Ecotech EZ Variable Speed Motor & Hayward SuperPump (aka FrankenPump)

[Chuck_Davis]

Re: Ecotech EZ Variable Speed Motor and the Hayward SuperPump

For the convenience of anybody else following this thread, here are the parts diagrams for the SuperPump and SuperPump VS:

http://www.hayward-pool.com/pdf/Parts Diagrams/Super-Pump.pdf

http://www.hayward-pool.com/pdf/Parts Diagrams/Super-Pump-VS.pdf

I spoke with Hayward, and the service factor on the SuperPump VS is 1.0, for a total horsepower of 1.5 HP.

The service factor on the EcoTech 1.5 HP variable speed motor is 1.6, for a total horsepower of 2.4 HP.

 

[acamato]

Re: Ecotech EZ Variable Speed Motor and the Hayward SuperPump

Here is the torque specs for a superpump

Motor mounting plate to motor bolts: 100 in/lbs (8.3 ft/lbs)
Housing bolts: 80 in/lbs (6.6 ft/lbs)


Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

 

[Chuck_Davis]

Installation of the new motor was fairly straightforward. The EcoTech has a larger diameter than the Hayward/A.O. Smith motor. As a result, the motor support at the end of the mounting plate has to be reduced in height so that the motor and wethead line up squarely. This only took a few minutes work with a Dremel tool. (Wear glasses, since there will be fragments of plastic flying around.) This could probably also be done with a file.

acamato reports having to make a similar modification, and also needing to move some other equipment due to the presence of the control pod on the top of the motor.

I'll report on operating experience after a few days.

 

[Chuck_Davis]

Motor / Impeller mismatch?

Split by moderator from sticky HERE. Please ask questions in your own thread. Thanks, jblizzle

New Question.................Why is performance poorer after upgrading from a 1 HP impeller to a 2.5 HP impeller?

I just upgraded my 2-speed Hayward SuperPump to a variable speed motor.

The original motor was an A.O. Smith 1.5 HP with a 1 HP impeller. (Inherited from previous owner/installer, who is a pool builder.) The nominal rating on the motor was 1.5 NPHP x 1.3 Service Factor = 1.95 THP. At low speed the motor was plate-rated at 1/4 HP and ran at 1725 RPM. At high speed it ran at 3450 RPM.

While researching this upgrade I determined that the Hayward SuperPump VS uses the standard SuperPump body (with 1.5" connections), a 1.5 NPHP x 1.0 Service Factor = 1.5 THP variable speed motor and a 2.5 HP impeller. The SuperPump VS motor can run at 600 RPM to 3000 RPM.

My new EcoTech variable speed motor is rated at 1.5 NPHP x 1.6 Service Factor = 2.4 THP. It can run at 1035 RPM (30%) to 3450 RPM (100%).

Since the Hayward SuperPump VS uses a 2.5 HP impeller, and since my motor was more robust that the SuperPump VS motor, as part of my upgrade I upgraded my impeller to a 2.5 HP impeller (along with the corresponding diffuser and seal plate). This literally gave me a "roll your own" SuperPump VS with a more powerful motor.

(I just read through Hydraulics 101, where there is the statement "Total HP (THP)...... = NPHP * Service Factor. This is the maximum load that can be safely driven by the motor and must always be greater than the maximum load from the impeller. A motor can be driven above the THP but will likely fail in a short period of time." How does Hayward get away with a 1.5 THP motor with a 2.5 HP impeller? More importantly, is my 2.4 motor at any risk from being used with a 2.5 HP impeller?)

In my "winter" configuration (with the heat pump bypassed), I was able to run the original motor (with its 1 HP impeller) at low speed (1725 RPM). I was able to get approximately 20 GPM, 5-7 lbs. of pressure at the Tagelus TA-60 sand (Zeolite) filter and 2.5-3.0 (out of 5) on the flowmeter for the Liquidator. (Note-The bottom range of the system flowmeter is 20 GPM.)

