Water volume expansion reservoir?

[rhitee93]

This sword cuts both ways doesn't it? You get the benefit of the extra water volume to slow down changes. However, if you need to do a water change to clear up an issue you would have to change 22 gallons to do a 20% water change on your 40 gallon display.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

This sword cuts both ways doesn't it? You get the benefit of the extra water volume to slow down changes. However, if you need to do a water change to clear up an issue you would have to change 22 gallons to do a 20% water change on your 40 gallon display.

This is very true.

I'm in the "I don't do water changes unless something has gone terribly wrong" camp, so that didn't even occur to me. The reefers who religiously do water changes could see that as a downside for sure.

 

[BeanAnimal]

You are just adding water volume and if ‘sealed’ a detritus trap. No more, no less.
Add more sump volume or use a second sump with a lid. Input at (or extended to bottom and output overflowing to existing sump at top. Gravity fed settling tank where detritus could be regularly vacuumed out or drained from a botto drain. A conical bottom HDPE tank with a bottom drain would be perfect.

 

[Seancj]

I've been doing this for the past two years. Tank overflow with two drains. One drain line goes to a large water basin (with filter sock and it's own heater) that then overflows into the refugium, the other overflow drain directly to the refugium. Water then goes to the sump with skimmer, reactors, and return pump.
I currently have an 80 gallon display with a remote 40 gallon water reservoir, a 30 gallon live rock/refugium, and a 25 gallon sump.
I did this as I knew I'd likely be overstocking the 80 gallon and didn't have room for a larger display at the time.
Once my larger display is set up, I will simply go with a larger sump tank to keep things more simple.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

You are just adding water volume and if ‘sealed’ a detritus trap. No more, no less.
Add more sump volume or use a second sump with a lid. Input at (or extended to bottom and output overflowing to existing sump at top. Gravity fed settling tank where detritus could be regularly vacuumed out or drained from a botto drain. A conical bottom HDPE tank with a bottom drain would be perfect.

I feel like many people would read "detritus trap" as a bad thing, but I really don't. Lots of us have very effective macroalgae refugiums these days that easily strip the water to 0 nitrates and 0 phosphates. Lots of people have resorted to dosing extra nutrients or intentionally overfeeding (or both) just to try and stay ahead of the refugium nutrient consumption.

Collecting the tank's detritus and letting it digest means that we can run the refugium longer without bottoming out nutrients. For me, being able to run my fuge longer and brighter means I get higher PH boosts and better oxygenation at night.

The conical bottom tank with a drain is a VERY interesting idea though. It sounds like a separation funnel, It would allow you to extract detritus in a very concentrated form, and discard it with only a few seconds of work.

I've been doing this for decades. Not a new idea. Tank overflow with two drains. One drain line goes to a large water basin (with filter sock and it's own heater) that then overflows into the refugium, the other overflow drain directly to the refugium. Water then goes to the sump with skimmer and reactors and return pump.
I currently have an 80 gallon display with a remote 40 gallon water reservoir, a 30 gallon live rock/refugium, and a 25 gallon sump.

I know that people have had multiple sumps. I've definitely seen that a handful of times myself. The "new" part that I haven't seen before is to seal and insulate the basin, and then forget about it. No changing extra filter socks, and no running extra heaters. If you've seen someone try that part, then I'd love to hear about their experience.

 

[GARRIGA]

Dilution the best quick solution. However, if adding an additional reservoir than why not fill it with media and increase the biological filtration while at it. Pumice is light and comes in various sizes. Can trap detritus, decompose it and then let the simmer and refugium process it. ULM that removes socks or other mechanical processes such as roller mats from taking up space or time. That large reservoir might also allow denitrification considering the depth that water must travel.

This exact idea was presented to me by one of the crush coral companies back in the day when I was researching the use of DSB and how to resolve any dangers associated with it including the build up of CO2 which would be solved by having the effluent travel through a bed of macroalgae. Having tall cylinder being preferred since denitrification only occurs when oxygen is depleted which in this case happens as water travels through a long passage of nitrification. The effluent in this example being the sump having a Fuge. although not sure one still needs a skimmer since most of the decomposing matter has been solved by the additional reservoir and the Fuge removes CO2 and provides oxygen negating additional air exchange.

