Common sump setup for 490gal system?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
R

RequiemTCE

Jack Dempsey
MFK Member
Jun 15, 2011
81
0
36
Portland, OR
Hello, and thank you very much in advance for any information you may provide.

I'm planning on getting a 340gal and I have a 150gal. I want to get a common sump for both tanks and install a "Big Tuna" denitrator (http://www.aquaripure.com/productpages/ANF1081.htm) in the sump. The 340 is 96Lx30Wx29H and the stand and tank will be custom Aqueon just like the 150 model so it should have ample room for a huge sump. A 200+ tank should fit comfortably in the stand under the custom 340 as long as it's not too tall.

My first question has to do with the configuration of the tank itself. I haven't formally ordered the 340 yet and I don't know whether I should get it drilled and with overflows from the factory. Let me state up front that I don't really know anything about sumps. I've never set one up. The 150 isn't drilled and doesn't have overflows. To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what that means as far as setup goes. From what I understand, it seems like it's better not to have it drilled and with factory overflows because it's not a very difficult or expensive obstacle to overcome using accessories if it's not "drilled and overflowed" from the factory. To me, it seems like the tank will be more versatile if I can run it without the presence of an overflow/return destination if all it takes is a couple sub-$100 parts to give it an "add-on" overflow and return. Can somebody explain what the drawbacks of the add-on overflow and return solutions are and why having holes drilled in the tank and overflows added would be preferable? Keep in mind that I don't plan on installing the sump immediately. The 150 currently has 2 Rena SP3s for filtration, and I plan on getting 2 FX5s for the 340 and setting it up for a couple months before I add the common sump/denitrator, and even after the common sump/denitrator are present I intend to keep all 4 canister filters running. I'd also like the option of disconnecting the shared sump and running both tanks in standalone mode, so it seems to me like keeping it pristine would be a better option.

Next question is size. And if there are any pre-made products that anybody recommends to tackle my bio-load. Stock list between the two tanks is as follows(they are currently in a 150 and 80):
22" Royal Clown Knife
17" Giant Gourami
18" Fire Eel
12" Pike Cichlid(Atapabo II)
Adult Oscar
Adult Severum, 10"
Two 7" Earth Eaters
3.5" Blue Phantom Pleco
7" L330 Watermelon Pleco
10" Normal Black Pleco
12" Tiger Shovelnose Catfish
21" Ornate Bichir

Obviously these are some monster fish with some monster appetites, and many of them are just getting started growing. I'll probably end up picking up a few more specimens that will fit in, being very selective, over the coming years as well since I'll have the added capacity of the 340. Most of them have lived together all of their lives and they all seem to thrive as long as I keep the pH around 7.0. I would like to feed these fish a lot, because I want them to grow quickly and it's downright amazing how much some of these fish can eat! I'm sure my fellow MFKer's know what I'm talking about here. So, how large of a sump should I get? And is there something I can just order online that will gracefully handle my bio-load? What accessories and media do I need if I can buy something pre-made, and do you have any recommended resources if I need to buy a tank and make my own?

And the last question, does anybody have experience with the Aqueon stands? Will it be structurally sound with a huge sump sitting under the tank?

Again, thanks for any help offered. I just don't have the time to research all of this right now, too much work to do lately.
 
A couple of thoughts here in no particular order:
1. You mentioned sharing the sump between the 2 tanks. I would advise against that as you would have a hard time controlling flow and the plumbing for a setup like that would have to get pretty complex for no apparent reason. Disease propagation is another reason I can think of that would make this setup less then adequate.
2. The same thought process applies to aquaripure filter. It's a biological system and even dripping into a single tank requires quite a bit work to fine tune. Don't get me wrong I love the filter and use it religiously, but number of variables involved in its operation is quite large and you don't want to add one more by sharing the water between tanks.
3. To your questions on the overflows. I firmly believe that you should have the tank drilled. Either do it at the factory or do it yourself, but do it nonetheless. Do note that aqueon uses tempered glass at least on bottom panels and tempered glass will shatter on drilling so find out what type of glass you're getting if you're planning to do it yourself. The HOB overflows are quite popular in the trade, but they all require at least a partial siphon to operate and are an accident waiting to happen in my opinion. Again, I'm not trying to offend anyone who uses HOB overflows, but I don't believe them to be reliable enough.
4. I would also suggest to install the sump before you start using the tank. The installation of plumbing (again I personally opt for hard plumbed systems - no flexihose or barbed fittings of any kind except for phosphate reactor maybe) is quite distruptive and you would want to test the setup before you start using it.
5. The sump size really boils down to the bigger the better. It's all about the volume of water.
6. Last, but not least and while realizing that you didn't ask for any unsolicited advice, I would discouragee you from running aquaripure along with canister filters. You can keep them running, but without bio-media and if so why waste the money on an FX5 when you can get a $20 fiber pad for mechanical filtration that will last you 6 months+ even if you replace it bi-weekly.
Hope this helps.
 
AlexLbk said:
A couple of thoughts here in no particular order:
1. You mentioned sharing the sump between the 2 tanks. I would advise against that as you would have a hard time controlling flow and the plumbing for a setup like that would have to get pretty complex for no apparent reason. Disease propagation is another reason I can think of that would make this setup less then adequate.
Click to expand...

