Ok let's please get back to my question...
Will it hurt anything if I go with the 1.25" Clack valve?
Will I see less pressure loss with the 1.25" valve as compared to the 1"?
Thanks
If your are not using the resin, then why sell it?
The standard distributor tube for the WS-1.25 is not 1.25", the standard is 1.05" OD. Why would you suppose that is?
And for 1.5" ID or 1.25" tubing/pipe, I could use the factory 1.25" or 1.5" plumbing connectors that Clack makes for situations like this and as you say, I'd be to 'Code".
Are you saying, using 1 1/4" connectors on the ws1 valve head? If so, then you have only defeated the whole piont of going up in valve head size. There is more than just a connector size difference between the valves. It probably would fool an inspector though, if that was the intended purpose.
Actually first and foremost it is to provide the constant Service Flow Rating gpm required for the peak demand gpm of the system the softener is treating.I think there are at least two reasons for using a larger amount of resin (4 cubic foot in the specific example) if the assumed maximum demand is 20-25 gpm with 20 gpg hardness. First a bit of background information which I expect you know but that other readers may not:
I've told him this numerous times over the last year or more here under the 2-3 names he's used here but hopefully he'll believe you.1. The salt efficiency of a softener is higher when the maximum capacity of the resin is NOT used. If one cubic foot of resin is regenerated with 6 lbs of salt the salt efficiency is approximately 3400 grains per lb of salt and approximately 20,000 grains of capacity are available. If that same one foot of resin is regenerated with 15 lbs of salt the salt efficiency is about 2000 grains per lb of salt and about 30,000 grains of capacity are available. Resin manufacturers publish curves and regeneration rates for one cubic foot vary from 3 lbs per cubic foot to 15 lbs per cubic foot.
It is all based on the constant SFR gpm required. If you don't get that right nothing else matters and leakage will be so high it's like not having a softener. That is how softeners must be sized and doing it that way also prevents noticeable pressure loss.2. The hardness leakage of a softener is lower when the flow per cubic foot of resin is lower. The higher the flow rate per cubic foot of resin the higher the hardness leakage.
So, to answer your question as to why a larger softener might be used, it would be to achieve greater salt efficiency and/or lower hardness leakage. Depending on the cost of salt compared to the cost of resin and the larger tank required for the larger amount of resin and the customers discount rate it may or may not make economic sense to go with a larger amount of resin to achieve greater salt efficiency.
The vast majority of prospective customers do not know what the word leakage means and 99% will say they do not want any hard water getting through their softener. Which is the way it should be. But... as an example, what amount of leakage would you say is OK?Hardness leakage in the typical residential application is a matter of personal preference and again it is really up to the customer to decide what hardness leakage is satisfactory.
I have explained leakage to thousands of prospective customers, it's not difficult and the WQA says the amount of acceptable hardness (leakage) in softened water is 1 gpg or less. I say 0 gpg is what everyone should have and expect.. And when you talk to people after describing leakage, no one wants any. Well every once in awhile there is a guy that before he buys a softener will say he doesn't like the slippery feel and he wants to add some hardness back into the softened water. That's until he gets used to the feel and then any hardness drives him nuts.The problem from the sellors point of view, in my opinion, is that it is very difficult to help the customer make an informed decision about an acceptable level of hardness leakage--getting reliable data about what hardness leakage will actually be is difficult at best and explaining or demonstrating the impact of hardness leakage is also problematic.
Yes I know what the spec sheets say. And again reading spec sheets is where you are getting your limited knowledge from. And yes distributors, independent dealers' suppliers, order the valves in from the manufacturer based on the size of the DT normally used. Then change the pi;ot if they go to a larger DT. So those are the facts Bob. Now ask yourself why they would normally use a smaller distributor tube than the porting of the control valve. And then why a WS-1 on up to a 21" tank and maybe on 1.25" and 1.5" plumbing.There you go again making up facts. Check the specification sheets for the 1" and 1.25" valves. The 1" valve has a distributor pilot of 1.05" (note it is the opening in the valve--the distributor tube is a separate part.) The 1.25" valve has a distributor pilot of 1.32" (again that is the opening in the valve body--the distributor tube is a separate part.) I can only assume that when you say standard distributor tube you are making reference to what your wholesale distributor lists in the catalog as a combination of a valve and a distributor tube.
Likewise, unless the salesperson wants to make more money or the prospective uninformed customer WANTS the larger control valve, there's no sense in a larger ported control valve when a smaller one will work; as an example here in this case where people are convincing Riverside that he should want a larger valve. Had I not mentioned the distributor tube he'd get a 1.05" from 9 out of 10 dealers because he doesn't need the larger valve or DT.However you do raise an important point--if a plumbing system is being designed for a specified flow rate it is important to pay attention to each component. It certainly wouldn't make sense to pay for a 1.25" valve and then use a 1" distributor tube with that valve. Similarly it wouldn't make sense to pay for a 1.25" valve to connect to 1" plumbing.
