|
|
|
Well Pump efficiency
|
Sort:
|
|
 Prev Next |
You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
junkhound
New Member
Posts:44
 |
| 20 Mar 2011 01:44 PM |
|
Glad to hear there was no comercial interest involved.
The dependence on tourism is something I have no idea about, but can agree with a previous poster that some like us would find a wind farm a draw.
Backin the late 1980s, I took the ferry and drove out to the end of PEI just to see the experimental wind farm, and was just a tourist. In 2001 PEI started a big commercial wind farm. I'd suspect you are well familiar with that project? Only about a 16 hr drive from where you are??
In the 80's also drove out of my way thru CA to see the Palm Springs installations.
I've not been on Samso, but have flown thru Copenhagen a few times and have gone up the coast to see the off shore intallation there. Hard for someone like me to even understand the visual objections, I find them of senic interest and the larger ones majestic.
Have also seen the wind farms in NW France, which are easily seem from the TGV from Paris to Brest.
Trying to think if I were in your shoes, probably the first thing I want is input fromthe tourism folks, and what if any surveys have found on acceptance or rejection of tourists views on off shore and on-shore windmills. From my own perspective, I'd consider botha a plus, but realize there are high spending tourist folks (like in the Hampotns) who dont wnat to change anything.
Others have already said it, but worth repeating for a community effort - FIRST energy savings are found in sealing and insulating homes and buisnesses, then in maximizing the heating/cooling options - incentives via tax breaks, no-interest loans, etc.. |
|
|
|
|
Birdman
Basic Member
Posts:179
|
| 20 Mar 2011 03:39 PM |
|
Junkhound,
Good points on all counts. I have never been to PEI, but I am familiar with the farm there. I hope to go up there to visit soon.
I agree, I find the turbines I've seen (land based) to be visually fascinating and essentially sculptural. I'm an architect so perhaps that's part of why i see them that way. Our initial proposed wind-farm is a group of 5 turbines, probably about 500' to the top of an upright blade. They would be about 2.8 miles offshore and would have a capacity of about 12 mW. I too, think they may be a draw for some people.
Anecdotally, my daughter spent last summer giving tours of the lighthouse that is on the side of the island that would face the turbines. The visitors coming through the lighthouse were usually interested in the wind project (a small info display about it was among the lighthouse displays) and in discussing the project with hundreds of visitors my daughter said the reactions were about 85% in favor. This is based almost entirely on the visual aspects alone. Some thought it might be a negative aspect for the view but would usually come around when they heard how high our rates were and how dirty our generators are.
We have certainly obtained info from the tourism folks. Whether the turbines almost 3 miles offshore will "spoil" the view enough to keep tourist away in droves depends on who you ask. I understand in Atlantic City patrons at the hotels often request rooms with a view of the five turbines built at the sewage treatment plant! Hmmmm....... Personally, I think our aging and cobbled power distribution system of rusting pole mount x-formers, poles, overhead wires and guys etc. viewed up close is far more detrimental to our view-sheds than turbines 3 miles away.
I totally agree, and counsel everyone who will listen, that the first efforts should always be efficiency and conservation. Button up the envelope first - then think about renewables. We're working on tax incentives for more efficient envelopes and better enforcement of the code re air sealing (another thread in itself....). |
|
|
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 20 Mar 2011 08:32 PM |
|
Posted By junkhound on 20 Mar 2011 10:13 AM
Just to 'enter the fray' on vfd, FWIW, my own well pump is VSD - in the PWM (pulse width modulated) sense. AVERAGE speed is maybe about 340 RPM . How does it work so low? Aha, the magic of PWM, the pump spins at 3400 rpm till the pressure switch turns it off, then it is off for 9/10 of the time, then the low pressure turns it back on, and it is on 1/10 or the time. The resulting 0.002Hz PWM is slower rate PWM than the 4 kHz mentioned earlier for VFD, but still 'PWM' and VSD, though not VFD, heh, heh.  That is pretty funny. But no reason to confuse the issue even more. People are already so confused about how a VFD works that many will actually think your pump is working at 340 RPM. I hate having to tell people that VFD’s will not magically save energy. It gets me into these tiresome point by point arguments. Then when they finally realize what I am talking about, they act like they just found out Santa Claus is not real. |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
anon
New Member
Posts:6
|
| 05 Jun 2017 01:07 PM |
|
Valveman sells CSVs, most posts on the internet about CSVs come from him.
