Going from WX-350 to Cycle Stop Valve...

How small is too small of a tank with a Cycle Stop Valve?

The tank-tee on my 10 year old Amtrol WX-350 sprung a leak. I called the well company who drilled the well and provided the tank. I have a 1 1/2 HP Redjacket pump submersed at 80ft, producing about 25GPM at 60PSI (I believe these numbers are correct). The system was designed to handle running irrigation sprinklers w/o cycling for hours at a time, and not affecting water use inside the house.

The well company recommends adding a Constant Pressure Valve/Cycle Stop Valve (he says they terms are interchangeable), and dropping down to a WX-202 or larger tank (up to a WX-240). Going from a 35 gal drawdown to 5 gal makes me nervous, though everything I read on this forum says small tanks are better with CSV. I was going to step up to the WX-203, but saw a thread with said, bad tank, get a WX-205, which makes sense to me.

I called Amtrol tech support, and they said my old tank has a cast iron tee, which cannot be repaired, but could be replaced, if I was fortunate enough (highly unlikely) to be able to unthread it without torquing the inner copper fittings. I guess the newer ones use SS. He said that my current tank is already too small to allow my pump to run for 2 minute cycles (25gpm@60psi), and that a CSV would help with a smaller tank, when running water for several minutes, such as a shower, but won't help much for the occasional drink of water, washing of hands, or flushing a toilet, where only a small burst of water is required.

Let's say I get a WM-250 (13 gal draw down), if the pump fills up the tank in 30 seconds, and I am not pulling any more water, it will stop far short of the 2 minute minimum recommended cycle run, leading to an early pump death, right?

He also confirmed that a Well-X-Trol is a Well-X-Trol, regardless of where I buy it.

1. What size tank can I realistically expect to use with this sized pump?

2. Will the CSV1W work for me, or must I step up to the CSV2W? If the 1 series is okay, what is the advantage of the CSV1Z?

Thanks,

Geordon

If the irrigation system was set up to use all the water the pump can supply, which is why it doesn’t cycle, you can’t afford any more friction loss. The CSV1W and CSV1Z will have about 20 PSI friction loss, so you would have to cut your zone sizes down by a couple of GPM.

The CSV160 only has 4 PSI friction loss which you would not even notice on the sprinkler system. This is the lowest price valve also. However, your pump man would need to install this valve inside the well casing or outside. It has a tendency of dripping a small amount, like 1 gallon per week. The drip does not hurt anything, it just needs to be installed in a place where the drip will not be noticed.

A WX 202 will hold 5 gallons of water. This allows you to use 5 gallons before the pump will start. This will give you 3 flushes, or a month of ice maker use without the pump starting. Then with a 50/70 pressure switch and a 60 PSI CSV, it will take about 2 minutes to refill the pressure tank. The CSV only fills the tank at 1 GPM above the CSV’s operating pressure, even though you have a 25 GPM pump. So even a tank with 2 gallons of draw down, could give you 2 minutes of run time.

We now use even smaller tanks than this. A WX102 as in our Pside-Kick control package, will hold 1 gallon of water, which we have found over the years to be plenty when using a CSV. Yes the pump has to start for every flush but, the CSV takes off so many cycles during long term uses of water, that a cycle for every flush does not add up to much, or hurt anything.

The WX 202 is a good compromise, and you really do not need any larger tank than this.

Thanks for the info. My supply line from the well comes into the house, then tees to the irrigation back outside and down to a 1" copper supply to the house (and pressure tank).

What if I inserted the CSV after the tee on the supply run to the pressure tank? This way, the valve won't introduce any more loss into my irrigation line. I already used oversized Irritrol valves to mininimize pressure loss there.

Has anyone heard of or used the Barrett Pump Stop?

Thanks,

Geordon

You can install the CSV after the tee to the irrigation line. However, you will need to also install a check valve facing the well in parallel with the CSV. This way when the irrigation system comes on, the water can go backwards from the pressure tank, through the check valve, to the irrigation, until the pump starts. You also have to make sure you never run any irrigation that will allow the pump to cycle.

The "Barrett Valve", if you want to call it that, is a badly designed, home made copy of the CSV. If it worked as well as the CSV, it would have the same patent number on it. The advertisements and installation instructions sound good because they have been copied from Cycle Stop Valves. But if you think it is the same as a CSV, I also have some good land in New Orleans I would like to sell you.

valveman said:

You can install the CSV after the tee to the irrigation line. However, you will need to also install a check valve facing the well in parallel with the CSV. This way when the irrigation system comes on, the water can go backwards from the pressure tank, through the check valve, to the irrigation, until the pump starts. You also have to make sure you never run any irrigation that will allow the pump to cycle.