Yes I know what the spec sheets say. And again reading spec sheets is where you are getting your limited knowledge from. And yes distributors, independent dealers' suppliers, order the valves in from the manufacturer based on the size of the DT normally used. Then change the pi;ot if they go to a larger DT. So those are the facts Bob. Now ask yourself why they would normally use a smaller distributor tube than the porting of the control valve. And then why a WS-1 on up to a 21" tank and maybe on 1.25" and 1.5" plumbing.
Likewise, unless the salesperson wants to make more money or the prospective uninformed customer WANTS the larger control valve, there's no sense in a larger ported control valve when a smaller one will work; as an example here in this case where people are convincing Riverside that he should want a larger valve. Had I not mentioned the distributor tube he'd get a 1.05" from 9 out of 10 dealers because he doesn't need the larger valve or DT.
And how about the by pass valve Bob, do you see a 1.25" or larger? Do you know the 1" is used for the 1" and the 1.25" valves?
Ask yourself what the pressure loss would be when 1.25" ID water line is reduced through say 6-7" of 1" ID plastic into a 14"-21" dia tank and then through 5' 2"+/- of 1.05" OD plastic DT and then through 6-7" of 1" plastic then back into 1.25". Peter should be able to help you if needed. Then tell me how a softener owner without pressure gauges before and after the softener can tell there is that amount of pressure loss.
I have explained leakage to thousands of prospective customers, it's not difficult and the WQA says the amount of acceptable hardness (leakage) in softened water is 1 gpg or less. I say 0 gpg is what everyone should have and expect.
Bashing you? If you have field experience, state what it is and realize that so far without stating it you are lying by omission. On the other hand I lay my experience out for all to see and all you seem to do is pick it apart because it doesn't match your understanding of things solely based on spec sheets. I'm replying to what you have said has been based on only spec sheets. Spec sheets don't tell the whole story and in your case you are missing something on some of those spec sheets and I am not going to tell you what it is until you mention it, and then maybe not then anyway because I'm thinking you will pick apart my explanation of that like you did with your resin spec sheet SFR argument.Gary, there you go again. Bashing me because of unfounded assumptions you make about my background, experience and knowledge base. However, I acknowledge that I do rely on published technical data as one of the sources of my information--don't you?
So again you are claiming I don't know what I'm doing because I live in and travel around the country in a motor home!! While your knowledge of softener sizing is based on what you read on spec sheets...I think it is telling that a salesman who sells from a no fixed address mobile home continually questions and berates the knowledge, experience and background of other posters. So be it. I am content to let the reader read what I post and decide for himself.
You should have your answer about my scruples Bob because our discussion has me saying that Riverside doesn't need the larger valve.And yes I have no doubt that there are unscrupulous dealers who would sell a 1.25" valve with a 1" distributor tube to an unsuspecting customer to make a little more profit. I hope you are not one of them.
Look how few posts of yours are in reply to anyone with problems and compare them to your posts that in essence say I'm wrong about something.
Emphasis above is mine. And I'm going to correct you again by simply stating that in residential softening the test used is grains per gallon, not ppm or mg/l. And if a lab etc. does it in ppm or mg/l it is converted to gpg. Call any dealer or resin manufacturer and learn the error of your way Bob.There have been previous discussions about leakage. Let me say again that I understand that zero grains per gallon of hardness means zero parts per million of hardness. With that understanding I think it is misleading at best, and dishonest at worst, to describe a typical residential softener as delivering "0 gpg". It just doesn't happen with softeners regenerated with a few lbs of salt per cubic foot and used with flow rates of up to 9 gallons per cubic foot of resin.
Well then you're wrong again Bob and I've explained it to you 3-4 times now but here you are again.I think I understand from your previous posting on this matter that you use a fairly crude hardness test--one that is only calibrated in units of one or more grains per gallon and that what you really mean when you say "0 gpg" is that with the hardness test you use that the test doesn't show 1 or more gpg.
And I'm going to correct you again by simply stating that in residential softening the test used is grains per gallon, not ppm or mg/l. And if a lab etc. does it in ppm or mg/l it is converted to gpg.
The spec sheet 1-5 ppm or mg/l per cuft is for industrial/commercial folks where over a certain ppm level, the hardness will cause them problems; like pharmaceutical, chemical, electronics and plating manufacturers as a small example Bob.
The code also says ID reduction is fine as long as it does not reduce pressure below the minimum, and your statment would apply in this case of 1.25" or 1.5" water line and a 1" control valve. That is because we don't have a peak demand for the total house yet, just the large shower or two showers.Well thanks for the info there but I don't make the rules, I enforce them. You and anybody else is more than welcome to file complaints and perhaps get things changed. I'm n ot in the change things business. I can not and will not overlook code violations based on how I feel about the code nor how I may feel about the situation or the individual. I don't make those distinctions because I do not want to take the liablility should something ever make it's way to court.
I have to ammend this though. Just because there is a 2" main coming into a building does not mean you have to keep it 2" The code only sets a minimum size and that is 3/4". What you do have to do though is to figure out the total load on the building taking into account number and type of fixtures, the incomiong pressure and the total developed length and head pressure on the system. 2" may very well have been grossly oversized right from the get go. Further more the steak house itself may not have needed to run softened water to all of their fixtures.
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.