Cycle Stop Valve voided my well pump warranty???

[wascalwabbitt]

Well, I can tell you that I had to stare at those graphs for quite a while before I thought I was understanding it. That picture is for sure not what I had perceived how a pump should work. Learn something new each day!!
Since then, I've looked at your site and some videos and see that you have a CSV that can be installed downhole just below the pitless adapter. My water system has that issue where the well output line is teed off to a hotsy building before coming into the farmhouse.
How are you able to adjust the setting on your downhole CSV when its sitting in the well bore?

 

[Reach4]

The downhole csv is ordered for a particular pressure.

No trouble teeing after a CSV.

 

[Sponsor]

 

[Valveman]

The CSV125 that fits in the well is a pre-set valve that comes in 40, 50, or 60 PSI. No adjustment to the CSV125. You adjust the pressure switch to work with whatever pressure CSV125 you use. The larger the pressure tank, the closer the off setting to the CSV125 to keep from taking too long to fill the tank. Like was mentioned above the CSV will work with any size tank. When using a 60 PSI CSV with a 60-80 gallon size tank, the pressure switch is set to 42/62. This you will keep the CSV from taking longer than about 2 minutes of run time to fill even large tanks.

 

[Midriller]

By George I think you've got it!

That is just the way pumps work normally. This is why I say a VFD is just trying to trick a pump into doing something it already does naturally. The amps or horsepower will drop when restricting the flow with a simple valve the same as they do when reducing the pump speed with a VFD.

Because it takes about 2/10S of a GPM to keep a de-rated motor cool, the CSV has a minimum flow built in of 1 GPM, or 5 times what is needed to keep the motor cool. So as long as you are using more than 1 GPM, which 2 GPM would qualify, the CSV will keep the pump/motor cool, running continuously (not cycling), and the pressure to the house at a constant 50 PSI or whatever pressure you set the CSV. Constant 50 PSI in the shower is more than adequate. It is so much stronger than when the pump is continually cycling between 40 and 60 that people tell me they no longer even need soap in the shower. LOL!

I am just blown away by the number of pump guys who don't understand this. Like the one in the recording, they think restricting the flow with a valve will harm the pump, and VFD's save energy. As you can tell from the recording, once a pump man has this myth-understanding in his head he won't even shut up long enough to learn how pumps really work.

This is all true for single phase "residential" 2 or 3 Wire pumps. There are many VSD's that do save power but it is in commercial three phase, or diesel applications where we are using a 300 h.p. diesel motor and a turbine shaft pump. This is the birthplace of Variable Speed pumps which is a very important difference between Variable speed and Variable Frequency. I would like to differentiate the two because a turbine shaft or high capacity pump is ran a 0.2 gpm there are a plethora of problems that will ensue. On the Residential DIY side there is nothing better or more reliable i just take issue in some of the "blanket statements" being made here. Not all motors are the same, not all systems are the same and all deserve respect because they all have their place and time.

 

[Valveman]

Well you are going to have to get the idea that VFD's save energy out of your head. They do not. A VFD adds 3% to 5% loss of efficiency because it takes that much energy to just run the VFD itself. Then anytime you reduce the speed of a pump you are getting fewer gallons per kilowatt, not more. A VFD would have to produce more gallons per kilowatt somehow, and that kind of magic is just not possible. Even large systems lose efficiency when using a VFD. Large VFD's do last longer than the small ones however. But now they usually only have one power pack for all three phases, so they don't last as long as they use to.

I am old enough to have been around during the birth of the VFD. They have gotten much better and less expensive over the years. However, the laws of physics have not changed. You still can't add something that decreases efficiency by 5% and say it saves energy. Even a big pressure tank or water tower is more efficient than a VFD. With a big tank the pump is either running at its best efficiency point, or it is off. You can''t get any more efficient that that.

For those who don't understand pumps, a VFD's can make badly designed systems more efficient. But a VFD will always decrease efficiency over a properly sized pump and a control system that keeps the pump working at its BEP or Best Efficiency Point.

With a CSV, 2HP and smaller pumps get 1 GPM minimum flow, 3HP and 5HP get 3 GPM minimum, and larger pumps get 3-8 GPM for cooling, as that is all they need.

