55 Gallon Sump Design

BlindParrot · 04/18/2017, 08:44 PM

Hello everyone,

this is my first post on Reef Central, but I have read the forums for a while now and recently decided to create an account. This is a sump I have spent some time designing and would like the community feedback on any flaws I have missed or any other design recommendations. I would also like to post this for other people to see this and maybe help them design their own sumps. Basically its a 150 Gallon FOWLR tank in the works and this is a 55 gallon sump with 5 chambers for filtration. One question I do have is, What do other DIY sumps leave as a gap for the baffles and the tank? I have heard 1/4 inch on both sides, as well as 1/4 inch total so 1/8 inch gap on each side. What is the best for 3/16 inch glass. Also I know 3/16 inch glass is small, but I believe it will work since no chamber can hold more than 9.2 gallons of water and a 10 gallon aquarium has 1/8 inch glass.

iiismet · 04/18/2017, 09:29 PM

1/8 inch on each side is fine for the gap for glass as it won't expand at all like acrylic might. I don't think you need all those bubble traps, I'd just put one before the return

nereefpat · 04/19/2017, 09:53 AM

Just a couple opinions...

The fuge seems a little small (6-7 gallons) for a 150 + 55, if you want to use it for nutrient export. It probably would help produce pods, if that is your goal.

The return section, where the evaporation will manifest, seems small too. I see you are using an ATO, but if this ever goes offline for some reason you will be a slave to evaporation.

As far as the space between baffles, it depends on flow. How much flow will go through the sump? I would use 1/4" glass for the baffles, for more strength against water pressure and in case you bump it.

BlindParrot · 04/19/2017, 10:04 AM

The fuge is about 4 gallons but I was only planning to use it as a place to produce pods. I also plan to maybe put some micropure rock between the skimmer and reactor chamber to add a lot of surface for nutrient export. The ATO section is about 5.5 gallons and will be attached directly to the RODI system with a double redundancy optical and float valve to keep the RO/DI system from filling up too much. Also my reason for using the 3/16 inch glass is because all chambers are less than 9.2 gallons and a 10 gallon aquarium only uses 1/8 inch glass so I decided 3/16 would be good enough to hold the water back.

Kodock · 04/21/2017, 06:44 PM

3/16 is just typically more likely to break given pressure and maybe a bump with a rock or pump. The width of the baffle should be the distance between the front and back of the tank minus the width of the glass. For instance, if you were to look at a 20L from the side, it would read 12". The glass is 1/8" on the front sheet and back sheet, so you will subtract 1/4" from the 12" to get your baffle width. (1/8+1/8=1/4)

This will make a direct fit, but when the glass company polishes it then it will take another baby amount off to make it a perfect fit. If you are not going to polish then you can take off 1/16-1/8 off your cut measurement.

I personally think that you have way too much going on in the design. A refugium of that size will only be a detritus bath. I would stick to 3 large chambers with a T return that has a trickle down system (layers of egg crate held up by pieces of PVC). Stay with heavy mechanical filtration and water changes, but that is just my own opinion because I have seen no critical change with refugiums and nitrate reduction. Carbon dosing and water changes are the only substantial nitrate control.

Kodock · 04/21/2017, 06:45 PM

Meaning that the correct baffle width for a 20L is 11.75"

Lsufan · 04/21/2017, 09:12 PM

I agree with nereefpat, I would use 1/4" glass at minimum. U are right that 3/16" will hold the water back but it really isn't about that. If u drop something or bump it the wrong way it will crack easier then 1/4". 10 gallon tank are protected with trim so u can't drop something on the corner of the glass & break it.

I would cut the baffles 1/8" short rather then 1/4". To me 1/8" is plenty, u just don't want to force the baffle into place. If u cut it to short then u have a big gap to fill with silicone which can make the silicone job messy.

I think u are trying to squeeze to much into the sump to where everything suffers. I would get rid of the first set of baffles all together & have the first baffles be the bubble trap after the skimmer. A properly set up drain won't cause many bubbles anyway. That's a little space u will save plus if u ever decide u don't want to run socks anymore u won't have a baffles for no reason.

I would find somewhere under the stand to hang the reactors & get them out of the sump. Between that space & getting rid of the first bubble trap u may have a fuge big enough to do something with.

