sump
 

I have run my tank now for almost 2 years without a mmajor problem in it. I have various corals in it, and most are soft. I have run it without a skimmer or a sump, but I would like to add one top it now.
Does anybody think that this may screw with the chemistry in the tank??

Also, I would like to build my own sump if possible. I have found various places on the web that will show me how to make it, but I am more worried about my inflow and outflow pipes. It will be coming from a 60 gallon tank. I have a mag 7 kicking around, and all the extra parts for the sump. Should I be using another mag 7 to keep the power the same, or is there another way to do this?

This is a question that I would like answered because I am uncertain about a few things, and I would hate to screw the whole thing thing up because I couldn't ask questions. It is also in reply to the boring thread that was posted, saying that there was nothing ever posted

What size main tank is it? Mag 7 seems small after head pressure.

5$ rubbermaid sumps work, but some people prefer modified glass aquariums or custom acrylic sumps with baffles. Either or works.

I would say that it wouldn't hurt your tank at all. Make sure your parameters are close and turn it on. Adding extra water volume is a good thing! Think of it as a water change but you're adding water to dilute the nasties :lol:

I'm sure they will be lots more replys so ask away!

main tank is a 60 gallon

Re: sump
 

I am sorry I can't help with this, but I would like to ask why you are considering this? I myself run three smaller tanks without sumps, or skimmers. I am very happy with my results. I do not have many of the "fuzzy sticks" type of corals, so the requirement for gadgets like sumps and skimmers is unnecessary for me.

So the question do you really feel you need to do this, and why?

A sump and skimmer won't mess with your water chemistry at all. The sump will make your life easier as it's a good place to do any chemical filtration as needed, a place for your heaters and skimmer, you can have some live rock in there for additional biological filtration and a refugium and the extra water volume will be nothing but an advantage. I've run both a tank with a sump and without and hands down, the sump is the way to go.

As for the skimmer; I wouldn't run a tank without one.. That's not saying you can't, many have done so successfully. If you're willing to do frequent water changes and have some other export mechanism in place, you'll do fine I guess. If you don't and also don't run a skimmer, eventually you'll run into nutrient problems.

Troy is right, after you see what a good quality skimmer can pull out of the water you will say "wholy crap!"... or something along those lines :lol: It makes you wonder why you would never want to pull that stuff out of the water. Just my opinon.

If you decide to get a skimmer someday a sump gives you better choices for skimmers aswell (aposed to the meager hang on choices available)

Mag 7 will work ok. If you have all the pieces I say why not hook it up?

Just for discussion here. It was, and still is my understanding that the purpose of a DSB is to handle the Nitrate to Nitrogen gas conversion. With Nitrate being the end product of organic waste breakdown it seems to obviate the need for a skimmer. By applying this strategy one also lessens the need for water changes, and the need for nutrient export.

That is how interpret findings, and that is how I run my tanks quite successfully I might add.

Bob, just to point out, nitrogen is not the only organic by-product in the system. I'm not even sure a skimmer would/could remove nitrogen. A DSB and/or rock is best at removing that. The skimmer is used to remove other compounds....I can dig up some names for these if you like.SOme of these can/will build up over time if you don't have a skimmer or do water changes
You are correct in saying a skimmer may not be required and if that works for you, you sacved some money!! :biggrin:
However; when I tell new reefers to not listen to you and invest in a skimmer, I do this because I believe it to increase their chances of being successful, not because you're way won't work. You show that it does work for you. You have also been doing this along time. After the new reefer has done this as long, I also would encourage experimenting with different techniques.
I'm not trying to be a know it all, or say you are wrong. I'm just giving advice that I think will increase the likelihood of success for the new guy!

Point well taken. I don't disagree at all. If a person wants to use the skimmer approach they are most welcome. I only ever offer what works in my somewhat limited setup. The reader is more than welcome to use whatever method he feels wiill work for him. I may not have mentioned that on one tank I use a refugium with Caulerpa for nutrient export, but as to its efficacy, I don't know. I also use Dick Boyd's Chemipure on two tanks. How well it works I don't know, but I like it.

That is my point. A reader is presented with different viewpoints that work for the person giving the advice. It is just that one person's viewpoint should not be denegrated (my word for the day), because it differs from another's. BTW I love your tank, but I can't afford, or won't afford the expense to have one the same, so I keep to softies and zoos, and such, and am perfectly happy. OK :arrow: :question: , and, yes one can keep a LTA in a 10 gallon tank under 52W of PC lighting. :rolleyes:

I'm not sure who or what this comment is directed at but the point, rather than whether one can, is whether one should. FWIW, 52W isn't exactly low light on a 10gal tank if that's what your inferring.

Back to the topic, I think running chemipure is probably helping Bob, as is the caulerpa. I sure wouldn't want to rely solely on a DSB. Brad makes good points on the subject.