Is a MAG-DRIVE 1800 on 75g reef to much

[posiden]

Originally Posted by jetskiking
http:///forum/post/3143673
If it was my tank I would run a quiet one 3000. It will only draw 45w as compaired to 145w and be plenty of flow through your sump. I agree that you have to calculate for head loss, but as I said before a lot of well known refers suggest only 3 to 5 times the volume an hour through the sump.
Are we talking about sumps or refugiums?

 

[jetskiking]

Originally Posted by Posiden
http:///forum/post/3143681
Are we talking about sumps or refugiums?
I am talking sumps. There is not a reason to flow that much. Lets look at what we keep in our sumps. First would be a skimmer. I run a recirc reef octopus skimmer that is ran off a maxijet 900 thats around 200 gph with the 5 inches of head. There is no need to flow more than 1 1/2 to 2 times the water than the skimmer can handle. Second would be a wet dry or bio filtration. These both rely on contact time so it can nitrify efficiently. Next would be chemical filtration. Pretty much works the same as the bio. Then there are heaters which work best with a little flow but not too much. We already have hit on the fuge.
Reality is I see people that overdo the flow in their sump. The expense in a reef tank is not just in the setup but also the expense of running. Running equipment that is oversized especially pumps and lights drives those costs way up. Plus your system might actually even suffer because of it.

 

[posiden]

Originally Posted by jetskiking
http:///forum/post/3143685
I am talking sumps. There is not a reason to flow that much. Lets look at what we keep in our sumps. First would be a skimmer. I run a recirc reef octopus skimmer that is ran off a maxijet 900 thats around 200 gph with the 5 inches of head. There is no need to flow more than 1 1/2 to 2 times the water than the skimmer can handle. Second would be a wet dry or bio filtration. These both rely on contact time so it can nitrify efficiently. Next would be chemical filtration. Pretty much works the same as the bio. Then there are heaters which work best with a little flow but not too much. We already have hit on the fuge.
Reality is I see people that overdo the flow in their sump. The expense in a reef tank is not just in the setup but also the expense of running. Running equipment that is oversized especially pumps and lights drives those costs way up. Plus your system might actually even suffer because of it.
When you place Bio balls or even LR in a sump it's no longer a sump. It becomes a wet/dry filter.
Sump; A pit at the lowest point in a circulating or drainage system.
If the skimmer is being fed by its own pump to allow the correct amount of flow through it, then the surounding water means nothing to it.
I agree there is running costs in this hobbie, however the costs also come from the CL or power heads that are used to create the turn over rate in a tank. If someone was to do a true "sump" and utilize a larger pump to gain more flow and less complexity to a system, then I don't see the issue. A true sump will only give you more water volume.
Yes it is more common not to see a true sump. In those instances high water flow would not be diserable. The amount of water flowing through those filtration systems would need to be adjusted accordingly. Bio Balls, DSB, ect..
The OP just asked if it was to much for the size of tank they have. We also don't even know what they have for a sump/refug. They could have another tank or a combo of tanks adding another 75 gallons to the system. After adding in head losses they would be right on the money then. But as it stands, we don't know the specifics. Assuming they are running a simpl and small sump, I posted eairler if it was plumbed with split returns the head loss will make the MAG 18 run about 750GPH. The same return configuration could be tweaked to give more flow depending on the size of the water volume down below.

 

[jetskiking]

Originally Posted by Posiden
http:///forum/post/3143701
When you place Bio balls or even LR in a sump it's no longer a sump. It becomes a wet/dry filter.
Sump; A pit at the lowest point in a circulating or drainage system.
By the definition you just provided its still a sump. Its just a sump that contains filtration. Plus since the biggest reasons for running a sump do not have anything to do with water volume then the reason we as hobbiest run sumps is to install this equipment without it being in the main display. Water volume and oxygenation are just added benefit.
If the skimmer is being fed by its own pump to allow the correct amount of flow through it, then the surounding water means nothing to it. That is not really true either. Run water too slow and you will be skimming previuosly skimmed effluent, run it to fast and its just a waste power.
I agree there is running costs in this hobbie, however the costs also come from the CL or power heads that are used to create the turn over rate in a tank. If someone was to do a true "sump" and utilize a larger pump to gain more flow and less complexity to a system, then I don't see the issue. A true sump will only give you more water volume. Why even do a sump then? just do hang on the back. As stated above more water volume is just a possitive byproduct of why we really run sumps. Also all those pumps are cumulative. Oversize a bunch of your systems and you could easily pay three times as much to power them than needed.
Yes it is more common not to see a true sump. In those instances high water flow would not be diserable. The amount of water flowing through those filtration systems would need to be adjusted accordingly. Bio Balls, DSB, ect..
The OP just asked if it was to much for the size of tank they have. We also don't even know what they have for a sump/refug. They could have another tank or a combo of tanks adding another 75 gallons to the system. After adding in head losses they would be right on the money then. But as it stands, we don't know the specifics. Assuming they are running a simpl and small sump, I posted eairler if it was plumbed with split returns the head loss will make the MAG 18 run about 750GPH. The same return configuration could be tweaked to give more flow depending on the size of the water volume down below.They also asked if there was such a thing as too much flow through a sump. The answer is yes. And assuming they are going to run more than just a container of water under their tank then it applies to them. Fact is most everyone I have seen or known with a 75 gallon including myself has great success with a mag 7 or 9.5. No need to oversize.

