I'm looking forward to your article.
The SUMP SLOW DOWN: The benefits of slowing down the water?
- QUESTION OF THE DAY
- Thread starter revhtree
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I'm looking forward to your article.
None - photosynthesis convert inorganic nutrients into biomass - it take up nutrients
Nearly zero or none and if it release any - it is recirculated nutrients. Your aquarium occupants are very effective to convert nutrients into biomass - much better than we. In our systems around 10 % will be biomass - in an aquarium system - around 20 % will be biomass (in general) This is mainly because there is no or very, very low thermal conversions in cold blooded animals.
Sincerely Lasse
^this. some people have the notion that if your skimmer pulls 1000 GPH and your sump has a flow of 1000 GPH, then all the water is getting treated every pass.
Unfortunately, that is not the case.
I wish I possessed the Horse Power. Was kinda hoping we had a phd in the making that could easily publish something. Again this has had to been done by now. @BRS
Yes contact time is a good answer - but in a recirculated system - the contact time is always the same independent of the flow. Bacteria, algae, gfo, skimmers and other "pickers" are not 70 + old guys that pick a cherry now and then - they are teenagers trying to pick it all ASAP. If you not pick the molecule this time - you will pick it next time but if they are too few (because others already have picked them) - it is not so effective. A steady flow of a steady amount of molecules give the best result per time unit and also as total amount.
In one fish farm - a very good supplier of biofilters for wastewater plants construct a super effective filter for nitrification - however we got a recommended flow that was very low. We try to convince them that we ought to run 10 to 20 times more/hour in order to get a good result because we was running an recirculated fish farm. They did not believe us at all. When they comeback 3 months later - they was very surprised of the result and the total rate of nitrification and BOD removal we had achieve. What have you done was the question - guess we answered. after that - all of their commercial run through plants get a huge recirculation throughput in their biofilters. It was back in around 1985
Could be and could not be - depend of the volume of the skimmer part and where inlet and outlet is placed - but I also prefer to have a higher skimmer output than flow through the skimmer part of the sump - even if I do not have it in my system
Sincerely Lasse
Yea... Just pullin' your chain. I couldn't do it either. However, it might be hard to get someone to do this kind of study when the available data already points to flow not being a big factor in nutrient management.
sarcophytonIndy
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the key is to have both low and high flow areas of your sump? I do have this is my sump, since it is DIY 55 gallon tank converted to a sump, and the baffle design is not perfect.
Suohhen
Well-Known Member
Ah yeah not phosphate but rather ammonia is released via fish grills. Thank you for pointing that out.
Back to the subject I have been hitting on.
FLOW.
I have referenced both closed LOOPED flow, and OPEN flow of nutrients making contact with the algae. Using rain and air molecules as my examples.
FLOW is the subject matter of my point here overall.
And it is also the subject matter of the thread itself and the question pole.
So my analogy's simply state, that the more flow the more stuff will make contact with the algae, this occurs no matter where the origin or start of the flow is, internal or external.
I answered the pole with not sure, because I do not feel there is a singular answer to the flow question.
As this thread proves, every tank is unique and its FLOW is best at XXXGph.
It is a balance to be had on a tank by tank basis.
Yes a pound of algae in its utmost health can consume x amount of nutrients.
A skimmer can remove x amount of proteins at its max.
Flow is the vehicle that carries the nutrients to the filtration.
So, if the FLOW is to slow it will not provide enough stuff for optimal performance.
If the flow is to fast well yes it can perform at its ultimate even though most of the nutrients may be going right by it the first time round.
So maybe I need to change my pole answer. LoL.
The folks over at Triton want 10X flow through the refugium.
So with this method I will have my flow match as closely as possible to the recommendation.
Maybe I drink to much Triton koolaid, but at this time and place I feel their knowledge on their system is above my current understanding and inexperience level so I will give them the trust on their theory at this time.
FLOW.
I have referenced both closed LOOPED flow, and OPEN flow of nutrients making contact with the algae. Using rain and air molecules as my examples.
FLOW is the subject matter of my point here overall.
And it is also the subject matter of the thread itself and the question pole.
So my analogy's simply state, that the more flow the more stuff will make contact with the algae, this occurs no matter where the origin or start of the flow is, internal or external.
I answered the pole with not sure, because I do not feel there is a singular answer to the flow question.
As this thread proves, every tank is unique and its FLOW is best at XXXGph.
It is a balance to be had on a tank by tank basis.
Yes a pound of algae in its utmost health can consume x amount of nutrients.
A skimmer can remove x amount of proteins at its max.
