Help Me Design An Efficient & Responsible Water Softening System

Which Fleck Valve Should I Source to Achieve Maximum Performance & Efficiency for My Application?

  • Fleck 5600SXT - Downflow Regen, Single Backwash Cam

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 5600SXT - Downflow Regen, Double Backwash Cam

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 5600SXT - Upflow Regen, Single Backwash Cam

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 7000SXT - Downflow Regen, Single/Double Backwash

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 6700XTR - Downflow Regen, Single Backwash Cam

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 6700XTR - Downflow Regen, Double Backwash Cam

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 6700XTR - Upflow Regen, Single Backwash Cam

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 5810SXT - Upflow/Downflow Regen, Single/Double Backwash

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Fleck 5810XTR2 - Upflow/Downflow Regen, Single/Double Backwash

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other - Reference Recommendation in Comments

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .

Users who are viewing this thread

schwartzy18510

New Member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
Hello All,

First post by a brand-spanking-new forum member here. I am in the planning stages of my first water softener install, and while researching several of the finer elements of designing and sourcing a water softening system, I repeatedly came across threads within this forum in Google search results.

My knowledge base on the topic has been expanded exponentially already by the information shared in past threads by venerable members of this forum, particularly user ditttohead. I opted to join up given the knowledge base here in the hopes of both gaining and sharing knowledge in the years to come.

This will be a rather long-winded post, as I have some rather specific requirements in mind and have already performed what I hope to be much of the advance homework and elementary research involved. In the interest of respecting the time of the subject matter experts here, I'll attempt to provide as much information as I can regarding what I have learned already and what I'm considering at this point.

Pertinent Data
The subject residence consists of a 1,528 square foot 3 BR, 2 BA one-story home, inhabited currently by myself, my wife, and my infant son. We do have plans to completely finish the full basement (currently partially finished) in future by adding another 2 BR, 1 BA and an additional kitchen on our way to another three children, God willing. This would double the current 1,528 square footage.

Indoor water usage is approximately 62.5 gallons/day currently. Main water supply is a private well, pertinent content from an independent third-party chemical lab test outlined below:
  1. Hardness - 21.8 gpg
  2. Manganese - .03 mg/L
  3. Iron - .01 mg/L (equivalent of .172 gpg)
  4. pH - 7.6 S.U.
  5. TDS - 500 mg/L
My main water supply line from the well is 1", but it is currently downsized to 3/4" just after my pressure tank. I've found that the house currently isn't plumbed to code due to the fact that there are no shutoff valves other than the one on the main, which is maddening. We also suffer from poor water pressure when one or more fixtures are running, as there are no dedicated fixture end-runs and all existing fixture supply lines consist of (very) long runs of 1/2" pex.

Aside from this knowledge, I will need to plumb in two sediment filters and an unsoftened water bypass to the outdoor hose bibs, split the existing fridge water supply from that of the kitchen sink, move the pressure tank to the opposite side of the basement, and plumb in a utility closet with connections for a tankless water heater, utility sink, clothes washer, future bath, and kitchen.

I therefore plan on simply redoing all of the existing supply line plumbing during the course of this project. I could potentially utilize 3/4" or 1" line through the softener all the way to my main cold water line manifold prior to fixture end-runs (w/shutoffs!). I plan to bypass the softener with a main supply line to an "untreated" water manifold which will feed end runs to my two outdoor hose bibs and the ice/water dispenser on my fridge, where we obtain all of our drinking water.

I also plan to install a spin-down sediment filter upstream of the softener and a dual grade 50/5 micron Big Blue sediment filter downstream from the softener, with pressure gauges before and after. The main idea with the downstream filter is to protect against potential resin loss from the softener making its way into the plumbing and fixtures.

I grew up with hard water and am used to its effects, and we've lived in this house for six years now with the existing hard water. The primary reason for pursuing a water treatment solution at this point is the desire to replace our 18-year-old (!!) electric tank-style water heater (from whence I just shop-vac'ed 62 pounds of mineral sediment) with a natural gas-fired tankless unit. Of secondary consideration is the ability to better wash cloth diapers without additional, expensive softening agents and detergents.

Background & Environmental Circumstances
First, some background for sake of context. My wife and I do our best to be environmentally responsible, particularly as affects water use. While Michigan by and large doesn't struggle with the drought conditions of the southwestern states, we do live in a unique area of southwest Michigan which consists of primarily sandy soils. The soil composition and climate provide the perfect growing conditions for seed corn, as the sandy soils eliminate the possibility of poor crops due to overwatering. However, also due to said sandy soils, irrigation is commonplace.

Random fact - our county alone produces 10% of the nation's seed corn, and is home to not only the Seed Corn Capital of the World but also the largest-in-the-world flagship processing facilities of seed corn giants Pioneer and DeKalb (Monsanto). There are more irrigated acres of cropland in our county than the rest of the state combined, as well as in any other county east of the Mississippi.

All of this seed corn production and the accompanying irrigation has resulted in some local water supply concerns. For example, the spring-fed private lake within our HOA has been suffering from significant year-over-year drops in water level for much of the last two decades. We recently commissioned an aerial survey of high-capacity irrigation wells and identified 101 such wells within a 2.5 square mile radius.

These circumstances serve as stark reminders for us to curtail our environmental footprint regarding water use as far as is reasonably possible.

System Type Selection
With the above context in mind, my wife and I waffled for some time on whether to install a salt-free descaling or conditioning system rather than a salt-based softening system due to both the water usage of a salt-based system during regeneration as well as the salt brine discharge into the water table.

Ultimately, after exhaustively researching and reading user reviews for most if not all of the primary salt-free descaling and water conditioning systems (including Clearwave, Eddy, EasyWater, Nuvo H2O, Evo Clear, Pelican, and Aquasana) we came to the conclusion that the extreme hardness of our water likely precludes satisfactory results being achieved from most if not all of these alternative systems.

Calculating the Environmental Impact of a Salt-Based Softener
To garner an idea of exactly how much environmental impact a salt-based softener would have for our situation, I spent several weeks sifting through innumerable forum posts, industry publications, technical considerations, and sizing guides in order to get a handle on determining appropriate salt-based softener size for our application.

After determining what I believe to be ideal system size, I created several mock regeneration schedules based on our water content, water usage patterns, and intended salt efficiency. I then cross-referenced this data with technical specs from several models to calculate water efficiency and gallons used per regeneration. Ultimately I was able to create what I believe to be a fairly accurate estimate of potential annual water and salt consumption.

My current plan involves sourcing a 48,000 grain (1.5 cu. ft. of resin) unit which, according to my calculations, should regenerate approximately every 20 days at a 5 lb. salt dose per cu. ft. of resin (salt efficiency of 4,000 grains/lb.) and a 5% (24-hour) reserve.

This results in estimated salt consumption of .34063 lb/day, 7.12 lb/regen, and 124 lb/year, with estimated water consumption of 3.27 gal/day, 65.4 gal/regen and 1,140 gal/year (Note: calculations do not include the advertised 30% backwash water savings offered by a Vortech tank - more on this later). This amount of salt and water consumption results in an increase of TDS in regeneration wastewater of 131%, from 500 ppm to 1153 ppm.

The above estimates put daily water consumption attributed to the softening process at about 5.2% of our daily household consumption, a number my wife and I can live with in exchange for all the benefits of soft water and the ability to install a tankless water heater which will, in turn, have a much lower environmental footprint than our current tank-style unit.

(Post 1 of 4)
 
Last edited:

schwartzy18510

New Member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
System Size Considerations
After performing some initial calculations in the early phases of this project, somewhat oversizing the softener to lower regeneration frequency stood out to me as a primary means of potentially increasing salt and water efficiency. The oft-recommended regeneration frequency of every 7 days within the industry raised my eyebrows, as even for my somewhat lean household regarding water use this would lead to quite high levels of salt and water consumption.

That said, I've also read plenty about the risks and inefficiencies caused by oversizing a softener for an intended application. It seems that the primary risks with doing so are two-fold, consisting of fouling the resin (caused by water with iron and/or sediment content) and channeling due to low flow rates.

