Forklifting my water treatment system

[wascalwabbitt]

Thank you for that thorough explanation.
I will have to find the proper tank to purchase as a contact tank.
Do you have any preferences?

 

[LLigetfa]

As you are aware, the inside of the contact tank as well as the inlet/outlet fittings get very gunked up so look for something that is easy to disassemble for cleaning. My preference was for the Wellmate tank but that was before Pentair decided to price them so high.

I hear some integrators are using softener media tanks outfitted with a bung that has threaded ports. Maybe @ditttohead has a line on these. You said contact tank as did I but a true contact tank has the outlet at the top so it does not hold air. If you need an AVC to be integrated into the tank, that narrows your options. There are external air removers that can be placed in-line.

A few posts back you asked me what brand the other tank was. ISTR that it is made by Flexcon and I wonder if they make them for Pentair.
https://www.flexconind.com/products/well-tanks/flex-lite-fls-and-flu-well-tanks/

 

[Sponsor]

 

[wascalwabbitt]

I hear some integrators are using softener media tanks outfitted with a bung that has threaded ports. Maybe @ditttohead has a line on these. You said contact tank as did I but a true contact tank has the outlet at the top so it does not hold air. If you need an AVC to be integrated into the tank, that narrows your options. There are external air removers that can be placed in-line.

I was looking at the Air Pump site which uses the softener media tanks. But my concern is that there isn't a bottom cleanout valve. When that tank gets full of sludge I think it would have to be tipped on end to clean. However, with their top diffuser there should be good mixing of air to water and would seem to be ideal for iron precipitation. --- but that lack of bottom blowout valve concerns me......

https://www.air-pump.com/packaged-systems/aeration-with-filtration-tank-systems/

https://www.air-pump.com/packaged-systems/aer-max-water-treatment-aeration-system/

For my application I think it needs air in the retention tank and thus an AVC. What are your thoughts?

 

[LLigetfa]

The precipitated iron does not really settle to the bottom but rather sticks to the sides of the tank so a blowdown port does little good except to drain the tank to make it lighter to move it. When it comes time to clean the tank, I take it to the wash bay at work and use a pressure washer with a long wand that fits in through the bung hole.

If you want a hybrid contact tank with AVC, then I suggest you mimic mine with a modified AVC so that there is more water and less air than a conventional hydro-pneumatic tank. One of the Flexcon tanks with side ports and external AVC or a shortened up top mounted AVC works well. If using side ports, put the AVC in the higher port.

Still, you need some way to introduce the air only when there is flow if you don't plan to use a packaged system. You could use a micronizer with the air inlet being on a barb nipple such as the Waterite if you can regulate the air pressure to be just below the water pump cut-in pressure. That way it would require less flow to create suction. If you intend to use a hydro-pneumatic pressure tank and have the micronizer before it, then slaving the compressor to the pump is easier.

There is another brand of iron filter that does not need an air pump or external micronizer. It utilizes the high flow backwash to create the suction on a built-in venturi and stores the air. Whenever it needs more air, it just does another backwash. I call it a "big gulp" system. These need higher backwash rates than my well can support. Two local dealers tried to sell me on such a system but the second dealer said I have too much iron for one and needed additional contact time, (and not enough GPM for backwash) hence what I ended up with. I also have the sediment motivation issue if I draw from the well too fast which is why I opted for the micronizer as it doubles as a dole valve.

 

[LLigetfa]

Here we are about 8 months later with another update. I am seeing iron staining on the tile grout in my shower so it seems iron removal is less than perfect. I'm not sure where to put the blame on the shortfall.

Iron Filter
I did a manual backwash on the iron filter on day 3 (programmed to run ever 3rd day) to observe what the drain water looks like. The C1 backwash cycle did not start out as concentrated with iron as my old system would when it first started. At the end of the 8 minute cycle, the water was not yet clear. I don't recall how long the backwash was on the old system.

The system is set to 40/60 and the pressure was holding 30 PSI during most of the backwash but dropped to 28 just before the C4 rinse and pack which ran for 5 minutes. My understanding of the Filter AG media is that it is a simple filter and does not react with the iron so question whether a longer backwash would help or hinder the effectiveness. I think a little iron in the media begets more iron and so improves the filtering and that a bit of iron leaks through immediately after every backwash.

I switched to the alternate micronizer for the test. Either micronizer draws air up to 50 PSI with similar bypass adjustment. The other micronizer was leaking a little at the air valve. I replaced the rubber check valve but did not pull and clean the micronizer body just yet. Both tanks have adequate air. I periodically purge the air from the second (downstream) tank and observe that air from the first tank does move forward when the PSI falls well below 40 PSI. I don't know if the AVC in the first tank is removing surplus air or not during the 40/60 cycles.

When I first open the 1/2 inch blowdown valve on either HP tank, the water appears to be fairly clear, not very orange so the iron is not in suspension or settling to the bottom but mostly sticking to the side of the tank. I have a 1 inch blowdown valve just before the iron filter inlet but have not yet plumbed it to the drain so have not yet used it. The intent with it is to purge the line from the HP tank. Doing so would drop the inlet pressure to both the iron filter and softener which would cause a flow reversal in both unsettling the media pack which would necessitate a manual regen.

At this point I wonder if I need more aeration? I could reduce the 40/60 delta to 40/50 or I could reduce the micronizer bypass and run both in parallel. If more aeration is not the answer, I wonder if I should use different filter media or more of the same Filter AG? The media tank is oversized for the amount of media in it. This was done so it would be the same size as the softener. I want to avoid drawing more GPM from the well in case it motivates sand/silt/clay.

Softener
I use only Morton Rust Defense salt in the softener to keep the media clean. The softener is metered and so the regens should happen before the capacity is depleted provide that the iron is properly compensated for in the settings. I do however, have two concerns. The wife's soaker tub draws more GPM than the micronizer passes and wonder if it exceeds the service factor resulting in bleed. I also wonder if the RO filter draw is too slow for the meter to count it.

The wife does at times comment that she thinks the water is not as soft as it should be but I frankly cannot tell any difference. She does not complain about the clarity of the water as she did on the old system. This is only anecdotal with no water tests. I've told her to buy some simple hardness test strips to confirm her suspicions rather than ask my opinion. She has not.

Well
I have not cleaned out or tried developing the well further. I had asked my softener/well pump man if I could hire him to assist me last Fall but he declined, not wanting to step on well driller license/jurisdiction. I've avoided increasing the GPM draw over the Winter for fear of motivating sand/silt/clay. There is still snow and freezing overnight temps now. I have time off from work now due to COVID-19 but the shutdown might make it hard to get hired help should I need to clean out the well now.

 

[LLigetfa]

After giving this a little more thought, I am leaning towards the "flow rate" of the Filter-AG media as the likely culprit for iron getting past the filter. The wife's soaker tub filler will draw about 7.5 GPM when the water pressure is 60 PSI. The micronizer will only allow around 5 GPM so as the tub fills, the flow rate will drop to around 5 GPM as the pressure drops.

Looking at the http://www.purewaterproducts.com/articles/backwash-chart flow rates for Filter-AG, the flow rate for my 10 inch tank is 2.7 GPM while the required backwash flow rate is 4.9 GPM. It does not factor cubic feet of media. Looking at that same chart, Katalox Lite lists 5 GPM for both service flow rate and backwash. I wonder now if it would have been a better choice of media. The Waterite Model Guide chart lists normal/peak flow rate at 2/4 GPM for 1 cf of Filter-AG but does not have KL in their list. FOr 1.5 cf of Filter-AG, it lists normal/peak flow rate at 2.5/5 GPM.

I wonder if I should/could add another half cubic foot of Filter-AG or KL to the existing media? When sizing the iron filter, we went with the larger 54 inch tall tank albeit with 1 cf of media to match the height of the softener. That means I have an extra half cubic foot of freeboard space.