VFD is a better solution, but more costly for residential usage, that's all.
At low speed, VFD saves up to 50% compared to CSV. You can see it at Grundfos's product selection site, they have power usage charts for VFD usage now. VFD can save you a lot of money if you plan to irrigate.
Also, CSV burns up motors in residential usage if it's bigger than say 2HP and adds an additional 100+ psi back pressure on your drop pipe. Have fun pulling it up to repair it when it bursts. |
|
|
|
|
Rdatrrdo
New Member
Posts:2
|
| 13 Sep 2018 12:30 PM |
|
Glad to hear there was no comercial interest involved.
The dependence on tourism is something I have no idea about, but can agree with a previous poster that some like us would find a wind farm a draw.
Backin the late 1980s, I took the ferry and drove out to the end of PEI just to see the experimental wind farm, and was just a tourist. In 2001 PEI started a big commercial wind farm. I'd suspect you are well familiar with that project? Only about a 16 hr drive from where you are??
In the 80's also drove out of my way thru CA to see the Palm Springs installations.
I've not been on Samso, but have flown thru Copenhagen a few times and have gone up the coast to see the off shore intallation there. Hard for someone like me to even understand the visual objections, I find them of senic interest and the larger ones majestic.
Have also seen the wind farms in NW France, which are easily seem from the TGV from Paris to Brest.
Trying to think if I were in your shoes, probably the first thing I want is input fromthe tourism folks, and what if any surveys have found on acceptance or rejection of tourists views on off shore and on-shore windmills. From my own perspective, I'd consider botha a plus, but realize there are high spending tourist folks (like in the Hampotns) who dont wnat to change anything.
Others have already said it, but worth repeating for a community effort - FIRST energy savings are found in sealing and insulating homes and buisnesses, then in maximizing the heating/cooling options - incentives via tax breaks, no-interest loans, etc.. https://thehomedweller.com/best-jet-pumps/ |
|
|
|
|
Rdatrrdo
New Member
Posts:2
|
| 13 Sep 2018 12:30 PM |
|
Many pressure tanks contain an internal air bladder. If the bladder goes bad it will not hold air and the tank will become full of water (ie: waterlogged). Her in Florida our pressure tanks are outside as we don't have basements. If you get 10 years out of a pressure tank down here you are doing pretty good. Assuming PVC piping a pro can cut out a tank and plumb in a new one in about 10 minutes. Once I saw it done, I vowed that next time I would do it myself. It took me a couple of hours but really was not that hard. A simple test to see if your tank is water logged is to just tap on it. If it hold air then the section that holds air should sound different than the section that holds water and you will hear the difference in your tapping. The reason you are losing pressure with a water-logged tank is that you cannot compress water like you can air. It is the compressed air that forces the water out (ie provides the pressure). Our local Lowes and Home Depot sells replacement pressure tanks. Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 08 Jan 2019 08:17 PM |
|
Posted By anon on 05 Jun 2017 01:07 PM
Valveman sells CSVs, most posts on the internet about CSVs come from him.
VFD is a better solution, but more costly for residential usage, that's all.
At low speed, VFD saves up to 50% compared to CSV. You can see it at Grundfos's product selection site, they have power usage charts for VFD usage now. VFD can save you a lot of money if you plan to irrigate.
Also, CSV burns up motors in residential usage if it's bigger than say 2HP and adds an additional 100+ psi back pressure on your drop pipe. Have fun pulling it up to repair it when it bursts.