Flow is the vehicle that carries the nutrients to the filtration.
So, if the FLOW is to slow it will not provide enough stuff for optimal performance.
If the flow is to fast well yes it can perform at its ultimate even though most of the nutrients may be going right by it the first time round.
So maybe I need to change my pole answer. LoL.
The folks over at Triton want 10X flow through the refugium.
So with this method I will have my flow match as closely as possible to the recommendation.
Maybe I drink to much Triton koolaid, but at this time and place I feel their knowledge on their system is above my current understanding and inexperience level so I will give them the trust on their theory at this time.
Not smaller than 10 % of the DT volume but not either to large
Sincerely Lasse
Sincerely Lasse
PhreeByrd
Active Member
It's my observation that skimmers work better when the nutrients in the water are more concentrated. Although the flow rate through the sump doesn't change the fact that eventually all of the water goes through the skimmer, a slower flow rate through the sump allows the skimmer to:
1. Process more highly contaminated water, making it more efficient.
2. Deliver cleaner water to the return section of the sump.
I think the same may be true for algae scrubbers and bacterial filtration, but I have no real proof of this.
Whether or not this makes a big difference, I can't say... and I do also believe that there is a point where the water flow rate could be too slow.
I try to match the flow through the sump to the amount of water the skimmer can process, and then slow it down just a little bit. My goal is to have all of the water entering the sump go through the skimmer just one time. Realistically, that's impossible to achieve, but that's my goal.
I have no nutrient issues, btw, and no nuisance algae issues at all.
1. Process more highly contaminated water, making it more efficient.
2. Deliver cleaner water to the return section of the sump.
I think the same may be true for algae scrubbers and bacterial filtration, but I have no real proof of this.
Whether or not this makes a big difference, I can't say... and I do also believe that there is a point where the water flow rate could be too slow.
I try to match the flow through the sump to the amount of water the skimmer can process, and then slow it down just a little bit. My goal is to have all of the water entering the sump go through the skimmer just one time. Realistically, that's impossible to achieve, but that's my goal.
I have no nutrient issues, btw, and no nuisance algae issues at all.
Rjramos
Valuable Member
This is a great subject! As a 25+ year reef hobbyist I am glad to be here and give my opinion. When I started, Berlin method ( live rock and skimmer) the recommendations were at least 10x turnover. The live rock did its thing in the display, and the recommended skimmer was one with a capacity of being able to handle double the capacity of the display. So in my case, it was a 65 gal display full of live rock with a 110 top fathom Venturi external skimmer. I still have this display with same skimmer running today btw. The whole system, turnover and skimmer was pumped with a little giant 3qx, (circulation1100gph) 1” in and out. The set up worked great for years, until I suddenly started having GHA, that I couldn’t get rid of. At the time, I looked into ecosystem aquarium’s method using “Miracle Mud“ , which had great reviews and videos from Mike Paletta. I ended up retrofitting a custom refugium, sized according to the Ecosystems recommendations for a 65 gal display, above the existing sump with no added pump. My stand at 40 inches, made it possible to split the drain from the display, to supply the refugium and the original sump below. I did this because according to their recommendations, 10x turnover through the refugium was too much for the refugium to be effective. The refugium would then drain out the the opposite end by gravity into the main sump below. For 2 weeks the skimmers air induction was shut off. When the skimmer was started again, it’s rate never changed ,only that now it was also processing refugium water. Caulerpa algae took off in the refugium and within 2 months without adding anything else, the GHA in the display was gone! This was my first experience with flow rates, and one that I have applied to every reef aquarium I have set up since.
So to answer the question in this thread, it depends. It depends on what filtration processes are taking place below the display and what kind of flow those processes require. The rate of flow through a refugium should not be your displays turnover if this is 10x, it’s too fast! A skimmer’s performance drawing out of a sump can also be increased if water returns to the sump through a split and gated line, instead of 100% return to the display. Also an additional pump drawing water from the sump and returning it there. This is the case, with chillers or media canisters that draw water from the sump.
Today, I see a lot of set ups with low turnover rates incorporating many internal wave maker pumps within the display. Although these increase the nitrification taking place with the live rock within the display, they don’t increase the rate of processes taking place below in the sump.
Another trend I see today is more water changing. Rather than process the water in circulation through filtration methods, just bail some water out of the system and add freshly mixed saltwater. It works, but it cost more due to salt mixes and RODI filter replacement. Some have even set up frequent small auto water changes. A better choice cause parameters tend to fluctuate less.
So to answer the question in this thread, it depends. It depends on what filtration processes are taking place below the display and what kind of flow those processes require. The rate of flow through a refugium should not be your displays turnover if this is 10x, it’s too fast! A skimmer’s performance drawing out of a sump can also be increased if water returns to the sump through a split and gated line, instead of 100% return to the display. Also an additional pump drawing water from the sump and returning it there. This is the case, with chillers or media canisters that draw water from the sump.
Today, I see a lot of set ups with low turnover rates incorporating many internal wave maker pumps within the display. Although these increase the nitrification taking place with the live rock within the display, they don’t increase the rate of processes taking place below in the sump.
Another trend I see today is more water changing. Rather than process the water in circulation through filtration methods, just bail some water out of the system and add freshly mixed saltwater. It works, but it cost more due to salt mixes and RODI filter replacement. Some have even set up frequent small auto water changes. A better choice cause parameters tend to fluctuate less.
Part of my equation is that the faster flow through also adds flow to the tank it self that doesn't have to made up with additional powerheads. Additionally, since I use mechanical filtration, the more turnover the more detritus, particles etc. that I am capturing before breakdown can occur. For me that is key, so that there is less bad stuff broken down for the other equipment like skimmers, bio filtration and chemical means to have to deal with. Yes, contact time is a factor for certain types of filtration. It may be true, in that instance, that the equipment/sump set up may factor into your flow rates. In any event, a previous poster was the most astute in saying that unless you test the water both before and after sump entry, at various flow rates, every thing up to that point is conjecture.
dbowman5
Valuable Member
i would hit like on all of the replies in this thread because of the thoughtfulness of the conversation. Thank You!!
very thought provoking and enlightening,, also very entertaining, High Marks All Around!
very thought provoking and enlightening,, also very entertaining, High Marks All Around!
10x is the standard. my way around this was to increase the volume in my sump. most have a store bought sump and the water levels are not very high in them. I made my sump out of a 30 gallon tank i only have one baffle before my return just to keep the bubbles out of my display. my sump runs between 28 and 29 gallons so pretty full.
Tank Volume: 310 gallons
Sump Volume: ~ 120 gallons
I reduce my sump flow 50% at night from midnight to 8 am. Here is my thoughts, during the day the flow in the tank is steady at 1200-1500 gallons/hour. The VorTech powerhead provide the other difference ing the flow in the tank.
From 9 pm to midnight the VorTech goes into Nuterient transport mode, and at that time the flow in the tank is also increased to 2100 gallons/Hour. This will remove the waste into the sump at that time, at midnight the VorTech goes into 20% flow and the return pump goes into 700 gallons/Hour.
The skimmer I use is an external recirculating skimmer and the flow into the skimmer is reduced to 700gallons/Hour, compared to 1200 gallons/Hour the rest of the time, to have the water more contact time, the airflow into the skimmer remains the same.
I have found that more waste is pulled out during that time and find that the nutrient level in the tank are always stable.
During the same time, the refugium is working and the waste that the skimmer is missing, I am hoping that the refugium is picking up.
Seems to work for my tank, seems to have found a happy place.
Sump Volume: ~ 120 gallons
I reduce my sump flow 50% at night from midnight to 8 am. Here is my thoughts, during the day the flow in the tank is steady at 1200-1500 gallons/hour. The VorTech powerhead provide the other difference ing the flow in the tank.
From 9 pm to midnight the VorTech goes into Nuterient transport mode, and at that time the flow in the tank is also increased to 2100 gallons/Hour. This will remove the waste into the sump at that time, at midnight the VorTech goes into 20% flow and the return pump goes into 700 gallons/Hour.
The skimmer I use is an external recirculating skimmer and the flow into the skimmer is reduced to 700gallons/Hour, compared to 1200 gallons/Hour the rest of the time, to have the water more contact time, the airflow into the skimmer remains the same.
I have found that more waste is pulled out during that time and find that the nutrient level in the tank are always stable.
During the same time, the refugium is working and the waste that the skimmer is missing, I am hoping that the refugium is picking up.
Seems to work for my tank, seems to have found a happy place.
Randy Holmes-Farley
Reef Chemist
Staff member
Super Moderator
Excellence Award
Expert Contributor
Article Contributor
R2R Research
My Tank Thread
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2014
- Messages
- 67,367
- Reaction score
- 63,700
Agree. I was about to write that a lot of folks were misunderstanding the contact time issue. It is not a one pass situation, where contact time matters. It is recirculating where contact time is "all the time".
If anything, higher flow is better (keeping dirtier water in the filtration systems rather than trying to clean cleaner water). It cannot be worse, might be unnoticeably different.
