<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11536289#post11536289 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jener8tionx
I would agree with you if there was a senario in which it would fail. This design although flawed without certain parts like something to draw out excess air, has zero reliability issues. I have tested it by forcing parts to fail and this is perfectly reliable. Please explain how it could ever fail.
There are many many ways it can fail.
It could fail because air builds up in the top of the C Channel and doesnt get drawn out by the pump.
The vacuum pump/powerhead can fail
The air line can clog
The airline can leak
The air nipple in the top of the overflow can clog (this was the problem I had with my CPR). It only takes a tiny speck to clog it.
It doesnt take a power failure for it to fail, and a failure doesn't necessarily mean a total break in siphon cause a flood. If the system is running and air accumulates, the flow slows, the level in the display rises, the level in the sump drops. This is what happened to me. Your ATO will kick in to refill the sump. If you are using Limewater topoff, this can be catastrophic. Luckily, I was not at the time. I am now.
This board is full of posts of people having failures with CPR overflows. Yours is not a CPR, but has the same issues.
Are you saying that CPRs haven't had these problems, or that yours is somehow different in design?
An overflow that does not accumulate air, and needs no external method for removing it is more reliable. That is just a fact, and has been proven many times over. No moving parts, nothing to plug in, nothing to clog.
