Airless Water Valve, Paying too much for water?

Users who are viewing this thread

ryanh572

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
amherst,ma
if u understand physics which i can tell you dont then you would understand how this works but you dont. if this is snake oil then why is it saving us 45% on our water bill.
 

ryanh572

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
amherst,ma
as far as i can tell none of you have bought the valve for the $40 and installed it, so right now your all guessing and none of you have a clue as to how it works. untill you buy one and try it youll never know and if this is all bull then why are there testimonials from all over the us showing the monthly savings??????? answer that
 

FloridaOrange

Plumbing Designer
Messages
1,298
Reaction score
2
Points
36
Location
SW Florida
None of us are going to buy this without knowing that it works. I won't take your word on faith as you are likely to be one of those benifiting from the sale of these.
1. Instead of saying we don't understand physics, why not debate the points brought up.
2. Why not answer the question about before or after the meter installation. If it's after how is the meter effected? If it's before, how can any layman perform an install that is prohibited by most water suppliers (upstream of meter is the suppliers property).

Until you attempt to actually answer these questions I'll have to catagorize you as a Troll.
 

FloridaOrange

Plumbing Designer
Messages
1,298
Reaction score
2
Points
36
Location
SW Florida
as far as i can tell none of you have bought the valve for the $40 and installed it, so right now your all guessing and none of you have a clue as to how it works. untill you buy one and try it youll never know and if this is all bull then why are there testimonials from all over the us showing the monthly savings??????? answer that

Testimonials from who? I can post testimonials all day long for stuff that doesn't work.
 

Rmelo99

Network Engineer
Messages
358
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Connecticut
I have a thought if you want some credibility. Why not send some comp units to Terry/and or Moderators and have them install(if they're willing) and post back results. There are several regulars on the board that I think many people will trust as an "unbiased reviewer"

If you are so confident in your product then you have nothing to fear...unless you know what the real results will be!
 

Nukeman

Nuclear Engineer
Messages
707
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
VA
I guess I don't understand physics, huh? I guess the BS, MS, and PhD that I hold in physics and nuclear engineering mean nothing, I guess??

If you are the physics master, why don't you tell use how it works? Magic? Pixie dust?

1. I can tell you that you cannot dissolve 40% air in water. This is basically their claim when they say that the air can easily be compressed and be undetected by the meter.

2. In order to compress something, work needs to be done. Without electricity or other energy source, I can tell you this device does not compress a thing. The water supply is say 80 psig. The water discharges at your faucet into 0 psig. Every point in the system is between those values. No way to make it higher than the supply pressure without a pump. All this device can do is put an additional restriction near the meter. This would make the pressure at the meter during a draw higher than it was before, but the pressure everywhere else in the system to be less than before.

3. Their lab "tests" are crap. Nothing but a single summary page and the tests were performed under unrealitic conditions (air only and a water main break simulation).

They try to "dumb down" how this thing works in order to avoid showing the details which cannot be supported.

Let's see the supporting physics behind this thing. So far, there is nothing shown that can support the claims. I'll be waiting for the physics master to explain this to us. :)
 

BuyandSellSmart

New Member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Geezzz.... Relax - sounds like a witch hunt!

I find it comical that everyone has “scientific†information that this product does NOT work without testing the product. I agree, the commercial is better suited for the "Majic Jack" or some other late night infomercial. However, I have contacted the company and I was able to speak to the inventor and an engineer.... because I am interested in the product. I was given conservative estimated saving reports and here's the most important thing - they gave me a 100% money back guarantee in writing for my community. Even a 20% savings will pay for the valve and installation in 4 months. My next step is to have the contract reviewed by the attorney for our board. Then we are having the valves installed. Naturally, I’ll post the results.

However, for an engineer, a few of the posts on this message board sound overly arrogant. Without testing any product for myself, I wouldn’t make a claim to its ability to function or not function. And for $40 it would be a cheap test. Our community is buying 2 of their commercial valves. So, I guess we’ll see.
 

Nukeman

Nuclear Engineer
Messages
707
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
VA
That is fine. If it works for you, then great.

You can say a lot about a product without testing it. It cannot violate law of physics. Simple as that. If they were more truthful and complete on how it really works (if it even does work), I would be fine with that. I think that any savings seen is because it will act as a restrictor and nothing more. You could get the same results with an orifice plate.

