Water Results Back - Need Opinions On Treatment Equipment

Discussion in 'Water Softener Forum, Questions and Answers' started by Dice, Jun 8, 2021.

  1. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    Hey guys, finally got my well water test done and here are the results:

    Iron Bacteria Present
    pH: 7.61
    Hardness: 12.35 gpg
    Iron: 3.45 ppm (seems to all be ferrous)
    Manganese: 0.02ppm

    My main goal is to disinfect, remove iron, remove sand & other sediment, and soften my water. The water guy that I had out recommend chlorination, retention tank, dechlorination unit w/ air injection, softener. All Clack heads (WS1 I believe). I wanted to see what you all thought about this equipment proposal from him because a couple parts of it do not make sense to me:

    1- 120 gal Flexlight Fiberglass Retention Tank
    1 - View Flow Filter to ensure no sand, silt or sediment goes past retention tank
    1 - 24 gpd Unidose Electromagnetic Pump w Bleeder Valve for priming
    1- 33 gal Solution Tank (Blue)
    1 - 13x54 Multimedia (Katalox + GAC) Dechlor Fully Automatic Taste & Odor Tank + Air Injection
    1 - 48,000 Grain Fully Automatic Clack Gold Wtr Sftnr with 250lb Cap Brine Tank
    Garnet as bedding media in all tanks


    What I don't understand is why I would need a spin down filter (the view flow filter) after the retention tank if 1) the retention tank will have a blow down at the bottom of it, and 2) I am going to have a dechlorination tank immediately after the retention tank filled with Katalox and Carbon. It's my understanding that Katalox can filter down to about 5 microns - is this sufficient for the sand, precipitated iron, and most other large particles..? If not, are there any other media combinations you all might recommend?

    The other part I do not understand is why he would suggest an air injection head on my dechlorination / multimedia tank? As I understand it the iron would be oxidized by chlorine in the contact tank, then be physically filtered out at the next stage. Is there a benefit to having an air injection head here that I am missing? If anything I would think this would want to be avoided, just in case, since I have bacterial iron?


    Please let me know your thoughts on his suggestions, my concerns, and any changes you all would make. Thank you very much.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2021
  2. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Occupation:
    Water systems designer, R&D, Technical Director
    Location:
    Ontario California
    Lots of problems here.

    Not sure why the air. If you do go air, please use o#, air tends to encourage bacterial issues.
    Flexlight is a pressure tank if I recall correctly, double check that.
    I would recommend the baffled tank instead. Not a fan of diaphragm pumps with chlorine, peristaltic is preferred. No priming issues. Pump tube replacement takes only a few minutes.
    Don't waste on the "view flow", get the Hydra, see video.
    Smaller chemical tank, you do not want more than a 30 day supply of chlorine.
    Don't mix KL with GAC
     
  3. Sponsor

    Sponsor Paid Advertisement

     
  4. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    Got it - 15 gal chemical tank instead of 30, double check the flex light tank, no KL with GAC, and Hydra if I want a filter like that.

    It didn't make sense to me to have air injection either, but 2 of the 3 local water companies I've consulted with suggested it which made me feel like maybe I was missing something / losing my mind. After evaluating for a few days however it really seems like it serves no purpose besides padding their quotes. Idk.

    Do diaphragm pumps with chlorine injection run into issues? Since I'm not educated on it I have no preference on pump type - I just want whatever works the most trouble free with the least maintenance (doesn't everyone).
    A baffled tank sounds great. I want to make sure all of my ferrous iron is oxidized before the water goes to the next treatment step. Do you think an 80 gal baffled tank could replace a 120 gal regular tank? What baffle factor should I be looking for to accomplish this? I can't seem to find any higher than 0.5 - 0.8 x baffle.
    I didn't see a need for the "view flow" filter , at least not installed where it was suggested to me. I would think that most large sediment would settle to the bottom of the contact tank and then I could just blow it down regularly? Then any finer sediment would be caught and backwashed out by the next treatment tank.
    I agree on the KL and GAC - not something I would want to mix together., but this was also suggested by 2 of the 3 local to me companies. I honestly do not see a need for a KL tank at all if all of my iron will be oxidized and settle to the bottom of the contact tank before the next treatment step. Am I missing something here?

    Please let me ask you if this set up is something that would work well to solve my iron bacteria, ferrous iron, minor sediment, and hardness issues:

    Chlorine injection (15 gal chemical tank with whatever pump works best), then into contact / retention tank with blowdown port (preferably a baffled tank to more thoroughly & quickly disinfect water and oxidize all iron), then into a backwashing catalytic carbon tank possibly mixed with a small amount of another media (not sure what type - KDF 85? Clinoptilolite?) for finer sediment removal (10-5 micron maybe?) and to oxidize any ferrous iron that may have slipped past the contact tank, then into a 48k softener. The water companies I've worked with around here seem to prefer the Clack control valves with 1" internals. They make it sound great in terms of flow rate, reliability, and maintenance, but again this is not my area of expertise at all.