One twist I'd incorporate is removing the sump all together and adding that back of tank to house the macro algae and eliminate the possibility of leaks or additional evaporation since only maintenance being the pruning of that algae as needed. My current thought process for my main display although from start it will be an AIO with closed loop pluming to a large sealed media container below tank that ends with a Fuge that spills into the main. Not going to be equipment fancy but simple and I believe effective. rather be fishing on the weekends and days devoted to work and family. Enjoy it and not be it's slave my motto.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I feel like many people would read "detritus trap" as a bad thing, but I really don't. Lots of us have very effective macroalgae refugiums these days that easily strip the water to 0 nitrates and 0 phosphates. Lots of people have resorted to dosing extra nutrients or intentionally overfeeding (or both) just to try and stay ahead of the refugium nutrient consumption.

Collecting the tank's detritus and letting it digest means that we can run the refugium longer without bottoming out nutrients. For me, being able to run my fuge longer and brighter means I get higher PH boosts and better oxygenation at night.

The conical bottom tank with a drain is a VERY interesting idea though. It sounds like a separation funnel, It would allow you to extract detritus in a very concentrated form, and discard it with only a few seconds of work.



I know that people have had multiple sumps. I've definitely seen that a handful of times myself. The "new" part that I haven't seen before is to seal and insulate the basin, and then forget about it. No changing extra filter socks, and no running extra heaters. If you've seen someone try that part, then I'd love to hear about their experience.

This is not new, it has been around in various forms for decades.

Benthic ‘’sumps“ or chambers or RDSBs (remote deep sand beds).

Anything from a 5 gallon bucket to a 50 gallon pickle barrel, lidded, dark and lower flow.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

This is not new, it has been around in various forms for decades.

Benthic ‘’sumps“ or chambers or RDSBs (remote deep sand beds).

Anything from a 5 gallon bucket to a 50 gallon pickle barrel, lidded, dark and lower flow.

I'm not looking for glory. I just want to discuss the pros and cons. "New" or "not" is irrelevant to me. If it has been done before, then that's great! I'd love hear their stories. Please direct me to them.

I currently live in an apartment and I probably won't be able to execute on this idea until I have a house. Which might be a long wait. So I want to live vicariously through discussion and stories.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I'm not looking for glory. I just want to discuss the pros and cons. "New" or "not" is irrelevant to me. If it has been done before, then that's great! I'd love hear their stories. Please direct me to them.

I currently live in an apartment and I probably won't be able to execute on this idea until I have a house. Which might be a long wait. So I want to live vicariously through discussion and stories.

If you are going to wait until you have a house, I would simply plan on having a larger sump, insulate it and lid it if you wish. I don't see any benefit in complicating it. You will find that the longer you are in the this hobby, the less complicated you will want things to become.

 

[MoshJosh]

Personally I think an extra sump or fuge or even display would be a better use of the space. I get the evaporation and heat argument. . . but just put a lid on the addition (sump, fuge, or otherwise) and problem is basically solved, Seems like an unnecessary use of space. . .

TLDR if you have the space use it for something more functional. Plenty of ways to add to total volume with other benefits.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

If you are going to wait until you have a house, I would simply plan on having a larger sump, insulate it and lid it if you wish. I don't see any benefit in complicating it. You will find that the longer you are in the this hobby, the less complicated you will want things to become.

But why not both?

Yes, I could get a larger sump if I needed a larger sump for the duties that a sump is used for. Examples being to house a larger refugium, more equipment, better air exchange, etc.

But if I'm happy with my sump's performance and I already have plenty of space for my intended equipment, and my only goal is to increase stability by adding water volume... then why not just used an insulated reservoir and just accomplish that goal? There aren't any moving parts, and it requires no regular maintanence. It's not adding very much complexity at all.

Personally I think an extra sump or fuge or even display would be a better use of the space. I get the evaporation and heat argument. . . but just put a lid on the addition (sump, fuge, or otherwise) and problem is basically solved, Seems like an unnecessary use of space. . .

TLDR if you have the space use it for something more functional. Plenty of ways to add to total volume with other benefits.

