garywil
New Member
I recently purchased a house that has a well for its water supply. It turns out that the well is rather low yield. (We've run out of water several times without using a lot of water.) So I decided to install a 2500 gal. storage tank and have the well pump into the storage tank. The well has a Grundfos controller, and after some research I decided I should install a SymCom 232-Insider PumpSaver to protect the pump against a dry well condition. Since the well will be pumping into a storage tank, I also need some way to turn off the well pump whenever the storage tank is full. It seems that I have 3 options:
1) install a float switch in the tank that removes power to the controller when the tank is full,
2) install a float valve in the tank that closes the inlet when the tank is full and install a pressure switch in the water line to the tank that removes power to the controller when the pressure goes high because the inlet valve is closed, or
3) install a float valve as in option 2, but let the PumpSaver turn the pump off when it detects a dead-head condition.
(Attached is a file that contains drawings of these 3 options.)
Here's the pros and cons as I see them for these options:
Option 1. This seems to be the typical way to turn off a pump when the storage tank is full, but it requires running a power line to the tank. In my case the run would be about 30 ft. I know these switches are very reliable and are not likely to develop a leak, but I've never been fond of running power where it has the potential for coming into contact with water. Also, it seems that typically one leg of the 230V power to the pump is run through the switch, and while that will turn off the pump, it still leaves one leg hot. It seems that a better option would be for the switch to control a relay that switches off both legs of the power to the well, but that requires adding a relay to the system and a way to power the coil on the relay.
Option 2. Using a float valve doesn't require running power to the tank, and the pressure switch can be put near the controller and will switch both legs of the power to the well, but I haven't run across anyone using this approach, so there must be some reason why this is a bad idea. Also, the pressure switch would have to be set so that it turns off the well before the PumpSaver detects a dead-head condition and turns it off.
Option 3. This doesn't require a pressure switch, but now for as long as the float valve is closed the PumpSaver is going to be turning the pump on after the timeout period, detecting a dead-head condition, and turning the pump back off until the next timeout period. I don't know if cycling the pump like this is bad for the pump or not.
Also, for options 1 or 2, do I turn off power to the controller/PumpSaver, or do I turn off the power coming out of the controller/PumpSaver and leave the controller energized? I know turning off power to the controller isn't a problem and is typically how this is done, but I don't know if having the PumpSaver installed in the controller should change this.
Any comments on these options or suggestions for different approaches?
1) install a float switch in the tank that removes power to the controller when the tank is full,
2) install a float valve in the tank that closes the inlet when the tank is full and install a pressure switch in the water line to the tank that removes power to the controller when the pressure goes high because the inlet valve is closed, or
3) install a float valve as in option 2, but let the PumpSaver turn the pump off when it detects a dead-head condition.
(Attached is a file that contains drawings of these 3 options.)
Here's the pros and cons as I see them for these options:
Option 1. This seems to be the typical way to turn off a pump when the storage tank is full, but it requires running a power line to the tank. In my case the run would be about 30 ft. I know these switches are very reliable and are not likely to develop a leak, but I've never been fond of running power where it has the potential for coming into contact with water. Also, it seems that typically one leg of the 230V power to the pump is run through the switch, and while that will turn off the pump, it still leaves one leg hot. It seems that a better option would be for the switch to control a relay that switches off both legs of the power to the well, but that requires adding a relay to the system and a way to power the coil on the relay.
Option 2. Using a float valve doesn't require running power to the tank, and the pressure switch can be put near the controller and will switch both legs of the power to the well, but I haven't run across anyone using this approach, so there must be some reason why this is a bad idea. Also, the pressure switch would have to be set so that it turns off the well before the PumpSaver detects a dead-head condition and turns it off.
Option 3. This doesn't require a pressure switch, but now for as long as the float valve is closed the PumpSaver is going to be turning the pump on after the timeout period, detecting a dead-head condition, and turning the pump back off until the next timeout period. I don't know if cycling the pump like this is bad for the pump or not.
Also, for options 1 or 2, do I turn off power to the controller/PumpSaver, or do I turn off the power coming out of the controller/PumpSaver and leave the controller energized? I know turning off power to the controller isn't a problem and is typically how this is done, but I don't know if having the PumpSaver installed in the controller should change this.
Any comments on these options or suggestions for different approaches?