[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V2 #833



Aquatic Plants Digest wrote:
> 
> Aquatic Plants Digest      Monday, July 14 1997      Volume 02 : Number 833
> 
> In this issue:
> 
>         Re: Brown silt
>         Re: Cheap Substrate Heating (G. Booth)
>         Re: CO2-Kh-PH table: Reference Wanted
>         Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V2 #832
>         Cheap Substrate Heating
> 
> See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the
> Aquatic Plants mailing list and on how to retrieve back issues.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 08:09:59 -0600
> From: George Booth <booth at hpmtlgb1_lvld.hp.com>
> Subject: Re: Brown silt
> 
> >Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 10:14:44 -0700
> >From: AL ROBINSON <amrsb at erols_com>
> >
> > Having several tanks, I recently started a plant tank. 29L, two floura
> > grow lamps, power heads etc. etc.  ... I have encountered a brown silt
> > like substance covering the entire tank. I have tried gently wiping it
> > from the plants leaves only to have it rapidly return. Could it be the
> > peat breaking down? Help.
> 
> I don't know what "floura grow" lamps are but I bet they aren't very
> bright.  What you are seeing is probably "brown algae" or diatoms.
> These typically appear when the light levels are too low.  "Silt"
> (fine dirt) would not stick to things very well and would become
> suspended when you stirred the water.  Since you had to "wipe" it, I'm
> guessing diatoms. Does this stuff look like the crud that forms in
> water tubing and filter boxes that aren't lighted?  Same thing.
> 
> George
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 10:35:23 -0400
> From: Karsten Klein <kklein at uceng_uc.edu>
> Subject: Re: Cheap Substrate Heating (G. Booth)
> 
> George wrote:
> 
> >You would probably want this to be a sealed system. Pulling aqaurium water
> >in would bring detritus and clog the tube.  And dumping the water back into
> >the tank might heat the tank too much IF all the heat was not transferred
> >to the gravel.  I suspect the silicon tubing is a pretty good insulator.
> 
> I do not quite agree with George saying silicon tubing
> would be a pretty good insulator, it is rather the opposite.
> Assuming Silicon tubing contains mostly Silicon, it actually
> is a very good thermal conductor. Here are some thermal

I thought that the tubing was made of silicone, or are they the same
thing?

> conductivities to compare (in units of W/cm*C):
> Silicon:           1.57
> Steel:             0.97
> Stainless Steel:   0.329
> Iron:              0.803
> If one wants to get a higher thermal conductivity than
> Silicon, there are only a few options, e.g.:
> Aluminum           2.36
> Diamond           20.0    (WOW!)
> Meaning one could use Carbon in order to get a very very high
> conductivity.
> In order to achieve a relatively even heat distribution in
> the gravel, one could split the tubing coming from the ballast
> into 4 or 5 tubes going to different places in the substrate
> and then merging them back together, guiding the cooled
> water back to the "ballast heater".
> 
> Regards,
> Karsten.
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 09:31:01 -0600
> From: George Booth <booth at hpmtlgb1_lvld.hp.com>
> Subject: Re: CO2-Kh-PH table: Reference Wanted
> 
> >Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 18:12:23 -0400
> >From: Sanjay Joshi <sjoshi at psu_edu>
> >
> >I have seen the CO2-Kh-pH tables in several places. I am looking for
> >a published reference that explains the chemistry behind these
> >tables, and also provides the formulas and equations used to derive
> >the tables.
> 
> I can *almost* explain the derivation of the tables.  Karla helped me
> with the derivation and calculations once upon a time.  I still have
> all the data but I am missing a key conversion that allows me to
> perform the calculations.  I need to convince Karla to help once
> again.  Or perhaps one of the chemistry gurus can fill in the missing
> pieces.
> 
> First some background. This was written quite a while ago and I'm a
> bit unsure of some of the details.  Please feel free to correct me.
> 
> =====  Begin: from an old posting  ======================================
> 
> Karla worked up some water chemistry last night to share with the net.
> This is detailed information about the carbonate buffering system in an
> aquarium and how CO2 and KH and pH are related.
