Centaur Carbon Filter ?'s

Discussion in 'Water Softener Forum, problems, installation and r' started by jfr121, Dec 7, 2012.

  1. Gary Slusser

    Gary Slusser That's all folks!

    Both versions of the one I mentioned are installed after the pressure tank and should have a check valve between them and the pressure tank.

    John, Not everyone has to use any acid to clean the center tube and if he had to, white vinegar works and he can soak it for weeks if needed because he gets two center tubes, one to be used and a spare to be cleaned between having to add new pellets. That's usually 2-3 months and depends on how much water is used. Once a month or when he adds pellets he opens a ball valve on the bottom of the mixing tank and flushes any dirt out of the mixing tank until it runs clean. That drain he'd connect a piece of a garden hose to and run the water to a floor drain or wherever he had to. He could leave the hose connected and simply coil it up.

    Additionally, I see that my previous reply to dittohead has been edited by Terry. Actually a paragraph was deleted, I guess because I had links to dittohead's web sites. And I say guess because dittohead sent me a PM a few hours before my post was edited. The PM subject line was something like... Immediately remove my web sites from your post" and then he repeated it in the body of the PM.

    The part that was deleted from my post/reply was saying to dittohead that on his company's two web sites, BTW, one is in Taiwan, there was no mention of his company selling any type of chlorination systems, or solution tanks or solution feeder pumps. I mentioned that because he said in the post I was replying to that he had sold many of the type chlorinators I mentioned and called them cheap etc..

    He has posted a link here to an article he wrote for an industry magazine that contains his name and his company name and that he'd give that info to anyone that PMed him. He's also posted links to videos that have his name on one or more of them. So I'm a bit surprised that he complained to Terry etc. about the links and then my reply was edited but, possibly Terry didn't know that.

    Dittohead has been here since about last Jan and we have 'discussed' the pellet chlorinator I suggested a number of times here but... IIRC, he has never before now mentioned selling it or its knock off, let alone hundreds of them.

    I also mentioned that the Taiwan site has some far out health claims for certain media being sold in inline cartridge filters with talk about infrared rays and their health benefits. Among others there is one with magnetic softening media. The US company site has a nice brochure about them. Anyone can email or PM me for the links.
  2. jfr121

    jfr121 New Member

    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Chicago IL
    And this is one reason why I am favoring peroxide injection. If the peroxide injection turns out to be more trouble then I expect I can always convert over to a chlorine system whether it is a pellet model or liquid injection type. It seems like all of these systems have their pluses and minuses, but there is one thing that always comes up in my research is that when set up correctly they all work well to get rid of the iron in the water. I believe it is more akin to someone who likes a car to get to the grocery store and another person who favors an suv, neither are wrong and they both will get to the store. :)
  3. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Messages:
    1,836
    Location:
    Ontario California
    The question is about the use of hydrogen peroxide, GAC tank size, capacity and flow, not about marketing claims for the Chinese Market or companies in Taiwan, lets try to keep on subject and not troll. Regarding hydrogen peroxide, what dilution do you plan on using? 7% has been the most common for water treatment. I have used both 35% and 50%, but dont attempt it. It is very dangerous to work with at those levels and not worth the hassle or the special handling. As I remeber, it is DOT hazzardous so shipping would also be a problem. 3% is probably to weak and might get annoying having to constantly add it to the system. Your idea of being able to switch to chlorine is valid, you may try it both ways. Either way is fine, Chlorine is usually preferred for very minor reasons, but if you are more comfortable with Hydrogen peroxide then definitely go for it. Let us know how it works out for you.
  4. Gary Slusser

    Gary Slusser That's all folks!

    This is on topic as a reply to your post quoted above.

    Since you don't call anyone here but me a troll you must be speaking to me or about me. I see that as more of your name calling that Terry mentioned yesterday.

