No.
Ideally DO will not be the deciding factor.
Your water usage is the independent variable, and your regeneration schedule should be determined by that.
Fleck 5600SXT 48K Settings Check
- Thread starter PeniParker
- Start date
Ideally DO will not be the deciding factor.
Your water usage is the independent variable, and your regeneration schedule should be determined by that.
Bannerman
Well-Known Member
When municipal water is obtained from multiple sources, they will most often state hardness as an average hardness number from all sources. As such, depending on your home"s location within the distribution system, the hardness of the water supplied to your home could be normally lower or higher than average. Because measuring hardness with a Hach 5B directly at your location, will provide a snapshot of the hardness at that specific time, recommend programming the softener's hardness setting for 2-3 gpg higher than the test result, to anticipate occasions that hardness maybe higher than normal. Hardness levels will often vary during times of high water consumption, fire hydrant use, or during distribution system maintenance or repair.
For a softener equipped with 1.5ft3 resin, to achieve the best balance of salt efficiency, soft water quality, and useable capacity, the usual recommendation will be to program the salt setting to 12 lbs (8 lbs/ft3), to regenerate 36,000 grains useable Capacity. These settings will result in a hardness reduction efficiency of 3,000 gr/lb (36,000 / 12 lbs), providing high quality soft water containing only 6ppm hardness.
For higher salt efficiency, 9 lbs salt {6 lbs/ft3) will regenerate 31,500 gr Capacity, thereby achieving 3,500gr/lb efficiency, but hardness leakage will be increased (lower quality soft water) to 10 ppm.
By programming the appropriate Reserve Capacity setting, that amount will be automatically calculated and subtracted from the gallons remaining shown in the controller's screen. No manual compensation calculation will be necessary.
Sponsor
Paid Advertisement
Hi everyone,
Could someone give me a tip regarding the correct BF time? My setup is:
Fleck 5600 SXT, 1.5 cuft, 48.000 grain, 0.5 GPM BLFC, P0.7
Water hardness = 19.21 gpg, no iron. We use about 100 Gal/day and to prevent bacterial growth I want to regeneration (DO) aftert 7 days latest. So how long does the BF time needs to be to regenerate the 14,000 grain (19.21 gpg * 700 Gal ≈ 14,000 grain)? I know, the system i bought is way too big for us...
From my understanding, the manual recommends a 10-minute brine flow (BF) to fully regenerate the 48,000-grain capacity. If I reduce the BF to about 3 minutes, I would theoretically regenerate the "used" 14,000 grains with the same hardness reduction efficiency.
However, since the resin would not be fully saturated and the NaCl concentration would be lower, the ion exchange process would be less efficient (smaller possibility of the ions meeting each other). This means that fewer Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺ ions would be fully exchanged with Na⁺. As a result, the concentration of residual calcium and magnesium (here referred to as "hardness leakage") would be higher compared to a full 10-minute regeneration of the 48,000 grains.
Would you agree with this reasoning?
Next step would be to set the SF to 50, in case more water is used than expected?
Could someone give me a tip regarding the correct BF time? My setup is:
Fleck 5600 SXT, 1.5 cuft, 48.000 grain, 0.5 GPM BLFC, P0.7
Water hardness = 19.21 gpg, no iron. We use about 100 Gal/day and to prevent bacterial growth I want to regeneration (DO) aftert 7 days latest. So how long does the BF time needs to be to regenerate the 14,000 grain (19.21 gpg * 700 Gal ≈ 14,000 grain)? I know, the system i bought is way too big for us...
From my understanding, the manual recommends a 10-minute brine flow (BF) to fully regenerate the 48,000-grain capacity. If I reduce the BF to about 3 minutes, I would theoretically regenerate the "used" 14,000 grains with the same hardness reduction efficiency.
However, since the resin would not be fully saturated and the NaCl concentration would be lower, the ion exchange process would be less efficient (smaller possibility of the ions meeting each other). This means that fewer Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺ ions would be fully exchanged with Na⁺. As a result, the concentration of residual calcium and magnesium (here referred to as "hardness leakage") would be higher compared to a full 10-minute regeneration of the 48,000 grains.
Would you agree with this reasoning?
Next step would be to set the SF to 50, in case more water is used than expected?
Last edited:
