Lost with softeners - please help!

Users who are viewing this thread

invernite

New Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Chicago Area
Hello,

I've been browsing this forum and am hoping to get some help from all the expertise on this board. We recently moved into our new home and have hard water (31 gpg hardness, 0.25-0.5 iron). I've been trying to buy a water softener and filtration system and am thoroughly lost - as a consumer it's worse than shopping for a mattress!

I've spoken to a couple of large companies in the area - one sells Kinetico and Fleck (though I thought Fleck only makes valves and not entire system), and the other sells EcoWater and Hellenbrand. Unfortunately they all throw around a lot of marketing jargon and acronyms that, to a consumer that knows nothing about water softeners, do nothing other than confuse customers. Both firms are pitching $5,000 systems (including the water softener, carbon filtration system - either built in, or separate - and under-counter RO for the kitchen). This amount is well outside of the budget - we had never imagined it would cost so much for home water treatment!

We are on city water (it's actually a large community well). Are the $5,000 top of the line systems really worth the price? Does downflow vs. upflow really make much of a difference? One company says two tanks are absolutely great because we'll never have hard water and regeneration is on demand (more salt & water efficiency), and the other says I don't really need two tanks (unless I need 24-hours soft water), and that the newer valves all regenerate on demand. Neither one is clearly telling me what the capacity they're recommending is, but from the conversation I'm putting together that one is suggesting 64K grains and the other 32K grains.

I feel like I'm being pushed to whatever they want to sell and unfortunately don't know how to make a well-informed purchase. I'm hoping that I can get unbaised advice here on what makes sense for our family. The summary info is:

Community well
6 people in the house
Average use of about 300 gallons per day (based off water usage statements over the last year at our last home)
30-31 gpg hardness
0.25-0.5 iron

All help is GREATLY appreciated!
 

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,798
Reaction score
4,412
Points
113
Location
IL
I've spoken to a couple of large companies in the area - one sells Kinetico and Fleck (though I thought Fleck only makes valves and not entire system)
Pentair, which owns Fleck, also makes tanks, and other stuff too.

Fleck-based systems can be repaired by many people, but Kintetico parts are closely restricted.

I'm putting together that one is suggesting 64K grains and the other 32K grains.
2 cubic ft ("64000") is undersized. That would regenerate about every 4 days.
 

invernite

New Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Chicago Area
Thanks for the lightening fast response, Reach4!

2 cubic ft ("64000") is undersized. That would regenerate about every 4 days.

Based on that, sounds like the 1 cubic ft system (32000) is off the table. Forgive the ignorance, but I thought that 2.5 cubic ft is the largest made. If so, would that be enough for our application? If not, what would a customer that needs a bigger system do? Simply have more frequent regenerations? Or look at twin tank solutions (although you'd likely still have frequent regenerations)?

Based on what I've been able to learn online I came up with the following math: 300 gal x (31 gpg hardness + 2 gpg for the iron) = about 10,000 grains/day. Allowing for 30% excess (just in case) gives about 13K gains/day. Does that seem right?

Oh yes, one more details. We have 1.5" piping for the softener already in place.
 

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,798
Reaction score
4,412
Points
113
Location
IL
Based on that, sounds like the 1 cubic ft system (32000) is off the table. Forgive the ignorance, but I thought that 2.5 cubic ft is the largest made. If so, would that be enough for our application? If not, what would a customer that needs a bigger system do? Simply have more frequent regenerations? Or look at twin tank solutions (although you'd likely still have frequent regenerations)?
The 14 x 65 tank is good for 3.0 cu. ft. "96000". You might need a step stool to program it. Even that would be a little smallish for you.

The Fleck 9100 2-tank may be your best bet.
 

invernite

New Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Chicago Area
The 14 x 65 tank is good for 3.0 cu. ft. "96000". You might need a step stool to program it. Even that would be a little smallish for you.

The Fleck 9100 2-tank may be your best bet.

Would that be the Fleck 9100 valve with two, 2 cu. ft. tanks? Or should I be thinking either smaller or larger tanks? Also, will that setup require one or two brine tanks? I'm hoping we'll have the space for everything that's needed. Finally, I'll double check whether we have 1.25" or 1.5" pipe, but will that work or will a reducer be needed? My understanding is that a reducer would reduce water pressure throughout the house?
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,088
Reaction score
455
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
A 9100 would be good but a 16x52 (3 FT) system is our preferred design. Similar height to a standard system, no step stool needed. Does your house plumbing have accommodations for the softener? Is it pre-plumbed for POE water treatment?
 

invernite

New Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Chicago Area
A 9100 would be good but a 16x52 (3 FT) system is our preferred design. Similar height to a standard system, no step stool needed. Does your house plumbing have accommodations for the softener? Is it pre-plumbed for POE water treatment?