Based on my water lab test results, I don't think I'll have an issue with resin fouling due to iron, and I plan on combating any sediment present with a spin-down sediment filter upstream of the softener. I think the channeling issue has a much higher chance of being an issue for my application. I've installed low-flow water fixtures throughout my house, with the current list of fixtures outlined below:
  • (2) Toilets - 1.6 gpf (w/bolt-on Luxe bidets installed) (plan to replace with dual-flush .9 gpf units soon)
  • (2) Showerheads - 0 - 1.5 gpm (adjustable)
  • (2) Bathroom Sink Aerators - .5 gpm
  • (1) Kitchen Sink Aerator - .5 / 1.0 / 1.5 gpm (adjustable)
  • (1) Energy Star-rated Dishwasher - 3.3 gal/cycle
  • (1) Energy Star-rated Clothes washer - 10 gal/cycle
  • (1) Energy Star-rated Refrigerator - w/ ice and water dispenser
While I've calculated theoretical maximum flow rate requirements approaching 7 gpm currently (two showers on max, kitchen sink on max, dishwasher and clothes washer filling) with the potential to rise to 8.5 gpm in future (additional 1.5 gpm shower to be installed in finished basement once kids are older), realistic flow rate is currently much more likely to live within a range of .5 - 1.6 gpm 95% of the time, with the majority of usage at a rate of 1.0 - 1.5 gpm (kitchen sink or shower) or 1.6 gpm (toilet).

I've read that in order to limit channeling, you should size a system to flow at least 3 gpm per square foot of resin bed area. Most 48,000 grain (1.5 cu. ft. resin) units come with a 10" x 54" resin tank, which translates to an ideal flow rate of 1.975 gpm to combat channeling. This obviously exceeds my realistic flow rate of approximately 1.5 gpm, which has me concerned.

However, if I look at stepping down to a 40,000 grain (1.25 cu. ft. resin) unit with a 9" diameter tank, sacrificing regeneration frequency for less risk of channeling, the ideal flow rate is still 1.78 gpm. I'd have to move all the way down to a 24,000 grain (.75 cu. ft. resin) unit on an 8" diameter tank to even get close (1.58 gpm) to the ideal range to limit channeling, and even then I may still see some. At this point I don't think we're willing to use the additional salt and water that would be required for the much higher regeneration frequency.

In the interest of doing what I can to source a system capable of combating channeling, I'm strongly considering the $80 upcharge for a Vortech tank to enable better mixing / fluidization of the resin bed during regeneration, which from what I have read may also help combat channeling through the resin bed during service while reducing backwash water use. I have read up on the arguments both in favor of and against the Vortech tanks, including the risk of the distributor tube coming out of position and forcing the need for tank replacement. I've also read a bit on turbulator options as an alternative.

My plan to install a tankless water heater, combined with the planned length of time between regenerations, has me concerned with channeling and hardness bleed-through. One of my primary concerns at this point pertains to the risk of channeling, so input on methods by which I can mitigate this would be quite welcome. Advice on whether a Vortech tank would be beneficial for my specific circumstances would also be welcome, as I am not settled on this point.

(Post 2 of 4)
 
Last edited:

schwartzy18510

New Member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
Valve Features & Impact On System Efficiency
Our estimated water and salt consumption (if correct) will be far below U.S. average for our household size. However, due to the aforementioned environmental considerations, the fact that I will be discharging regeneration wastewater into my septic tank (another topic for another day), as well as the fact that I am an optimizer by nature (inefficiency keeps me up at night), I am looking for a control valve which will enable me to configure and operate a salt-based softener with the highest possible salt and water efficiency.

I've therefore done significant research on options or features such as meter-based regeneration, upflow regeneration, double backwash, proportional brining, variable regeneration, dual tank systems, distributor plates, turbulators, and Vortech tanks. It is on these perhaps finer points that I am primarily in need of advice and input, given the aggressive goals I have in mind for my system.

Meter-based Regeneration

This feature is a given for me as opposed to timer-based systems. I'd like to optimize my salt and water use as far as is possible, so the Fleck SXT, XTR, or XTR2 controllers which enable tweaking individual regen step cycle times are what I'm considering, independent of specific valve model.

