Tom Sawyer
In the Trades
Ok, I'll file that comment where is belongs LOL
It looks like you've never done this type thing before because you've got some very serious errors in that.
In the interest of experimentation, I am using Morton iodized salt instead of salt pellets, and only 1.3 lbs/cu ft in an attempt to establish a lower boundary of efficiency. I'm sure it's going to work, but I am typing this as I stand beside my brine tank, pouring shaker after shaker of salt into the tank... one hand pours, the other types. Been at it for 3 hours and 22 minutes, estimating another 13 hours will be needed to have enough to do the next regen cycle. More to follow as data "flows" in...
You didn't miss just one zero. And now after dittohead has pointed out other mistakes, you conveniently aren't acknowledging them.Oh my god, now I am red faced with embarrassment because I did indeed miss the zero but in my defense I think I was in the middle of breaking up a fight while typing. LOL
You didn't miss just one zero. And now after dittohead has pointed out other mistakes, you conveniently aren't acknowledging them.
F6hawk, please show me the same errors on my web site.
ok, fella's. i have to admit , this stuff is a bit over my head.
so i am just going to ask.
on the short list. 5600sxt, 7000sxt. either 48000 or 64000. saving $$$ on salt is a GOOD thing. as is easy of operation(though i would figure it out after a lil while ) and reliability.
now "if you were me", what would you choose ? if any of these.
Other than the 6 lbs/cuft, go look at the salt doses you say are needed, they are all way wrong. And I say if you knew how to do this stuff you wouldn't have made the mistakes or would have been able to find them when you were told of errors and went to correct them. And all that is on you.You are right, I missed two zero's....so what? with the exception of you, everyone else knew what I was talking about and I fixed it and I acknowledged that I mistyped and that I edited my mistake. Are you now satisfied or do we have to continue with this supercilious nonsense? You spend so much of your time trying to discredit everyone and only succeed in discrediting yourself.
I suggest a 2.0 cuft (64K) programmed for 3333 grains/lb of salt with the 5600 SXT. That will give you a constant SFR of 13 gpm and the 5600 costs the least, is easy to troubleshoot and rebuild when needed and parts are easy to find locally or online.ok, fella's. i have to admit , this stuff is a bit over my head.
so i am just going to ask.
on the short list. 5600sxt, 7000sxt. either 48000 or 64000. saving $$$ on salt is a GOOD thing. as is easy of operation(though i would figure it out after a lil while ) and reliability.
now "if you were me", what would you choose ? if any of these.
pppssssstt HINT... If it were simple Outcast would not be saying this stuff is still over his head.Please click on my signature, please please please. Seriously, it is simple and stop trying so desperately to direct traffic to your website. .
I suggest a 2.0 cuft (64K) programmed for 3333 grains/lb of salt with the 5600 SXT. That will give you a constant SFR of 13 gpm and the 5600 costs the least, is easy to troubleshoot and rebuild when needed and parts are easy to find locally or online.
Just for the record F6, I did mention that 60 GPD is pretty much what most of us are using for a water usage per day number while quite a few of the sizing charts out there are still going with 75 and even 80-100 gpd and of course, which ever you use changes the capacity etc. However I think it's important for anyone sizing equipment to make an honest assessment of their water use.
You're not trying very hard.I can't point out the errors, because his numbers are basically the same as yours. Well, not HIS, but Aquatell's.
The only piece of info not on my sizing page is the gpm of the person's peak demand flow rate, which only he can provide.The reason I ended up using this site was because you plainly state you are retired, and your site, while it was a step in the right direction for me, left as many questions as I found answers. I'd wager that with a little more effort, you could tweak your info so that a newbie such as Outcast or I would be able to understand this whole softening thing better.
The 5600 is the most popular control valve in the world and has been for a long time. The design (invented about IIRC 1960 something), seals, spacers and piston with a separate brine valve is used in the 7000 and all other Fleck residential valves. A great improvement huh.Outcast, I cannot say anything about the 5600 except that several on here say it's reliable... but I will say that I chose the 7000SXT over it because it is newer, improved, and typically, newer technology ends up replacing the old. Not ALWAYS true, but based on the pro recommendations here, I went with the 7000SXT myself, and am very happy.
There are a couple errors in that and no one should follow your thinking. I see Tom mentions something about it in a follow up post but isn't very clear. BTW, the salt dose and the water used per regeneration is all adjustable. You'd oughta stick with landlording.as far as sizing the tank goes, having a bit more capacity (2.5 vs 2.0 cu ft) gives you more options down the road, IMHO. Bear in mind that as you use less salt per regen (8 or 6 lbs/cu ft, or 16/12 lbs per regen on a 2.0 cu ft tank, vs. 20/15 lbs per regen on a 2.5 cu ft), you also need more water to do the cycle. The more salt you use (up towards 15 lbs/cu ft), the less water the regen cycle takes.
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.