Thanks for the feedback. So you're suggesting a single 3 cu. ft. tank over a twin tank setup using two, 2 cu. ft. tanks?

I'm pretty sure our house plumbing has accommodations for the softener. I've attached a picture for your review. The builder has put two 1.25" pipes for the softener to be connected to.

I am concerned that many valves I see have either 0.75" or 1" inlets. Since this would require a reducer from our current 1.25" pipes, what kind of water pressure drop might we see as a result? I believe the fixtures themselves aren't as big as 1.25" so that may be the limiting factor, but if multiple fixtures are running at the same time, perhaps the softener will become the constraint? Any thoughts with respect to water pressure are greatly appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • 20180504_104610.jpg
    20180504_104610.jpg
    131.2 KB · Views: 342

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,798
Reaction score
4,412
Points
113
Location
IL
A 9100 would be good but a 16x52 (3 FT) system is our preferred design. Similar height to a standard system, no step stool needed. Does your house plumbing have accommodations for the softener? Is it pre-plumbed for POE water treatment?
At 31 grains *1.3 compensation * 300 gallons per day, I figure 3.5 cubic ft would give 6.95 days with 8 pounds/cuft of salt.

That does not include any iron compensation. If the water is chlorinated, the iron will have settled out before it gets to the house.

What about a 16x65 tank with a step stool? I figure 4 or 4.5 cuft of resin.
 
Last edited:

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,088
Reaction score
455
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
Considering the minimal salt savings with a twin alternating design compared to the cost and complexity, the 3-3.5 cf single is a push compared to the twin alternating. Twin would technically be more correct but if the homeowner is relatively conservative with water usage they would see their days between regeneration go to something closer to 7-9 days.

Does your house have low flow fixtures? 1.2 or less gpf toilets? Or do you have mega shower heads and old laundry units? If you have modernized to the more efficient appliances and your fixtures are all modern low flow designs you would typically be closer to 40 gallons per person per day.
 

invernite

New Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Chicago Area
Considering the minimal salt savings with a twin alternating design compared to the cost and complexity, the 3-3.5 cf single is a push compared to the twin alternating. Twin would technically be more correct but if the homeowner is relatively conservative with water usage they would see their days between regeneration go to something closer to 7-9 days.

Does your house have low flow fixtures? 1.2 or less gpf toilets? Or do you have mega shower heads and old laundry units? If you have modernized to the more efficient appliances and your fixtures are all modern low flow designs you would typically be closer to 40 gallons per person per day.

Our house has the following: all 1.28 gpf toilets, all showers are 1.75 gpm @ 80 psi, except the master, which also has a rain shower that's 2.5 gpm. All bath faucets are 1.2gpm. 6 people in the house using 4 bathrooms. Laundry machines are new (yet to be delivered).

I looked at our water bills at the last house over the last 18 months and we average about 9,000 gallons/month, or about 300 gallons/day. With that, iron of 0.5 ppm, and a hardness of 30-31 gpg, I figure I need 300*33 = about 10,000 grains/day. So a 3 cu.ft. would provide 96,000 grains, and a regen cycle about every 9-10 days?

Not sure how to factor in the best salt and water efficiency into that analysis in terms of tank sizing. I've read that going with a slightly larger tank and using a little less salt is more efficient, but I don't understand the dynamics of that well enough to incorporate into my analysis.
 

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,798
Reaction score
4,412
Points
113
Location
IL
Understand that, in effect, the grain number is really a convention to indicate resin volume at the rate of 32000 per cuft of resin. If somebody started that today, it might be called a serious exaggeration. However this has been done for years and years and years. So now it is a convention.
So 3.5 cuft would be called 112000 and 4 would be called 128000.

If you used enough salt to get that much capacity out of a cubic ft of resin, that would take about 16 pounds of salt per cuft. At half that dosing (8 pounds per cuft) you get 24000 of actual softening. So 3/4 of the softening from half of the salt. That was the dosing I used in my calculations.

At 6 pounds/cuft, you get 20000.

Also there is a high-hardness compensation factor.

With your setup, you can self-install yourself pretty easily, other than getting stuff down the basement stairs.

Cut off the copper caps at the bottom of the pipes. Remove any burrs from the cut. Push on the connectors on the full-flow Falcon stainless steel lines.... Still gotta place the brine tank. Run the brine tubing to the brine tank. Run the drain line to a drain place or maybe to an air gap to share the washing machine standpipe if you have one downstairs. A floor drain works.
With a 14 inch diameter tank, the backwash rate will be 7 gpm. Like a 5/8 inch garden hose at full blast but no nozzle.
 
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