Purchasing new softener + GAC - help sizing and general advice?

[Gary Slusser]

Using the 5600, you will never notice any additional pressure loss than you would if you had the 7000.

As to selling the house and leaving the equipment (which I strongly suggest), your sizing is sufficient for most families water use and you wouldn't buy a vehicle thinking about the size of the family that might buy it when you get rid of it, so why do that with water treatment equipment that meets you needs?

[ditttohead]

Any concern with the GAC at 2 cu ft. when sizing for 12 GPM peak flow rate?

On the softener, I will rarely exceed max flow rate of 7 GPM. I anticipate in the next 5 years that I'll exceed 7GPM twice a year, and not to exceed 12 GPM at all.

Regarding sizing for the house for future buyers, I plan on taking my softener and GAC with me if I ever sell!

The GAC system has a much lower service flow, this is based on organics, THMs, VOC, etc removal to a specific amount. As you can see by the chart, the GAC service flows are much lower than the softeners. Peaks are nearly identical.

And with 4 showers, just do the math, what if you had guests, and had the laundry going, the dishwasher, and a couple of showers, maybe the kitchen sink. It is not too far fetched to see the flow rate quickly goes up much higher than 5 gpm. There is also code to consider. The water treatment equipment must be sized to the house, not to the number of current occupants.

[Gary Slusser]

I would not size based on the total/max gpm of the fixture count method as the code requires, which means all fixtures running wide open all at the same time; no one lives like that.

Another code calls for not reducing the plumbing connectors below the size of the plumbing. But it does not get into the internal port sizes of the control or by pass valves or distributor tube or meter etc.. IOWs if you have 1" plumbing they want a 1" by pass valve and that's as far as the inspector delves into the stuff.

I always sized based how the family actually uses water and the flow rate of a full flow tub IF the tub is or might be used i the future. In this case I think the planned flow rate of not more than 9 gpm is probably going to be too low by a few gpm as time goes by but that depends on the age of the kids. Teens require more laundry and longer showers than say 3 and 5 year old kids that are thrown in a tub together with a few inches of water in it (parents are still doing that right?).

Personally I don't see guests using 4 showers while the dish and clothes washers are running at the same time. Four shower heads is a max of 10 gpm. A large tub without an anti scald valve usually flows at over 15 gpm if both hot and cold are full open, which BTW isn't how you fill a tub. And with a tankless water heater, it is flow controlled and in many cases due to the increased cost, most are undersized and nowhere close to the gpm actually needed.

[Kent Leigh]

Considering the 5600 cannot backwash filter media in tank sizes higher than 12" (according to several sources - is this correct), I'm a bit concerned going with 5600 on the softener and 7000 on the GAC. Might as well go 7000 each to keep parts and repair consistent.

[ditttohead]

The "difficult to rebuild" 7000 myth has been fairly debunked by the video I posted anyway. The 7000 will do you very well. The cost should be very similar to the 5600 as well. I would also refrain from telling you to go against code. As to the internal manifold and distributor of the system, the engineering apsect of it has to do with velocity of water through a pipe. Code requires velocities be maintained below certain thresholds unless the application is designed to handle excessive velocities. Commecial and residential water heaters, softeners etc all have been engineered for these slighly higher velocities. Ever take apart a 2" commercial water heater to find the dip tube is 1-1/2"? Softeners as well, the internal manifold may be slightly smaller than the systems size claim, this is beacuse the velocity can exceed 10 FPS when it is insulated inside the tank and surrounded by water.

[Gary Slusser]

Considering the 5600 cannot backwash filter media in tank sizes higher than 12" (according to several sources - is this correct), I'm a bit concerned going with 5600 on the softener and 7000 on the GAC. Might as well go 7000 each to keep parts and repair consistent.

The 5600 should not be used as a filter valve on tanks larger than 10" dia , and 12" dia for a softener. All valves have a tank dia limit.

Usually the parts for a 5600 will be less expensive than parts for the 7000 and the softener normally is also. And the 5600 is much easier to work on and program. Softener and filter version valve parts are not identical.

[Gary Slusser]

The "difficult to rebuild" 7000 myth has been fairly debunked by the video I posted anyway. The 7000 will do you very well.

No one said it wouldn't do well, just that the 5600 is easier to work on.

The cost should be very similar to the 5600 as well. I would also refrain from telling you to go against code. As to the internal manifold and distributor of the system, the engineering apsect of it has to do with velocity of water through a pipe. Code requires velocities be maintained below certain thresholds unless the application is designed to handle excessive velocities. Commecial and residential water heaters, softeners etc all have been engineered for these slighly higher velocities. Ever take apart a 2" commercial water heater to find the dip tube is 1-1/2"? Softeners as well, the internal manifold may be slightly smaller than the systems size claim, this is beacuse the velocity can exceed 10 FPS when it is insulated inside the tank and surrounded by water.

You advise against the code every time you suggest a softener or filter size that is not large enough SFR wise to exceed the total fixture count method gpm. And as to velocity, every time you advise any 3/4" control valve on 1" plumbing and a 1" by pass valve.

Since the velocity increases through a short (a few feet max) reduced size 'plumbing, there is little pressure loss.