To play devil's advocate, if the reservoir is contained inside an insulted box like I proposed, then you could use the top of the box as working counter space for doing testing, or for dry good storage, you could even mount controllers and equipment to the front or side walls. The inside of the box is wasted space, but the outside can still be functional and perfectly dry. Unlike an extra sump, which seems like it would make for terrible storage for dry goods and electronic components.

 

[MoshJosh]

But why not both?

Yes, I could get a larger sump if I needed a larger sump for the duties that a sump is used for. Examples being to house a larger refugium, more equipment, better air exchange, etc.

But if I'm happy with my sump's performance and I already have plenty of space for my intended equipment, and my only goal is to increase stability by adding water volume... then why not just used an insulated reservoir and just accomplish that goal? There aren't any moving parts, and it requires no regular maintanence. It's not adding very much complexity at all.



To play devil's advocate, if the reservoir is contained inside an insulted box like I proposed, then you could use the top of the box as working counter space for doing testing, or for dry good storage, you could even mount controllers and equipment to the front or side walls. The inside of the box is wasted space, but the outside can still be functional and perfectly dry. Unlike an extra sump, which seems like it would make for terrible storage for dry goods and electronic components.

Couldn't all those things be said of a sump/fuge with a lid? Also, using it as counter space implies a certain positioning I don't think may reefers want, namely not hidden. I guess you could build it to look like an adjacent cabinet. . . but that is a lot of work for added (and unusable) water volume.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

Couldn't all those things be said of a sump/fuge with a lid? Also, using it as counter space implies a certain positioning I don't think may reefers want, namely not hidden. I guess you could build it to look like an adjacent cabinet. . . but that is a lot of work for added (and unusable) water volume.

I would argue that this water volume is not "unusable", it's doing exactly what it was intended to be used for. Specifically, increasing system overall stability and providing an insurance to protect your fish from ammonia spikes in systems with smaller water volumes.

Lets say that you install an extra sump, then you put a lid on it, then you wrap insulation around it... Now you've got an sump that you can't see inside of, wrapped in ugly insulation sitting where (presumably) people can see it.

Building a pretty box around it to hide the insulation from view makes perfect sense. But then, you can't have moisture building up inside the box, or it'll mold and degrade the wood. So you decide to seal the lid to the sump. Well, you've just arrived at the "sealed reservoir in a box" idea in the same way that I did. lol

 

[MoshJosh]

I would argue that this water volume is not "unusable", it's doing exactly what it was intended to be used for. Specifically, increasing system overall stability and providing an insurance to protect your fish from ammonia spikes in systems with smaller water volumes.

Lets say that you install an extra sump, then you put a lid on it, then you wrap insulation around it... Now you've got an sump that you can't see inside of, wrapped in ugly insulation sitting where (presumably) people can see it.

Building a pretty box around it to hide the insulation from view makes perfect sense. But then, you can't have moisture building up inside the box, or it'll mold and degrade the wood. So you decide to seal the lid to the sump. Well, you've just arrived at the "sealed reservoir in a box" idea in the same way that I did. lol

But aside from extra water volume, it does nothing for the system that other options would. Lets say you have room for 20 gallons of water, whether you have to build or modify the space (you would be building the reservoir after all). . . a 20 gallon refugium would add just as much water volume but ALSO export nutrients. If you had a 40 gallon display and upgrade to a 60 gallon you have added 20 gallons of volume and ALSO more room for corals, fish, whatever. Add a 20 gallon frag tank to the system. Add 20 gallon sump for more biologic or chemical filtration. . . a sand bed, a fluidized media reactor. . . this list goes on and on.

Also I think the concern of insulation may be over blow here. Yes if the added water volume was outside the home or in an adjacent room like garage I could see that being an issue. But in the average home temperature I think a heater upgrade would more than suffice, and frankly I would be upgrading the heater regardless of how the volume was increased, insulated or otherwise.

The idea just misses the mark for me. . . stability is harder to attain in smaller tanks/systems, if you want more stability and have the room. . . get a bigger tank or bigger system. I could plum a 5 gallon tank to a 50 gallon brute trashcan full of saltwater. . . yes it would be more stable. . . but kind of a waist if you ask me.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

But aside from extra water volume, it does nothing for the system that other options would. Lets say you have room for 20 gallons of water, whether you have to build or modify the space (you would be building the reservoir after all). . . a 20 gallon refugium would add just as much water volume but ALSO export nutrients. If you had a 40 gallon display and upgrade to a 60 gallon you have added 20 gallons of volume and ALSO more room for corals, fish, whatever. Add a 20 gallon frag tank to the system. Add 20 gallon sump for more biologic or chemical filtration. . . a sand bed, a fluidized media reactor. . . this list goes on and on.

The idea just misses the mark for me. . . stability is harder to attain in smaller tanks/systems, if you want more stability and have the room. . . get a bigger tank or bigger system. I could plum a 5 gallon tank to a 50 gallon brute trashcan full of saltwater. . . yes it would be more stable. . . but kind of a waist if you ask me.

The extra fuge requires extra lights and extra removal of macroalgae, and the extra macroalgae requires extra dosing of micronutrients, and you might export too much and drop your nutrients to 0 and have problems starving your coral.

The frag tank requires expensive lights, and extra calcium, alk, and magnesium dosing, as well as extra fish so that the fish waste can provide nutrients for all the extra coral.

All of those require more RODI for top off, which means I need a bigger ATO reservoir, and the evaporation means they lose heat, so I need bigger heaters. The extra lights on the frag tank or fuge means bigger power bills.

Upgrading my display tank to a bigger size just to have better stability is a monumental amount of work. I'd have to build a new stand, hunt down the new tank, buy new light fixtures and bulbs, redo ALL of my plumbing, and then I have a pile of old stuff laying around that I now have to try and sell off so it's not sitting around taking up space.

It's makes no sense to propose upgrading the display tank as a "lower effort" alternative. Upgrading the display tank is "ALL the effort".

Besides, I'm happy with the size of my tank. Bigger display tanks are bigger headaches and a lot more work.

I just want my parameters to be more stable. That's it. All those other 'solutions' add additional problems and expenses as side effects.

 

[MoshJosh]

The extra fuge requires extra lights and extra removal of macroalgae, and the extra macroalgae requires extra dosing of micronutrients, and you might export too much and drop your nutrients to 0 and have problems starving your coral.

The frag tank requires expensive lights, and extra calcium, alk, and magnesium dosing, as well as extra fish so that the fish waste can provide nutrients for all the extra coral.

All of those require more RODI for top off, which means I need a bigger ATO reservoir, and the evaporation means they lose heat, so I need bigger heaters. The extra lights on the frag tank or fuge means bigger power bills.

Upgrading my display tank to a bigger size just to have better stability is a monumental amount of work. I'd have to build a new stand, hunt down the new tank, buy new light fixtures and bulbs, redo ALL of my plumbing, and then I have a pile of old stuff laying around that I now have to try and sell off so it's not sitting around taking up space.

It's makes no sense to propose upgrading the display tank as a "lower effort" alternative. Upgrading the display tank is "ALL the effort".

Besides, I'm happy with the size of my tank. Bigger display tanks are bigger headaches and a lot more work.

I just want my parameters to be more stable. That's it. All those other 'solutions' add additional problems and expenses as side effects.

How unstable is your tank? And what is the goal? Seem plenty of stable nanos and PICOs that grow coral and have happy fish/inhabitants. . .

if all you want is water volume and least work/investment. . . plumbing a brute trashcan full of water into your system will get you there .

Side note, better option would be a pump in the ocean plumbed to your house/into the tank, then tank overflow back to the ocean. . . but I'm land locked so that's a no go for me.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

How unstable is your tank? And what is the goal? Seem plenty of stable nanos and PICOs that grow coral and have happy fish/inhabitants. . .

I get nightly PH swings from 8.3 to sometimes as low as 7.9. My alk swings quite a lot sometimes, maybe 1 to 2 dkh in a day if I don't dose that day. Although it hasn't happened recently, I do worry about one of my large mexican turbo snails potentially dying behind a rock and causing an apocalypse. I've been there before.

