How's this sump plan look?

[eric b 125]

I'm planning a 200DD build with 40B sump. I know that the sump is a little small, but I need to fit all my equipment in the Marineland Monterey stand so this is the largest sump I could fit. I'm only going to move about 600 gph through the sump.
My main concern is the baffles. The only other sump I built was for my 125 and some of the baffles went all the way to the top of the sump. With this design, none of the baffles will go all the way up, but instead I plan on putting four 2" X 2" squares of glass near the top to which I will clip eggcrate. If there is a power failure, this will prevent macro from floating into the other chambers and causing problems when power is restored.
Each square on the graph paper represents 1"

 

[eric b 125]

I should add: I do have an ATO w/ 20g reservoir.

 

[2quills]

I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The next sump I do though I don't want to build the bubble trap with the traditional 3 baffle design. I don't think it's necessary and its a bit of a detritus trap. I'll simply make them like how you have the 2 baffles between your skimmer and fuge.
I am kind of partial to having the return in the middle. This gives me the option to isolate either my five or skimmer chambers while keeping the rest of the system running. Works good when I want to clean the skimmer or gives me the option to iron dose the fuge only. I'll isolate it and let the iron circulate in the fuge for half a day and then bring it back online.

 

[edat]

Looks good. Basically the same design I used on my 40L that ran on my 125 for years.

 

[eric b 125]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397795/hows-this-sump-plan-look#post_3546998
I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The next sump I do though I don't want to build the bubble trap with the traditional 3 baffle design. I don't think it's necessary and its a bit of a detritus trap. I'll simply make them like how you have the 2 baffles between your skimmer and fuge.
I am kind of partial to having the return in the middle. This gives me the option to isolate either my five or skimmer chambers while keeping the rest of the system running. Works good when I want to clean the skimmer or gives me the option to iron dose the fuge only. I'll isolate it and let the iron circulate in the fuge for half a day and then bring it back online.

The way I plan on running my overflows won't really allow me to put the return in the middle. Even if I could, I'm working with such a limited amount of space (especially H) in the stand that plumbing would become a problem, too.

I like the idea of getting rid of the last baffle, though. With only 600 gph running through it, whatever microbubbles there are will have plenty of time to surface before the return pump.

 

[eric b 125]

On the big site, it was suggested of me to ditch the fuge. I know it's not a large fuge, but I think it will still have benefits, no?

 

[2quills]

On the big site, it was suggested of me to ditch the fuge.  I know it's not a large fuge, but I think it will still have benefits, no?
I guess the question is how much? If it's to grow macros you could maybe save a little room by building an algae scrubber. Pods love em. Mine worked great while I had it going. I simply got tired of cleaning it. Pluss the system seems quieter without it.
What about an external skimmer and just a large fuge and return section?

 

[pegasus]

A 15" x 18" fuge area should be sufficient for a 200G, provided you'll pair it up with an adequate skimmer. If you plan to use mud or sand in the fuge, the skimmer baffle design won't work as you'll have a sand or mud storm as soon as the flow begins. It will work for a bare-bottom fuge, but that's not very common unless it's a chaeto tumbler. I like having a single baffle with a "window" three inches from the bottom. This allows water to flow across the mud/sand and through the macros instead of dispersing throughout the chamber. I'd also ditch the third baffle, and if you need a bubble trap, drop a piece of foam in the slot. Just my 2c...

 

[acrylic51]

If I'm looking at this correctly your skimmer output flows over a baffle and then under a baffle to enter the fuge area? Is the fuge going to be BB or sandbed? Not really sure if that last baffle is really needed.....Personally I think the return section is small.....You did mention an ATO though, but still on the small side. Probably most that commented on ditching the fuge section was thinking about dosing....that sort of thing. I wouldn't use any foam to stop micro bubbles....a PITA and eventually will become a problem.....Just my .02

 

[2quills]

If those two baffles were flipped around it would work better as a bubble trap IMO and you'd mitigate any potential sand storm if you decide to stick with the arrangement.

 

[acrylic51]

The water falling over that first baffle could possible initiate micro bubbles....You'd be surprised how little of a drop is needed and see what your saying.....

 

[pegasus]

Water cascading over the second baffle will create bubbles, but there's a solution for that, too. I've seen strips (acrylic or glass) attached across the top of the baffle at 45 degrees that allow the water to "slide" into the fuge section. The downside to this setup is it creates a dead spot directly below. I previously wrote about a window 3" above the bottom of the baffle, but it's actually 4" from the bottom. This allows for a 3" sand or mud bed in the fuge with a direct stream of water flowing across it. The window idea isn't mine... my refugium has it. I have an eshopps r-300, and it's rated for 225-300 gallons. The refugium section is 15 x 16 inches, and your plan is to have a 15 x 18 inch section, so it should be more than sufficient for 200 gallons. I don't particularly care for the baffling for the return section, as it needs the foam to slow the fall of water so there are no bubbles entering the return chamber. The foam DOES prevent macros from spilling over in power outages, but it requires cleaning at least once every couple of weeks to keep water from backing up in the skimmer & fuge chambers, kicking in the ATO. Other than that, I love it.

http://www.eshopps.com/products/filters/refugium/r300/

 

[2quills]

A half in drop over a baffle wouldn't be enough to concern me with extra bubbles. He's planning for low flow through the sump it sounds like. I'm running a 1300gph pump on my 120g with 65 gallon sump. Skimmer chamber is next to the return and I have no issue with micro bubbles making it to the display. There are bubbles created from the 2" drop but they rise strait up to the surface so it's not a concern. However, the small return chamber would be a concern to me more in this regard if the micro bubbles from the skimmer didn't first have to make their way through the fuge. Decisions, decisions lol.

 

[eric b 125]

Thanks for your responses, everyone! The reason I have the baffles b/w the skimmer and fuge set up that way is so that water flow goes through the macro, rather than just skimming over it. I have an extra Korallia 1 and 4, one of which will go into the R overflow and the other I can use in the fuge if I need. I'm not putting sand in the fuge, but I will have LR (rubble, at least) in there. Like Corey said, there will be low flow running through the sump so microbubbles will have plenty of time to surface before the return.

 

[acrylic51]

That was my thought on the micro bubbles from the skimmer.....Not sure on skimmer choice, but there are bubbles put off and the smaller the return you make it harder to eliminate....You'd be totally surprised how small amounts seem to be exaggerated when fired back into the tank.

 

[pegasus]

Once again, the window has the advantage over baffles because it's basically at the bottom of the skimmer. Most micro bubbles never make it that far down, but they do rise... to the surface where they will spill over into the fuge if overflowing a baffle. You'll need extremely slow flow for the bubbles to dissipate before they reach the return chamber. Just saying...

 

[eric b 125]

How thick should the glass be for the baffles?