I could also reduce the max pressure from 60 PSI to 50 PSI*. That should reduce the starting flow rate on the tub filler. It should also increase the aeration. The air draw on the micronizer dwindles as it nears 60 PSI as noted by the sound.

*I have an electronic pressure switch that allows me to reduce the 20 PSI delta (40/60) to 10 PSI (40/50).

Lastly, I have not delved into the flow rate on the softener as to whether the 7.5 GPM is letting hardness/iron to bleed through.

 

[Reach4]

Looking at the http://www.purewaterproducts.com/articles/backwash-chart flow rates for Filter-AG, the flow rate for my 10 inch tank is 2.7 GPM while the required backwash flow rate is 4.9 GPM. It does not factor cubic feet of media. Looking at that same chart, Katalox Lite lists 5 GPM for both service flow rate and backwash. I wonder now if it would have been a better choice of media.

Their backwash rates for KL are lower than optimum. I would aim for 7 or 8. KL following some chlorine sounds more effective, rather than purely mechanical. You would get both more reaction and mechanical with KL.

https://terrylove.com/forums/index.php?attachments/img_kl10-png.45237/

I wonder if I should/could add another half cubic foot of Filter-AG or KL to the existing media? When sizing the iron filter, we went with the larger 54 inch tall tank albeit with 1 cf of media to match the height of the softener. That means I have an extra half cubic foot of freeboard space.

Maybe. Or maybe pull out 0.5 cuft of filter AG and ad 1 cuft of KL.

 

[LLigetfa]

I want to stay with simple aeration and not use chlorine.

Maybe what? Top up with more Filter AG or KL. You listed a third "maybe" option.

 

[Bannerman]

we went with the larger 54 inch tall tank albeit with 1 cf of media to match the height of the softener.

So it seems you installed 1 ft3 of media within a 10" diameter tank as opposed to the common 9" tank. Although any given flow rate across the larger tank cross section will be lower than the 9" tank, the distance from the top of the media to the tank bottom will also be less, thereby reducing the amount of contact distance (and time) through the media for iron removal to take place.

 

[LLigetfa]

the amount of contact distance (and time) through the media for iron removal to take place.

I don't think contact time is a factor for Filter-AG since there is no catalytic action, just mechanical. If you think that additional media depth would help by adding another half cubic foot, I will consider it. If you imply that the media depth for a half cubic foot of KL does not provide enough contact time since KL uses a catalytic action, then should I infer that I should replace the 1 cf of Filter-AG with 1.5 cf of KL?

 

[LLigetfa]

So it seems you installed 1 ft3 of media within a 10" diameter tank as opposed to the common 9" tank.

The decision on tank height was between my water guy and his supplier (Waterite). Waterite does not offer a 9 inch tank with Filter-AG. See attachment below. I was not consulted and don't know what drove that decision so I can only assume it was so that both tanks would be the same size for ease of plumbing and aesthetics.

When I look at the Waterite product matrix, the 10x54 tank is only listed with 1.5 cf of media but my invoice states their FAF10A which is a 10x47 tank.

 

[Reach4]

I want to stay with simple aeration and not use chlorine.

Maybe what? Top up with more Filter AG or KL. You listed a third "maybe" option.

Just weighing (1 cuft Filter-AG and 0.5 of KL) vs (0.5 cuft Filter-AG and 1.0 of KL). Air before KL should be good.

KL is denser but not by a huge amount. The top basket may be important when you up your DLFC.

 

[Bannerman]

Media manufacturers will typically specify a recommended media bed depth within their specifications. For filter AG, this is 24" - 36".

Perhaps your 10" bank's bed depth is within the 24" minimum recommendation, but the filter might perform more to your satisfaction if the bed depth is greater.

A 9" X 48" tank will usually allow 1 ft3 of media with a column height of approx 32". A 10" X 54" tank will allow 1.5 ft3 with a column height of approx 36 ". A 12" X 52" tank provides approx 34" column height for 2 ft3 of media. Each of these tanks containing the intended amount of media, will permit the column height to be closer to the 36" recommendation,

 

[LLigetfa]

Perhaps your 10" bank's bed depth is within the 24" minimum recommendation, but the filter might perform more to your satisfaction if the bed depth is greater.

