Duplex sump concept

[mr.wilson]

i think housing aiptasia in the sump would eventually get into the display tank. I dont use a UV because I want my micro-fauna from my fuge to make it to my DT because I have a mandarin and leopard wrasse

There is no significant migration of pods from the refugium to the display, unless you are using a header tank with a surge, rather than a lower sump with a centrifugal pump. UV sterilizers are oxidizers, but they don't literally sterilize the water. In most cases the bulbs are old and greatly diminished, and the throughput ratio is far too high to kill anything you can see with the naked eye.

There are several physical barriers stopping them from making it to the display, but you could substitute any colonial polyp anemone. There's no reason why you couldn't use bubble/rose anemones instead. I don't think they will make it to the display tank either

 

[robow]

Yes, UV sterilizers will adversely affect pods, but so will mechanical filters, media reactors, protein skimmers, ozone, and pumps. UV sterilizers are more efficient at killing smaller organisms. In order for pods to be killed or damaged in a UV unit they need to first get into it. Pods don't migrate from a refugium to the display tank readily. They scurry in and around rocks and algae, but they don't get sucked up in pump intakes as often as many people think. Even if a few pods die in transit to the display tank, they are still viable fish & coral food. The best way to add pods is to shake it in the display tank when you do your weekly harvest.

I never thought of it that way thanks.

 

[SWINGRRRR]

I read all the pages of this thread awhile back, but I don’t remember seeing this idea. Maybe its there, I just missed it. I set-up my sump in the duplex complex on the 21st I think it was. So its still very young. I am already seeing a lot of life. I find myself laying on the floor and watching the ‘fuge more than my DT. Anyway, in my last tank I ran a ‘fuge and missed all the pods and stuff in my new tank which was set-up BB.
Over the past couple of days I was trying to think of ways to add more surface area of for the eggcrate. I lost a lot when I added the sand to my ‘fuge. I know that’s not best, but it was my only option. Well, I made eggcrate towers, and slipped them over my drainpipes in my overflows. I have a 135 with dual corner overflows. I was able to make 3panels that are about 5X7, zip tied them together, and just dropped them in. I still have room at the top so I may make another to double that surface area again.
I figured, it would add a ton of space for pods and sponges in an unused, out of sight area, my overflow. And it would also help with water filtration, before it even get to the sump.
When I do the other side, Ill get pics. The side they are in now is up against the wall and cant see it.

 

[Ellie2103]

Hi Mr. Wilson,

I got the egggrake. I do not now how to build it. Do you could tell me dimentions.

Thanks
Herb

 

[mr.wilson]

Hi Mr. Wilson,

I got the egggrake. I do not now how to build it. Do you could tell me dimentions.

Thanks
Herb

The dimensions are not very specific. You could space the upright pieces about 3-4" apart. Use cable ties (zip ties) to attach them. Make it a little smaller than the space it is going in to make sure it fits in place.

The depth of your refugium where the algae grows should be about 4" deep. The eggcrate will make up the rest of the space below it.

 

[tabwyo]

I plan on converting a current 55g FW tank over to a "Benthic Refugium". Here are some concerns though.
1) How often would you clean out the bottom?
2) How do you maximize the "benthic" space in a 55 and still make it accessible to maintenace w/o having to tear it apart every time?
3) This setup will drian via overflow back into my main sump. Would a bottom draw style overflow be benificial in this application? As in provide the right flow.

 

[mr.wilson]

I plan on converting a current 55g FW tank over to a "Benthic Refugium". Here are some concerns though.
1) How often would you clean out the bottom?
2) How do you maximize the "benthic" space in a 55 and still make it accessible to maintenace w/o having to tear it apart every time?
3) This setup will drian via overflow back into my main sump. Would a bottom draw style overflow be benificial in this application? As in provide the right flow.

I would vacuum the bottom annually if it needed it. I wouldn't worry about 100% access for siphoning it out, as a proper design should have a manageable amount of detritus. Denitrifying bacteria will populate the detritus. As long as it is a light dusting, not a 1/2" nutrient sink, it will be fine. you could slope the bottom to let detritus settle at one end. You can use a removable eggcrate top that lifts off of the upper duplex where the algae grows. A lower drain will help the water circulate evenly through the zone.

