Convert of Reef Ready

[nfored]

Hello.
I have been running my 220 on a sump for about 7 months now, I have always used sumps on all my tanks. Well it has always been costly to run my sump the pump to get about 2200GPH - 3000GPH uses 565 watts of electricity.

So $0.10 per Kwatt hour cost about $1.20 per day to run, this coupled with the heaters this winter would push my cost close to $2.00 a day. With a new car payment and baby on the way I have been struggling. I have been faced with the fact I might have to give up my fish.

So rather then give them to a pet store that would house them in way to small of a tank and then sell them to someone who would do the same I made a choice. I placed them in a 55 tank, shut down my 220. I plan to leave them there for about 3 or 4 months, until I can buy 2 FX5's to filter the tank.

So here is the question

The tank has 3 holes drilled. Two 2" Horizontal overflows at each end of the tank, and a 1" return drilled in the center. I am going to put reducers on the two 2" overflows to get them down to a 1" barbed. I can then hook up intake of the FX5's to these overflows, this will be nice since I will never have to prime the filter.

Do you think that I can run the intake from 2 FX5's through the single 1" return? I had a pump that pushed over 3000GPH at the head height I have it running at; going through that 1" retun. However I never measured the flow so I don't really know how much it was actually pushing. In addition big pumps like that make big pressure so I know it can force more water through smaller spaces.

I have seen that 1" PVC can flow 960GPH under gravity pressure, and 2200GPH with close to 100psi.

http://flexpvc.com/WaterFlowBasedOnPipeSize.shtml

The nice thing is the tank is acrylic so I can always drill a second return line if I need to. However I would like to avoid this as eventually when things get back to normal I would like to move back to a sump setup, and the second return would be a problem.

B.T.W when I decided to go with Horizontal overflow it was the best choice ever this is the quietest overflow ever. The only noise is from the turbulence inside the drain pipe, since I made a wet sump. I could never figure out how to eliminate the turbulence noise.

 

[yogurt_21]

? that's a horrible wattage for a pump in that flow range. my primary pond pump is 3150gph at 1' head and uses 155watts. I think it's time you went pump shopping.

forget the fx5's since you mentioned reef ready, canisters in salt water environments tend to become nitrate factories. your sump should be perfectly fine, just change out the pump for something with better efficiency.

Option A:
at my pump's wattage you're looking at 11$ a month to run the pump vs your current 36$. And my pump cost only 90$ noting that we are looking at about 2600gph at a 5' head. (11.5x an hour tank turnover)

so equipment cost plus 2 years run time= 354$

Option B:
2 fx 5's would give you a running cost of 7$ a month. Add the intial cost of 250$ a unit (might be able to get for less off of fleabay) plus media which i won't factor in but can be pricy. so 500$ equipment cost and remember fx5's run about 607gph with media(950gph empty at 0 head)
http://www.thatpetplace.com/pet/group/971/product.web
... and that's not counting the 5' of head. but we'll be naive and call it 1200gph total. (5.5x an hour turnover)

so equipment and running cost for 2 years = 668$

it would take you 4.5 years for option A to exceed the cost of running option b for 2 years.

it would take 104months (8.67 years) for the fx5's to end up cheaper than getting a pump.

so if you are really concerned with money due to a new arrival, it makes the most sense to just get a new pump for 90$ and call it a day.

and yes being a dad means doing lot of math. lol My baby girl was borth april 17th.

 

[nfored]

It's fresh water the tank is just reef ready, meaing its drilled for overflows. What pump do you have, I personally love sumps and would rather have a sump.

The pump I have can do 3000+GPH at 10' this was important to me so that I could ensure at least 2000gph after all the plumbing. I have looked at many pumps and they all used about 300 - 600 watts. You pump sounds like it would help.

One thing to remeber though about canisters is there is virtually no head since its a sealed system the presure is the same on both sides. The head preasure is only the distance from the top of the tank water level to the top of the tank. This is why they need very little power to push the same GPH as a sump pump.

I hope I get a girl.

 

[nfored]

Current Pump
Watt age : 565
Cost Per Kwh : $0.10
Cost Per Hour : $0.062150
Cost Per Day : $1.491600
Cost Per Week : $10.441
Cost Per Month: $41.76
Cost Per Year : $542.94

2 x FX5's @ 55 watts each Same wattage as your pump
Watt age : 110
Cost Per Kwh : $0.10
Cost Per Hour : $0.012100
Cost Per Day : $0.290400
Cost Per Week : $2.033
Cost Per Month: $8.13
Cost Per Year : $105.71

So my new calculations show 1st year savings of 337.23 using the pump your talking about. Or a 1st year savings of -$68.00 If I bought 2 FX5's

Going with a sump is more attractive to me so a more efficant pump would be be 1st choice.

 

[yogurt_21]

http://cgi.ebay.com/2750-GPH-Founta...emQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item3ef3ac1b71

hmm can't seem to find the 3250gph but this is the 2750 the next model down. doesn't list the brand and I'm at work right now so i can't grab it for you. It's not one of the brands you're used to but it's reliable. My freind has had the 3250gph model for 5 years no issues I have mine for 9 mos so far no problems.

Hmm not sure of this brand, and effiency is slightly less. not to mention lower ehad height (mine is 17.75') and less flow per head height.

http://cgi.ebay.com/New-SUBMERSIBLE...emQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item33540b110e


aha!
http://cgi.ebay.com/3250-GPH-Founta...emQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item45ee8f0e5a
I'll let you know the brand when i get home.

 

[nfored]

I have seen these style pumps before, I have been thinking about my problem, and about the real needed turn over rate.

Many post, and much research on this form suggest, that turn over rate need is greatly dependent on filter type and design. I have been thinking I can run my tank on a much lower turn over rate, if I redesign the sump, and use better Bio media.

Typically in a sump cheaper media such as bioballs and lava rock can be used, this is because you can have more space to use more media. So you are not forced to buy high density media like you would in a canister.

Also the true effectiveness of bio media is contact time with the water, in sumps the contact time is short, the time it takes the water to trickle down. This is why high turnover rate is need, if you can't get long contact time, make the time it takes the water to get back to the bio media short.

So if you where to design a sump where the contact time is longer, you can have slower turn over rate.

So here is my Idea of a redesigned sump.

Instead if dividing the section top to bottom, forcing the water to fight gravity, and loss of total sump water capacity, divided them from side to side. This way you still have the whole capacity of the sump, also as long as the spacing is at least 6 inches you will never restrict flow.

The bucket is the only enclosed space, this is where the water will enter the sump and contact the mechanical filter; This will be the only bypass free place. Now I no we have all be taught bypass is bad, and bypass free is good. This is not 100% true, for mechanical filtration this is true you need no bypassing since dirt is not effected by osmosis. However what is important to the fish is the water parameters,and this is effected by osmosis. If you take 50 gallons of water out of a 100 gallon tank, filter it so it has zero pollutants then place it back in the tank, the water is 50% pilutant free do to osmosis.

So why is this important in my design? because you will only line the bottom of the Maze with biomedia. The water that dose contact the biomedia will have a prolonged contact time, removing the pollution more effectively; this will in turn lower the pollution in all the water through osmosis. You get two benifits here slower movement is better for mechanical filtration, the slower water means more contact time for the biomedia this is also a plus. also you can use a lower powered pump for the filtration, and then use ultra low power power heads for circulation.

Attached is an example.

 

[Pharaoh]

Can you please explain a bit more towards your need for such a high turnover? I am running a 450G system on a 3,600gph pump. I know I'm not getting 3,600gph at the output, but my system still stay relatively well filtered.

As stated before, pumps are cheap and there are many efficient models on the market.

Here are some good ones.
www.[B]reeflopumps[/B].com

 

[FSM]

565 watts is horrible efficiency.

A reeflo dart uses 160 watts and pumps 3600 GPH max.