Your over thinking this one. It's simple really. I like to use submersible pumps because they are easy to plumb but any pump will do. Just run one pump to the 340 and another pump to the 150. There's no complicated plumbing at all, what ever you pump into the tank will drain back to the sump. Nice thing, as your fish grow and you need more flow just add another pump or go larger as long as your drain can handle the flow. Funny thing on this set up is the drain capacity. If you haven't ordered the tank yet go with at least two 1.5" drains. Another additional advantage to this set up is adding a trickle system is super easy. Put a drain on your sump and run that drain to your yard or where ever you can dump the water. Then you just plumb some PEX line from the nearest cold water supply and run a gallon or so water per hour to each tank. The extra water will flow down your overflows (extra large drains come in handy here) and into your sump. The extra water flows out your sump. No more water changes.
As far as disease transfer, I agree, this is a strong possibility. I keep this to a minimum with an isolated tank in another room for new fish to quarantine. Only healthy fish go in the fish room. So far (knock on wood) ten years now I haven't even had ich in my fish room. I believe the benefits out weigh the possible negative. Too each his own of course, 10 fish keepers 10 opinions lol


Edit: I agree with everything else in Alex's post :)
 
Thanks you two, very helpful information. I'll go ahead and have the factory set it up for a sump and get the sump installed at least for the 340 before I start using it.

Regarding keeping the tanks separate to avoid dealing with extra variables for the Aquaripure filter, maybe I'm having a conceptual problem or missing some important information. When two tanks share a sump, can't you effectively consider them to be one large tank as far as water parameters and stock go? I understand the notion that dealing with the variables from two tanks is worse than dealing with one, but why would they still be considered two tanks at that point rather than one 490gal tank? If the common sump isn't good enough to make it seem that way I could always cross-filter two of the canister filters(I will still have 2 SP3's I could use for this even if I don't get the FX5s) - inputs in one tank, outputs in the other where the tanks meet side by side and drape a permanently primed siphon hose in the back corners to mitigate flow-rate discrepancies between the two filters. Particularly at that point it seems like this system is a far cry from 2 tanks with separate stock. John at Aquaripure was actually the one that brought up the idea of a common sump. He says that a Big Tuna is too much for either tank alone, but I'd need to set up and maintain at least 3 X-Large systems to support two different tanks with two different sets of parameters in standalone mode. Do you think that is more or less variables and maintenance than one Big Tuna in a single "virtual" 490gal?

The same thinking can be applied to the spread of disease. If somebody told you they were getting a 490gal tank with the above stock list, would you recommend that they abandon that plan and instead get a 150 and 340 gallon tank because disease might spread among them?

And of course, if I set up something like Egon suggests I could have one centralized auto-water-changing solution with minimal complexity rather than dealing with 2 tanks.
 
Sorry if the above post seemed argumentative or confrontational in any way, that's certainly not my intention. :)

Just trying to think this through. It's a lot of money and I want to get it right.
 
I agree, a common sump for two tanks shouldn't be a problem. Surplus water should always be in the sump. You pump it into the tank and the over flow drains it back. You could use a 100gph sump pump on one tank and a 1500gph sump pump on the second tank and the tank overflows will return the surplus water to the sump accordingly.

The purpose of an HOB or DIY pipe overflow is for tanks that are NOT drilled and the owner decided to switch to a sump without taking the tank down to drill it. If you are going to use a sump start with drilling the tank!!!! The most aggravating part of setting up a sump is the hassles with a siphon over flow. I use a DIY overflow pipe on my 110g glass tank and can't wait to finish my new DIY stand so I can drill the tank when I move it to the new stand.

For a 340g I would drill/have it drilled for a 1.5" drain pipe. You can always use reducers and smaller pipes if you don't need that much flow but it is nice not to have to limit your pump size because your overflow doesn't flow enough.

That Big Tuna looks like a plastic cylinder with several hundred to several thousand feet of 1/4" tubing rolled up inside. $899 seems a little pricey to me...
 
Actually, what do you guys think about this idea?

First, some pertinent information that I haven't given so far: The 150 is 29 tall just like the 340 will be. Same manufacturer for tanks and stands, they will be exactly the same height. I will ensure so when I order it just to be sure.

What if, instead of draining and drilling or going the HOB route for the 150 and linking it directly to the common sump, I just draped a siphon hose(3/4"? 1"?) between the two tanks in the back corners where they meet standing side by side, and hooked both SP3s up so that they are draining from the 150 and returning to the 340? In my thinking this would cause water from the 150 to be transferred to the 340 through the SP3s at a rather high volume, and it would then return to the 150 through the siphon hose to equalize the water levels in both tanks. The siphon hose would be draped down to within 3-4 inches of the substrate - just below the level that the SP3s intake water in the 150, so any exchange between them should be independent of the overflow operation. Or rather, the overflow operation will determine the level of the water in the 150, and the siphon will act to preserve that level in the 150 as the SP3s remove water from it.

Crazy? Uninformed? It seems to me like this would be by far the most elegant and cost-effective solution.
 
The difference in water level between the two tanks will determine the flow in the siphon tube. In other words the 340 will always have a slightly higher water level than the 150.

From my experience with siphons, overflows and sumps I would just drill both tanks. I would use a drilled overflow for each tank and a sump pump for each tank. Simple, effective, cheap and fool proof!

What you suggested will work... but several people have told you that a drilled overflow is the easiest least hassle route to go... there is nothing to keep you from experimenting though... experimentation is the best way to learn!
 
Definatley drilled dual overflows in the 340 with 1.5" drains. If the 150 is to remain running, get a good hob overflow like Eshopps in the 1500gph range. A big sump with a ton of bio media for the 2 tanks to run off of. Mag 12 pump for the 150 and a mag 24 or equivilent for the 340. Ditch the canisters.. Heaters in the sump. Its simple and effective
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom