Water Treatment Advice

Users who are viewing this thread

Joseph Shelton

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
Hello all,

I'm looking to DIY install a water softener and filtration system at a home with well water I just bought in Michigan. This is my first time installing one so I'm looking for advice on the best way to accomplish what I want to do.

The test results attached are drawn through the kitchen sink after about 10 mins of flow, the water is untreated and coming straight from the well/pressure tank.

Goal: Soften the water, remove iron and remove slight rotten egg smell so that my wife is happy with the smell/taste of the water. And also to remove the arsenic that is present in the well water so it is safe for the little ones.

For sizing the softener I calculated the hardness at around 21 grains and I'm sizing the system for a family of four. So 4 people * 70 gal per day * 21 grains = 5,880 grains per day, which yields 41,160 grains per week. So for a regen cycle of once per week and oversized for better efficiency I figured a 64k grain softener with 2.0 cu.ft of resin would be the ideal choice. I was looking at the AFW Iron Pro2 softener (link), which I believe should also be able to effectively remove the 0.88ppm iron from the water.

For the Arsenic and rotten egg smell I was looking at the Express Water Heavy Metal Whole House Filter System (link). My thought here is that this would be after the pressure tank and before the softener. So it would function as the intake sediment filter and then this system uses a KDF85 for the middle cartridge, which I hope will remove Arsenic from the water. My understanding is that KDF85 only effectively removes one of two species of Arsenic that could be present in the water. So if there is any remaining post filter I will install a point of use RO system in the kitchen.

So overall system plan.

Well -> Pressure tank -> 3 Stage Filter with KDF85 -> 64k softener / iron filter -> house

Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    144.5 KB · Views: 178

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,892
Reaction score
4,435
Points
113
Location
IL
Well -> Pressure tank -> 3 Stage Filter with KDF85 -> 64k softener / iron filter -> house
A backwashing iron filter before the softener can help deal with your H2S (almost never tested for, but the nose knows), arsenic, as well as the iron. For a backwashing filter, it is usually important that your pump can supply the required gpm.

KL is a popular media. It requires enough backwash rate, and the lowest prescribed numbers don't seem to be sufficient. My iron+H2S backwashing filter only takes 5 gpm backwash. It injects a bleach solution through the media during each regeneration every 3 days. I don't have a prescription for you. My iron is less than yours. H2S was my main motivation. As it turned out, the arsenic was removed to below the test sensitivity. Unlike you, my raw water arsenic was below the MCL level, but it was a pleasant surprise to see it gone.

A softener can remove that much iron, but will not deal with arsenic.

KDF85 in cartridges? I don't know -- I never studied KDF. Will that deal with arsenic or H2S? I would think you would want backwashing of that media too. KDF media are heavy, and require a lot of gpm per square ft.
 
Last edited:

Joseph Shelton

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
Thanks for the info.

I estimated my pump flow rate to be around 14 gallons per minute by measuring the volume of water pumped into the pressure tank during a pump cycle. I think this should be enough to support a backwashing iron filter of some shape or size.

When you say KL media, that is Katalox correct?
 

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,892
Reaction score
4,435
Points
113
Location
IL
Thanks for the info.

I estimated my pump flow rate to be around 14 gallons per minute by measuring the volume of water pumped into the pressure tank during a pump cycle. I think this should be enough to support a backwashing iron filter of some shape or size.

When you say KL media, that is Katalox correct?
Yes, Katalox Light.

Your pressure tank test would have to include draining the tank with the pump off. You don't use the nominal tank size, but the actual drawdown to the point where you hear the pressure switch click back on.

Designs that inject some H2O2 before the KL seem to be more effective, and those that use air can work with extra cleaning. Both tend to get the media clumping up with insufficient backwash.
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,091
Reaction score
456
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
KDF is not used for arsenic reduction unless you are dealing with the iron and coprecipitation... I would not recommend this for your application. BB for iron or H2s reduction is also not recommended, this will result in excessive costs and filter change-outs. A properly designed system should mitigate the iron and H2s with a low cost per gallon treated. The initial cost may be a little more but the cost per gallon treated will typically offeset this in a year or two max. I would highly recommend avoiding most online companies, most of these companies are pure price point driven and have no idea how to build equipment. Most use a fulfillment company to make and ship the equipment and do nothing more than look for the lowest price. The two links you have are just that, low price leaders...
Arsenic is a whole different story. It is a skin permeable contaminant so it should be removed at the POE, but this can be costly especially if it does incorrectly. Understanding the methods of arsenic reduction and the reasonable expectations and operating cost are very important.
 
Last edited:

Joseph Shelton

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Michigan
Are there any reputable online dealers for equipment then? I'm not sure where you could buy these components locally.

Or am I better off giving it up and calling the Culligan man because of the arsenic?
 

Bannerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,847
Reaction score
791
Points
113
Location
Ontario, Canada
Search for local Water Treatment professionals in your area. They will better understand local water conditions and will likely have identified effective treatment methods for those conditions.

Proprietary dealers such as the one you mention are not typically recommended due to the limited equipment service options and parts availability which is usually restricted to only their closed dealer networks.

Water Treatment dealers that are independent will typically offer and support Fleck, Clack and Autotrol control valves and will also offer replacement parts for DIYers. Both Fleck and Clack are the two most recommended brands on this forum.

Because local dealers actually service and stand behind the equipment they offer, they will be less likely to configure their systems with low-quality components (tanks, bottom screen, resin etc) that are prone to failure or problems.
 

Water Pro

In the Trades
Messages
365
Reaction score
33
Points
28
Location
syracuse
KDF85 in cartridges? I don't know -- I never studied KDF. Will that deal with arsenic or H2S? I would think you would want backwashing of that media too. KDF media are heavy, and require a lot of gpm per square ft.
KDF requires extremely high backwash rates, making it ineffective for most residential applications.
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,091
Reaction score
456
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
They were referring to KDF in cartridges, these are run in an upflow configuration in a 4.5" chamber so flow rates of approximately 4 GPM will help prevent the KDF from "cementing". Regardless, filter cartridges are not typically "backwashed".
 

Water Pro

In the Trades
Messages
365
Reaction score
33
Points
28
Location
syracuse
They were referring to KDF in cartridges, these are run in an upflow configuration in a 4.5" chamber so flow rates of approximately 4 GPM will help prevent the KDF from "cementing". Regardless, filter cartridges are not typically "backwashed".
point taken. do you think a point of use RO would be more efficient/cost effective for removing the arsenic, while at the same time removing the sodium?
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,091
Reaction score
456
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
Many contaminants can be absorbed through the skin easily, arsenic is one of those. An RO will reduce the arsenic significantly but the home owner needs to determine the acceptable level of risk of bathing in water with arsenic. Sodium is of far less concern and is easily reduced with an RO.
 
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