Brandie's 210 Upgrade

Discussion in 'Tank Journals' started by goldielocke76, Jan 25, 2013.

  1. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    I thought I'd give everyone a break after my last post. ;) I'm afraid that if I post like that more often than not, you all will not want to read anything I post :p
  2. iCon

    iCon Supporting Member

    No, we'd just get to experience what Denzil experiences on a daily basis! J/K! S)
  3. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    LoL, so!! ;P why do you think I post on here so much?? ;) ahahahahha
  4. CookieJar

    CookieJar Guest

    Well thought out. 1 thing I'd advocate is having both a GFO and carbon reactor, both separately controlled- can be 1 pump with a Y-connector & flow valves. that way you can run some of each, and if needed doubleup on either if you need to.
  5. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    The only thing that scares me about the carbon is the face that it *seems* to be linked with lateral line erosion. I've never experienced/seen it before until I inherited a fish that had really bad pits around its eyes, and open "lines" down it's "cheeks." It is a Flame Angel. The pits around her eyes are just now starting to heal over, and I can't imagine having a tank full of fish that look like that. It looks painful.

    I had no idea carbon had to be changed out so frequently, so that's why I got a single reactor for GFO instead of the dual that I originally wanted. I could have controlled them seperately, but it seems like a lot of work for very little benefit, for the short period of time. So I bought a nice little sock, and when I need to run carbon, I fill up the sock, and take it out after 10 days, and I don't have to worry about lateral line erosion. Sorry, for some reason, it just scares the hell out of me.
  6. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    Sump Schema!! Feel free to pick it apart and tell me everything that's wrong with it!!! :D

  7. gimmito

    gimmito Guest

    Are you spitting the drain ? It looks like you are feeding the skimmer and fuge separately. Any filter socks or catch trays ? A external pump may save you some room also.
  8. rygh

    rygh Supporting Member

    That is a lot of fish. Great fun.
    But when they get full size, those big tangs are going to produce a lot of pollution.
    A 19 inch by (guessing) 24 inch surface area is not a lot of fuge.
    You are either looking a BIG water changes, bio-balls, RDSB, scrubbers, or some other method.
    I would recommend just two sections : Return, and a big sump+skimmer section.
    It is not hard to drop in acrylic movable baffles to tweak the flow and keep macros out of skimmer intake.
    That allows for maximum flexibility in the future. Larger fuge, or other filtration methods.
    Also eliminates troublesome issues with splitting drain lines.
  9. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    I planned on putting LR pieces in the section of the drain, sort of how I have it going now. I was trying to stay away from the filter socks because I worried about nitrate build up.

    I did plan on splitting the drain, where some went in to the fuge, but the rest went in to the LR drain area, then to the skimmer. Never thought about an internal pump, but it's something to think about....

    Gotta look into what a catch tray is. Never heard of it when talking about a sump...
  10. gimmito

    gimmito Guest

    Dan Riggle & Tony Vargas uses a catch tray. I believe Junne (Siokoy) uses one too.
  11. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    Fuge is roughly 19" x 24" x 21" (21 being the height of the baffle, although I was thinking about making this 23") so that would give me roughly 45 gallons of fuge space. I know it's not as large as I was hoping it would be, but, I thought that the fuge, in addition to the macro that is kept in the display, that it would be enough. I planned on doing a biotope instead of a tank that had just fish and corals.

    I always thought bioballs were nothing more than detritus catchers? So I hadn't even thought about adding them. Not sure what a RDSB is, but I've looked at turf scrubbers but still need to do more research. I am working with relatively a small space, so it didn't occur to me to try to use them.

    You talk about using only two compartments, but then I lack a fuge altogether, but you had previously mentioned before the one that I had was too small, so I'm a little confused. I've thought about stacking two different tanks, one for the fuge, and one for the sump, but then I was looking at 40 gallon breeders, and it takes up more room and then I lack the water volume. Or since I plan to have a GFO, and calcium reactor, I'm pretty sure I can get a bigger/longer tank, and hang the GFO on the stand walls, but then I lack stand space all together. I can do an ATO, but, I don't think I can make it as big as I was hoping for.

    It's not ideal, as much as I would like it to be. An ideal situation would be being in our own house with a fish room in the back so I could have 120 gallon fuge as well as 120 gallon sump xD but not possible at the moment. Maybe a few years down the line....?

    And I will have to ask more questions about moveable baffles... I didn't know that there could be such a thing..

    Thank you for looking at it and telling me. These posts are what I need to see/hear. :)
  12. rygh

    rygh Supporting Member

    Sorry, meant bio-pellets, not bio-balls. Agree, bio-balls are a mess.
    RDSB = Remote Deep Sand Bed. I tried one once - worked for a while, ended up a mess. Others like them and hate them.

    So to be more clear on the two compartment idea:
    Section 1 = For both skimmer and fuge together.
    Section 2 = For return pumps.