Haven't seen this thread since 2011. Sorry I missed it. Sure I sell CSV's, and proud to have come up with something that makes pumps last longer and use smaller pressure tanks. Which making pumps last longer is what a CSV does, not shorten the life. That 100 PSI back pressure reduces the motor amps, and makes the motor run cooler by making the pump think it is in a deeper well so it can't pump as much water. A CSV makes any size pump last longer. It is jusT as easy on a 100HP or 250HP pump as it is a 1HP.
And again NO, NO, NO VFDs do not save energy. Look at those curves in the Grundfos product catalog that you mention. You will see that a 1.5 HP pump will drop to 0.4HP when restricting the flow with a CSV. A VFD cannot save anymore energy than this. But the market for VFD's is more than 27 billion and they make more selling VFD's than they do selling pumps anymore. Just helps them sell more VFD's when people fall for the hype about VFD's saving energy, which they do not.
VFD's will save energy on many systems without centrifugal pumps. But because pumps lose head by the square of the speed, a VFD cannot slow down a pump enough to save any energy. |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 08 Jan 2019 08:18 PM |
|
...... |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
newbostonconst
Advanced Member
Posts:778
|
| 09 Jan 2019 01:35 PM |
|
Do you have any real data that shows your cycle stop valve actually stops the pump from cycling more then a correctly setup bladder tank system. My well has a 80 gallon tank and cycles the pump once every shower. Thus at the most it is cycling two times a day per person. I really don't see your system being able to do that and thus question your product description of being cycle stop.
Thanks for trying to sell another valve on a six month old post. |
|
| "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." George Carlins |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 09 Jan 2019 04:15 PM |
|
It’s a 2 year old post. I just didn't see it until now as it was 2011 last time I saw this thread. And I have been making CSV for over 26 years now, so anyone who says they don’t work or damage a pump hasn’t got a leg to stand on.
If you don't want to solve all your pump system problems and save a lot of money on an 80 gallon tank you don't need, then you don't want a CSV. Your 80 gallon tank only holds 20 gallons of water. So if you can take a shower with 20 gallons, the pump would only cycle once. But even with a 4.5 gallon size tank that only holds 1 gallon of water, the CSV would still only let your pump cycle once for a shower. Your 80 gallon tank will cause the pump to cycle for every 20 gallons used. The CSV would only let the pump cycle once, even if you use a million gallons in the shower. With a CSV the pump will cycle once for each use of water, but will not cycle on/off repeatedly WHILE you are using water. That makes a big difference in how long your pump will last, how large of a pressure tank you need, and how much pressure you have while using water.
With a 80 gallon tank and when taking a shower, the shower pressure will get lower and lower as the pressure drops from 60 to 40 before the tank is empty. Since all the water is coming from the tank, your shower pressure will start out weak and get weaker for the duration of the shower. With a CSV and a small tank, you would have good strong 50 PSI constant pressure for as long as you want to shower.
If you don't have any irrigation or long term water uses, a house only uses 200-300 gallon per day. That would mean your 80 gallon tank (20 gal draw) would only cause your pump to cycle 10-15 times per day. The only advantage of a CSV would be to save you about 500 bucks on that big tank, and give you stronger constant pressure in the house instead of 40 to 60 over and over.
I have charts to show that the average number of cycles per day is the same with a CSV and small tank, as it is with a so called “properly sized tank”. But I can’t figure out how to post a chart or photo on this forum. You can find it on my web page if you are interested. But again, if you don’t want to save money, make your pump system last longer, and get strong constant pressure in the shower, then you won’t like a CSV.
But I might be needing to take the advice in your signature. LOL
|
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
rvalue
New Member
Posts:66
|
| 10 Jan 2019 01:04 PM |
|
I have the Sense in my home, which isolates the electrical signature of various items, and tracks their usage. I have a regular old 1.5 HP pump with an 85 gallon pressure tank. We have 9 people in our home, and in the month of November used 11.6kWh for the pump. At $0.40/kWh, that is $4.64 for the month. Although VFD would use even less energy, I suspect the initial cost is too great to justify the savings given the life expectancy of the pump.
|
|
Details matter!
