Refugium flow? High or low?

[Enderg60]

Im planning a sump and trying to figure out if I want ALL the water to pass through the fuge (2000 GPH) or if I want to bypass it and feed it off a pump for lower flow.

I plan to have sand and cheato in there and nothing else. The fuge section would be 40"w x 10"d x 18"h, being so wide I figure the 2000 GPH would be spread out enough to not demolish the cheato.

But before I actually have this thing made I figured Id ask around.

 

[Who me?]

Generally accepted practice is a lower flow.
I'd plan it with a T and valve so you can adjust the flow through the fuge, allowing you to find the best flow rate.

 

[Dom]

Im planning a sump and trying to figure out if I want ALL the water to pass through the fuge (2000 GPH) or if I want to bypass it and feed it off a pump for lower flow.

I plan to have sand and cheato in there and nothing else. The fuge section would be 40"w x 10"d x 18"h, being so wide I figure the 2000 GPH would be spread out enough to not demolish the cheato.

But before I actually have this thing made I figured Id ask around.

No need to complicate it with extra plumbing. Let all the water flow through it. With baffling and bubble traps, the flow through the refugium will be plenty slow.

 

[Enderg60]

Lol perfect internet. Ask a question get both answers.

 

[Who me?]

Lol perfect internet. Ask a question get both answers.

I believe Dom and I are both saying the same thing, low flow.
We're just suggesting different ways of achieving it.

I prefer the valve as you can fine tune the flow exactly how you want it.

 

[Enderg60]

Not really. He said the size of the fuge would slow the water down enough that full flow would be fine. As in lots of flow (the full 2000 GPH) but evenly distributed into a gentle current.

You just said low flow, as in separate from the sump flow and only getting supplied via a pump for much lower flow ( as in 300-600 GPH).

I prefer full flow, since its a simpler setup and nutrient uptake from the water column will be consistant since it depends on the algae growth and available nutrients. My concern is the flow being to high for good algae growth and possibly blow around the sand Id like to put in there too.

 

[Who me?]

Not really. He said the size of the fuge would slow the water down enough that full flow would be fine. As in lots of flow (the full 2000 GPH) but evenly distributed into a gentle current.

You just said low flow, as in separate from the sump flow and only getting supplied via a pump for much lower flow ( as in 300-600 GPH).

I prefer full flow, since its a simpler setup and nutrient uptake from the water column will be consistant since it depends on the algae growth and available nutrients. My concern is the flow being to high for good algae growth and possibly blow around the sand Id like to put in there too.

No I didn't say separate pump. I said put a t on the drain that's coming in so you can control how much goes through.

I don't care how much you make the flow "gentle". 2,000 gallon per hour is still way too much for a fuge IMO

 

[Who me?]

The fact that you started the thread and are asking the question shows you're at least considering the options, right?

Why not spend a few extra dollars and a little extra time now to give yourself the flexibility rather than changing your mind later and having to rip stuff apart and redo things later?

 

[mdb_talon]

It dont matter how many baffles you put in there the flow is the same.....33g/min. If anything baffles may reduce agitation and direct flow but that also that increases velocity in some areas.

Personally i would always set it up with a valve/bypass so i can adjust flow. Thats a lot of flow even for a 40" wife refugium

 

[Spare time]

Lol perfect internet. Ask a question get both answers.

I think the point is it doesn't matter much. It mostly depends on the macroalgae and how it's setup.

 

[Enderg60]

I can always get a bigger pump and add another tap off the manifold, but Im about to spend a lot of money on a custom sump so the decision must be made soon. Im completely open to other options, but in order to change my mind I need some facts and numbers not just people answering "fast" or "slow" then taking a pole.

Spare time mentioned the type of algae which is a good point. Im planning on cheato and possibly a section with a different macro that tangs will like to eat.

So I guess a better question would be, what algaes like high vs low flow. And what is considered high flow for macro algae?

 

[Who me?]

If you're going with Chaeto you'll want enough flow for it to roll/tumble, but not too much for it to get knocked around...

Again, more reason for a valve to pinpoint the perfect amount of flow. thats my advice, thats all I got for you, good luck.

 

[coreytrv]

@Enderg60, what did you end up doing? How's it working out?

I have the exact same question, here's the scenario:

(2) tanks 400 + 700 gallon totaling = 1,100 gallons draining into common sump.

EST max flow rate = 5,000 GPH.
Refugium area 115 gallon size.

If baffles are set high, then flow would be relatively high in top area, and calmer in the deeper sections.

What do you think?

 

[Pistondog]

@Enderg60, what did you end up doing? How's it working out?

I have the exact same question, here's the scenario:

(2) tanks 400 + 700 gallon totaling = 1,100 gallons draining into common sump.

EST max flow rate = 5,000 GPH.
Refugium area 115 gallon size.

If baffles are set high, then flow would be relatively high in top area, and calmer in the deeper sections.

What do you think?

The refugium does not need more than a few gallons per hour.

 

[coreytrv]

The refugium does not need more than a few gallons per hour.

I understand it doesn't "NEED" more than a few gallons per hour. BUT my issue is whether or not this setup would be detrimental. Given the flow / setup.

Putting the refugium on the end of the sump and plumbing into the return pump would require a major re-work of the sump.

 

[Pistondog]

I understand it doesn't "NEED" more than a few gallons per hour. BUT my issue is whether or not this setup would be detrimental. Given the flow / setup.

Putting the refugium on the end of the sump and plumbing into the return pump would require a major re-work of the sump.

I think if all the flow goes thru the refugium you will be limited on what will stay in place. I would plan on diverting most flow around or under the fuge.

 

[coreytrv]

Ok, got it!

Pump return section in middle, refugium on side, controlled with valves FROM return pump.

Plumbing can run UNDER the stand, so I can pull from middle section and control refugium flow.