The "Barrett Valve", if you want to call it that, is a badly designed, home made copy of the CSV. If it worked as well as the CSV, it would have the same patent number on it. The advertisements and installation instructions sound good because they have been copied from Cycle Stop Valves. But if you think it is the same as a CSV, I also have some good land in New Orleans I would like to sell you.

Click to expand...

The brass Barrett valve does look a lot like the CSV, but I was actually looking at the newer stainless steel 1" valve, which appears to be completely different. Is this still an inferior product?

I have been running the zoned irrigation for nearly 10 years now, and have not noticed any pump cycling.

Using the parallel check valve, what model CSV would you recommend?

We have done a lot of research and development on the simple differences between these two type valves. "Barrett Valves" are just off the shelf Watts valves from HD, with an 1/8" hole drilled through the middle of them. Anybody with a drill can make a valve like these. Especially if you use the instructions from someone who makes a similar system, and has many years of experience. Drilling holes in valves has been tried for generations. The problem is, and has always been, the drilled by-pass "hole". You need a small "by-pass" hole so the pump will not cycle at low flows, and the smaller the "by-pass", the smaller the tank can be. But small holes with water rushing through them clog easily, just like the holes in your shower head. The water coming through this hole is what cools you pump and motor. So 5 minutes after the hole clogs, your pump is toast. A larger hole is noisy and lets to much water through, so the pump still cycles, even with 3 times the size of pressure tank. Also, opening and closing a control valve can cause destructive water hammer in the system, just like when your washing machine solenoid valve closes, only much stronger.

We discovered these things ourselves many years ago, and designed a way to solve the problems. The difference that makes the Cycle Stop Valve patented and dependable, is a simple notch by-pass, or non-closing valve seat. Knowing what size, angle, and position to place this type by-pass took years of research. Once perfected, this by-pass can be as small as needed and still cannot clog. It eliminates the water hammer that happens when other type valves close off. Other than these things, the principal of these two type valves are basically the same.

Some of the valves on "Barretts" web page are off the shelf models of the same valves we have specially manufactured to our patent specifications. Others on his page are some we tried and rejected many years ago. The stainless valve you ask about has excessive friction loss. The friction loss charts on Barretts page are not correct. He has used the bolted open figures given by the manufacturers. This means of figuring friction loss is not even close or applicable when these valves are used for other purposes, such as pump control.

So you can drill a hole in a Watts valve and make your own "Barrett Valve", or you can use a real CSV, that has proven to be dependable and increase the life of pump systems. Sorry for the long post but, I really hate bad copy cat products. They can give the original product a bad reputation.

What all this means to you is summed up in the following quote by someone who has already tried both.

"Not only is this a copy of the Cycle Stop Valve, it is a poor one. It slightly reduces pump cycling. I read about the Cycle Stop Valve and planned to put one in. I was purchasing a well pump from Barrett Supply and Matt told me he had a Cycle Stop Valve. He used that name, not his own product's name which was not the truth. He then showed me the "poorly designed" Cycle Stop Valve and told me his was much better. The valve was very loud because the orifice is drilled too big. Within 2 seconds of turning a sprinkler off, the pump cycled off. Running a 2 gpm sprinkler still allowed the pump to cycle every 3 minutes. I returned Matt's valve and bought the Cycle Stop Valve which is extremely quiet. I ran the same experiment, turned the sprinkler off, and it was 2 minutes before the pump cycled off. I can run down to 1.4 gpm and the pump continues to run without cycling. The Barrett Stop Valve provides pressure regulation just fine but does little to limit pump cycling. I am a mechanical engineer. It's obvious that he does not understand mechanical principles and is not a designer of anything but more one who likes to tinker."
Posted by wildbillba on Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:48 AM

The best valve for your application would be the CSV1Z, or really a CSV160 in the well. Your well company sounds like they know what they are doing. Ask them what they think.

valveman said:

The best valve for your application would be the CSV1Z, or really a CSV160 in the well. Your well company sounds like they know what they are doing. Ask them what they think.

Click to expand...

I will give my well driller a call and find out what they were going to use. Also, if my well uses at least a 1 1/4" line, I think I will move up to the CSV1.25/60, then I can put in front of the irrigation draw, skip the parallel reversed check valve, and not worry about friction pressure loss.

Since the plastic valves cannot tolerate bacteria, algae, etc, should I be concerned about this? Or if that was an issue, it would be in my drinking water, and I would already know about it?

CSV’s are not sized to the water line, they are sized to the pump. The CSV1.25 is made for a 50 GPM pump and has a larger minium flow. You will still not have any friction loss with the CSV1, and the minimum flow is correctly sized for your pump. CSV’s are nearly always one size smaller than the pipe line. Other than that, you are on the right track as far as what to do.

