Messages

1411

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: Which CSV model will hand some silt and sand

« on: September 09, 2011, 11:01:19 AM »

Hi tom
The best CSV to handle sand is the CSV1Z.  And yes many times the sand problem will be greatly reduced when the pump stops cycling, which surges the well.

1412

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: sta-rite pump

« on: August 31, 2011, 08:14:05 AM »

Thanks for sharing.  Glad you liked it.  You could post a picture here if its not to much trouble.  Everybody likes pictures!

1413

Valve Tech / Re: New CSV to replace my other

« on: August 30, 2011, 10:54:18 AM »

I am glad you got it adjusted the way you want it.  I'll bet in a short time you will be able to tell the differencs in shower pressure when the CSV is holding 58 constant compared to when the tank is draining down to 40 PSI.

Yes we have parts for everything.  Valves that handle a lot of sand, iron bacteria, or have been frozen will ocassionally need a part.  Most of the valves we sold 15 to 18 years ago have had no repairs and are still working fine.  Your not likely to wear one out.

Thanks for sharing this with everyone, let us know if we can help with anything.

1414

Valve Tech / Re: CSV1Z vs CSV1W

« on: August 30, 2011, 08:49:34 AM »

Both valves have 1" female and 1 1/4" male threads on each end.

1415

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: sta-rite pump

« on: August 29, 2011, 10:48:27 AM »

That should work fine.  Let us know how it goes.

1416

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: sta-rite pump

« on: August 29, 2011, 07:56:46 AM »

You still need the pressure switch.  You can leave it attached to the motor as is.  You just need to add some length to the sensing line and attach it after the CSV.  Plug the hole in the pump case where the sensing line came out of.  Or you can use an additional pressure switch mounted after the CSV, and just bypass the switch on the side of the motor and go straight to the wires.

1417

Valve Tech / Re: New CSV to replace my other

« on: August 28, 2011, 07:44:33 PM »

A large pressure tank is a disadvantage to how quick the pump starts and how fast you have constant pressure at the tap.  But a large tank can be an advantage for the pump not having to start as often for short term uses of water.  It is a trade off that works well either way.  You could loosen the small adjustment screw in the pressure switch which should reduce the on/off bandwidth to 15 PSI instead of 20. 

Or you could use one of our digital pressure switches so you could reduce the bandwidth to 10 PSI like on at 50 and off at 60.  You are still utilizing half of the big tank this way.  You never see the pressure go below 50, long term uses stay constant at 58, and when no water is being used it shuts off at 60 PSI.  Makes it hard to see a difference in pressure no matter how you are using the water.

1418

Valve Tech / Re: CSV1Z vs CSV1W

« on: August 28, 2011, 07:32:15 PM »

At 50 or 60 no difference.  Any other pressure and the CSV1Z is best.

1419

Valve Tech / Re: New CSV to replace my other

« on: August 28, 2011, 01:21:17 PM »

Sorry if our instructions are confusing, but the CSV will work with any size pressure tank.  It doesn't really matter where the pressure switch is set, because the setting of the CSV will determine the pressure you see while using water.  With a large pressure tank, you just set the CSV closer to the off setting of the pressure switch.  In other words, with a 40/60 pressure switch, set the CSV at 58 PSI.  Then the CSV only fills the last 2 PSI of the tank at 1 GPM, and it will only take 2 or 3 minutes to top off the tank.

With the CSV1W, that means tightening on the adjustment screw about 2 full turns clockwise.  Just make sure when you run 1 or 2 GPM, that the pressure stays just under 60 so the pump doesn't shut off.

1420

Valve Tech / Re: New CSV to replace my other

« on: August 22, 2011, 12:00:17 PM »

I would appreciate you coming back and giving people the benefit of your experience.  I thought I would explain the way a bypass works in a CSV.  As you have seen, several other companies copy everything I do, so I have not printed this information before.

The bypass in the smaller CSV’s is 1 GPM average.  In other words you will get between ½ and 1.5 GPM, depending on the differential pressure from your pump.  If you have a pump that builds high pressure, it will squirt 1.5 GPM through the bypass.  A low-pressure pump will only squirt ½ of a GPM through the bypass.  This actually sizes the bypass to match the cooling requirements of the particular pump.  Higher-pressure pumps need 1.5 GPM to stay cool, while lower pressure pumps only need .5 GPM to stay cool.

