iv been told!! Thought while i was in the process Id add some fixed filters under the cabinet and have a fixed feed into the tank to make water changes a little nicer. I should add Im a plumber so i have these filters and skills add my finger tips, not trying to get out of using water conditioners all together just trying to better the quality water befor it enters the tank..  

 

[mjoconr]

As a counter point to Kathy (humbug), I've been testing my water before use since february and my water has no Chloramine (total Chlorine), Chlorine (Free Chlorine) and no NH3 (Ammonia). I also have been testing the tanks for NH3 and NO3 before water and after water changes and always see a significate drop on NO3 and no NH3.

I also do the test at about the test minute point, in case thre is a problem (so I can add conditioners)

The correct media will remove Chloramine and using two filters increases the contact time to the point that the 3ppm of total Chlorine which in my water from the mains is totally removed.

[fishdance]

A high grade activated carbon is sufficient to remove chlorine and chloramine. You can increase dwell time through filter by controlling flow or increasing filter size/using several in series. Quite easy to make a carbon holding container out of 90mm stormwater pipe as long /big as you need for example.

It's also very simple to test for chlorine /chloramine and carbon filters fail gradually  giving you plenty of time to change. I use cartridges for those 10 inch filter housing that i can self pack. This gives me better quality control (medical grade carbon) and economical pricing. 

On a slightly different topic but related, i sometimes chlorine bomb incoming water that is high in nitrite and then strip out chlorine. 

 

[humbug]

Sorry to disagree, but there is a significant difference between manufacturer’s claims in the filter market, and the evidence provided in peer reviewed, scientific papers. 

For effective removal of chloramines using activated carbon, a contact time of 15 to 20 minutes is required.  These sort of dwell times are just not achieved in in-line filters. 

All I can do is suggest that anyone thinking of using carbon filters for chloramine removal really should take the time to research some of the literature available.  Some of these filters are OK for chlorine removal, but not for chloramine. 

[GERMAN]

OK so the general consensus is that, yes its OK but don't just rely on the filter as a water conditioner..... which is good because I plumbed up my tank over the weekend with a bank of mains water filters under it haha, thought it couldn't hurt, but I'll still be using some sort of water conditioner as a safe guard. Looking forward to having my tank back to where it was 4 months ago, with some good improvements 

Thanks for your input! 

[Buccal]

Ever tried filling a drum with water and heavily aerating it for two days before using as water change ???   It will remove remove the chlorine out the chloramine,, and obviously remove chlorine directly as well.

Wont remove completely, but neither do the filters, the filters exhaust very fast to.

Be good to see these two methods tested against each other....

[mjoconr]

Chloramine stays in the water for much longer than a few days. It's why they us it.

[Ducksta]

3 hours ago, mjoconr said:

Chloramine stays in the water for much longer than a few days. It's why they us it.

How long it lingers depends entirely on the level of agitation/aeration though.  Which is why it's important to have heavy aeration in your water holding drums.

But even when aging water in drums I still personally used products like safe or prime.  The cost per dose is insignificant when dosed properly, and the peace of mind is priceless. 

Having said that I now run a hose from my laundry tap in to my tank, 200-300 litres at a time I suppose, and dump some (unmeasured) conditioners in while it fills up.

[Alex]

It is amazing the lengths people will go to, to get rid of chlorine/chloramine - filters on taps and aging water etc

I fill my tanks up with a garden hose and estimate the amount of dechlorinator to add in while the tank is filling. I have always used prime in the past now use that stuff from the Tech Den (supachlor I think the name is). If I can't physically see evidence (anecdotal will do) that their is a benefit, I simply wont do it. 

I guess my point is 'what is the point'? Of going through the process of installing of filters and aging water when in the vast majority of cases it is an uneccessary waste of time and resources?

[Buccal]

I agree, some people like to go through motions, and some get excited at being able to control Microsystems.

