Sump Design: Single End input or dual?

[Wingman6]

Hi All,

Working to set up my 180 gallon and before doing my plumbing i'm trying to work on my sump design. I have been doing a ton of research on the best design and there are two that i'm trying to decide between.

Idea 1:

3 section sump (left to right) with skimmer near input, baffles to refugium, refugium, baffles or single to return, return area.

Possible Pros?: all dirty water coming into skimmer end for cleaning, simple design. Skimmed water into refugium.

Idea 2:

3 section as follows (left to right): Skimmer section as deep as need, bubble trap baffles, return section, baffle, and then deep refugium. I will split my return from a single 2 inch to 2 1 inch return and valve it at both ends.

Pros?: can have deeper refugium with adjustable flow (i have heard you want slower through here but not sure). Can select the height wanted for the skimmer section

Cons: more difficult plumbing. Have to put two filter socks on each return. Some non skimmed water will make it to the refugium?

I'm sure this will cause some debate but i'm hoping to pick the most reliable option and start building.

Thanks for all the help.

 

[halcyonism]

Skimmer > return > refugium with both drains going to the skimmer section and the refugium fed from a tee / ball valve off of the return line.

 

[Wingman6]

Skimmer > return > refugium with both drains going to the skimmer section and the refugium fed from a tee / ball valve off of the return line.

Sorry I should have said the overflow is a single drain out. So basically you are saying make a t off the single drain and send it to the fuge? I read a t doesn't work well when put on the fuge line as gravity wins out?

 

[halcyonism]

Sorry I should have said the overflow is a single drain out. So basically you are saying make a t off the single drain and send it to the fuge? I read a t doesn't work well when put on the fuge line as gravity wins out?

Single over flow is fine, just route it to the skimmer section with no tees. The refugium should be fed with a tee / ball valve off of the return line, this way you can adjust the flow through the refugium.

 

[Wingman6]

Single over flow is fine, just route it to the skimmer section with no tees. The refugium should be fed with a tee / ball valve off of the return line, this way you can adjust the flow through the refugium.

OK I see what you are saying. So pull return from the middle and feed the fuge with part of what's going back to the tank. Sounds great.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[super_steve85]

Yakima, huh? I used to live in Ellensburg. I hear it's been getting hot there lately.

Single over flow is fine, just route it to the skimmer section with no tees. The refugium should be fed with a tee / ball valve off of the return line, this way you can adjust the flow through the refugium.

IMO, this doesn't seem to be overly efficient. With this setup you will be losing flow back to your DT because a portion of your return water is going straight back to your sump. If your return pump is large enough you may still end up with enough flow, but I would think you want to circulate as much water through your DT as possible.

Also, you will end up with a decent amount of the same water circulating through your fuge and not getting back to the DT. What I mean is, water will flow from the fuge to the return section and then back to the fuge. There's no real value here except water movement in your fuge.

What have you heard about a tee off of the drain line not working? If all of the drains are above your sump you should get flow into both areas. What am I missing?

 

[Wingman6]

Yakima, huh? I used to live in Ellensburg. I hear it's been getting hot there lately.




IMO, this doesn't seem to be overly efficient. With this setup you will be losing flow back to your DT because a portion of your return water is going straight back to your sump. If your return pump is large enough you may still end up with enough flow, but I would think you want to circulate as much water through your DT as possible.

Also, you will end up with a decent amount of the same water circulating through your fuge and not getting back to the DT. What I mean is, water will flow from the fuge to the return section and then back to the fuge. There's no real value here except water movement in your fuge.

What have you heard about a tee off of the drain line not working? If all of the drains are above your sump you should get flow into both areas. What am I missing?

I read that if you have a vertical drain and put a t connect on it, there is almost no flow into the connection.

This does make sense you are stealing water from the dt.

This would make me think its better to have the single input and return so you aren't putting non skimmed water into the fuge. Could be wrong on that one.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[super_steve85]

I read that if you have a vertical drain and put a t connect on it, there is almost no flow into the connection.

Yes. With a tee off of a vertical drain you would have to restrict the flow downhill of the tee to get flow off of the side. You're right. I was picturing my setup where I have a mostly horizontal stretch that I could tee off of.

 

[super_steve85]

This would make me think its better to have the single input and return so you aren't putting non skimmed water into the fuge. Could be wrong on that one.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

That's the way I've got mine setup and it seems to work fine. I have seen guys do two drains with one getting skimmed and the other going to the fuge. Not sure what the benefits of that setup would be, though. I like to give my skimmer access to as much of the crummy water as possible and avoid as much crud in my fuge as I can.

