Plumbing Advice

[the_cros]

Hi All.

I’m in the process of moving my Red Sea 350 into my basement. This will allow me to setup a new Trigger CR44 sump in my workshop which is in the room behind the Display Tank wall. This mean I now have the pleasure of working out the plumbing that will hopefully be somewhat “future proof” …

So now for the fun ... I am looking for input on the below plumbing option. I have never tackled anything like this so any recommendations/guidance would be greatly appreciate.

I am planning for the majority of the pipe to be 1” and I will deal with any reductions/increases at sump (CR44 has 1.5” openings) & display (RS350 has 33mm after modification to R42221 part). I am also toying with the idea of two return pumps so that i can have better flow control for the manifold and UV sterilizer.

What do you think?

Two Pump Option:

I hope all my forum reading and YouTube watching has not sent me too far astray .

 

[Tlledsmar]

I'd lose half the valves and run the UV sterilizer parallel to the sump. Save lots of money and potential leaks. I'd also ditch the flow meters for cost savings and it's a bit like measuring your crank. What are you going to do if the measurement doesn't make you happy?

 

[Red_Beard]

Agree with above. you have 3 valves inline that don't isolate any point in the system except another valve. Most of the valves in the UV line can be eliminated if it were ran parallel rather than inline with the main return. Keeping it inline also is going to reduce capacity of your main return pipe and introduce extra variables into dialing in your secondary return to keep it all quiet. Also, i know some people like them, but in my opinion, there are 2 kinds of check valves. Ones that have failed, and ones that are going to fail. So, you may as well not introduce needless restriction and just plan in a siphon break for when the pump is turned off/fails. There are a few ways to do that, ie put a smallish hole right at the water line that will soon suck air if flow stops, or give enough room in your sump that the return jets suck air before it overflows. Either of those are going to be more reliable than a check valve (and less maintenance).

 

[the_cros]

Thanks for the comments.

Couple of clarifications/updates

1. Removed 3 in-line valves (future manifold can be added later)
2. Added description to 3 ball valves in UV line; was trying to control a different flow rate for manifold and UV line and also be able to shut down UV line when needed.
3. Removed check valve (sump can handle any overflow anyways)

 

[Tlledsmar]

Now, with some fancy math (it's not that scary) you can do away with the emergency drain entirely.

 

[mike550]

Wow. So I’m not a huge plumbing guy but you don’t need so many unions. Just enough to take out sections as needed. Also I use Cepex valves that have unions built in on either side of the valve.

 

[Red_Beard]

Much better. still only problem is the UV being inline with the main return. your " back pressure for uv line " valve introduces additional problems if the pressure from your main return pump is more than the pressure from your uv pump (this is vary likely) and will create a potential for backfeeding the uv from the main return. It would be so much cleaner to isolate it completely from the main return, especially where you have separate pumps anyways. then if you turn it off or pull it for cleaning or run it intermittently it doesn't affect the flow through your main system.


Just dump the UV return in the sump, it doesn't need to go to the display

 

[the_cros]

Much better. still only problem is the UV being inline with the main return. your " back pressure for uv line " valve introduces additional problems if the pressure from your main return pump is more than the pressure from your uv pump (this is vary likely) and will create a potential for backfeeding the uv from the main return. It would be so much cleaner to isolate it completely from the main return, especially where you have separate pumps anyways. then if you turn it off or pull it for cleaning or run it intermittently it doesn't affect the flow through your main system.


Just dump the UV return in the sump, it doesn't need to go to the display

So in that scenario i would be better off adding a new return line to my tank?
Main Pump for Return 1
Manifold/UV line for Return 2 (New)

 

[Tlledsmar]

Set the overflow up so that it is 1, large enough diameter to never be overwhelmed(full siphon) by your pump at wide open and 2, at such a height in the tank that even if it is completely blocked somehow, there is enough room in the DT to hold all the water in the pump chamber above the pump. No need for any valve, you unplug the pump and the overflow is now empty. I would probably put a few unions in this design but would have the UV sterilizer dump into the DT separately from the pump or back into the sump. Plumbing it back into the return line is going to cause issues.

 

[Tlledsmar]

Just dump the UV return in the sump, it doesn't need to go to the display

This x10

 

[mnl119]

Hi All.

I’m in the process of moving my Red Sea 350 into my basement. This will allow me to setup a new Trigger CR44 sump in my workshop which is in the room behind the Display Tank wall. This mean I now have the pleasure of working out the plumbing that will hopefully be somewhat “future proof” …

So now for the fun ... I am looking for input on the below plumbing option. I have never tackled anything like this so any recommendations/guidance would be greatly appreciate.

I am planning for the majority of the pipe to be 1” and I will deal with any reductions/increases at sump (CR44 has 1.5” openings) & display (RS350 has 33mm after modification to R42221 part). I am also toying with the idea of two return pumps so that i can have better flow control for the manifold and UV sterilizer.

What do you think?

Two Pump Option:

I hope all my forum reading and YouTube watching has not sent me too far astray .

I've often wondered if constructing a manifold and branching flow through a UV is worth the complexity. I understand the desire to slow water through the UV to increase dose to a lethal level, but those numbers we've all seen are for once-through systems and our aquariums are cycled over and over.

To explain, let's consider 2 examples. In example A, we bypass the UV with 80% of the flow thus achieving what I'll call a Lethal Dose (LD) through the UV with 20% of the flow. In example B, we just send 100% of the flow through the UV achieving 0.2LD on each pass.

Now let's assume we have a 5x hourly turnover rate of the tank and consider 1 hour. In example A, we have treated (1-0.8^5) of the water with at least 1 LD, and 33% of the water remains untreated. In example B, we have treated 100% of the water with a LD (5*0.2LD), albeit in a more chronic way than in example A.

Anyone care to explain? In order to really answer the question experiments are probably needed where the same tank is run in both modes and pathogen counts would be required.

 

[Tlledsmar]

I've often wondered if constructing a manifold and branching flow through a UV is worth the complexity. I understand the desire to slow water through the UV to increase dose to a lethal level, but those numbers we've all seen are for once-through systems and our aquariums are cycled over and over.

To explain, let's consider 2 examples. In example A, we bypass the UV with 80% of the flow thus achieving what I'll call a Lethal Dose (LD) through the UV with 20% of the flow. In example B, we just send 100% of the flow through the UV achieving 0.2LD on each pass.

Now let's assume we have a 5x hourly turnover rate of the tank and consider 1 hour. In example A, we have treated (1-0.8^5) of the water with at least 1 LD, and 33% of the water remains untreated. In example B, we have treated 100% of the water with a LD (5*0.2LD), albeit in a more chronic way than in example A.

Anyone care to explain? In order to really answer the question experiments are probably needed where the same tank is run in both modes and pathogen counts would be required.

This one is as much of a can of worms as "flow rate vs dwell time"


My thoughts (with very little scientific backing) are:

Run lower flow rates, allow more dwell time, be thorough,even if you only turn over 3x per hour, you won't have any problems IME as long as you have plenty of water movement in the DT.

 

[the_cros]

Much better. still only problem is the UV being inline with the main return. your " back pressure for uv line " valve introduces additional problems if the pressure from your main return pump is more than the pressure from your uv pump (this is vary likely) and will create a potential for backfeeding the uv from the main return. It would be so much cleaner to isolate it completely from the main return, especially where you have separate pumps anyways. then if you turn it off or pull it for cleaning or run it intermittently it doesn't affect the flow through your main system.


Just dump the UV return in the sump, it doesn't need to go to the display

Thanks for all your input and feedback. I’ll probably go with dumping it back into my sump pump.

Option 1: New Return Line

Option 2: Dump back into Sump

 

[Tlledsmar]

Still so many pointless valves and unions bit if you have the money and don't worry about leak points then go for it




On a less "preference" note: I would recommend dumping the uv line back in where the overflow enters, because microbubbles and variation in water height.

 

[the_cros]

Wow. So I’m not a huge plumbing guy but you don’t need so many unions. Just enough to take out sections as needed. Also I use Cepex valves that have unions built in on either side of the valve.

I have stocks in the union company

 

[Red_Beard]

I like option 2. You could get rid of the top valve though because if there is no flow through the uv there would be no flow to that valve (controlled via the lower flow valve). And instead of tee'ing the UV backpressure line back into the return you could just dump it strait to the sump too, what with reduction of variables and all. The unions before and after the UV are great so you can remove it for servicing though.

Where you have the return going into should be fine, as there are still some baffles between it and the return pump, but either way.

 

[mike550]

One more suggestion. Consider using flex PVC between your pumps and your main pipes. A bit more forgiving when attaching pumps and also reduces the vibrations coming from the pump.

 

[Pistondog]

Keep the flowmeter as a remote indicator via apex or other. Good to know the return is working. If the flow decreases the pump is probably starved and its time to clean the filter going into the return chamber.
Could also put an alarm on it. If the number falls below x the pump is not running and your fish are at risk in a few hours.