Plumbing Q

[rjrgroup]

Umm, at the expense of sounding dumb here...I am in the process of designing my 210 close loop, fuge and skim set-up.
My Q is how to best utilize a super duper skimmer and fuge with a slow fuge and a high flow CL. The skimmer is rated at 500 gal heavy stock and my system will be 300 gal total. The CL will be a barracuda with 2 clockwise and 2 counter-clockwise loc-lines emerging out of the sandbed. I plan on using a diverting device to switch between CW and C-CW.
I don't want to skim my pods nor do I want to deprive my fuge of essential bacterias by skimming before fuge intro.
I have no intention on running a UV or chiller but would like to add in a calcium reactor at some point.
I would love to hear how everyone has separated their flow systems and the results.
Thank you in advance for your response,
RJR

 

[vicbay]

blakejohn;636158 wrote: most people run a CL just for flow. The skimmer, sump and fuge is not included into the CL.

+1. most close loops I've seen are to give good circulation without fear of leaks or overflows. breaking in on this plumbing defeats that purpose imo.

 

[rjrgroup]

I know that's what most people do, however, I don't understand the flow with the fuge. If I skim before fuge, I remove essential "bacteria" that help proliferate the inhabitants with-in. If I skim post fuge then I'm removing the growth coming from it. If I skim off the CL, then I'm not affecting anything, right?

 

[mockery]

Randy from your first post it sounds like you are trying to power your return and close loop from the same pump is that correct?

 

[rjrgroup]

Nope, I was hoping to achieve a slow flow sump with a 400-ish GPH pump and the CL off a 4,800-ish pump. I just don't know whether to pull off the CL with a "T" or tap in to the fuge/return.

Mockery;636195 wrote: Randy from your first post it sounds like you are trying to power your return and close loop from the same pump is that correct?

Edit: Hmm, interesting point on the aerobic bacteria...

blakejohn;636197 wrote: I know people will argue that a skimmer removes things that you want to keep. But the amount of trace elements, bacteria and wanted nutrients that it does remove is little that you wouldnt even notice. And you are not skimming 100% of the water inflow (unless your using a beckett powerd by your overflow drain).

Your skimmer IMO will not remove bacteria as it will promote aerobic bacteria growth on the walls of the skimmer.

Your skimmer helps remove DOC's and particulate matter. The purpose of the macro fuge is to aid the skimmer in removing more.

Your skimmer may remove a few pods, but in comparison to the pods in the tank it is really nil.

 

[mockery]

rjrgroup;636199 wrote: Nope, I was hoping to achieve a slow flow sump with a 400-ish GPH pump and the CL off a 4,800-ish pump. I just don't know whether to pull off the CL with a "T" or tap in to the fuge/return.

I would not tap off the CL pump. If you do and the power goes out or the pump shuts off then the water will start draining out of the fuge port.

If you do go that route though make sure you have a float valve on that line.

How many drains does the tank have?

 

[lilrobb]

Do NOT tap into the CL lines - that is desaster to happen

 

[jj ocean]

My fuge is fed right from where my drain lines first enter my sump/fuge – before my skimmer and UV pull. My fuge drains back over to my sump downstream of those pulls and right before the baffles that lead to my return. The final build was a variant of the drawing below and I’ve modified my sump/refugium a lot since this drawing (baffle locations, pulls/exits, equip, etc.), but this will give you some idea.

alt="" />

As someone else said I wouldn’t be worried about feeding the fuge with the skimmer exit (did that for 2 years). The big thing is that you want as little pumps touching your fuge exit (think blender).

Now, the best way to setup and plumb a fuge in my opinion is to have it elevated above the DT. Have the return manifolded and one valved line (to adjust gph) would feed up to the fuge completely unobstructed of filter sock, floss, etc. The drain from the fuge is completely gravity feed back into the DT (either over the back or through a bulkhead) – zero loss of due to impellers. Obviously, a fuge above the DT can’t be done in every setup, but that is the optimal config imho. If/when I end up doing my large in-wall tank, I will set it up that way.

 

[fish scales2]

You no longer have a "closed loop" and defeat the purpose. Do you really believe you could run your closed loop 4800 gph through an area in your sump that contains less than 20 gallons of water? The returns for the closed loop are on the bottom of the tank so a power outage leaves you with the possibility of draining the entire display. Most check valves are not designed for that amount of pressure, there are some but the opportunity for failure is still there.

IMO have a separate fuge from the display all together. And allow it to gravity fall into your Sump with rubble rock/skimmer/return. And add an extremely large UV as you are planning on at least 7 tangs.

If you want something challenging than go over to my 150 and you can play with the maze of solenoids and figure out what in the world they do.

 

[rjrgroup]

I'm asking just for the purpose of discussion...not because I'm trying to be difficult. If the fact that I'm still discussing this frustrates anyone...please move on to the next posting.
I do realize the potential hazard with opening the CL, however, I was <u>considering this only</em></u> in conjunction with a pair of N/O solenoids. If the power goes out, the solenoids close. Additionally where I could split the line would be regulated via gate valve to manually adjust the flow to the skimmer. The skimmer is a external unit and requires more flow than I was intending to run through the fuge.
I do have 2 overflows and was curious if it might be better to use 1 as the fuge supply and the other for the skimmer. Does this sound more applicable?
The only down side I see to this set-up is running an additional pump.
I'm very surprised no one commented on the 400-ish gal. return...? I figured I would excommunicated for that one,lol.

 

[rbredding]

the simplest way to get everything you want (skimmer/CL) is to remove the fuge from the equation..


check out the last couple pages of my build thread (link below) and see what I did..

the drain from the right overflow is essentially split so that part of it goes into my fuge, the other part runs into my sump..

then the fuge gravity flows into my sump.. i've got extremely slow flow through the fuge (less than 20gph) and about 700gph through my sump (estimate)

that enables you to simplify your closed loop (paramount, otherwise you're asking for trouble) and have flow through your sump/skimmer so that it stays efficient, yet microbubble free...

 

[rjrgroup]

Saweeeet! Very nice build Ron. I love the way it's set-up.

Rbredding;636278 wrote: the simplest way to get everything you want (skimmer/CL) is to remove the fuge from the equation..


check out the last couple pages of my build thread (link below) and see what I did..

the drain from the right overflow is essentially split so that part of it goes into my fuge, the other part runs into my sump..

then the fuge gravity flows into my sump.. i've got extremely slow flow through the fuge (less than 20gph) and about 700gph through my sump (estimate)

that enables you to simplify your closed loop (paramount, otherwise you're asking for trouble) and have flow through your sump/skimmer so that it stays efficient, yet microbubble free...