> 
> Buffering
> - ---------
> 
> First of all, when strong acids like sulfuric or hydrochloric acid are
> added to water, they completely ionize into hydrogen ions and the
> corresponding salt (HCL -> H+ + Cl-).  However, when weak acids like
> carbonic or phosphoric acid are added to water, they form "conjugate
> acid-base pairs" (HA and A-) that are in equilibrium.  There is an
> "equilibrium dissociation constant" (K) for a weak acid defined as:
> 
>         [H+] [A-]   where [H+] = concentration of hydrogen ions
>    K = -----------        [A-] = concentration of the salt or conjugate base
>           [HA]            [HA] = concentration of the weak acid
> 
> This relationship is for the reaction:
> 
>        HA <==> H+ + A-
> 
> Note that K will vary slightly with temperature (and other things?).
> 
> The acid-base equilibrium is described by the Henderson-Hasselbach equation
> (derived from the "equilibrium dissociation constant" relationship):
> 
>                 [A-]
>   pH = pK + log ----      or   pK = pH  when [A-] = [HA]  {since log(1)=0}
>                 [HA]
> 
> The point where pH = pK is the point at which the system has the most
> buffering capacity to handle additions of acids or bases and can occur at
> multiple pH values for different buffering systems such as carbonate and
> phosphate.
> 
> For example, with the carbonate buffering system, this occurs at pH 6.37
> and pH 10.25.  At pH 6.37, H2CO3 (carbonic acid) and HCO3- (bicarbonate)
> are present in equal concentrations. At pH 10.25, HCO3- and CO3--
> (carbonate) are present in equal concentrations.
> 
>    H2CO3  <==>  H+ + HCO3-  <==>  H+ + CO3--
> 
> Another common example is the phosphate buffering system (I believe
> products like pH-UP and pH-DOWN are based on this system).  This has
> equilibrium points at pH 2.13, 7.21 and 12.32.
> 
>    H3PO4  <==>  H+ + H2PO4-  <==>  H+ + HPO4--  <==>  H+ + PO4---
> 
> Conjugate Base to Weak Acid Ratio
> - ---------------------------------
> 
> At any pH point, the Henderson-Hasselbach equation describes the ratio of
> [A-] (conjugate base) to [HA] (weak acid).  For example, consider the
> carbonate system at pH = 7.0:
> 
>                     [A-]                          [HCO3-]
>       pH = pK + log ----     ->  7.0 = 6.37 + log -------  ->
>                     [HA]                          [H2CO3]
> 
>                                  [HCO3-]   4.27
>       0.63 = log (4.27)      ->  ------- = ----  ->  77% / 23%
>                                  [H2CO3]   1.00
> 
> [I'm afraid I can't figure out where 77%/23% came from! George]
> 
> Therefore at pH 7.0, the carbonate system is 23% H2CO3 and 77% HC03-.  If
> you make a graph of pH versus the relative base/acid concentrations, you
> will get a "S" curve due to the logarithmic nature of the equation.  An
> important observation is that at the pK point the slope of the curve is
> nearly vertical, i.e., a large change in relative concentration produces
> only a small change in pH.
> 
>        100% |             ___       ___
>             |            /         /
>             |           /         /
>  salt       |          |         |
>  concen.    |          |         |
>         50% |   H2CO3  +  HCO3-  +  CO3--
>             |          |         |
>             |          |         |
>             |         /         /
>             |    ___ /     ___ /
>          0% |___________________________
>                       6.4      10.3
>                           pH
> 
> (A graph of this appears on page 32 of the _Aquarium_Atlas_ (Baensch, 1987).
> 
> How this system relates to buffering can be seen from an example.  Consider
> the process of protein ammonification (from "Water Chemistry in Closed
> System Aquariums", A.J.Gianoscol, 1987).  One of the byproducts of this
> process is phosphoric acid (H3PO4).  At a pH of around 7, phosphoric acid
> will rapidly dissociate completely to H+ and dihydrogen orthophosphate
> (H2PO4-) and dihydrogen orthophosphate will dissociate partially to H+ and
> monohydrogen orthophosphate (HPO4--) (note that monohydrogen orthophosphate
> won't dissociate to H+ and phosphate (PO4---) until the pH gets up around
> the third equilibrium point at pH 12.32).  The free hydrogen ions (H+) can
> then combine with bicarbonate (HCO3-) to form carbonic acid (H2CO3),
> shifting the acid/salt balance slightly downward.  Since the reaction takes
> place near the pK point, the slight shift in concentration does not
> measurably affect pH.
