Sump Design
- Thread starter KStatefan
- Start date
StirCrayzy
Well-Known Member
Any mechanical filtration before skimming?
Not planning on it.
StirCrayzy
Well-Known Member
I would advise a settling chamber before the skimmer then.
rostervandross
Active Member
How is your sump coming along?
I am planning one as well and would like to follow along
I am planning one as well and would like to follow along
Your design isn't that bad, but it can be improved upon.
Add some sort of mechanical filtration before the skimmer. This will keep big dirt, algae and so on from entering the skimmer.
Put the chaeto area in its own compartment and feed it with water from the return pump. Best place would be where you have the ATO water currently.
Use a separate bucket or other container for ATO water. You may need something much larger than 8 gals. My reef can evaporate about a bucket of water a day. If you have the space, the ATO container can be located in back of the tank or to the side of the tank. It's a lot easier to fill there.
If possible make the return area larger. It's amazing how much live water can be in a system.
Add some sort of mechanical filtration before the skimmer. This will keep big dirt, algae and so on from entering the skimmer.
Put the chaeto area in its own compartment and feed it with water from the return pump. Best place would be where you have the ATO water currently.
Use a separate bucket or other container for ATO water. You may need something much larger than 8 gals. My reef can evaporate about a bucket of water a day. If you have the space, the ATO container can be located in back of the tank or to the side of the tank. It's a lot easier to fill there.
If possible make the return area larger. It's amazing how much live water can be in a system.
HI, very interested in why your suggesting that the chateau should be placed in the area he has marked for his ATO storage ?
It seems to me that the chateau would be more advantageous before the return not after ? With all water that has been skimmed flowing through it ?
When you speak of mechanical filtration before the skimmer, i am assuming you mean "filter sock"for example ?
rostervandross
Active Member
Is your skimmer not collecting much, cracker?
I am trying to design a sump as well and thought having the skimmer in the first compartment where the run over from the tank dumps into would be best to clean the oils and film that floats on the top.
Just speculation, but I was thinking if the first chamber was the refuge, lots of that stuff would get stuck in the chamber and not make its way to the next to be skimmed out of the water.
I suppose the refugium would benefit from pre skimmed tank water? But trying to weigh pros and cons.
I am trying to design a sump as well and thought having the skimmer in the first compartment where the run over from the tank dumps into would be best to clean the oils and film that floats on the top.
Just speculation, but I was thinking if the first chamber was the refuge, lots of that stuff would get stuck in the chamber and not make its way to the next to be skimmed out of the water.
I suppose the refugium would benefit from pre skimmed tank water? But trying to weigh pros and cons.
I have my skimmer in the fist section of my sump, I use socks on the days I turkey baste my rocks and stir my sand bed and remove it after about 30 mins.
It makes sense to me to have as many proteins and organic matter skimmed before it hits the chateau. Then the nutrients in turn are consumed by the chateau,
Then any remaining nitrates are then consumed by the bacteria on the live rock and matrix I run, ensuring I only return the cleanest water possible back to the DT.
I think a lot of people make the mistake of having a return pump far to powerful, meaning that the water does not seem to have a chance to move through the sump slow enough for the sump to do its job.
My tank turnover is only 4 x the tank volume (1500lt tank 5000lr/hr return) as opposed to my flow rate in the DT tank being 50x water volume turnover.
Not saying this is the best or only way, but it is the way that makes sense to me. I run a ULN with undetectable nitrates and phos below 0.02. I credit that the sump working as it should.
It makes sense to me to have as many proteins and organic matter skimmed before it hits the chateau. Then the nutrients in turn are consumed by the chateau,
Then any remaining nitrates are then consumed by the bacteria on the live rock and matrix I run, ensuring I only return the cleanest water possible back to the DT.
I think a lot of people make the mistake of having a return pump far to powerful, meaning that the water does not seem to have a chance to move through the sump slow enough for the sump to do its job.
