Water volume expansion reservoir?

[MoshJosh]

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.




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?

Kind of unrelated to the entire post, but if it is actually "sealed", you are likely going to need a gate valve to regulate return flow otherwise you will be creating a syphon etc. . .

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

Kind of unrelated to the entire post, but if it is actually "sealed", you are likely going to need a gate valve to regulate return flow otherwise you will be creating a syphon etc. . .

I don't think that's unrelated at all. The siphon risk is real.

In my first post I sort of addressed that by allowing for a small air hole. Perhaps air line hose running to the outside of the box?

I admit that I'm not sure what the safest or most effective way to solve that problem is. It feels like it is solveable though.

 

[BeanAnimal]

You are going out of your way to re-describe existing concepts as if it somehow changes their properties.... then proposing and defending the pros and cons of those properties as if they are somehow different too... Baffling (no pun).

Sure put a tank of some sort between your overflow and your sump. It will add extra system volume. Lid it or seal it if you wish. Insulate it if you wish.

You have two options

1 - place it at the same level as the existing sump with horizontal plumbing (of adequate size) to allow it and the sump to self level during operation and backflow. This simply becomes an extension of the sump.

2- place it's output above the sump, allowing it to drain into the sump via gravity. Deal with whatever overflow issues you need to to keep this quiet and/or prevent or deal with air entrainment (just like you would from the tank overflow). It will need to have a standpipe(s) setup (overflow) just like your display tank.


Not trying to be abrasive - just wishing to simplify the conversation to what we are actually dealing with.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

You are going out of your way to re-describe existing concepts as if it somehow changes their properties.... then proposing and defending the pros and cons of those properties as if they are somehow different too... Baffling (no pun).

They're new concepts to me. I don't know everything. That's why in my first post I asked if anyone had done this before.

I tried pretty hard to find someone else's story of solving this problem (stability) by using this specific solution. I coudn't find them. Yes, I found similar solutions such as the ones people have suggested in this thread (bigger display, bigger sump, etc), but never this specific solution as I have proposed it. And I do believe that it does solve the stability problem with fewer side effects than the alternatives.

If someone else has done what I've described, then that's awesome! Please share the stories or links with me so that I can enjoy them. I really do want to read everything about it that I can get my hands on.

I honestly do not understand why you're placing so much emphasis on whether this is a novel idea or not. I don't claim to have invented any part of it. It's just something that I decided that I want to do.

I appreciate your feedback about the possible plumbing issues though. I'm not ignoring it, I'm just thinking through it and digesting it. I have very limited plumbing experience so it's very helpful to give me things to watch for and think about.

 

[JCM]

If I were to go through the trouble, I'd probably fill it with live rock personally. But either way, yeah it'll work (and has been done plenty). I don't think the insulation is necessary unless it's somewhere without HVAC.

Your ph sounds fine though, and there are easier ways to stabilize alk. I don't see a ton of benefit myself if it's just water.

 

[BeanAnimal]

but never this specific solution as I have proposed it. And I do believe that it does solve the stability problem with fewer side effects than the alternatives.

This is where we are stuck on semantics. Yes, it is done regularly in one fashion or another and the "side effects" are not different then the "alternative" because this and the alternative are the same exact thing

Call it what you wish, a second sump, a second inline tank, etc.. The "lid" being sealed, set-on, or missing and the vessel being insulated or not are all variations of the same exactly thing and only differ in minor detail with regard to what ELSE they can be used for.

If someone else has done what I've described, then that's awesome! Please share the stories or links with me so that I can enjoy them. I really do want to read everything about it that I can get my hands on.

This site and the internet are full of threads where people have added second sumps, remote DSBS and/or remote water volume in one fashion or another. Read until your heart is content.

I honestly do not understand why you're placing so much emphasis on whether this is a novel idea or not. I don't claim to have invented any part of it. It's just something that I decided that I want to do.

Then do it... I think most of us are proponents of adding system volume when possible.

The perceived emphasis is because you continue to attempt to differentiate the concept somehow when there is no differentiation. It is an additional container of water added to your aquarium system and in this case nothing more than added volume that serves no other functional purpose or access (skimmer, fuge, media, etc.).

As I suggested above - if you are building or buying a house, the very simplest thing to do is upsize your sump. I run a 50 gallon sump on a 75 gallon display. I keep a pile of LR in it and it services as a detritus trap where I can siphon out the gunk as needed.

If you insist on having your sump under the stand and still adding volume then you will basically need a second tank (HDPE maybe) with a lid (set on or screw on) that is plumbed with bulkheads and a standpipe system to overflow into the existing sump. Build a cabinet around it if you want.

 

[NanoJHB]

I think this is such a great idea, especially if you've got a smaller tank and limited space!

