Bean's Design Adapted for Nano Cube 28-Gal. Tank
Bean's Design Adapted for Nano Cube 28-Gal. Tank
I'm thinking a 1" pip and 1/2" bulkhead for all three. This should give you just over 800gph and the ability to fine tune the system better with the valves. I doubt someone would be running more than 800gph on a 28G tank. This is what I would run on my 20L if I wasn't doing a AIO.
David
Hi, OtherCents:
Thanks for your input regarding using Bean's method on my 28-gallon Nanocube. Regarding the 800-gph figure you cite for 1/2" bulkheads + 1" tubes, does that entail allowance for Bean's method of not opening the siphon tube all the way (whereby I would dial it back just a little, to allow the open-channel tube to carry some water)? The original twin pumps that were stock equipment from JBJ, fitted in the sump of the Nano Cube 28, were 266 gph (x 2 pumps). So that would be 532 gph total, making your figure of 800 gph fit right in--with a little extra power than the stock pumps. I was originally paranoid of drilling the bulkheads too small. But after Bean set me straight a few posts back, I realize that such a fear was wholly unfounded, as using 1.5" bulkheads and plumbing would have been absurd for such a small tank (great advice!). So between Bean's recommendation and your recommendation, we're looking at between 1/2" and 3/4" bulkheads with 1" standing tubes. You both have given me a lot to think about!
But here's another wrench in the machine: the side-by-side, companion tank, that will house a refugium, feeds into a common sump, below the Nano Cube. They share water and pumping. The only catch is that the smaller refugium tanks is half the size of the Nano Cube. It is a BioCube 14 (14-gallon tank). Now, what size should the bulkheads and standing pipes be for the BioCube? Consider if the BioCube's bulkheads or standing pipes are smaller than the Nano Cube's bulkheads or pipes, then the return pump--which will split the water-return to both tanks evenly via a "tee"--may cause slight disparities in drain rates between the tanks. Now, I know that Bean has said in his threads that if the water rises in the overflow tank (say, rising higher in the Biocube because it's bulkheads or standing tubes are smaller) it exerts more hydrostatic pressure on the plumbing, causing the water to move out faster.
Hence, according to this logic, I shouldn't worry about any disparities in the water's return-flow-rate that may be effected in part by a disparity in the bulkhead or standing-pipes size of each respective tank. So maybe it's really no big deal, and I should drill or plumb smaller in the BioCube 14, to avoid more overkill. If so, then I could probably drill all holes on both tanks 1/2", using 1" standing tubes on the Nano Cube and 3/4" tubes on the BioCube? I'm not sure here. What recommendations would you all make on this? Bean? OtherCents? Anyone? Thanks again! Your knowledge is very helpful.