With the new motor and 2.5 HP impeller I was able to get approximately 20 GPM and 4 lbs. of pressure with the motor running at 40%/1380 RPM and approximately 25 GPM and 5-7 lbs. of pressure running at 50%/1725 RPM.

The Liquidator was not functioning, however, with the motor running at 40%/1380 RPM or 50%/1725 RPM. I determined that there was not enough pressure to push any flow past the check valve on the input (fill) side of the Liquidator. After removing the check valve it turned out that at 40%/1380 RPM there still wasn't enough pressure (or head) to reach the Liquidator. (I.e. with the tubing disconnected from the Liquidator, if the end of the tubing was held several inches below the connector on the Liquidator there would be flow but at the level of the connector there would not be any flow.) Increasing the motor speed to 50%/1725 RPM, the same speed as the original motor (with its 1 HP impeller), would provide flow to the Liquidator (but only with the check valve removed).

The location of the pool equipment might be a factor in this disappointing performance. The equipment pad is roughly 40 feet away from the closest skimmer and roughly 3-4 feet above the level of the pool.

All piping is 1.5". There are three 1.5" lines from two skimmers and the bottom drain that come together just in front of the pump. The Tagelus TA-60 is plumbed for 1.5" pipes. There is a 1.5" return (that splits underground to two eyeballs) and a 1.5" line to a waterfall.

What can I do to get performance at least as good as the old system? With the upgrade from the 1 HP impeller to the 2.5 HP impeller I really expected to be able to run at a lower speed. As it stands now, it looks like I'll have to run at a higher speed. Would there be any value in downgrading to a 1.5 HP or 1.0 HP impeller?

(I realize that most of my savings from the variable speed motor will - hopefully - come during summer when I can - hopefully - run at less than full speed with the additional 60 feet of piping and the heat pump in-circuit. My experience so far has me nervous, however.)

In case they might be useful, I've included a few pictures of the equipment pad.

 

[Lummy]

Maybe I am missing something but how is performance "POORER"?

If you compare the 2 motors at the same RPM, you stated you were getting 5gpm more using the larger impeller

In my "winter" configuration (with the heat pump bypassed), I was able to run the original motor (with its 1 HP impeller) at low speed (1725 RPM). I was able to get approximately 20 GPM, 5-7 lbs. of pressure at the Tagelus TA-60 sand (Zeolite) filter and 2.5-3.0 (out of 5) on the flowmeter for the Liquidator. (Note-The bottom range of the system flowmeter is 20 GPM.)

With the new motor and 2.5 HP impeller I was able to get approximately 20 GPM and 4 lbs. of pressure with the motor running at 40%/1380 RPM and approximately 25 GPM and 5-7 lbs. of pressure running at 50%/1725 RPM.

 

[acamato]

Too bad you didnt take amp readings for your old motor at the two speeds. Then you really would be able to compare performance.

Here are some pump curves for the SuperPump.

Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

 

[Chuck_Davis]

Lummy - That's what is so puzzling. According to the flowmeter, at 1725 RPM there is a higher flow rate, but downstream from the flowmeter there is now not enough pressure/head to push water past the check valve to the Liquidator. If I go up to 55%/1897 RPM there is a weak flow of water through the check valve. On the suction side of the Liquidator (connected to the lint pot) there has not been any increase in apparent flow according the (simple) Liquidator flowmeter. My expectation, perhaps unrealistic, was that upgrading from a 1.0 HP impeller to a 2.5 HP impeller and from a 1.95 THP motor to a 2.4 THP motor would have given the overall system more performance "headroom" rather than remaining marginal or dropping. I had also hoped to be able to run at a notch or two below 1725 RPM in the "winter" configuration.

BTW - Just for grins I swapped the check valves between the inflow and suction sides of the Liquidator to make sure none of the check valves had gone bad, but there was no difference.

acamato - My old motor was an A.O. Smith (black) with a 1.3 Service Factor. The current Hayward 2-speed motors are gold with a 1.0 Service Factor. I don't know what Hayward was using in the late 90's. The curves are probably comparable, however. This piece of Hayward literature plots out the curves for low-speed operation: http://www.hayward-pool.com/pdf/literature/LITSUPER11.pdf. Even with the 2.0 HP 2-speed motor there isn't much hope above 20 feet of head when running at low speed. Given my long piping runs and elevation above the pool, I'm wondering if I am up against a design limit of the pump body, regardless of horsepower. Luckily the high speed curves offer some hope of energy savings during the summer.

Does anybody have any thoughts or reaction about Hayward using a 1.5 THP VS motor with a 2.5 HP impeller, or any potential risk to my 2.4 THP EcoTech VS motor with a 2.5 HP impeller?

Thanks!

 

[mas985]

Does anybody have any thoughts or reaction about Hayward using a 1.5 THP VS motor with a 2.5 HP impeller, or any potential risk to my 2.4 THP EcoTech VS motor with a 2.5 HP impeller

The SuperPump VS has a max speed of 3000 RPM so the 2.5 HP Impeller is really loading the motor only to about 1.6 THP. With the extra efficiency of the motor, it is sized appropriately.

BTW, a 2.5 HP Impeller only increases flow rate by about 18% over a 1 HP Impeller (on the same plumbing). So it isn't surprising that you don't see much of a change. This is the main reason high HP pump are so inefficient. For that 18% increase in flow rate, it takes almost 60% more energy. Not a good trade off.

 

[acamato]

Throw a ammeter on the motor when its running. See what it is drawing at various speeds to see what HP it is acutall using..
If you have a pump that needs 1hp to run with a 1hp motor and you install a larger motor, you will not see a performance difference. The motor will only provide the power needed to the pump.

I would say that the performance change is from the impeller and diffuser not the motor.

Pump curves are dependant on the wet end of the pump not the motor. Pump curves usually have other lines indicating different HP required. Since Hayward provides a package (motor and wetend) they don't need the HP lines on their curves.

Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

 

[mas985]

An amp meter alone won't tell you the brake HP the motor is using. You also, need power factor, voltage and motor efficiency.

 

[Chuck_Davis]

Quick update - I went out to fiddle some more with the input (fill) line to the Liquidator and now it is pumping like a fire hose. Previously there must have been some sort of temporary blockage in the old Rainbow chlorinator, which is where I plumbed in the line. No remaining issues for any Liquidator owners considering this upgrade.

 

[acamato]

My pool isn't open yet, but I got my pump running this past weekend. With the multiport in recirc (need to put the filter back together). Pressure was at 21 psi running full speed and 5 psi at 50% speed. Water was 53 deg. I plan on opening it on 5/3 when I get back from my trip. I am also waiting for a new 0-30 psi gauge to come in.

The pump/motor is extremely quiet.

Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

 

[Lummy]

I put mine in this past weekend and I'll agree with you that it is very quiet. I like the sound it makes when it spins up at first, sounds like a jet plane

I'm getting about 20 PSI at full speed and ~10psi at 50%.

 

[Chuck_Davis]

As noted previously in the thread, I put in a 2.5 HP impeller. In my "winter" configuration (with heat pump bypassed) I could run at 50%/1725 RPM and get 26 GPM and 7 PSI at the sand (zeolite) filter. In my "summer" configuration (with an extra 60 feet of 1.5" pipe and a heat pump in-circuit) I have to run at 65%/2243 RPM to get 20 GPM (the minimum for the heat pump) and 14 PSI at the filter. (I have performance measurements in 5% flow/RPM steps if anybody is interested.) I don't know yet how many hours I will have to run to maintain the FC level and heat the pool or if I might have to increase GPM for heating.

I may try a 1.5 HP impeller (which I have). I know I'll have to run the pump a little faster, but I want to see if the noise changes. It's not that the unit is noisy per se, but at 65%/2243 RPM there is a resonant frequency that comes through the concrete equipment pad (even though I have a sound absorbing pad under the pump) and into the house. I'll wait a bit and see if I get used to the noise, though.