> 
> To put it simply, the system is "buffered" since any free H+ ions can
> combine with bicarbonate without altering the pH much.  Naturally, as
> more and more "buffering capacity" is used up, the pH will be able to
> shift more and more.  Also, salts from the weak acids build up in the
> water.  Both these consequences point to the need for occasional water
> changes to remove the salts and replenish the buffer.
> 
> Since the phosphate system has an equilibrium point at pH 7.2, you
> would think it would be preferred to the carbonate system for
> freshwater aquariums.  This is not true for three reasons.  First,
> aquariums naturally produce organic acid compounds (metabolism
> by-products) so you are most concerned about buffering acids.  If you
> keep your pH at around 7.0, you are already below the phosphate pK
> point and will keep getting further away as acids are buffered,
> reducing the amount of buffering potential.  Using the carbonate
> system, pH 7.0 is above the pK so that any acid buffering will move
> the pH even closer to the best buffering point.  Second, plants can
> use the carbon compunds which are part of the carbonate system.
> Third, phosphates tend to grow algae, which is not desired.
> 
> Using the Henderson-Hasselbach equation and some chemical
> calculations, you can create a chart showing the relationship of pH to
> KH to CO2 (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).
> 
> =====  End: from an old posting  ======================================
> 
> Sounds easy, right?  OK, here are some scribbles from my old work
> sheet -- the results of which created a fine pH/KH/CO2 table.
> 
> First, the "equation" that Karla gave me:
> 
>                  [A-]
>    pH = pK + log ----
>                  [HA]
> - -or-
>                      HCO3-      CO2
>    pH = 6.37 + log [ ------ = ------- ]
>                      H2CO3   1.64CaCO3
> - -or-
>                      HCO3-      CO2
>    pH - 6.37 = log [ ------ = ------- ]
>                      H2CO3   1.64CaCO3
> 
> I don't remember how to interpret this.  Is HCO3-/H2CO3 "the same as"
> CO2/1.64CaCO3?  Or is the relation part of the equation?  What's the
> deal with "1.64"?  HCO3- is the KH which is 17.8 mg/l CaCO3.  Where
> does this fit in?  Are the concentrations in millequivalents (I
> suspect it is but I am meq impaired).
> 
> Next, the results. I calculated two points for each of many pH values.
> The points are the CO2 concentration for that pH at KH=1 degree and
> KH=8 degrees.  This makes a nice linear chart with CO2 on the vertical
> axis, KH on the horizontal axis and showing lines of constant pH.
> 
> Here's some sample results (CO2 in mg/l):
> 
>                              CO2@    CO2@
> pH   log[A-/HA]  [A-/HA]     KH=1    KH=8
> - ---  ----------  -------    -----   -----
> 6.4     0.03       1.07     12.01   95.98
> 
> 6.7     0.33       2.14      6.00   47.99
> 
> 7.0     0.63       4.27      3.01   24.05
> 
> 7.7     1.33      21.38      0.60    4.80
> 
> 8.0     1.63      42.66      0.30    2.41
> 
> Notice the nice "power of 10" relationship between pH and CO2 values.
> (pH=6.7, CO2=6.0) and (pH=7.7, CO2=0.6).
> 
> I made a notation at the top of the table showing a factor of "0.292"
> for KH=1 and "2.334" for KH=8 (2.334 = 8 * 0.292).  I don't remember
> what this factor meant.
> 
> Also note that [A-/HA] * CO2 is a constant value (with rounding):
> 
>   1.07 * 12.01 = 12.8       1.07 * 95.98 = 102.7
>   4.27 *  3.01 = 12.8       4.27 * 24.05 = 102.7
>  21.38 *  0.60 = 12.8      21.38 *  4.80 = 102.6
> 
> So, if someone could figure out how to calculate the [A-/HA] values
> for CO2 and KH, the equation is simple to rearrange to solve for
> any one of the variables given the other two.
> 
> I feel sooooo stupid.
> 
> I'll forward this to Karla.  Perhaps she will be inspired to help out
> once again.
> 
> George
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 06:58:24 -0500 (EST)
> From: "Roger S. Miller" <rgrmill at rt66_com>
> Subject: Re: Aquatic Plants Digest V2 #832
> 
> > >Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 18:12:23 -0400
> > >To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
> > >From: Sanjay Joshi <sjoshi at psu_edu>
> > >Subject: CO2-Kh-PH table: Reference Wanted
> > >
> > >I have seen the CO2-Kh-pH tables in several places. I am looking for
> > >a published reference that explains the chemistry behind these
> > >tables, and also provides the formulas and equations used to derive
> > >the tables.
