Help with overflow plumbing

[chimera]

i agree with suphew here. it seems like some simply oppose the design of the durso just because they think they found something better. the durso has been used by thousands of people to reduce noise, and most have very few issues. its a great design, but as with most things, if you dont design it correctly from scratch and dont fine tune it after installation, its little improvement than without it. the greatest noise occurs when water drops into the overflow the greatest distance. the other noise created is gurgling when the water level in the overflow rises and drops. if the durso is designed with the correct pipe size and the top of the standpipe is as close as practically possible to the top of the overflow, there will be a shorter distance for water to fall (less noise) and the correct size piping, correct size hole is used there will be no or very little gurgling noise.

dont just oppose something because you think your own design is better. maybe it is better, but it doesnt make the durso a bad design. im definately using it again on my next tank. while its not completely silent, i dont even notice it.

basically if you can hear your overflow overtop of the T.V. only THEN do you have a problem!

[suphew]

basically if you can hear your overflow overtop of the T.V. only THEN do you have a problem!

Damn, then maybe I should get rid of my durso's

[lduncan]

I'm sure this works fine until a snail/fish/stone/etc gets stuck in the ball valve. The point is you are restricting the flow, which has two affects, first you are increasing the likely hood that something will get caught at the restrictor, yes this could happen with a durso but is far less likely because there its far more likely that an object will get caught by a ball valve than a pipe reduction. And second you are reducing the margin of error if something does go wrong, the maximum amount of flow you can get is dictated by the smallest part of the plumbing.

Care to quantify those probabilities and likelihoods? You have overflow grates, and standpipe covers to prevent things large enough to cause blockage entering the overflow in the first place.

In reality you're no worse off, or safer with a durso as opposed to a full siphon system.

How often do overflows become blocked resulting in flooding?

Rather than just making unquailifed statements can you please explain what is incorrect about what I said? I'm always willing to take on board correct information and learn from it.

FUD = Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. It looked like you were suggesting that a full siphon system was more trouble than a durso, and that people don't use full siphons because they are not "tried and tested" like durso's, and that's the reason that 95% of people use them.

I run two setups both with durso's, the DURSO's on both are very quite (nb: I didn't say silent), the noise I get is from the water going over the comb and the water exiting the down flow pipe, both of these you will still get with any other system. The reason some people have problems with durso's is because they cant read and follow instructions, they don't make them up correctly ie reduce the pipe size between the standpipe and the down flow, and they don't spend the time tuning them before they give up.

The reason people have trouble with durso's is because they don't fully solve the problem they are intended to. It's a fundamentally flawed design. People have different perceptions on what quiet is, so though it may be adequate solution to some people, for others it's not.

In my opinion durso's are a waste of time. They cost more, due to all the plumbing parts you need, they take longer to assemble, and you have to play around drilling holes, fine tuning air values to get just the right amount of air flow etc. Also, in practice don't provide any significant increase in safety over a full siphon system, which are inexpensive, and quick to construct and "tune", while being self adjusting to variations in pump output.

Layton

[suphew]

Care to quantify those probabilities and likelihoods

yep theres a 60% probability of at 3% likely hood.

You have overflow grates

I have some monstor snails, tube worms, etc that live in my over flow, just because they have to be small to get in doesn't mean they wont grow large in there.

standpipe covers

Sorry must have missed the part where you listed standpipe covers in your design, hmmm seems to be missing from your pictures

How often do overflows become blocked resulting in flooding?

Mine? Never because I use durso's

FUD = Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. It looked like you were suggesting that a full siphon system was more trouble than a durso, and that people don't use full siphons because they are not "tried and tested" like durso's, and that's the reason that 95% of people use them.

Fear? thats taking it a bit far isn't it? I was just pointing out what I see as a major flaw, you have yet to convince me that this isn't the case. I dont disagree that there are ways around this, like Creaker has done by adding a second backup siphon, but this just seems like adding complication and expense to make a poor system work. What is the rest of your point, most people do use durso because they are tried and tested, this is fact. I have never said there aren't other options that work (in fact I have said the opposite a few times, aka SteveA's setup), but why advise newby's to try re-inventing the wheel, risking their live stock.

The reason people have trouble with durso's is because they don't fully solve the problem they are intended to. It's a fundamentally flawed design

I have to disagree with this, durso's do exacty what they are designed to do, provide a safe and quite over flow.