 

[winesalot]

So if I understand what you're saying, based on this graphs:

As the head on the pump increases, the gpm outflow decreases.
As the gpm outflow decreases, the pump hp needed decreases. And less hp takes less amps.
By manually restricting the flow, you are effectively increasing the head.
What's up doc -- that's blyming crazy!!! lol

Here is another way of looking at this. Horsepower is a measurement of work done. Watts is another unit of work done. Work done, in this case, is only being done when water is moving. In fact, 1Hp = 745.7. Watts = volts x amps. 1 HP = 745.7 x volts x amps. Since voltage and 745.7 are both constants in this equation it is a direct correlation that if you move less water your hp is down so mathematically your amps have to go down.

 

[Valveman]

Well sort of. Horsepower and amps do drop when the pumps flow is restricted. However, the horsepower calculation has more to do with flow, pressure, and efficiency. So one horsepower and 745 watts are not a constant.

Like this.

HP =

However, even with a VFD the drop in horsepower is not linear with the drop in flow rate. The more you slow down a pump with a VFD, the less horsepower it is drawing. But the flow rate drops off faster than the horsepower. So the slower the pump speed, the fewer gallons per watt or Kwh is achieved and the more energy a VFD is wasting.

You can slow a 300HP turbine down until it is only drawing a 200HP load, and a VFD salesman will tell you that is saving 33% energy. However, it is now drawing 200HP worth of power and only supplying 150HP worth of water, so the VFD is really wasting 25% energy.

 

[Midriller]

Well you are going to have to get the idea that VFD's save energy out of your head. They do not. A VFD adds 3% to 5% loss of efficiency because it takes that much energy to just run the VFD itself. Then anytime you reduce the speed of a pump you are getting fewer gallons per kilowatt, not more. A VFD would have to produce more gallons per kilowatt somehow, and that kind of magic is just not possible. Even large systems lose efficiency when using a VFD. Large VFD's do last longer than the small ones however. But now they usually only have one power pack for all three phases, so they don't last as long as they use to.

I am old enough to have been around during the birth of the VFD. They have gotten much better and less expensive over the years. However, the laws of physics have not changed. You still can't add something that decreases efficiency by 5% and say it saves energy. Even a big pressure tank or water tower is more efficient than a VFD. With a big tank the pump is either running at its best efficiency point, or it is off. You can''t get any more efficient that that.

For those who don't understand pumps, a VFD's can make badly designed systems more efficient. But a VFD will always decrease efficiency over a properly sized pump and a control system that keeps the pump working at its BEP or Best Efficiency Point.

With a CSV, 2HP and smaller pumps get 1 GPM minimum flow, 3HP and 5HP get 3 GPM minimum, and larger pumps get 3-8 GPM for cooling, as that is all they need.

Again in the residential market you are 1000% correct as the motors fall into this as the cost to "Change Frequency" v. gals pumped negates any energy efficiency. Also in a residential setting we have many quick uses of water which requires a soft shut down to ensure the pump doesn't short cycle while your washing dishes. This is your biggest power waste. In a commercial setting or where three phase is available, there is no need to change from 1ph to 3 ph or AC to DC. Your usage also goes up so your cost to run the drive drops far below 1%. A pump is less efficient off its peak rpm. A motor is far less efficient on start up. In ANY situation where the pump is required to run 24/7 The Variable Speed Systems where just make shift pressure actuator hooked to a rod and attached to the fuel pump on a 150 hp diesel motor running a 2000 gpm irr. well. In your theory, It would be more efficient to hook it to a clutch and keep the motor at 2500 rpm and just "slip the Clutch" instead of letting off the gas. NOT ALL SITUATIONS REQUIRE THE SAME EQUIPMENT this is my only point. There is a reason every multi stage pivot has a variable speed drive (not V.F.D.... huge difference) attached ind of a CSV and its not because farmers love wasting money.