 

[Wingman6]

That's the way I've got mine setup and it seems to work fine. I have seen guys do two drains with one getting skimmed and the other going to the fuge. Not sure what the benefits of that setup would be, though. I like to give my skimmer access to as much of the crummy water as possible and avoid as much crud in my fuge as I can.

I agree. I guess I'm not as concerned with the type of water going in but more the control and depth of the water. The split system gives you that but I need to either split my drain or send some return. Not sure I like either option. As mentioned earlier you reduce flow into the main tank for one and the other you put some restriction on the drain. Hmmm

 

[halcyonism]

It really all depends on the size of the return pump and type of drain you have. If it is a reef ready tank with a typical stand pipe ("mega flow") drain, then you will most likely need to restrict the return line anyways to avoid your drain from "flushing."

 

[Wingman6]

It really all depends on the size of the return pump and type of drain you have. If it is a reef ready tank with a typical stand pipe ("mega flow") drain, then you will most likely need to restrict the return line anyways to avoid your drain from "flushing."

Makes sense. Given this is my first large tank, i really am not sure about much on it. The drain from the overflow is 1.5 inches. Sounds like a lot of me but we shall see. I'll likely install a valve regardless to at least have the capability. I will probably ahve this dropping straight down into the sump.

The pump is a reeflo dart which has quite a bit of flow i believe. It will be putting flow into 6 3/4 inch bulkheads at the top of the tank (this is how i got the tank) and also a 1.5 in bulkhead in the middle of the back of the tank (looked more like a drain to me but the guy had it this way). I will likely valve off this 1.5 inch return unless its needed.

 

[uncleof6]

Makes sense. Given this is my first large tank, i really am not sure about much on it. The drain from the overflow is 1.5 inches. Sounds like a lot of me but we shall see. I'll likely install a valve regardless to at least have the capability. I will probably ahve this dropping straight down into the sump.

That 1.5" drain is not a lot--particularly if that drain is a "mega flow" which is nothing more than a fancy name for a Durso, and considering you are going to be using a Dart--it is a recipe for problems--noise, bubbles, flushing etc--unless you cut the dart's output back to around 300 - 400 gph--complete waste of the pump.

Putting a valve in an air assisted (aka Durso) drain, introduces a restriction in the line, which for one increases the turbulence in the line and exaggerating the above mentioned problems, as well as creating a flood risk, as often to get adequate flow through these contraptions, it must be adjusted somewhere between turbulent flow and a siphon--and with no back up--well won't take much to plug the valve up.

Putting a valve in and/or splitting a drain line is a bad idea, though practiced widely--unless it is a higher performance siphon system as described here on RC, where the valve is used to control water level in the overflow, and no other purpose. These systems have a 'safety back up' feature, to prevent flooding.

Flow control through a system, should be strictly limited to valving on the pump outlet.

The pump is a reeflo dart which has quite a bit of flow i believe. It will be putting flow into 6 3/4 inch bulkheads at the top of the tank (this is how i got the tank) and also a 1.5 in bulkhead in the middle of the back of the tank (looked more like a drain to me but the guy had it this way). I will likely valve off this 1.5 inch return unless its needed.

You are going to find that because of the drain configuration, you are going to have to dial the Dart way down, to achieve the best performance with the drain.

That said, splitting the return line into six outlets @ 3/4", and the snake pit of plumbing needed to hook it all together, is going to introduce a great deal of friction loss to the system, reducing the pumps output to begin with.

Better overall plan, all things considered, would be to plug all those holes, and run a single 1.5" return line, up over the back of the tank, (holes could be put to another use, depending on their location) and convert to a siphon system. On these larger tanks, a different approach is needed, as the standard common practices IMO are inadequate.

Flow rates, with a well designed system and this pump can approach 2500 gph, or better, so feeding the fuge from a "tee" in the return line, is hardly going to steal flow from the main tank, and as far as "recirculating the same water" through the fuge, this is a trivial matter, and somewhat off the mark--much the same as using flow rates that match the skimmer flow rate--so all the water gets skimmed.

Perhaps my favorite recommendation is to tee off the return to "bleed excess flow" from the return line, directing it back to the sump. Absolutely useless, and a waste of electricity. However, feeding a fuge from the tee'd return line--can kill two birds with one stone, and would not be a waste.

Overall there is no advantage to having a "fuge" in the center of the sump. You would have no flow control through the fuge, and if needing to take it offline for whatever reason, the whole system has to go down. There is no need for 100% of the water to go through the fuge, nor is there any percentage of recirculation that would be problematic with the "fuge" on the end, power fed from the pump. You have the pump. Put it to good use.

