Xtra large sumps / remote water holding tanks

roland jacques

Member
Market
Messages
643
Reaction score
0
I see a lot of people going to VERY large remote water holding tanks. Lots of these are as big or bigger than the display tank (mine included).

Is there any PROOF of the value of having these big remote tanks/ sumps holding just water?

What is your opinion of these large sumps...?
 
I think they're a good idea, as long as you can take them out of the system without too much trouble, and everything stays running. Otherwise, if you have a problem, you've got it in the extra volume as well.

For example, say you have a severe problem with phosphate, and are looking to do water changes. Instead of trying to change your system + the holding tank, instead dump the holding tank, refill it with RO and new salt, and open it back up- would make the process much easier and faster.
 
glxtrix;105532 wrote: dilution is the solution to pollution ;)

Is this really true?
If all things the same except water volume.
Example
300 gallon reef changes 60 gallons water monthly.
300 Gallon reef plus 700, 1000 gallons total system changes 60 gallons monthly.

Wont they both reach the same saturation point of pollution? wouldn't that be Dependant on their filtration system not the volume? The larger volume just taking longer to get there.
 
Good point Chris,
I'm trying to think of the down sides to these very large remote sumps. Temperature control is a a concern. I'm wondering if excess bacteria would be a concern if the flow in that tank is to slow.
 
Roland Jacques;105567 wrote: Is this really true?
If all things the same except water volume.
Example
300 gallon reef changes 60 gallons water monthly.
300 Gallon reef plus 700, 1000 gallons total system changes 60 gallons monthly.

Wont they both reach the same saturation point of pollution? wouldn't that be Dependant on their filtration system not the volume? The larger volume just taking longer to get there.

Most of the time with a larger remote sump, the possibilities are endless. Here are some that came to mind:

1. There are usually larger amount of live rocks involved allowing more biological filtration. I dont' really know any cases where increased in volumes and area where the hobbyist wouldn't take advantages by not adding more live rocks.

2. Increased in surface area will also allow more oxygen exchanges.
 
I think the "dilution is the solution to pollution" really applies to something that may go wrong like a fish dying. You could get a disastrous ammonia spike in a small tank but it may not even register in a large volume set up.
 
Budsreef;105611 wrote: I think the "dilution is the solution to pollution" really applies to something that may go wrong like a fish dying. You could get a disastrous ammonia spike in a small tank but it may not even register in a large volume set up.

Your right. and ph, cal, alk,... stability too.

I was just reading of a guy who has 900 gallon water tank underground in his backyard. Plus 600 gallons of filter/pump, for a 500 gallon reef. It got me thinking is there such thing as to much "sump".
 
The one drawback I see is dosing.

Let's say you have a 75g display and you need to add some magnesium 'cause you tested and it's low...but you have a 300g sump. :doh: You would then need to dose for 375g (not the lower dose of 75g) to make any difference. :confused2:

I think it would be critical to use a more robust salt mix from the start if you are doing a mega sump.
 
That's true, but your corals won't use at the 375g rate- they'd continue to use at the 75g rate. So, your overall consumption of whatever you're dosing remains the same. You'd go through the same amount of magnesium over time- it'd just decline slower over that same period of time.
 
Let's take that same scenario - 75g display with a 300g sump - how do you rate your skimmer? :unsure:
 
In these huge sump systems, you should probably plumb the skimmer into the drain line. This way the skimmer would be based primarily on bio load and the amount of flow coming from the main display. Water volume really doesn't matter as much in this design. Even if you have a giant sump and in sump skimmer, the skimmer will take longer to pull the DOCs out but I would think your with such a huge water volume your skimmer has a lot of time to pull it out as well.
 
Cameron;106136 wrote: In these huge sump systems, you should probably plumb the skimmer into the drain line. This way the skimmer would be based primarily on bio load and the amount of flow coming from the main display. Water volume really doesn't matter as much in this design. Even if you have a giant sump and in sump skimmer, the skimmer will take longer to pull the DOCs out but I would think your with such a huge water volume your skimmer has a lot of time to pull it out as well.

I agree. In my humble opinion skimmer size needs to be based on bioload. Small bioload can use a skimmer rated for less. Large Bioload can require skimmer rated for as much as twice the actual volume.
 
I can tell you that the larger systems are far more stable. WHen I had a small setup, I constantly had to tinker with it; adding stuff all the time. With a large steup, all the parameters are sooooooo stable.
 
i agree the smaller system seems to always need to tweeked,when i had up 210,220, i was constantly messing with it,when went to the 450,with 100gal sump bio-balls,150 gal sump 400 lbs rock,100 gal refugium,my tank is now stable less maintenance,if you loose a fish it doe'nt spike.
 
Cameron;106136 wrote: In these huge sump systems, you should probably plumb the skimmer into the drain line. This way the skimmer would be based primarily on bio load and the amount of flow coming from the main display. Water volume really doesn't matter as much in this design. Even if you have a giant sump and in sump skimmer, the skimmer will take longer to pull the DOCs out but I would think your with such a huge water volume your skimmer has a lot of time to pull it out as well.

Exellent point, filtration flow path is Much more important with these mega sumps.
 
Back
Top