Planning a DIY whole home filtration system

Users who are viewing this thread

Lifespeed

Member
Messages
402
Reaction score
4
Points
18
Location
California
Thank you Lifespeed.

I that is good information on softener sizing. I am looking at a whole house carbon filter too. Would you offer any suggestions for sizing there? It looks like that will potentially be my limiting factor as their flow rates are so painfully low.

For chlorine removal (confirm your municipality uses chlorine, not chloramine which requires Centaur carbon for removal) the service flow rate is much higher than listed. I use a 1.5 cu ft 7000SXT Centaur carbon filter for chloramine removal with flow rates occasionally reaching 7 - 9 GPM. However, you appear to have some other organic molecules in the water which would be good to remove. I am not familiar with contact times to remove those pollutants, you may need to do some research on that.

A 2.0 or even 2.5 cu ft carbon filter only increases the tank diameter 2" - 4", so is still reasonable in a residential setting. 1.5 cu ft would be fine for chlorine or chloramine removal alone, and might also be fine for your application, I just don't know the service flow rate for the other organic molecules in your water.
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,088
Reaction score
455
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
Service flow rate is typically 3 GPM per Cu. Ft. (estimated). Actual flow rates can be much higher with varying degrees of contaminant removal as the flow rates increase. I am putting together a chart for this and should have it completed somtime late next month. The chart is very difficult to get any of the carbon companies to sign off on, but it looks like I can get it done soon. The GAC systems will flow much hiher than their service flow, you simply lose removal performance.



For a standard house, a 1.5 cu. ft. GAC system is considered adequate. As stated, shloramine removal is achieved with carbons engineered for chloramine reduction.
 

Uellee

New Member
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Louisiana
For chlorine removal (confirm your municipality uses chlorine, not chloramine which requires Centaur carbon for removal) the service flow rate is much higher than listed. I use a 1.5 cu ft 7000SXT Centaur carbon filter for chloramine removal with flow rates occasionally reaching 7 - 9 GPM. However, you appear to have some other organic molecules in the water which would be good to remove. I am not familiar with contact times to remove those pollutants, you may need to do some research on that.

A 2.0 or even 2.5 cu ft carbon filter only increases the tank diameter 2" - 4", so is still reasonable in a residential setting. 1.5 cu ft would be fine for chlorine or chloramine removal alone, and might also be fine for your application, I just don't know the service flow rate for the other organic molecules in your water.

No chloramine here, looks like coconut shell carbon is probably the way to go. I have read that some companies even add a small amount of KDF-55 to GAC filters:
"Widely used for reduction of free chlorine and heavy metals. Adds life to carbon filters, serves as a mild bacteriostatic agent to retard bacteria growth in filter beds, and acts to prevent scale buildup."

Useful or excessive?


Service flow rate is typically 3 GPM per Cu. Ft. (estimated). Actual flow rates can be much higher with varying degrees of contaminant removal as the flow rates increase. I am putting together a chart for this and should have it completed somtime late next month. The chart is very difficult to get any of the carbon companies to sign off on, but it looks like I can get it done soon. The GAC systems will flow much hiher than their service flow, you simply lose removal performance.



For a standard house, a 1.5 cu. ft. GAC system is considered adequate. As stated, shloramine removal is achieved with carbons engineered for chloramine reduction.

Thank you.

If 1.5cf is the standard then I suppose I'll go with that, seems reasonable.
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,088
Reaction score
455
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
Adding KDF to GAC is common but does nothing. KDF is an amazing filtration media when applied correctly. Added to a GAC bed is a waste. It is purely a marketing gimmick when done that way. A KDF media guard, or a spate KDF tank is a much better idea.
 

Uellee

New Member
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Louisiana
Adding KDF to GAC is common but does nothing. KDF is an amazing filtration media when applied correctly. Added to a GAC bed is a waste. It is purely a marketing gimmick when done that way. A KDF media guard, or a spate KDF tank is a much better idea.

... but probably completely unnecessary in my case?
 

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,088
Reaction score
455
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
... but probably completely unnecessary in my case?

