# Plumbing Design for my 75 - Opinions?



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

I'm working on putting together a 75g and am trying to work through plumbing design questions. I've got substrate and a stand on the way, and I'm agonizing over acquiring (fabricating) the tank in another thread. In this one, I'd love to engage a bit of feedback on plumbing, so I can start lining up parts.

The design below uses pieces from my current 20, which is pretty much over built by design, so I could throw that stuff into a larger tank later.

I rather not get into questions of "how many watts is that heater?", or "which canister are you planning on using for the polishing?", or even worse "what size and type is that hose?". Those are great questions for _after _ the basic design is completed.

What I'm trying to do will, I hope, be obvious from the design below:

Bring water in and out of the tank through bulkheads - though this could be omitted without changing much in the design.
Have redundancy in the basic filtering to facilitate problems and maintenance.
Have a separate polishing filter, really just to "decloud" the water after heavy substrate work.
Get all my water testing and treatment in-line and out of the tank.
Have two heaters, both required to keep the tank warm, so that failure of either won't cook the fish.

Would love to get your thoughts! Thanks in advance.


----------



## jhoetzl (Feb 7, 2005)

If you are really going to go with all that equipment, why not move 1 or 2 of the devices hanging off the filter to the polishing run. For adding all that redundacy you are putting a lot off the primary. If the primary goes, you don't have any T's with valves to allow the secondary to temporarily get dosing, Co2, etc...

Maybe one main T & valve before the primary intake connected to the secondary intake and one right after the primary to the spot right after the output of the secondary?


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

jhoetzl said:


> Maybe one main T & valve before the primary intake connected to the secondary intake and one right after the primary to the spot right after the output of the secondary?


Man, that's why I love this forum. One reply and I've got major good ideas for improvement! Agreed. Thanks!




jhoetzl said:


> Why not move 1 or 2 of the devices hanging off the filter to the polishing run. For adding all that redundancy you are putting a lot off the primary.


I've got all that stuff hanging off a little Eheim Ecco now, and I've got _plenty _ of flow. It always surprises people, but it's true. I'd rather not split the "processing" loop - all or nothing as it were. And with your idea above, I can have it all, even it my primary filter is out. Great idea.

But the split will be between the primary and secondary, not primary and polishing. I don't want anything on the polishing line, because as much as it will be a polishing filter, I'll really only be using it for heavy cleaning after tank maintenance. So I'd rather keep the other functions off that loop to keep them from getting mucked up.

Now I've got to go work on a revised diagram. :wink:


----------



## e.lark (Feb 2, 2005)

Looks good to me...if you dont mind having the returns both on one side. For form and function I would be inclined to have the intake bulkheads in the corners with the two returns in the middle. I assume you will have strainers in the intakes, I would think you could have better options to hide the look of those in the corners.

I dont see how water is going to make it to the middle polishing filter unless your intake lines were taking in alot of water. It seems like it would need its own intake.

When you plumb the ph probe inline, is it completely submerged or is only the tip inline?


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

e.lark said:


> Looks good to me...if you dont mind having the returns both on one side.


That's just how it shows in this drawing. I have no idea where the in and outs will be under the tank. I'm worried about the plumbing under the tank right now. Almost left that out of the diagram because I didn't want to get into "proper bulk heading" in this thread. Would rather discuss that here.  Fair question though.




e.lark said:


> I dont see how water is going to make it to the middle polishing filter unless your intake lines were taking in alot of water.


The intakes will be big enough to take in tons of water, but I only intend to use the polishing filter when both canisters are off, and the valves on the intakes for both the primary and secondary is off. I think I'll change the name of that to a "heavy cleaning" filter, because as much as it will have an ability to polish, I do not intend to use it in conjunction with the other filters.




e.lark said:


> When you plumb the ph probe inline, is it completely submerged or is only the tip inline?


It's inline in my tank now, tip submerged only. Got a separate thread on it here.


----------



## Buck (Oct 13, 2002)

I have a question Steve... what are Dosing Pumps ?


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Ok, modified version below, with a extra lines connecting the primary and secondary filter lines. Designed to be shut off most of the time to keep them separate. But could be turned on if you wanted to isolate either filter and still have all of the in-line processing happen. Or you could switch it so that the secondaries return took all the flow, if something really bad was happening with the primary return line. Decided not to implement it as a T valve, but to keep two flows that were theoretically independent end to end.

Also changed the name on the polisher to prevent confusion.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Buck, your post came in while I was writing...

I've got a peristaltic pump that squirts a measured amount of NPK in-line every day, on a timer for the beginning of the photo period. Just got back from three weeks away and only had to have my son put in micros once a week. Great way to dose without being present. roud: 

I've got a 2nd one in this picture because I want another one for the micros too. Can't mix the stuff into one container because of precipitates. Think it was Iron with Phosphate, but not sure. I should re-label them Dosing Macros and Dosing Micros.

All this, and more, can be avoided by a sump, or an autodoser hanging on the lip of the tank. But I'm trying really hard to avoid a sump, or anything visable in/on the tank.


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

In your diagram you do not have any pumps powereing the system. Are you going to use the cans to power everything?

When I do a performance-cost-no-objst tank I will ditch the sump and cans and move to a modular system. A filter I would consider is linked below:

http://www.bigalsonline.com/catalog/product.xml?product_id=22091&category_id=2887&pcid1=2885

The idea being that the return pump, heater, and 'extras' can be swapped etc...


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

BlueRam said:


> When I do a performance-cost-no-objst...


Cost is an object. I'd rather spend the real money on lights. I've got everything in the diagram now in my 20g except the primary filter (canister), a 2nd in-line heater, and the 2nd dosing pump. I'm not considering the tubing and PVC, or even the valves, as all told that shouldn't go much over $100.




BlueRam said:


> Are you going to use the cans to power everything?... ditch the sump and cans and move to a modular system.


Yes, since I am trying keep the cost a bit under control. Your link looks cool, but I thought modular was $$$. Am I wrong? Not to mention that I don't know a d*mn thing about modular systems.


----------



## John P. (Apr 10, 2004)

Steve, you may need to build a hydroelectric dam, too, with all the power you're going to be consuming, LOL! 

Should be very cool, though.


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

I would like to say I have seen a similar filter for as low as ~$90. Get a good pump for ??? ($50? <0' head>) and you are looking about the same $ as a can with a fair bit more hassel (but hey you are building a tank!). You have a good size filter that will keep the water fairly clean (25 micro + UV). It looks like it is fairly easy to pop open an clean to boot. You might notice that the modular filter linked is starting to look like pool equipment too...

You seem to like new ideas and sugestions no mater how radical so have at it!


----------



## khoile (Jan 27, 2005)

May be you can place the polishing filter at the output of your primary and secondary filters (T both filter output together to produce more force). You can then use this
http://www.bigalsonline.com/catalog/product.xml?product_id=22105;category_id=2887;pcid1=2885;pcid2=
to do your water polishing 24/7. You can ofcourse have a bypass so to turn the water polishing off too.

Or you can just put a water polisher like Vortex at the output of the primary or secondary. I'm not sure if one filter is sucking the other is pushing at different rate, it may create cavitation.

Just my 2 cents.
Khoi,


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

John P. said:


> Steve, you may need to build a hydroelectric dam


Thanks JohnP! But I'm using all that power today except the primary pump, the 2nd dosing pump (30 minutes a day for that), and the 2nd heater. But on the heaters, keep in mind, I hope to size them so that one will not be enough, but two enough, so a failure of one won't toast the fish. So the total heater power, between the two, should not be a whole lot more than 1 big one.





BlueRam said:


> You seem to like new ideas and suggestions no mater how radical.


Well you got that right! I'm just not sure where I draw that line though... in-line pH, I can look at that and see it's going to work. Build your own, tank... how hard can it be? But modular systems... I don't know. Hard pressed to see the advantage over the Eheims that I've come to be so happy with. That is between my own little one, and all the _endless_ hype I read about them here.  
But I will check it out, and give it a good think. Pls let me know if you know any links to educate "modular newbies". Thanks.



Khoi said:


> do your water polishing 24/7


Wow. I can see having that polisher on the diagram is going to cause me trouble. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but my water is crystal clear now. And I hope it will be on my new tank. (Vanity I know) So I'm not planning on running the polisher much at all.

All I want that for is to turn the other pumps off, and that one on for a few hours, after I've been digging in the substrate, clouding up the water. (Like now, I'm typing with damp, "pruned" fingers from digging in my tank!)

So I'm not really interested in 24/7. Just a few hours a month. Thanks for the suggestion though. :icon_bigg


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

You are building a modular system!


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

BlueRam said:


> You are building a modular system!


LOL! That really is funny! Never thought of that. I just thought it kinda made sense... :icon_bigg

Truthfully though, I always though modular implied "easily replaceable", and this is not that. If a piece bites the dust, the UV for instance, the unit can be cut off from the flow, but any disconnection from the system will still be a pain in the a**. I experimented with that concept on my 20, putting in quick disconnects. But I quickly figured out that...

1) It adds a whole lot of "inches" of equipment in your lines, and things get crowded fast.
2) They have leakage problems too.
3) They are WAY overpriced, and I would just rather spend that money somewhere else!

So, modular, maybe. Quick change on the parts, definitely not. Just designed so you can live with it for a little while. :icon_wink


----------



## Buck (Oct 13, 2002)

Well being that I aint never heard of a peristaltic pump, I threw that phrase into google and came back with some very high tech looking devices that all seemed to run in the high HUNDREDS for cost !   

You either have a great source for equiptment or you mean business with this setup... LOL

Lookin good Steve, I hope your project comes together as planned. roud:


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

Do get me wrong- I think Eheim's are great in that you can go out and buy one box that moves water in the tank/filters/heats all while being absolutely quiet. The are doing a good job. However there are some thinks the Eheim does not do. Stuff like UV/CO2 reactor/pH probe/doser etc.... So to get around this you have built a "modular" system. In the system you propose, the only things the Eheim is let doing is moving water and prefiltering (you are not even using the hose kit!). So lets ask if the Eheim impeller is the most efficient way to pump water. For some the answer is yes and off you go. For others flow rate and power consumption leans towards external. This is especially important in reef systems which are moving thousands of gallons per hour. So if you go pump only you also need a filter to keep the pump from clogging- enter my first link...


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

Buck said:


> Well being that I aint never heard of a peristaltic pump, I threw that phrase into google and came back with some very high tech looking devices that all seemed to run in the high HUNDREDS for cost !


As you might already know: The peristaltic pump works on the same premise as squeezing out a tube of frosting except the fingers are metal and go around in a circle... The advantage is that the material inside the tube never comes into contact with mechanical bits. Think moving blood (fluids) without damaging (contaminating) it. So add the word "medical" and the cost increases greatly.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Buck said:


> devices that all seemed to run in the high HUNDREDS for cost !


Thanks Buck. They aren't cheap. That's why I only have one now. But IUnkown has figured out how get the cost to less than $100 here.  Still not cheap though. But I travel a lot, and being able to "set it and forget it" is for me, a requirement of staying in the hobby.




BlueRam said:


> the only things the Eheim is let doing is moving water and prefiltering (you are not even using the hose kit!). So lets ask if the Eheim impeller is the most efficient way to pump water.


I think your line of thinking is solid. But I'm not concerned with having the _"most efficient way"_. A very wise man once said "everything worth doing, is not worth doing right". Words to live by. Keeps things in perspective and often the costs down.

So for me, other than esoteric questions about efficiency, there are five other factors for me:

1) Being familiar enough with solution components to know I'll be happy.
2) Keeping cost down.
3) Having a real, real, quiet system.
4) Having a reliable system.
5) Having an easy to maintain system.

Eheim hits most of the above pretty well, except maybe number 2. But since I'm planning on sizing the primary canister so that both of them are needed to run to keep optimal flow (in other words, losing one is a problem, but not crippling), which lets me buy as smaller unit. Thus keeping the cost down because I've already got the secondary canister.

Given all the above, is there really a compelling reason to look at something else?


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

How did I miss this thread?

Something you might want to consider is a thing called laminar flow. Laminar flow is when all the water is going in a straight line and no turbulence is present. All those 90 degree elbows introduce turbulence, slows things down considerably and thus output. There are actually calculations you can perform to demonstrate the loss of flow. Each 90 degree turn will slow the flow down by a certain factor and these factors compound with every 90 degree turn you make. You might be able to find such a site online if you do a search for "fluid dynamics". I learned all this crap in engineering school. Turbulence can really slow down the rate of an impeller pump because its not made to pressurize but rather just push the water along. You can minimize the effects of turbulence by stretching out the turns with flex tubing but it will be ugly. Or you can go to a positive displacement type pump that can pack some pressure to overcome these losses.

Marcel


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Thanks Marcel. Always good to get comments from the cosmically in-tune. :wink: 

I don't know squat about that stuff, except that it occurs. But I do know this... everything you see in that primary line, except an inlet for a 2nd dosing pump and the under bulkhead contraption, exists in my 20g today. But it's running off the smallest Eheim Ecco they make. And the filter is silent, unlike when something presents too much pressure and it starts making noise. And my water is crystal clear. Sparkling. So I assume whatever diminished flow it has, it is enough.

I appreciate the point. But I kind of figured that if I found out the flow on my pump, it would be a matter of simple math to know how much flow from a similar Eheim put would suffice under dramatically similar circumstances on a 75.

Am I being naive?


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

Put the whole thing together and find out! The worse that could happen is that you'd have to add another pump in there somewhere. :wink:


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Now THAT is a practical answer! Thanks. :icon_bigg


----------



## Laith (Jul 7, 2004)

Great system. Really like it!

Would love to do something like this on my 200l but I'm pretty sure I couldn't fit all that plumbing and equipment in the stand!

Set it up and then show us some pics!


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Laith said:


> I'm pretty sure I couldn't fit all that plumbing and equipment in the stand!