Their own testing shown on the site is nothing but a summary page without showing the experimental setup and even that summary pages shows tests that were done under conditions which do not match real world conditions. If they wanted to accurately test this, they would connect one end to city water + city meter. Run with the valve and without the valve. Add a flow meter downstream (mag or turbine type) to measure actual flow compared to the flow measured by the city meter. This is what you would need to do to back up the claims. They also claim that up to 40% of water is air, but they do not support the number. Physically, you cannot dissolve that amount of air in water under typical city water pressure/temperature. It just is not going to happen.

Listen, a real engineer does not throw up numbers without information supporting them. I want to see details on testing and references backing up the numbers. Their engineer is welcome to come on here and share the details. I see so many holes in the theory behind this thing, it is starting to look like Swiss cheese.

Your last statement is basically the thinking that all infomercials want you to have. They know you might not be 100% sure on the product, but if cheap enough and offer a money back guarantee, they will buy it and try it out. They know that most people won't bother returning it, even if it doesn't work. Are they going to pay for labor to have it removed if it doesn't work?

Now, with a username like "BuyandSellSmart" and a location near where the company is located, don't you think we believe you are either part of the company, a vendor selling the product, or someone hired by the company to make the product look good?
 
Last edited:

BuyandSellSmart

New Member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
"We" believe that you are part of the company? As far as I can see it's only your post that comes to that arrogant assumption. As intelligent as you'd have everyone believe you are based on your user name, you are full of assumptions nukeman.

BuyandSellSmart is from my user name for my company. I am a partner in an real estate investment group. We “Buy” bank foreclosures. I was shown this product from another investor who thought I’d be interested in this because we install energy and water efficient appliances in all of our remodeled homes. We also landscape our properties with eco friendly plants and we use recycled materials to make repairs. We do this to set ourselves apart from greedy investors who try to cut corners with no concern for the environment. I understand this product does not reduce consumption but if it saves a new homeowner a few dollars a month on their water bill then we are willing to try it in our homes. Not to mention that my community spends $12,000 a month on water and we’ve scheduled our installation.

Nothing can be said about a product without testing it. More inaccurate information is that the valves are all made of pvc. The commercial valves being installed in our community are made of brass. And another one of your assumptions is incorrect, as a part of our contract with the company, they are responsible to refund our money for the installation also. I did ask the question of if something happened after the installation such as a broken valve or cup link. Their plumbing company is responsible with their liability insurance. I don’t see the down side to this.

All I hear is a lot of untested claims to the impossibility of this products function. As for the company paying me for anything. That’s a laugh. We’ve never made more in any market good or bad with our foreclosures. They seriously couldn’t afford my time. Oddly enough, I was motivated enough to simply want to point out how ignorant even smart people can be based on what they couldn’t possibly be 100% sure about.
 

Bryan0116

New Member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Dallas, TX
All I read about this product is bad comments and “fancy” words to make people believe someone is so smart that can figure something out without using it first.

Instead of talking BS about something you have not try, get the product, see it, analyze it, use it and then TALK about it.

I do not see how $40 is going the hurt the finances of a PhD and if so let me know I will get for you so you can stop with all the BS.

I going to get it and I will be telling you about my savings.
 

Nukeman

Nuclear Engineer
Messages
707
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
VA
This poor horse has been badly beaten, but thought some might be interested in this (patent application):

http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090289207

Highlights:

As is well recognized, there are occasional breakdowns, repairs, maintenance procedures, malfunctions, etc., of public water utility facilities and/or other water distribution and supply systems which results in the interruption of water delivery. Such interruptions, while not common, frequently result in air entering the path of fluid flow within the water supply lines. Such interruptive air flow, for purposes of clarity, may hereinafter be referred to as "air pockets" and/or "air flow segments", it being recognized that such air flow may also contain minimal amounts of water such as entrained water vapor. As such, these air pockets are at least partially separated from the conventional water supply passing through the water supply line(s). Regardless of the degree of separation, the formed air pockets or air flow segments also pass through a water meter assemblies associated with the various facilities to which the supply of water is normally delivered. As a result, the homes, businesses and like facilities connected to the water supply lines are charged for water that was never delivered.


