20 gallon sump bulid

2quills

2quills

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwilcox http:///t/387474/20-gallon-sump-bulid#post_3410047
Final Design.....THANKS for all the input, still don't know what kind of pump to get or what lights to use on the Algae Scrubber
Warm white compact floursecent bulbs. What size is your display tank? System volume determines what size of screen and pump you should run.
 
S

saxman

Guest
If you're running a "refrigerium" (the term is REFUGIUM) with live macro algae, IMHO, the algae scrubber is redundant and unnecessary.
With the original design, I think the perforated inlet tube is going to limit the output of your overflow too much and it will be easily "overpumped", and you'll end up with flow issues in the DT because you'll have to dial your pump back to compensate for the reduced flow rate of your O/F.
Skimmers remove very few, if any pods from the tank. Skimmers can't suck them off of surfaces, where most of them grow, and to be honest, one rarely finds swimming copepods in aquaria that haven't been introduced. Those pretty red Tigriopus californicus ("tigger" pods) you see in the bottles are a temperate species that don't do well at normal tropical temperatures. They give birth to an inordinate number of males above about 68*F, so the culture just burns out.
I'd go with an Eheim 1260 pump if you can swing it (they're a little more money, but worth it). Otherwise, a Mag 5 or a QO 2200 would be fine for a 500 gph-ish pump.
 
S

saxman

Guest
IMHO, 500 gph isn't even close to what a 90 gal needs. I'd be looking at at least the 1000 gph range, esp. if it's a reef.
For reference, our 48" x 24" x 20" 100 gal FOWLR/live macro is running a LG 4-MDQX-SC (1325 gph @ 0 head), and a Iwaki MD40RLT (750 gph) on the CL.
The tank is running dual 1.25" Durso-style O/F's, which means that they neck down to 1" bulkheads.
The setup isn't a crazy-flow tank either...it's a lionfish tank.
Granted, there's a lot of head on the main returns, but I think you'll be shocked at how much you lose. Are you running any other equipment on your main returns (chiller, UV, SCWD, etc.)?
FWIW, here's a pic showing the plumbing on our 100 gal (minus the drain hoses):
 
2quills

2quills

Well-Known Member
Hey Sax couple of questions for you or one question at least lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxman http:///t/387474/20-gallon-sump-bulid/20#post_3410112
If you're running a "refrigerium" (the term is REFUGIUM) with live macro algae, IMHO, the algae scrubber is redundant and unnecessary. Would agree that you could do either or successfully. In most if not all cases where scrubbers AND macro have been ran at the same time. A properly set up scrubber will out compete any of the macro's and the macro will die.
With the original design, I think the perforated inlet tube is going to limit the output of your overflow too much and it will be easily "overpumped", and you'll end up with flow issues in the DT because you'll have to dial your pump back to compensate for the reduced flow rate of your O/F. Also agree as I'm sure the vast majority of folks who run scrubbers would that this is not the smartest way to set up a scrubber. People do have them plumbed from their overflows but it isn't ideal. Especially on external overflows where there is no built in redundancy. It's best to set up a scrubber either on it's own pump or Tee off of your return pump. According to the success rates the right amount of flow is key to running a successful scrubber. As is lighting and screen size.
Skimmers remove very few, if any pods from the tank. Skimmers can't suck them off of surfaces, where most of them grow, and to be honest, one rarely finds swimming copepods in aquaria that haven't been introduced. Those pretty red Tigriopus californicus ("tigger" pods) you see in the bottles are a temperate species that don't do well at normal tropical temperatures. They give birth to an inordinate number of males above about 68*F, so the culture just burns out. I don't think the argument is so much that skimmers are removing all of the pods from some of the more experienced hobbiest who've been running them . But more of the fact that scrubbers seem to be varitable breeding grounds much more so than a fuges with macro. Almost like fertility drugs for pods. For whatever reason they love the stuff and thrive like crazy on the screens. Guys who've ran both will virtually always, always tell you they have way more pods when running a scrubber vs a typical skimmer/fuge set up. Infact one of the important parts of cleaning your screen weekly is to kill off the excess pods that feed on the screen. If left unattended they will eat it to the point it begins falling off into the system, dieying and releases it's nutrients.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxman http:///t/387474/20-gallon-sump-bulid/20#post_3410121
IMHO, 500 gph isn't even close to what a 90 gal needs. I'd be looking at at least the 1000 gph range, esp. if it's a reef. Just a curriosity here but why is it so important that he needs to run 5+ times the turnover rate of his system through his sump? Just asking because I could think of many people who would argue that 3-5x is more then adequate if not more efficient. I know guys are running tanks successfully at many different rates but just wondering that if it can be done without a crazy high amount of turnover then why do it?
Aaron: I'm going to send you a link to a place that is nothing but folks running scrubbers if you want to check it out. Lots of good info, pics, designs to browse. And you can hear and see many success stories over there. Even from folks who were first reluctant to believe that a successfull reef tank can be maintained with a scrubber as the only filtration device. You can ask questions, here opinions and decide for yourself what to do. There is a little more science involved than simply throwing a screen together with some lights and expecting it to work miricals in your tank. So you really might want to read up before you make the decision to build on. JMO
 
