29 exo biuld

[bitts]

ok so what have I not thought about?

 

sorry about the return & closed loop stand pipe's drain/dursos being the same hight they where just easier to draw that way. and they would need to be above the water line. end result may look sleightly diffreent but this will hopefully get my thought across.

 

 

does anyone see a flaw that I am over looking.

[bitts]

fixed the stand pipes and put in the weir.

 

can any one see a flaw in my plumbing?

 

just wanted to make sure that im right in that as flow incresses in from the return side. it will decress on the inlet side.

 

can any one see a flaw in the bubble trap between the return and closed loop.

[ashaf22789]

It looks like it will work to me. It looks complicated though. Just keep it simple with the 2 drains, 1 return from sump, 1 suction for closed loop and return for closed loop. I dont know what all the extera plumbing is arround the returns though.....?

 

And idk if you plan on running the closed loop to the pump like that but you need a line into the pump and another out. They dont cross/join at any point.

[bitts]

think I finish duddling, put in the pumps n stuff.

 

now I know there might be easer ways of doing this. but I wanted to figure out how to not have pipes going over the rim or use check valves.

[ashaf22789]

Ok so why is there a suction for the closed loop in the overflow and in the tank? IMO i would have a surface suction inside the display and leave the overflow to go to sump.

[bitts]

closed loop has two inlets, first is from the tank(easy). second is from the return pump in the sump(weirdness). this is fed thru the bubble trap in the overflow.(thats what those wired stand pips are for) kinda like a continus siphion overflow, but if it goes bad, it just goes back down the drain. the reason for posting was its seems like it would work, but it also seems like Im smokin crack. cause its just not posable that im thinkin of something no else has thought up or done, if it actually works. there for what am i missing.

 

 

ps if im being an idiot some one tell me, Ive been stoned stupied on oxycodon since mon which is probably why I thought of this.

[neanderthalman]

.....

 

From a design philosophy - what "problem" are you trying to solve, that isn't solved by a standard sump return/closed loop system. Why are you connecting the two? What is the intent?

 

I forsee a metric shiat-ton of micro-bubbles from air sucked into your closed loop pump. The intent of a closed loop is to provide the majority of your flow, and from your plans it's clear that your closed loop is intended to be much larger than the sump return. I would anticipate that you will find that the water level in the bubble trap feeding the closed loop will become depressed from the suction of the closed loop pump, and allow air to become introduced from water crashing down the pipe. This will then get chopped up by the closed loop impeller and introduced to your system.

[bitts]

.....

 

From a design philosophy - what "problem" are you trying to solve, that isn't solved by a standard sump return/closed loop system. Why are you connecting the two? What is the intent?

was tring to get the water from the sump back into the display with out going over the rim or using check valves. and no bubbles.

 

 

I forsee a metric shiat-ton of micro-bubbles from air sucked into your closed loop pump. The intent of a closed loop is to provide the majority of your flow, and from your plans it's clear that your closed loop is intended to be much larger than the sump return. I would anticipate that you will find that the water level in the bubble trap feeding the closed loop will become depressed from the suction of the closed loop pump, and allow air to become introduced from water crashing down the pipe. This will then get chopped up by the closed loop impeller and introduced to your system.

 

 

was also thinking that the flow rates fedding the pump may not equallize causing what the inlets flow rate to exced, or not meet the pumps. one of the responces i recived on rc brought up that the smaller pump may introduce trubulence at the propeller/impeller shaft and cause pump failure within months.

 

would still like to figure out how to do this simply because I hate being shown up by plumbing. theres got to be a way to introduce the water without creating bubbles. or blowing up the pump.

[reefone]

sorry but ur plans just look like a nightmare waiting to happen. if u dont want the return hanging over the back drill another bulkhead at the top of the tank. and if ur sump is designed right u dont need any check valves.

[neanderthalman]

was tring to get the water from the sump back into the display with out going over the rim or using check valves. and no bubbles.

 

A standard method does this by putting the hole for the return as high as possible, and running the sump less than full to accommodate the extra volume that will drain on power loss. See my tank thread for an example.

 

If you don't like this solution (and some don't), there is an easy mod to your design that will also work.

 

Partition your weir.

 

Currently, you have your two drains on the left side, and the return coming up inside the right side. Eliminate the bubble traps, and the second inlet to the closed loop. The closed loop now only sucks water directly from the display tank.

 

Silicone a wall in the middle of your weir, dividing it into a left side and a right side. Plumb the return pump so that it fills the right section through a bulkhead in the bottom of the weir. The water returning from the sump will simply fill up this section and then gently overflow into the tank. On power failure, your water level will only drop to the height of your weir.

