basslover34;3527207; said:The theory is there and has been addressed before, there are lots of sump systems out there that have several media chambers and run exactly the same way. But there is still the question of which one is more efficient, some people will say that contact time is more important than speed of flow, personally I'm a big fan of the idea that small tanks need higher turn over rates than large ones... but all of this is negated by the fact that a well established tank doesn't need any turn over at all ( I have several tanks that run filter less due to the amount of bacteria within the tank itself). Most tanks are not in desperate need of their filters for anything more than breaking the water surface for gas exchange (this is not to say all tanks of course just the ones that are well established)
This has been a hot debate for many many years, old schoolers will be more in favor of the low-slow turn over while a lot of youngins will follow the More is better side of the debate.
Lil_Stinker;3531015; said:I mis-read the original theory and drawings, the pictures certainly bring it all together.
With the air infusion, the theory seems sound. The air keeping the water moving in the media, while providing O2 to the bacteria in the media.
Alternately, you could make the maze the other way, see attached image. Also the "Bucket" could just be a chamber in the first compartment, using all available sump area..
tscharf;3534539; said:this thread got me to thinking, could you make a two story sump? it would look almost exactly like that but 2 of them, one stacked on the other. instead of the pumps being in the end chamber on the top level there would simply be a whole in the bottom where the water would drop down to the second level. would that work?