I would also try to find a place to put another container for the ato so u could get it out of the sump. They make all kinds of different shaped containers that u may can find a 10 gallon container to fit under the stand. That way u can make the return a little bigger & probably even gain a little more on the fuge. I would highly recommend making your return section big enough to hold enough water to last for atleast a couple days of evaporation. I have had my ato shut off for whatever reason quite a few times & that will give u a day or two to catch it before your pump runs dry.

Please don't take what I posted the wrong way or that I'm being critical of u because I can tell u have put a lot of thought into this. I just hate to see someone try to get to much out of something & it cause everything to suffer.

BlindParrot · 04/22/2017, 07:05 AM

Ok I think I understand what you are getting at. I was just pinching pennies with the 3/16" glass but I forgot the edges of glass are the fragile part and that's the part that's is most likely to get hit. I was seriously considering adding the skimmer to the filter sock area and putting only one bubble trap before the return area. The reason I decided to put the reactors in the sump is that they are supposed to work better in the sump from what I read. Something about the water level and less distance to pump water. Plus if I put them outside the sump they will be behind the sump which I won't have good access to due to all the other stuff I plan to have under the sump. And I guess I still haven't done enough research on a refugium to fully understand. I am conflicted if it is too small to not do anything, or it is too big and will just gather ditritus. I'll probably have about 700gph going through the sump unless I manifold the return pump for something else which I might.ill try to dial it down to around 600 gph because that's what my skimmer runs. Lastly the Auto top off system I was planning will be directly connected to the RO/DI system with double back up float switches and double back up optical sensors as well as the back ups already in the ato system. Then finally I'll have the RO/DI system on a timer so even if the system double fails somehow, the water will only come on a certain time in the day that I chose. This whole system will be rubbing APEx with as many safety switches and detectors as I possibly can.

BlindParrot · 04/22/2017, 08:04 AM

Also if this helps, I plan to make this a FOWLR tank with a lionfish as the main fish and then add fish compatible with it. Then later i will want to add corals to the tank and i kinda want the fuge to have a frag rack so they can grow out before going in the tank since some lionfish compatible fish are to have caution around corals. But here is my updated sump, does this work better?

jeepj667 · 04/22/2017, 11:05 AM

The new design will have your skimmer fully submerged.

BlindParrot · 04/22/2017, 12:38 PM

Yea I forgot to raise it up again before taking the screenshot, but here is my final design I believe I am going with. The overflow when off will allow about 5.66 gallons drain when it is off. With that volume and the volume already in the sump, it will allow about 9 gallons of wiggle room in the case of the display tank draining.

uncleof6 · 04/22/2017, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodock

3/16 is just typically more likely to break given pressure and maybe a bump with a rock or pump. The width of the baffle should be the distance between the front and back of the tank minus the width of the glass. For instance, if you were to look at a 20L from the side, it would read 12". The glass is 1/8" on the front sheet and back sheet, so you will subtract 1/4" from the 12" to get your baffle width. (1/8+1/8=1/4)

This will make a direct fit, but when the glass company polishes it then it will take another baby amount off to make it a perfect fit. If you are not going to polish then you can take off 1/16-1/8 off your cut measurement.

I personally think that you have way too much going on in the design. A refugium of that size will only be a detritus bath. I would stick to 3 large chambers with a T return that has a trickle down system (layers of egg crate held up by pieces of PVC). Stay with heavy mechanical filtration and water changes, but that is just my own opinion because I have seen no critical change with refugiums and nitrate reduction. Carbon dosing and water changes are the only substantial nitrate control.

Not true. While carbon dosing does reduce nitrates, it does so by unnatural means, encourages abnormally high populations of the wrong type of bacteria (heterotrophic) and white cloud blooms that are lethal in some cases to other tank inhabitants (depletion of oxygen

and it must be continued or the system could very well crash if trying to return to the natural process and path for the processing of Nitrogen in the system.

Consistently over 40 something years, the DSB has been the single most effective and least problematic method for nitrate reduction. It gets a bad rep due to mis-implementation, inappropriate maintenance, and numerous other things done by hobbyists themselves.

This method (DSB) along with "true" live rock, (practically a thing of the past) got this hobby started, and continues today to be the very foundation. It is the only methodology to have survived from the early days to present time, and most if not all large public aquariums continue to use the method in one form or another (plenum systems and non-plenum systems.)