acrylic51

acrylic51

Active Member
I think a big thing with running a flow rate excessively through the sump is most sumps aren't designed or capable of handling high flow allowing excessive bubbles back to the DT. Another reason is skimmers aren't processing what they should/could at higher rates.
 
S

saxman

Guest
2Quills,
Algae scrubbers aren't a new thing by any stretch of the imagination (I seriously considered running one about 15 years ago). They've been around quite awhile, and I know there are those who swear by them, just as I swear by live macro. I find running macro a whole lot less troublesome than designing and implementing a scrubber that is quiet and works well, and considering that we keep "high waste" predatory fish and that we have a dozen or more setups running at any given time, we need SIMPLE and EFFICIENT.
That's what's great about the hobby...lots of ways to get results.
 
2quills

2quills

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxman http:///t/387474/20-gallon-sump-bulid/20#post_3410193
2Quills,
Algae scrubbers aren't a new thing by any stretch of the imagination (I seriously considered running one about 15 years ago). They've been around quite awhile, and I know there are those who swear by them, just as I swear by live macro. I find running macro a whole lot less troublesome than designing and implementing a scrubber that is quiet and works well, and considering that we keep "high waste" predatory fish and that we have a dozen or more setups running at any given time, we need SIMPLE and EFFICIENT.
That's what's great about the hobby...lots of ways to get results.
Certainly can't argue with that.
Yeah they've been around for quite some time. First one came on line back in the late 70's I believe. In order for them to actually work back in the day they usually had to be big and bulky and required a lot of space. I think with a lot of the innovations in lighting and techniques over the years that has led to some pretty interesting new ways of running them. As well as other filtration concepts. That being said, I don't think scrubbers are for everybody. It's best for all to do their homework and figure out what they think is best for them. I was almost going to recommend earlier to Aaron that if this is his first sump then perhaps it wouldn't be such a bad idea to cut his teeth with a skimmer and some macro.
 
acrylic51

acrylic51

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxman http:///t/387474/20-gallon-sump-bulid/20#post_3410121
IMHO, 500 gph isn't even close to what a 90 gal needs. I'd be looking at at least the 1000 gph range, esp. if it's a reef.
For reference, our 48" x 24" x 20" 100 gal FOWLR/live macro is running a LG 4-MDQX-SC (1325 gph @ 0 head), and a Iwaki MD40RLT (750 gph) on the CL.
The tank is running dual 1.25" Durso-style O/F's, which means that they neck down to 1" bulkheads.
The setup isn't a crazy-flow tank either...it's a lionfish tank.
Granted, there's a lot of head on the main returns, but I think you'll be shocked at how much you lose. Are you running any other equipment on your main returns (chiller, UV, SCWD, etc.)?
FWIW, here's a pic showing the plumbing on our 100 gal (minus the drain hoses):

Saxman.....on the flow side of things your talking a lot of variables......Sump being the big key issue....If the sump is to small or poorly designed you'll never push that kind of flow through it......You as well I as know your not getting a true 1325 gph through the sump. I'm not doubting or questioning the logic of more flow through a sump. I've never been 1 to follow that "norm" of 3x-5x flow......
Trying to push 1325 gallons through the sump would make your skimmer crazy and inefficient to say the least.
 
S

saxman

Guest
Quote:
You as well I as know your not getting a true 1325 gph through the sump.
Of course I'm not getting that flow...look at the system design...there are valves, elbows and a chiller, which is also why I quoted "@ 0 head". However, we also both know that with even a little head loss, a 500 gph pump isn't going to cut it for a 90 gal tank by the time it's all plumbed. What I'm attempting to do is save the OP some money by not buying too small a pump in the first place. If nothing else, he should "overpump" a bit and add a bleed-off valve back to the sump in case it's needed, OR try and calculate his exact head loss and sump flow, then match the pump to that number (I figure it's easier for a novice to get a slightly larger pump).
 
aaronwilcox

aaronwilcox

New Member
Would the Rio Plus 3100 - 900 gph - UL Listed work for my system?
I'm also not quite sure on all the pluming in my system, such as where I would/might need check values, ball valves, and T valves?
 
