Help with sump design

[swk]

Which is better and why? Attached are 2 designs that I quickly sketched up. One is a basic left to right flow through design and the other splits the drains and has a centrally located return pump. Thanks for any insight you guys can provide!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Marc]

I'm going to vote by my logic and not by my experience. Since this is really my first time doing salt =)

Option B would be my vote.
All water passes through the sock(s),skimmer and refugium. So all water being pumped back into the display has been "treated." It will also be easier down the road if you decide to run reactors.

 

[Tenny]

I'd say A. Admittedly, my sump is similar to B, but that's only due to the tight configuration space I had in my stand.


The main problem with B is the water movement may be too fast to create a great breeding location for pod's in the refugium. With option A, you can limit the amount of water that comes into that side via a ball valve as you don't want too much water movement. Plus even in b, not everything actually passes through the skimmer anyways, so it's not like you will be skimmed anyways. If you are concerned with excess waste getting back into the return, then you can put a filter (sponge, etc) between the refugium and the return.

 

[HiFidelity]

I'll share my design which is a breed of both A & B (in function perhaps not in design);

My setup that I am currently working on will have the drains in the first chamber on the left (no socks) which will also house my skimmer, next section will be fuge, then last one will house the return pump. No bubble traps because my drain will run at full siphon & pipe outlet will be submerged.

I am redirecting my skimmer outlet to the last chamber to cut down flow on the refugium also so that the skimmer does not skim the refugium water. I mainly just want the fuge for copepod population.

Redirecting the skimmer alleviates the issue of too much flow to the fuge, this is how;
if my return pump is pushing 500 gph at the return nozzle, my skimmer (euroreef rs-80) has a pump that moves 325 gph, considering that this flow is directed past the fuge my fuge will only get 175 gph. If this is too low or too high I can easily adjust the return pump to the desired flow thus adjusting the fuge flow since the skimmer rate is static.

 

[Tenny]

I am redirecting my skimmer outlet to the last chamber to cut down flow on the refugium also so that the skimmer does not skim the refugium water. I mainly just want the fuge for copepod population.

That's exactly what I did on my frag tanks. It seems to work well.

 

[swk]

I'd say A. Admittedly, my sump is similar to B, but that's only due to the tight configuration space I had in my stand.


The main problem with B is the water movement may be too fast to create a great breeding location for pod's in the refugium. With option A, you can limit the amount of water that comes into that side via a ball valve as you don't want too much water movement. Plus even in b, not everything actually passes through the skimmer anyways, so it's not like you will be skimmed anyways. If you are concerned with excess waste getting back into the return, then you can put a filter (sponge, etc) between the refugium and the return.

Would a sponge block the pods from entering the display from the fuge?

 

[swk]

To everyone: could I simply place another filter sock in the fuge area? Or are socks just a bad idea period?

 

[rygh]

To everyone: could I simply place another filter sock in the fuge area? Or are socks just a bad idea period?

You will get a lot of different opinions on that.
Mine : If you reliably clean them every day or two, then good. Otherwise bad.

 

[grizfyrfyter]

You will get a lot of different opinions on that.
Mine : If you reliably clean them every day or two, then good. Otherwise bad.

Exactly. If you leave the socks in for a week, it's just somewhere for stuff to rot.

 

[Tenny]

Would a sponge block the pods from entering the display from the fuge?

Didn't think about that.

Personally I would just do without a sponge filter / sock on the refugium side and just make it a really low water amount going into it. That way sure, some waste water will make it back, but it'll be minor and hey... it's just water from the DT anyways...

 

[swk]

Exactly. If you leave the socks in for a week, it's just somewhere for stuff to rot.

Oh, that's how I roll with my fw tanks. No socks for me!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swk]

Didn't think about that.

Personally I would just do without a sponge filter / sock on the refugium side and just make it a really low water amount going into it. That way sure, some waste water will make it back, but it'll be minor and hey... it's just water from the DT anyways...

Ok. I think that idea works for me. Don't know if I mentioned it, but a fella on RC suggesting feeding the fuge with a part of the sump return in the middle via a split in the return line. Thought that was a slick idea too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gimmito]

I vote for sump B. I would split the drains though and control flow via ball valves. +1 on no socks.

 

[swk]

Didn't think about that.

Personally I would just do without a sponge filter / sock on the refugium side and just make it a really low water amount going into it. That way sure, some waste water will make it back, but it'll be minor and hey... it's just water from the DT anyways...

Ok. I think that idea works for me. Don't know if I mentioned it, but a fella on RC suggesting feeding the fuge with a part of the sump return in the middle via a split in the return line. Thought that was a slick idea too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swk]

Didn't think about that.

Personally I would just do without a sponge filter / sock on the refugium side and just make it a really low water amount going into it. That way sure, some waste water will make it back, but it'll be minor and hey... it's just water from the DT anyways...

Ok. I think that idea works for me. Don't know if I mentioned it, but a fella on RC suggesting feeding the fuge with a part of the sump return in the middle via a split in the return line. Thought that was a slick idea too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swk]

Don't know what happened there. Mods please help clean up my mess lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swk]

Ok, since I've decided to split the returns and so design A, do I need bubble traps on both sides, or just on the skimmer side?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rygh]

Hmm. Looks like Jim has 2 votes for B, and one for A.

I like B better, mostly because it is hard to keep the flow between left/right balanced,
and a fuge needs some flow. But it really depends on the fuge flow you want.

If space is critical, you may not need the first bubble trap on B. You essentially have two there.

 

[denzil]

I plan on keeping mine real simple which is along the lines of your "A" diagram except without all the baffles. I actually only have one wall to separate the fuge and the rest of the sump where the skimmer, heater, etc., reside. My drains will be T'd off so I can control how much of the drain flow goes to the fuge while the rest goes to the sump. Optionally, I may have it set up so that if I want to use a filter sock to 'polish' the water for visitors, I have that option.

 

[aqua-nut]

I like A with modifications. The mod I'd make is to supply the fuge with water from the return. Have all the OF water go to a area for socks. As per denzil's post, it's so you can polish the water. Most of the time you'd be sockless but when cleaning/disturbing crud in the tank you can sock up and get rid of it all. Leave the socks in for 24hrs.

With fuge fed from the return you can easily control flow and it makes drain plumbing simpler. Return water is not fully clean water, just cleaner than tank water. It should have lots of nutrition for the fuge. With low flow in the fuge you probably don't need the bubble trap on the fuge side.