 

[usefulidiot213]

The stuff I learn on this site is absurd.. I never even heard of this until today. This is awesome.

 

[tabwyo]

I am going to post a more in depth description of my filtration system in the Equipment forum. Feel free to have a look and chime in on anything you feel may perain to this concept of filtration.

 

[tabwyo]

Here's that thread....
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1739485

 

[eddiesylas]

I appreciate the three years of work that has maintained this thread (it only took me a week to get through it). Thanks. After building a benthic zone in my sump I have begun to explore ways to jump start growth here. While researching I was directed to this article: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/jan2003/feature.htm. Is dosing silica counter productive in the goals of reducing unwanted trace elements or will dosing silica further reduce other unwanted elements such as phosphates and nitrates?

 

[mr.wilson]

I appreciate the three years of work that has maintained this thread (it only took me a week to get through it). Thanks. After building a benthic zone in my sump I have begun to explore ways to jump start growth here. While researching I was directed to this article: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/jan2003/feature.htm. Is dosing silica counter productive in the goals of reducing unwanted trace elements or will dosing silica further reduce other unwanted elements such as phosphates and nitrates?

I've read that article before. I believe Randy ended up losing the sponge he was trying to feed with silicate/silicon, but there are lots of variables, so we can't fairly evaluate his experiment. This Ron Shimek article http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php illustrates that silicon is one of the very few elements that are in deficit in typical reef tanks, compared to natural reef values. I assume that is due to our diligence in excluding it from salt mixes, ion exchange resins that absorb it, algae harvesting/export and bonding to calcareous media (rock & sand).

I think silicate dosing is worth trying. Just make sure you have a good test kit and don't exceed NSW levels. You can use nuisance algae growth as a visual test if you are adding too much. Hopefully sponge & other non-photosynthetic benthic invert growth will be your tangible difference.

Dosing iron may be another addition worth while. It will help with macro algae growth and perhaps have positive effects on inverts. Let us know how it works out for you.

 

[tabwyo]

Would using silica sand in a fluidized bed filter be a moderate route of silica introduction? From what I know in the peto-chemical field silca is a fairly inert substance (reef chemistry speaking).

I wouldn't be above trying to add iron to my system by adding some red flourite to another fluidized filter.

 

[mr.wilson]

Would using silica sand in a fluidized bed filter be a moderate route of silica introduction? From what I know in the peto-chemical field silca is a fairly inert substance (reef chemistry speaking).

I wouldn't be above trying to add iron to my system by adding some red flourite to another fluidized filter.

It appears that the only way silicate actively leaches from silica sand is through localized acidity due to bacterial growth. An iron based clay like laterite or flourite is worth trying. You may get some phosphate precipitate as an added bonus.

 

[sifnos]

.could we compile the benthic zone and the cryptic zone ?

 

[mr.wilson]

.could we compile the benthic zone and the cryptic zone ?

It's the same thing. The cryptic zone Steve Tyree's uses is within the display tank. We are talking about remote compartments on this thread.

I recently set up a 55 gallon drum as a settling container and extra water volume for a 100 gallon display tank. The idea was the water drained from the display tank into a 55 gallon drum, ten drained into the sump where there was a duplex filter system. The detritus was supposed to settle in the bottom of the drum where it could be siphoned out. It's been two years and there still isn't any detritus settled at the bottom. It's probably the only place in the system that has no detritus What the 55 gallon drum does have is tube worms, tunicates, and sponges covering the entire inner surface.

 

[tabwyo]

I've thought about useing old bleach drums for tower filters befor. Detritus is the exact reason I didn't do it. Just figuring how much of a PITA it would be to remove the media and clean it out changed my mind. They would make one hell of a live rock "reactor" though. Imagine how much rock you could pile in a 55g drum. The dwell time by volume as compaired to a sump or fuge that is just a fraction of the DT's volume. Volume is probably the cheapest thing a reefer can do to improve their system. The only problem is space.