Upflow (Counter-Current) Regeneration
When I first read about the concept of upflow regeneration, it seemed like a no-brainer. Tack on some marketing materials from online vendors associated with the new upflow regen Genesis systems and it looked like a home run, particularly given the fact that I plan to install a tankless water heater which will require low hardness bleed for optimum longevity.

Then I started reading about some of the additional complexities which counter-current regen adds to a system - packed bed, top basket, heavy duty screen, and special resin requirements. Yikes. Additional reading turned up information that in practice, upflow regen is not nearly as efficient as it is in theory, and that its primary benefit is simply to ensure less hardness bleed-through rates due to the "final finisher" aspect of the most highly regenerated resin being at the bottom of the bed.

That said, I still have questions on the concept of upflow regeneration:
  1. Is a packed bed strictly necessary for technical reasons in a counter-current regen situation, or is it simply desirable in order to fully capture the brine efficiency and final polisher effects of the lowest portion of the resin bed being the most highly recharged?
    • I ask only because I have seen several online sellers of full softener systems which included the Fleck 5600SXT valve configured for upflow regen, but have seen no references to these systems including a packed bed tank. I should probably contact these sellers with a follow-up question to this effect.
  2. I have found literally zero online sellers who advertise Fleck-based softener systems possessing packed beds. Any idea where I could source a packed-bed tank for use with a Fleck valve?
    • If not, would it be possible to fabricate my own packed bed using any readily available resin tank?
  3. Is resin loss during backwash in a counter-current regen scenario a valid concern?
    • If so, would an upper basket prove sufficient to prevent this in an unpacked bed?
  4. Would adjusting the backwash gpm settings be a workable solution to prevent over-fluidization of an unpacked bed in an upflow regen scenario?
  5. Is it possible / recommended to utilize undersized backwash injectors in upflow regen scenarios lacking packed beds in order to avoid over-fluidization of the resin bed?
  6. Can upflow regen reduce or eliminate the ability to utilize water pressure to drain a water softener vertically? I'm looking at a vertical lift of 5-6' and a horizontal run of 2-3x that to tie in to my main drain line currently.
Would upflow regeneration be a good fit for my application given my planned regeneration frequency and plan to install a tankless water heater? Would it be worth the additional complexity for sake of the efficiency and/or performance gains?

Double Backwash
If upflow regen becomes too complex/involved/expensive or if I can't find readily find a valve configured for it, I've read that double backwash in a downflow regen environment offers some of the same benefits (particularly for high efficiency applications with salt dosage levels under 8 lbs.) at the expense of some additional water use.

This may present a good fall-back option for my scenario if upflow regeneration comes off the table. What are thoughts on the usefulness of this feature, particularly at combating channeling for my particular situation?

Proportional Brining
The concept of proportional brining initially struck me as a perfect mechanism to enable me to protect my future tankless water heater from occasional hard water exposure by setting a plentiful reserve capacity for the softener while not sacrificing any salt or water efficiency, as any unused reserve capacity would simply be subtracted from the brine strength used for the next regeneration. Since I don't have a need for soft water 24/7, this feature seems as if it would be a great way to save the additional expense of investing in a dual-tank setup operated by the Fleck 9100SXT, which would provide an equally-efficient no-reserve scenario.

An industry publication article mentioned that the primary benefits of proportional brining are captured with counter-current or upflow regeneration, and that if used in downflow or co-current regeneration, periodic full regenerations are recommended to make up for lost capacity. I've had a few others weigh in on this who have expressed related reservations, stating that proportional brining "provides some salt efficiency at the expense of softener performance and reliability. This requires water to be added to the brine tank a couple of hours prior to regeneration, which results in a weak brine (It takes 48 hours to get saturated brine in a stagnant tank). That weak brine is less capable of regenerating the softener, resulting in more hardness bleed."

Are these concerns regarding performance and reliability valid? How well does proportional brining work in practice in both upflow and downflow applications? Would it serve as a useful replacement for the no-reserve capacity scenario offered by dual-tank setups, without the additional upfront investment? Or does the weakened performance due to unsaturated brine make the entire feature efficiency-neutral?