Jake Vierzen
R-Value Homes
Grand Rapids, MI
616.299.3654 |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 10 Jan 2019 01:19 PM |
|
Posted By rvalue on 10 Jan 2019 01:04 PM
I have the Sense in my home, which isolates the electrical signature of various items, and tracks their usage. I have a regular old 1.5 HP pump with an 85 gallon pressure tank. We have 9 people in our home, and in the month of November used 11.6kWh for the pump. At $0.40/kWh, that is $4.64 for the month. Although VFD would use even less energy, I suspect the initial cost is too great to justify the savings given the life expectancy of the pump.
Actually a VFD would increase your energy cost. Like I have explained a zillion times, the drop in horsepower when reducing the speed with a VFD is not linear with the drop in flow rate. Your 1HP pump will give you 10 gallons per horsepower on a regular pressure tank system. And even though a VFD would reduce the power needed to spin the pump from 1HP to 0.5HP, when doing so it is only producing 1/10th of a horsepower worth of water. So the VFD drops the energy needed to spin the pump, but the pump has to spin many more hours a day to produce the same amount of water. Therefore your typical 5 bucks a month on energy to run your pump will increase to 7-8 bucks a month.
The myth that a VFD saves energy is so strong that no matter how many times I explain it, a lot of people still think it saves energy. It is worse than having religion. With religion there is a chance that it is true, with a VFD there is no chance, yet people still believe it. PT Barnum once said "there is a sucker born every minute." That was a long time ago so I am changing that to a more present day figure by saying that now there is a sucker born every second. And the fact that they sell 27 billion dollars worth of VFD's that do not save energy as they advertise just proves it. |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 10 Jan 2019 02:43 PM |
|
Posted By rvalue on 10 Jan 2019 01:04 PM
I have the Sense in my home, which isolates the electrical signature of various items, and tracks their usage. I have a regular old 1.5 HP pump with an 85 gallon pressure tank. We have 9 people in our home, and in the month of November used 11.6kWh for the pump. At $0.40/kWh, that is $4.64 for the month. Although VFD would use even less energy, I suspect the initial cost is too great to justify the savings given the life expectancy of the pump.
Also just noticed you are paying 0.40/Kwh. Ouch! I only pay about 10 cents. That makes a big difference. My electric for a house well is only a buck or two a month. They keep inching up the price trying to get us use to 80 cents a Kwh, as that is probably about how much it cost to break even with a wind turbine. |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
newbostonconst
Advanced Member
Posts:778
|
| 10 Jan 2019 03:05 PM |
|
So as we have all stated and agree cycling your pump causes it to fail.
So I believe the CSV setup will cause the pump to cycle more then a 80 gallon tank setup.
Cost of the 2 setups is very similar and CSV 1 year warranty tells me it doesn't last any longer.
So, every couple of gallons of use the CSV setup is going to run the pump. That means every couple toilet flushings or hand washings? Where the 80 gallon tank would cycle every 20 gallons of use and likely cycle only every shower because it is going to top off at the end of the shower and have 20 gallons to supply fixtures till the next person takes a shower and it tops off again.
I don't see it as a savings compare to the normal setup and think it is actually worse. I do agree the VFD energy argument but the VFD should be easier on the pump with a softer start.
Just my two cents. I also think the time you spend on every site trying to sell your valve is similar to the VFD sales expense in a capital to sales volume scenario.
You are a very smart person like many of us searching for that million dollar break through product.....Good Luck...I think all three are very similar and your product will win in the small space/simplicity argument. |
|
| "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." George Carlins |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 10 Jan 2019 03:32 PM |
|
Posted By newbostonconst on 10 Jan 2019 03:05 PM
So as we have all stated and agree cycling your pump causes it to fail.
So I believe the CSV setup will cause the pump to cycle more then a 80 gallon tank setup.
Cost of the 2 setups is very similar and CSV 1 year warranty tells me it doesn't last any longer.
So, every couple of gallons of use the CSV setup is going to run the pump. That means every couple toilet flushings or hand washings? Where the 80 gallon tank would cycle every 20 gallons of use and likely cycle only every shower because it is going to top off at the end of the shower and have 20 gallons to supply fixtures till the next person takes a shower and it tops off again.
I don't see it as a savings compare to the normal setup and think it is actually worse. I do agree the VFD energy argument but the VFD should be easier on the pump with a softer start.
Just my two cents. I also think the time you spend on every site trying to sell your valve is similar to the VFD sales expense in a capital to sales volume scenario.
You are a very smart person like many of us searching for that million dollar break through product.....Good Luck...I think all three are very similar and your product will win in the small space/simplicity argument.
You can also use a CSV with an 80 gallon tank. You get the best of both that way. But you would just be wasting space and money on that big tank, and not getting to see constant pressure unless you use more than the 20 gallons that 80 gallon tank holds.
Like I have said,if you don't have a problem with short pump/tank life, water hammer, wire wear, check valve failure, pressure switch failure, or any of the many things caused by cycling, then you don't need a CSV. But I enjoy showing people with a standard tank (80 gal or whatever) they have problems they didn't even know about. If you have never experienced constant pressure, then you don't know what you are missing. People get use to the 40 to 60 swing in pressure and think that is normal. But after installing a CSV they come back and say they didn't know their pressure could be so good, and didn't realize they were living with inadequate pressure all these years.
The CSV was blacklisted by several of the big pump companies some 25 years ago. They said "The CSV makes pumps last longer and use smaller tanks. Since their company makes a living selling pumps and tanks, any employee who mentiones a CSV would be terminated immediately."
I always thought if you made a better mousetrap people would beat a path to your door. But I never realized making a mousetrap so good it makes mice extinct would cause the industry to blacklist and try everything they can to keep it from becoming common. I now believe there is probably a cure for cancer and the common cold, but there is so much money made on treatment, we will never hear about the cure. There are a lot of conspiracies that keep people from knowing about things that save them money.
I am just blown away that people think VFD's save energy and make pumps last longer, when that is absolutely not true. Bearings running dry until it finally gets up to 50% speed, voltage spikes, harmonics, lack of cooling flow, and many other things the VFD does are much harder on a pump/motor than just letting it start the normal way. All you have to do to increase the life of a pump started the normal way is just to not start the pump more times than it can withstand, and that is what a CSV does. |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
sailawayrb
Veteran Member
Posts:2283
|
| 10 Jan 2019 04:00 PM |
|
Your are indeed correct Newbostonconst.
It has been well established by actual engineers who design pumping systems for a living that a CSV would be a very bad choice for the typical residential domestic well water application. You will use more power than needed and cycle the pump more than needed (which shortens pump life) as compared to just using a properly sized well pump and bladder tank.
In simple terms, the typical duty cycle of a typical residential domestic water application is very high due flushing toilets, washing hands, cycling washing machines, taking showers, back-flushing filter media, and people just getting a glass of water and a CSV will cycle the pump for each of these small events whereas a properly sized pump and bladder tank will not.
For the detailed engineering explanation and valid data comparisons, you can Google “CVS versus VFD” at reputable engineering forums (e.g., eng-tips.com, terrylove.com, etc.) that discuss pumping systems to gain a full appreciation and understanding. You will learn that the data presented on the CVS marketing website has been carefully cherry picked to make the CSV appear superior to a VFD and most of the claims on this website are very misleading at best. You will also learn that most pump manufacturer warranties prohibit the use of a CVS. Pumping systems really need to be designed to satisfy the requirements of the system and making a blanket statement that one pumping system component is always superior to another should always be a red flag.
The best solution (i.e., longest pump life and lowest energy usage) for the typical residential domestic well water application is a properly sized well pump and bladder tank. The best solution for an irrigation system is a properly sized well pump and VFD at the other end. There may well indeed be situations where a CSV can be mated with an existing pump to provide a better ROI than replacing the pump and using a VFD, but that is about the extent of the performance benefit that a CSV provides for these applications. The CSV does provide a space savings benefit, but unless this is a hard requirement, this isn't worth the performance loss.
It is always best to have a knowledgeable person properly design a pumping system to satisfy the system requirements at maximum energy efficiently and pump life. Please don’t just swap out pumping system components without first applying this knowledge or you will likely regret it. |
|
| Borst Engineering & Construction LLC - Competence, Integrity and Professionalism are integral to all that we do! |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 10 Jan 2019 05:12 PM |
|
Posted By sailawayrb on 10 Jan 2019 04:00 PM
Your are indeed correct Newbostonconst.
It has been well established by actual engineers who design pumping systems for a living that a CSV would be a very bad choice for the typical residential domestic well water application. You will use more power than needed and cycle the pump more than needed (which shortens pump life) as compared to just using a properly sized well pump and bladder tank.
In simple terms, the typical duty cycle of a typical residential domestic water application is very high due flushing toilets, washing hands, cycling washing machines, taking showers, back-flushing filter media, and people just getting a glass of water and a CSV will cycle the pump for each of these small events whereas a properly sized pump and bladder tank will not.
For the detailed engineering explanation and valid data comparisons, you can Google “CVS versus VFD” at reputable engineering forums (e.g., eng-tips.com, terrylove.com, etc.) that discuss pumping systems to gain a full appreciation and understanding. You will learn that the data presented on the CVS marketing website has been carefully cherry picked to make the CSV appear superior to a VFD and most of the claims on this website are very misleading at best. You will also learn that most pump manufacturer warranties prohibit the use of a CVS. Pumping systems really need to be designed to satisfy the requirements of the system and making a blanket statement that one pumping system component is always superior to another should always be a red flag.
The best solution (i.e., longest pump life and lowest energy usage) for the typical residential domestic well water application is a properly sized well pump and bladder tank. The best solution for an irrigation system is a properly sized well pump and VFD at the other end. There may well indeed be situations where a CSV can be mated with an existing pump to provide a better ROI than replacing the pump and using a VFD, but that is about the extent of the performance benefit that a CSV provides for these applications. The CSV does provide a space savings benefit, but unless this is a hard requirement, this isn't worth the performance loss.
It is always best to have a knowledgeable person properly design a pumping system to satisfy the system requirements at maximum energy efficiently and pump life. Please don’t just swap out pumping system components without first applying this knowledge or you will likely regret it.
OMG! You are so wrong! I wrote most of those threads at Terrylove and engtips. If you are an engineer, you need to go back to school and figure out how pumps really work, because you don't have a clue.
Just as one example, show me one pump company who disallows a warranty because of a CSV. lol |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 18 Jan 2019 03:43 PM |
|
Posted By Valveman on 10 Jan 2019 05:12 PM
Posted By sailawayrb on 10 Jan 2019 04:00 PM
Your are indeed correct Newbostonconst.
It has been well established by actual engineers who design pumping systems for a living that a CSV would be a very bad choice for the typical residential domestic well water application. You will use more power than needed and cycle the pump more than needed (which shortens pump life) as compared to just using a properly sized well pump and bladder tank.
In simple terms, the typical duty cycle of a typical residential domestic water application is very high due flushing toilets, washing hands, cycling washing machines, taking showers, back-flushing filter media, and people just getting a glass of water and a CSV will cycle the pump for each of these small events whereas a properly sized pump and bladder tank will not.
For the detailed engineering explanation and valid data comparisons, you can Google “CVS versus VFD” at reputable engineering forums (e.g., eng-tips.com, terrylove.com, etc.) that discuss pumping systems to gain a full appreciation and understanding. You will learn that the data presented on the CVS marketing website has been carefully cherry picked to make the CSV appear superior to a VFD and most of the claims on this website are very misleading at best. You will also learn that most pump manufacturer warranties prohibit the use of a CVS. Pumping systems really need to be designed to satisfy the requirements of the system and making a blanket statement that one pumping system component is always superior to another should always be a red flag.