Kodock · 04/25/2017, 07:57 AM

It is possible to crash the tank over many years if done improperly. It has the same time gap of a tank crash for any other random reason. I did not reccomend that he dose carbon. I am simply stating that a fuge is a waste of time. Water changes and carbon dosing are the only 2 true "instant" nitrate reducing methods. The tank is large enough to not be substantially effected by a temporary nitrate problem anyway. I was just stating an opinion, I do not recommend carbon dosing because of user error possibilities. I also don't recommend a refugium. A 2 chamber, 3 baffled sump with a skimmer and mature live rock is sufficient enough. But hey, what do I know.....

hammond0 · 04/26/2017, 03:36 PM

BlindParrot or anyone else. What software are you using to generate your design? I need to do the same thing.

BlindParrot · 04/26/2017, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammond0

BlindParrot or anyone else. What software are you using to generate your design? I need to do the same thing.

Sketchup is what I used.

uncleof6 · 04/28/2017, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodock

It is possible to crash the tank over many years if done improperly. It has the same time gap of a tank crash for any other random reason. I did not reccomend that he dose carbon. I am simply stating that a fuge is a waste of time. Water changes and carbon dosing are the only 2 true "instant" nitrate reducing methods. The tank is large enough to not be substantially effected by a temporary nitrate problem anyway. I was just stating an opinion, I do not recommend carbon dosing because of user error possibilities. I also don't recommend a refugium. A 2 chamber, 3 baffled sump with a skimmer and mature live rock is sufficient enough. But hey, what do I know.....

Water changing is not really an instant solution. You change out percentages of percentages, and you are always behind production, in the end: you break even if lucky. Carbon dosing, disrupts the natural processes that have been utilized to get this hobby up off the ground—as well as being subjected to user error. I do not subscribe to the notion of "instant" anything with marine aquaria, that is probably were we diverged the most.

I quite agree with you on most of your points as restated. I have often been "seen" to say, that in sump refugia are a waste of time. To get any real benefit from a refugium, the things need to be at least half the size of the display tank. This includes trying to "grow pods" as a food source in sump. The other problem I see is trying to get them to do everything, but they don't even do one thing all that well. (combining rock, sand, macro...)

uncleof6 · 04/28/2017, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammond0

BlindParrot or anyone else. What software are you using to generate your design? I need to do the same thing.

Sketchup and Bunkspeed Hypershot

uncleof6 · 04/28/2017, 06:42 PM

A more "modern" approach to a sump:

hammond0 · 04/28/2017, 09:06 PM

Acrylic is so expensive, Where do you guys get yours from?

I think I just need to find a glass supplier that can polish edges.

BlindParrot · 04/29/2017, 12:58 PM

Hyper shot does a great job at making realistic graphics. I generally use lumeon for my works but that's mostly landscaping and I didn't think to make my sump look realistic, but that looks sharp. The other thing I will be doing for this sump is making it an informative sump with laser cut vinyl with information and direction of water flow for people that don't know how sumps work. I want my sump to be as clean and as nice as the display tank itself. I do have a thread on this site for my 150 gallon tank build, it's my first saltwater tank and I'm going all out. Trying to make it as clean and functional as possible but spending the least amount of money. My father has a minor in marine biology and has helped me figure out things that most people disagree on. Such as today I just bought 150 pounds of pool sand which is sort of frowned upon in the reef community, but my father has had many tanks in the past useing cheap alternatives to argonite and this is one he suggests because it is 99% silica and that's fine in a 150 gallon tank and also has almost the exact same chemical composition as the glass and silicon so it's not bad for a reef.

Kodock · 05/06/2017, 12:58 PM

Now that is talent.. @uncleof6

Vinny Kreyling · 05/06/2017, 05:10 PM

IF measurements allow, a standard fish tank is the cheapest way to make a sump.

