No overflow box, just a strainer screwed into the bulkhead?

[pmrossetti]

Saw a 300g tank done this way lfs. 3 2" bulkheads in back of tank with strainers screwed in, no overflow. It was draining very quietly and you could hardly see them. Tank looked great. Is this a viable option for those who don't like the overflow boxes?

Your thoughts or experience? How important are the overflows?

[thereeftank]

I don't have personal experience with this setup, but considered it before. It's quiet because it's siphon, no air. More water is moved through same tube size because it'a all water. Have to be careful, because if power died to return pump, water level will drop until you get air into the line, so make sure you have a big enough sump and bulkheads placed appropriatly.

Overflow boxes are benifical because they permit the skimming of the surface of water. A lot of "junk" float on the very top of the water, overflows let it go down to the sump/skimmer.

[pmrossetti]

Originally Posted by thereeftank

I don't have personal experience with this setup, but considered it before. It's quiet because it's siphon, no air. More water is moved through same tube size because it'a all water. Have to be careful, because if power died to return pump, water level will drop until you get air into the line, so make sure you have a big enough sump and bulkheads placed appropriatly.

Overflow boxes are benifical because they permit the skimming of the surface of water. A lot of "junk" float on the very top of the water, overflows let it go down to the sump/skimmer.

I don't think it was a syphon.the water was about 1/2 way covering the bulkhead and there was airline tubing coming from dry side like the glass-holes set up.
?

The overflow box only skims the water into the box the junk is still on top until it goes in the hole, no? With a lot of flow in the tank maybe that's all you need? Just wondering.

[frankpayne32]

This is exactly the setup I have on my 125 gallon tank (check out my build thread if you are interested in seeing it, it's my homepage in my profile). Let me tell you the pros and cons as I have experienced them for the past 15 months on my set up.

Pros:
1. Extremely low profile in the tank. You lose next to nothing in terms of space. This looks much better IMO.
2. Extremely quiet overflow.
3. Using and "L" you can fine tune the water depth in your tank.

Cons
1. Poor nutrient removal. The reason people have surface skimmer boxes as the surface is where protenacious surfecants collect (the stuff you want to remove from your tank). Surface skimmers remove these very efficiently while my setup is not nearly as efficient. I do get a film on the surface of my tank from time to time. I correct this by removing the strainers when I do water changes once a week (this is the only time I use filter socks on my system).

A part of me wishes I installed teeth surface skimmers but I really do like how clean looking my setup is. I hope this helps!

[pmrossetti]

Originally Posted by frankpayne32

This is exactly the setup I have on my 125 gallon tank (check out my build thread if you are interested in seeing it, it's my homepage in my profile). Let me tell you the pros and cons as I have experienced them for the past 15 months on my set up.

Pros:
1. Extremely low profile in the tank. You lose next to nothing in terms of space. This looks much better IMO.
2. Extremely quiet overflow.
3. Using and "L" you can fine tune the water depth in your tank.

Cons
1. Poor nutrient removal. The reason people have surface skimmer boxes as the surface is where protenacious surfecants collect (the stuff you want to remove from your tank). Surface skimmers remove these very efficiently while my setup is not nearly as efficient. I do get a film on the surface of my tank from time to time. I correct this by removing the strainers when I do water changes once a week (this is the only time I use filter socks on my system).

A part of me wishes I installed teeth surface skimmers but I really do like how clean looking my setup is. I hope this helps!

thanks,i will look at it. pluses and minus with everything I guess.

[stormrider27]

Originally Posted by frankpayne32

This is exactly the setup I have on my 125 gallon tank (check out my build thread if you are interested in seeing it, it's my homepage in my profile). Let me tell you the pros and cons as I have experienced them for the past 15 months on my set up.

Pros:
1. Extremely low profile in the tank. You lose next to nothing in terms of space. This looks much better IMO.
2. Extremely quiet overflow.
3. Using and "L" you can fine tune the water depth in your tank.

Cons
1. Poor nutrient removal. The reason people have surface skimmer boxes as the surface is where protenacious surfecants collect (the stuff you want to remove from your tank). Surface skimmers remove these very efficiently while my setup is not nearly as efficient. I do get a film on the surface of my tank from time to time. I correct this by removing the strainers when I do water changes once a week (this is the only time I use filter socks on my system).

A part of me wishes I installed teeth surface skimmers but I really do like how clean looking my setup is. I hope this helps!

Nice build page Frank . I have a couple of questions that I hope you will not mind answering.

1. How loud is your overflow?
2. Couldn't you have installed a coast to coast overflow or was something preventing you from doing so.

Thanks!

[reefer1979]

I am running a 36x18 (50 breeder) this way and it works pretty good. its set up as a peninsula tank with one of the 18 inch as the back of he tank and a mp40. I set it up like this originally so that i could adjust the water level to accommodate different size waves from the vortech. I slip the barbed fitting inside the bulkhead and place the strainer over the barb end which holds it nicely, that way to raise or lower water level i just adjust the angle of the strainer, because of the restriction this can cause i added two one inch overflows for this tank and i could easily use a much larger return pump if i chose to.

Surface skimming still works but not as well as a traditional spill over type method.