Adding a few pounds of KDF to a carbon tank has little if any affect. A proper KDF design requires the media guard, or KDF in its own tank. Check out this link for some information on how to apply it. You need an adequate amount in its own tank for proper performance. The media guard is unique in that it distributes the water directly through multiple small chambers of KDF and is the other option that works well. https://terrylove.com/forums/showthread.php?45302-Prototype-system&highlight=prototype
 

Shopco

Member
Messages
50
Reaction score
1
Points
6
Location
Riverside, CA
Chlorine is relatively easy for GAC to remove but, chlorine reacts with Natural Organic Mater (NOM) to produce Trihalomethanes (TTHM), which are worse for you than the chlorine. They are harder for GAC to remove and require a longer dwell time. You have high TTHM’s. I would point you to the following link. Trihalomethane Removal.pdf by RJ Potwora. According to him you need a dwell time of at least 7 minutes with GAC mesh size of 12x40. This translates to 1 gpm per cf. of carbon, or 2 gpm/cf. with a 20x50 mesh. I, personally, do not know anything other than what I read or someone tells me.
 

Tom Sawyer

In the Trades
Messages
3,625
Reaction score
34
Points
48
Location
Maine
Adding a few pounds of KDF to a carbon tank has little if any affect. A proper KDF design requires the media guard, or KDF in its own tank. Check out this link for some information on how to apply it. You need an adequate amount in its own tank for proper performance. The media guard is unique in that it distributes the water directly through multiple small chambers of KDF and is the other option that works well. https://terrylove.com/forums/showthread.php?45302-Prototype-system&highlight=prototype

It also requires a water pump and distribution piping that can crank some volume. KDF is a heavy media that needs good volume and pressure to backwash properly
 

Uellee

New Member
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Louisiana
So last year's planning was met with an abundance of work that halted my progress on getting any filtration in place and I am just now getting back on track with this stuff.

Last year my experience with local filtration "experts" was all through high pressure sales and what I thought were overpriced products. This negative experience sent me to the online suppliers. I didn't end up buying online because of the potentially questionable quality, although I did learn that what I was looking for didn't need to cost anything near what I was originally led to believe.

I recently contacted a local filtration/plumbing service who I felt would give me a better experience all around. I conveyed my filtration interests and had a solution recommended. (they use the Dyna-Pro brand products)

Maybe some people on here could help me gauge whether the solution and cost are appropriate.



He suggested 1 cu ft GAC filter with Centaur carbon and a mechanical timer control valve (I guess the increased humidity in Louisiana doesn't work well with circuit boards)

I suggested that I would probably be interested in at least 1.5 cu ft as my interest in removing chlorine is not the only reason for the filter and that some of the other contaminates may require a bit more contact time. I also suggested that my in-house installation should allow a digital circuit board just like the rest of the electronics in my house.

He originally suggested a 40,000 grain softener with a metered mechanical control valve (again due to the increased humidity). He adjusted his suggestion to a 48,000 grain softener after we decided on a 1.5 cu ft GAC filter. He said it would be better if they were both the same size, I think he said the reasoning was because the plumbing would be easier and it would look better. (really?)

I suggested, with what I had looked into, that I thought a 32,000 grain system would be sufficient and once again that I might be interested in a digital control valve. He discouragingly mentioned that by dropping the resin tank by a size or two I would only save about $100 per increment. We are a family of three right now but might reach six by the time it's all said and done so I am trying to plan accordingly.

So, his price for two 1.5 cu ft tanks w/media, brine tank, two mechanical valves, and all necessary filtration parts, delivered for $2,500. I plumb and install.

It still seems a bit steeper than I would expect for just the parts.

Thoughts on the setup or the price? Thank you.

Details:
3/4" supply
3 Bathrooms

From Municipality:
6 grains of hardness
Chlorine, not chloramine
Chlorine ranges from 1.00 - 1.45
Manganese - 0.00 - 0.02
Some samples at or within 85% of MCL on chlorination by-products
 
Last edited:
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