In contrast, an air pocket or like air flow segment passing along the water supply line will exert an insufficient amount of air pressure on the sealing structure to displace it from its sealing relation with the inlet. More specifically, the predetermined force or predetermined biasing force exerted on the sealing structure by the biasing assembly from within the interior of the housing is calculated to be greater than any force exerted on the sealing structure from within the water supply line by an air pocket passing along and reaching the inlet of the valve assembly. As a result, the sealing structure will not be displaced from its sealing relation with the inlet and the air pocket will be compressed, resulting in it being disbursed or it being forced into the water in the water supply line being delivered to the facility. As a result air flow will not independently pass through the metering assembly and no inaccurate costs or charges will be registered.

This invention relates to a valve assembly disposed along a path of fluid flow along in a conventional water supply line, upstream of a conventional water meter assembly which is disposed and structured to determine the quantity of water delivered to a corresponding facility. The valve assembly is structured to eliminate or significantly reduce the passage of air through the water meter, wherein the air may be in the form of an "air pocket" existing within the water supply line due to damage, repair, or maintenance thereof. As a result the meter will only register the actual quantity of water delivered to the facility and avoid any charges resulting from the passage of air through the meter.


So,

1.It is a basic spring-loaded check valve from what I can tell. The figures do not show, but the text is enough to figure it out.

2. It is desgined for conditions which are not the norm (water main breaks, etc.)

3. Patent states that it is located upstream (before the meter). This is generally not legal, so that is why they have you install after the meter instead.

4. The "up to 40% of your water bill could be air" as stated on their website must only point to a condition where there is a water main break or major water service work where water is shutoff or disrupted at the street. When flow starts back up, there will be air in the line. I could see 40% air in this situation. This type of condition is rare and would only impact the meter for a few seconds at best (maybe a minute if there were a bunch of air in the lines).

5. Any water saved under normal use is just due to the additional restriction under normal operating conditions. It will only potentially save water during a shower or similar. Things like toilets are fixed volume, so no savings there.

6. Water pressure will drop. It will be the same if no fixtures are in use. However, during a draw, the pressure will drop (it has to). For instance, a plate blocking the flow with a single pinhole will still show a system pressure of 80 psi (for instance) everywhere. Try turning something on and the house pressure will drop to nearly 0. I'm not saying this device is like this, but stating that "no loss in pressure" can be misleading. It depends on how you test the pressure.

7. The commercial shows a quarterly water bill before and after the install. You can't see the text..they just highlight the total bill. How do we know that the higher bill isn't from Summer (watering lawns) and the next bill is from the Fall (normal household useage only)?

Anyway, it looks like the marketing of the device does not line up with the intended use stated on the patent. For those who believe it works, are you going to dispute the patent? I hope you have a lot of water main breaks and similar situations in your area because that is the only thing this device is designed for. :)

For those who said I couldn't possibly know if it worked without testing, I can tell you that I can know. Fluids are my thing. Just like how the plumbers and other trades people on here have their specialty; this happens to be my specialty.
 

Gordox

New Member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
maine
It's about the air-not the water!

I don't think that this device is hoax. I believe that it is a little pressure regulator. There are several factors in play. 1) most municipal water main pressures are around 70+ psi - some higher-some lower. 2) All you really need for residential two story houses is 40-50 psi. to provide the proper volume of flow through household fixtures. 3) There is air dissolved in the water.

I don't think that it has anything to do with fluid dynamics. It's about air and the ideal gas laws i.e. PV=nRT.

So, understand the relationship of pressure and volume of a gas (air) if the mass and temperature are held constant. When the pressure decreases the volume increases and vice versa.

Now if you hold the pressure higher across the water meter, but reduce the pressure on the residence side of the meter, the volume of the air+water mixture flow through the meter is less than than what is flowing on the low pressure side of the reducer. The volume of the water+air mixture will increase by a ratio of the pressure reduction on the air molecules. The air is still there but as a higher percentage of the low pressure volume.

So the air isn't really compressed, it's held at water main pressure until after the "Airless Valve" ( pressure reducer). So the performance is dependent on the amount of air dissolved in the water ( which is considerable in this part of the country during the winter months - our water looks "milky" because of the dissolved air content). Also, the higher the water main pressure, the better the results would be.

I am a retired Electrical Engineer but, when I went to school, we were required to trully understand the problem before before assuming anything to be true or false! The rest is simply physics.
 

Nukeman

Nuclear Engineer
Messages
707
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
VA
But, they claim that pressure is not reduced.

Anyway, the flow resistance is dominated by the valves at the faucets, etc. Basically, think of the faucets as a 100k pot and the airless valve as a 1k resistor (to try to jive with their claim of no reduction of pressure, which cannot be true). Sure, it will increase overall resistance, but is small in the scheme of things. You could just open up your faucets less and achieve the same results (higher pressure at meter).

Check out the patent. That will tell you what it does and what it doesn't. It clearly states that the disc stays closed when a slug of air hits it after repair on the main or during a water main break. Once the water arrives at the meter, the slug of air is compressed until the pressure overcomes the tension setting on the spring and then allows it to pass. This is what it is designed for.

I understand the design. Claims made do not have supporting info. Advertising does not align with the patent.
 

Gordox

New Member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
maine
What patents say, doesn't necessarily mean much !

I have spent time this winter researching patents on golf equipment. It is unbelievable how many there are based on the same principle (polar moment of inertia) but the claims are on how it is applied to improve one's game. Patents were issued, but we know that, historically, the average scores have never come down. In fact, they go up because people practice less and try to "buy a game", instead!

Yes, I could get a patent on those "magnets" someone keeps talking about, providing he doesn't have a patent pending, already !! No, I have not read the Airless Valve patent because it's just someone's claim to an idea. But, in it's simplest form ( i.e. hype removed!) what is being described is the operation of a pressure regulating device. Patents don't imply scientific principles. They are a form of financial protection of a person's idea for a period of time to allow them to recoup their development costs, etc., before anyone else gets to benefit from that idea. During the "pending" phase, the patent office checks to see if anyone else has an active patent on the idea. Whether it works or not will be proven when and if anyone actually buys it!

Those same dominant faucets will work fine on a well/pump system with the pressure set at 40 psi as off of a municipal water supply @ 90 psi. You'll never know the difference. They put aeration nozzles (venturis) on those "throttling valves", to reduce today's high water main pressures at the nozzle. Why not reduce it after the water meter?. So, I suppose the claim really should be that you will not see a noticeable difference in water flow at the fixtures in your home.

I am sure that the static pressure is equal on the domestic and municipal side of the meter. But, when you start drawing water I am sure that the domectic pressure drops. Of course it does, with or without the Airless Valve, but I'll bet it's down to 40 psi or so with one installed.

A vain type water meter totalizes volume of liquid delivered. (I doubt that the water companies will purchase and install mass flow metering just because of the Airless Valve !) If the liquid was strictly a non-compressible fluid, such as water, the device would have absolutely no effect on the reading. But because a portion of the liquid is compressible (the air) the meter will see less volume of the liquid at a higher pressure than it would at a lower pressure. This is why it isn't illegal etc. - you have done nothing to alter how the meter measures and the municipality produces the main pressure, themselves.

I made a very good living helping provide energy savings in centrifugal pumping applications. Variable speed pumping is the "norm" today. But, initially, clients said that the claim was "snake-oil" while it was merely the apllication of the Affinity Laws of centrifugal devices. Simply stated, the horsepower requirement varies as the cube of the speed of a centrifugal device. Theoretically, if I can cut a pump's speed in half, I use 1/8th of the horsepower to deliver the same volume. The fact is that every system was sized to meet maximum demands that were rarely, if ever, seen. So, the supply gets "throttled" to meet the actual demand. Slowing the pump or fan down saves tons of energy .. regardless of who believes it or not.

I don't sell Airless Valves. I won't buy one because we pay the minimum bill since the kids have grown and gone. But, if I was being billed a considerable amount for water ( and sewer, by the way, because the two bills are based on the water volume used), I would try this out. You could use a water pressure regulator from a hot water boiler water supply - the only thing is they cost more than forty bucks!

Anyhow, all the best guys. Remember, electricity is a fluid and follows all the same rules as any other fluid- you just can't see it. You can feel it, however, to assure you that it's present!
 

bisjoe

Utilities Specialist
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sammamish, WA
I'm a utility specialist at a public agency and spent 17 years at a water district before that. I have not seen one of these in person nor tested it, but have some comments. In their advertisements they claim it doesn't reduce water pressure. That well may well be true, but pressure is not changed by restricted flow, volume is. This may be little more than a traditional flow restrictor as sold or given away by utilities for use in shower heads to save water. By placing it in the house line all flow to the home will be restricted, thus saving water if one still showers and waters the lawn for the same number of minutes as before. Filling a container will take longer, though, and would measure the same use on the reading. To test this would require a large volume such as filling a pool since a gallon is 1/748 of the CCF (hundreds of cubic feet) typical meter measurement for billing. If one were inclined to buy one just for fun, and attach it to a hose, run at full force and see how long it takes to fill a 5 gallon can, compared to without it,
you would have evidence of it being a low restrictor.