    Your California company's web site says you sell the Taiwan web site products worldwide and shows a map of the various worldwide locations you use to do that. And there is no info about not selling certain products at all those locations or limiting a product to "the Chinese market" as you are now claiming .

    So here you are misrepresenting yourself and other things again. Your California web site also says that you have many of your products manufactured in a new plant in China that was built to your specifications.

    Anyone wanting to see for themselves can email or PM me.

    JohnF10... chlorine producing "nasty compounds" (trihalomethanes - THMs) in private well water is rare to nonexistent but GAC removes or reduces THMs. That happens with chlorination in surface water systems with certain organics in it but some people in the water treatment business that don't like chlorine seem to not know that or more likely, play on peoples' fears or comments against chlorine.

    Peroxide is not known to cause harmful by products but it is much more dangerous to use and store while being more expensive and harder to find than chlorine bleach, or pellets. And with a solution feeder, your Dad will be handling it or bleach much more frequently than every 2-3 months with the pellet chlorinator I mentioned.
  5. Bob999

    Bob999 In the Trades

    Messages:
    448
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Hydrogen peroxide is commercially available in 7% solution and that is the common solution used in residential water treatment.

    I am not aware of any evidence to support the claim that 7% hydrogen peroxide is "much more dangerous to use and store" than commercially available household bleach (5-6% solution) or 73% chlorine pellets used in pellet feeders.

    While it is true that hydrogen peroxide is more expensive than household bleach I believe that the cost of hydrogen peroxide is comparable to chlorine when generated by a pellet feeder.
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2012
  6. jfr121

    jfr121 New Member

    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Chicago IL
    I plan on using 7% hydrogen peroxide for the safety reasons you stated. I will definitely let you know how the system works or not. I sure appreciate everyone's help here!
  7. jfr121

    jfr121 New Member

    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Chicago IL
    This is part of the reason that I came to this forum and that was to find out honest information from people who have used/installed the systems and don't have a vested interest in selling me a product. I have to take all of your experiences and come up with a plan that should work for me and my dad. I do like the idea of only having to add the chlorine pellets every 2-3 months and not having to figure out a dosage, but don't think adding some peroxide or bleach to to the solution tank will be too difficult for my father to do on a regular basis. At the same time he can keep an eye on the carbon filter Clack valve and check for any leaks or other problems.

    It sounds like hydrogen peroxide doesn't add any "harmful byproducts" to the water that must be filtered out by the carbon filter so it would appear to be a safer way to go. I do not believe that the cost of the peroxide will be prohibitive at the injection ratios it will be used at to get rid of the 4ppm of iron. That is if my math is correct.
  8. Gary Slusser

    Gary Slusser That's all folks!

    What the guys that propose solution feeders rarely if ever mention about them is the problems and what has to be done to correct them IF you don't get the dose right.

    Possibly your Dad will not appreciate having to do the troubleshooting and applying the corrections if he has problems keeping the dose correct. You may not like having to help him from a distance or on site either.

    Possibly Dittohead and Bob999 will tell you a bit about that but I wouldn't bet on it, they mostly want to disagree with me on most everything and whine (Bob999 has been banned from here before with a different name or two).

    What size retention tank are you going to use? What size solution tank?

    If your Dad doesn't get all the iron oxidized he then has to adjust the volume of the chlorine dose and if that doesn't get'r done, then the strength of the solution.

    Now that isn't hard to do but... testing for free chlorine residual is because the water in the retention tank hasn't been replaced with the new dose and until it is all test results are invalid because the new dose is being diluted in the retention tank.

    Way back in the beginning of my 'career' in water treatment I sold a few and serviced many solution feeders that were used for iron, H2S and/or Coliform bacteria control. Not long after I started I quit selling them because of the constant babysitting and customers getting upset. Many did not want to play with the doseage other than turning the pump up to inject more solution. And those that did got upset over having to mix solution more frequently and usually that didn't solve the problem anyway. So maybe Dad should read this and you get his input before buying anything.

