My new 600 gallon reef
- Thread starter JohnL
- Start date
- Status
Goodwin9
Premium Member
I didn't stick my hand in the sump to check, but the head of the pump is screwed into the bulkhead. I don't know if it completely goes through the bulkhead into the sump. If it doesn't, a cap on the inside might work. But as my luck goes, I am sure the pump head probably screws through the bulkhead and into the sump...
melev
Well-known member
While I don't envy the task ahead of you, it looks like you need to drain that compartment of the sump, unscrew the nut on the bulkhead and extract the bulkhead with pump and associated plumbing to look into it.
When you reinstall it, you could modify that connection to your sump to avoid that job ever again.
So you think the impeller of the feed pump is calcified in place?
When you reinstall it, you could modify that connection to your sump to avoid that job ever again.
So you think the impeller of the feed pump is calcified in place?
jnarowe
New member
It's not going to be the impeller. Without water the Bluelines probably overheated and fused. You may not even be able to physically remove the impellers.
If you can't get the pump off without draining the sump I would suggest the following:
-- Get schedule 80 threaded bulkheads. These bulkheads will give you a secondary benefit of being able to plug them with a threaded cap from the inside, should other measures fail;
-- Drain and ditch the crappy bulkhead(s); replace with schedule 80. This may require a slightly larger hole. A larger hole can be made by using a curved file to get an exact fit, or you can make a plug the size of the current hole with scrap wood, and then go up in hole saw size to fit the new bulkhead(s). My preference would be to use a file. This is more work, but you get a much better fit.
-- Ditch the Bluelines and replace with a Sequence Hammerhead and a manifold which feeds the chiller, reactors etc. All of those devices can be run off one good pump. Because the Sequence is not a magnetic drive pump, it is much less likely to seize up in a no-water situation. They provide excellent reliability, less heat, and an extremely good flow curve.
-- When you add the pump, put a ball valve and union between it and the sump, as well as between it and the manifold.
IMO, there is simply no reason to have multiple pumps driving your equipment. Then you can have a spare pump that can be swapped in when you do any cleaning, or in the unlikely event of a pump failure.
My Hammerhead has been running my ENTIRE system for 26 months, 24/7 with ZERO problem. It endures power outages, spikes etc. with no problem, and costs slightly more than the Blueline 70.
More flow, less wattage, and IMO, much safer.
If you can't get the pump off without draining the sump I would suggest the following:
-- Get schedule 80 threaded bulkheads. These bulkheads will give you a secondary benefit of being able to plug them with a threaded cap from the inside, should other measures fail;
-- Drain and ditch the crappy bulkhead(s); replace with schedule 80. This may require a slightly larger hole. A larger hole can be made by using a curved file to get an exact fit, or you can make a plug the size of the current hole with scrap wood, and then go up in hole saw size to fit the new bulkhead(s). My preference would be to use a file. This is more work, but you get a much better fit.
-- Ditch the Bluelines and replace with a Sequence Hammerhead and a manifold which feeds the chiller, reactors etc. All of those devices can be run off one good pump. Because the Sequence is not a magnetic drive pump, it is much less likely to seize up in a no-water situation. They provide excellent reliability, less heat, and an extremely good flow curve.
-- When you add the pump, put a ball valve and union between it and the sump, as well as between it and the manifold.
IMO, there is simply no reason to have multiple pumps driving your equipment. Then you can have a spare pump that can be swapped in when you do any cleaning, or in the unlikely event of a pump failure.
My Hammerhead has been running my ENTIRE system for 26 months, 24/7 with ZERO problem. It endures power outages, spikes etc. with no problem, and costs slightly more than the Blueline 70.
More flow, less wattage, and IMO, much safer.
jnarowe
New member
You know, I don't want to sound like I am "endorsing" one make over another, and that is an important point. After re-reading my post it may seem that way, but I am sure Bluelines have their advantages in certain situations. I am just trying to help Chuck get away from "small tank" thinking.
He needs to move a lot of water, or have the ability to do so, as safely and efficiently as possible within the parameters of his system. And I hate to see so many points of failure with little or no advantage.
My mentor has lectured me in the past about relying on just one pump to service my system, and after a good listen, I point out that I have a replacement pump waiting in the wings, and a controller that will alert me to any problem.
He needs to move a lot of water, or have the ability to do so, as safely and efficiently as possible within the parameters of his system. And I hate to see so many points of failure with little or no advantage.
My mentor has lectured me in the past about relying on just one pump to service my system, and after a good listen, I point out that I have a replacement pump waiting in the wings, and a controller that will alert me to any problem.
melev
Well-known member
Chuck has several pumps on his system, and using the Reefkeeper II, he can turn off all three when it is time to feed. I don't think he needs to change them out for new pumps necessarily to consolidate, considering what he is running now. Each pump has its own task, and has been doing a good job for some time. If the pump is shot and unrepairable, installing a Dart or Barracuda would be nice if the bulkhead size supported it. It doesn't, from what I could see.
Replacing the current bulkheads with beefier ones is a nice perk, but may not be worth the hassle factor. I'm sure right now he just wants to solve this issue and get back to enjoying his tank.
jmho.
And yes, he's got tons of goodies everywhere. The trick is finding it. He needs to do a full inventory and then set up some storefront software to keep track of what he has and where. :lol:
Replacing the current bulkheads with beefier ones is a nice perk, but may not be worth the hassle factor. I'm sure right now he just wants to solve this issue and get back to enjoying his tank.
jmho.