They cost more, due to all the plumbing parts you need

So would it be cheaper to have two siphon pipes, two holes, two taps, as creaker has done to try and work around the flaws of the siphon system? I don't think so. The extra parts in a durso, 1 'T', 1 90, 1 end cap, thats less than the cost of 1 extra tap.

play around drilling holes, fine tuning air values to get just the right amount of air flow etc

Firstly this just show that you don't understand how durso work, reason being that you dont use air valves because they block up with salt etc. I do agree that it takes time fine tuning, but once it is done, thats it. I havn't used a siphon system but I can't see how you wouldn't need to constantly retune it as algae builds up, pump output changes, etc etc. I would rather spend a week setting a durso once than a life time of adjusting taps to have to the correct level of water in my over flow.

[lduncan]

I have some monstor snails, tube worms, etc that live in my over flow, just because they have to be small to get in doesn't mean they wont grow large in there.

What's stopping these monster snails getting into the durso and blocking it?

Sorry must have missed the part where you listed standpipe covers in your design, hmmm seems to be missing from your pictures

Surely it's standard issue on any stand pipe, durso or otherwise?

Mine? Never because I use durso's

Is that the reason? because you have durso's? It's like saying, my overflow has never blocked because it's a full siphon.

That's not the reason it hasn't blocked. The reason is either that an event has never occurred which could cause blockage, or that there are other features which prevent objects of a size capable of causing blockage to enter the standpipe.

A durso design in itself does not prevent or reduce objects which could block the overflow from entering it.

Fear? thats taking it a bit far isn't it? I was just pointing out what I see as a major flaw, you have yet to convince me that this isn't the case.

FUD is a generic phrase for your earlier post.

I dont disagree that there are ways around this, like Creaker has done by adding a second backup siphon, but this just seems like adding complication and expense to make a poor system work. What is the rest of your point, most people do use durso because they are tried and tested, this is fact. I have never said there aren't other options that work (in fact I have said the opposite a few times, aka SteveA's setup)

I don't know the details of crackers system. But a full siphon overflow is a simple concept. I think you are putting too much faith in the perceived safety of the durso over a full siphon. In practice, there is not difference in safety.

but why advise newby's to try re-inventing the wheel, risking their live stock.

More FUD.

So would it be cheaper to have two siphon pipes, two holes, two taps, as creaker has done to try and work around the flaws of the siphon system? I don't think so. The extra parts in a durso, 1 'T', 1 90, 1 end cap, thats less than the cost of 1 extra tap.

Why two? The durso doesn't have redundancy, so why are you trying to compare two full siphon's to a single durso? It's not valid.

Firstly this just show that you don't understand how durso work, reason being that you dont use air valves because they block up with salt etc. I do agree that it takes time fine tuning, but once it is done, thats it.

I know how durso's work both in theory and construction. People use a variety of methods for altering the air inflow in the durso, some use straight drilled holes, some use air valves, some use slotted rotating end caps etc.

I havn't used a siphon system but I can't see how you wouldn't need to constantly retune it as algae builds up, pump output changes, etc etc. I would rather spend a week setting a durso once than a life time of adjusting taps to have to the correct level of water in my over flow.

Based on that I don't think you understand how it's setup, or the theory behind how it works, and automatically adapts to changing flow conditions.

I've only ever had to tune it four times in the last several years. Once on setup, once after a tank move, then on installing a new skimmer on the overflow, and then again when my return pump crapped out several weeks ago.

Tuning a full siphon takes literally 5 minutes max. An overflow which takes a week to set properly is clearly sensitive to changes so that means by nature it's going to be less tolerant of changing pump outputs and buildup etc.

Layton

[KP]

Man of man, this is getting intense.

After every post I change my mind :lol: :lol:

All good, personal preference I guess.

[suphew]

suphew wrote:

I have some monstor snails, tube worms, etc that live in my over flow, just because they have to be small to get in doesn't mean they wont grow large in there.

What's stopping these monster snails getting into the durso and blocking it?

Feel like I'm banging my head against a wall. Because I dont have a half turned off tap in the middle of my standpipe waiting for an object to get stuck on or for crap to build up. My down flow is 40mm of smooth unresticted pipe, i would happily send a golf ball down it. You seem to keep missing the point, I have never said the siphon system wont work and isnt "safe", what I have said is the tap adds flaw to the design which could be a problem, the durso doesn't have this flaw and is therefore safer.