    I asked what size tanks because if the dose is off and can't be corrected with a small adjustment here'r there, you dump the retention tank water and start over. And you may be doing that with the solution tank too.

    For 4 ppm of iron I suggest you are going to need at least a 120 gal retention tank. Or the bottom drain mixing/retention tank I suggested that is equivalent to that size tank. BTW, the larger the solution tank the more the solution can weaken before the solution is used.

    Now if Dad had hard water and needed a softener, I'd say to size it correctly for this iron and the hardness and use SST-60 resin and a Turbulator distributor tube and get rid of the iron that way.

    Dad would only have to keep some salt in the salt tank and mix a solution of 1/4 to 1/3 cup of Iron Out in a gallon or two of water and pour it into the water in the salt tank once every month to 6 weeks and do a manual regeneration and be done fooling with his iron problem. He'd save bunch of bucks and gobs of floor space and reduce frustrations and maintenance to next to none.
  9. Tom Sawyer

    Tom Sawyer In the Trades

    Messages:
    3,166
    Location:
    Maine
    I'm just a guy that has sold, installed and serviced filtration equipment for almost 40 years now. I like to keep things simple. If I were selling you equipment it would be a stenner pump and liquid chlorene. Not that I have anything against pellets, it's just easier to get bleach in liquid form. Maintenance is not a big deal with either system. Just something that has to be done occasionally. dosing isn't a problem either. You have to remember that these systems all require maintenance and they all need to be checked occasionally. I NEVER treat iron with a softener and I've explaind the why's a hundred times here before so no need to go over that agian but, it is certainly an option for you if YOU or your dad will maintain the system. If not, you will have problems. Oh, peroxide is good, works fine, can be hard to find, doesn't have that bleach smell LOL
  10. Bob999

    Bob999 In the Trades

    Messages:
    448
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I want to second the comments of Tom Sawyer.

    ALL WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT REQUIRES REGULAR TENDING AND MAINTENANCE.

    In my opinion both pellet feeders and injection systems require comparable amounts of maintence and tending--not identical as to what must be done but the amount of time and effort is very comparable.

    Both hydrogen peroxide and chlorine are effective in treating iron. There are advantages and disadvantages of each.

    My personal opinion is that JohnF10 seems to have enough information at this point to make an informed decision about what best suits his circumstances and preferences--but if he doesn't he seems perfectly capable of asking for more information (or opinions) if that is what he wants.
  11. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Messages:
    1,836
    Location:
    Ontario California
    Getting the dosing "right" is actually very easy on a solution feeder. The worst case is that you may slightly overdose but the gac tank will take care of that. The pellet feeders will dose some large amounts of chlorine intermittently when water is not flowing, the water will sit in the feeder and the chlorine level will go very high but the contact tank will dilute that out and even so the gac will easily handle very high doses of chlorine. and as stated before, the strange trolling that goes on here is tired and old. The water motor style dosers give consistent dosing regardless of flow rate. 7% hydrogen peroxide is fairly safe to work with. 35 & 50% should only be used in commercial applications, never residential. I look forward to hearing how the system works out for you. And... Most of the real professionals on this site recommend against iron removal with a softener. I agree with them. It works, it is not the best solution. Advancements in technology have made iron removal simple, cheap, and efficient.
  12. Gary Slusser

    Gary Slusser That's all folks!

    Have you given him instructions or, what do you base that on and why couldn't he under dose just as easily as over dose? With 4 ppm of iron he may have iron or other types of bacteria that adds to the chlorine demand that can not be estimated prior to figuring the solution strength or the volume of the dose. Or are you going to make another blanket statement disagreeing with that?

    That is not true of the model I suggested. It is a venturi and doesn't work unless water moves through it. And since the chlorinated water is going into a mixing/retention tank full of water (as is a normal retention tank) and the unit is not a constant flow chlorinator, the water that goes through the chlorinator that has no chlorine added also adds to the dilution in the mixing/retention tank and that brings the level of chlorine down. That's why you can not get an accurate free chlorine residual test result (thereby you should not test for residual chlorine in the system I suggested) as you do with a solution feeder (that is a constant feed) and regular/normal retention tank.