S

saxman

Guest
Here's where you should put your "T" and your valve (pay no attention to pump placement in this dwg):

As far as check valves go, I'd design the system so you don't need one. They cut down on flow (any fitting does), and they give you a false sense of safety, because they can, and do fail or become clogged by a snail, algae/crud, etc. If you use siphon break holes on your return fittings and set up your "max fill" level on your sump, you'll be fine.
I really haven't been a fan of Rio pumps for critical applications, but that's based on some of the issues they had with their older design pumps (they had a bad habit of not restarting following power interruptions and also burning up), so someone else may be able to give you some input there. However, based on your system design, I'm guessing you have roughly 5' of head loss to deal with, which will put that pump right in the ballpark for what you're looking for.
You didn't say if you're using rigid PVC or flexible hose for your plumbing, but you should note that the Rio 3100+ has a hose barb output, so if you're using rigid plumbing, you'll need to adapt it to rigid pipe, which is easily done with a 3/4" or 1" hosebarb x FPT fitting, depending on what size pipe you run.
I also recommend using a true union ball valve on your pump output so you can isolate and remove the pump if necessary (use a hosebarb x MPT fitting on the "pump end" instead of the FPT previously mentioned).
 
snakeblitz33

snakeblitz33

Well-Known Member
I recommend buying a Mag Drive 9.5 for your return pump. They are truly sump pumps. They usually take about 10 years to break down, and when they do, you will just have to replace the impeller. The reason I suggest using a Mag 9.5 is because:
1. You may or may not need the extra flow in the tank - using a ball valve to control the flow is just fine!
2. If you don't need that much flow, you can easily rig up an algae scrubber in the future if you wish, or you can power other devices.
I am one of those nut jobs that believes a well managed algae scrubber is pretty much the only piece of equipment you need if it's put on a true reef tank. Protein skimmers are great for fish only tanks or really large applications where removal of particulate organic matter is a must.
2Quills, thanks for taking up for algae scrubbers. I guess I come from the "old school" too, calling them turf scrubbers. lol.
 
acrylic51

acrylic51

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxman http:///t/387474/20-gallon-sump-bulid/20#post_3410405
i
Of course I'm not getting that flow...look at the system design...there are valves, elbows and a chiller, which is also why I quoted "@ 0 head". However, we also both know that with even a little head loss, a 500 gph pump isn't going to cut it for a 90 gal tank by the time it's all plumbed. What I'm attempting to do is save the OP some money by not buying too small a pump in the first place. If nothing else, he should "overpump" a bit and add a bleed-off valve back to the sump in case it's needed, OR try and calculate his exact head loss and sump flow, then match the pump to that number (I figure it's easier for a novice to get a slightly larger pump).
I'm following you Saxman!!!!! I didn't see he was wanting to use a pump rated at 500gph.......I was merely stating that "we" never get the true flow, because of elbows, fittings, and other things.....
As far as bleed-off as Saxman mentioned isn't a bad idea.......hurts nothing in the end......I'm also of the school of thinking as well as having a little more pump than needed. Worse case you could use it to feed your scrubber instead of employing an additional pump.
As far as pump recommendations I'd opt for the Eheim over the Mag for several reasons, but the biggest is the reputation, efficiency, and minimal heat transfer to the tank water vs the amount of heat the Mag will produce. Mags also have a tendency not to like to start and stop over time. That is a noted issue with them after a while.
 
snakeblitz33

snakeblitz33

Well-Known Member
Eheims cost 2x more in most cases. It sounds like the OP is on a serious budget. I was simply suggesting something that might work for him.
I do like Eheims though.
 
S

saxman

Guest
We have several old Mags, and they do seem to work forever if you get a good one, but I've also recently tossed a couple that gave it up completely. We typically use them for top-off and utility pumps these days.
I've been running external pumps for quite awhile now, but we also have several Mags, QO's, MJ's, even a few small Rios. That being said, if I were to go out and buy a new submersible, I'd have to go with an Eheim based on all I hear about them, and what a few friends tell me as well. I still have an old Eheim 2215 canister that was my first SW filter over 20 years ago, and it still works, so the quality speaks for itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top