Good to know and aligns with my train of thought. I don't know the cost difference between Filter-AG and KL. Also don't know the cost/benefit of adding a half cf of KL versus Filter-AG. KL looks expensive at a quick glance and probably more so in Canada.

My tanks are black so I cannot see the level of the media but ISTR a distinct sweat line before I installed jackets on them. The softener with 1.5 cf of media was significantly higher than the iron filter with just 1 cf. I did not measure the Filter-AG height but suspect it was close to 24 inches. I have no intention to remove the jackets to check.

 

[LLigetfa]

Dredging this back up, my iron filter appears to have degraded and I think it is channeling. Is channeling the correct term to describe the water flow forming a narrow channel through the media? I think this narrow "channel" increases the velocity of the water through the media, decreasing the ability to filter the iron.

I asked my water guy about adding more media and want him to do a heath assessment of the system but he side-stepped my questions and suggested the wife not fill her soaker tub with the taps wide open. That is not an option the wife would accept and I need to redirect the wife's anger onto him instead of me.

 

[Reach4]

Dredging this back up, my iron filter appears to have degraded and I think it is channeling. Is channeling the correct term to describe the water flow forming a narrow channel through the media? I think this narrow "channel" increases the velocity of the water through the media, decreasing the ability to filter the iron.

Or increasing the stream size and passing iron particles without them getting snagged.

Checked your backwashing gpm lately?

I wonder if you could do your backwash in maybe 4 pieces, with time for the pressure tank to start full each burst after the first? I don't know if the WS1 has an equivalent of the Fleck 58xx "Other" mode, where you define the sequence of events sorta freestyle.

 

[LLigetfa]

I think the DLFC is the limiting factor for backwash, not my pump/micronizer. I question the choices my water guy made in programming the filter backwash cycle but will leave it to him to tweak. The last thing I want is finger-pointing.

 

[ditttohead]

The Clack Ws1 can do up to 10 GPM with only a button change.

 

[LLigetfa]

I asked my water guy if it has a top basket but he could not answer it. I think if cutting the freeboard too close, that increasing the DLFC could drive media to the drain. My old iron filter had that problem when air from the HP tank would blend with the water during backwash. The second HP tank with shortened AVC was meant to prevent such a recurrence.

I think if it has a top basket, that it could get iron fouled over time and become more of a constriction than the DLFC. If/when I can get a commitment from my water guy to come on site to add more media, that he will assess the condition of existing media and verify adequate backwash. I will also take him to task to review the regen programming.

This is the first Summer since forklifting and I wonder if the extra water used for irrigation may have contributed to the iron filter being compromised. That however does not explain what I observed back in February. What I call "irrigation" is nothing more than a hand held spray nozzle on the end of a garden hose, not any elaborate system of sprinkler and soaker hoses as we had in the past.

 

[Bannerman]

if cutting the freeboard too close, that increasing the DLFC could drive media to the drain.

If this is the same unit that you are considering adding additional media to, if there is additional space for more media, then it would seem the freeboard is currently oversized so as to support a higher DLFC rate without concern of media loss.

You keep relying on this water guy even as it seems he is not always addressing your concerns or providing info. If there is sufficient tank space for additional media, perhaps proceed to obtain the correct type and quantity and install it yourself.

A top basket is typically not wanted in an iron removal tank for the reasons you mentioned. A diffuser or umbrella will instead deflect the incoming flow across the top of the media so there will not be a constant concentrated water stream always pouring into the same spot which will erode a hole down into the media.

Here is an example of an umbrella diffuser from Ditttohead's catalogue.
https://view.publitas.com/impact-water-products/2018-catalog-final/page/140

Perhaps a common heavy duty top basket could be modified to function as a diffuser while reducing potential for becoming blocked with iron.