 

As for where to place this wall, I would put it closer to the right than the left, so that the return section is smaller than the drain section. This will slightly reduce the volume of water that will drain to the sump on power outage.

[bitts]

A standard method does this by putting the hole for the return as high as possible, and running the sump less than full to accommodate the extra volume that will drain on power loss. See my tank thread for an example.

 

If you don't like this solution (and some don't), there is an easy mod to your design that will also work.

 

Partition your weir.

 

Currently, you have your two drains on the left side, and the return coming up inside the right side. Eliminate the bubble traps, and the second inlet to the closed loop. The closed loop now only sucks water directly from the display tank.

 

Silicone a wall in the middle of your weir, dividing it into a left side and a right side. Plumb the return pump so that it fills the right section through a bulkhead in the bottom of the weir. The water returning from the sump will simply fill up this section and then gently overflow into the tank. On power failure, your water level will only drop to the height of your weir.

 

As for where to place this wall, I would put it closer to the right than the left, so that the return section is smaller than the drain section. This will slightly reduce the volume of water that will drain to the sump on power outage.

that or maby instead of a bubble trap just have the return come up for the siphion break then go back down and into the tank so the returns enter tank as low as posable. hmmmmm....

let me do some more duddling.

 

and thanks guys

[bitts]

that or maby instead of a bubble trap just have the return come up for the siphion break then go back down and into the tank so the returns enter tank as low as posable. hmmmmm....

let me do some more duddling.

 

and thanks guys

 

ok so I still think it would work but this may be easier

someone called the bubble trap antisiphion towers which got me thinkin, still dont like the idea of an external with 5 holes. but this would be stupid simple which is allways best.

[neanderthalman]

That could work.

 

Stupid simple would be to plumb directly to your return bulkhead, and simply use a bit of loc-line and a flared nozzle inside the tank. Using the loc-line, put the flared fitting just below the water line to minimize the amount of water that drains on power loss. Done.

[bitts]

but wouldent the loc line have the posability of leaking. maby not garented but still a wet floor is a wet floor. if not, than yes much easier.=) was thinking that if the bubble trap is not an option then may need to rethink the cloosed loop. having 5 holes drilled in the back of a 29 seems to be asking for truoble. espacilly with a big notch cut into it. although could come up through the bottom for the closed loop.

 

just doing the the return lines and a larger pump would be easiest and most likly cheapest. one of the things I was very excited about for the closed loop is that they dont suffer from head pressure which inables the pump to run @ its most effesent state. then by minimizing the return being able to have it cost less to run both than it would otherwise cost to run an equally sized return pump.

 

still think that if you can get water into and out of things like calcium reacters & sulfer denitrators. then theres got to be a way to do it with a closed loop with out enducing turbulence/cavitation at the pump and bubbles in the display.

 

 

on a side note neanderthalman for a closed loop do you think a 1" scwd feeding 2 3/4" scwd's could work well. would requier 4 return points which is what got me thinkin about coming up from below as well as from the back wall. would then have each fed into an eductor nozzle.

 

 

as always thank you for the input and critique.

[neanderthalman]

If you want four outputs, I would suggest picking up an OM squirt. You'll have far less head loss, and the cost difference will be negligible.

 

If you want to run a calcium reactor or similar from a closed loop, you can do so as long as the outlet of the reactor is into the display (not the overflow). However, you're far better off splitting water off of a return pump for reactors, so that the outlet can feed back to the sump.

 

Loc-line does not have appreciable leakage. good stuff. Also, don't worry about five holes - I have eight in the back of a 40B, and had four in the back of a 10g.

[bitts]

If you want four outputs, I would suggest picking up an OM squirt. You'll have far less head loss, and the cost difference will be negligible.

 

If you want to run a calcium reactor or similar from a closed loop, you can do so as long as the outlet of the reactor is into the display (not the overflow). However, you're far better off splitting water off of a return pump for reactors, so that the outlet can feed back to the sump.

 

Loc-line does not have appreciable leakage. good stuff. Also, don't worry about five holes - I have eight in the back of a 40B, and had four in the back of a 10g.

 

 

 

first wow you totally swiss chessed that tank, love the thread. will be stealing sevral ideas for my biuld. as for the point on reactors. simply pointing out that you can get water into & out of one with out making bubbles, there for should be able to do the same thing with closed loops. but may be a mute point by now, but theres still part of me that has to figure these things out. has anyone else done a closed loop that pushed limits of the back pane.