That makes the so called 3 GPM bypass in our competitors valve actually work between 1.5 GPM and 5 GPM, even though they don't know this is happening.

Larger Cycle Stop Valves have a bypass with 5 GPM average.  This actually works between 2.2 and 8 GPM, depending on the backpressure of the particular pump being used.  Again this bypass matches the cooling requirement for each particular pump.

Our competitors cannot use this small of a bypass, because a drilled hole this small will easily clog with debris or from a buildup of hard water deposits, the same as happens to the holes in a shower head.  The Cycle Stop Valve has a patented non-closing seat instead of a drilled hole.  The non-closing seat of the CSV will not clog, and can be made much smaller to accommodate lower flow rates and utilize smaller pressure tanks.

Very few people understand how to size the non-closing bypass or measure the flow rate.  Even though it is a fairly simple operation, I will leave this part un-written so as not to make it even easier for my competitors to further copy our design.

Needless to say the smaller the bypass, the lower the useful flow rate without cycling the pump.  The smaller the bypass the lower the pressure tank-fill rate and therefore the smaller the pressure tank that can be used.  Please let us know the smallest flow rate you can use without cycling the pump, and how that compares to our competitors.

1421

Valve Tech / Re: New CSV to replace my other

« on: August 17, 2011, 08:21:04 AM »

Welcome Hoss
All our competitors say theirs is just like a Cycle Stop Valve only cheaper.  As you have seen, this is not true.  The patented half moon design in the CSV is what allows us to make the small 1 GPM bypass.  A drilled hole the same size would quickly clog up, so our "competitors" drill a 3 GPM hole to try and prevent clogging.  So anytime you use less than 3 GPM, such as with a 2.5 GPM showerhead, the pump still cycles on and off, which is not good.

Yes the CSV1W will work down to 1 GPM.  We guarantee everything we sell.  I'll bet you can't get your money back on the faulty valve from our competitor.  Good thing it was "cheaper".

Another one of our many competitors uses a different tactic.  They are outright infringing on our patented half moon bypass design with just one of their insignificant valve models.  That way they can advertise their "Constant Pressure Valves" as having "no drilled holes, and no screens, just like a CSV", even though all their other models do have drilled holes and screens.  We hear from people occasionally that say, "this valve is suppose to be just like a CSV with no drilled holes and no screens".   We have to tell them that’s only on our competitors model A, and all of their other models B though Z have drilled holes and screens.

I hate that our "competitors" are using these tricks, which give the original Cycle Stop Valve a bad reputation without due cause.  It does prove that the design of the CSV works so well that others will go to great lengths to copy or steal our idea.

When you get that valve replaced with an original CSV, please come back and let everyone know the difference you experience.  You might save others from wasting their money on those expensive paperweights.
Thanks
Cary

1422

Open Loop Geothermal Heat Pump / Re: CSV valve and water with low PH (6)

« on: August 13, 2011, 10:13:28 AM »

It will not effect the plastic or Stainless Steel ones at all.  There is no lead in the other CSV's to worry about either.  Even the B series are coated on the inside.  Only the CSV1W and CSV1Z would be effected, but then it would take a long time for it to cause a problem.

1423

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: Two Well System ??'s

« on: August 10, 2011, 07:56:51 AM »

I think the new 1.5 HP pump maybe all you need.  You need about 20 PSI extra to make up for the 40’ elevation to the house.  So you need to run a 60/80 pressure switch with a CSV set at 70 PSI.  Even in the shallow well the ¾ HP can only be turned up to about 30/50 if the well pulls down to 200’.  You can run a two well system this way but the ¾ pump will only help keep some water going at 30/50 when the 1.5 HP pump is not working.  If the 12 GPM from the 1.5 HP doesn’t keep up, you will need to put another pump this size in the second well to double the volume at the higher pressure

1424

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: VFD doesnt save power??...

« on: July 23, 2011, 10:25:36 AM »

Now that’s funny, but also sad!  A “teacher” should know what he/she is talking about before “teaching” it to others.  People who finally “get it” tell me they had to un-learn what their “teacher or professor” “taught” them, which is sad. 

If you really believe a VFD can save energy, then you also believe it is a perpetual motion machine, whether you said it out loud or not.  Because there is no more efficient means of pumping than to use a properly sized pump, running on across the line controls, operating at it’s best efficiency point. 

