I find your remarks a little rude and it would appear that your intent was to be offensive. Nonetheless, I will respond to your comments in oder to set the record straight for those people who are following along.
Firstly, this is not just a design for a high flow sump! It is (I feel) an improved overflow design that is dead silent and failsafe. It will scale well to just about any size system and flow requirement.
But that (high flow sumps) appears to be the arena that you have framed your comments, so I will respond in that context.
Lets look at them one at a time:
Wastes electricity pumping water up to the display as you need to overcome head preasure,
Not in a low flow situation! It works just the same and can be scaled to any size! However back to your point: Many people desire high flow sumps. YOU may not like the notion, but that does not mean that it is a waste of anything. Yes, it does use more energy to overcome higher head pressures. That alone is not the whole story though. You are making a mistake in assuming that there is no reason to have a HIGH FLOW sump. There are reasons, and therefore the energy usage is not a waste or avoidable. YOU may hold that opinion that it is a waste, but that would be your opinion and based on a narrow set of facts without consideration of the many different types and needs of setups.
There are MANY valid reasons for the use of a high flow sump. Manny people use their sumps as RDSBS, Live Rock filters, extensions of the displays, etc. A high flow sump is what makes this possible. Yet other people do not have room for closed loops and do not like the look of powerheads in their tanks, they choose to get a portion of their flow from the return pump. There are plenty of other valid reasons as well.
increase salt creep in the sump,
That is simply not at all correct. This setup does not introduce air into the sump and therefore does not produce salt creep. I have ZERO salt creep in 2 years of operation. Your making assumptions based in a lack of knowledge about the system. The fact is that the system was designed to eliminate the salt creep and bubble problem!
overly dependent on the pumps in the sump,
And a display with CL pumps is overly dependent on them. Your contention here does not make sense. Whatever pumps provide the life support are going to be depended on.
Secondly, the LIFE in the sump is part of the system in some setups. Lets take my sump for example. It holds 1/2 of the LR and 1/3 of the system water. I have therefore increased my bio-capacity by a large margin. The SYSTEM is dependent on the sump and its high flow, but without the sump (or a low flow sump) the system would not support the same bioload. Your contention is based on a shortsighted opinion and a basic flaw in logic. I.E. you are considering only 1 type of setup as good and therefore the ONLY valid way of setting up a fish tank.
limited sump design due to high flow,
A low flow sump is also limited in design and function as well. Each serves a different purpose. Because a round peg does not fit into a square hole, does not mean that EITHER peg is deformed. Is the Minivan limited in function to the dump truck, or the dump truck limited in function to the station wagon? It is all a matter of need.
Because you came here to take a pot shot at my design. Each style of system setup has pros and cons. There are many choices to make when designing a system. You are welcome to your opinions, just make sure that you don't confuse those opinions with fact. You may not see a benefit, but many people do.
It is much better to circulate the tank water with either a CL or powerheads and to size the return pump from the sump based on your filtration equipments needs.
No sir, it is not better. It is one way of setting up a tank. Again, pros and cons abound with any design.
If your CL or powerheads fail, the return pump will keep the tank alive.
And In the converse, if the return pump dies, the CL will keep the tank alive. This has nothing to do with the overflow design.
If the sump blows up, the CL/powerheads will keep the tank alive.
And likewise, if my sump blows up my CL will keep my tank alive. This has nothing to do with the overflow design.
You don't need all the crazy plumbing,
That is your opinion, but the examples you give below indicate that you do not understand this design. The plumbing is not at all crazy. They are as simple (or more so) than a stockman or a durso. They are standpipes. Only (1) needs a valve. The airline can be omitted and the system still MUCH more failsafe than a Durso or Stockman.
a simple level adjusting Durso will work or a 1/2" siphon with 1" open air drain as back-up at 1/4 the cost of your set-up.
There is no failsafe in such a setup. The durso introduces air into the sump and is also a PITA to keep adjusted. Been there, done that, so have countless others. This is not
quiet it is DEAD SILENT and has NO salt creep. It is failsafe for just about any kind of clog or mishap and never needs adjusted.
The sump acts as a settling tank, which you can vacuum!
MY sump does act as a settling tank that I can vacuum out. Even if it did not (the flow as you content was too high), there is a popular school of thought that says you want to keep the detritus in suspension until it is eaten or skimmed out. Either way, this is a non argument.
Less heat introduced into the tank.
Watts are Watts my friend. A 140W closed loop pump puts the same heat into the tank as a 140W return pump. The CL pump may flow a bit more due to the lack of head and you could make the heat per gallon of flow argument. However, you need to keep in mind that a sump can serve many purposes depending on the system topology. A low flow sump is not an option in some setups and therefore the point is moot. Also, as already pointed out, this system works for LOW FLOW sumps as well. Watts are Watts and the point is also moot.
This intent of this thread is not to debate the pros and cons of high-flow or low-flow sumps, it was to document a silent and failsafe method of creating an overflow system. I have responded to each of your points and shown them to be poorly supported by the facts. I would hope that we can leave this here.