The best solution (i.e., longest pump life and lowest energy usage) for the typical residential domestic well water application is a properly sized well pump and bladder tank. The best solution for an irrigation system is a properly sized well pump and VFD at the other end. There may well indeed be situations where a CSV can be mated with an existing pump to provide a better ROI than replacing the pump and using a VFD, but that is about the extent of the performance benefit that a CSV provides for these applications. The CSV does provide a space savings benefit, but unless this is a hard requirement, this isn't worth the performance loss.
It is always best to have a knowledgeable person properly design a pumping system to satisfy the system requirements at maximum energy efficiently and pump life. Please don’t just swap out pumping system components without first applying this knowledge or you will likely regret it.
OMG! You are so wrong! I wrote most of those threads at Terrylove and engtips. If you are an engineer, you need to go back to school and figure out how pumps really work, because you don't have a clue.
Just as one example, show me one pump company who disallows a warranty because of a CSV. lol
OK it has been more than a week since I ask to be shown even one pump company who disallows a warranty because of the use of a pump control valve. And all I got was Crickets!!!
That is because pump control valves have been a mainstay in the industry for a hundred years. The typical control design is for the pump to start against a closed valve, then the valve slowly opens, allowing it to maintain a constant pressure while water is being used. When there is no more demand, the control valve closes drip tight, and a timer allows the pump to run for an additional 60 seconds before shutting off the pump. It is well known in the industry that it is OK to completely deadhead a pump for 60 seconds using timers or flow switches. However, when deadheading a pump the water in the pump case starts to heat up, and the pump will be damaged if not shut off in about 60 seconds. It is also well known in the industry, that restricting the pump with a valve decreases the amp draw or power required.
However, only a few people in the industry really understand these things. Many like sailawayrb still think a valve burns energy and a VFD saves energy, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
Most of the problems associated with older style pump control valves were solved with the introduction of the Cycle Stop Valve or CSV. Since the CSV never completely closes, timing how long you can deadhead the pump and all the controls needed to make that happen are no longer issues, as the pump is never deadheaded. With older style pump control valves seat wear was always a problem. The CSV having a non-closing seat also means seat wear is no longer an issue. The CSV never completely closes anyway, so the seat can have a lot of wear and still function flawlessly. With the drip tight closure of older style pump control valves, the valve speed had to be reduced to keep from causing water hammer on valve open or close. With a CSV valve speed control is not needed. The non-closing CSV can be made to open and close as fast as possible without causing water hammer as again, it never completely closes which is what causes water hammer. Allowing a CSV to react as fast as any changes in the distribution system while eliminating water hammer solved pretty much any other problem associated with older style pump control valves.
Since the CSV is much better for a pump than any other type of control valve and better than VFD type controls as well, pump manufacturers would never disallow a warranty. They would first have to disallow a warranty for using a Cla-Val, Watts, Bermad, Singer, OCV, Zurn, Wilkins, Dole, Gold Seal, Ball Valve, and a hundred different other brands of fully closing type pump control valves first.
I agree finding someone knowledgeable to help design a pump system is a good idea. However, finding someone who is really knowledgeable and not just thinks they are knowledgeable is the problem. A good test would be to ask if they think a VFD saves energy or if a valve is hard on a pump? If they answer yes to either of these questions, they only think they know how pumps work. Keep looking! |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
icfbound
Basic Member
Posts:120
|
| 20 Jan 2019 12:54 AM |
|
Ahh...maybe intelligent people don’t endlessly debate you because they now recognize how pointless this would be given your bias, ignorance and history. You endlessly debate this subject on just about every forum on the internet and endlessly claim how great the CSV product that you market and sell is. Hundreds of competent people in the field have pointed out for many years how erroneous and misleading your claims are but you still keep rambling on. Seems like you are ripe for a marketing fraud lawsuit. Are you willing to make your case in a court of law?
