Pro's & Con's on draining to Refugium

[budster.stig1]

I am planning a twin DT's system, I wonder if one tank could drain to the skimmer, and the other to the refugium, both would flow back to the return sump to be pumped back to the DT's. Any downside to direct flow to the fuge? What'cha think?........................Budster.stig:spin2:

 

[T Diddy]

I suppose it depends on the size of your fuge and the flow provided by your return pump. My system is very similar to what you describe though. The refugium is fed directly by the DT (with a ball valve to control flow), then back to the sump. Another drain flows directly to the sump where the skimmer is located.

HTH

 

[budster.stig1]

T diddy: Thanks for your response. The return pump will be about 1800 GPH split for 2 tanks so about 900 GPH would flow to the fuge. I guess as long as both drains eventually make it to the return sump balance will be easy to achieve?

 

[T Diddy]

sounds fine...just be sure that the sump is substantial enough to handle the volume of the two displays and fuge when the power goes out. Also, be sure to snail-proof any drains as you are probably already aware. How big is the fuge going to be?? Mine is a 100 gallon rubbermaid agricultural tub.

 

[budster.stig1]

T Diddy: The refugium will be 75g. glass tank w/ internal overflow on one end. I have been reading some of "Mr. Wilson" posts on this forum and he is a big believer in directing the skimmer effulent to the refugium, and using flow whenever possible instead of pumps. If I were to both drain one tank and direct skimmer effluent to my fuge I guess my fuge would have to be a lot bigger to accomodate that much flow? What'cha think.

 

[T Diddy]

Budster,

The amount of flow won't be a major issue in a fuge that size. 75 gallons sounds great. I too think that gravity is much more efficient than pumps, but I'm not sure about the advantage of sending skimmer effluent to the refugium. I would consider using both holes in 75 as drains to the sump, though...just in case

 

[wmilas]

I tried this. I found that not passing raw water through a filter sock or skimmer first caused alot of bio build up in the refugium. This doesn't sound bad at first, until you realize that the refugium can, and will over a period of years turn into a a giant nutrient sink that has to be cleaned to get those nutrients out.

I had a 65 gallon refugium with jut plain cheato. With raw water there was alot of biomasss that accumulated on the bottom of the tank and sides that had to be scraped/vacuumed out.

I tried adding rock rubble to see what would happen. Welcome to algal overgrowth nightmare even though the rest of the system was algae free. The biomass trapped there rotted and encouraged algal growth that the cheato could not out compete.

So my experience is that unless you want to do alot of manual work to the refugium feed it with cleaned water from the sump.

 

[budster.stig1]

Thank you Wmilas:
I was hoping that someone who has done this would chime in! Thanks again for you input. I will look very carefully before jumping......................Budster.stig

 

[budster.stig1]

What about a clean-up crew to help control Bio-waste in the Fuge. I have heard of people using critters in the sump and/or fuge, What'ca think?

 

[uncleof6]

I have also tried every machination of this theme, with the same results a Wmilas. I also, recommend that water from the DT be sent directly to the skimmer section, where it needs to go. This gives the skimmer a chance to remove organic compounds, rather than just recirculating the organics, to be processed by bacteria, and ultimately became algae problems. I do not agree with the use of socks, however the logic that Wmilas uses is sound. There is no advantage to feeding raw water to a fuge, however, there is a huge advantage to giving the skimmer a chance to do its job. The skimmer does not remove anything that a fuge needs, neither do the socks. Rock is nothing but bio balls, big ones--the function to produce nitrates which most use a fuge to get rid of. Counter productive I would think.

A fuge as commonly used, is for export not for production. Therefore using a CUC in the fuge, makes it a producing habitat, rather than an export area. There are different uses for a "fuge," be that as it may, the less you have to concentrate on it the better. Feed water that has been through the skimmer section, and if really felt needed the socks as well.