 

[Wingman6]

That 1.5" drain is not a lot--particularly if that drain is a "mega flow" which is nothing more than a fancy name for a Durso, and considering you are going to be using a Dart--it is a recipe for problems--noise, bubbles, flushing etc--unless you cut the dart's output back to around 300 - 400 gph--complete waste of the pump.

Putting a valve in an air assisted (aka Durso) drain, introduces a restriction in the line, which for one increases the turbulence in the line and exaggerating the above mentioned problems, as well as creating a flood risk, as often to get adequate flow through these contraptions, it must be adjusted somewhere between turbulent flow and a siphon--and with no back up--well won't take much to plug the valve up.

Putting a valve in and/or splitting a drain line is a bad idea, though practiced widely--unless it is a higher performance siphon system as described here on RC, where the valve is used to control water level in the overflow, and no other purpose. These systems have a 'safety back up' feature, to prevent flooding.

Flow control through a system, should be strictly limited to valving on the pump outlet.

You are going to find that because of the drain configuration, you are going to have to dial the Dart way down, to achieve the best performance with the drain.

That said, splitting the return line into six outlets @ 3/4", and the snake pit of plumbing needed to hook it all together, is going to introduce a great deal of friction loss to the system, reducing the pumps output to begin with.

Better overall plan, all things considered, would be to plug all those holes, and run a single 1.5" return line, up over the back of the tank, (holes could be put to another use, depending on their location) and convert to a siphon system. On these larger tanks, a different approach is needed, as the standard common practices IMO are inadequate.

Flow rates, with a well designed system and this pump can approach 2500 gph, or better, so feeding the fuge from a "tee" in the return line, is hardly going to steal flow from the main tank, and as far as "recirculating the same water" through the fuge, this is a trivial matter, and somewhat off the mark--much the same as using flow rates that match the skimmer flow rate--so all the water gets skimmed.

Perhaps my favorite recommendation is to tee off the return to "bleed excess flow" from the return line, directing it back to the sump. Absolutely useless, and a waste of electricity. However, feeding a fuge from the tee'd return line--can kill two birds with one stone, and would not be a waste.

Overall there is no advantage to having a "fuge" in the center of the sump. You would have no flow control through the fuge, and if needing to take it offline for whatever reason, the whole system has to go down. There is no need for 100% of the water to go through the fuge, nor is there any percentage of recirculation that would be problematic with the "fuge" on the end, power fed from the pump. You have the pump. Put it to good use.

Thanks for the response. Definitely detailed. I picked up the tank second hand and it is pretty much plumbed already with a 1.5 inch return that gets split into 4 3/4 inch feeds from the 1.5 inch return. The two end 3/4 feeds supply two 3/4 inch bulkheads from the top.

In addition, the guy before me had a 1.5 inch return in the middle back of the tank. I was going to keep this plumbed with a valve so i could keep some flow going there but i am worried about the risk of a siphon in power loss.

Also, sounds like it is a good idea to change the overflow drain to 2 inches from the 1.5. I'm guessing it will fit and is easy enough to do while have the tank apart.

i'm a bit confused by the last portion where you mention feeding the fuge from the return. You say bleeding it off isn't a good idea but to feed it is? Maybe i missed it but what is the difference here. Sounds like you agree with skimmer on one side and fuge on the other of the sump, but are you saying its ok to t off from the return and feed the fuge?

 

[uncleof6]

Thanks for the response. Definitely detailed. I picked up the tank second hand and it is pretty much plumbed already with a 1.5 inch return that gets split into 4 3/4 inch feeds from the 1.5 inch return. The two end 3/4 feeds supply two 3/4 inch bulkheads from the top.

You really should reevaluate the use of these holes. This arrangement will be extremely restrictive. I could see using two of them for returns (keeping the plumbing at 1.5" till just before entering the tank at the bulkheads.) Simpler is way better. All those return points are unnecessary, and even two are unnecessary. All those holes would better serve you pass throughs (depending on their location) for an internal weir/external plumbing box with the drain plumbing.

In addition, the guy before me had a 1.5 inch return in the middle back of the tank. I was going to keep this plumbed with a valve so i could keep some flow going there but i am worried about the risk of a siphon in power loss.

Why should you suffer from the complexity and mistakes made by the one before you? The things I suggest will take a bit more work to put together, however, in the end result will be superior performance wise.

Also, sounds like it is a good idea to change the overflow drain to 2 inches from the 1.5. I'm guessing it will fit and is easy enough to do while have the tank apart.

That would certainly help. On the other hand, siphon system will prove to be better with your pump/tank size combination.

i'm a bit confused by the last portion where you mention feeding the fuge from the return. You say bleeding it off isn't a good idea but to feed it is? Maybe i missed it but what is the difference here. Sounds like you agree with skimmer on one side and fuge on the other of the sump, but are you saying its ok to t off from the return and feed the fuge?

Sorry for the confusion. Many are told that they have chosen a pump that is too large for their system (will flow more than the rule of thumb arbitrary values.) It is often suggested, that they tee off the return pump and send the "excess" water back to the sump, for whatever mythical reason this would seem appropriate. At the same time, they will also be told to feed the "fuge" from a tee in the drain line...... one of my favorite recommendations.....and from the pattern of suggestions, it seems that though this would be ok to do, feeding the fuge from a tee in the return line is stealing flow from the main tank.

It is a waste to send water back to the sump--to bleed off excess flow. One, there is no such thing as excess flow through the sump, the more the better in reality. Limitation being the size and configuration of the sump--and also drain capacity must be taken into consideration.

Feeding a "fuge" from the return line, requires some advance planning--i.e. pump size. Generally, a couple hundred gph over what the tank "needs" at your total head loss. If you already have the pump (which you do) it is an advantage to feed the fuge with it. Reasons stated. You are going to have to dial the pump back with your plumbing plans anyway, as the drain (even at two inch air assisted) is not going to be happy with it.

What is the difference? "Bleeding excess flow" accomplishes nothing. Feeding a fuge from the return line, accomplishes something, though it does "bleed" flow from the return line--a system designed for it looses nothing, but gains flexibility in terms of operating a "fuge."

 

[ianjirka]

I have a setup with a dual overflow (partial C-2-C, 4 pipes, BeanAnimal design). One goes to the skimmer, one to the fuge, with the return in the center. It works fine. One advantage is there is 2x more area to 'cascade' water down, which reduces noise.

OTOH, you have twice as many drain lines. For me this creates two issues
1) Return flow is split between two 1.5" pipes -- it takes a *long* time to flush the pipes when turning the return pump off. I typically flush manually. Maybe this isn't an issue with a Durso. I'm going to try turning one of the returns into an emergency return, and take the remaining and use a T + valves to split the drain to each end to see if it helps. Having only one drain into a single end would also help.
2) Twice as many filter socks . I like a design I saw where instead of putting the sock over the drain pipe, the drain went into a small chamber, and cascaded into a section that held filter socks sitting in acrylic holes. The water would flow down the hole into the sock. This looked much easier to change than using the rings that attach to the sump sides. They take up more space though, and probably wouldn't want to do it in both directions.

-Ian

 

[Wingman6]

i had one more question regarding the sump. If i am setting up a refugium and skimmer chamber in the sump, i obviously want the fuge to be the biggest it can be. What is the small size i can make the "return" chamber. I'm planning to put a 2 inch bulkhead for the sump return as low as i can go coming out the side.

 

[ianjirka]

i had one more question regarding the sump. If i am setting up a refugium and skimmer chamber in the sump, i obviously want the fuge to be the biggest it can be. What is the small size i can make the "return" chamber. I'm planning to put a 2 inch bulkhead for the sump return as low as i can go coming out the side.

Just big enough to not run dry . Evaporation, water changes and fluctuation in the amount of 'suspended' water (changing return pumpnflow rates for example) are the ones I notice. Mine is relatively small at 13g, out of 90g total. I could have made it smaller but this gives me good tolerance.

You also need enough volume in your sump to take all the water when your return pump is shut off, otherwise you will flood.

 

[uncleof6]

i had one more question regarding the sump. If i am setting up a refugium and skimmer chamber in the sump, i obviously want the fuge to be the biggest it can be. What is the small size i can make the "return" chamber. I'm planning to put a 2 inch bulkhead for the sump return as low as i can go coming out the side.

Just big enough to not run dry for several days. This is far more important than the size of the fuge. Sacrifice fuge size to meet this need. An ATO is a convenience, not a failsafe. Do not rely on it to keep your pump safe.

Just in general for your setup I would not consider anything less than a 40 gallon as a sump for your system. 40 Breeder. Also, the sump should only run ~ half full. This should insure ample room for power out drain down. Bigger would be better.

 

[Wingman6]

Just big enough to not run dry for several days. This is far more important than the size of the fuge. Sacrifice fuge size to meet this need. An ATO is a convenience, not a failsafe. Do not rely on it to keep your pump safe.

Just in general for your setup I would not consider anything less than a 40 gallon as a sump for your system. 40 Breeder. Also, the sump should only run ~ half full. This should insure ample room for power out drain down. Bigger would be better.

Thanks for the input. I'll definitely keep that in mind. I think the tank I have is a 55 gallon for the sump. Still working out how wide and deep it should be. Also kicking around getting a bigger sump from the get go.