Converting to Rola-Chem for liquid chlorine dispensing

There's another consideration. And maybe @JamesW can point us to the article, in which a group of kids was seriously injured when they jumped into a chlorine-automated pool, after that automation malfunctioned during the night and emptied the entire tank of chlorine into the pool.

Do you test your water for chorine before anyone gets in, each and every time? Right. No one does. And you don't need to when adding chlorine manually, or when using tabs or an SWG. But if you're going to hook up a 15 or 30+ gallon tank of chlorine to your pool, are you willing to bet your family's safety on the timer running the pump? I sure wouldn't.

As per a previous post, I'm the guy with an SWG and automated acid dispenser, and I have very high confidence I have not only the most convenient pool possible, but also the safest. And the most cost effective, to boot! And while I use a tank of acid with a Stenner pump, the tank only hold 1.5 gallons of acid, so even if it did fail, it's not going to hurt anyone, or the pool.

There's a reason everyone is trying to steer you to an SWG... actually, many reasons.

Dirk said:

There's another consideration. And maybe @JamesW can point us to the article, in which a group of kids was seriously injured when they jumped into a chlorine-automated pool, after that automation malfunctioned during the night and emptied the entire tank of chlorine into the pool.

Click to expand...

Like this?


A 10 GPD Stenner pump with a 15 gallon Stenner tank filled to the brim, in a 10K pool, will add 100ppm of chlorine if run continuously for 24 hours. Certainly a hazard.

It is a hazard, but with proper testing and control of the pump run-time, likely a low probability.

With controls and testing, a chlorine tank can be managed properly. For the couple years I used the Stenner, I had no problems. I used a smart plug and Alexa to dose chlorine properly.

PoolStored said:

likely a low probability.

Click to expand...

Agree. Just making the OP aware. Probability vs possibility.

PoolStored said:

I used a smart plug and Alexa

Click to expand...

As in a WiFi smart plug? Anything can fail. And, of course, most things will work as expected indefinitely. But I don't have the trust required to use a WiFi device for controlling something that could potentially cause harm if it malfunctioned. No way. Maybe just me... but neither my $1000 phone nor my $3500 laptop can give me 100% WiFi reliability, so you can guess what I think of a $20 "smart" plug.

My system not only has redundant factory safeguards, but can't really cause harm even if there is a catastrophic failure of all of those safeguards. I run my SWG near 100%, and the main pump is only scheduled for the time needed to allow that 100% setting to chlorinate the pool. So my system literally cannot overdose chlorine.

And as I mentioned, even if my acid automation dumped the entire contents of the acid tank into the pool, right after I filled the tank, it would only be a gallon and a half of acid. These are additional safeguards that don't rely on mechanical or electronic devices (and especially not on me!), which are redundant to the ones that came with the equipment. They satisfy my paranoid nature about automating pool chemical dispensing. Everyone will have their own acceptable risk level, but it's important we all know what those risks might be, however unlikely.

Newdude said:

I agree. You KNOW i agree. But i can't say how small of a pool the convience would be justified by paying more with the SWG. The smaller the pool got, the more disposable my income would need to be to be able to spend it at that time.

Even for a larger pool, I always say that no matter how favorable the math is, it doesn't make the funds available to switch today.

Click to expand...

I’m assuming budget is not the OP restraining factor. He is considering a $630 system and roughly doubling of his yearly chlorine costs to avoid having to dump the water every year. So it’s at least $1k of out of pocket expense in the first year alone and an ongoing increase of $~$200/year. An RJ-20 is $1200. Seems like a no-brainer but I could be off base on that assumption.

His ROI actually is better - he guestimated his yearly Cl to increase to $430, as opposed to the initial, and then very minor, salt additions in the future. Now if we can just get him over the pH/Acid fear....

But yes, too many years where other things took precedence over pool stuff, and it seemed a SWCG was a bridge too far. Hence why I stayed with tabs for so long. I was even that way just before I got my generator - my first jump was to look at stenner systems, if one looks back in my posting history a few years. Of course, now that I know, I'm kicking myself for not reordering the priorities years ago....

I used a Stenner pump to dose the pool with Chlorine. It was okay for while but certainly not perfect nor hands off. I stopped using it when the tank leaked over a gallon of chlorine into the ground, killing some nearby trees. The injector nozzle can clog which would stop chlorine flow. Chlorine demand also varies based on how much sun the pool is getting, bathing load, and whether a cover is used. I found I still needed to regularly check on things.

I've switched to a SWCG and I'm mostly happy. It doesn't work below ~60° so I use tabs in the winter. This is a good thing because my CYA ends up dropping way too low after winter anyway. While the SWCG is a bit less work than chlorine injection I still have to periodically monitor Cl levels during the season and/or when we use the solar cover. The salt cell also needs to be cleaned periodically.

My pool demands a boatload of acid no matter which approach I take. I'm tempted to add acid injection...

Jetjohn6 said:

The salt cell also needs to be cleaned periodically.

Click to expand...

If you manage your CSI, it won’t need it. The CSI needs to stay slightly negative and your poolmath logs have it above 0 quite a bit.

Jetjohn6 said:

My pool demands a boatload of acid no matter which approach I take. I'm tempted to add acid injection...

Click to expand...

That’s because your TA is too high (if your poolmath logs are up to date). Let it get down to 50/60 and should calm down quite a bit.

Jetjohn6 said:

While the SWCG is a bit less work than chlorine injection I still have to periodically monitor Cl levels during the season and/or when we use the solar cover.

Click to expand...

It's important to know that no matter what automation is applied, regular testing of the water, and adjusting the various levels, never goes away. I can skate by with once a week, which sure beats every day, or every other day, but I still have to make sure the systems are working and that they are adjusted properly for the current climate.

There is no such thing as a maintenance free pool. Keep your expectations in check, and strive for a low-maintenance pool.

And I never have to clean my SWG. I still have to check it periodically, but it never needs cleaning. I am a CSI fanatic, and maintain a proper CSI religiously.

Bperry said:

If you manage your CSI, it won’t need it. The CSI needs to stay slightly negative and your poolmath logs have it above 0 quite a bit.


That’s because your TA is too high (if your poolmath logs are up to date). Let it get down to 50/60 and should calm down quite a bit.

Click to expand...

Looks like he last tested CH 3 yrs ago, and has just been carrying forward the 680 value since then. Understandable that managing CSI may be difficult with Vegas water, with its high CH load.

But lowering TA (if it too isn't being raised by water additions) would be the way to go to reduce acid use.

sande005 said:

Looks like he last tested CH 3 yrs ago, and has just been carrying forward the 680 value since then. Understandable that managing CSI may be difficult with Vegas water, with its high CH load.

But lowering TA (if it too isn't being raised by water additions) would be the way to go to reduce acid use.

Click to expand...

Makes sense. CSI could be even worse now.

sande005 said:

Looks like he last tested CH 3 yrs ago, and has just been carrying forward the 680 value since then. Understandable that managing CSI may be difficult with Vegas water, with its high CH load.

But lowering TA (if it too isn't being raised by water additions) would be the way to go to reduce acid use.

Click to expand...

I've certainly tested CH in within the last year but don't often record results. Thanks to the high CH I intend to drain and fill in the next couple months