Help me design my new 240gal setup!

[liveforphysics]

You might considder taking Mojoreefs advise about how to skim, as it effects the pump you use for the skimmer. He does very very low flow rate through his mammoth skimmer on his 850gal SPS reef. His setup is the best looking system I have ever seen, and he told me that running high flow through the skimmer is a bad thing, and he completely backed up his statement with exellent reasoning and experience, along with the example of his beautiful tank.

If you want exellent circulation without wasteing thousands of Kiliwatt/hrs of electricity each month, considder going with an intank propellor system like tunez or vortechs. Even if it you double the money for initial costs, it will rapidly pay for itself in your powerbill. Its also so much less bulky and clumsy than haveing a city of protrudeing PVC sticking out allover hell and back on the back side of your tank.

Also remember that high head pressure or flow restrictions on either side of a pump will cause it to use more power, make more heat in the pump and the water, and decrease the lifespan of the pump. In other words, getting a pump thats too big for the job and flow restricting it is not so good, however, useing a large vari-AC (like a rheostat for AC) would control your flow levels without those bad side effects.

 

[Scooterman]

First of all we're talking a 240g set-up secondly we suggested a smaller circulation pump through the sump & skimmer. That pump on a CL in a 240 with good placement will not blow away your LPS or even softies but you will need more enough outlets to accommodate the pump. On a side note others jumping in here may want to read the thread before posting, we are working with what he wants or already has in possession.

 

[reedman]

I'm with Scoot. I have a 3000 gph pump on a 75 and I had both frog spawn and hammer corals that were very happy (so happy they grew too big for the tank). You won't have any problems at all with that size pump.

Just to reinforce what has been said so far: We are all preaching the low flow thru the sump to maximize the efficiency of your skimmer. Luke has a good point on the pumps. The internal propeller pumps are very efficient (albeit far too expensive in my opinion). The drawbacks to these include; invasive to the viewing area of your tank, cost, limited flow patterns.

I like the closed loop because I can adapt it as the tank changes (rescaping the tank, coral growth, coral placement). I also like the fact that all I see in the tank are the outlets (and they are black). additionally, on a closed loop I can have static returns, later add seaswirls (as I did), an ocean motions, a motorized ball valve, or any number of other flow changing gadgets. I don't need to buy a new pump. Lots of adaptability.

 

[Slickdonkey]

All good arguments for a closed loop. One problem I have is that it will be against a wall, so the back will not be accessible. Thus it's even more important to set it up right initially because you can bet the tank is not going to move until I sell the house!

 

[Slickdonkey]

One thing that was pointed out to me is that there will be significant head pressure on the return pump. This could be over 20ft when taking into account the vertical distance, 1" returns, and elbows/valves, etc.

Something else I thought of is that maybe I could run my skimmer externally and pump the output into the refugium. However, I was shooting for a flow rate through the fuge of around 300gph. This would save me having to tee off the line to the chiller, UV, and chemical filter.

Also, I've heard it's often better to use more pumps to accomplish everything I'm trying to do with one.

 

[liveforphysics]

2 tunez, 10,000gph+ of flow, no issues related to head pressures, no swiss cheese tank with a maze of PVC, 124watts of total power consumption VS 600watts at 0.11$ per kW/Hr is going to be saving you 38$ per month ($467/year in saveings).... And you get the flexibility to change your flow around easily as you change the location of high and low flow corals around in your tank. If you stick 1 tunez on each end, you can put your softys and LPS in the middle area, and SPS on the sides (or nearly infinate other working combos). Its also a leak free thing with much much less plumbing nightmare to worry about springing leaks (we all hear about it all the time)... I personally dont see how it doesnt make sence, but ehh, everybody is different, and its you are free to do whatever the heck you want.

The skimmer thing was the whole reason I piped in here. You should really talk to Mojoreef about the differences between what a very low flow skimmer driven by airstones removes from the water VS a becket high flow type, it was convinceing enough, it actually made me think skimmers arent such a bad thing if done correctly. Likely all you would need to do is drop a pile of air stones in the bottom of the skimmer you have, remove the becket nozzle, get a little weeney pump for circulation, and get a nice air pump to drive the stones. It would be another thing to lower the monthly energy bill, and according to Mojo, it results in a much much better end product leaving the skimmer. It was also important WHERE you placed the water intake to the skimmer to get the desired level of surfactant compounds to enter the trickle going through the skimmer. Very interesting stuff, definately at least worth looking into before you actually get setup, its always easier to change things before its setup.

 

[reedman]

Luke, he is not planning to keep SPS as far as I can tell. That's why I keep recommending lower flow. Tunze are nice, but they have their limitations. Not a be all end all solution for everyone...and in my opinion far too expensive. As far as leaks...I have yet to have one on plumbing. Maybe if people put a little more effort into knowing how to use PVC they wouldn't have the leaks...don't know. It's all about how you want your tank and where you want to put the money. i'd rather see corals than a tunze.

that much head pressure and you better get a good pump (Iwaki or something similar). The statement "putting all your eggs in one basket" definitely holds true in reefkeeping. Just think what would happen if you fail that one pump (and it does happen). Redundancy is a good thing, within reason. You could also keep a spare pump on hand.

