FX4’s ran inline?

[Cheesyclop]

I bought these used fx4’s and the previous owner had them all ran together connected with pvc. Does anyone have any experience using them like this? I thought it was a cool idea but wasn’t sure if this setup is as effective as running them separate? Should I set them up again like this or run them regularly?

 

[Toby_H]

If I'm reading the picture correct...

There is one pipe coming out of the tank, and one pipe going in...
The pipe then goes to the last FX5, with a T coming down to each of the the 2 previous...
The return is a reverse of this same thing...
The return from the last FX5 goes to straight to the tank... with each of the other FX5s T'ed in to join that return pipe.

If that's correct, they aren't really "in line". I'd consider inline where water goes from tank into FX5#1, out of FX5#1 into FX5#2, out of FX5#2 into FX5 #3, out of FX5#3 back to the tank. This would be ridiculous. (imo)

If my first summary is correct... The benefit is you only have two pipes in the tank, instead of six... The down side could be, if the pipe is too small, it will throttle your lines reducing flow. Which won't hurt the mag-drive impellers, but is a waste/loss of power. But I'm not doing the math to see if your pipes are in fact "too small".

I will say it's interesting... Different... Has pros, and cons... Personally I'd have to run it and watch it for a while to see how they balance.

If I were in your shoes... and the plumbing was all in tact, I'd run it like it is and watch it. Try to calculate the flow rates and see if it's throttled. Look up flow rates for your sized pipes (I think there's sticky here with that info).

 

[Cheesyclop]

If I'm reading the picture correct...

There is one pipe coming out of the tank, and one pipe going in...
The pipe then goes to the last FX5, with a T coming down to each of the the 2 previous...
The return is a reverse of this same thing...
The return from the last FX5 goes to straight to the tank... with each of the other FX5s T'ed in to join that return pipe.

If that's correct, they aren't really "in line". I'd consider inline where water goes from tank into FX5#1, out of FX5#1 into FX5#2, out of FX5#2 into FX5 #3, out of FX5#3 back to the tank. This would be ridiculous. (imo)

If my first summary is correct... The benefit is you only have two pipes in the tank, instead of six... The down side could be, if the pipe is too small, it will throttle your lines reducing flow. Which won't hurt the mag-drive impellers, but is a waste/loss of power. But I'm not doing the math to see if your pipes are in fact "too small".

I will say it's interesting... Different... Has pros, and cons... Personally I'd have to run it and watch it for a while to see how they balance.

If I were in your shoes... and the plumbing was all in tact, I'd run it like it is and watch it. Try to calculate the flow rates and see if it's throttled. Look up flow rates for your sized pipes (I think there's sticky here with that info).

You are right with how they are set up.

My main concern was improper flow rates and the troubles that could bring. I’m thinking about setting it back up like that and seeing how it works but I will definitely do the math first the make sure the pipe is sized properly.

I wasn’t and still am not sure if this guy was onto something smart or the opposite

 

[jjohnwm]

Yes this setup has them hooked up in parallel, which is exactly the opposite of inline.

Looks like a lot of work for no benefit, IMHO. Assuming that your calculations can prove that the single return line is indeed big enough to not restrict the output of three separate filters...with three separate pumps using likely more energy than one larger more efficient one...to me the silliest thing about this is the apparent lack of separate valves to allow individual filters to be removed from the system for cleaning while the others continue to function. This looks like one of the setups that are often featured in picture threads started by aquarists who find the hardware much more interesting than the fish.

Personally, I would not even play with this as it is currently configured. In order to make it even halfway worthwhile, I would install two cut-off valves on each filter, one on intake and one on outlet, and ideally have quick-disconnect unions that would allow easy removal of any one of the filters independently for servicing and cleaning. Fortunately, it appears that you plenty of vertical clearance under your tank to modify the setup this way. For maximum efficiency, each filter would need its own mechanical filtration to keep the remaining bio- or chemical-filtration in that unit from clogging.

TLDR version: get a sump.

 

[HUKIT]

How are the trays laid out? Are the first two filters acting as a pre filter only or is each stuffed with media?

 

[Cheesyclop]

Yes this setup has them hooked up in parallel, which is exactly the opposite of inline.

Looks like a lot of work for no benefit, IMHO. Assuming that your calculations can prove that the single return line is indeed big enough to not restrict the output of three separate filters...with three separate pumps using likely more energy than one larger more efficient one...to me the silliest thing about this is the apparent lack of separate valves to allow individual filters to be removed from the system for cleaning while the others continue to function. This looks like one of the setups that are often featured in picture threads started by aquarists who find the hardware much more interesting than the fish.

Personally, I would not even play with this as it is currently configured. In order to make it even halfway worthwhile, I would install two cut-off valves on each filter, one on intake and one on outlet, and ideally have quick-disconnect unions that would allow easy removal of any one of the filters independently for servicing and cleaning. Fortunately, it appears that you plenty of vertical clearance under your tank to modify the setup this way. For maximum efficiency, each filter would need its own mechanical filtration to keep the remaining bio- or chemical-filtration in that unit from clogging.

TLDR version: get a sump.

I bought this set up specifically just for the filters to use on another tank of mine. It was too good of a deal to pass up.
It was a pain to break it down. As you said there are no unions or ways to take apart the pipe when I bought it. If I were to set it up again I would have to add unions and more valve to be able to service the filters.
The more reading I do it seems like this is a bad idea. It looks like I will get better performance by running all 3 separate as they were meant to.

 

[Cheesyclop]

How are the trays laid out? Are the first two filters acting as a pre filter only or is each stuffed with media?

All three are set up the same. With the sponges and media that comes with them out the box. At first I thought they would be set up as a pre filter but I was wrong. This seems to not be ideal