    I greatly appreciate all of your input with this. I've been a lurker on this forum for a while and you seem to always have pertinent suggestions and knowledge!
     
  5. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    One thing I forgot was that one company suggested chlorinating the well itself. I have a submerged pump and pressure tank system. Could this cause problems of oxidized build up in the pressure tank or corrosion of parts in the pressure tank or well casing?
     
  6. water pro

    water pro Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2020
    Location:
    syracuse
    avoid oxidizing iron in the well. no point in pushing rust through your pump and well line, or having it accumulate in your well.
     
    Dice likes this.
  7. water pro

    water pro Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2020
    Location:
    syracuse
    you want a peristaltic pump imo. stay away from baffle tanks. they don't provide enough contact time. been there. done that. GAC will work fine. no catalytic needed.
     
  8. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    That's two votes for peristaltic pumps - works for me. I'll be sure to make that change.

    Based on ditttohead's suggestion and everything that I've read about them, a baffled retention tank sounds like it would be the better way to go if it provides more thorough mixing.
    Let me ask: let's say I get a larger 120 gal baffled retention tank instead of a smaller 80 gal baffled tank to replace a 120 non baffled tank - you would still recommend sticking with the non baffled tank? I thought that baffled tanks only provided more thorough / quicker mixing but the same amount of total possible contact time of a retention tank of the same size?
     
  9. water pro

    water pro Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2020
    Location:
    syracuse
    of the same size. ditto head may have more experience with baffled tanks.
     
  10. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    Okay, gotcha. Thank you for your input.
     
  11. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Occupation:
    Water systems designer, R&D, Technical Director
    Location:
    Ontario California
    Baffling is extremely beneficial. A non baffled tank is much smaller than it claims. Condsider the flow path of water through a tank, It is going to flow in the path of least resistance which is the shortest distance. Baffling forces the water to go in multiple direction thereby utiliaing the majority of the tanks actual space rather than just a small portion of it. In a regular tank, the water flows from the bottom of the tank to the top, the flow is almost exclusively up the middle of the tank. In a baffled tank, the water is diverted in multiple directions forcing the water to use more of the tank. In general a properly design 80 gallon baffled tank will outperform a standard 300 gallon non baffled tank.
    upload_2021-6-17_15-45-21.png
     
    Dice likes this.
  12. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    Do you think that a static mixer ahead of a regular contact tack would be sufficient for most cases?

    Excuse my ignorance in this next question, but to remove oxidized iron I was wondering why a simple spin down filter, such as the Hydra like you guys have suggested, wouldn't suffice instead of a big 'ol katalox backwashing tank? Too much iron going through it to be effective?
    I ask because the increased pH in KL treated water has me concerned. Any other viable options to filter out my oxidized iron besides Birm, Greensand, Filox? Since ferric iron is a particulate shouldn't I just need a sediment filter.. Must be something I'm missing here.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2021
  13. ditttohead

    ditttohead Water systems designer, R&D

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Occupation:
    Water systems designer, R&D, Technical Director
    Location:
    Ontario California
    For H2o2 or ozone a static mixer can be a good solution, for chlorine, not so much. Chlorine needs time for effective bacterial kill.
    KL is somewhat problematic sometimes for pH rise. As to the spindown, simply way too small. It would need to be cleaned constantly and the spindown filters have too high of a micron size to effectively reduce the ferric iron. Many customer us clinoptilolite effectively which is he base of KL. The manganese dioxide ore coated materials Birm, MTM, Greensand+ Filter-OX, KL) , or pure Manganese Dioxide ore (Pyrolox, Filox, Etc) will catch ferric iron and can revert ferrour iron to the ferric state, something Cliniptilolite cant do. So long as you completely convert the iron from the ferric to the ferrous state prior to the clinop system, it can be very effective.
     
  14. Dice

    Dice New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2021
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    I see. That all makes perfect sense. I had a suggestion from a local company to just use the backwashing carbon filter to remove the ferric iron. Would this be effective or would it not catch the iron or would it foul the carbon extremely quickly do you think?

    Thank you again for all of your help.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2021
Similar Threads: Water Results
Forum Title Date
Water Softener Forum, Questions and Answers Well Water Test Results - Softener Sugestion Aug 6, 2021
Water Softener Forum, Questions and Answers Well Water test results. Jun 17, 2021
Water Softener Forum, Questions and Answers Water Results Back--What do you Suggest? Jun 10, 2021
Water Softener Forum, Questions and Answers Water test results in..need help Dec 24, 2020
Water Softener Forum, Questions and Answers Help Calculating Grains Per Gallon - Water Results Inside Nov 30, 2020

Share This Page