04/19/2017, 09:53 AM	#3
nereefpat Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: Central Nebraska Posts: 3,190	Just a couple opinions... The fuge seems a little small (6-7 gallons) for a 150 + 55, if you want to use it for nutrient export. It probably would help produce pods, if that is your goal. The return section, where the evaporation will manifest, seems small too. I see you are using an ATO, but if this ever goes offline for some reason you will be a slave to evaporation. As far as the space between baffles, it depends on flow. How much flow will go through the sump? I would use 1/4" glass for the baffles, for more strength against water pressure and in case you bump it. __________________ Pat Current Tank Info: 125 in-wall , 40b sump. 6 bulb T5. ASM G2 skimmer. LPS and leathers

04/19/2017, 10:04 AM	#4
BlindParrot Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Mississippi Posts: 9	The fuge is about 4 gallons but I was only planning to use it as a place to produce pods. I also plan to maybe put some micropure rock between the skimmer and reactor chamber to add a lot of surface for nutrient export. The ATO section is about 5.5 gallons and will be attached directly to the RODI system with a double redundancy optical and float valve to keep the RO/DI system from filling up too much. Also my reason for using the 3/16 inch glass is because all chambers are less than 9.2 gallons and a 10 gallon aquarium only uses 1/8 inch glass so I decided 3/16 would be good enough to hold the water back. __________________ "Money is like an arm or leg, use it or lose it" -Henry Ford Current Tank Info: 75 Gallon Freshwater Angelfish, Building a 150 Gallon Saltwater Aquarium

04/22/2017, 07:05 AM	#8
BlindParrot Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Mississippi Posts: 9	Ok I think I understand what you are getting at. I was just pinching pennies with the 3/16" glass but I forgot the edges of glass are the fragile part and that's the part that's is most likely to get hit. I was seriously considering adding the skimmer to the filter sock area and putting only one bubble trap before the return area. The reason I decided to put the reactors in the sump is that they are supposed to work better in the sump from what I read. Something about the water level and less distance to pump water. Plus if I put them outside the sump they will be behind the sump which I won't have good access to due to all the other stuff I plan to have under the sump. And I guess I still haven't done enough research on a refugium to fully understand. I am conflicted if it is too small to not do anything, or it is too big and will just gather ditritus. I'll probably have about 700gph going through the sump unless I manifold the return pump for something else which I might.ill try to dial it down to around 600 gph because that's what my skimmer runs. Lastly the Auto top off system I was planning will be directly connected to the RO/DI system with double back up float switches and double back up optical sensors as well as the back ups already in the ato system. Then finally I'll have the RO/DI system on a timer so even if the system double fails somehow, the water will only come on a certain time in the day that I chose. This whole system will be rubbing APEx with as many safety switches and detectors as I possibly can. __________________ "Money is like an arm or leg, use it or lose it" -Henry Ford Current Tank Info: 75 Gallon Freshwater Angelfish, Building a 150 Gallon Saltwater Aquarium

04/28/2017, 06:42 PM	#18
uncleof6 Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: AWOL Posts: 12,013	A more "modern" approach to a sump: __________________ "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (oft attributed to Einstein; most likely paraphrasing by Roger Sessions; compactly articulates the principle of Occam's Razor) Current Tank Info: 325 6' wide Reef

04/29/2017, 12:58 PM	#20
BlindParrot Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Mississippi Posts: 9	Hyper shot does a great job at making realistic graphics. I generally use lumeon for my works but that's mostly landscaping and I didn't think to make my sump look realistic, but that looks sharp. The other thing I will be doing for this sump is making it an informative sump with laser cut vinyl with information and direction of water flow for people that don't know how sumps work. I want my sump to be as clean and as nice as the display tank itself. I do have a thread on this site for my 150 gallon tank build, it's my first saltwater tank and I'm going all out. Trying to make it as clean and functional as possible but spending the least amount of money. My father has a minor in marine biology and has helped me figure out things that most people disagree on. Such as today I just bought 150 pounds of pool sand which is sort of frowned upon in the reef community, but my father has had many tanks in the past useing cheap alternatives to argonite and this is one he suggests because it is 99% silica and that's fine in a 150 gallon tank and also has almost the exact same chemical composition as the glass and silicon so it's not bad for a reef. __________________ "Money is like an arm or leg, use it or lose it" -Henry Ford Current Tank Info: 75 Gallon Freshwater Angelfish, Building a 150 Gallon Saltwater Aquarium

04/18/2017, 09:29 PM	#2
iiismet Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 60	1/8 inch on each side is fine for the gap for glass as it won't expand at all like acrylic might. I don't think you need all those bubble traps, I'd just put one before the return