Add a VFD to that and you are increasing the energy use in several ways.  The parasitic losses or energy used by the VFD equipment itself, increases energy consumption.  The loss of motor efficiency from operating on pulsing DC voltage from a VFD compared to pure sinusoidal AC current as with ATL, increases energy consumption.  The harmonic current from a VFD increases motor heat losses, increasing energy consumption.   Harmonics fed back to the grid from a VFD increases energy consumption of every other electrical device on the entire grid.  The air conditioning required for proper cooling of the VFD, increases energy consumption.  The energy reduction for decreasing the speed of the motor is not linear to the reduction in flow, which increases the energy consumption per gallon produced.  Replacing equipment that was prematurely destroyed from all the VFD problems listed earlier increases energy consumption.

I know how to read a pump curve, so break one out if you can prove me wrong.  To say a VFD saves energy is ludicrous, to anyone who knows the facts.  I am use to these kinds of insults from people who already fell for the VFD hype, drank the Kool-Aid, and don’t have the facts to argue the point.  Since this is my forum, I could easily delete all your personal insults.  But I want others to see the kind of things people say to me for posting the truth about VFD’s.  You need pretty tough skin to say that VFD’s are a scam.  Because most everybody else in the industry, is either part of the scam, or fell for it hook, line, and sinker like Mr. VFDtech.

I locked this thread so you can’t delete anything.  You may start another if you have ANY facts to show.  I can only hope some of your students read this, realize teachers are not infallible, and start doing some research on their own.

1425

Pumps, Wells, Tanks, Controls / Re: VFD doesnt save power??...

« on: July 22, 2011, 09:41:46 AM »

Ahh, so I have irritated yet another VFD salesman or engineer who would like to pass off the VFD as a “perpetual motion machine”.  Sorry, the volts/herts ratio thing is not new.  But it has absolutely nothing to do with the power needed by the pump to supply the flow and head required.  No matter how you supply the power, it still has to be enough to spin the pump and deliver the flow and head needed.

You are right that I maybe lacking in some of the “latest” improvements to VFD’s.  This is because there have been so many “upgrades” I can’t keep up.  Ever since I started working with VFD’s some 25+ years ago, they have made major changes every 12 to 18 months, trying to solve some of the inherent problems.  I have tried to keep up.   But in the process I may have forgotten a lot about VFD’s.

With every “upgrade” VFD’s have gotten better at reducing stray voltage, harmonics, voltage spikes, bearing currents, and skipping critical speeds.  Yet the problems from VFD’s are caused by “laws of physics” and can never actually be solved.   With every upgrade VFD’s have gotten easier to program, smaller, lighter, and cheaper.  But no matter how many “upgrades”, they will never be able to “break the laws of physics”.  It is always going to take X amount of energy to produce Y amount of gallons at Z head in feet, no matter how you spin the pump.

The problem has always been that VFD experts want to forget that head is the most important part of pumping.  I don’t know how many VFD articles I have read that are completely incorrect.  The VFD expert will say “reducing HP by the cube of the speed means a 100 HP pump slowed by 50% will only use 12.5 HP”. 

This is completely neglecting the fact that head is reduced by the square of the speed.  Reducing the pump speed by 50%, also reduces the head or lift by 75%, which means it quit pumping a long time ago.  Typically a pumps speed can only be reduced by 10% at the most, and still produce enough head to get water out of the well or to the top of a water tower.  Reducing the speed by 10% means reducing the power required by only 27%, not by 87.5% as VFD salespersons would like for you to believe.

If you know how to read a pump curve, you can see that the power required is naturally reduced by about 50%, simply by reducing the flow rate, without changing the pump speed at all.  So a VFD is just trying to trick a pump into doing something it already does naturally, and VFD salespersons would like to keep that fact from being understood.  Going on about “internal PI loops, volts/hertz ratios, and monitoring power output is just “baffling with BS”, because there is nothing brilliant about it.  A VFD will never be a perpetual motion machine no matter how complicated you make it sound.

The vile and venom spewed by VFD proponents is reminiscent of what Columbus must have experienced when he tried to explain that the world in not flat.  But all the vile and venom that ever existed does not change the fact that the earth is actually round, and VFD’s do not save energy.

Therefore Mr VFD, no discredit to your knowledge of VFD’s, but you are the one lacking in technology regarding the natural characteristics of pumps .. put that in your VFD and .... it!