And yes, he's got tons of goodies everywhere. The trick is finding it. He needs to do a full inventory and then set up some storefront software to keep track of what he has and where. :lol:
jnarowe
New member
I am not saying to replace them for no reason, but that if one or more of the pumps is seized, which there is a high probability of based on what he wrote, that he should go ahead and improve his system design at the same time.
If he has to replace either Blueline, then cost-wise, he is 3/4 of the way to a much better pump.
And swapping bulkheads is by no means a "perk" if he ever has to plug one in the future. Schedule 80 threaded bulkheads offer much better sealing, more threads available, and will hold much better under the strain of screwing in or unscrewing a plug, should that need arise.
And having several pumps on the system is a problem waiting to happen. They add heat, points of failure, and electrical waste. Using multiple magnetic pumps instead of one larger Sequence is like paying for electricity to heat your tank while you pay to run your chiller. It's just very innefficient and reduces your safety factor.
Not perks, but better system design.
stdreb27: It's not "redundancy" when both are doing different jobs. That actually lowers your theoretical redundancy because then you would need 4 pumps to provide full redundancy, should both fail.
If he has to replace either Blueline, then cost-wise, he is 3/4 of the way to a much better pump.
And swapping bulkheads is by no means a "perk" if he ever has to plug one in the future. Schedule 80 threaded bulkheads offer much better sealing, more threads available, and will hold much better under the strain of screwing in or unscrewing a plug, should that need arise.
And having several pumps on the system is a problem waiting to happen. They add heat, points of failure, and electrical waste. Using multiple magnetic pumps instead of one larger Sequence is like paying for electricity to heat your tank while you pay to run your chiller. It's just very innefficient and reduces your safety factor.
Not perks, but better system design.
stdreb27: It's not "redundancy" when both are doing different jobs. That actually lowers your theoretical redundancy because then you would need 4 pumps to provide full redundancy, should both fail.
Goodwin9
Premium Member
All good points, but at this time, I think that I am going to drain the sump to repair or replace the pump. There isn't enough room to install union ball valves between the pump and sump. See the picture below. They would be nice, but I just don't see any way to install them in the present setup.
They are 4 Blueline pumps providing the circulation in the tank. Two attached to the sump, one for the chiller loop which ran after refilling the sump, the second, which isn't working, is connected to the manifold in the picture which feeds the sand filter, GFO reactor, the spray bar in the refugium, and one return in the tank. Both of these pumps are Blueline 70's. There are two addition Blueline 100's on closed loops, one for the canister filters & UV's, and the second powers 3 returns in the tank along with feeding the calcium reactor.
With the situation that just happened, the two 100's continued to provide flow in the tank, even though the sump was bone dry.
Hopefully, it's just a matter or replacing the impeller section on the Blueline 70 pump which I plan on doing tomorrow and I hope to get the Blueline 20 on the calcium reacto taken apart this afternoon to figure out what needs to be done there.
kau_cinta_ku
New member
wow that really sucks chuck. sorry to hear about that.
I have never seen pumps directly screwed into bulkheads like that before. really makes cleaning them almost impossiable with out drainning the sump.
any way of just putting a 45 degree elbow comming off the bulkhead then adding the union ball valve? that should get the pump away from the stand.
I have never seen pumps directly screwed into bulkheads like that before. really makes cleaning them almost impossiable with out drainning the sump.
any way of just putting a 45 degree elbow comming off the bulkhead then adding the union ball valve? that should get the pump away from the stand.
Bax
Premium Member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12850201#post12850201 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Goodwin9
All good points, but at this time, I think that I am going to drain the sump to repair or replace the pump. There isn't enough room to install union ball valves between the pump and sump. See the picture below. They would be nice, but I just don't see any way to install them in the present setup.
Good thing you had the CLs! My return just seezed last week due to calcium build up ad fortunately my Tunzes had done the same thing a week earlier and I was able to clean them so they circulated the tank when the return was down. Murphy's law would normally require them all to fail together!
Anyway, Can you turn the pumps sideways and add the DUBVs with an 90 deg L into the pump? The 1" DUBVs are only about 5.5 to 6" long. It would save you a ton of hassel in the future.
jnarowe
New member
Chuck, I know you rely heavily on advice from other reef keepers, but much of the advice you are getting is not applicable to a system of this size. No way in the World I would ever use a magnetic driven pump on any kind of life-support equipment. They add heat, extra risk, and have generally poor flow curves for anything other than use as a powerhead.
What I am trying to get across is that any time you have to drain the sump to effect a repair, careful planning and upgrading is called for. It's a hassle to do it in the first place, so why not take the opportunity this failure has presented, and upgrade the system so it won't happen again? If that was a Sequence pump, you could be gone on vacation and it would still be running dry when you got home.
You have the opportunity now to correct some design issues while you have the sump offline anyway. With a couple of modifications, you could lower your risk substantially, lower your operating cost substantially, and lower your equipment cost substantially.
What I am trying to get across is that any time you have to drain the sump to effect a repair, careful planning and upgrading is called for. It's a hassle to do it in the first place, so why not take the opportunity this failure has presented, and upgrade the system so it won't happen again? If that was a Sequence pump, you could be gone on vacation and it would still be running dry when you got home.
You have the opportunity now to correct some design issues while you have the sump offline anyway. With a couple of modifications, you could lower your risk substantially, lower your operating cost substantially, and lower your equipment cost substantially.
- Status