The "cistern" with the conical bottom drain ( love that idea to remove the built up detritus) would add a ton of stability, especially if you're keeping SPS and/ or a large bioload.

 

[NanoJHB]

It's a simple pumping job and adds a decent amount of benefits without any real downsides.

Don't see why there are more people on board with the idea....

 

[BeanAnimal]

It's a simple pumping job and adds a decent amount of benefits without any real downsides.

Don't see why there are more people on board with the idea....

Last I checked - there are countless "people on board" who add extra volume to their system by adding an extra tank in one fashion or another.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I think this is such a great idea, especially if you've got a smaller tank and limited space!

The "cistern" with the conical bottom drain ( love that idea to remove the built up detritus) would add a ton of stability, especially if you're keeping SPS and/ or a large bioload.

It does not need to be conical bottom, but it helps for removal. A large sump can serve the same purpose. I originally design my system around a conical bottom tank as a sump (20 years ago) , but they were just too expensive and I did not have space for the diameter that I needed.

Instead - I built a 50 gallon sump and have the live rock in it elevated off of the bottom (egg crate) with a tiny powerhead pushing all of the detritus into one corner where it can be vacuumed out.

This is not needed for those who run filter socks or similar auto roll type mechanical filters. I used to run filter socks, but they are a pain to deal with.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

This is where we are stuck on semantics. Yes, it is done regularly in one fashion or another and the "side effects" are not different then the "alternative" because this and the alternative are the same exact thing

This site and the internet are full of threads where people have added second sumps, remote DSBS and/or remote water volume in one fashion or another. Read until your heart is content.

The perceived emphasis is because you continue to attempt to differentiate the concept somehow when there is no differentiation. It is an additional container of water added to your aquarium system and in this case nothing more than added volume that serves no other functional purpose or access (skimmer, fuge, media, etc.).

There is an overflow design which bears your name.

However, (as far as I know) you did not invent the weir, the standpipe, the ball valve, or the siphon. People were using return pumps and overflow drains before you described your take on the system.

You looked at the existing concepts, and you combined them in a new way, and then you shared that combination with the world.

I can only guess that there were people that described your overflow as "just another plumbing job", and that "there are plenty of overflow designs. This isn't anything special.". If they said, "I already have an overflow, I see no reason to use yours. Stop thinking that your idea has any special benefits", and then they showed you a simple standpipe... How would you have felt?

We both know that your combination was special. It's now the gold standard against which we measure all overflows.

But you didn't invent the concepts involved. You just had a combination, a configuration. That's what this is for me. It's a configuration of an external sump. A combination of pieces in a way that I haven't seen before. If this isn't a new configuration, then I'll happily give credit to whoever did it before me.

But to say that this isn't unique because remote sumps already exist seems almost hypocritical considering your history in the hobby.

This design will probably never be as influential as your contributions, and I respect you, but man, you are coming across as way more hostile than I feel like I deserve.

 

[BeanAnimal]

There is an overflow design which bears your name.

However, (as far as I know) you did not invent the weir, the standpipe, the ball valve, or the siphon. People were using return pumps and overflow drains before you described your take on the system.

LoL I never said that I did. To that end, I incorporated a standpipe design published by Richard Durso as a building block to my system.

I can only guess that there were people that described your overflow as "just another plumbing job", and that "there are plenty of overflow designs. This isn't anything special.". If they said, "I already have an overflow, I see no reason to use yours. Stop thinking that your idea has any special benefits", and then they showed you a simple standpipe... How would you have felt?

Sir, respectfully - I published something novel and if you're idea here was novel I would be the first to say "wow that is something neat and new" - but alas, it is not. No matter how many ways you re-word it .

Can you explain to me what you think is novel or new or not been done before?
Insulation - been done
Extra sump with no equipment - been done
Lid on the sump - been done
Extra system volume using a 5 gallon bucket, jerry can, pickle barrel, 55 gallon drum or similar - been done

But you didn't invent the concepts involved. You just had a combination, a configuration. That's what this is for me. It's a configuration of an external sump. A combination of pieces in a way that I haven't seen before. If this isn't a new configuration, then I'll happily give credit to whoever did it before me.

This is where your disconnect is. There is nothing novel, new or different about what you are proposing. It is just extra tank of water attached to the aquarium, no matter how you keep re-wording it. You are not the first guy to insulate a sump, put a lid on a sump or use a container to add volume to your system.

But to say that this isn't unique because remote sumps already exist seems almost hypocritical considering your history in the hobby.

Sorry to be so blunt, but it isn't unique or novel.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

I never said that I did.

And I never claimed to invent remote sumps, dark sumps, insulation, lids, or tanks of water.

