DIY Sump Design

The 45 has to stay though. Straight down equals water on my floor instead of in my sump. I think I'll keep the ball balls too because though it may come in handy later during maintenance or if I want to move things around.
 
Hey check this out, my lucky day I guess I the pump..

"Refunded
There's no need to return your item. Your refund has been issued." - Amazon
 
So the pump I have right now is rated for about 160 gph. Think I should upgrade to 264 or 396 gph? I'd like to use the same pump type because they are quiet and durable.

The pf-nano overflow is rated at 200 gph.
 
Get rid off the ball valve on the overflow. That rating on the pump is for 0 head pressure so you will not be pumping at that speed. You have to look at the pump curve. Here is an example of one

 
Thanks for that chart it's a nice reference. I ended up going with the pump rated for 396 gph. Should still be plenty at the maybe three foot rose I've got.
 
The valve on the overflow is an obstruction waiting to happen... no need for it... when doing maintenance the pump will be off anyway
 
Ball valve not needed but I have one myself, I leave it fully open so its as of its not there restricting any flow. Why a ball valve then you may ask, I have a union below it so I can be lazy and pause my siphon as oppose to reprime when I want to disassemble. I also have my feed line more into the sump, so if I need to move my sump for any reason I can easily remove the last section on the way. Unions are great, you might want to consider adding them to your design. Regarding pump sizing don't use the chart posted as a generic guide, you should always check against your specific pumps literature as they vary greatly between makes and models, this info is usually on there website. FWIW your feed opening is to close to your sumps top edge (vertically) fo my taste, I prefer more engagement to avoid any chance of a mess but that maybe just me :)

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
 
Thanks for that chart it's a nice reference. I ended up going with the pump rated for 396 gph. Should still be plenty at the maybe three foot rose I've got.

You would be surprised how much flow you are losing. That chart is not for the pump you have. You have to look up the chart for your pump. Also your pump is going to have an even greater loss in flow then normal because it's not made to be a return pump. Do your self a favor and cancel the order and get your self the proper pump. I would spread the overflow and return out. One on each side of the tank.
 
Last edited:
By the way you know the baffles are going to have to be glass for that sump right?
 
Last edited:
This is the chart for those pumps. I'm not near its height limit so I'm not worried about this one. I ordered the first one because it was rated less than the overflow. I didn't want the pump to overwhelm it. But that was before I was familiar with the gurgling sound of an overflow without enough flow. Also I didn't know about reducing the flow from the pump via a valve. Seeing as it's apparently common practice I assume it's not too hard on the pump.

By the way, why do you think the baffles must be glass for this build?

81suyJcsfbL.jpg
 
That's not the pump curve. That doesn't tell you the flow loss at 3'. In fact that doesn't even really tell you the flow at 0'. All they do is put the pump in a tank and see how high the water sprays to get the max head height. That's with no friction.
 
Last edited:
This is just an example it doesn't apply to your pump but it will give you an idea of what you have to do.

The Eheim 1250 is rated for 6' 7" and has a speed of 317gph now if we look at the yellow line on the chart above we can see at 3' we are going to be running at only 200gph so we lost over 100gph with a pump that's made to be a return pump. Note this also assumes you are using hose not PVC. Your pump is not made to be a return pump so your loss would be even greater. You will have to look to see if there is a curve chart for that pump. My guess is no because they don't generally do that for power heads and it's a cheap one at that. You may be able to get away with that pump if you over size it big time. You might get lucky and get 150gph out of that pump which would be good enough for you.
 
Last edited:
That's not the pump curve. That doesn't tell you the flow loss at 3'. In fact that doesn't even really tell you the flow at 0'. All they do is put the pump in a tank and see how high the water sprays to get the max head height. That's with no friction.

Edit: I mean max head height not 0'.
 
The baffles have to be glass because the tank is glass. Acrylic won't bond to glass.

What I mean to say is silicone doesn't adhere to acrylic very well. You may not get the baffles water tight for one and they may not stay in place. Also you would be able to pull the baffles out by hand so it's a very weak bond.
 
Last edited:
That's not the pump curve. That doesn't tell you the flow loss at 3'. In fact that doesn't even really tell you the flow at 0'. All they do is put the pump in a tank and see how high the water sprays to get the max head height. That's with no friction.

Not sure what you are saying here the chart indicates the first pump has a 0 head rating of 75gph and h ( head) max ie cut off at 2.5 feet... not sure which pump the op is using but that chart is more then sufficient to generalize flow at 3'.... one must also consider pipe diameter number of elbows bends etc etc as they all add head pressure...

matching your pump to your overflow is the most useless dumb thing to do... your pump should be considerably more powerful then the overflow rating... and the gurgling is generally not from too low of flow but rather too much flow drawing in air. The overflow in question here is very small single pipe (3/4") I am guessing... which will handle diddly squat for flow...

And the concern with acrylic baffles in a glass tank is not adhesion but swelling... acrylic absorbs water, it swells as it does it... swells too much it blows out the tank... if you use hone depot crap acrylic then yes adhesion will also suck... glass for glass, acrylic for acrylic...i really dont see why this is debated it simply does not make sense...kinda like ditching a car with Bondi or fiberglass, the materials don't have the same thermal characteristics they crack break and fall apart... same as our tanks when you mix materials.
 
Back
Top