Variable Regeneration
Variable regeneration, defined as the ability of a valve to automatically adjust reserve capacity based on actual water use, seems like a nice "auto-pilot" feature which would help reduce efficiency losses due to artificially high reserve capacity settings in set-it-and-forget-it situations. Not sure how useful it would be for me, as I plan to monitor my gallon usage closely and adjust my reserve capacity if needed. Thoughts on practicality?

(Post 3 of 4)
 
Last edited:

schwartzy18510

New Member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
Valve Type & Configuration Options
Now for the options outlined in the above poll. Fleck and Clack control valves both appear to be highly recommended for mid-level residential use. That said, it appears that Clack's decision to sell only to dealers makes availability for DIY'ers such as myself a major issue. In the interest of not being beholden to a dealer for parts or service, I've ruled Clack out.

Fleck 5600SXT
I believe the Fleck 5600SXT valve would ultimately work well for my application despite not necessarily checking all of the boxes on my initial wish list, as I believe the standard unit is a downflow regen model with no double backwash, proportional brining, or variable regen options.

However, I've read that the 5600SXT can be purchased in either upflow or downflow configuration, and can be converted to possess double backwash capability via a relatively cheap cam replacement. That said, after perusing all available versions of the product manual I see no reference to a proportional brining feature which would eliminate waste associated with any remaining unused reserve upon regeneration.

Fleck 7000SXT
The Fleck 7000SXT offers higher internal porting (which I likely will never need, but you never know), is said to have superior build quality, does not require a separate cam for double backwash compatibility, and enables soft water refill. In addition, page 8 of the product manual for the Watts version references proportional (variable) brining as an available feature.

However, I've also read that the 7000SXT is available configured only for downflow regeneration, and it has been discontinued by Pentair leaving me subject to end-of-life and replacement part availability concerns.

Fleck 6700XTR
At an advanced point in my homework I stumbled upon a reference to another Fleck control valve, the 6700XTR, which offers upflow regeneration with proportional brining and is available in versions offering either single or double backwash. For good measure, the display is a handy-dandy two-line 16-digit display, eliminating the guesswork and manual consultation requirements of the SXT valve controllers.

At first blush, this valve looked like everything I could ever want or need. That said, the 6700XTR model didn't seem to be nearly as popular as the 5600SXT, and I could/can find little information or reviews on it online. After some additional digging, I found that it appears the Fleck 6700XTR was discontinued by Pentair as of March 31st, 2016. It is still available for sale from some online vendors, though my chances of finding upflow configuration Model #42134 available in combination with a Vortech tank and a packed resin bed probably aren't very high.

Any information on the performance of this model would be helpful, including what risk I would be taking by ordering a valve which has been deemed end-of-life.

Fleck 5800-Series
Pentair recommends the Fleck 5800-series valves as a replacement for those interested in the Fleck 6700XTR. The 5800 series appear to be marketed as a more modern replacement for the 5600 series, and come in three different port sizes (5800, 5810, and 5812 series) with three different controllers available (LTX, SXT, XTR2).

It appears all of these models are available in upflow configurations and no longer require cam replacements to enable the double backwash option, but only the XTR2 touchscreen controller appears to offer proportional brining capability, while checking in at nearly twice the price of the Fleck 5600SXT.

In addition, Pentair appears to have made the decision to market the new 5800-series valves only to dealers, making them unavailable through online retailers or resellers and limiting their availability to the DIY community.

Genesis Upflow
I have also researched the Genesis brand valves, which at first blush appear to check all of the proverbial boxes. However, after consulting the product manuals I've found that Genesis has overly simplified the user programming to the point that I am concerned I would not be able to fine-tune my salt and water efficiency as needed for a high performing system.

The Fleck 5600SXT programming provides the end user much more control, at the expense of bordering on the complex. For my situation, I far prefer the additional control offered by the Fleck rather than the simplification of the Genesis.

Other
Is there any other Fleck control valve or valve version on the market currently which possesses a combination of features which you believe would be best for my specific situation?

Any and all help is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time (and patience)!

(Post 4 of 4)
 
Last edited:
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

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.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks