im helping a friend set up a 125 gal and hes using a sump, just wondering how much co2 is loss due to sump....thanks

anybody,thanks

If there's a lot of agitation, then there'll be quite a bit of CO2 loss. Try to minimize surface/water agitation as the water goes to the overflow/drain, to the sump, through the sump, and up again.

DiabloCanine and a few others should be able to chime in. I'm pretty sure they're running their setups with sumps w/o problems.

A good reactor will help keep the tank saturation with the optimal level of CO2.

Like epicfish stated a good reactor will help.

Ditch the bioballs and try and bring the intake line below the water surface in the wet/dry.....basically turn it into a sump.

As said avoid as much agitation as stated, and if you can cover the sump, that should help as well.

I run a 110 gallon with a 40 gallon sump, including the wet/dry portion and bioballs. I inject CO2 right before the returns. I do have to inject a bit more CO2, but I can still get enough to have gasping fish if I turn it up too much. I keep it around ~25-30 ppm usually. CO2 loss in sumps is exaggerated imo, and CO2 is relatively cheap.

Do a search on "sump" and you'll find lots of info. Like others have said, minimize water agitation as much as possible. Having the overflows drain out under the water surface in the sump seems to be a big part. I run mine via some PVC all the way to the bottom of the sump. I personally would do away with the bioball potion if it's a wet/dry filter (not just a sump). What's great for oxygen exchange is also great for outgassing CO2. Some people have submerged the bioballs so that they act as a place for bacteria growth, but in a planted tank with lots of surface area on the plants this normally isn't necessary. Most people are just using plain old aquariums as their sump.

David

get a cover for the sump . and try to get the best seal possible . so get the duct tape out and go crazy so if th sump does out gas co2 it will build up under the cover and redefuse into the water

While it is true a canister is more efficient at Co2 usage and a tank from what I hear can last for years, maintaining Co2 @ correct levels is possible without much Bps in a sump environment if proper diffusion method is used, I know this because I am doing it. I am maintaining a limegreen DC with only 5Bps and my setup consists of a 90gal, a CPR CS150 overflow in which I have placed a Durso standpipe, not to retain Co2 but too reduce noise and a 30gal sump. The water from my tank is not directed underwater, it is filtered through a micron sock which gets dispersed over another layer of coarse filter media, then finally over a Biowheel and I have no special covers to retain Co2.

IMO I think the sump / Co2 loss explained above is exaggerated and you do not lose much Co2 as stated. If I can maintain a limegreeen DC with 5Bps on a 90gal how much less is needed in a canister setup?

While I will suggest a canister filter for ease of use over a sump don't be discouraged in using your sump on your tank as needed Co2 levels can be maintained. Take a look at this Reactor, this is what I am using currently with excellent results and prior to this I was misting with a Rhinox 5000.

Now the important thing with a sump setup is the final flowrate that is used 'tank turnover rate' this should be around 600gph with less being better, anything over and you are asking for trouble, remember this is not 'saltwater' :-D.


Here are some plants in my 90gal sump setup....see my sig also........





When I was misting with Rhinox as you can see healthy unstunted growth





Using a sump on a planted tank is possible as I am using one now and I have no fancy setup to prevent loss of Co2.

thanks guys, we set up the tank today( so tired ) did nit have a chance to run the coe coz we dont have any tools to tighten the reg. so will have to do it tomm.then will measure the water after a day or 2 to how much co2 we need to inject....thanks