Sump Design...Whats your thoughts? (Layout)

cashman95

cashman95

New member
I am getting ready to start a new tank, and have gone over some sump designs on paper. The tank will be a 45 gallon custom cube with a barebottom design and very little rockwork for that open/modern look. I am planning on keeping mostly SPS.

This is one that I came up with. I will be using a new MSX160 skimmer, and would like to use filter socks. I have incoporated a Live Rock Refugium to encourage critter populations, and a DSB/Live sand area for denitrification. The narrow size and shallowness of water in the DSB zone will hopefully create a narrow river affect and keep detrius from settling. The Live rock zone is somewhat bigger and hopefully calm enough for pods and etc. I have given the skimmer zone a bit of extra room, hopefully creating a somewhat stagnet area allowing the skimmer to have a longer dwell time.

Give me your thoughts......
75galreef


75galreef
 
I was under the impression that a 5 gallon bucket was great for a dsb, and thats not much surface area.......anyone else?
 
I can't speak to the DSB issue, but I figure even if its not enough surface area is better than nothing right? I incorporated a DSB in my fuge where I hope to primarily grow pods. I have some chaeto in there as well, but that's not its primary purpose. Needless to say, its 12x7 with a five inch sand bed and another 6 inches of water on top of that. Can't say its working well or not as I've just set it up.

As for the rest of your design. If I'm reading this right, water flows into skimmer zone, flows over to fuge zone, which in turn flows through DSB zone, and finally into the return zone. Do I have this right?

That sounds logical to me. Some people want to dump raw tank water into the fuge area so that whatever you have in the fuge can benefit from the higher level of dissolved nutrients. You might want to consider that.
 
swilcoxen, yes you have it right! I am with everyone when it comes to dumping raw water into the fuge, but lets face it not all water will be "cleaned" by the skimmer so the fuge will get somewhat "raw" water and I wasnt specifically happy with raw water (detritus) being able to settle into the fuge area. I know its probably inevitable, but I always think less detritus is better thats the reason for the filter socks?!?!?!?


lowman31.....I might raise my overall water level up in the sump so I can add sand, or take it out till I get the desired flow I am looking for.

Thanks all for the comments!

Does that make since?
 
I like the plan and agree that having a fuge after skimmer is fine. Any thought to an auto top off resevoir? A 45g will probably evap around 1/2 a gallon a day.
 
Yes I have one just not in the sump. It will be outside in the garage. That way I can hold about 7 gallons and hve it run thru a Kalk reactor, before being gravity fed into the sump with a float valve.
 
dont do DSB not worth it........just add more liverock and algae.........forget DSB all together just more chaeto....what i would do is keep the return and the skimmer aread and everything else should be liverock rubble and chaeto no calpurea
 
How about this design.its guiding principal is the kiss theory.The fuge gets its raw water from a cross over on the main drain and the flow rate thru the fuge can be controled.Also with a slow flow thru the fuge pods wont get washed out until its near an overpopulation level.Also the only place I intend to use live rock is in t
Fuge2.jpg
he over under baffles to help eliminate micro bubbles.
 
bsagecko

I DO NOT LIKE ALGEA refugiums. They are NOT all that! They contribute harmful toxins that can easily damage SPS, Trap Detrius, cause "green water", etc. IN MY OPINION...having a low fish bio-load, and doing weekly water changes is the best way to "absorb nutrients").

Refugiums are just that "a place for animals(critters) to take refuge from being eatin by predators. The whole cheato idea has been totally blown out of purportion in my opinion. Cheato was initially used as food for pods and such, not as nutrient absorbers.

I am going to use a BareBottom display, with very minimal fish, aggresive skimming, constant carbon, and filter socks to catch any detritus. The whole purpose of the DSB(if done right)is for Nitrate control, BUT it must be done correctly in order to be benificial, and not a nutrient sink.

NATIVEVAMAN....I am not very fond of having DSB is a slow flow area(refugium). Correct me if im wrong, but DSB's need to have good flow in order to not build up with detrius, thus the reason for the "river" effect in my sump.

Please comment....
 
if you dont like algae refuge then dont have one but i am telling you a DSB that small will not do anything.....but act as a detrius collector and eventually a nitrate factory..............


if you want a DSB, then you basically need one the size of your tank with high flow......it is true that most refuges act as places for pod growth....but chaeto doesnt kill sps............protein skimmers are overrated IMO you dont need one.....the hobby went for 20+ years without them.........and if your fish bio load is going to be so small then i dont see the point if you going to do water changes like you say....... ( i do currently run a protein skimmer but i got it for free so i couldnt say no ETSS REEF DEVIL)

the fact of the matter is you cannot deny the fact that chaeto is a nutrient absorber.........i hope you have a big pocket book for the constant carbon because basically after 1-2 weeks it has to be replaced..........filtersocks are bad IMO.......i would use bioballs before filtersocks.......................

What is type of skimmer are you going to get in order to super skim also the size tank you are planning isnt a very good idea for SPS i wouldnt do anything smaller than 75g for SPS.........
 
bsagecko...thanks for your comments. I wish you would re-read/look at my sump design, as I have previously written that my DSB is going to have high flow"hince the reason for the river effect" so detrius shouldnt be a major factor, also the filter socks should help with that as well. I will and have always had great luck with filter socks. They really dont pose a problem unless you dont ever change them out(anyone else think differently?). DSB have a bad name, because of bad designs. If you do it correctly, you wont have a problem.

I like the challange of keeping SPS, even if its harder to do in a smaller tank. I have done it before, have had friends do it, local shops do it, and many people on reef central do it......but thats the whole purpose of having such an elaborate sump design. I am trying to create a stable enviroment for the SPS and give it that "BIG TANK" theory.

Beleive it or not, I am using everyone's comments to try and disprove my sump design, or maybe even make it better, so please dont feel that I am being contraversial. I enjoy the criticizm as well as the compliments, and I do take everyone's opinion into account!

Please keep them coming!
 
New Sump Design

New Sump Design

I have modded my original sump design. I have taken out the filter sock area, and expanded the return section. What do you think?
75galreef
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Help with Overflow Design Issue
Replies
0
Views
142
SFMAquariums
S
R
some random questions
Replies
1
Views
225
SantaMonica
S
E
Red Sea weir overflow
Replies
9
Views
304
griss
griss
E
What's Old is New Again
Replies
2
Views
483
Uncle99
Uncle99
T
I'm confused...
Replies
12
Views
606
wvned
wvned
Back
Top