    The skimmer actually takes up a fairly small amount of space. Not the full 18 x 24 you have allocated.
    But if you hard-build a separate section, you have to oversize for any possibility, so for a 3 section
    plan, what you have is about right.
    The idea is that if you combine them, you can optimize fuge/skimmer area ratio.
    Plus, that extended area with macros really reduces bubbles.
    Also, you can add other equipment to that section as needed, without running into
    constraints with the fixed 15 inches.

    Movable baffles are really just pieces of acrylic you jamb in to tweak the flow.
    They will not hold any pressure. It just sections off areas.
    You can use egg-crate to help hold the pieces in place. Or even duct tape (above water level)
  13. rygh

    rygh Supporting Member

    Another clarification:
    I would normally consider a 3 section design to be better.
    I am only suggesting 2 sections because you are fairly space limited.

    Yet another idea:
    Is there any way you can run the ATO from a garage or other closet?
    All you need is a hole for airline tubing and 2 small wires.
    You put the reservoir and a peristaltic pump outside. Controller pumps it in as needed.
    Then you can have a huge fresh water tank, and not take up valuable real-estate under your main tank.
  14. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    Ah ok, gotcha. Thanks :) so I just had a thought, what if the skimmer ( I can think about this now since it's not going to be the 2' x 2' I originally allocated when looking at a bubble king) the return pum, and everything else is outside of the tank, leaving the tank as a fuge, and plumbing the reactors and skimmer to the return pump? That way, I have the 120 gallon fuge, and the room in the stand is used for things like ATO, skimmer, return pump, gfo, calcium reactor, etc.??

    I'm really trying to make things work without a biopellet reactor since I've heard lots of mixed reviews while running biopellets and wanting LPS. I heard that it can be done, and have yet to really look into what people are doing that gives them sucess, but again, was hoping to stay away from it. Also have to think of the macro algae and the biopellets outcompeting the macro.

    Ah ok, so that explains why I saw crooked baffles in some pictures when looking at sumps and fuges LoL.

    **Edit** So if you have the 2 sections, I'm assuming you have no substrate at all?? The only reason I partitioned them off is because I didn't want any substrate getting in to the pump and ruining it, since it happened to my skimmer pump and I had to replace the impeller. I'm still hoping though that the 120 gallon fuge with external plumbing is a good option... LoL
  15. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    I was thinking of doing something similar to what Denzil's doing: I would request that a section be built in the stand so I can put a container up there. since space would be limited, I would make it shallower, but longer, and since I plan on having the sides open up for maintenance, that's how I would fill it up. Also, I am pretty sure that I can make it outside the stand... we have decided that will will move the bookshelves into our room, so maybe I can put it outside in a piece of furniture...
  16. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    Also, I'm not opposed to putting shelves in the stand to help with room. Actually, the better I can organize it, the better off I'll be.
  17. rygh

    rygh Supporting Member

    The thing about a "1 section" system is that the water level affects the skimmer.
    If your return pump shuts off, water rises a lot, pressure difference can cause skimmer to overflow.
    I actually run that way. But I have a float switch that shuts off the skimmer if the water level
    gets out of bounds. So possible, but be careful.

    External reactors, return pumps, and so on are great.
    Return pump will be noisier, but less heat transfer.

    Substrate is a concern, yes, that changes things. Especially if you want fine mud.
    I remember a trick someone did for that:
    They put a Tee on the drain, and connected it to the skimmer directly.

    Drain in from tank
    Tee = Skimmer Intake
    Out to sump, mid-level. (Sometimes in, if return pumps are off)

    Not sure if that was a good idea or not. Pros/Cons.
  18. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    I'm sorry, I feel dumb for asking, but I have to since I thought I understood, but since I am unsure, I want to ask to be sure: The '1 section' sump you are talking about is using the 120 gallon as only a fuge right?

    Would it be better to plumb the skimmer directly from the drain to the return, or from the skimmer to the return? I guess it can go either way, but I was more curious as to what may be more beneficial.
  19. rygh

    rygh Supporting Member

    No worries, it is always hard to explain things with threads. :)
    I think I might have misunderstood your idea as well.

    For "1 section" idea, there is a single sump tank. Skimmer + Fuge + Return pumps + reactors + whatever.
    If skimmer and returns are external, then the intakes to those devices come from that one sump tank.
    But again - water level will rise and fall, so beware of that.

    I don't really understand the second question.
    It is generally considered better to have skimmer "upstream" from other things, closer to the
    drain, so dirty water goes through it first.
    You cannot connect the pressure return line from return pump into a normal skimmer.
    Skimmer venturi needs low pressure to work.
  20. goldielocke76

    goldielocke76 Supporting Member

    Ok, (I'm not going to quote since it's getting long, haha) so what if, instead of having a sump/fuge combo, I use the 120 gallon tank as a fuge only. That means I'd have to tee off the drain, maybe get a manifold ( I think I am using that in the right sense) and have the manifold feed the skimmer and the reactors, etc. This would leave all the equipment out in the stand. If that is possible, I'm going to assume it's also possible for me to plumb the returns of the reactors, to the main return to the tank.

    I'm not even sure if that's possible, lol, and you're right, things are hard to understand through threads :D thank you for being patient with me

Share This Page