    Type more accurate, informative, educational and helpful posts and I wouldn't have to correct you so often.

    One of those professionals, a retired plumber, has said in a private forum here not seen by nonmembers that he never was into water treatment much more than selling a softener once in awhile. Another has not said what he does or if he is in the industry. Both have been banned here under other names and one of them with many other names. So that leaves you and as we see you usually say I'm wrong and put down what I say and how I say it and call me unprofessional and a troll when I question what or how you say it, or correct you as in this post.

    Chlorination is what was being discussed and it was specifically for iron removal. None of the chlorine systems that have been suggested are new technology, simple, or cheap (as in inexpensive). A retention tank alone is hundreds of dollars more than the increased cost of SST-60 resin over the cost of regular mesh resin and a turbulator distributor tube. Or do you want to disagree with that too?
  13. Tom Sawyer

    Tom Sawyer In the Trades

    Messages:
    3,166
    Location:
    Maine
    Yep, and one member here has been banned from a dozen diy forums, care to guess who that is LOL and one member here was the moderator of this forum for a short time until well.......you can guess the rest LOL. Oh and one member here has never held a license to install or service filtration equipment or well pumps, guess who ? Ah credibility, you just can't buy it and you sure can't fake it.....at least not for very long.

    Oh yea, who's the retired plumber? Can't be me. I still hold my masters license's and my filtration and pump installers licenses and my RSES license and my gas fitters license and my oil and solid fuel license and my instructors license and my teaching license and last I checked, it's still my name on the company checks. LOL

    Note also that other than offering the OP my advice, I have stayed out of the rest of this mess right up until the proceeding post which is the usual rehash of misrepresentation and out and out lies.
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  14. Mikey

    Mikey Aspiring Old Fart, EE, computer & networking geek

    Messages:
    2,714
    Location:
    Central Florida
    Some experts/opinionators/vendors/whatever recommend injecting prior to the pressure tank, which seems to me to make a lot more sense. I have 2 pressure tanks from 2 manufacturers and both recommend it. The main concern among those that don't is that it will shorten the life of the bladder, but both of my manufacturers say that's no problem if the solution is well mixed (which, of course, it's not, if injected after the pressure tank). The preferred sequence of one source is pump->injection->holding tank->pressure tank->GAC etc. I modify that slightly by inserting one of those swirly mixing tanks into the chain: pump->injection->swirly mixing tank->pressure tank->holding tank->GAC etc. (I keep the holding tank to maintain a long contact time for disinfection.) There is often concern expressed that that would put the pump pressure switch too far from the pump, but I haven't seen any evidence of that here. One day I'll put in a differential pressure meter to get something quantitative.
  15. Gary Slusser

    Gary Slusser That's all folks!

    Unless you do as you have done with the additional equipment ahead of your pressure tanks, the solution isn't fully mixed with the water stream before a pressure tank either.

    The problem with injecting before the pressure tank is that the oxidation starts at the point of the oxidizer's injection. That causes substantial sediment formation in the outlet of the injector, the water line and the pressure tank if the reason for the chlorination is due to iron in the water.

    The pipe past the injector starts to block up and that reduces flow. Plus, since the pump comes on before the pressure tank fully empties, the sediment builds up in the pressure tank.

    In JohnF10's situation with 4 ppm of iron, that is going to happen very quickly and a reduced flow prevents the carbon filter from backwashing correctly and that leads to carbon filter failure and that causes more flow reduction and a corresponding pressure loss in the house.