Surely it's standard issue on any stand pipe, durso or otherwise?

see above, I have no need to add 'extras' to my durso to allow for a flawed design

there are other features which prevent objects of a size capable of causing blockage

bingo!! features like not having a half turned off tap contolling the system.

FUD is a generic phrase for your earlier post.

I understand what your saying now, so FUD is to my posts what BS is to yours?? How about trying to clearly argue you case instead of using pointless generic phrases that add nothing.

I don't know the details of crackers system. But a full siphon overflow is a simple concept. I think you are putting too much faith in the perceived safety of the durso over a full siphon. In practice, there is not difference in safety

And I have explained why I disagree, not going to bother again, but am still waiting for you to explain why you think a system relying on a half turn off tap is as safe?

suphew wrote:

but why advise newby's to try re-inventing the wheel, risking their live stock.

More FUD.

Again if you can't add anything useful, why do you even bother??

Why two? The durso doesn't have redundancy, so why are you trying to compare two full siphon's to a single durso? It's not valid.

I dont know why two, I'm just using the only working siphon system that I remember has been posted here as an example (crackers). I assume he has two because he knows the half turned off tap idea could be risky and has added a work around.

I know how durso's work both in theory and construction. People use a variety of methods for altering the air inflow in the durso, some use straight drilled holes, some use air valves, some use slotted rotating end caps etc.

Quote from www.dursostandpipes.com

"The End-Cap is held on with teflon tape. A very small, as small as I could make it (thickness of a toothpick), hole is drilled in the top of the End-Cap fitting."

This is the one and only way Richard says to make the holes. To go back to my point before, the reason durso's fail is because people can't read and follow instructions, you posting just confirms you are one of these people.

Based on that I don't think you understand how it's setup, or the theory behind how it works, and automatically adapts to changing flow conditions.

I've only ever had to tune it four times in the last several years. Once on setup, once after a tank move, then on installing a new skimmer on the overflow, and then again when my return pump crapped out several weeks ago.

Your just contradicing your self here

Why would your return pump output vary? Well because the power transmission system doesn't provide 240 Volts at 50 Hz. It provides something in that general region, pump output can drop over a period on months from debris and calcium buildup, heat can change output. It is not usually a significant change, but enough to cause an annoyance

Tuning a full siphon takes literally 5 minutes max. An overflow which takes a week to set properly is clearly sensitive to changes so that means by nature it's going to be less tolerant of changing pump outputs and buildup etc.

The height of the standpipe will depend on how much volume your return puts out, which will determine how high above the top of the stand pipe, the weir water level will have to be.

So you'll need to experiment a bit with the height of the stand pipe to get a trade off between not having the water drop over the weir causing too much noise, and not having enough margin for variation in pump output, and room to create a full siphon, etc.

I'm sure you could calculate some rough numbers to work out an estimate of the ideal stand pipe height, but my brain's in no state to go through that physics at the moment

And again.

[scholesy]

I put a Durso on my tank. A little bit of thought spent on making sure I made it right, a couple of weeks' wait for it to quieten down - it's real quiet. I made a perspex runway that hangs thru the slits on the overflow and this reduces the remaining noise even further. I can control the flow via my AquaMedic 3600l/h pump if I want to (but I like having it at full whack).

[rossco]

KP, this thread ain't intense, you haven't even started to discuss what skimmer or coral enhancement system to use!!!

One thing I have learnt - all the contributors do have something to contribute to our thinking and understanding of whats going on...

[lduncan]

Looks like another overly defensive person.

Feel like I'm banging my head against a wall. Because I dont have a half turned off tap in the middle of my standpipe waiting for an object to get stuck on or for crap to build up. My down flow is 40mm of smooth unresticted pipe, i would happily send a golf ball down it.

Doesn't a durso need a restriction in it to work? There is almost as much potential for blockage there, if the usual precautions aren't taken.

Also for you're perceived safety you're relying on an object not being irregular in shape for you overflow not to block. If you're worried about safety, that's not a safe assumption. For example, a pyramid shaped snail may be able to get into and part way down the overflow in one orientation, then it may rotate and become pinned, or could get trapped on the restriction at the bottom of the durso, thereby blocking the overflow.

That's why covers should be used on any overflow system.

You seem to keep missing the point, I have never said the siphon system wont work and isnt "safe", what I have said is the tap adds flaw to the design which could be a problem, the durso doesn't have this flaw and is therefore safer.