 

[crazyreefnut]

Hi Guys I run a small pool/pond pump on my 180 rated at 3600 gph and I dial it down a bit and as all of you have stated before as long as you stop the Vortex and use all plastic valves to dial down and you do not mind spending more on electric and the cost of the actual pump, Go for it again everything depends on the way that it is plumbed and without knowing all the details it is hard to say.

 

[posiden]

Originally Posted by jetskiking
http:///forum/post/3143755

A sump with filtration can no longer be simply referd to as a sump. It has taken on a purpose other than hinding equipment.
How is it a waste of power? The added flow will be giving you direct impact in the display. There will be less need for the extra power heads.
As I stated eairler by placing the skimmer in the sump it has now become a filter. Thereby having to change its needs. If one wanted to place a skimmer in the sump and keep the two separet. All that would be needed is another chamber fed its own source, and then allow the excess to spill into the high flow sump. In my examples of drain systems the open channel would be the one a person could send into that chamber.
Larger volume in not just a byproduct of running a sump. The added volume will give the system more stability. So just running a HOB isn't the same. You also cant hide anything in a HOB.
Why would someone oversize a bunch of things in thier system? If you have almost all of your flow or turn over rate in one, why would you buy large power heads? The total wattage is a total. It doesn't matter if it is one pump or five.
Too much flow through a sump......NO. There is such a thing as to much flow through a filter.

 

[reefjunkiee]

Originally Posted by Posiden
http:///forum/post/3143859
A sump with filtration can no longer be simply referd to as a sump. It has taken on a purpose other than hinding equipment.
How is it a waste of power? The added flow will be giving you direct impact in the display. There will be less need for the extra power heads.
As I stated eairler by placing the skimmer in the sump it has now become a filter. Thereby having to change its needs. If one wanted to place a skimmer in the sump and keep the two separet. All that would be needed is another chamber fed its own source, and then allow the excess to spill into the high flow sump. In my examples of drain systems the open channel would be the one a person could send into that chamber.
Larger volume in not just a byproduct of running a sump. The added volume will give the system more stability. So just running a HOB isn't the same. You also cant hide anything in a HOB.
Why would someone oversize a bunch of things in thier system? If you have almost all of your flow or turn over rate in one, why would you buy large power heads? The total wattage is a total. It doesn't matter if it is one pump or five.
Too much flow through a sump......NO. There is such a thing as to much flow through a filter.
to each his own, but all the hard core reefers with sps i know do not run high flow through a sump, as mentioned before you have a much more effective skimmer with lower flow, or most of that food will just wash right through the sump back into the tank to break down. I used to think like you, with more flow through a sump less flow needed, but what you are trying to do is what is called a closed loop, not a sump. a sump by practical terms is a area which you place filters such a a skimmer, and a Fuge. low flow through a sump is the way to go.

 

[posiden]

Originally Posted by reefjunkiee
http:///forum/post/3144112
to each his own, but all the hard core reefers with sps i know do not run high flow through a sump, as mentioned before you have a much more effective skimmer with lower flow, or most of that food will just wash right through the sump back into the tank to break down. I used to think like you, with more flow through a sump less flow needed, but what you are trying to do is what is called a closed loop, not a sump. a sump by practical terms is a area which you place filters such a a skimmer, and a Fuge. low flow through a sump is the way to go.
Are you insinuating that I am not a "hard core reefer"?
I am not trying to do a closed loop. That would not need a OF or a sump.
What I am driving at is treminology. A sump is no longer a sump once it is turned into a filtering device. In which case, as I have stated before. The flow would then be adjusted acordingly.
I am not trying to say one way is better then another. I have been stating the differences and that in a true example of the meaning, of the word sump, amount of flow doesn't matter. Cause there will be no filtering taking place, just hiding equipment.

 

[jetskiking]

Originally Posted by Posiden
http:///forum/post/3144199
Are you insinuating that I am not a "hard core reefer"?
I am not trying to do a closed loop. That would not need a OF or a sump.
What I am driving at is treminology. A sump is no longer a sump once it is turned into a filtering device. In which case, as I have stated before. The flow would then be adjusted acordingly.
I am not trying to say one way is better then another. I have been stating the differences and that in a true example of the meaning, of the word sump, amount of flow doesn't matter. Cause there will be no filtering taking place, just hiding equipment.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sump According to what I'm reading a filter is a sump according to the first definition. And actually according to the first definition it dosn't have to be the lowest point. As a matter of fact its possible to place a sump above your aquarium. Also since it says it can be a reservoir here is the definition for that http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reservoir. You can pick it apart if you want but nobody I know runs just a tub of water under their tank.
Also as stated I never figure my return pump into the flow rate for my corals. I have been taught not to. You can create more flow with power heads or a closed loop for a cheaper running cost. I know you said wattage is wattage but you can create more flow with less wattage when you are dealing with zero head height. I can flow 2100 gph with no head loss with only 20w it takes over 150w to do that with a return pump and at least three times the cost up front. Its also over 6x the power usage. To get the flow I have in my 120 with my return pump I would have to run a 6000 gph. Thats a bigger pump then I run the waterfall and bead filter with on my 2000g koi pond.

 

[posiden]

Originally Posted by jetskiking
http:///forum/post/3144249
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sump According to what I'm reading a filter is a sump according to the first definition. And actually according to the first definition it dosn't have to be the lowest point. As a matter of fact its possible to place a sump above your aquarium. Also since it says it can be a reservoir here is the definition for that http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reservoir. You can pick it apart if you want but nobody I know runs just a tub of water under their tank.
Also as stated I never figure my return pump into the flow rate for my corals. I have been taught not to. You can create more flow with power heads or a closed loop for a cheaper running cost. I know you said wattage is wattage but you can create more flow with less wattage when you are dealing with zero head height. I can flow 2100 gph with no head loss with only 20w it takes over 150w to do that with a return pump and at least three times the cost up front. Its also over 6x the power usage. To get the flow I have in my 120 with my return pump I would have to run a 6000 gph. Thats a bigger pump then I run the waterfall and bead filter with on my 2000g koi pond.

Sorry, but I will pick the definitions apart. Nowhere in the reading is a filter mentioned. It doesn't even mention one when it references an engine crankcase. We all know there is an oil filter in the oiling system of an engine. Yet it is left out of the definition cause filtering is separet form the sump.
In the other definition for a reservoir. Yes, a recptical for liquids can be placed above a tank, it still doesn't reference a filtering property. Like I mentioned before, it is not a common thing to see a true sump in a system. And so the flow is adjusted acordingly. But they are not sumps.
On your pond, again you not running a sump. It is a bead filter as you stated.
Yes, I agree you can get more turnover with powerheads due to the lack of head height. "IF" the powerhead is kept high in the tank. A power head placed lower in the tank will not pump as much water as it would if it were kept close to the surface. That's one of the reasons why skimmers aren't very tall. If they are tall they still run in shallow water. It doesn't matter how much gallonage there is, a foot under water is the same all the way around. Power heads loose thier ability to push water efficently when any head height is imposed on them. The same thing applies to a closed loop, If it is kept high and not under the tank It will produce more flow. If it is under the tank or even going through a OM 4 way, then head height imposed on the pump is huge, giving you less flow. Giving the reason they run Sequence Reeflo pumps and plenty of pipe diameter to go with it.
The load on a pump will dictate the actual wattage being used..No? I have scene posts where folks have meters on thier pumps and they don't use as much energy as they are stamped to use.

 

[jetskiking]

Originally Posted by Posiden
http:///forum/post/3144447
Sorry, but I will pick the definitions apart. Nowhere in the reading is a filter mentioned. It doesn't even mention one when it references an engine crankcase. We all know there is an oil filter in the oiling system of an engine. Yet it is left out of the definition cause filtering is separet form the sump.
In the other definition for a reservoir. Yes, a recptical for liquids can be placed above a tank, it still doesn't reference a filtering property. Like I mentioned before, it is not a common thing to see a true sump in a system. And so the flow is adjusted acordingly. But they are not sumps.
On your pond, again you not running a sump. It is a bead filter as you stated.
Yes, I agree you can get more turnover with powerheads due to the lack of head height. "IF" the powerhead is kept high in the tank. A power head placed lower in the tank will not pump as much water as it would if it were kept close to the surface. That's one of the reasons why skimmers aren't very tall. If they are tall they still run in shallow water. It doesn't matter how much gallonage there is, a foot under water is the same all the way around. Power heads loose thier ability to push water efficently when any head height is imposed on them. The same thing applies to a closed loop, If it is kept high and not under the tank It will produce more flow. If it is under the tank or even going through a OM 4 way, then head height imposed on the pump is huge, giving you less flow. Giving the reason they run Sequence Reeflo pumps and plenty of pipe diameter to go with it.
The load on a pump will dictate the actual wattage being used..No? I have scene posts where folks have meters on thier pumps and they don't use as much energy as they are stamped to use.
Its called reading comprehension. It dosn"t specifically say filter but since a filter is is a resivior used to hold liquid and since it is typically the lowest point in the system makes it a sump. This would even inclued a cannister filter as described by definition 4.
Also a powerhead pumps the same anywhere in an aquarium because it is not effected by head untill you try and pump water above the water level. A powerhead on a skimmer has head because it pumps water above the water level. A closed loop does not have head even with the pump under the aquarium. The siphon created by the intake side counteracts the head on the outake. The piping will create resistance but it does not have head height. Its simple physics
Anyway, I'm done with this topic

your reaching really far.

 

[posiden]

Originally Posted by jetskiking
http:///forum/post/3144477
Anyway, I'm done with this topic

your reaching really far.

I thought we were having a decent conversation. You were expressing your thoughts and I was expressing mine. I was not trying to aggrivate you by going on. Sorry if I have upset you in any way.
We will close this book.