Yeah - that is what I am trying to work out. I wanted to keep all systems that I could swap stock (add heavier bio load at will) though that might not be the best option.
I will post up some pics.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Biofiltration and gph
- Thread starter Plum
- Start date
Yeah - that is what I am trying to work out. I wanted to keep all systems that I could swap stock (add heavier bio load at will) though that might not be the best option.
I will post up some pics.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Yes water enters a sump, then the reeflo is plumbed in via a bulkhead, where it is flowing to a sand filter, ultima, the 40lbs carbon.
Any reason replacing the reeflo with laguna would cause issues?
Checked flow rates of the ultima II and I am just meeting there 2000 gph minimum with 10' head.
Cleaning could be an issue - maybe that is hat you are thinking also.
The systems can handle more flow, so that is not an issue. Was actually thinking of adding 3 lagunas as opposed to the reeflo - though the issue is that only one reeflo can power the ultima... Which is here this question came from.
Tons of flow in the tanks - I have some extremely large power heads.
Wanted to move to more energy efficient pumps (laguna where I can submerge them and take advantage of the heat they throw off) while also increasing flow/mechanical filtration.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Agree - and understand this scenario. Inte case of the ultima II, where moving from approx 4200gph (hammerhead) to 2000 gph (laguna) I was not sure the implications, if any.
My stocking is quite light today. But if I were to heavily stock, would turning the water over quicker, result in better bio filtration, or would higher contact time allow be "better".
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
So if I understand your setup correctly, the Hammerhead draws water from the sump and pushes it though a sand filter, then through the ultima, then through 40lbs of carbon? What is the distance from the pump's intake to the water level of your display?
You probably need every bit of the Hammerhead to operate that system. Because of all the friction from what you are pumping through, I don't think you will get any flow at all from a Laguna.
Let's do the math to get your systems total head:
Sand Filter: Estimating 7'
Ultima 4000: Per Ultima, avg. of 5'
40lbs of Charcoal: Estimating 6'
That's 18' of head before accounting for static discharge head (the distance the from your pumps intake to your water level in the display) or discharge friction head (friction loss from plumbing).
The shutoff head of the Laguna Max Flo 4200 is 15' (in other words, it pumps zero gallons per hour at 15'), so you will probably get no flow by swapping the Reeflo out for the Laguna 4200.
If it's possible to run the Sand Filter, the Ultima and the Charcoal as a closed loop (in other words have it pull water directly from the display tank as opposed to from the sump) you could get away with running a smaller pump while achieving similar flow. But then you would have to run a separate pump for your sump, which will eat up the savings you gain from making the Sand, Bead and Charcoal filters closed loop.
Unfortunately, I don't think you can reduce your pump size very much, without making some major changes.
If you are really looking to cut back on electrical consumption, you could try running your system on the sump only (do away with the sand, bead and charcoal filtration since it requies a lot of energy to push water through them) and instead run your drains into filter socks, then through a fluidized bed, wet/dry or submerged pond matrix for bio. If you were to do this, you could run a Laguna Max Flo 4200 and if you have 10' of head, it would do about 2,000GPH on only 160 watts. Or you could run a Reeflo Super Dart Gold which does a little over 2,200GPH on 178 watts.
I think with a 150G sump, you have plenty of room for bio-filtration...the main drawbacks would be that you would have to clean filter socks (which can be a real pain), as opposed to simply backwashing your sand and bead filters.
If you planned on swapping out the Hammerhead for potentially 3 Laguna Max Flo 4200s, you would actually be using more elctricity...your Hammerhead is likely pulling around 325 watts whereas each Laguna 4200 pulls 160 watts (160watts x 3= 480watts), so there are no savings there. But the point is moot because the Laguna 4200 will most likely not be powerful enough to run your current system.
Yes - today the pump goes through the sand filter and then to the ultima II. It can then flow to the charcoal, or I have set up a bypass.
It is more about efficiencies - not so much a savings on electricity at the of the month.
I was thinking of powering the ultima with 1 laguna alone. Power the sand & charcoal with another - though your correct - head might be an issue for the sand/charcoal.
I run filter socks today... Maybe no real point to it...
The lagunas are also submersible throwing off some heat in the tanks which I could use making them "more efficient" than the 160 watts quote from laguna.
Someone in reed central ran some testing and estimates 40% off the wattage of the pump was heating the tanks.
So - by those estimates, 2 lagunas would consume 160 watts each, where 60 watts each is also used to heat my water.
This means @ 8 feet of head, 2 lagunas would produce 4500gph - very similar to the GPH thrown of by the hammerhead (don't have those figures at my fingertips, though similar gph)
This translates to a 125 watt savings each hour (based on hammerhead drawing 325 watts/hour). Over a 24 hour period, that is 3000 watts a day, or 3 kwh. My average kwh charge from the hydro company is $0.141, so daily that is $0.423/day and $154.40/year.
I have three systems so - this efficiency can be done in each system.
More than likely, I will add another laguna or maybe a 4th to the systems for more flow, or filtration (mechanical, light bio). So toss out the 1 hammerhead for 3 lagunas, maybe a 4th ( I will test on 1 system 1st of course)
Not sure... The thought had crossed my mind...
My hydro company does time of use, meaning that from 7pm to 7am the power is $0.121, and 7am to 7pm the power averages $.171. So, laguna 3 and 4 offering extra flow/mechanical/light bio could click on during cheap time, and click off during expensive time.
This might be more trouble than its worth - the last idea of clicking of pumps 3 and 4 during expensive electricity hours...
Running laguna #3 24/7 based on 40% of wattages heating the water is $123.52. Running laguna #3 & #4 during only cheap hours would be a yearly cost of $106.00.
Laguna pump costs approx $180, plus extra PVC plumbing, and ball valves - say another $80. $260 investment to save $17 is not a good investment.
Now that I ran those numbers... The shutting off a 3rd/4th pump seems not to make any sense.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
You have Ultima 4000, optimal flow/pump recommend is 4000gph @ 10' head. Laguna 4200 Max Flow produces roughly 1800gph @ 10' head. Your bead media won't be tumble.
http://www.aquaultraviolet.com/products/filters/ultima2/4000
You may want to plumb to Ultima II, then sand filter, then charcoal. Ultima II needs as much flow as the pump produces.
Good point...I forgot about that added benefit.
Funny thing, I actually learned about the Lagunas from Reef Central. The added bonus of the heat was one of the reasons I went with them.
I have run the pumps you mention on my system, but I believe I had 9' of head. I ran the Hammerhead Gold on my tank and it would just barely overpower my overflow teeth so that I would have to slightly valve the pump back. I also ran two Laguna Max Flo 4200s and I didn't have to valve them back, but it did max out my overflow teeth (water would hit the top of my tank). The chart for the older models shows 2092 @ 9' so 4,184GPH running two of them. The flow chart for the Hammerhead Gold shows 4,400 @ 9' of head, so my experience with them makes sense. That probably doesn't matter, since if you are buying new, you would probably be getting the next generation models.
Laguna has come out with a "Next Generation" (newer model) that is more efficient than the older model that I have. Below are the flow charts for the older Lagunas and the Next Generation (New) Models. If you get two of the Next Generation Max Flo 4200, you should get just under 5,000GPH @ 8' of head on only 320 watts.
Flow Chart for older Lagunas:
Flow Chart for "Next Generation" (current model year) Lagunas:
Flow Chart for Standard Reeflo Hammerhead:
Flow Chart for Hammerhead Gold:
I seen that optimal flow was 4000, but you could run down to 2000-4000 with this ultima - you are probably correct though....... Would be best to stay up at the optimal flow area for the filter
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
