Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board > General > Reef

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-16-2009, 12:31 AM
golf nut golf nut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of Toronto
Posts: 454
golf nut is on a distinguished road
Default

I am not sure if you noticed, but if you continue to read the article from the magazine you quoted you will see the following, if you read further you might find that the writer is actually advocating against 10x through the sump rather 3x or 4x is better..

Quote:
As with any complex subject in this hobby, people are always looking for (and giving) rules of thumb. With regard to water movement in reef aquariums, many authors will advocate at least 10 times the volume of the aquarium per hour. So if you have a 100-gallon reef, you should be moving around 1000 gallons/hour. This is a fine starting point as long as you understand that this does not mean that you need to move 1000 gallons of water in and out of your aquarium.
Many reef aquarists use some sort of overflow in the tank to take water to an external container called a sump. In the sump various tools such as protein skimmers, carbon containers, reactors, etc. filter the water. The water is then returned to the aquarium. This is referred to as an open loop. The volume of water that flows through this loop need only be 3-4 times the volume of the tank (not 10+). This is the filtration flow rate. The rule of thumb that was mentioned earlier refers to the circulation rate in the aquarium. This number takes into account, not only the return from the filter, but circulation from various other pumps as well. I cannot tell you how many times people have come to me and asked how they can quiet there filter down on their 90 gallon tank because they are trying to put 900 gallons/hr through their overflow.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issu...3/beginner.htm
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-16-2009, 12:53 AM
sphelps's Avatar
sphelps sphelps is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lyalta, East of Calgary
Posts: 4,777
sphelps is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr OM View Post
I am not sure if you noticed, but if you continue to read the article from the magazine you quoted you will see the following, if you read further you might find that the writer is actually advocating against 10x through the sump rather 3x or 4x is better..
Yes I did notice, did you notice the reasoning (noise not performance) and the fact it has nothing to do with my argument or why I quoted that? Like I said before some just love to argue but I didn't say 3-5x was wrong just that it's not a requirement and 10x will work equally well if you can deal with the higher flow. Also note the date of the article.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-16-2009, 01:00 AM
golf nut golf nut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of Toronto
Posts: 454
golf nut is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphelps View Post
Yes I did notice, did you notice the reasoning (noise not performance) and the fact it has nothing to do with my argument or why I quoted that? Like I said before some just love to argue but I didn't say 3-5x was wrong just that it's not a requirement and 10x will work equally well if you can deal with the higher flow. Also note the date of the article.
You appear to be confirming your 10x turnover sump rate theory, however the article simply claims that 3x is adequate, otherwise they would have advocated a 10x capacity and explained how to select the correct size pipe for a silent overflow
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-16-2009, 01:08 AM
sphelps's Avatar
sphelps sphelps is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lyalta, East of Calgary
Posts: 4,777
sphelps is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr OM View Post
You appear to be confirming your 10x turnover sump rate theory, however the article simply claims that 3x is adequate, otherwise they would have advocated a 10x capacity and explained how to select the correct size pipe for a silent overflow
Like I already stated, it takes more experience to run higher flows through overflows properly, it's not for everyone and it's not necessarily better than lower flow. That article is for beginners, which you would have noticed if you read the title rather than immediately trying to find something to argue with. I would never tell a beginner to use 10x turnover just like I wouldn't tell one to use a herbie overflow either.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-16-2009, 01:16 AM
golf nut golf nut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of Toronto
Posts: 454
golf nut is on a distinguished road
Default

You quoted the article to back up your statement, I am arguing no more than you are.

I have always promoted low flow, and have used syphon systems for many years, I have never advocated a Durso, a Durso is for people that have incorrectly sized their drains.

Please refrain from accusing me of making this a personal issue.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-16-2009, 01:32 AM
sphelps's Avatar
sphelps sphelps is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lyalta, East of Calgary
Posts: 4,777
sphelps is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr OM View Post
You quoted the article to back up your statement, I am arguing no more than you are.

I have always promoted low flow, and have used syphon systems for many years, I have never advocated a Durso, a Durso is for people that have incorrectly sized their drains.

Please refrain from accusing me of making this a personal issue.
Perhaps you could read things properly before making your arguments, if you did you would realize that quote had very little to do with my points. It was only intended to show that 10x is a general rule of thumb for total flow, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-16-2009, 01:37 AM
golf nut golf nut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of Toronto
Posts: 454
golf nut is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphelps View Post
Perhaps you could read things properly before making your arguments, if you did you would realize that quote had very little to do with my points. It was only intended to show that 10x is a general rule of thumb for total flow, nothing more.
What has 10x total flow got to do with 10x sump rates? they ask for 3x sump rates and 10x total flow, not your 10x sump recommendation, trust me I read it properly, I think you were the one that used it to prove your point, but had not read it properly.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.