 

[Slickdonkey]

Yeah, it's hard to know what to do, especially when I've never used a closed loop or the Tunze units. I think the Hammerhead is rated at 320W, and when I was looking at powerheads I figured on 4 Tunzes in part because of the layout of my tank (both overflows are between the middle and the ends). So maybe there isn't such a disparity in energy consumption.

Regarding a backup pump, this is a good suggestion. I'll just think of it as an insurance policy with a one-time payment.

 

[reedman]

Also on the air stone skimmers. Yes they work great. Remember though that Mike has a 1500 gallon total system volume. Does a 240 gallon system warrant that type of filtration? Maybe, but I am running a smaller version of the skimmer Slickdonkey got on a 75 and have to feed more to get nutrients back into the system. You don't have to have a 1 ton pickup to tow a 200 LB trailer do you? Just a thought

 

[Slickdonkey]

Here is my first cut at a closed loop design, assuming that's what I end up doing. I'm sure there are some problems so think of this as a challenge to find them.

In the diagram, the plumbing coming from the MBV is only drawn to illustrate the connections, it won't actually look like this. I imagine it will just be done however I can get it to all fit together (not looking forward to this).

Some background as to why I did it this way: I chose three 1.5" bulkheads because I think this will not create as big of a suction as only two openings would. I don't want anemones or other critters to get stuck to it. Also if you look at the layout of the tank, the overflows are not in the corner but rather offcenter on each side. I think having the bulkheads on the outsides of the tank will help flow on the ends.

Most likely the inputs on the bottom will be directed upwards to avoid stirring up the sand.

I plan to use locline Y-fittings on the CL returns. I'm looking at the Ocean's Motions 8-way motorized ball valve to give an alternating current.

View attachment 11169

 

[liveforphysics]

Thats good that the hammerhead only draws 320watts (likely measured at zero head though), that does change the power draw concern around quite a bit.

Just another thought with flow in the tanks, I could build (assumeing the forums patent police doesnt get upset at the thought of building something) an all titanium/lexan/carbon composite device to vector the output of a tunez stream to have a pattern of deflection like a wave maker. So, visualize something similar to the adjustable vents in a cars heater, only being actuated by precision servos controled by a micro controler program. I could do it for sub $100 per unit.

But, I'm not trying to butt-in here on your plan, just sugesting ideas that you may not have considdered.

 

[mojoreef]

The tank is eight feet long if you try to use tunze's you will end up needing at least four and then at that you will have a bunch of dead spots. Tunze's are cute but if you only have two that means only two points of flow in a 8 foot tank with LR all over the place. Not a good plan regardless of cost.

On your drawing. You only need 2 inputs into the closed loop pump and you want them to be easy to access for cleaning. If it were me I would bring them up one side and have them 6 inches below the surface.
On the outputs you only have 6 drawn and the 8 way has eight. I think the 8way would make for one hell of an octopus in trying to plumb that all in. If it were me again I would go with a 4 way and use all 1 1/2 inch plumbing up the back of the tank. Just prior to going into the tank I would split each output into two basically in the same locations you have them drawn. That way you get the full use of the 5800 you planed on using.


Mike

 

[Scooterman]

ModelHammerhead
Horsepower 1/3 H.P.
Max Head 23' MAX HEAD
Flow 5520 USgph @ 4'
In1.5" FNPT
Out1.5" FNPT
Watts350 WATTS
Pressure RatedNo
Drive

I had a Tunze stream with controller, I also had over the top CL. I never liked the streams design for hanging it until they came out with the magnet holder. I also hated the fact these long cables would all disconnect except the ones from the ph to the controller, this made cleaning the unit a pain, they are costly, they are huge but I sorta got use to it, and it sucked you couldn't set the controller all the way down to wide open while changing, most of the other controller features were useless, (you pay for it all) otherwise as the wide pattern flow is very nice & they have a super low heat & power features big plus. I had both & together they worked well that is how I got random flow. The CL pumps can't be compared to the streams, water movement is different, each has different characteristics well Worth the investment. I see nothing wrong with using a MBV or OM either designs work well, also the combo like I did. I really like the airstone skimmers they were used years ago, just these days they have become refined in design.

 

[bc_slc]

Mike said it all, I like that you have the 3 intakes spread out between the overflows, but I would put them up a bit higher. If mike says you only need 2 intakes, then all the better. That being the case, plumbing the two 1.5" intakes into one 2" pipe is probably ok, but the hammerhead has a 1.5" threaded input - keep that in mind.