My tank turnover is only 4 x the tank volume (1500lt tank 5000lr/hr return) as opposed to my flow rate in the DT tank being 50x water volume turnover.
Not saying this is the best or only way, but it is the way that makes sense to me. I run a ULN with undetectable nitrates and phos below 0.02. I credit that the sump working as it should.
Yes, any macro algae is best placed in it's own area and fed from a T in from the main return pump. You want the flow through the refugium to be comparatively slow compared to the volume of water being filtered.
You don't want the refugium becoming a dirt trap, so it should be supplied with clean water. As pointed out above you also want a lower flow through the refugium. You can't do this when you run all the water through it.
Filter socks are one way to do it, but there are others. The key point is that they should be easy to remove and clean.
All that being said, if you don't have everything as I've described, it's not the end of the world. Your systems will still work ok, just not quite as well as it could. If you have an existing system, it's usually not worth tearing the sump apart to correct this, but if it's new work you might as well get it right.
You want to per-filter the water to remove all the big dirt, pieces of algae and so on. The fine filter socks we typically use are actually a lot more than you need. A fine mesh would work too. However, that's about all you can get today.
I agree that you want the fuge to receive clean water, isnt that why the skimmer is in first chamber ?
And a sock if you have excess particulate ?
I feel you can have slower flow through your fuge, as we have done. We run the 5000lt/hr with two T-off to UV and Reactors so technically I run probable about 4000lt/hr through mine. It works just fine ?
Are you saying I need to increase by return pump flow to the DT ?
cracker
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the input. Roster, I get a lot of dark nasty stuff from my skimmer, so I assume it's working. I just don't know if it's working as good as it could. so when I stated "over all it's not working very well for me" I meant the tank has a bunch of excess nutrients in it over all. I have considered running filter socks on all the drains to my sump. It wouldn't hurt for me to try it and see what happens. Thanks
Also I "think" high flow thru the sump is best. But like I said earlier over all it's not working well for me.
Also I "think" high flow thru the sump is best. But like I said earlier over all it's not working well for me.
rostervandross
Active Member
I cant think why you'd split your algae apart but could you split your refugium like this?
Even if you didn't make an algae chamber, routing return water back into the refugium is the only way I could think of making your water spend more time in the refugium without routing skimmed water around it which seems to defeat the purpose.
cracker- oh ok. I would assume the nastier the skimmer stuff the better your sump design is allowing the skimmer to do its job, but I see your point about it being a sign of too much nutrients and waste.
cracker
Well-Known Member
Thanks Dave, I was of a mind that raw water to the skimmer and refugium was best. I will add filter socks to all these drains. What You say about removing the larger particles 1st makes good sense.
Ok, so You advocate feeding the ref with water form the return pump. Is this for more dwell time in the sump? In Your OP, Can I run socks on all drains and still have high flow thru the sump? It's stuck in my head that I want a lot of flow thru the entire system.
Also Thanks to KS for the thread Jack!
Ok, so You advocate feeding the ref with water form the return pump. Is this for more dwell time in the sump? In Your OP, Can I run socks on all drains and still have high flow thru the sump? It's stuck in my head that I want a lot of flow thru the entire system.
Also Thanks to KS for the thread Jack!
Whats your theory of high flow through the sump ? Is it to stop detritus settling ?
As you have just said, something is not quite working for you, maybe try slower flow, you never know it may work better ?
I cant think why you'd split your algae apart but could you split your refugium like this?
Even if you didn't make an algae chamber, routing return water back into the refugium is the only way I could think of making your water spend more time in the refugium without routing skimmed water around it which seems to defeat the purpose.
cracker- oh ok. I would assume the nastier the skimmer stuff the better your sump design is allowing the skimmer to do its job, but I see your point about it being a sign of too much nutrients and waste.
Generally yes, but I would completely eliminate the live rock and sand area. Put that stuff in the main display tank. In a sump it tends to become a massive dirt trap and you can't easily clean it or blow it out with a powerhead.
I know a lot of people do put live rock in the sump. I just found it cause more more of problem there.