It turned out the new motor (and impeller) did give my Liquidator some heartburn. I have the fill line for the Liquidator plumbed into the old Rainbow chlorinator, which is on the equipment pad next to the Liquidator, well below the high point of the system at the top of the filter and just before the return piping starts its 3-4 foot drop to the pool. (Pictures above.) Even with the Liquidator fill line moved to the connector directly off the main return line at the bottom of the Rainbow, there isn't (reliably) enough pressure/head to lift the fill water to the top of the Liquidator. I suspect that this is because the Rainbow is on the "downhill" side of the system, and the pressure/head at that point is lower for some reason with the new motor/impeller. I'm going to re-plumb the fill line to the "uphill" side, probably between the filter and the flowmeter.

 

[acamato]

Why don't you pipe the liquidator fill line to the discharge of the pump (between pump and the filter)? The pressure in the line should be more than enough to fill the liquidator.

Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

 

[Chuck_Davis]

That was my first instinct, but I cheated and read the Liquidator manual and they specify connecting the fill line after the filter. As long as the connection point is higher than the Liquidator, which it would be, it should be fine. I might give Hasa a call and see if there is a reason for that spec, however.

 

[acamato]

That was my first instinct, but I cheated and read the Liquidator manual and they specify connecting the fill line after the filter. As long as the connection point is higher than the Liquidator, which it would be, it should be fine. I might give Hasa a call and see if there is a reason for that spec, however.

I guess that its better to have filtered water going into the liquidator. Debris that gets through the skimmer and pump baskets can cause issues with the float vlaves and check valve.

I had to remember where I had mine hooked up to. I did have the fill line after the filter and out line was into the front drain port on my pump. This photo shows where I had the fill line.

 

[Chuck_Davis]

I replaced the 2.5 HP impeller with the 1.5 HP impeller. (The seal plate and diffuser had to be replaced also, but they are the same ones I used with the original 1 HP impeller.)

The pump might be slightly quieter, but the main difference is that the resonant vibration that was making its way into the house is gone.

As expected, I have to run the motor 5%/172 RPM faster for equivalent performance (GPM, pressure at the filter) as with the 2.5 HP impeller. In my "summer" configuration, with the heat pump in-circuit, I now have to run at 70%/2415 RPM to get 20 GPM, which is the minimum for the heat pump. I haven't yet fired up the heat pump to know if I'll have to increase hours or speed to keep the pool at a wuss-certified 88 degrees.

I also lost "a little off the top." 2.5 HP impeller: 90%/3014 RPM=40 GPM, 25 PSI; 95%/3728 RPM=45 GPM, 28 PSI; 100%/3450 RPM=48 GPM, 31 PSI. 1.5 HP impeller: 95%/3278 RPM=39 GPM, 25 PSI; 100%/3450 RPM=41 GPM, 27 PSI.

Note - Moving the fill line connection for the Liquidator to between the filter and flowmeter solved that problem.

 

[mas985]

As expected, I have to run the motor 5%/172 RPM faster for equivalent performance (GPM, pressure at the filter) as with the 2.5 HP impeller.

Why did you expect only a 5% change? On the same plumbing (not head loss), the 2.5 HP impeller should produce about 15% more flow rate than the 1.5 HP impeller so you would have to increase the RPM by 15% to match the old impeller.

But what were you hoping to accomplish by downsizing the impeller? A smaller impeller is less efficient and requires the motor to run at higher rpm for the same flow rate so overall efficiency suffers. Also, I would expect more noise from the higher RPM although as you had experience, the resonance may be different.

 

[Chuck_Davis]

Since I already had the 1.5 HP impeller (and seal plate and diffuser), I figured I'd try them to see if the resonant noise went away, which it did. The overall noise level, which included the resonance, is the same or very slightly lower despite the higher RPM.

My wording was unclear. I was expecting some increase in RPM's. I was pleasantly surprised when (in my particular system) I only had to increase the RPM's by 5% to get matching performance. My suspicion is that the elevation of the pump and equipment above the pool level (3-4 ft) and the distance from the pool (40 ft to the pump, 70 ft to the heat pump) are factors in this.