If anyone thinks they have burst a pipe or destroyed a pump from using a CSV please PM me with your information. It may be possible to instigate a multi state class action suit given the years of forum discussion and warnings provided to this individual that now exist which would be available for discovery. |
|
CONservative: The first three letters are all you need to know to fully understand this Republican.
<br /> <br />
Racist: A person who believes their race is superior to another race.
<br /> <br />
Religion: The deception of suckers who fear nonexistence to believe in a nonexistent supreme being and to adhere to false doctrine to control and exploit them.
<br /> <br />
Republican: A greedy, racist, sexist person who skillfully uses deception, hate, fear and religion to control and exploit suckers to gain personal wealth and power to benefit themselves while using government to limit the freedoms, safety and pursuit of happiness of others.
<br /> <br />
Sexist: A person who assaults, discriminates, intimidates or stereotypes the opposite sex.
<br /> <br />
Sucker: A weak minded person who has been brain washed and who usually lacks education and critical thinking skills allowing them to be easily deceived. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGAqYNFQdZ4">Watch...Don't Be a Sucker!</a>
<br /> <br />
Trumpian: A narcissistic and skilled con artist Republican who is highly attractive to suckers and uses Fascist and Nazi tactics and commits traitorous acts to undermine democracy to gain personal wealth and power. |
|
|
Valveman
New Member
Posts:85
|
| 20 Jan 2019 01:38 PM |
|
Posted By icfbound on 20 Jan 2019 12:54 AM
Ahh...maybe intelligent people don’t endlessly debate you because they now recognize how pointless this would be given your bias, ignorance and history. You endlessly debate this subject on just about every forum on the internet and endlessly claim how great the CSV product that you market and sell is. Hundreds of competent people in the field have pointed out for many years how erroneous and misleading your claims are but you still keep rambling on. Seems like you are ripe for a marketing fraud lawsuit. Are you willing to make your case in a court of law?
If anyone thinks they have burst a pipe or destroyed a pump from using a CSV please PM me with your information. It may be possible to instigate a multi state class action suit given the years of forum discussion and warnings provided to this individual that now exist which would be available for discovery.
Wow! Just wow! You can’t read a pump curve and make an argument on a scientific basis, so you just resort to name calling. Where have I seen that tactic before? LOL! Although, I would love to argue politics, I would be happy if you just learn to read a simple pump curve. I would gladly welcome the opportunity to make this case in court, would you? I know how to read a pump curve, and you obviously do not. Reading a pump curve is all it takes to prove my point that VFD’s do not save energy. Ever wonder why after 26 years no one has tried to sue me? Even with close to a million out there working today, there has never been a single instance of a CSV destroying a pump. Quite to the contrary, there are close to a million instances of pumps lasting longer than normal because of a CSV. The big pump and VFD companies would love to shut me up and keep me from telling the truth about their most profitable item. But they know I am telling the truth and there is nothing they can do about it. Actually, I am the one who needs to start a class action suit against all those companies who say VFD’s save energy and valves are bad for pumps. I have been documenting those liable and slanderous quotes for years, in anticipation of doing just that. I will add your name to the list if you like? And yes, this seems to be an endless debate for me, as there are way fewer “competent” people in this field than you would think. I am still waiting after 26 years for someone to post a pump curve that proves me wrong, or show a single pump destroyed by a CSV. Since that will never happen, I will continue to show up anywhere people are making inaccurate statements about pump systems. I don’t know that much about politics. But from your signature I would say you are quick to jump to conclusions without considering the facts. |
|
| cyclestopvalves.com |
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
Active Forums 4.1
 |
Membership: |
 |
Latest:
croccohvacusa |
 |
New Today:
0 |
 |
New Yesterday:
0 |
 |
Overall:
35027 |
 |
People Online: |
 |
Visitors:
203 |
 |
Members:
0 |
 |
Total:
203 |
|
|
|