I also agree with the OM 4 unit, rather than 8. If you run 8 outlets and two are on at a time, that is the same as having 4 outlets (one at a time) and splitting them right before the tank. You could basically leave the outlets the same as in your drawing and run them something like this:
1) a. Left side, up and over the top return. b. Left side exit 6" from the top
2) a. Left center exit 6" from the top. b. Left center exit 3" from the sand bed.
3) a. Right center exit 6" from the top. b. Right center exit 3" from the sand bed.
4) a. Right side, up and over the top return. b. Right side exit 6" from the top

That would give you quite a bit of powerful flow from the outlets. Basically, with an OM 4 and one circuit active at a time, you are only dividing up the flow between two outlets (minus friction of course).

Not having actually done a CL, but having thought about it a lot, I personally think that the most important thing is to decide how many outlets you want to have (or how many times you want to divide up the flow) at any one time, and then work backwards to figure out where and how to get them lit up.

 

[Slickdonkey]

Thanks for the input, guys. I'll draw up another draft tomorrow and post it.

By the way, have any of you run the Hammerhead as a CL pump? I'm curious how loud it is. I'd like to put it under my house but this could be a plumbing challenge. If it isn't that loud to begin with I may just leave it behind the tank.

 

[liveforphysics]

Ok, I have been thinking...

When somebody said that closed loop flow is a differnt type of flow, it made me realize something. We are arent looking for flow in GPH at all, we are looking for turbulance. Smoothly exchangeing 5,000gph through the tank is not as much to our bennifit as say 2 very high velocity 250gph streams. We are looking for maximum water moving past corals, and this means turbulance in the tank.

Basically, for the folks who dont specialize in fluid-dynamics here, GPH just became as irrelivant of a term as say "watts per gallon". We dont need huge flow low pressure pumps at all. We just need turbulance, and high velocity (attained from larger pressure differentials and low x-section runers) low flow streams are MUCH MUCH better suited for creating turbulant water movement in the tank. Plumbing just became the whole pie here, and the ideal pump choice is nothing I have seen on the market before.

If anyone wants me to calculate exit velocitys on there indivdual CL setups, let me know, I will just need a few pieces of data to do it.

I suddenly feel so foolish for not seeing the true goal of the circulation method, and feel a like a kid being caught in the numbers one paper game(GPH).

 

[Scooterman]

Luke used the force Luke!

If you take a close look at what Mike is saying he can achieve that in his designs, this guy hasn't been so successful for no reason you know.

 

[mojoreef]

We are arent looking for flow in GPH at all, we are looking for turbulance. Smoothly exchangeing 5,000gph through the tank is not as much to our bennifit as say 2 very high velocity 250gph streams. We are looking for maximum water moving past corals, and this means turbulance in the tank.

Your close, GPH really doenst mean alot (it does pertain but your not looking for a set number). We are looking for flow to do a few things for us
1. keeping an amount of flow past our corals, this will allow food/waste to flow past them bringing them dinner
2. We also want the flow to keep as much detritus in the water column, one for the above reason and the other is to allow waste to be migrate out of the tank via an overflow to a place we can deal with it.
3. Flow will also help keep detritus from landing and building upon your rocks and sediment and more importantly from building up on your corals.

We dont want flow to be put directly onto a coral as it will pull tissue eventually. But just enough to keep things in motion and not allow for to many dead spots. Dead spots in flow will allow for the accumulation of detritus/waste which will lead to cyano and other forms of algae to take hold. When we look at bringing flow to a tank we want to cover as many areas as we can so we dont run into these problems. Tunze style units are fantastic but when all the smoke clears its only two units blowing water in one direction each. With all the rock/corals and so on in the tank and the fact its eight feet long your not going to be able to get that coverage with these units by themselves. The bottom line is that the more outputs you have the more effective coverage you have and thus the less dead spots you will see.
If you can make the flow random and alturnating all the better, as some detritus and so on will land somewhere even with full coverage. Having flow coming from one area and then stop and come from a different source tend to be able to pick that landed detritus up and put it back into play. Remember that detritus is THE most important food source for corals and filter feeders, more important and nutritionally benefical then any other food you can feed. It is not only loaded with the basic P and N bt is also covered in bacteria and other microscopic fuana trying to reduce it.
If you use a unit such as a OM, what you are doing is breaking down the pump gph into 4 parts, each part is going to be the total gph of the pump if you plumb it correctly. So in the case of my suggestion your going to get around 5000gph from two outputs every 15 seconds, then on to the next and so on.
With the use of a MBV you get the same concept but only coming out two sides. SO you could build two manifolds on either side of the MBV and have the flow come from one side for what ever period of time and then from the other. with multiple outputs on each side of the unit you could direct the flow however you wanted with lockline in the tank. The thing I like about the MBV over the OM is that you can set the time for the switch over.

Anyway their is kind of a brief overall concept.



Mike

 

[Slickdonkey]

Has any one used the OM revolutions devices before? These look cool; it would be neat to incorporate these into the design somehow.

Then again, you kind of get that "powerhead in the tank" look I suppose.

 

[Scooterman]

Check this out

http://www.reeffrontiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5191&highlight=MARINE+DREAMER