[Tom Sawyer]

Considering the minimal extra cost of going larger against the possible problems of under sizing I can't imagine why you would want to even consider using a 5600 over the 7000. As for the code. It is what it is and it was written by guys with engineering degrees that "really" understand flow velocities, pressure loss and sizing. They didn't just scratch a bunch of crap on paper for something to do.

[ditttohead]

Tom, thanks, some people dont understand or disagree with code. Or they feel they know better than the code writers who are usually people from the industry with decades of experience and serious degrees.

Reading through the posts by others, I am curious as to when I have ever recommended a 3/4" system on a 1" pipe? As I recall, I am fairly consistent with recommending the 7000 for the simple reason that it is an easy valve to maintain, usually exceeds the code requirements for flow rates, simple to install, easy to program, and considering the valve only needs repair work after a decade, I dont think the cost difference between a $40 piston vs a $45 dollar piston is going to upset any reasonable person. The most expensive repair part on any Fleck valve has been the meter. The 7000 meter turbine assembly is 1/2 the cost of the 5600, 2510, etc.

As to SFR, I always recommend meeting of exceeding it but with the understanding of code, peak can be considered. Minimum recoomended flow rates need to be addressed as well as SFR. You can not consider one without the other. I guess all those code compliance classes, continuing credit requirements, and recertifications are just a waste of time.

[Tom Sawyer]

This is a DIY site. I think that its unprofessional and irresponsible to advise folks to ignore the code. The codes are there to protect everyone, not just the homeowner. I have no problem servicing the 7000SXT valve at all. It might take a minute or two longer than the Clack WS but who cares?

[Gary Slusser]

Then I expect the two of you to require a fixture count before you get into helping anyone here size a softener.

And to require all control and by pass valves and the distributor tube and distributor tube baskets are capable of allowing the max gpm flow that the fixture count method developed.

Also.... that you require that none of those parts be a smaller ID than the water line plumbing the softener or filter is to be installed on.

[ditttohead]

As you have stated yourself on a regular basis, you disregard code, are unlicensed, and despise regulations. Many of the advice givers on this site are licensed, certified, insured, and do just as you say. And since you do not read the codes, nor do you agree with the idea of codes, nor would you understand the codes if you did read them, and you recommend ignoring the codes, I am not sure where you are going with this other than to troll. Lets start with velocity ratings of a non specifically engineered device. Velocity requirements are very basic, and can be exceeded in a properly designed and engineered system. The same way the 80 PSI code can be exceded if the equipment is specifically designed and engineered as such. It is really not that complex, but you will puff out your chest, raise your voice, grit your teeth, drag extra deep on your DIY cigs, and replay with another ridiculous post.

[Gary Slusser]

To correct your personal attack comments etc.. I am very aware of the codes we are talking about and will require you two to live up to them with emphasis on the total fixture count method of determining the peak demand flow rate that the softener sizes you suggest must be capable of treating.

I have never sold, installed or serviced any water treatment where I was required to have any license other than a driver's license. The same for the well pump work I did.

As to the "advice givers" here... you are not a dealer and do not sell to the end user/consumer and IMO you are here to 'police' the only forum I post in. "Tom" is/was a retired plumber and codes guy and part time high school plumbing teacher that until recently always said he wasn't into softeners much but now says differently. He has been banned here numerous times using numerous names, starting with NHmaster and gets into adult beverages at times (or not) and then gets into nit picking like now. So there aren't many (not counting you two, I count only 3 of us) advice givers here that are here solely due to having the best interest of the DIYers at heart.

[Kent Leigh]

The 5600 should not be used as a filter valve on tanks larger than 10" dia , and 12" dia for a softener. All valves have a tank dia limit.

Usually the parts for a 5600 will be less expensive than parts for the 7000 and the softener normally is also. And the 5600 is much easier to work on and program. Softener and filter version valve parts are not identical.

Hi Gary, I prefer to keep the valves the same for both for ease of operation and maintenance. Since i'm looking at a carbon unit that's a 12x48" tank, I can't put a 5600 on it. Therefore, I've selected the 7000 for both GAC and softener.

Thank you for the help!

[Kent Leigh]

Hi Dittohead, just picking up on your last comment regarding service flow rates on the GAC. Today I have assumed a 2 cu ft GAC would meet my needs, but with the chart you provided, that will give me a 6 GPM service flow rate. This should be adequate for normal use, but in the cases where i have a peak flow rate exceeding the 6 GPM, would i expect chlorine bleed? Again, assuming peak flow rates at 12 GPM (more like 7 GPM but sizing for future visitors or changes to the house that would increase our normal peak).

Going from a GAC at 2 cu. ft. to a 3 cu. ft. system is an expensive proposition (extra $2-300 up front costs).

On a side note, I had a local treatment company come out. Two installers came out (not the owner), which I'm very appreciative that they came out the day after Thanksgiving. They quoted me the following system: 2 * 2510, 1 CF carbon + 1 CF Softener, 18X33 brine well @ $2600. The system would set to cycle twice a week at 12 lbs per cycle. When I challenged them on the size of the unit and that I wanted to go with a lower salt efficiency system, they basically told me regen at 6.5 lbs wouldn't regenerate the resin sufficiently. It was such a poor presentation and representation, I didn't bother getting into the math and going over additional specs and price.