[neanderthalman]

first wow you totally swiss chessed that tank, love the thread. will be stealing sevral ideas for my biuld. as for the point on reactors. simply pointing out that you can get water into & out of one with out making bubbles, there for should be able to do the same thing with closed loops. but may be a mute point by now, but theres still part of me that has to figure these things out. has anyone else done a closed loop that pushed limits of the back pane.

 

Bubbles aren't usually an issue for closed loops. They're an issue for drains.

 

So long as the closed loop intake has several inches of water, it shouldn't suck air and therefore create no bubbles.

 

Same principle applies for reactors.

[bitts]

ok so after much debate and cost analysis looks like neaderthal man may be right. dont think he ever sad it but will be cheaper to simply run a standerd exo with a normal return system, replacing the closed loop with an mp10. now im still thinking this might be worth trying if for nothing else than to see how it did but for now a vortech will have to do. imagin a 10 x 10 exo for giggles. anyway on with the biuld.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ok im ordering silicone (dow999a) with in the week. so depending on the weather & what the wife says. this may be done soonish.

[bitts]

does anyone have sugestions as to the best or fastest why to polish the weir after cutting.

could maby use the dremel, but was just planing to wetsand it. thought that there may be a better way i hadnt thought of.

 

thanks in advance.

[bitts]

so after talking with my cousin over the weekend. im looking at this two sheets of each, all the way to 30 micron. and using dimiond files to make sure the weir is totaly level.

 

http://www.najatools.com/catalog.php?cid=105

[brun129]

looks like you've just cut a slit into the back of the tank. VERY, VERY BAD IDEA. There will be no pressure that high up and you will get next to no flow from that small of a hole. I'd be surprised if you got more than 150GPH of water coming through that slit. Worse than that, any little thing that blocks that slit - like maybe a snail or two that water would start flowing over the sides of your tank until your sump is empty.

 

Just something to think about.

[bitts]

the purpose of the weir's length is to improve surface skimming, same as internal coast to coast. but by moving the overrflow box outside of the display, the tank volume is retained. as an additional benifit waterflow becomes less restrickted & turbulent allowing for the creation of true gyre's within the tank. as to flow, with the weir being 20" by 1/4" the flow should be, at least deseant. a 1/4" hole will run at 10.584 gph @ a 1/4", mutiply that by 80 (or the weirs lenght in 1/4") and it looks like it will do 846.72 gph befor reaching the top of the weir or the slit. as the water just begins to flow across the entire weir, a water height of 0.05" it should be around 378.24gph or so. now the real question is weither the tank cracks due to any mico flaws i leave in the weir, mmmm... wet sanding.

[ajmckay]

Bitts, do you have and good sources on how to wet sand glass?

 

I'm re-siliconing a tank and I want to be sure I get off 100% of the old silicone.

 

Oh, and not to hijack this thread, your overflow design looks good to me. I would love to attempt something like that except I would be afraid of cracking.

[bitts]

not really, my cousin is a jewller & gave me that link to the 30 micron based 3m sandpaper. he has used it on his glasses befor so im hoping for a good result. just planning to do it by hand, starting big and working down. water. sand. repeat. joy.

 

as to cracking the tank, im actualy more worried about drilling the return holes. the weir went great, dremel, streight edge, & the right bit. oh and the garden hose, lots of water.

[brun129]

as to flow, with the weir being 20" by 1/4" the flow should be, at least deseant. a 1/4" hole will run at 10.584 gph @ a 1/4", mutiply that by 80 (or the weirs lenght in 1/4") and it looks like it will do 846.72 gph befor reaching the top of the weir or the slit. as the water just begins to flow across the entire weir, a water height of 0.05" it should be around 378.24gph

 

You cannot say that a 1/4" flows x amount of water. A 1/4" hole will flow x amount DEPENDING on the pressure on the inside, the pressure on the outside the thickness of the glass and even the temperature of the water to a minuscule extent. The total lack of water pressure from the inside would severely reduced the possible maximum flow.

 

Regardless - flow is the least troublesome part of your design. Why in your renders do you have an emergency drain ? Because of the possibility of a clogged drain line correct ? But that possibility is overlooked in the design of your weir.

 

What happens when a snail or two or four cover the opening ? FLOOD, your sump will be drained onto your floor. Take it from somebody with firsthand experience - My carpet anemone decided to let himself go loose one night and ended completely my overflow - 5 gallons on the floors before I could shut off the pump.

 

Your original renders have it right - cut a groove into the top of the tank - your execution has it all wrong.