Moderators: Dennis Todaro
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
<alex2>
Posted
WE HAVE IN OUR UNIT A BICARB MIXER WITH A PROPELLER.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE USE OF THIS PROPELLER WILL CAUSE CO2 LOST.
WHAT KIND OF MIXER CAN BE USED INSTEAD OF A PROPELLLER?
THANKS FOR YOUR FEEDBACK.
 
Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
It is not only the propeller system that allows for CO2 to be lost but the propeller in conjunction with a partially/open mixing tank system.Companies that make completely closable systems with a bottom mixing system to name some: Zyzatech and MarCor Services. I dont know if Zyzatech still make them or not but I know MarCor does and its pretty nice. They are expensive in comparison to the tank/propeller style some of us still use in our clinics.Good Luck.
 
Posts: 127 | Location: Texas | Registered: 24 January 2001Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
I BUILT A FEED LINE OUT OF PVC STRIGHT INTO THE TANK, AT THE END OF THIS LINE THERE IS A FITTING THAT PRODUCES A JET STREAM. WHEN PLACED AGAINST THE TANK IT MIXES REALLY WELL.
LOTS OF TURBULANCE FROM THE BOTTOM UP. ALL AVAILABLE FROM US PLASTICS. THIS WILL ALSO REDUCE CO2 LOSS IN OPEN TANK SYSTEMS.
 
Posts: 3 | Registered: 04 May 2002Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ALEX2:
WE HAVE IN OUR UNIT A BICARB MIXER WITH A PROPELLER.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE USE OF THIS PROPELLER WILL CAUSE CO2 LOST.
WHAT KIND OF MIXER CAN BE USED INSTEAD OF A PROPELLLER?
THANKS FOR YOUR FEEDBACK.


I thought we could use the propeller type if we cut it off after 10 min.
 
Posts: 2 | Location: Texas | Registered: 29 March 2002Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
We have 3 units totalling 30 machines, and we have been using the Polly on a Dolly with the propeller for the past 10 years at least. The amount of CO2 lost is miniscule , and sometimes the nurses let them run for an hour or so.
 
Posts: 19 | Location: Canada | Registered: 29 October 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
In many individual facilities (one I used to work for included) the propeller type mixer has had much success. Often, the problem with CO2 loss comes in how stable the bicarb solution produced is, and for how long. This becomes a larger issue with plumbed distribution, as bicarb precipitate can clog up the whole thing. A closed system is far preferable to an open top tank due to both off-gassing and bacteriological concerns.

There are many systems currently available which utilize some other type of mixing, with or without distribution.

I'd be happy to discuss this issue further any time, either through e-mail or on the phone.

Sandie Monsman
Isopure
440-946-0540
 
Posts: 22 | Location: Willoughby, Ohio, USA | Registered: 03 May 2002Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community  
 


Copyright RenalWEB 2008