 

[Valveman]

I appreciate it and agree with most of that. However, I must disagree on all pivots using variable speed. There is a big difference in a gas or diesel engine and an electric motor. The gas engine will not reduce energy consumption much unless you let off the gas. An electric motor can produce high or low horsepower without reducing the speed. It just depends on how much load the pump is drawing at the time. We use a CSV on a lot of pivot systems with electric motors. As a matter of fact the USDA used Cycle Stop Valves on their test projects for variable flow pivots many years ago. As these pivots go around the field, the GPS and moisture meters tell it how many drops or sprinklers to open up. A 2000 GPM pivot can vary the flow down to 500 GPM in the lower and wetter areas. The CSV keeps the same 30 PSI on the pivot no matter if it is putting out 2000 GPM or just 500 GPM. And with an electric motor, the efficiency is almost exactly the same as with a VFD.

We also use a lot of Cycle Stop Valve on turbines with gas engines. A governor keeps the engine from revving too high when the CSV retricts the flow. And even though the engine is not reducing in speed, it still uses less fuel when the CSV restricts the load. However, I agree with you on this that adjusting the RPM of the gas engine will save even more.

I was upset the USDA report spent so much time on how the variable rate pivot worked that they barely mentioned how they were using a CSV to vary the flow from the pump. However, many years earlier the USDA did a study on variable rate drip irrigation where they did describe how the CSV worked. Not much difference between variable rate for drip and a pivot. Here is a link to the report form the USDA.

https://cyclestopvalves.com/pages/usda-study-of-cycle-stop-valves

 

[Midriller]

Basically IMO. you are best off to have neither a CSV or VFD and just have a properly sized pressure tank for your system in a residential setting, unfortunately some situations are less conducive to this are require some more engineering. I personally believe Permanent Magnet (rare earth) motors are a far more efficient from the get go (less rotor resistance, longer stacks, and lower inrush) plus soft start which helps reduce motor/pump bearing failure from start thrust. (w/o a flow control device) What type of amp draw reduction do you expect to see when lets say a 1 h.p. 20 gpm pump is only flowing 1 gpm to the tank? The idea to me that either a VFD OR CSV would be considered energy saving is ludicrous, It is purely for comfort and reliability, respectively!!

 

[Valveman]

In all my years of installing pumps, a big pressure tank alone was never good enough. I would sell someone a 1.5HP, 20 GPM pump with an 80 gallon pressure tank as a standard system. Then I would tell the customer when irrigating he/she has to always use 20 GPM to keep the pump from cycling. Yes, yes, of course with a nod of the head was always the replay. A couple months later I drive by that house and they have one of those tractor sprinklers with about 500' of hose doing circles around the apricot tree in the yard. I tell myself I should stop and remind them of the 20 GPM irrigation requirement, or I will soon hear from a mad customer. Too busy, other jobs to do that day and drive on. A few months later a get the angry call. The pump always quits after the 20 gallons is the tank is gone, which gives the homeowner just enough time to get lathered up in the shower. Mad, standing in the shower with soap all over, had to dip water out the back of the toilet to rinse off, then called me. That pump I sold them just a few months ago was no good. I sold them a cheap ass pump, etc, etc.

I remind them that is was actually about 4 years ago, and that time goes by fast. I also remind them they were told over and over to ALWAYS use 20 GPM when irrigating. I explain that would take about 10 of those tractor sprinklers running at the same time. The typical response was that I never told them to run 20 GPM for irrigation, and that they don't even have 10 faucets to run 10 sprinklers if they wanted to. So now I am over replacing their pump for free. I had to put off a paying customer and make them mad, to take care of the warranty that shouldn't be a warranty. So I am losing double money that day.

After starting to install a Cycle Stop Valve and a 20 gallon tank on every one of these applications, my warranties went away. They can run just one tractor sprinkler, or run water anyway they want, and not hurt my pump. My yearly profits went up immensely. I didn't realize how much taking care of warranties actually cost me until they went away. Warranties had always just been a cost of doing business.

If you can train your customers how to properly use a pump system, you don't need a CSV. LOL! After starting to install CSV's on every system I no longer even had to mention HOW to use a pump system. The customer can use water anyway they want, and it never cost me an extra penny.

Plus the CSV is the only product I ever sold in the pump business that would get me kudos calls from the customer. Normally you never hear from a customer until they are mad and out of water. But I would hear from CSV customers elated at the strong constant pressure from the new system. It is great to hear form happy customers instead of mad ones, which is why I like selling CSV's.

I agree the permanent magnets are a good idea for motors. But permanent magnet motors don't need a VFD to be advantageous. Soft start and bearing failure from starts is not a problem when you don't start too much, which is what a CSV makes happen.

Interestingly Grundfos, who is setting the pace for variable speed pumps, has the best pump for natural horsepower reduction. Ironically, their pumps have such a good natural horsepower reduction that a VFD is not needed to reduce energy consumption. Here is a curve for a 2HP pump that shows the horsepower drop from 2.3HP at 25 GPM all the way down to 0.8HP at 1 GPM. This is what I mean when I say a CSV can save as much energy as a VFD.

 

[Midriller]

First and foremost if you installed a 1.5 hp 20 gpm pump so the customer could run a garden hose sprinkler, you engineered the system incorrectly for the home. a 10 gpm on a 62 gal tank will do that all day with no issues for many years. The reason i assume your profits went up is you sold more CSVs. (more parts) I never run enough call backs to figure out what it costs me ( 1/month) I see the h.p. drop but your energy use and h.p. do not follow the same line, this is making the assumption that a 2 h.p. pump pumping only .8 gpm is only drawing less than half the power, when in reality it may have only dropped by 15% in amp draw. Anyone who has deadheaded a pump understands this. My take is the only difference between a CSV and VFD is cost to convert power, and cost to run the box (Franklin - Higher, Grundfos -lower, b/c of fan operation) I agree CSV's are good but I'm loosing you on some of your arguments towards how horribly inefficient they are, Payback is a non factor. The ONLY answer to the which is better is ONLY up to the Customer. The Constant Pressure provide no initial dip to 40 PSI therefore higher average pressure, and you get a shiney box on the wall that blinks. CSV is ALOT cheaper with more versatile setups ( used with all pumps) less electronics, doesn't care about humidity or lightning ( the pump might ) both are good setups but as far as efficiency goes the only answer in engineering and asking the customers how they use (or intend to use) their system, If money was no option and i had my way every hose with irrigation would have 2 wells with 10 gpm pumps and and alternator switch. Past that its just "stepping on the gas and the brake"

 

[Valveman]

First and foremost if you installed a 1.5 hp 20 gpm pump so the customer could run a garden hose sprinkler, you engineered the system incorrectly for the home. a 10 gpm on a 62 gal tank will do that all day with no issues for many years.

Oh I tried my best to talk them into a 10 GPM, 3/4HP. But their father, brother, friend, etc, had a 2HP and they really wanted a 2HP so "they would have good pressure". Lol! I talked them down to the 1.5HP and told them they would have to run 10 sprinklers at a time, or don't run sprinklers at all. Yeah, yeah, nod, nod, but they never really understand this. At least they don't understand until they burn up the first pump. Then they want to claim they were never told to run 10 sprinklers, and that I was bad for not talking them into the 3/4HP in the first place.

The reason i assume your profits went up is you sold more CSVs. (more parts) I never run enough call backs to figure out what it costs me ( 1/month)

No. I was selling less. Standard 80 gal tank system back then was $1500. I was selling the CSV and a 20 gal tank for $1300, and getting all the bids. Even one warranty a month is two paying jobs lost. Losing the profits on 24 jobs a year really adds up more than you think.

I see the h.p. drop but your energy use and h.p. do not follow the same line, this is making the assumption that a 2 h.p. pump pumping only .8 gpm is only drawing less than half the power, when in reality it may have only dropped by 15% in amp draw. Anyone who has deadheaded a pump understands this.

I am not making any assumptions, it is right there on the pump curve. I have this same pump at my house and the amps do drop by 50%-60%. It is all about the design of the pump. Franklin and Pentair pumps will not drop but 15% like you say, as they are badly designed pumps, made for planned obsolescence. not efficiency or longevity. Goulds and some other floating stack type pumps typically drop 30%-40%. But a Grundfos and several of their copies will drop 50%-60%, just like it says in their curve. Horsepower and Kwh's are directly related.

My take is the only difference between a CSV and VFD is cost to convert power, and cost to run the box (Franklin - Higher, Grundfos -lower, b/c of fan operation)

Since you have to use twice the size of VFD to convert single phase to three phase, they do use more energy than when supplied three phase power. When you add in the cost to run the VFD box itself, it makes up for the little bit of difference between varying the speed and simply restricting a pump with a valve. The loss of efficiency for using a VFD is NOT shown on the pump curve and must be added back in.

I agree CSV's are good but I'm loosing you on some of your arguments towards how horribly inefficient they are, Payback is a non factor. The ONLY answer to the which is better is ONLY up to the Customer.

I assume you mean how "horribly inefficient VFD's are". They are horribly inefficient. Yet the manufacturers keep claiming a VFD saves energy, which is just false advertising. I will quit saying how horribly inefficient VFD's are, (which is true) when they stop saying a VFD saves energy, (which is not true). And yes on most of these small pumps that only use $3-$10 a month electricity, payback or efficiency is meaningless. And yes it is always up to the customer. Many customers who start with VFD's end up with CSV's. After they have tried both, they understand the less expensive, more reliable, longer lasting option is the CSV.

The Constant Pressure provide no initial dip to 40 PSI therefore higher average pressure, and you get a shiney box on the wall that blinks.

The VFD's that do not have "sleep mode" and do not drop to 40 PSI before the pump starts are not able to utilize any water from the pressure tank. The 20 PSI bandwidth is needed to get the draw down from the tank. With the switch on the Sub/Monodrive and the SQE system the pressure only drops a pound or so before the pump comes on. This means you don't get any drawdown from any size pressure tank, and the pump will come on for even the slightest draw of water. The better VFD's have figured this out and use "sleep mode" to make the pressure drop before the pump comes on, so some water from the tank can be utilized. They do have shiney boxes and blinking lights. It helps to keep people from "paying attention to the man behind the curtain pulling the strings". LOL

CSV is ALOT cheaper with more versatile setups ( used with all pumps) less electronics, doesn't care about humidity or lightning ( the pump might ) both are good setups but as far as efficiency goes the only answer in engineering and asking the customers how they use (or intend to use) their system,

A customer usually has no idea how they will use water. And even if they have a good plan, plans ALWAYS change. Just like me telling customers since they wanted a 20 GPM pump they have to always use 10 sprinklers, never 1 to 9 sprinklers, it is just not going to happen. The best thing for a customer is to be able to use their water anyway they want. A CSV allows them to use 1 to 10 sprinklers or do anything they want. Engineering a system with a CSV that will allow customers to use water anyway they want, is much better than trying to make them use water the way the system was engineered.

If money was no option and i had my way every hose with irrigation would have 2 wells with 10 gpm pumps and and alternator switch. Past that its just "stepping on the gas and the brake"

We do houses with 2 or more wells all the time. They are more efficient and give you a backup system. However, I have never liked or used alternators, as they wear out both pumps at the same time, and you don't have a reliable backup. We do a lead/lag type system where the lead pump does 98% of the work. The lag pump only comes on when extra water is needed, or it gets exercised once a week just to keep it in good shape. That way the lead pump actually last longer as it is not cycling as much, and the lag pump will still be like new many years from now when a backup pump is needed.

I understand why you think those things. When you said "stepping on the gas and the brake" I know you must have been to a hundred VFD classes. That is the kind of nonsense they teach in their "Up-sell with VFD's for more profit" classes. Lol! No offense! It happens to everyone, including me. They are lying to all of us when they say "a VFD saves energy". But it is an easy lie to pull off. Everyone sees the amps drop when slowed with a VFD and just assumes that is saving energy. Those companies will never explain the drop in amps is not linear with the drop in flow rate, which actually makes it less efficient and use more energy per gallon. Valve control is like "stepping on the gas and brake" is just another one of the lies they get away with, because is not an easy concept to understand.

 

[White Shadow]

Hi guys, I'm back and I need some help again. Yesterday, I turned on my irrigation system for the first time since my burned out well pump was replaced last December. As a reminder, I had a Gould's 1.5hp pump that was cycling every 60 seconds or so when running my irrigation system and that pump burned up on me after about one and half seasons of running my irrigation system. The well guys replaced that pump with what they called a "high output" 1hp pump. At the same time, they removed my CSV, telling me that the CSV was the cause of the pump failure and denying me warranty coverage. Well, Cary helped me get my money refunded from the well company, so I was happy about that.

I wanted to see how much my new well pump was cycling with the irrigation running, so I turned it on last night and watched the pressure tank gauge closely. I ran a few different zones and here's what I found: First, looking at the gauge, I noticed that the pressure switch cycles from 38 psi to 67 psi. So it goes a bit lower and a bit higher than the typical 40 to 60 psi range. Is that a problem? Should this be adjusted back to 40 - 60 psi?

I timed the cycle and here's what I found: The tank drops down from 67 psi to 38 psi in a little less than 1.5 minutes. Then pump takes a little less than 2 minutes to pump the pressure tank back up to 67 psi. So to go from 67 psi, to 38 psi, and back up to 67 psi again takes less than 3.5 minutes total. So my new pump is still cycling a lot, but not quite as much as my old pump.

I still have my CSV and want to install it again, but I need help. I'm not sure how to properly set it up. I've read that you want to keep it towards the top of the range, but I don't know if my pressure tank should be set to 67 psi before the well pump shuts off. Any advice?

 

[Valveman]

I see pump guys widen the 40/60 pressure switch to 38/67 or something similar all the time. They are trying to reduce the number of cycles that way, yet they remove a Cycle Stop Valve that would eliminate nearly all the cycles. Go figure! The setting of the CSV is closer to the off setting for larger tanks. You just want to set the CSV so the pump runs a minute or two to fill the tank AFTER all the water faucets are turned off. Sorry you can't find a competent pump man. But you are doing the right thing educating yourself and adding the CSV to your water system.

 

[White Shadow]

So should I leave it at 38/67 or should I bring it back to 40/60?

And I'm not sure of the size of my tank, but I can check it when I get home. I believe it's one of the larger size tanks. When the CSV was originally installed, I remember they ran the irrigation and then adjusted the CSV. Does that sound correct? Or does it not matter if the irrigation is running or not?

 

[Valveman]

38/67 won't hurt anything. That is just the on and off pressures anyway. The CSV will be set at 60 PSI and will hold 60 PSI as long as you are using water. As long as dropping to 38 isn't causing a low pressure issue before the pump starts, it will be fine.

 

[White Shadow]

38/67 won't hurt anything. That is just the on and off pressures anyway. The CSV will be set at 60 PSI and will hold 60 PSI as long as you are using water. As long as dropping to 38 isn't causing a low pressure issue before the pump starts, it will be fine.

Well, I have noticed at times that the water pressure send a little low when taking a shower. Maybe that's when the pressure tank is toward the low pressure limit.

The guy who originally installed my CSV seems like a good pump man. Maybe I'll just call him back and pay him to put it in again, but I'd rather do it myself and learn something along the way. I can't imagine it would be too difficult to get the thing installed and adjusted again. When the other guy removed the CSV, he took it out along with the water line up to the pressure tank. Then he spliced in a new water line in place. So I have the CSV with the water line already attached at one end.

 

[White Shadow]

So here's my plan. Please tell me if I'm missing any steps along the way.

1. Turn off the breaker for my well pump
2. Close the ball valves after the tank that supply water to the house and to the irrigation system before draining the tank
3. Connect a garden hose to the hose bib on the bottom of the tank, open the valve and drain the tank. Close the valve and disconnect the garden hose when the tank is fully drained and has zero pressure showing on the gauge
4. Disconnect the water line coming into the tank and reinstall the CSV
5. Turn the pump breaker back on and open the ball valves to supply water to the house and irrigation system
6. Once the pressure tank is full and the pump stops, run an irrigation zone and adjust the CSV to about 2 psi under the pump cutoff point.

Is that everything? Did I miss any steps?

By the way, I looked at my pressure tank last night and it's a 62 gallon tank. That tank was originally installed with the 1.5 hp pump, but now I have a "high output" 1 hp pump, so I'm guessing that it's probably a bit oversized, right? Preferably, I'd want a much smaller tank when running a CSV?

 

[Valveman]

A 62 gallon tank holds 15 gallons of water. It is larger than you need with a CSV, but will be fine. You just need to set the CSV 5 PSI under the cut off pressure while running 3 GPM. You have to wait for the tank to drain and the pump to come on before you can adjust the CSV.