Now I don't use conditioner, I think my breed room sheer volume with every two hour automated, interval partial water changes.

But I have displays inside and don't use it,, I've even had foot long Americans and American hybrids die from stupendous aggression then getting caught behind rocks (tank is a meter deep and it's not designed for any maintenance at all besides filter clean and magnet glass cleaners,,,,,, months my water wasn't right, the big cats some almost and some a foot live of rotten flesh for months on end, and I don't see them, they then run out and later they're back out feeding on pellets with the cichlids lol,,,,,, the fish are all fine water had its days till flesh completely rotted,, but that's how good my filtration is and how I can determine and manage,,, "through regime alteration",, depending on the visual goings.

But through all that I still don't use conditioner, I've used canisters x 2 fx for a long time,, but later I added tubs of K1 media,,, I'm about to rip the canisters of my tank, and build two 150mm pvc storm water tall standing tumbler stacks for K media, likely 1.2m high, they will eject onto trays raised a inch over the water level, maybe on straps, these trays will hold disposable mech media,,, 

These things will benefit a lot of water activity and circulation and oxygen exposure,, all these things is what creates a healthy environment, together with decent KH levels,,,, as Alex suggested, the advantages of the generic purifier filters are minimal,,, also as the Ducktsa mentioned there is a percentage of benefit when done properly, water raging,,,,,, I don't see why one would want to overlook a IBC with a raging pond air pump, bulk size tub of prime or safe, the water that comes out of these after a fortnight is sweet gold,,, I've never done it lol, but that's what's done.

The kaldness.  K media,, will take you to the next level, if your looking for bright, quick moving fish that have that clean cut quality look,,,, increasing oxygen just by that little bit stimulates many little science related things throughout the tank,,, amazing what it does for tropheus keepers when they realize they havnt had sufficient water turnover aggetation,, and the tropheus.

Chloramines has never held up Tropheus or Petrochromis from breeding, can't see it impacting most other other species.

[fishdance]

On 8/14/2016 at 6:05 PM, humbug said:

Sorry to disagree, but there is a significant difference between manufacturer’s claims in the filter market, and the evidence provided in peer reviewed, scientific papers. 

For effective removal of chloramines using activated carbon, a contact time of 15 to 20 minutes is required.  These sort of dwell times are just not achieved in in-line filters. 

All I can do is suggest that anyone thinking of using carbon filters for chloramine removal really should take the time to research some of the literature available.  Some of these filters are OK for chlorine removal, but not for chloramine. 

The problem with online forums is that you don't know the skill level of readers. When hobbyists first start out,  it's nice to have reassuring rules and absolutes. 

DONT clean filters in tap water. One inch of fish per gallon. Etc. 

However,  the best way to gain experience is to push those boundaries. Sometimes at the expense of livestock or equipment. 

Quite a few people here will know how much water can be changed straight out of the tap without chlorine neutraliser or if a ten degree water difference is okay.  

 

Readers should also be aware of their own skill levels. Ask 5 people for advice and get 5 different answers, all most likely correct for that person.  

[Buccal]

Agree with you Fishdance,, most things need to be seen for ones self to obtain clear definition or knowledge.

So making mistakes to is where one learns best,,, it also triggers creativeness.

And that's why these sites are good, we can throw it all up and fast track,, in the same time comparing and benefiting from each other.

Many gadgets and sciences may be positive, but sometimes to what extent,,, and is it worth it....  For example a expensive denitrator,, might remove 15% total nitrate at best,, is it worth it,, slightly bigger water changes instead ??.

Thats why we chat, compare and learn.

[z18turbo]

  Agree with what has been said above with regards to aging water change water. I now run an insulated IBC in the garage with a water tank pump and 19mm hose. Fill with 1000l of warm tap water + salts + Prime then leave for 24 hours with heater, 2500 hr circulation pump and air running. I also measure my salts by weight with the wife's kitchen scales so this remains consistent week by week. It may be in my head but the tank seems healthier.