04/21/2017, 06:44 PM	#5
Kodock Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Georgia Posts: 19	3/16 is just typically more likely to break given pressure and maybe a bump with a rock or pump. The width of the baffle should be the distance between the front and back of the tank minus the width of the glass. For instance, if you were to look at a 20L from the side, it would read 12". The glass is 1/8" on the front sheet and back sheet, so you will subtract 1/4" from the 12" to get your baffle width. (1/8+1/8=1/4) This will make a direct fit, but when the glass company polishes it then it will take another baby amount off to make it a perfect fit. If you are not going to polish then you can take off 1/16-1/8 off your cut measurement. I personally think that you have way too much going on in the design. A refugium of that size will only be a detritus bath. I would stick to 3 large chambers with a T return that has a trickle down system (layers of egg crate held up by pieces of PVC). Stay with heavy mechanical filtration and water changes, but that is just my own opinion because I have seen no critical change with refugiums and nitrate reduction. Carbon dosing and water changes are the only substantial nitrate control.

04/21/2017, 06:45 PM	#6
Kodock Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Georgia Posts: 19	Meaning that the correct baffle width for a 20L is 11.75"

04/21/2017, 09:12 PM	#7
Lsufan Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Baton Rouge Posts: 1,410	I agree with nereefpat, I would use 1/4" glass at minimum. U are right that 3/16" will hold the water back but it really isn't about that. If u drop something or bump it the wrong way it will crack easier then 1/4". 10 gallon tank are protected with trim so u can't drop something on the corner of the glass & break it. I would cut the baffles 1/8" short rather then 1/4". To me 1/8" is plenty, u just don't want to force the baffle into place. If u cut it to short then u have a big gap to fill with silicone which can make the silicone job messy. I think u are trying to squeeze to much into the sump to where everything suffers. I would get rid of the first set of baffles all together & have the first baffles be the bubble trap after the skimmer. A properly set up drain won't cause many bubbles anyway. That's a little space u will save plus if u ever decide u don't want to run socks anymore u won't have a baffles for no reason. I would find somewhere under the stand to hang the reactors & get them out of the sump. Between that space & getting rid of the first bubble trap u may have a fuge big enough to do something with. I would also try to find a place to put another container for the ato so u could get it out of the sump. They make all kinds of different shaped containers that u may can find a 10 gallon container to fit under the stand. That way u can make the return a little bigger & probably even gain a little more on the fuge. I would highly recommend making your return section big enough to hold enough water to last for atleast a couple days of evaporation. I have had my ato shut off for whatever reason quite a few times & that will give u a day or two to catch it before your pump runs dry. Please don't take what I posted the wrong way or that I'm being critical of u because I can tell u have put a lot of thought into this. I just hate to see someone try to get to much out of something & it cause everything to suffer.

04/22/2017, 11:05 AM	#10
jeepj667 Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 10	The new design will have your skimmer fully submerged.

04/25/2017, 07:57 AM	#13
Kodock Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Georgia Posts: 19	It is possible to crash the tank over many years if done improperly. It has the same time gap of a tank crash for any other random reason. I did not reccomend that he dose carbon. I am simply stating that a fuge is a waste of time. Water changes and carbon dosing are the only 2 true "instant" nitrate reducing methods. The tank is large enough to not be substantially effected by a temporary nitrate problem anyway. I was just stating an opinion, I do not recommend carbon dosing because of user error possibilities. I also don't recommend a refugium. A 2 chamber, 3 baffled sump with a skimmer and mature live rock is sufficient enough. But hey, what do I know.....

04/26/2017, 03:36 PM	#14
hammond0 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Houston, Tx Posts: 11	BlindParrot or anyone else. What software are you using to generate your design? I need to do the same thing.

04/28/2017, 09:06 PM	#19
hammond0 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Houston, Tx Posts: 11	Acrylic is so expensive, Where do you guys get yours from? I think I just need to find a glass supplier that can polish edges.

05/06/2017, 12:58 PM	#21
Kodock Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Georgia Posts: 19	Now that is talent.. @uncleof6

05/06/2017, 05:10 PM	#22
Vinny Kreyling Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Miller Place, NY Posts: 7,206	IF measurements allow, a standard fish tank is the cheapest way to make a sump. __________________ 250 gallon mixed reef, 2 Reefbreeder's Photon V 2, Deepwater BLDC 12, DAS EX-3 Skimmer, MTC mini cal, 2-3/4" Sea Swirls, Aquacontroller & 6 Tunze pumps.