 

[budster.stig1]

Uncleof6: Thanks for you in-put. What you say makes sense. One thing I would point out is in my case 1/2 of the DT water would drain to the fuge, the other 1/2 would drain to the skimmer sump, then to the fuge, as I will have 2 display tanks, both 150g. ea......................Budster.stig

 

[xdannyxrocksx]

What size tanks..
Only experience i had this was with two 40breeders down to a 40 breeder sump.Not exactly what you have planned, one to skimmer, one to fuge, but i got two crashing tanks..that sucked.

 

[tmz]

I feed drain water from some of the tanks in the integrated sytem to the refugia and then it moves on to the sump and on to the skimmer and return pumps. No filter socks or other filters are used. It has worked very well with low nutrients for over 5 years, the last 3 or which have included dosing moderate amounts of vodka and vinegar.

 

[budster.stig1]

Thanks TMZ: I say your system in Nov. It's Awesome! When making a case for not returning a DT to the fuge, the point is made that only treated water should be directed to the fuge, however in a large system with multiple DT's the amount of treated water directed to the fuge is something less than 1/2 the system capacity at best, any way you lay it out, due to skimmer efficiency and sheer water volume. How does draining 1/2 to the fuge, and 1/2 to the drain sump for skimming then on to the fuge differ from feeding the fuge directly from the return sump. The reason I am looking at this concept is to provide flow utilizing gravity, instead of wattage for flow to and from external components.....................budster.stig:idea:

 

[BlueDartReefer]

I've got a 265G and a 75G plumbed together that both drain to the same 50G sump. Starts with dual sock filters- heater / skimmer section- refugium area and finally to the return chamber. I originally considered bypassing the filters and even the skimmer with the 75G return. However, I personally didnt see the refugium benefiting from all the extra waste that would accumulate by doing so. I prefer the look of a very clean tank and I'm a huge fan of sock filters- which I change out about every five days. They do wonders for mechanical removal and eliminating all bubbles from the return lines.

 

[budster.stig1]

Thank you Blue Dart Reefer:
It's been a few days and I have thought about this and I have decided that DT over-flow, by nature, contains too much organic waste to put it any where other than to the filter system which ever filter type one chooses to use. So yes I agree with your concept and I think yours, wmilas, and uncleof6 success with this concept speaks for itself. I will direct the effluent from the skimmer pump (my fuge and two sumps are all external) to the refugium and will run an open return line to the fuge also to increase flow and the fuge capacity. Thanks again for in-put..........................Budster.stig

 

[CHSUB]

great thread, and some great points; however i just designed my system and fug to receive "raw" dt water and then pass it back to the dt unskimmed, the fug will be set up with LR and cheato, no sand, lite opposite the dt, i plan on vacuuming the fug when i do my waterchanges. i believe this will feed the fug more nutients and in turn supply the dt with live food. i think the skiimmer removes thing the dt could use; just my thoughts...

 

[budster.stig1]

Chsub I believe you just described the "Berlin" sump concept. There are some who have had and are having success with that concept. When seeing what a skimmer loads out of the DT water, I just can't talk my self into trying your concept. "A clean tank is a happy tank", you can always dose nutrients..........................Budster.stig

 

[CHSUB]

Chsub I believe you just described the "Berlin" sump concept. There are some who have had and are having success with that concept. When seeing what a skimmer loads out of the DT water, I just can't talk my self into trying your concept. "A clean tank is a happy tank", you can always dose nutrients..........................Budster.stig

actually the "berlin method" has a deep sand bed, i will have no sand in the fug. i'm also using a large skimmer. i want to feed the fug with "raw" dt water and return that water to the dt, skipping the skimmer...not sure if it will make a difference, and i could easily change it later by feeding the fug with the return pump. i thought this was a noval idear, but people on this thread didn't like it, but i want to try for myself. i will also be using gfo and some kind of carbon source, vinager or bio pellets. it is a new tank and i'm doing the plumbing now..

 

[phillyfishguy]

I have a multiple system and drain one line to the fuge and frag tank. The other line drains directly into my sump. It works for me.