for my 180.. 40x20x??h is the dimentions. trying to figure out what kind of return to use I was going to use mag 7 one for each side of the tank but now with a new fuge I could just very well go external. anyways what you guys/gals/ and doodettes think?
sump design input please??
- Thread starter diablo
- Start date
Help Support Reef Aquarium & Tank Building Forum:
for my 180.. 40x20x??h is the dimentions. trying to figure out what kind of return to use I was going to use mag 7 one for each side of the tank but now with a new fuge I could just very well go external. anyways what you guys/gals/ and doodettes think?
Salty D-O-G
Well-known member
A 180 gallon tank should have at least 3600 GPH in pumping action. I've got 2 1800's and one 2400.
Jerry
Jerry
Scooterman
Well-known member
IAP just did a thread in his forum with good design ideas; the amount baffles you have will take up lots of room but with a long sump will work out fine, nice design. Now with that said, personally I keep seeing people making fuges along with the sump, this really isn't the proper way to make a fuge & in the long run chances are you will have problems & or not really get the full benefit from a fully functioning fuge. I know everyone says well better than nothing at all but no not really, that design defeats the BB concept thoroughly because it is in the sump & a major detritus trap & unless you can harvest enough crop you won't get it all out rather just eventually build up & you'll wonder what is going on. If you’re going BB you don't need a fuge at all, now if you’re keeping a SB then I would install a separate fuge. Take that as 2 cents of experience from me because I know you will get a million other ideas
the tank will have a sand bed. I am the sand loving outcast in the forum. sorry guys cant shy away from what I like. now scooty with this design would it do away with the sump idea all together? I had a similar set up on my 90, and I let it get away from me when I lost the battle to majano's. but with this system I have takin a fresh start. dried rocks for about a week (same as when it gets collected) while I was getting thing set up. I did so too kill off everything for a fresh start. I will be using miricle mud or mineral mud, havent really decided yet I dont care about cost I am researching the better product. I plan on swapping out the mud about every 6 months as part of my maitinence strategy. contimplating the sand in the display every 6-9 months but not at the same time as the mud. I am going to try my best at keeping things very clean. your thoughts?
Krish
RF STAFF
Just to add to what was already mentioned, I don't think you'll benefit much from the rubble in the sump as it will do little for denitrification IMO. It will probably be more of a pain/nuicance with "shedding" into your return chamber and being returned to the tank (seeing the return pump sits right there) than it will benefit you any. Your live rock in the main display should be all you need
Scooterman
Well-known member
I have seen great tanks with MM, skimmer & skimmerless, (the skimmer tanks looked cleaner), they was running over two years with the MM. I like sand myself, nothing wrong with it, I don't like a dsb’s anymore just because of the looks, & a remote dsb isn't worth the effort IMO.
The MM is replaced in portions & if kept up should work out nicely, you want dead slow water movement through the area, & you don't want to stir it up. I like the stub addition I saw in the IAP thread, it suppose to slow down the crashing waters. MM has a very through web-site, If your going this route I would thoroughly read & understand their system with design in mind, it will work best that way. The Mud system is a little different by design I would refer to the site for design in this case. I think the rubble rock would be a trap also, take it out IMO, I keep trying that & can’t avoid the trap, I had overflow water dumping directly on it & it still was a trap, let the Mud take care of that.
The MM is replaced in portions & if kept up should work out nicely, you want dead slow water movement through the area, & you don't want to stir it up. I like the stub addition I saw in the IAP thread, it suppose to slow down the crashing waters. MM has a very through web-site, If your going this route I would thoroughly read & understand their system with design in mind, it will work best that way. The Mud system is a little different by design I would refer to the site for design in this case. I think the rubble rock would be a trap also, take it out IMO, I keep trying that & can’t avoid the trap, I had overflow water dumping directly on it & it still was a trap, let the Mud take care of that.
joshinjosh
Cnidarian
plan looks awesome, but 1200gph is definately on a low side for a 180; with such little flow you wont be utilizing ur sump to the fullest
josh
josh
burning2nd
Well-known member
right one.....
this is my 10 gal sump... simular 2 your design..
my 55 gal sump will be the same just larger.
this is my 10 gal sump... simular 2 your design..
my 55 gal sump will be the same just larger.
Scooterman
Well-known member
What makes you say that?
You can do with 600gph through the sump, also a refuge is being used where you most definitely don't need more flow through it. Size of a tank doesn't matter, what matters is what your doing to get the water skimmed above that counts, what falls into the sump to get filtered, picked up by the skimmer or processed in the fuge!.