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >
> > >sanjay joshi
> 
> There are probably any number of references for the tables, as they are
> based on rather basic aqueous chemistry.  My fav is
> 
> Skougstad, M. J. et al, 1979.  Methods for determination of inorganic
>         substances in water and fluvial sediments.  Techniques of
>         Water-Resources Investigations of the United States Geological
>         Survey, Chapter A1. U.S Government Printing Office, Washington,
>         DC. 626pp.
> 
> I believe there is a newer version of the same reference.
> 
> The formula (on page 280) is rather simple:
> 
>         mg/L CO2 = 1.60 X 10^(6.0-pH) X mg/L HCO3-
> 
> Note that HCO3- in mg/L is alkalinity in German degrees kH * 21.8.
> 
> The formula is good for fresh water with less than 800 mg/l of solutes.
> Sea water will depart significantly from this relationship because of
> variations in activity coefficients and the importance of several
> complexes (CaHCO+, and so on) that form in concentrated solutions.  It may
> be possible to use programs like USGS' PHREEQC code to  produce a
> similar, semi-empirical relationship for sea water.
> 
> Roger Miller
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 10:17:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Paul Chapman <chapman at SEDSystems_ca>
> Subject: Cheap Substrate Heating
> 
> George Booth wrote:
> 
> >Think about what would be going on here.  Let's say that the water in the
> >tubing did pick up some heat from the ballasts (it should since the
> >ballasts typically run at 150 F or so).  So the heated water in the tube
> >begins to heat up the gravel.  To heat the gravel, the water in the
> >tubing has to give up heat.  In a very short distance, the water in the
> >tubing has given up all it's heat to the gravel and becomes the same temp
> >as gravel.  Over a very long time, the gravel around the first part of
> >the tubing gets very hot and gravel downstream gets cooler and cooler.
> >This does not produce a very even heat density in the gravel.  Too hot in
> >one section, not hot enough in some sections, not hot at all in the last
> >sections.
> 
> Seems to me this would be a problem with a very slow flow system
> only i.e. if the water is allowed to sit in the tubing long enough to give
> up all of its heat.  Why not increase the heat available to the system by
> cranking up the rate of flow?  Granted, the heat in the first sections
> would be higher, but you can make the difference between the
> first and final sections negligibly small with a high flow rate.
> 
> >You would probably want this to be a sealed system. Pulling aqaurium water
> >in would bring detritus and clog the tube.  And dumping the water back
> >into the tank might heat the tank too much IF all the heat was not
> >transferred to the gravel.  I suspect the silicon tubing is a pretty good
> >insulator.
> 
> Yes, it would have to be a sealed system.  As far as the silicon tubing
> being a good insulator, maybe, but I can feel the heat off such a tube
> when I run hot water through it....Any idea on how much heat transfer is
> really necessary?
> 
> >And, of course, you would have a problem with brown algae build up unless
> >you used sterlized water and somehow kept it sterilized.
> 
> Could be a problem.  Solutions might involve adding something to the water
> in the sealed system to keep the algae down.
> 
> >How would you control the heating?  Hopefully, the on-off cycle of the
> >lights would just perfectly balance the heating of the gravel so the tank
> >water would not get too hot.
> 
> Put the pump on a timer, or under thermostatic control, the same way you
> do your Dupla cables.
> 
> >And, boy, won't that be exciting when the tubing springs a leak, wets down
> >the ballasts and causes a fire!  Cool.
> 
> Seems like the risk of fire is negligible if a ground fault circuit
> interrupter is used.  Other techniques could be used as well, such as
> bolting the ballast on top of a metal plate, and fixing the coils on the
> bottom.
> 
> Paul Chapman
> Saskatoon, SK.
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of Aquatic Plants Digest V2 #833
> ************************************
> 
> To unsubscribe to aquatic-plants, send the command:
>     unsubscribe aquatic-plants
> in the body of a message to "Majordomo at ActWin_com".  Archives are
> available on the web at http://www.actwin.com/fish/aquatic-plants
> or via FTP to ftp.actwin.com in /pub/aquaria/aquatic-plants.