    Other possible problems with a blockage from the injector to the pressure tank is that can cause a higher than normal pressure in the well line from the submersible pump to the injector. If it gets high enough, it can exceed the working pressure of the plastic parts you have between the submersible pump and it's controlling pressure switch and weaken them leading to failure. Or blow a submersible pump off plastic drop pipe. That can happen because the pressure switch will not see the pressure in real time, there can be a lag while the pump builds pressure in the system ahead of the injector. The injector can block up also.

    Another potential problem is creation of a vacuum between the pump and injector if your check valve in/on the pump's outlet fails. That can collapse any plastic mixing/retention/holding tanks very quickly. Then the next time the pump comes on it runs spewing water everywhere out of the crushed tank/plastic parts until the well runs dry, the pump burns up or someone shuts off the power to the pump.

    The best way is to inject after the pressure tank and have a correctly sized retention tank keeping the length of pipe from the injector to the retention tank as short as possible. But with iron water, any length of any type pipe will eventually block up.
  16. Tom Sawyer

    Tom Sawyer In the Trades

    Messages:
    3,166
    Location:
    Maine
    Gary is correct here in his assessment of using the pressure tank. It WILL cause problems. There was a local company around here that put lots and lots of those systems in using the pressure tank and I can't count how many we had to go back in, clean out the lines, try and flush the tank out and in some cases replace the tank and re-route everything to a retention tank. Good money for us, not so good for the customer and that company has gone down the road so to speak. One of these days I might get around to asking the folks that write up the instructions, just what in hell they were thinking. Maybe they were thinking they could sell more equipment LOL
  17. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Messages:
    1,836
    Location:
    Ontario California
    Agreed, a retention tank is the correct way to do it, not the pressure tank. A pressure tank will work for a very short amount of time, but problems will arise. Not sure what the other ramblings of the one guy on here who has never held a license, certification etc was all about. It must be a conspiracy since everybody but one person on this site agrees that the op is on the right track and should do just fine with his chemical dosing pump (water motor design) and hydrogen peroxide, which can easily be converted to chlorine if he so desires.
  18. Mikey

    Mikey Aspiring Old Fart, EE, computer & networking geek

    Messages:
    2,714
    Location:
    Central Florida
    How is this calculated for a tank of a given diameter -- or is it not calculated, but given in a table I haven't found yet? I thought it would be half of a sphere, but doing that calculation for a 12" tank results in 0.26 cu ft. Doing the reverse calculation starting with 0.13 cu ft gives a diameter of 9.5", implying a tank wall thickness of 1.25 if the 0.13 cu ft volume is correct. Are the tank walls really that thick? Or am I assuming something wrong here? I'm trying ultimately to find the bottom dome volume of a 10" tank.
  19. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Messages:
    1,836
    Location:
    Ontario California
    Actually, the calculation is an estimate and changes by each tank manufacturer. It is not a true dome like half a ball, so the actual amount is usually charted, not calculated. I will add that chart to my next catalog, if I remember, I will post the most common dome capacities on Monday. The wall thickness also changes by each manufacturer and manufacturing technique. For the most part, they are all close enough so a chart will be accurate enough.
  20. Mikey

    Mikey Aspiring Old Fart, EE, computer & networking geek

    Messages:
    2,714
    Location:
    Central Florida
    Thanks. I've got a couple of empty tanks, one 10" and one 8" I could actually measure, but I doubt it'd be worth it.
Similar Threads: Centaur Carbon
Forum Title Date
Water Softener Forum, problems, installation and r Convert Fleck 7000 Centaur carbon system to add chlorination / bleach injection? Apr 20, 2014
Water Softener Forum, problems, installation and r correct order set-up for water softener and Carbon filter with backwash Aug 23, 2014
Water Softener Forum, problems, installation and r Softener /Carbon filter sizing help Aug 7, 2014
Water Softener Forum, problems, installation and r Water Softener + Whole House Carbon Filter - Help with Proper System Selection Jun 23, 2014
Water Softener Forum, problems, installation and r Deciding which carbon (GAC) filter to remove city Chloramine Sep 26, 2013

Share This Page