Silent and Failsafe Overflow System

uncle thanks for pointing that one out (romex in conduit) duh. I should have known that one.

Regarding the things you can do with a plugged appliance that violate NEC, this is why the NEC states that anything within 6 feet of a water source (aquarium) must be connected to a ground-fault protected circuit. So not using a GFCI would be a violation. Of course the fault would have to occur at or downline from the GFCI device, which is why you really should have it connected to a GFCI breaker in the panel...
 
uncle thanks for pointing that one out (romex in conduit) duh. I should have known that one.

Regarding the things you can do with a plugged appliance that violate NEC, this is why the NEC states that anything within 6 feet of a water source (aquarium) must be connected to a ground-fault protected circuit. So not using a GFCI would be a violation. Of course the fault would have to occur at or downline from the GFCI device, which is why you really should have it connected to a GFCI breaker in the panel...

Well some finer points, are that AC motors, in continuous use, (over 3 hours) and HID (MH, and especially Fluorescent) lighting "should" not be connected to a GFCI. This is a recommendation, so the modifier "SHALL" is not used i.e. it is not a regulation. Of course the regs refer to plug and cord connected equipment within 6 feet of water..... I find the greatest danger, is the multi-outlet devices, and for good reason--they are outlawed by the NEC for continuous use (over three hours.) Same for extension cords. Number 1 reason for fires associated with aquariums (hot to neutral shorts--GFCI no trip,) and Number 1 reason for broken bones in the home (tripping over extension cords) figures derived from NFPA, and Arson.org. OOPS sorry, not on topic ;)
 
You can use Romex, just strip off the outer jacket, and use the individual conductors and ground.
Only to code if each individual conductor has markings... The conductors on most romex doesnt :)


This whole "romex" in conduit topic comes up quite often at electrical forums. In most cases, most inspectors (in a residential settings) would rather see a short section of NM in a length of conduit (with proper connectors on the ends) than they would a JB at both ends to switch from NM to THHN and back. This is often the case when a panel is plumbed with conduit stubs to an attic or wire chase or a garage has switch and receptacle boxes mounted to block walls and fed from an attic.
 
Only to code if each individual conductor has markings... The conductors on most romex doesnt :)

Agreed...

This whole "romex" in conduit topic comes up quite often at electrical forums. In most cases, most inspectors (in a residential settings) would rather see a short section of NM in a length of conduit (with proper connectors on the ends) than they would a JB at both ends to switch from NM to THHN and back. This is often the case when a panel is plumbed with conduit stubs to an attic or wire chase or a garage has switch and receptacle boxes mounted to block walls and fed from an attic.

Authority having jurisdiction, ultimately has the say so, no arguing that.
 
Can I build a coast to coast internal overflow 48x1.5x5" and then use 2 x 1" bulkhead in back wall to a bigger external overflow with bean animal setup? Is the internal overflow and 1" bulkheads gonna be able to handle 1000 gph? Also is there a paint that is ok to use with saltwater. Thanks
 
The 2 1" bulkhead is for the water to go from internal overflow box to the external overflow box. I don't want to have a huge internal overflow box with the 3 standpipes. Does tat make sense.
 
(2) 1" bulkheads feeding the external overflow box will not be enough, and even if they were, would not provide sufficient surface skimming and your little overflow box would likely accumulate scum.

The bulkheads are VERY restrictive for the space the take up. You would be better serverd drilling (3) or (4) 1.5" HOLES (about the same size needed for a 1" bulkhead) and using the open holes to feed the external box. There are MANY examples of such a setup here in the thread.
 
The 2 1" bulkhead is for the water to go from internal overflow box to the external overflow box. I don't want to have a huge internal overflow box with the 3 standpipes. Does tat make sense.

erptacmt - I concur with Bean, as that's exactly what I did for my setup. My small internal weir feeds the external overflow box via 3 - 1.5" holes drilled in the tank. No bulkheads needed, as they'll just impede the flow into the box. Have a look at the pic below for visualization. You can find more pictures and details in my project log:

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1978645

tank36.jpg~original
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The 2 1" bulkhead is for the water to go from internal overflow box to the external overflow box. I don't want to have a huge internal overflow box with the 3 standpipes. Does tat make sense.

This is an example of what your are wanting to do. It is posted elsewhere in this thread also. An example. It gives a guide to the basic relationship between the holes, and water levels etc.

<a href="http://s655.photobucket.com/albums/uu274/uncleof6/?action=view&current=Untitled-12.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu274/uncleof6/Untitled-12.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
 
Thanks guys. I'm reading through the thread. It's very long as you guys all know. I'm ordering my tank soon so I need the info quickly. I'll keep reading.
 
Setting up my new 300 it was set up to run a beananimal overflow. The problem is I dont really know this overflow the only way I can really do this would be like in the picture below. Will this work I cant run three pipes into the sump.
DSCF4522.jpg~original
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top