Coral reefer
Past President
I would go all three on back wall horizontally near The top
Tank Journal - No Tank
- Thread starter Bruce Spiegelman
- Start date
sfsuphysics
Supporting Member
Well depends how you want to view the tank, just because it's 3 feet front to back doesn't mean you have to do a peninsula style, you could make it 2 side viewable then that opens up a direction for pumps to be on a wall. Although when I had my 180 (4'x3') I had 5 MP40s on the back wall and that was more than enough flow, of course it was not super filled with rock either so that helped greatly.
I would be with Mike on this, but IIRC the internal overflow is 3 feet long, so that might make it a bit difficult to get a Gyre in the middle of the tank. MP40s though would be a lot easier to maneuver around with the only real restriction being the plumbing that comes out of the overflow in the back. I probably would do 2 side viewable only though, kind of like with my existing tank... which I still need to get some pumps for.
I would be with Mike on this, but IIRC the internal overflow is 3 feet long, so that might make it a bit difficult to get a Gyre in the middle of the tank. MP40s though would be a lot easier to maneuver around with the only real restriction being the plumbing that comes out of the overflow in the back. I probably would do 2 side viewable only though, kind of like with my existing tank... which I still need to get some pumps for.
Yep. That's my first plan. If I feel I need more flow somewhere I can supplement, but this should be plenty. I know from experience with my current 6' tank that the Gyres reach about three feet on 50% power when I have them on each end. So three on the back should work perfectly. If rock work cause a dead spot or two I have a couple extra MP40s as well.
rygh
Guest
It is funny on how much the other equipment adds up to, and you are being cheap on Apex EL.
I run dual returns for safety, in case a pump fails, which has happened.
UV is very handy to eliminate the water yellowing that a scrubber can cause.
I run UV. Fairly slow off only one return. I think 55W, but I forget.
I run an algae scrubber at times, but generally off. Scrubs a bit too much.
Interesting lighting choice. Never seen an Atlantik in use. Lots of different wavelengths, that's for sure.
Maybe with that many different colors, the disco effect of that layout will not be so bad.
Sump seems a bit small. Fine if just for equipment though.
Flow on long tanks is a pain....
I did see a drawing on the forums that I was tempted to try. Avoided the length problem by going the other way.
They had several gyres on the back, pushing water DOWN the back.
Down back, forward along bottom, and up in front. Pushed detritus to front for easy cleaning.
Nice gentle flow by the time it hit corals.
I run dual returns for safety, in case a pump fails, which has happened.
UV is very handy to eliminate the water yellowing that a scrubber can cause.
I run UV. Fairly slow off only one return. I think 55W, but I forget.
I run an algae scrubber at times, but generally off. Scrubs a bit too much.
Interesting lighting choice. Never seen an Atlantik in use. Lots of different wavelengths, that's for sure.
Maybe with that many different colors, the disco effect of that layout will not be so bad.
Sump seems a bit small. Fine if just for equipment though.
Flow on long tanks is a pain....
I did see a drawing on the forums that I was tempted to try. Avoided the length problem by going the other way.
They had several gyres on the back, pushing water DOWN the back.
Down back, forward along bottom, and up in front. Pushed detritus to front for easy cleaning.
Nice gentle flow by the time it hit corals.
It is funny on how much the other equipment adds up to, and you are being cheap on Apex EL.
I run dual returns for safety, in case a pump fails, which has happened.
UV is very handy to eliminate the water yellowing that a scrubber can cause.
I run UV. Fairly slow off only one return. I think 55W, but I forget.
I run an algae scrubber at times, but generally off. Scrubs a bit too much.
Interesting lighting choice. Never seen an Atlantik in use. Lots of different wavelengths, that's for sure.
Maybe with that many different colors, the disco effect of that layout will not be so bad.
Sump seems a bit small. Fine if just for equipment though.
Flow on long tanks is a pain....
I did see a drawing on the forums that I was tempted to try. Avoided the length problem by going the other way.
They had several gyres on the back, pushing water DOWN the back.
Down back, forward along bottom, and up in front. Pushed detritus to front for easy cleaning.
Nice gentle flow by the time it hit corals.
It's not that I'm being cheap on the EL -- it's that it's all I need. ORP is fairly worthless IMO.
I run a scrubber on two tanks and it's made all the difference since I also run the Triton method.
My frag tan uses an Atlantik. I have Kessil's on one tank, T5 combo on another and the Orphek on the frag. Growth on the frag is significantly better than the others. There's no disco effect at all.
Sump is just for equipment. Leaves me space underneath for the UV and other storage.