If it worked to stop the measurement of air as advertised, industrial customers paying $50,000-100,000/month for water and even more for sewer charges based on the water use would have thought of this a long time ago.
 

LongJohnSilver

New Member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sterling, CO
Let's see, common sense says to measure water going through your meter, this would have to go before the water meter. If it is after the meter then it has to be a restrictor to make the water go slower so you use less water and your water pressure would go down. And if it is taking the air out where does the air go? If we have extra air in our water then wouldn't our faucets spit at us? My vote is that it is a rip off, a con, etc.
 

billyc

New Member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Carolina
This looks like a really high pressure drop check valve...

I apologize for the long first post but I get frustated with scam artists like airlessvalve.com.

Below is Figure 5 from the patent application, which looks an awful lot like a check valve. I don't see the air compression features other than the back pressure created by the spring. This wouldn't affect the volume measured by the meter because it isn't really a back pressure regulator - or any type of pressure regulator. It is however a pressure reducer (the water loses pressue by expending force to compress the spring). I do note however the reduced flow diameter at the inlet. You will save money using this device because you will use less water and you will have much less water pressure.

Some of the claims are straight up BS - I don't have to buy it to know this (as many people have already said). This company is inept enough to show it themselves. On their website FAQ page, question 5 asks about water pressure. The answer is " our valve was designed so it would not decrease the water pressure flowing into a home or business owner’s facility" then they have a video that shows 90-100 psi water pressure upstream of the meter (who uses a 1000 psi guage on 100 psig water?) with 7.7 gallons per minute (gpm) flow. Then they show 2 pressure gauges downstream of the meter and the "airless valve". These gauges show very low (20 -30 psig) water pressure - until they CLOSE THE VALVE and deadhead the system to get back to the 90+ psig pressure. If you look closely, you will note that the farthest downstream gauge registers about 120 psig (higher than the linlet pressure...miracle!). Then comes the kicker, the final flow rate is 7.2 gpm. That Sensus water meter has about 5 psi drop for the flow rate (design is 7 psi at 20 gpm - http://na.sensus.com/Module/Catalog/File/water?id=507). If the upstream pressure is 95 psi, the meter loss is 5 psi, and the end result is 25 psi, I just lost 65 psi or 68% of my water pressure! This is their video, not something I am making up! Why would I need to buy this crap to test it when they proved that it does not do what they say.

I'm not getting into the other bogus lies - air in water (not much), compressibility, before the meter-after the meter, blah, blah. If they lie about one thing - that makes them liars.

Bottom line - in their own test video, they show about 70% unrecoverable pressure loss and a 6.5% decrease in water flow. They were running slightly higher pressure than you typically get at a normal residential meter so the pressure losses are probably less in a normal application - maybe you lonly lose 50% of your pressure.

I think this airlessvalve.com clearly fits the definition of scam. They say no decrease in water pressure, and then show a huge pressure loss on thier own video. The scam includes trying to make you think the pressure is the same by closing the valve. Duh...no flow = no pressure loss.

I have to mention one other thing. In the patent application and in their truly ridiculous "scientific paper", they talk about water main breaks being a place where air can be introduced into the pipe if not corrected quickly. Where I am from, the water pressure in the line tends to exceed atmospheric pressure resulting in water coming out of the pipe, not air going in. You can read it however you want - like residual air is left over after the pipe is fixed - but that is not what they say. In essence, what they say is "Idiot consumer - please be sucked in by my lies and science-babble and send me $40. If enough idiots respond, I can retire quickly."

20090289207006.jpg
 

Jimbo

Plumber
Messages
8,918
Reaction score
18
Points
0
Location
San Diego, CA
I have a deal for you. Send me 2 of them for 2" pipe size. I will pay to have them installed on the meters at my condo comlex. I have 36 months of WEEKLY meter reading data. I will know very quickly if there is a difference.
 
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

This is awkward, but...

It looks like you're using an ad blocker. We get it, but (1) terrylove.com can't live without ads, and (2) ad blockers can cause issues with videos and comments. If you'd like to support the site, please allow ads.

If any particular ad is your REASON for blocking ads, please let us know. We might be able to do something about it. Thanks.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks