Sumps, Weirs & Placement

[JustKia]

Sorry to have a load of questions.

Do sumps have to be below the main tank? Can you have the sump inline with the main tank instead?
Can you use a weir box system if you have the sump inline?
If you were to have a divided main tank (ie one side predators, one side non-predators) which side would the weir/sump be best? Which side would the return be best?

 

[ben1987]

qith a traditional weir design you are using gravity to do the work for you, this is why the sump is usually below.

You could use this method if the display tank was a taller tank than the sump next to it. Or if the water level in the sump was lower.

As for teh other question it wouldnt matter. Would both these tanks be FOWLR? Then it wouldnt matter if one ot of fish needed copper. You are risking infecting both lots of fish running the system this way though

 

[JustKia]

The reason for thinking of maybe dividing the tank is that hubby and I both want Dwarf Fuzzy Lionfish and clownfish - obviously that's not going to work all in one, so I've been trying to figure out possible ways to acheive what we want to do.
We'd be planning on corals as well, but not really got to the stage where I've looked at any specifics.
Maybe it's backwards to normal(?) but we've gone from the point of what we definitely want, then looking at what can work with that and so on from there.

For positioning in the living room (rather than dismantling a double fitted wardrobe) it's be better off with the main tank low down. If the sump tank was to go actually on the floor (with marine ply and polystyrene/cork tiles under it) then it could be around 12" lower than the main tank.

 

[ben1987]

im not saying it isnt do able. Just odd. If you get white spot in a FOWLR you can usally copper treat the whole system. Having one half reef one fish only, you cant as copper kills inverts and corals.

 

[JustKia]

Isn't that the case in any tank that has inverts and/or corals though?
With my f/w tank I've accepted that because I have shrimp I have to avoid certain treatments and make sure what I do use is shrimp safe.
Even in an undivided s/w tank, if opting for peaceful reef safe fish, I'd be adding inverts and corals so would have to avoid certain treatments.

Odd is fine with me never one to conform to "the norm" I'm afraid.
Whether it can work from a physical/mechanical side is the deciding factor.
If there's not really any "better" side for the sump, return, etc to be placed on then that makes it easier, although I'm going to assume that having the return in the opposite side from the weir/outlet would help to ensure good flow.

 

[bitteraspects]

there is an alternative set up wher the sump ios placed higher than the display, and it overflows into the tank that way.
powered by a pump or powerhead in the tan, which pushes water to and through the sump, and overflows back into the tank from the side.

 

[xxBarneyxx]

Yeah it doesnt matter which tank is at the top as long as one is higher than the other. The top tank has the overflow (I would strongly recommend drilling the tank instead of using an overflow box) and the bottom tank has the return pump.

If you have a big "sump" tank and want a lot a flow in it then having it above the main display can be a problem in that you would then need a big pump sitting in the display tank (where as if the sump is under the display the pump is hidden out the way). That may not be a problem for you though.

 

[JustKia]

So, drilling is better?
Pump from lower tank (sump) to main tank...
Then what method is used to get water from main to sump if not overflow?
Sorry, if this seems like daft questions but there's a great deal of opportunities opening up for me right now and I'd like to take advantage of them to get the best I can.

My first f/w mistake was to not go with the biggest tank that could be afforded - I don't want to fall into that mistake here with s/w.
If I go with "tank on a stand" then I'm limited to approx 4ft length.
However we have a large amount of "dead space" under our window (which doesn't get direct sunlight) but it does mean the complete set-up has to fit below the level of the window sill (approx 3'6") - this then gives the potential length of around 8ft.
As it's ground floor, and runs across the joists and those joists are additionally supported by brickwalls every 3ft then I've got a decent chance to go with a pretty large volume.
The problem being no space to put a sump underneath.
I can go with to the side and as the current plan is for the main tank to be raised approx 1ft (gives potential space for hiding plumbing, etc) then the sump can be slightly lower by not being raised.
That can then be hiden by a simple cabinet built around the entire setup.

Obviously, I'd rather have the larger volume for many reasons.
At this stage if there is a better method for getting water from one tank to the other, I'm open to suggestions

 

[SkiFletch]

Agree with Barney. At some point one tank needs to be higher than the other so that you can use gravity to feed back. Drilling is MUCH safer than not drilling and it's really not that hard at all. Just buy a cheap diamond hole saw the correct diameter for the bulkhead fitting from ebay and you're all set. You don't need to do a lot of holes here, so Hong Kong's finest cheap tools do the trick here

Anyway you can draw a quick picture of what you're thinkin here? Even a penciled out sketch in MS paint?

 

[JustKia]

I know the sump tank would have to be big enough to take the volume of water that would spill over the weirs if the pump should fail.
The water would be pumped from the sump and over the top of the far side. If the pump fails it's not going to create a back siphon and flood the sump that way right?
So the sump pump is filling up the right side of the tank. A weir from there to the left side and from there a weir box with durso (?) standpipe to fill the sump tank.
Is using the standpipe not a form of overflow? Is there a better method of getting the water from main to sump?

Although some of the sump would not be below the level of the main tank the weight of the water would keep it filling into the sump, I believe, although only to the level that spills over the weir.
Could/would/should that work?

Not to any scale - just a rough idea
Base of main tank would be roughly 8"-12" above base of sump tank

 

[jtnova13]

if you put the sump on the side with the overflow and use a side mounted overflow, you might be able to do it with gravity.

 

[JustKia]

A side mounted overflow?
Instead of a durso standpipe?
How would that work?

I'm not looking for the "easy solution", I'm looking for the "better solution" albeit within the space I have to work with.

What I'm trying to avoid is the "I wish I'd taken the time/money to do xyz in the beginning" problem.
I'd like to take advantage of having the larger body of water (more stable conditions) as possible while minimising the risk of flooding.
Drilling won't be a problem if that's the best option for a low level tank with the sump not much below it.

 

[jtnova13]

you can have a side mount durso. Just use a 90 degree and a bulkhead on the side of the tank instead of the bottom. You will probably have to use street-els instead of regular 90 degree fittings to save space, or just custom design the overflow box to house your side mount.

Otherwise, you could do a side mount overflow like the one at glass-holes.com

 

[xxBarneyxx]

You idea looks fine. What JT is saying is that instead of having the holes drilled in the bottom and having the dursos inside the weir (which is the "standard" way to do it) have the holes drilled on the side of the tank and have the durso standpipe on the outside of the tank.

On the picture below you can just about see what I mean:

 

[JustKia]

Gotcha
That could be the answer.
I presume I then need to place a grid or such over the durso inlet to prevent any accidental escape attempts?