I' ll rethink dual returns/
jccaclimber
Supporting Member
I'm not sure how you're planning to plumb in the UV, but I would set it up so that it cannot run dry in the event of a single pump failure or drain clog. Not the end of the world, but no sense heating it up faster than necessary if something fails. The problem with this of course is that configuring it in a way that it does not naturally drain when the power cuts makes it difficult to open up for bulb changes. Perfectly possible with clever plumbing, and even easier if you add a ball valve, but something worth considering up front.
RandyC
Supporting Member
You can actually break the quartz sleeve or break the bulb if you run dry or with too little flow to keep the unit cool enough.
You could also set up some protections with an Apex (if you have one) to shut off the UV unit under a number of conditions
- wattage of pump drops below a certain value
- pump is off
- Add a flow meter and turn off if flow rate is below a certain amount
- water temperature too high
- leak detected
Last edited:
Coral reefer
Past President
You’ll have to explain this to me in person. I’m curious
RandyC
Supporting Member
Actually though, stagnant water is eventually as bad as running dry. So unless you have flow coming from the other surviving pump through the UV unit, I'm having trouble envisioning what @jccaclimber is thinking. Clarification please.
I actually have two return pumps with one of my returns plumbed into my UV sterilizer. I did notice that there is some amount of flow coming in the reverse direction when the pump connected to the UV unit is off. My Neptune flow sensor reported around 100ish gph, but take that with a grain of salt as the flow sensor is not accurate in the reverse direction.
jccaclimber
Supporting Member
Stagnant water probably isn't good, but the time to failure is likely much higher, and if its being exposed to UV it probably isn't growing much funk the way other stagnant chambers would (this last bit is partially speculation on my part).
Shown below are three possible implementations, none of which use valves.
UV-1 is fed by the supply. In the case of a drain failure the siphon break will prevent the UV unit from running dry.
UV-2 is fed the same way, but packaged vertically.
To mostly drain either of these units simply plug the siphon break and stop the drain. The unit will drain to whatever level the outlet tube is at, minus any volume in the tubes. Obviously UV-1 drains a bit better than UV-2, although UV1 will have a tendency to trap air bubbles which is a long term risk. This can be remedied by putting the outlet facing up, although that of course makes draining more difficult. A better solution would be to put the inlet on the bottom and the outlet on top. Add a T and ball valve to the inlet side, and then you can still drain.
In either of these cases it would be a good idea to put in a bypass and a couple of ball valves so that you do not have to leave that drain shut off while the UV unit is removed for service. People think that it isn't a big deal because it is a short period of time, but mistakes happen, and are most likely to happen when you are making changes to your system.
When connected as a venturi the siphon break will have a tendency to suck air and make noise, but when placed in a stagnation point it will take on water. As a result the siphon break should terminate above the water level of the display. This way in the unlikely event of a clogged outlet or simply a non-venturi installation the siphon break will not spill water. A shorter siphon break is possible if it dumps in to the sump area, but this results in splashing, or a dedicated line to guide its slow drain path. All venturis need to large enough to prevent clogging by fouling when stagnant, but venturi that acts as a slow drain needs to be sized a bit bigger to achieve this IME. There are easy ways to produce a siphon break that has neither of these issues, but they tend to make a lot of splashing noises which I'm not a fan of, even inside the equipment cabinet.
UV-3 requires a separate pump within the sump. It is plumbed as a closed loop, and therefore not drain. This way rather than diverting a portion of drain flow you can use that pump to control the flow rate. This flow will bypass the rest of your sump, so in that way is inferior to using a drain line. To drain this unit simply lift the inlet line out of the water and it will drain to nearly the level of the return pump chamber. If it were mounted higher than in the picture that would be a more complete draining.
Notice that I did not plumb the source from the return pump which causes wasteful recirculation of recently exposed particles back through the UV unit. The same issue is present if the UV unit drains in to the same or earlier sump chamber than it is drawn from. I did specifically pull the UV from the highest chamber and drain it to the lowest chamber. This way even in the event of a pump failure you do still get a slight siphon effect to draw water through the unit.
It is worth noting that unlike the picture below UV-3 would be better served by putting the inlet at the bottom of he unit and the outlet at the top. This will naturally flush trapped air rather than encouraging it to build up. There is only so much space in the picture below, so I didn't draw it that way.
Not shown, but you could also run the UV unit on a closed loop off of the main tank and T off of a drain. Be careful in setup however to make sure that it does drain well and that it does not have a tendency to trap air bubbles.