Sir, respectfully - I published something novel

You published a novel configuration using existing concepts and components, arranged in a new way, right?

This is where your disconnect is. There is nothing novel, new or different about what you are proposing. It is just extra tank of water attached to the aquarium, no matter how you keep re-wording it.

Your design was just an overflow.

You are not the first guy to insulate a sump, put a lid on a sump or use a container to add volume to your system.

You were not the first person to put standpipes behind a weir.

Seriously. Explain to me how you are able to define any difference at all between what you did then, and what I did here, because I can't see any difference at all.

Sorry to be so blunt, but it isn't unique or novel.

It is easy to change my mind. Simply show me another sump set up in the configuration that I described.

Not something similar, I mean this exact configuration. Don't show me a crappy standpipe when I'm talking about a BeanAnimal overflow.

If you (or anyone) can do that, then I will immediately admit that I was wrong and I will offer a heartfelt apology to you and anyone else who desires an apology from me for this thread.

If no one has made one before, then it is novel by definition. Do you agree?

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

Double posting because I just noticed your edit asking me a question...

Can you explain to me what you think is novel or new or not been done before?
Insulation - been done
Extra sump with no equipment - been done
Lid on the sump - been done
Extra system volume using a 5 gallon bucket, jerry can, pickle barrel, 55 gallon drum or similar - been done

I proposed a gravity fed cistern external to the main display and sump, that will passively increase water volume while requiring no additional chemical or nutritive inputs, no additional power usage, no additional equipment aside from the materials used for it's construction, and no extra maintenance work for (potentially) years at a time. It doesn't increase evaporation, it doesn't increase demand on the heating or cooling system.

That it is completely hands-off while being laser focused on increasing system stability all while having nearly no negative side effects or additional costs is what this design has that none of the others do.

 

[Seancj]

If its gravity fed from the display tank, without some form of filtration and/or internal circulation to keep it suspended, it will collect detritus, and thus, rather quickly, begin to have negative side effects as a nutrient sink. You will need to clean it/syphon out the detritus, so therefore, it is no longer "completely hands off" and will certainly require "extra maintenance work".
I don't believe we have any piece of equipment or intervention in this hobby that is "completely hands off" for any extensive length of time.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

If its gravity fed from the display tank, without some form of filtration and/or internal circulation to keep it suspended, it will collect detritus, and thus, rather quickly, begin to have negative side effects as a nutrient sink. You will need to clean it/syphon out the detritus, so therefore, it is no longer "completely hands off" and will certainly require "extra maintenance work".

I've already addressed this in previous comments.

I have a very successful refugium. I have to dose nitrate and phosphate to keep my levels above zero. This is starting to become a common "problem" these days. I have absolutely no problem letting detritus digest in that chamber. It will allow me to dose less and run my refugium brighter and longer, resulting in greater oxygen production at night and a larger PH boost.

I'm totally fine with that "downside".

 

[Seancj]

Very good! Best of luck should you try it out.
I, for one, will immediately begin referring to my present, and all future, "remote increase water volume containers" as an 'ErasmusCrowley". I rather like the sound of that....rolls off the tongue quite nicely.
Easy to remember too as those are the names of two of my favorite literary and TV characters. Erasmus the robot villain from the Dune prequels and Crowley, the demon, from Supernatural.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Double posting because I just noticed your edit asking me a question...




I proposed a gravity fed cistern external to the main display and sump, that will passively increase water volume while requiring no additional chemical or nutritive inputs, no additional power usage, no additional equipment aside from the materials used for it's construction, and no extra maintenance work for (potentially) years at a time. It doesn't increase evaporation, it doesn't increase demand on the heating or cooling system.

That it is completely hands-off while being laser focused on increasing system stability all while having nearly no negative side effects or additional costs is what this design has that none of the others do.

Again you can re-describe a sump any way you wish... it is a sump.

This is getting beyond silly.

 

[Erasmus Crowley]

Very good! Best of luck should you try it out.
I, for one, will immediately begin referring to my present, and all future, "remote increase water volume containers" as an 'ErasmusCrowley". I rather like the sound of that....rolls off the tongue quite nicely.
Easy to remember too as those are the names of two of my favorite literary and TV characters. Erasmus the robot villain from the Dune prequels and Crowley, the demon, from Supernatural.

I'm definitely going to give away my age here, but when I chose the name the Erasmus part came from the "Quest for Glory" games. The wizard Erasmus and his pet rat Fenris.

The Crowley part came from Aleister, who was probably where they got the name for the demon from Supernatural as well. I did really enjoy that character though, and it was a shame when they killed him off.

 

[Derrick0580]

Just seems easier to diy a huge sump out of a rubbermaid stock tank