Filter with 50mm port better than 40mm

[Milan]

Hi,

I aiming for a highly efficient system with 50mm piping and a Viron P320 for my 55,000L Pool - and was wondering if a sand filter with 50mm ports on the filter is better than one with 40mm? (I need to buy a new one)

Waterco (S602) claims it is:

http://www.waterco.com.au/component...ers/sand/media-filters/micron-s602-eco-filter

I can't buy this filter because the P320 is too powerful for it when running on high speed.

My alternative is the Hurclon (Astral) Cantabric Filter - but I don't like the plastic tank - would prefer fibreglass if possible.

http://www.astralpool.com.au/products/cantabric-filters.

There aren't that many 25 inch, 50mm sand filter choices out there. There are more choices with a 40mm port - but efficiency is my priority and preference (if it makes a difference).

I would appreciate your views/knowledge.

Kind regards,
Milan.

 

[JasonLion]

Yes, larger ports are just slightly more efficient, though the difference is really very very small.

 

[Milan]

Yes, larger ports are just slightly more efficient, though the difference is really very very small.

So when you say minor - is it worth paying $100 more for a 50mm filter over a 40mm one in terms of the efficiency ($$) I can save over the life of the filter?

Another question if I may - are non-fibreglass filter tanks ok??? ie plastic ones?

 

[jblizzle]

You may not save anything. In fact, the more efficient you make your plumbing and filter, the more water is moved and the more electricity the pump will use at a given RPM. Now if you then lowered the speed of the pump you may save a little.

There is really no point in making the system ultra efficient. And why would you need to run the pump at full speed? We generally recommend running the pump as slow as possible and then the plumbing efficiency becomes even less important.

Almost all filters in the U.S. are fiberglass or plastic.

 

[Donny]

You may not save anything. In fact, the more efficient you make your plumbing and filter, the more water is moved and the more electricity the pump will use at a given RPM. Now if you then lowered the speed of the pump you may save a little.

There is really no point in making the system ultra efficient. And why would you need to run the pump at full speed? We generally recommend running the pump as slow as possible and then the plumbing efficiency becomes even less important.

Almost all filters in the U.S. are fiberglass or plastic.

I'm a little confused here?? I'm NO expert by any stretch of the imagination but I must say all of the reading I have done suggests that the plumbing is VERY important when running the pump on low speed. Wouldn't one want larger pipe (more volume) when running on low?? In fact some pumps require 2 inch min pipe. Perhaps you are referring to the ports only ??

 

[Bama Rambler]

Plumbing size and efficiency isn't quite as important when running on low speed as it is on high speed and for high flow devices. However, I always like to make the plumbing and equipment as efficient as practical.

I believe what JB was saying was that if you make the plumbing more efficient it will inherently move more water at the same pump speed which means that the pump will use more power than if the plumbing was less efficient. Even given that, I'd personally choose the more efficient design as you can offset the greater power usage (i.e. greater flow) with less total run time.

Given your list of equipment and features, I would pay the extra for the larger valve and filter.

 

[Donny]

Great explanation, thx!!