The goal is to double the water volume, so that I cut my PH swings, my alk swings, and my vulnerability to surpise deaths in half.

if all you want is water volume and least work/investment. . . plumbing a brute trashcan full of water into your system will get you there .

Ah, but the brute trashcan isn't insulated, and I don't want to waste more electricity on heat. So I need to insulate it, but insulation is ugly, so I need to hide it inside a box, but the box is wood and I can't have moisture building up in there.... And here we are again, back where we started...

Side note, better option would be a pump in the ocean to your house the tank overflow back to the ocean. . . but I'm land locked so that's a no go for me.

I'm in a midwest state, so that's not possible for me either. I wish that I could though.

 

[BeanAnimal]

But why not both?

I think you are stuck on semantics - the "sealed bucket" is not adding anything novel it is just more water. So keep flow, pumps, etc. simple and add a bigger sump. A conical bottom detritus separator would be novel, but is it worth the trouble?

You want to put a 55 gallon drum inline to add volume, go for it. Be aware that a "benthic" or sealed non-serviceable interior can become a problem. Aiptasia and sponges (good and bad) as well as many types of worms grow in the dark. If you have have to do an in-tank copper or other treatment, it would need to be taken off-line as it can't be easily cleaned and these inverts and sponges may perish during the treatment and poison the tank.

Do as you wish, but simple is usually better.

To play devil's advocate, if the reservoir is contained inside an insulted box like I proposed, then you could use the top of the box as working counter space for doing testing, or for dry good storage

My 50 gallon rectangular HDPE water reservoir is just such a worktop. I have very little space. ... but it is a PITA when I have to remove the lid. Non-removable lid... see first section of this post, as that is undesirable as well.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I would argue that this water volume is not "unusable", it's doing exactly what it was intended to be used for. Specifically, increasing system overall stability and providing an insurance to protect your fish from ammonia spikes in systems with smaller water volumes.

Lets say that you install an extra sump, then you put a lid on it, then you wrap insulation around it... Now you've got an sump that you can't see inside of, wrapped in ugly insulation sitting where (presumably) people can see it.

Building a pretty box around it to hide the insulation from view makes perfect sense. But then, you can't have moisture building up inside the box, or it'll mold and degrade the wood. So you decide to seal the lid to the sump. Well, you've just arrived at the "sealed reservoir in a box" idea in the same way that I did. lol

Respectfully, you are doing a lot of arm flapping to somehow differentiate an "insulated container" from an "insulated sump with a lid" and provide different pros and cons for each when they are the same thing.

Two sumps complicate plumbing and overflow design.

YOU CAN NOT have TWO SUMPS that are not connected with a common pipe large enough to accommodate the entire return pump flow or where one drains into the other. All return pumps have to pull from the same connected pool of water or you will have imbalance problems.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

I think you are stuck on semantics - the "sealed bucket" is not adding anything novel it is just more water. So keep flow, pumps, etc. simple and add a bigger sump.

I don't understand what semantics you think that I'm stuck on...

I know that it's just more water. I'm not saying that it's special in any way.

I'm saying that "just more water" is what exactly I want, and nothing more than that. I can't fit a bigger sump in my stand, I've already maxed out my under-display space. So if I want a bigger sump, then I have to either build a new stand, or have a standalone sump sitting next to my display.

Let's say that I do upgrade my display and my sump. I build a new stand and I max out my new and bigger fuge, and I stock my display full of coral and fish and inverts.... And I discover that even though I've doubled my water volume, I've doubled the demands on my water parameters as well. So my stability is still not where I want it to be. Wouldn't any tank of any size benefit from increased stability?

Should I upgrade again? And again? At what point can I stop chasing bigger displays and bigger fuges and just add more water volume to the system instead?

If I'm happy with my sump as it is, and all I want is more water volume, it seems like a fine solution to just add more water volume.

Respectfully, you are doing a lot of arm flapping to somehow differentiate an "insulated container" from an "insulated sump with a lid" and provide different pros and cons for each when they are the same thing.

What I'm arguing for, is a remote insulated sump, which uses gravity to return tank water to the main sump, with a sealed lid to prevent moisture escaping, all hidden inside a wooden box. That's all.

Does it make you feel better if I call it a sump instead of a container?