 

[mr.wilson]

I've thought about useing old bleach drums for tower filters befor. Detritus is the exact reason I didn't do it. Just figuring how much of a PITA it would be to remove the media and clean it out changed my mind. They would make one hell of a live rock "reactor" though. Imagine how much rock you could pile in a 55g drum. The dwell time by volume as compaired to a sump or fuge that is just a fraction of the DT's volume. Volume is probably the cheapest thing a reefer can do to improve their system. The only problem is space.

Like the old shop keeper says "you know how I do it... volume". That 100 gallon cube tank actually has two 55 gallon drums, a 150 gallon frag tank, a 30 gallon frag tank, and a 150 gallon duplex filter. The 150 gallon frag tank turned into more of a display tank somewhere along the way

The 100 gallon cube display tank gets about 500 GPH turnover to the filtration. The 500 GPH runs through the first drum so slowly that I was sure detritus would settle to the bottom. The second drum is full of live rock. I'm guessing it has lots of non-photosynthetic inverts too, likely more than the eggcrate structure I built for the duplex sump.

The whole purpose of the duplex was to jam a lot in a small footprint ie. under the stand. If you have the space, by all means add as much volume as you can. It makes up for temperature swings, heat transfer from lights & pumps, it holds carbonates & calcium stocks, dilutes nutrients, and provides more surface area for greater biodiversity.

The tank is very successful but it's hard to peg which aspect of the system is the key to its success. It has a reliable Bubble King skimmer, lots of benthic inverts, good nutrient export with chaeto & xenia, and regular carbon changes. The one thing the tank hasn't needed or received is water changes.
It used to have a phosban reactor, but it was taken off line once phosphates hit zero, as the chaeto & benthic zone appeared to be able to maintain zero nutrients.

 

[sifnos]

I owned a cube 24*24*24 and I make a stand 45*28*33 (is bigger for a bigger aquarium in the future) so I have plenty of room for a sump. It is hard to me to combine the dimension of the sump with my equipment to have this douplex system. My thought for the sump is... from the aquarium over flow into the first section with skimmer. After the egg crate with live rock at the top and caulerpa. Under of this I am planning to put the dsb and the benthic zone. Then, the cardoon and PO absorber. At last, bubble trap and the return pump. After all the post reading I think it’s right to plan your equipment depend on the sump and no the sump depend on your equipment. So I have an H&S with an aquabee 2001 and for the retutn I have an eheim 3000 compact. How can I achieve the best result? Should I sell this stuf and buy new to have the right flow. How many time shoyld I turn the water to have best results? How any gallons should be my overflow ??thank you

 

[mr.wilson]

I owned a cube 24*24*24 and I make a stand 45*28*33 (is bigger for a bigger aquarium in the future) so I have plenty of room for a sump. It is hard to me to combine the dimension of the sump with my equipment to have this douplex system. My thought for the sump is... from the aquarium over flow into the first section with skimmer. After the egg crate with live rock at the top and caulerpa. Under of this I am planning to put the dsb and the benthic zone. Then, the cardoon and PO absorber. At last, bubble trap and the return pump. After all the post reading I think it's right to plan your equipment depend on the sump and no the sump depend on your equipment. So I have an H&S with an aquabee 2001 and for the retutn I have an eheim 3000 compact. How can I achieve the best result? Should I sell this stuf and buy new to have the right flow. How many time shoyld I turn the water to have best results? How any gallons should be my overflow ??thank you

Your return pump should match your skimmer pump output. You can tee a line off that bleeds back into your sump and perhaps goes through your carbon again.

You probably don't need the bubble trap because the algae growing at the surface of the refugium will diffuse the bubbles.

If you are tight for vertical space, move the sand bed into the overflow box in the tank if you have one. It has been proven that the oxic layer (at or near the surface) of sand beds are the most productive in nitrate reduction. You can use a "breather tube" or tubes to create a greater oxic layer(s). This is an older article, but the science hasn't changed http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-10/eb/index.php and part two http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-11/eb/feature/index.php or Rob Toonen's look at plenums http://www.seabay.org/art_plenums_part1.htm

It may even prove to be more efficient to put the sand in the perforated tubes, and let the water circulate around it, rather than use the perforated tubes to hold the aerated water.