Thanks Laith. I'll be you could fit it. You just have to be a bit creative. I've got most of the stuff in the primary loop under my little 24" x 12" stand for my 20g now - that along with a 5lb CO2 tank, a fert reservoir, and gosh only knows how much electrical equipment (timers, timer controllers, power strips...)

I've got shelf near the top, with the electrical stuff on that. And saving space has been greatly assisted by not only doing the typical "bolt it to the sides" plumbing, but also by attaching things to the underside of that shelf, hanging down. It frees up space on the bottom too!

It can definately be done. My 20g's been kind of a "proof of concept" for me on that.


----------



## wantplantsnotwork (Nov 28, 2004)

*Remember the basics.....*

I can remember way back when , at the begining of engineering school:
1) Form follows function

2) Make sure it's part of the solution, not part of the problem.

3) K.I.S.S. -----> Keep it simple [email protected]$%*

Very important to consider. Not trying to take any wind out your sails, but you really have to ask yourself if you like gadgets (and their corisponding tinkering); or you are trying to solve a *real* problem.

Many, many people keep *excelent* 75 tanks with much less.
For every joint, every 90*, and coupling, you have leak potential, crud build-up, and a very real friction loss. The more power you need to overcome the loss's, the more *NOISE* you are going to generate.

Just my 02, worth what you paid for it!


----------



## Momotaro (Feb 21, 2003)

I have to agree with Peter on this one, Steve. I think this one may be a bit over thought.

That is a heck of a lot of equipment. You are looking to install three filters, two inline heaters, a couple of dosing pumps a UV and a CO2 reactor. Lot of equipment to fit under a 75G. I looked under mine and there is no way I could do it, never mind keeping all the power lines and plumbing "legible".

I mean, it is your set up, do whatever makes you happy, but I don't see it. As Marcel mentioned, I see pressure and rate of flow problems. I am not sure how you are going to get the power to make the system work.

As far as redundancy, you have two filters. Great move, as I believe two are just about a requirement for a heavily planted 75G aquarium. The polishing filter? Why not just drop in a Diatom when you need it and be done with it. One less plug you need to figure out how to power and one less piece of equipment in the cabinet. Same goes with the second heater. Leave the second one in the box on a shelf and install it if your primary heater fails. Again, one less thing to power and one less thing to try and cram under the aquarium.

It is a fun design, but I am not sure how practical it really is once you get down to it. There is a heck of a lot of time and money laid out there. I just think you should think you should have a look at this side before you take the plunge!

Very respectfully  

Mike


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Wow! I LOVE you guys! Negative comments are MOST WELCOME. roud: Thanks. That's why I posted...

So now with the retort!



wantplantsnotwork said:


> you really have to ask yourself if you like gadgets (and their corresponding tinkering)


Yes! I do. But only if I can get them to work and then walk away. Minimal maintenance for a little extra effort or investment!



wantplantsnotwork said:


> For every joint, every 90*, and coupling, you have leak potential, crud build-up, and a very real friction loss. The more power you need to overcome the loss's, the more *NOISE* you are going to generate.





Momotaro said:


> As Marcel mentioned, I see pressure and rate of flow problems. I am not sure how you are going to get the power to make the system work


Are you guys reading the posts?  I've got EVERYTHING you see on the primary line except a 2nd dosing pump under my 20g now. With my wimpy little Ecco. And it's quit. And it doesn't leak. And it doses. And it gets thermometers out of my tank. And it gets diffusers out of my tank. And it gets pH probes out of my tank. And it gets heaters out of my tank. And its been working for over 6 months (not long I know, but possibly long enough), and it WORKS.

Form DOES follow function now. It gets crap out of my tank. Maybe not an objective for everyone, but please respect the fact that it's way up the priority list for me.



Momotaro said:


> Same goes with the second heater. Leave the second one in the box on a shelf and install it if your primary heater fails.


Good point. But as I mentioned early in the post, the idea is to have two heaters that independently are not enough, so that if one fails in the on position, you don't cook the fish. But here's a place where experience really comes to play, something I don't have. Are heaters so reliable now that this is no longer a concern? It certainly was when I was last in the hobby (eons ago), as a kid.



Momotaro said:


> The polishing filter? Why not just drop in a Diatom when you need it and be done with it.


Good question. Because I've had it with hauling crap out, dropping it in, packing it up and putting it away. I want to flip a switch, flip it off, and forget it. Convenience, pure and simple. It may not be everyones cup of tea, but I think that it should be considered "reasonable" as a design objective.



Momotaro said:


> There is a heck of a lot of time and money laid out there.


Again, are you reading the post? Other than a 2nd heater, which is arguably optional, and a 2nd dosing pump, also arguably optional, the one last thing I don't have NOW under my 20g is a bigger canister. And that is not optional if I'm moving to a 75. 

So there are only two optional things there. Everything else is I've got.

Thanks for the feedback. Please keep that voice of experience coming my way!


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

Please do not take my comments are critical or negative. I post in good sprits.

You are trying to do something hard and we all respect that.

So flow rates: You are running a small Ecco now with reasonable size tubing. Lets say the Ecco 2231 has flow of 127GPH <rated> (or 6.3 volumes per hour). To keep the same water movement for a 75 (at 4 volumes per hour) you are going to aim for ~300 GPH <true> (my 60 is doing about 200-250 which is not all that much IMHO...). So you are trying to push more water volume through each component. In some cases you can use larger tubes to carry the flow but in others you are going to be hosed. In particular, if you pass all the water through the UV unit you are going to have much shorter residence time so the unit is not as effective over-all in addition to any backpressure caused by smaller hoses. This is the problem with scaling up paper airplanes etc. I do not doubt that your system works now at all as I can tell from your prior posts.

You are also going to be working with increased pressures (depth of water) so a fitting that does not leak now may become a problem later and the risk of a breakage goes up too. I understand trading extra investment for minimal maintenance put please understand that I fear Murphy’s law and one less thing to break is well one less thing.

Heaters: The lifetime of a heater starts when it is plugged into the wall. Using multiple heaters seems like a good idea does not work perfectly because one of them will come on first and do most of the load. This is why Discus people put multiple heaters on a temp control system. Ie when the temp drops the power is switched on and the heaters go until the temp sensor shuts them off. The set points are a few degrees above the cut point so if the controller sticks, the temp does not shoot through the roof. (starts to sound a lot like a controller and say UG cables, Ti probe etc.. where the coil does not have a thermostat) You can by a modular heater holder so if the heater fails you can unscrew the old one and replace it. Since the heater has been on the shelf you can consider it "like new." 

So if I come off harsh please let me blame my science (getting strange answers) or the sore in my throat or bad communication... but never an attack on anyone directly. When you get this to work and I get a big tank rest assured I am going to bite you design! Bwahaaaaa!!!


----------



## Betowess (Dec 9, 2004)

What kind of polishing filter are you thinking of? Obviously not a D1. Maybe something like an inline magnum? For as rarely as one needs to use one, it seems like it might as well be left out of the loop. I imagine the Eheims have a polishing pad like the Rena's do. Because even if you flip a switch you still have to clean a magnum or D1, Just my opinion. bob


----------



## BOTIA (Dec 23, 2003)

*kiss*

I'm with the kiss group myself. A sump will do all that you ask and one thing more. You could have a constant water level and/or water level adjustment. 
Heaters go in the sump with the dosing pumps ,the co2 reactor and uv goes on the return pump line.
I have a 5 1/2 gallon sump on my 15 tall and I love it . it's very easy to maintain (barely do anything) and keeps my tank bare of equipment. The over flow is a simple diy pvc one that was dirt cheap to make. If you are going to have bottom bulkheads you might want dursts standpipe to reduce co2 loss and noise.
I love techy stuff too but it always seems to need more tinkering than you think...
Botia


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Betowess said:


> What kind of polishing filter are you thinking of?


I've got a HOT Magnum that I think could be hooked up in-line pretty easily. Might need an extra pump on that line though.




Betowess said:


> still have to clean a magnum...


Of course. But I don't think I have to clean it every time I use it. So this setup is still more convenient.

But I'll tell you what DOES worry me Bob - anaerobic bacteria. If I shut that part of the line off when not it use (most of the time), will I be creating a breeding ground for really nasty stuff? That in itself could be enough to make me give up on that part of the idea.




Botia said:


> I have a 5 1/2 gallon sump on my 15 tall and I love it


I will readily admit that a sump it probably the most "KISS" way to approach most of this stuff. And here's where I have to beg everyones indulgence...
I love trying new things. And trying to get every single thing out of the tank, and in-line, is something that I don't think has been seriously explored. And I really want to try it. I may crash and burn. But if I do, the whole community learns from my mistakes. So I'm not doing a sump. I want to try this. But thanks for suggesting it.




Botia said:


> If you are going to have bottom bulkheads you might want dursts standpipe...


I want to be REAL clear on the fact that I am not committed to bulkheads vs. tubes over the side of the tank. I'm in love with a pair of Lily pipes I got from IUnknown. My principal reservation is the limitations the placement of bulkheads has on your aquascape options. Once they are drilled, you are stuck with the positions, and must 'scape around them. So I've not made up my mind on that point yet. It's a trade off between versatility and completely hiding all equipment.
But I'm not so sure about the durst standpipes. Take a look at what James Hoftiexer has done here.




BlueRam said:


> Please do not take my comments are critical or negative. I post in good spirits


Never expected anything different! roud: That's why the forum is here, to hash these things out.




BlueRam said:


> In particular, if you pass all the water through the UV unit you are going to have much shorter residence time so the unit is not as effective over-all


That's why I have the ball valve and the by-pass on it. Only some of the water will go through it, hopefully adjusted to the correct rate. Learned that one from a design GDominy posted.




BlueRam said:


> You are also going to be working with increased pressures (depth of water)


That is most definitely a concern. Good point and completely agreed.  




BlueRam said:


> I fear Murphy’s law...


Understood. And agreed. But you can do things to minimize that. Like now, every line, and every component I have is rigidly mounted - nothing loose. The list of components is still high, and Murphy could have a field day, but I've tried hard to minimize his opportunity.





BlueRam said:


> Heaters...


I'm trying to avoid the cost of a controller, though this is clearly the best solution. I understand the point about one heater doing most of the work, but the idea is that it would require both heaters to do all the work when it is cold. And I'm not sure if you addressed the basic design concept - to have a setup that will allow your fish to survive if one fails in the "on" position. Maybe I'm missing something.



Thanks for the response folks. You've given me lots to think about.... :wink:


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

OK, back to the drawing board...









Things I've changed...

Some things are green. All of those particular components are set up exactly as shown in my 20g now.
I've removed two bulkhead connections. Really just to avoid discussion on "where" they should go.
I've labeled any equipment that I already have.
I've moved order of the Primary and Secondary lines.
The secondary line has all the in-line stuff now.
The valves have been labeled NC or NO for Normally Closed or Normally Open.
I lost a lot of ball valves.
I lost a lot of corners.

It's all constructed around the assumption that leaving things in-line, the way they are now, off the Eheim Ecco, then flow rates on those items in-line will still be appropriate. This will all be augmented by the primary filtration line, which will require much larger canister (or modular filter BlueRam) to handle the bulk of both filtration and water movement. They should both be run in tandem. The polisher will normally be off (and even closed if that won't create anaerobic conditions.)

The normally closed "T"s above and below the filters is to allow the primary filter to be crossed over to the input and output sides of the Ecco, if there were a problem with the Ecco. In normal operations the two lines would work independently.

And things you may be wondering about...

Insufficient heating - Yup. Still got to decide where to put a 2nd heater. I don't think the one I have now will be enough.
Insufficient CO2 - I don't know. This thing will accommodate a much higher bubble rate than I'm using now, and the regulator is off most of the time. I suspect it will ramp up to a 75g just fine.
Inappropriate flow on UV - this is the way I have it set up now, and only running at night BTW. So my assumption is that the flow will remain similar to what it is now (assuming that's appropriate) and the affected water volume will just be turned over more slowly than if I broke down and got a larger one.
Poor design on primary line switch over to in-line functions. Yes, it's not optimal. I'm certainly open to a better way, but it really isn't supposed to be used that way unless something bad went wrong with my secondary canister. And then you could throttle down the flow with the valves.
HOT Magnum underneath the tank? I think it might work. At least a ME friend of mine thinks so. If it doesn't forget the polishing function. I'm not buying another polisher just to get it under the tank. I'll give up the "flip a switch" scrubbing function.


Any comments are appreciated. Thanks! :smile:


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Hey folks, throw me a bone here! :icon_mrgr I radically simplified the design - but no feedback.

Did I make you all mad the first time through, or was it just too long to read?  

I've got a stand arriving tomorrow, and I would love to begin plumbing it. And would love to know if this simplified design will work. And if so, what sort of Eheim (sorry, definitely Eheim) canister will I need for the primary filtration line? Assuming it is running parallel to the secondary?

Thanks!


----------



## khoile (Jan 27, 2005)

Why do you have your probes at the input instead of output? Will it trap dirt and eventually reduce water flow? I'm not sure the design of your DIY, it still make better sense to me placing at the output where water is free of debris.

Khoi,


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

I like this setup much better. Actually, I don't see how you could simplify it any more than this without keeping all the features you want. This is good engineering. The simplest way is always the best way.

You could simplify it a little further by moving the PH and Temp probes to the main bulkhead entrance pipe. By doing this, you could eliminate the cross fitting and valve between the primary and secondary filter inlets, further lessening the plumbing complexity while retaining the same functions.

Marcel


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

I like khoiles idea of putting the ph probe on the outlet side. But keep the temp probe on the inlet side to keep tank temp readings accurate. Putting the temp on the outlet side will give a false temp from the heated water coming out of the heater.


----------



## khoile (Jan 27, 2005)

m.lemay said:


> I like khoiles idea of putting the ph probe on the outlet side. But keep the temp probe on the inlet side to keep tank temp readings accurate. Putting the temp on the outlet side will give a false temp from the heated water coming out of the heater.


I Agree. Make perfect sense.  Still it a single point of failure if the DIY got clog though. Maybe placing the probe inside the tank?

*Edit*
Now that I look at the design again, it look perfect. I was worry that the probe may not have sufficient water flow to measure temp accurately. Maybe you should have multiple probes and do somesort of voting logic for redudancy sakes, you can actually know which one is bad by comparing values between probes, or maybe not :icon_bigg 

Khoi,


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Marcel - Good point! Thanks, never thought of that! Will have to incorporate that into the design.

Khoi - I've got a thread here that goes into a bit of detail on that question. But basically it's because both the temp and pH probe are in "T"s and are recessed a bit out of the main water flow, and thus not subject to debris in the water. Debris should flow on past. Or that's the thinking anyway. Been running a while now like that and it works.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Wow, you guys are posting too fast for me to respond... Thanks.

Khoi - outlet side would work. But you should take a look at that link. Clogging is really, really unlikely.

I had it up front due to my ignorance of water chemistry. I was concerned that being behind the CO2 might mess up the reading, given the highly carbonated state of that water. If someone can confirm that that is not an issue, moving it to the output piping would make a world of sense. Thanks!

But inside the tank - No. Have gone to a lot of work to get everything OUT!


----------



## khoile (Jan 27, 2005)

I looked at it. Well look like you're ready then . Please post pictures.

Khoi,


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Thanks Khoi!

Anybody care to venture a post on the proper canister size for the primary line? I may talk a lot, but there's a lot I don't know!!!


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

Ok' I took the liberty of doing a quick redesign. Eliminated 3 valves and moved probes around.


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

The ideal spot for the ph probe would be after filters but before the reactor.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Hey Marel! You are too funny man - hijacking my drawing like that! But the changes are good. 

But in retrospect, the pH probe HAS to be between to cut off valves. I forgot about that. If you get air in the lines, it gets in the probe fitting, and the fitting has to be "burped". You can check the thread on it for a description. So where ever it goes, it needs a isolation by valves.

Maybe right after the filters is an ideal place. That would not introduce any more valves either. Just shut off one further up the line in both direction when ever "burping" is required.


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

Why can't you just put the probe in the side of the tube or at the bottom to eliminate the burping problem.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Sorry Marcel. Long complicated answer on that one. I wish I could. To get the full story, you have to grit your teeth and read this thread. Or you can just accept "sorry, not possible." Sad but true.


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

Yeah..... I just read the whole thing. What a PITA that is!! I guess the only wat to get around it is to sink the probe into the current. Unless..... might be too complicated. But here goes anyway.

drill a small hole at the top of the probe fitting , attach a small airline barb to it and feed it back into the current at a higher point, air bubble rises, gets caught in the upstream current and out to the tank.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

m.lemay said:


> drill a small hole at the top of the probe fitting , attach a small airline barb to it and feed it back into the current at a higher point, air bubble rises, gets caught in the upstream current and out to the tank.


Hey! That's pretty clever! And who said "them that can't do become moderators"? :icon_wink 

That's a good idea. Would you mind posting that on that thread? I'd love to capture that idea and explore it there.

So... if that worked, I don't have to put it between two shutoff valves. But if I put it on the output junction, I can't bring that bubble back to a higher point in the line. We're at the top. So I think I'm still back to somewhere past the filter, before the CO2. Unless I'm missing something.

PS - sorry you had to dredge thru that whole thread!


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

> So... if that worked, I don't have to put it between two shutoff valves. But if I put it on the output junction, I can't bring that bubble back to a higher point in the line. We're at the top. So I think I'm still back to somewhere past the filter, before the CO2. Unless I'm missing something.


 Exactly, you'd have to put it after the the outflow of the two filters but before the reactor. then run the airline tubing up to a higher elevation. Ideally you'd wanna create a suction effect where it returns into the out flow using the venturie effect. I don't think it'll be necessary though, as the head pressure should be higher at a lower point in the line, plus a slight increase in back pressure created by the UV/reactor/heater downstream should be plenty of pressure differential to shoot the bubble out.

Marcel


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

OK, I hacked the drawing apart a little more. LOL.
I also show how the venturie effect works. on the righside of the drawing. I also moved the temp probe next to the ph probe but thats just an option to keep things neat.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Hey Marcel, I should just send you my original drawing and let you have at it! :hihi: 

Got a couple problems with the suggestions:

1) I assume that "air line" is going to have a check valve, if one will let gas but not water through (do they do that?). Otherwise that airline is going to become a "water line".

2) I wouldn't put the temp probe behind the filter. But that's only because I'm assuming the the filtration process must contribute _some _ heat - whether from the biological process, machine or water friction, or excess heat from the motor.

Wadda ya think?


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

No check valve required. We want water to go thru that airline. If there's water going thru it, then we know the air is purged. you'll get a little bypass past the reactor and UV but the line is so small it'll be negligible. Your filter probably has way more internal bypass than that line will provide.

Yeah, you might be right on the temp probe. put it back where it was.

Marcel


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Thanks Marcel, will make the change...


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

OK, things are lining up... the stand arrived yesterday, the substrate is supposed to arrive today, the glass company gave me a delivery date on the glass, and I ordered a Eheim 2026 as the primary canister. So gotta get this design nailed down.

Here's the current version...

Only problem with the picture below, is that I'm not sold on the bulkheads as a concept. I believe they are _the way_ to go if you want to lose sight of all equipment. It can be done well. But it also constrains your layout options. And since I've barely begun my 'scape ideas, I'm hesitant to commit to it. I'm going to have the holes drilled in the tank bottom to keep my options open. I've already ordered the caps to seal them off until I'm ready to integrate them into an aquascape.

So, the picture below, in the short term, may have multiple hoses running out of the top of the PVC tubes, along with a connection to "non-functional" bulkheads.


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

I would put the green items on their own switched circuit. Ie if you turn on the ecco you should also turn off the other material too so you are not dumping CO2, UV and dosing into stagnant water. I see that you can bypass the ecco but it would sill be a good idea to switch it all. 

The plan is looking good though. Less thinks makes a better design!If you are going to block the bulkheads I recommend leaving them "wet" or putting in a capped PVC riser. Otherwise you might have to take the tank apart to get a good dry/clean seal.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

BlueRam said:


> I would put the green items on their own switched circuit.


I agree! In fact, that is how it's set up on my 20g now, and the whole electrical kit-n-caboodle will move over to the 75. I hit one button on an electrical controller, and the Ecco, UV, heater, CO2 solenoid, and doser all shut down! I've described it a bit more in this thread.




BlueRam said:


> If you are going to block the bulkheads I recommend leaving them "wet" or putting in a capped PVC riser. Otherwise you might have to take the tank apart to get a good dry/clean seal.


That's great advice! But if I bring the riser higher than the substrate, I'll have to factor that into the initail 'scaping considerations, and that's what I was looking to avoid. That is until, of course, I know a 'scape that accounted for bulkheaded in/out flows. And it's been my working assumption that at that time, ripping lots of things up would just be part of it.

But the point is still a good one. If I got risers that came within 1/2" or so of the top of the substrate, it wouldn't impact plantings too badly - and would certainly reduce the pain on the day that I took a deep breath and said "OK, it's bulkhead time."


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

Yes, the idea is to get the bulkheads secure and waterproof as early as possible. How you cap them is up to you (I would use a capped PVC tube) so that they are in place and the worse think to happen is you get some gravel down the pipe when you pull the cap. I am just thinking about the pain if you try and swap bulkheads on a wet tank. Going to be dirty, and there is a good chance they will leak--> back to dirty --> leak etc. 

You also need to think about a strainer on the intake side so that fishies/shrimp do not get sucked in. I recommend something removable so you can just pull it and clean at your leisure. I would aim of the top of the riser 1" or so above the substrate. Real easy to hide with a rock or piece of wood. The flow will be up which might be a little weird so you may want a movable nozzle to redirect flow.


----------



## m.lemay (Jul 28, 2002)

Wow, the design has cleaned up considerably from the first one you posted. Less complicated and still does what you want it to. Awesome roud:


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Marcel - when you get a little help from good people with experience and insight, it's amazing what you can do. Thanks for the compliment. roud: Thanks for the help - everyone! :icon_bigg 

Blueram - I got 4 3/4" inner diameter bulkheads, and the caps have an outer thread that screws the cap down flush. I don't like slip fitting (too permanent) and I thought it best to keep the threads on the inside since I wasn't immediately installing the final hardware. But that probably will be too close to the bottom, and your suggestion about a riser is a good one.

Not sure about the 1" and the rock though. My only tank is a 20g, and I'm used to not being able to hide anything! Not well anyway. Maybe it's easier in a 75.

Been looking at nozzles too. And because a little upside down strainer or two will be relatively easy to hide, I'm tempted to start with those. I.E. - starting with bulkheaded outflows, but bringing the inflow over the side with lily pipes until I'm comfortable that I can hide a nice inflow well.

Zapus - if you're reading this, I don't have the courage to do a manifold yet. Waiting to see how yours works out. :icon_wink


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

scolley said:


> Blueram - I got 4 3/4" inner diameter bulkheads, and the caps have an outer thread that screws the cap down flush. I don't like slip fitting (too permanent) and I thought it best to keep the threads on the inside since I wasn't immediately installing the final hardware. But that probably will be too close to the bottom, and your suggestion about a riser is a good one.
> 
> Not sure about the 1" and the rock though. My only tank is a 20g, and I'm used to not being able to hide anything! Not well anyway. Maybe it's easier in a 75.


I would put the slip on the inside and the threaded on the outside. So thread on the shutoff valve where the bugger is not going to come off (but replaceable) and use the slip fitting (no glue) on the inside to you can pull the tube out if you need to. The inside does not need to be watertite. I have my durso this way so I can pull it and flush any food/stuff that has been collecting. You would not want to pull it out too often as rocks would fall but you could. I would expect you will have to pull the screen though so make this easy. Hiding?? You are what, 18" wide. With what you are planning you might be lucky to see the hard scape as if becomes overgrown. But: if it goes room divider you might have a problem.... I think you could be clever and hide them in rock work on one side (think sloping bank). If white PVC bugs you slip some black ABS over it (might be a good idea anyways <like 2" diameter around bulkhead to block substrate....>) So you better get it done or we might be here forever. But hey, you are building you tank so you can do whatever!


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

Hey, you are building your own glass so lets drill two holes in the bottom and two in one of the short sides! Drawing picture....

Make the wall returns black spa type things and hide it with wood work etc. You would get a real nice flow pattern!


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

D*mn BlueRam! You are just full of good ideas!

Your comments on the threaded outside plus slip inside is perfect. Now I've got to buy more bulkheads! Anybody want some inside threaded bulkheads? Brand new. Cheap!

That's a good idea about the sides too BlueRam, but I've got a real jones for background-less tanks. And I'm hoping to position the tank someday where it will be visible from all sides. And holes in the side would mess that up.

Think about it. No equipment visible is kind of liberating. All of a sudden you don't have to hid every thing against the back wall. I'm not sure how you submit that to the AGA contest though - I don't think I've ever seen a back view shot! But it also presents some interesting 'scaping challenges. Yet another reason why I find it attractive. No guts - no glory!

I've been kind of thinking about the same flow pattern you are alluding to in your drawing. I haven't said anything about it yet in the forum, but I've been looking into creating a type of "internal" glass lilly - one that discreetly comes up from the bottom, but gently diffuses the current. It would do the same thing as your drawing, but equipment potentially less visible. Darn. Now you made me spill the beans...


----------



## BlueRam (Sep 21, 2004)

I have seen a few "three side" view tanks but the recent "four siders" are the Amano 'test kitchen' pics posted somewhere. 

Looks something like Oliver Knott's "State of nature"

http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org/2004.cgi?&Scale=514&op=showcase&category=0&vol=2&id=25

Where you slope downwards as opposed to sloping back to front. I have it drawn with one end against a false wall or cabinet so it would stick into the room like as ismuth. But now is the time to plan before holes are drilled! 

Can you turn the bulkheads over?


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

The bulkheads are threaded on both sides. Rats.

But I woke up in the middle of the night last night and thought about the stand that's in a box in my garage, waiting to be assembled. Here's a link to Big Als pic.

Anybody see a problem with that picture? I did and couldn't go back to sleep... :icon_frow


----------



## jhoetzl (Feb 7, 2005)

scolley said:


> But I woke up in the middle of the night last night and thought about the stand that's in a box in my garage, waiting to be assembled. Here's a link to Big Als pic.


Been there! BTW, I have the 30" wide sedona, in Red Oak...with the cap
With a 37 AGA tank.

*Note to self...take pics of something other than equipment!

Well, here is one...
http://www.geocities.com/jhoetzl/tank/images/tank_initial_setup.jpg 
(but it doesn't show the stand)


----------



## shalu (Jan 16, 2003)

scolley said:


> Anybody see a problem with that picture? I did and couldn't go back to sleep... :icon_frow


Missing the top cover?


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

So jhoetzl, hope you like your stand. Seems real solid, and a good value, relatively speaking. I didn't spring for the canopy, though I like 'em. I'm just going for the "open top" look.

But that selection of a stand is going to be a problem for me. Care to venture a guess? The clues are all right here...

In fact, when I woke up last nite and realized it, it event was a BFO - a Blinding Flash of the Obvious.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

shalu said:


> Missing the top cover?


Noooo... that's to easy, that was planned and easily recoverable (if the $ is available). No. This is worse.


----------



## shalu (Jan 16, 2003)

ok, let me guess again. Are those drawers for real? Could that leave you short on height in cabinet to work with? Even if they are fake, it is an easy accessibility problem.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

shalu said:


> Are those drawers for real?


Shalu - you are real close. The drawers are real. But I'm not worried about the space.

It's the bulkheads _with _ the drawers! How am I going to put bulkheads in the bottom of the tank?

Solution- I'm going to have to turn those _real _ drawers (that I was looking forward to) into _fake _ drawers. Bummer. A true BFO!


----------



## jhoetzl (Feb 7, 2005)

easy fix...maybe...more cosmetic
Don't really install the drawer...Liquid Nails it to the front.

Or, at least on the 30" model, the draw isn't full depth...probably the same for the other models...

Here are some really quick shots of it:
http://www.geocities.com/jhoetzl/tank/images/equipment/sedona_bottom_description.JPG
http://www.geocities.com/jhoetzl/tank/images/equipment/sedona_bottom_description2.JPG


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Hey thanks jhoetzl! That's encouraging! So is yours 30"x12"? Because mine's 48"x18", which means that where you have @6" open, I might have @12" open. That would be great, and could be enough.

I've also got the option of reducing the drawer size, which could give me another 2-3".

Looking at your pictures (thanks BTW!) it looks like there is particle board under your tank. Is that part of the stand, or is that your tank?

I didn't realize until yesterday when I looked in the box that there might not be a flat surface to put the tank on. Without taking everything out of the box, it looked like just a rim. I'm pretty curious since my tank will be a self-built, all glass. And I'm a bit concerned about putting a flat glass bottom on a stand that only supports it by the rim.


----------



## jhoetzl (Feb 7, 2005)

scolley said:


> Looking at your pictures (thanks BTW!) it looks like there is particle board under your tank. Is that part of the stand, or is that your tank?


The particle board is just the bottom of the drawer.
The bottom of the tank area is open, with a center support about 2-3" wide, running front to back in the center.

In this picture:
http://www.geocities.com/jhoetzl/tank/images/equipment/sedona_bottom_description2.JPG
Just to the left of the @6" text, that darker area is the bottom of a piece of driftwood, then to the left of that is the center support.



scolley said:


> I didn't realize until yesterday when I looked in the box that there might not be a flat surface to put the tank on. Without taking everything out of the box, it looked like just a rim.


It is just a rim...with a center support. I would think it would be fine, but I guess you could install 1/4 particle board or something like it, with some angle irons or something supporting it, but probably unecessary.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

jhoetzl said:


> Just to the left of the @6" text, that darker area is the bottom of a piece of driftwood...


Yeah, that's actually what I was looking at. I guess the dark brown I was looking at is your substrate. I thought the driftwood was some sort of burnt spot!

I guess I'll have to get some particle board or something. Not really comfortable with glass supported just around the rim.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

*Final Design - Better Be!*

OK, spent a good bit of time reviewing all this with a mechanical engineer buddy tonight. He convinced me of the need for a couple more ball valves, and 3 check valves. I'm too lazy to go through all the reasons why at this point, but it basically had to do with keeping unwanted back flow under control when every pump was not on.


So here is what I _really _ hope is the final design. Will only consider minor changes at this point. I do believe after the repeated beatings, this horse is just about dead.


----------



## jhoetzl (Feb 7, 2005)

OK, so I was in a LFS yesterday and say the 48" sedona setup with a tank on it, but no substrate...so...here it is. The drawers are just a bit deeper, so I think you would still only have 6" or so of space. However, there are two seperate ones, so you could have one real one, full depth, and make one a false fronted one.

Also, on the bit with the particle board bottom...
I've heard of people using styrofoam based home insulation sheets to smooth out a surface before putting the glass on it, just to compensate for any small surface irregularities, but I must say, if you are concerned about the tank being supported around the rim and center, then I would questing the integrity of the tank build. I mentioned it to a guy in the LFS and he thought the same. 

Oh, and on your last diagram...I'd go for the eth 201, which is just 5/8 fittings instead of 1/2, keeping it closer inline with the 1" pipe elsewhere...


----------



## Buck (Oct 13, 2002)

The only thing I would change is the color of the Hot Mag to Red, using the same color as the Eheim 2126 may cause turbulence in the primary intake line creating a vacumm causing the temp probe to take false readings and you might boil your fish. :hihi:

Very impressive setup bro...I cant wait to see this beast built ! roud:


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

jhoetzl said:


> The drawers are just a bit deeper, so I think you would still only have 6" or so of space.


I think I'll just make them both shallow drawers, as I'm having a hard time imagining any reasonably flexible bulkhead configuration with them on just one end of the tank.




jhoetzl said:


> I've heard of people using styrofoam based home insulation sheets to smooth out a surface before putting the glass on it... if you are concerned about the tank being supported around the rim and center, then I would questing the integrity of the tank build.


Thanks. Planning on using styrofoam or rubberized matting to do as you suggest.

But the integrity issue is _really just a design  issue_. It's a home built tank, designed to supported by the bottom, as opposed to another popular design, which supports the tank by the edges. So while it may work, in light of having no information to suggest it will, I'd just rather be safe then sorry.




jhoetzl said:


> I'd go for the eth 201, which is just 5/8 fittings instead of 1/2...


Good point, but I already own it (everything green I have set up as you see it now), and that entire secondary line will remain 1/2". Working now, should continue to work. As to keeping in line with the 1" pipe up top, that 1" is spec'd that way to provide _excess _ capacity, not to set the stage for what will be downstream. Thanks though for the suggestion.





buck said:


> ...using the same color as the Eheim 2126 may cause turbulence... and you might boil your fish.


Hey Buck - thanks for raining on my parade! :biggrin: 

No really, thanks for the encouragement. Will be cool when done. Love to have you inspect it personally if you ever have the chance. But I do intend to impose a _strict_ "beer required _in hand_ for all inspections " rule. 

Be forewarned! :icon_wink


----------



## jhoetzl (Feb 7, 2005)

OK, last thought on the drawer...

So there I was, crusing at 20000 feet or so earlier (had to fly up to Montreal for work), and what is my mind wandering about...this blasted plumbing...hehehehe.

Anyway, if you really want to get some utilization of that drawer space for storing gadgetry...try something like these:

http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/product_details.cfm?offerings_id=10466
http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/product_details.cfm?offerings_id=58

My parents installed them (my dad made them) in the kitchen and my mom found plenty of use for them. That site was found rather quickly for a nice pick of what I mean...


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

jhoetzl said:


> So there I was, cruising at 20000 feet or so... and what is my mind wandering about... this blasted plumbing...


Sounds like about 20 minutes after they came by with the second set of cocktails if you asked me!



jhoetzl said:


> if you really want to get some utilization of that drawer space for storing gadgetry...try something like these:
> 
> http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/produc...erings_id=10466
> http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/produc...offerings_id=58


Now that's a darn good idea! Thanks! I'm sold - fold down drawers that still allow for bulkheads! What more could I ask for? And I'll bet I can get everything I need at Home Depot! Thanks pal. roud:


----------



## Noz2Glass (Mar 4, 2004)

*. . . dead horse beating . . .*

Regarding the pH probe: Is the pH/CO2 affected after going through the filters? Not sure what you're going to have in the filters bio/chem/mechwise. If the probe was in front of the filters as in earlier layouts it might get fouled up sooner but do I recall correctly from an earlier post that you're already cleaning it monthly on your 20g?

Bob


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Another good contribution from Bob! Thanks. The horse is clearly not yet dead.

I am inspecting the pH probe as a regular part of the PM cycle, but I do belive that getting it upstream from the filter is a "better safe than sorry" route. Not sure why I ever thought otherwise. It is exactly that concern that caused me to put it where I originally had the pH probe. Sorry Marcel, the probe is going back to up by the temp probe.

Gotta be getting close now...


----------



## Chamkeeper (Apr 12, 2005)

Great Thread!!! 

I have a couple salt tanks with gravity overflows. First thing that goes wrong, something impedes the water-gravity connection. Snails, algae, rogue fish, whatever, next thing you know, shop-vac on carpet, not too good. I would suggest the biggest darn gravity overflows you can stand. I have a 1" on my 7 office reef, 3" on my 30g reef at home. 

I propose a smart device watching/running the tank. Two filter setups, two heaters, two everything cycling on-off in just enough time for the water to get cold. Back too KISS, ball valves don't fail, if no one is there to adjust then the problem is uncontrolled.

My $0.02 says worry more about seeing what's going on in the tank, either send it to you (internet, text messege, blah, blah) and/or make idicators that get a knowledgable person on-site in your absence. I have seen the best equipment not solve a problem, people solve problems, as soon as they know about them.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Thanks Chamkeeper. Sounds like good advice! I'll get my 10 yr old son, a mechanical engineer in waiting to be sure, all trained up on the workings. The wife wouldn't touch a tank with a ten foot pole! Unfortunately that same son is abysmally bad at in-tank observation for me. If something is wrong with some equipment he can spot is right away. But getting a little observation from him about what's going on in the tank... no way. His powers of observation just fall apart when it's not dealing with the mechanical. 

I building the plumbing now, and have deviated a bit from the pics. And I promise the changes will be "interesting" if nothing else.

The bulkhead holes are all 1". At the moment, I'm planning on two of those as drain holes. They pour into a 1" PVC manifold which forks off into 3/4" branches with 1/2" barbs for each line. I don't think flow out of the tank will be impeded.

The returns will be over the side.


----------



## PJAN (Feb 18, 2005)

So far a good plan

My only concern is the PH-probe for two reasons :
- fast flowing water could give a troublesome reading ( on - off )
- the probe is getting dirty fast. Look at the innerside of any pvc-pipe or hose : always brown biofilm or algae. So you should clean it weekly....to get an accurate reading. Dirty probes are not accurate because the biofilm is interfering with the electrical reading ( mv > PH -probes are measuring a small current etc.).

So keep that in mind and be ready to plug the PH - hole if you have to disconnect it.

Gr. PJAN


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

PJAN - I've already got this setup working in my current tank. It just requires cleaning once a month, which is no big deal since I recalibrate at about that interval anyway.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

*Update*

I finished both the stand and the manifolds last nite. I've photo documented both, so pics will come later. Good news is though, I can start the tank tonight. It will tank 4 days to assemble, and as soon as that's done, I've got to go on a business trip - will not even be able to water test it for a few weeks. Bummer. Well, I suppose it will give the silicone plenty of time to cure anyway. :wink:


----------



## PJAN (Feb 18, 2005)

scolley said:


> PJAN - I've already got this setup working in my current tank. It just requires cleaning once a month, which is no big deal since I recalibrate at about that interval anyway.


Ah, Ok. Just checking  

Well, proceed please with glueing. Nothing more to say roud: 

Gr. PJAN


----------



## cprroy73 (Nov 10, 2004)

Hey scolley, If you already said it in this thread sorry, but are you taking down your 20gal? Just curious.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

cprroy73 said:


> Hey scolley, If you already said it in this thread sorry, but are you taking down your 20gal? Just curious.


Well, you know, that was my plan. All the equipment I put in the 20g was over the top from a capacity perspective, by design. I planned on putting it all toward a larger tank. For example - I've got an Orbit 130W PC over it. Too much for 20g x 11 or 12 hrs/day. But I figured if I get another 24" Orbit, and put them end to end over a 48" tank, I've saved money. Right? But instead, because I'm fortunate enough to be able to buy nice 48" fixture, I find my self engaging in an entirely different thought process. Rather than trying to save every nickel, I'm looking at all the money spent, and going "Hey, why scrimp on the lights if I don't have to? After all this do-rey-me, just finish the job." You get the idea...

So originally losing the 20g was the plan. But now I'm beginning to wonder. The two factors, both of which are significant,that could keep me on that plan are as follows:

1) The whole in-line water treatment system is working with the 20g right now. It would be simple to just transfer it over, even if that means a new, larger filtering line running parallel, as I've set forth in this design.
2) Time. The big killer for me. I'm trying to reduce time. And as much as having a 20g grow-out tank, or what ever, would be nice, it will consume more time. And that's a precious commodity for me.

So, long answer to a short question - I don't know. I did at one time, but I don't anymore.


----------



## Buck (Oct 13, 2002)

I thought I was gonna see a photo here of an operational system when I saw the update.... :icon_bigg


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

Buck said:


> I thought I was gonna see a photo here of an operational system when I saw the update.... :icon_bigg


Gee Buck. Sorry about that. Look here for updates. But that won't be for a few weeks. Got work travel, vacation, then paying attention to my family for little while before I can resume building. But ALL the parts are here... And many built and photographed. But still far from finished. But it's coming!

Thanks for checking. :icon_bigg And good luck building your accommodation for those lama's, chickens, or what ever the livestock du jour is! roud:


----------



## cprroy73 (Nov 10, 2004)

Scolley have you decided on a lighting setup for the 75. tek lite, pc's, vho's.
Also I purchased a new 58 oceanic I currently have a standard 55. The 55 has a 48inch coralife 260watt fixture over it. I was thinking of running only 2 bulbs and no co2 in the 55. Maybe just a moss, fern, and anubia grow out tank. The new 58 will have 192watts and the co2 from the 55 as my high light tank. The money is really not the issue it is the extra maintance that concerns me about multiple high light tanks.

Maybe nice to have a low maintance and a high maintance tank.


----------



## scolley (Apr 4, 2004)

cprroy73 said:


> Maybe nice to have a low maintains and a high maintains tank.


I'm with you on that! Sound's like a good decision. I just can't take the time for two high-maint tanks. Maybe I should consider that too! Thanks for mentioning it.

And no, I haven't finalized any thinking on the lights. PJAN had to go and post info on his dimmable T5's, and now I'm all in a tizzy for something I can't afford! So I'm thinking about it for a while. What really gets me, is that in Europe there are clearly a number of options for dimmable T5's, but here in the states the options are much more limited. I suspect this will change with new product announcements about 15 minutes after I buy something. So I'm stalling.


----------