Slimmy or abrasive stuff in the water is what causes this type CSV to leak. Which is the reason this valve needs to be installed outside, in case you have something like this in your water.

valveman said:

CSV’s are not sized to the water line, they are sized to the pump. The CSV1.25 is made for a 50 GPM pump and has a larger minimum flow. You will still not have any friction loss with the CSV1, and the minimum flow is correctly sized for your pump. CSV’s are nearly always one size smaller than the pipe line. Other than that, you are on the right track as far as what to do.

Click to expand...

Since I will be more inclined to use the CVS1 with a larger tank (no smaller than the WX-250 with a 13 gallon drawdown, more likely the WX-302, if my WX-350 is dead), the higher minimum flow wouldn't be a problem, right?

I think the charts show a 4 PSI loss using the CSV1, versus less than 1 for the CSV1.25 at 25GPM, right?

I did contact my driller, as you recommended, and he said he would put in the 1" valve. I didn't ask for specifics as to why or what brand it was, though I know it would be installed just below the pitless adapter.

To me, the cost difference is neglible for my application, which is to ensure the pump runs its 2 minute minimum when it kicks on with a tank smaller than the necessary 50 gallon drawdown, and to eliminate/reduce water hammer at pump shut off. Providing constant pressure is a bonus to me -- not the primary goal. Unless the CSV1.25 won't work, I would rather have the lower PSI loss and higher minimum flow for the larger pressure tank. Does this make sense?

Is the water released into the atmosphere a small amount which only occurs during valve "actuation"? The reason I ask, is if I could avoid hiring my well driller to come and pull up the pump to install in the well casing for new installs or a failed CSV. I was thinking of installing inside near the pressure tank, and place in a shroud, such as a short length of 4" or 5" PVC with a drip pan and runoff to the nearby sump pump. If the amount of moisture released is very minimal and could be managed inside, this seems like the perfect installation technique.

When you see how the CSV works, you are going to like the constant pressure. Then you are going to wish you didn’t have to wait for the big tank to empty, before you see the constant pressure. You are also going to wish you had installed the 1" valve, so you would have constant pressure at the low flow rates as well.

However, the way you want to do it will still eliminate some of the cycling, and will give you constant pressure some of the time.

If your well pump is also 10 years old, then it is running on borrowed time as well. The average life of submersibles that cycle off and on is 7 years. Installing a CSV will test your motors thrust bearing. You may find that the well pump is on it’s last leg. Since you had such a big tank, and the irrigation was set up to keep the pump from cycling, you might get a few more years with the pump, then maybe not.

If you go back with a big tank like the WX302, and your irrigation system is set up to perfectly match your pump, there is really not much need for the CSV. Especially since you won’t see the constant pressure until the big tank is empty, and you won’t have constant pressure at low flow with the larger CSV. You have two pump men telling you the best way to go is a small tank and a CSV1 but, it is your system and you should do whatever you want.

Valveman,
I see it all the time. Just because we have been specialist in our field for 30 plus years, they still think they can read a chart better.

Sometimes the experts are the ones installing, and the ones that write articles and books are just doing their best to quote us exactly.
The advice you are finding here is unadulterated expertise before it has been muddied by a chair bound story telling writer.

Not that we don't need works of fiction, but it's hard to explain what has taken decades in a 30 minute conversation, when the writer has decided how the story will write itself even before the interview.

I am not taking offense to any of the comments directed my way. Having an engineering background and an analytical mind causes me to over think many things before I finally settle on something. I really do appreciate the input from valveman based on his expertise of his products.

I apologize if I sounded disrespectful. I meant no such thing. To many years of working alone, and listening to diesel engines roar, sometimes leaves me short of the proper vocabulary. However, it left me plenty of time to over think things myself.

I apologize if I sounded disrespectful. I meant no such thing. To many years of working alone, and listening to diesel engines roar, sometimes leaves me short of the proper vocabulary. However, it left me plenty of time to over think things myself.

Click to expand...

Then why am I being grumpy?

It's easier in person to be sure, when you can read the expression.
In Seattle, its' the land of software and airplane engineers.
You do have to shift a gear when engaging them.

valveman said:

I apologize if I sounded disrespectful. I meant no such thing.

Click to expand...

No apologies necessary, valveman. It was just the way I read Terry's post, it seemed like he was begin a little defensive against my persistent questions, maybe just to protect the conversation from other thread readers, who might think I am doubting your product, which I am not. I also believe you think this thread is worthwhile, or you would not be spending time posting to it.

As I stated earlier, I value the advice I can get from you, Terry, or any other contributing poster on this forum. That is the one of the strengths of the internet -- for individuals from all over the country (or world) to share their experiences and assist others.