|
18-02-2010, 01:31 PM | #21 | |
Dragon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,938
|
Quote:
Sweet! |
|
18-02-2010, 03:34 PM | #22 |
Dragon
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,451
|
understand now. Is there a minimum limit to the sump size to have a good filtration? Basically, what is the minimum tank size recommendation for using sump method of filtration? 3ft main tank with 2ft sump tank?
|
18-02-2010, 03:42 PM | #23 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
18-02-2010, 05:26 PM | #24 |
Endangered Dragon
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,261
|
prof atom, very interesting & valuable lesson again ...
i'm using an atman 8450L/hr for my 6X3X2.5ft with 5X2X1.5ft sump. turn over is ard 4.5X after pressure loss to height & elbows. water is crystal clear ... also using a MeBner 6000L/hr for my 6X2.5X2ft tank with 4X2X1.5ft sump. turn over is abt 6X plus ... no worries abt water quality. now looking at ways to reduce NO3 without using denitrator, like optimising biohome fully using bigger compartment chamber to reduce flowrate thru media ... Last edited by naser90096; 18-02-2010 at 05:27 PM. |
18-02-2010, 06:16 PM | #25 |
Senior Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,712
|
Anthony
Perhaps you could propose a sump layout design which you think would be optimum in filtration? |
18-02-2010, 10:12 PM | #26 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
18-02-2010, 10:15 PM | #27 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
18-02-2010, 10:26 PM | #28 |
Senior Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,712
|
Hahaha.. well perhaps using those standard designs, you could advise on the optimum biomedia layout?
Base on normal as well as heavy bio-loads perhaps? |
18-02-2010, 10:38 PM | #29 |
SiaoGu Gives You Wings
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,169
|
My opinion for sump turnover is ... "as fast as you can afford".
Here's my reasoning, Bio media is not single pass filtration. E.g Reverse Osmosis. Where the water only have 1 chance of passing through the media. Bacteria will have higher efficiency when in higher waste concentration assuming carbon is not the limiting factor. Eg. Both 100mg/l and 10mg/l of NH3 is passing through the same media with same flowrate. In terms of percentage NH3 removal, the 100mg/l will have a much higher efficiency than 10mg/l. By introducing a higher flowrate, you are narrowing the gap towards perfect water circulation. The main idea is to bring higher concentration waste water(from main tank) to the bio media as fast as possible Alot of pumps available in the market are rated at 0 head loss so you will not get the rated flowrate. Depending on the pump you use and headloss, flowrate can be reduced drastically to only 10-20%. Biomedia and piping will clog overtime and that will reduce the flowrate further. So my opinion is, go for the highest flowrate and better quality pump. |
18-02-2010, 10:47 PM | #30 | |
Dragon
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 662
|
Quote:
So High/Low flow rate, big/small sump tank and more/less medias are good? An understanding of concept is more important. Tks. |
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|