In a vertical configuration air bubbles can result in most of the bulb being unsubmerged, likely resulting in suboptimal cooling. Perhaps more important, in either vertical or horizontal installations trapped air results in decreased UV exposure. Due to the volume of the air bubble there less water in the unit being exposed to UV at a given time. Put a different way, because the volume of water traveling through has a smaller cross section/travel distance (horizontal/vertical trapped air pocket) the average flow velocity in the unit will increase, resulting in your water spending less time in the unit. No matter how you look at it you get less exposure time, which means your unit is less effective.
Shown below are three possible implementations, none of which use valves.
UV-1 is fed by the supply. In the case of a drain failure the siphon break will prevent the UV unit from running dry.
UV-2 is fed the same way, but packaged vertically.
To mostly drain either of these units simply plug the siphon break and stop the drain. The unit will drain to whatever level the outlet tube is at, minus any volume in the tubes. Obviously UV-1 drains a bit better than UV-2, although UV1 will have a tendency to trap air bubbles which is a long term risk. This can be remedied by putting the outlet facing up, although that of course makes draining more difficult. A better solution would be to put the inlet on the bottom and the outlet on top. Add a T and ball valve to the inlet side, and then you can still drain.
In either of these cases it would be a good idea to put in a bypass and a couple of ball valves so that you do not have to leave that drain shut off while the UV unit is removed for service. People think that it isn't a big deal because it is a short period of time, but mistakes happen, and are most likely to happen when you are making changes to your system.
When connected as a venturi the siphon break will have a tendency to suck air and make noise, but when placed in a stagnation point it will take on water. As a result the siphon break should terminate above the water level of the display. This way in the unlikely event of a clogged outlet or simply a non-venturi installation the siphon break will not spill water. A shorter siphon break is possible if it dumps in to the sump area, but this results in splashing, or a dedicated line to guide its slow drain path. All venturis need to large enough to prevent clogging by fouling when stagnant, but venturi that acts as a slow drain needs to be sized a bit bigger to achieve this IME. There are easy ways to produce a siphon break that has neither of these issues, but they tend to make a lot of splashing noises which I'm not a fan of, even inside the equipment cabinet.
UV-3 requires a separate pump within the sump. It is plumbed as a closed loop, and therefore not drain. This way rather than diverting a portion of drain flow you can use that pump to control the flow rate. This flow will bypass the rest of your sump, so in that way is inferior to using a drain line. To drain this unit simply lift the inlet line out of the water and it will drain to nearly the level of the return pump chamber. If it were mounted higher than in the picture that would be a more complete draining.
Notice that I did not plumb the source from the return pump which causes wasteful recirculation of recently exposed particles back through the UV unit. The same issue is present if the UV unit drains in to the same or earlier sump chamber than it is drawn from. I did specifically pull the UV from the highest chamber and drain it to the lowest chamber. This way even in the event of a pump failure you do still get a slight siphon effect to draw water through the unit.
It is worth noting that unlike the picture below UV-3 would be better served by putting the inlet at the bottom of he unit and the outlet at the top. This will naturally flush trapped air rather than encouraging it to build up. There is only so much space in the picture below, so I didn't draw it that way.
Not shown, but you could also run the UV unit on a closed loop off of the main tank and T off of a drain. Be careful in setup however to make sure that it does drain well and that it does not have a tendency to trap air bubbles.
In a vertical configuration air bubbles can result in most of the bulb being unsubmerged, likely resulting in suboptimal cooling. Perhaps more important, in either vertical or horizontal installations trapped air results in decreased UV exposure. Due to the volume of the air bubble there less water in the unit being exposed to UV at a given time. Put a different way, because the volume of water traveling through has a smaller cross section/travel distance (horizontal/vertical trapped air pocket) the average flow velocity in the unit will increase, resulting in your water spending less time in the unit. No matter how you look at it you get less exposure time, which means your unit is less effective.
An effective UV is too big to fit in most sumps.
Flagg37
Guest
Yep, I think it needs a whole redesign. It could be shaped more like a box with the tube
Inside snaking back and forth like in a tankless hot water heater.
sfsuphysics
Supporting Member
What if it's mounted vertically?
Mine are all mounted vertically.
jccaclimber
Supporting Member
I'd much rather have the option of adjusting the pump myself than dealing with someone else's proprietary pump that would likely cost more for the same thing should it ever fail. No need for the people running slow to pay for a pump capable of the higher flow rate of the people using it for algae reduction, etc.
Mozby
Guest
But helping with algae vs helping with parasites requires different flow rates, no?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes -- but the slower flow required for parasites also does algae.
I agree, I’ve been thinking about this too