600 gallon Acrylic Reef
- Thread starter pwhitby
- Start date
- Status
Travis L. Stevens
New member
I see your point, and it's a good one, but in hind sight wouldn't have been easier to look at it this way? I guess it's a half full, half empty way of looking at it. (If you can't tell, besides #1, I pretty much pulled the rest out of thin air)
1) get under the tank in the stand than actually in the tank?
2) It just lets you have more experience
3) But someone has to do it?
4) Would a little weld-on fix it?
Travis. To cut a hole with no imperections thru thick material, you cut from both sides using a hole saw mounted in a drill press.
Experience is fine
I wouldnt trust anyone else to do it, but it doesnt mean to say I enjoyed the experience.
and no. Weldon would not be the ideal way to fix a scratched tank from which water leaked....out of the bottom.
It would have been much easier to have had the tank drilled at manufacture, but like most things, doing it myself allows for alterations in plans. I had intended to drill the sides only, but after a long chat with Paul at Oceans motions I decided on a different approach. Instead of having the OM creating opposing pulses (note I dont say "wave") that cancel each other out, I am going to create sequential pulses which complement and cause a rolling water motion in the tank.
To clarify this a little.....
There are four returns from the OM. Each is split into two feeds into my tank.
OM cycles thru outlets 1 and 3 together then 2 and 4 together.
Feed 1. bottom of the tank, RHS . Slpits to two, each comes up thru the middle of tank, pipe travels across tank towards front and points UP.
Feed 2. Back of tank, near bottom. Feed splits to two and enters tank, blows straight forward about 5 inches above bottom.
Feed 3, same as 1, but on LHS
Feed 4 same as 2 but on LHS
Returns to pump, midway up and across back wall.
heres what happens.....water enters tank behind the rockwork from feeds 2 and 4, this pushes water out the front of the rock, near the tank bottom, towards where feeds 1 and 3 are. 1 and 3 cycle on and blow the water UP towards the tank top. The suction created by the pump returns pulls water backwards across the top. This is helped by the overflows on the back and by the sump return blowing straight down the back of the tank.
The reslut is a rolling of the water in the tank.
This has a couple advantages....it remains non laminar since it is pulsed, it pulls dirt up from the sand into the water column and helps keep zooplankton suspended. Its not wastefull of the pumps energy since the pulses are not in opposition.
Make sense?
P.
Experience is fine
I wouldnt trust anyone else to do it, but it doesnt mean to say I enjoyed the experience.
and no. Weldon would not be the ideal way to fix a scratched tank from which water leaked....out of the bottom.
It would have been much easier to have had the tank drilled at manufacture, but like most things, doing it myself allows for alterations in plans. I had intended to drill the sides only, but after a long chat with Paul at Oceans motions I decided on a different approach. Instead of having the OM creating opposing pulses (note I dont say "wave") that cancel each other out, I am going to create sequential pulses which complement and cause a rolling water motion in the tank.
To clarify this a little.....
There are four returns from the OM. Each is split into two feeds into my tank.
OM cycles thru outlets 1 and 3 together then 2 and 4 together.
Feed 1. bottom of the tank, RHS . Slpits to two, each comes up thru the middle of tank, pipe travels across tank towards front and points UP.
Feed 2. Back of tank, near bottom. Feed splits to two and enters tank, blows straight forward about 5 inches above bottom.
Feed 3, same as 1, but on LHS
Feed 4 same as 2 but on LHS
Returns to pump, midway up and across back wall.
heres what happens.....water enters tank behind the rockwork from feeds 2 and 4, this pushes water out the front of the rock, near the tank bottom, towards where feeds 1 and 3 are. 1 and 3 cycle on and blow the water UP towards the tank top. The suction created by the pump returns pulls water backwards across the top. This is helped by the overflows on the back and by the sump return blowing straight down the back of the tank.
The reslut is a rolling of the water in the tank.
This has a couple advantages....it remains non laminar since it is pulsed, it pulls dirt up from the sand into the water column and helps keep zooplankton suspended. Its not wastefull of the pumps energy since the pulses are not in opposition.
Make sense?
P.
Untamed12
New member
As you describe it, it sounds like there are alot more CL holes than just 4 in the bottom and 4 in the back for the returns.
(4...just for the returns?)
I'd love to see a photo of the tank now that it has the holes. That would clarify it for me.
The rolling water use of the OM4way and CL makes a lot of sense to me and I'm reconsidering my CL holes as a result.
(4...just for the returns?)
I'd love to see a photo of the tank now that it has the holes. That would clarify it for me.
The rolling water use of the OM4way and CL makes a lot of sense to me and I'm reconsidering my CL holes as a result.
I had the same chat with Paul a couple of months ago and he also sold me on the idea. We hit a snag in our install plans and it is on hold currently, but I would love to hear how well that CL layout works for you. Even though we have planned to use the "rolling water" idea, I still plan to just dril the back of the tank for all of the CL returns. It will end up with 1 extra 90" in the return that is aimed at a 45 towards the front top of the tank, but I like that better than having a hole in the bottom where I also had to line up and drill our stand.
.Please do keep us informed as to how that CL works out. Paul stated that it did wonders for reducing detrius buildup and for keeping just general good PE in corals.
Untamed12
New member
OK...one more CL question. Why did you choose to split each OM4way into 2 BEFORE entering the tank?
I'm thinking...split the returns AFTER they enter the tank and reduce the number of bulkheads necessary with the same result.
...but I'm also sure you had a good reason... more smaller bulkheads instead of fewer, larger ones?
I'm thinking...split the returns AFTER they enter the tank and reduce the number of bulkheads necessary with the same result.
...but I'm also sure you had a good reason... more smaller bulkheads instead of fewer, larger ones?
- Status