[on the spot]

The down sides of the pipe with strainer method, chiefly nutrient export, far out weigh the can't hardly see it up side.

If there is room behind the tank to add an external overflow box I'd suggest this. The surface skimmer inside the tank can be very narrow, as little as 1/2 inch space. There is no need for a bulkhead, just a hole through the back of the tank. The box glued to the back of the tank will accommodate all the drain plumbing. The BeAn Animal drain set up is what I'd recommend.

[frankpayne32]

Originally Posted by stormrider27

Nice build page Frank . I have a couple of questions that I hope you will not mind answering.

1. How loud is your overflow?

-Almost silent. You can't hear it unless you put your ear to it.

2. Couldn't you have installed a coast to coast overflow or was something preventing you from doing so.

-I could have but I didn't want to give up the real estate in my tank.


Thanks!

No prob!

[frankpayne32]

Originally Posted by on the spot

The down sides of the pipe with strainer method, chiefly nutrient export, far out weigh the can't hardly see it up side.

This is really just opinion. I've already said that it is not as efficient at nutrient export but I have a heavily stocked mixed reef that grows coral and fish better than most. I don't have any problem with nutrient export.

[on the spot]

Originally Posted by frankpayne32

This is really just opinion.

O tay.

In my opinion evacuating the upper most surface of water is more beneficial than not.



YMMV

[frankpayne32]

Originally Posted by on the spot

O tay.

In my opinion evacuating the upper most surface of water is more beneficial than not.



YMMV

I said the same thing. You said there was no benefit to using a strainer when I listed several.

[fishhawk123]

I was toying with this idea, but I was thinking of using this idea for a dedicated display refugium above the main DT with a overflow skimmer in it and a main sump below. My thoughts were this. 110gallon display, 60 gallon display fuge above main tank, 55 gallon sump and mini fuge. As I am still putting together equipment, nothing is set in stone yet. Appreciate any thoughts and ideas.

[billdogg]

The downside, at least IMO, is if the strainer(s) become clogged you run the risk of a overflow and/or running the return pump dry. Yes, I understand that with frequent cleaning that should not become a problem, but things happen, maintenance gets put off for one reason or another....and then the wife gets very angry.

jm.02

[Shaummy]

I have 1 drain in my 90gal and it's set up this way. I have the same findings that frankpayne listed. I too was concerned that it would limit some surface skimming.

My strainer is sitting in a 90deg elbow so it's pretty well vertical. Once I knew where my water level was going to sit..I actually cut out 1 set of the "bars" all the way around in the strainer that was closest to the water surface.

This seemed to allow a better flow/drop of water into the drain without adding noise etc.. Been working pretty good for the last 3 years.

[brob22]

am i missing something here. isnt a bulk head with a strainer skimming the surface of the water?

[Shaummy]

Originally Posted by brob22

am i missing something here. isnt a bulk head with a strainer skimming the surface of the water?

It does..but it is not nearly as efficient that an actual overflow box might. The overflow box has a lot more surface area to skim off the top water.

[fishhawk123]

I could see the possibility of the fuge drain getting clogged, but was thinking 3 drains from the fuge gravity feeding to the DT. 2x at the same height and 1x slightly above. I could also put lighting crate below all 3 to act as a pre-screen / strain to keep the algae in check? Just thinking out loud at this point lol.

[DasCamel]

Eehhhh, one failed bulkhead and the entire tank will drain instead of the water volume of the overflow.

[fishhawk123]

Umm no, I was unclear I guess. The bulkheads would b located 1 to 3 inches from the top of the display fuge. So I can't see that happning. If all three strainers happened to clog, then u have a bit of a mess.

[KafudaFish]

I have seen all plastic drain covers in the plumbing section and have wondered if that could be used as a strainer.

Seems like Sanjay has flat strainers on his closed loop intakes that could work.

[fishhawk123]

Remember, as far as my setup that I was planning to have a main sump under the display tank and a display fuge above the display tank. Lots of live rock and rubble in the display fuge and maybe some algae, mainly as a pod farm ( 60 gal. ) this is the tank I am considering the 3 bulkhead drain with elbows and strainers approx. 1 to 3" from top of tank. The 110gallon Display tank will have a bean animal ghost overflow leading to a 55 gallon sump.As the display fuge will have 3x gravity drains into the main tank, and the bulkheads will b close to the top of the fuge, I am having a hard time seeing any problems. It s possible , I am not understanding the "One failed bulkhead and the entire tank will drain" situation u mentioned. Did I miss something?

[fishhawk123]

My thoughts were 1. U don't need to skim the above tank refugium as the display tank has an overflow skimmer, and then hits the sump with a large protein skimmer, then baffles, then a smaller refugium area, then returned to display refugium. So if the return died, 1to 4" of water drains to display where the ghost overflow drains that to sump 2. Why pay another $200 for an overflow box for a refugium ?

[heathlindner25]

The only thing I can think of happening is if your tank crashes and you lose a few fish... those fish can get sucked into the drain and plug it. I've seen it happen but only once in 10 years or so, 2 drains and 2 dead fish plugged both.

[fishhawk123]

But the drains will have low profile strainers. Don't think they could get 100% clogged.