But overflows have other features to stop blockages, you should not have objects capable of causing blockages getting that far into the system. You may not have said it isn't safe, but comments like "but why advise newby's to try re-inventing the wheel, risking their live stock" sure do imply it. The tap is not a flaw when normal precautions (overflow covers) are used.

see above, I have no need to add 'extras' to my durso to allow for a flawed design

Well that's your incorrect perception, a durso is almost as susceptible to blockage as any other method if other features like overflow covers are not used.

bingo!! features like not having a half turned off tap contolling the system.

The restriction required by the durso is almost as bad. That's why covers should be used on all overflow systems including durso's

I understand what your saying now, so FUD is to my posts what BS is to yours?? How about trying to clearly argue you case instead of using pointless generic phrases that add nothing.

And I have explained why I disagree, not going to bother again, but am still waiting for you to explain why you think a system relying on a half turn off tap is as safe?

Again if you can't add anything useful, why do you even bother??

That's what you're doing, spreading FUD. Some people might call it a myth, or ignorance.

I dont know why two, I'm just using the only working siphon system that I remember has been posted here as an example (crackers). I assume he has two because he knows the half turned off tap idea could be risky and has added a work around.

Sounds like he just added redundancy, so it's twice as safe as a single durso or other system.

Quote from www.dursostandpipes.com

"The End-Cap is held on with teflon tape. A very small, as small as I could make it (thickness of a toothpick), hole is drilled in the top of the End-Cap fitting."

This is the one and only way Richard says to make the holes. To go back to my point before, the reason durso's fail is because people can't read and follow instructions, you posting just confirms you are one of these people.

Personally I'm quite capable of reading and following instructions, so I don't know how your drawing that conclusion. Anyway I wonder why people tried all these other methods of regulating the airflow? There must be a reason for them to bother trying other methods. Maybe they didn't get the desired performance or noise reduction from his "one and only" method, so tried other ways?

Your just contradicing your self here

What is contradictory?

Layton

[slappers]

[chimera]

The main objectives are that the overflow is hidden, quiet, takes up minimal tank space and takes water from the middle of the tank.

Just need a strainer over the bulkhead to stop fishies getting sucked in.

I am thinking two of these overflows would be the way to go.

Not sure of pipe size?

KP - IMO the design you have illustrated will work fine. In regards to having two overflows, a second would only be required if 1. you have such excessive return flow that a single overflow could not handle it, 2. you want to add some form of redundancy incase one overflow became blocked - which in itself would be extremely rare if everything else is designed correctly.

In regards to pipe size, I would personally make the smallest restriction at least 32mm, even if its a smaller tank. Reasons are two-fold, capability of handling larger flow if you upgrade your return pump plus anything that *may* get stuck in the overflow (unlikely with a decent strainer) is less likely to impact flow which could flood the tank.

One thing I would point out though, is that in the design you have shown make sure the strainer you use is accessible and removeable. I have a closed loop which the outlets are small strainers made from a piece of piping with a cap and heaps of 8mm holes drilled in it. It has been in place for quite sometime and 2 of the outlets sit under my reef rack. Through the sides of my tank I can see both strainers and both have brown algae growing around them. While it is not excessive, I know one day I will probably have to clean them out which means stripping down my tank.

Just as you have stated, you dont want your overflow(s) to be seen, this is also my goal when I get around to creating my new tank, basically having a more natural looking reef (in other words, having the pumps and piping required to create flow but without seeing anything ) So, in the new tank all aquascaping will be done first and the plumbing will integrate into and around it. For your tank, I would suggest designing the strainer as a 90 degree bend with a pushfit pipe that rises up the back of the tank with a cap and heaps of holes in it. You can always hide the pipe with creative rockwork. The pushfit means you can remove and clean it. Having it as long as possible means more holes and less chance of blockage.

[wasp]

Layton

Layton what are you doing?

I never said the above. That quote is not mine. I agree that as described the durso is cheaper, but for whatever reason you have tried to drag my name into this argument attributing stuff to me I never even said.

Please withdraw it.

Also, why so doggedly defend every position you ever take? Most people use Durso's they can't be that terrible. Life does not have to be one long argument does it?

If you continue this thread will end up yet another thread you crashed with your arguing & end up getting moderated. ( Again ).

If you could resist the urge to attack every little thing your various opponents say, perhaps you might leave the way open to find agreement with people on things.

[lduncan]

Jees, no need to go crazy. I apologise for that mistake wasp, I can't edit it now. If the moderators want to then they can. It's a pain not being able to edit spelling and grammar mistakes now too.

It was not intentional, so tone it down, no need to attack me.

I'm trying to set straight the FUD and myths around full siphon overflow systems, and the misconceptions which clearly surround the "safety" features of the durso. It doesn't look like anyone else is prepared to do it, so I might as well.

These discussions trigger people to think about things, and not just go through the motions doing what other people do, mindlessly copying. I don't know, maybe it's the engineer speaking in me.

There are often a multitude of different ways to do something, if you have an accurate understanding of a variety of methods you can chose the one best one for your situation. For any situation there is always only a single best solution. However if you basing you decision on FUD, myths, or misinformation, then you don't have that opportunity. But then in that situation, I guess it's a matter of ignorance is bliss, as they say.

Layton

[wasp]

I'm trying to set straight the FUD and myths around full siphon overflow systemsLayton

All I can see is pages of argument. I don't really care about durso's I know nothing about plumbing, but as a victim of your arguing on many occasions it bugs me to see you still at it.

no need to attack me.Layton

Just pointing out a few home truths you badly need to learn.

I'm trying to set straight the FUD and myths around full siphon overflow systemsLayton

FUD? Myths? your opinion, but inflamatory language to the person on the other side.

However if you basing you decision on FUD, myths, or misinformation, then you don't have that opportunity. But then in that situation, I guess it's a matter of ignorance is bliss, as they say.Layton

Listen to yourself.

FUD, myths, misinformation, ignorance.

That type of language is insulting and derogatory, and does not belong in the sensible discussion you claim you want.

I have been on the recieving end of all those kind of insults from you myself, when what I have said has been perfectly fine.

It is this type of desire to put others down and "attack the messenger" that causes so many threads you are in to become unseemly arguments.

[Pegasus]

Suphew.. IDuncan..

It's about time you two guys had another warning about your constant bickering and ruining other members threads.

Comment for the day by Suphew..

Again if you can't add anything useful, why do you even bother??

Time you both considered this.

Please stay on topic or this will end up as yet another locked thread.

Bill

Mod.

[beachy]

Looking at the design on the first page, i find it hard to see how the syphon will break if the pump is turned off, wouldnt the water just keep draining to the bottom of the intake?

Would it be a good idea to use the same setup, but build an overflow box around it, so water can be taken from the surface(no film), and the added securety knowing that if a pump fails it will only drain to the overflow level? i guess then you will still get a gurgle though.

[suphew]

there are so many ways I could reply to the misinformation from layton, but as is usual he driven a tread to death with a lack of fact and logic, contridictions and then when proved incorrect by sound reasoning lowering it to personal insults.

I still stand by what I said at the start, chose to do what almost every other reefer in the world does or take Laytons word for that using his system will be ok. Pretty simple choice really.

My last word.

[slappers]

just dont keep your water level so high in your sump. so if there is a power cut or pump failure your sump wont over flow

[lduncan]

there are so many ways I could reply to the misinformation from layton, but as is usual he driven a tread to death with a lack of fact and logic, contridictions and then when proved incorrect by sound reasoning lowering it to personal insults.

Where did I personally insult you? Could you retract that statement. It's incorrect.

Layton

[suphew]

really wonder if you actually read what you post

That's what you're doing, spreading FUD. Some people might call it a myth, or ignorance

Thankyou wasp.

Sorry Bill, point taken (MY first warning by the way )

[chimera]

Looking at the design on the first page, i find it hard to see how the syphon will break if the pump is turned off, wouldnt the water just keep draining to the bottom of the intake?

no. the hole in the cap will suck air in and essentially break the syphon. without it it will keep sucking water out til the tank drains. with the hole there, the water should drop to the bottom of the horizontal section of the T plumbing. the other important part is making the cap higher than the water level in the display tank otherwise you'll lose water out through the hole!

[wasp]

Where did I personally insult you? Could you retract that statement. It's incorrect.Layton

Surely you are joking? Either that or you suffer from serious memory loss.

You have been insulting me for years.

Remember this?

Your an idiot.

If that is not a direct insult, what is?

I could add many more of your insults so don't tempt me. But I'm leaving it at that I'm mindful of what Pegasus said I'm out of your new arguing thread. I'd love to see some new beginnings and more sensible behaviour here.

I'd suggest you do the same, or if you cannot, at least tone down the inflammatory language.

[chimera]

I would have no hesitation to ban you all at this point in time, give it up all of you.

[wasp]

Don't worry, I'm out, ( in disgust ).