Preventing Liquidator’s white deposit from the horse’s mouth

[revstriker]

Update:

I re-ran the hoses to the pump so that they went up above the LQ. Both the valve and the flow meter are now above the LQ. I had to add about 2 feet more of hose in order to do this (replaced a smaller section between the flow meter and the check valve). This had a negative effect on my flow. Now I am hardly getting any flow, even with the valve fully open. I even removed the check valve, but it made no difference.

Decided to check and see if the LQ would still drain into the pump, even though the hose ran above it. I used some old OTO that I had to to color the water. I squeezed a bunch right by the outlet valve which turned the water brown. I could see it in the tube heading up to the valve. I then shut the pump off. The flow of the water slowed down, but it was still moving toward the pump. This tells me that no matter where the hose is, you can still get a siphon effect. I'm sure if I left the pump off long enough, it would eventually drain down to the outlet valve, and then let air in line.

So I've decided to get rid of the LQ. Its been a frustrating experience to say the least. I'm only happy that I chose not to drill holes in my lines.

 

[duraleigh]

It makes sense to me that the WS would be calcium. I can't imagine any way to keep from reaching calcium saturation inside the LQ. Anything downstream from the LQ is going to be at risk for calcium scaling until you get to the main pool pipes and the bleach gets diluted dramatically. Calcium doesn't tend to deposit on flexible tubing all that much compared to other surfaces. But the valves and meter would be prime spots for calcium scaling. Putting them on the upstream side should solve a good part of the problem, though the tubing will still be at some risk.

Jason is correct....the WS is calcium. it cleaned up perfectly in about twenty seconds with a 4-1 solution of muriatic.

So, the calcium is gonna be there....we just have to figure the best way to deal with it. Interesting that keithw (and I think others) has yet to experience this issue so there must be some conditions under which it doesn't form.

Meanwhile, that was a painless fix that I don't mind doing every month or so until we can arrive at a better solution.

 

[cruzmisl]

Update:

I re-ran the hoses to the pump so that they went up above the LQ. Both the valve and the flow meter are now above the LQ. I had to add about 2 feet more of hose in order to do this (replaced a smaller section between the flow meter and the check valve). This had a negative effect on my flow. Now I am hardly getting any flow, even with the valve fully open. I even removed the check valve, but it made no difference.

Decided to check and see if the LQ would still drain into the pump, even though the hose ran above it. I used some old OTO that I had to to color the water. I squeezed a bunch right by the outlet valve which turned the water brown. I could see it in the tube heading up to the valve. I then shut the pump off. The flow of the water slowed down, but it was still moving toward the pump. This tells me that no matter where the hose is, you can still get a siphon effect. I'm sure if I left the pump off long enough, it would eventually drain down to the outlet valve, and then let air in line.

So I've decided to get rid of the LQ. Its been a frustrating experience to say the least. I'm only happy that I chose not to drill holes in my lines.

Did you try cleaning the floats as I suggested in another thread?

 

[joenj]

What is the source of the calcium deposits in the LQ? Does it come from the bleach or just your CH from your pool? I do not have any deposit problems.

My current numbers for our vinyl pool:
CH 70
TA 90
CYA 50
PH 7.6
FC 3

I am using 12.5% bleach in the 4gal LQ.

I wonder if the gunite pools, with their higher CH levels, are more prone to these deposits.

 

[revstriker]

Did you try cleaning the floats as I suggested in another thread?

In 3 weeks, I replaced the hoses twice, replaced the valve, and cleaned out the flow meter twice (I used a mixture of vinegar and water which worked well). I did not remove the floats to clean them. I probably could, but to be honest, if this is the kind of maintenance it is going to need in just 3 weeks of use, then its really not worth the bother. My goal for purchasing the LQ was to spend less time playing with bleach and adjusting my FC levels in my pool. With the LQ in place, I've actually had to spend more time, and I don't see that getting any better.

So testing daily and manually adding bleach daily will end up being much less time spent than fighting with the LQ every day, trying to figure out the "right" setting, cleaning the WS off of everything, and worrying about the possibility of this thing failing and causing damage to my pump.

I will hang on to the unit to see if eventually someone can come up with some good enough add ons to make this thing work the way its supposed to. However, as it stands now, it is one of the most disappointing products I have ever purchased.

 

[torchroadster]

I've been watching this thread very closely - I poured a concrete pad for my liquidator yesterday and planned to install tonight. Coincidentally my CH is low at about 150 IIRC. Now I'm wondering if I should bring up my calcium or not? What is the downside of not having CH at 200-300 in a new gunite pool?

It sounds like the consensus is to install the flow valve on the inlet side, I assume the in-flow equals the out-flow, so it doesn't matter which side the flow valve is installed on. Is this accurate?

Any other things I should plan to do differently on my install to help reduce the WS problem?

 

[Sabot]

Correct, it does not matter which side the controls are on. I have tried both.

 

[mrafal]

I've been watching this thread very closely - I poured a concrete pad for my liquidator yesterday and planned to install tonight. Coincidentally my CH is low at about 150 IIRC. Now I'm wondering if I should bring up my calcium or not? What is the downside of not having CH at 200-300 in a new gunite pool?

It sounds like the consensus is to install the flow valve on the inlet side, I assume the in-flow equals the out-flow, so it doesn't matter which side the flow valve is installed on. Is this accurate?

Any other things I should plan to do differently on my install to help reduce the WS problem?

Inflow and outflow are equal averaged over time. The inflow on my setup varies from zero to a high value as the float valve maintains the water level. The outflow is pretty constant as long as the pump is running.

 

[revstriker]

It sounds like the consensus is to install the flow valve on the inlet side, I assume the in-flow equals the out-flow, so it doesn't matter which side the flow valve is installed on. Is this accurate?

I disagree with this. Installing the flow valve on the inlet does not really control the outlet flow per se. However, if you restrict the inlet, you'll end up maintaining a water level which is right at the outlet valve instead of an inch or so below the water level. This could lead to air getting sucked into your tubing if your outlet valve does not close properly, as mine did not.

 

[Water_man]

In 3 weeks, I replaced the hoses twice, replaced the valve, and cleaned out the flow meter twice (I used a mixture of vinegar and water which worked well). I did not remove the floats to clean them. I probably could, but to be honest, if this is the kind of maintenance it is going to need in just 3 weeks of use, then its really not worth the bother. My goal for purchasing the LQ was to spend less time playing with bleach and adjusting my FC levels in my pool. With the LQ in place, I've actually had to spend more time, and I don't see that getting any better.

So testing daily and manually adding bleach daily will end up being much less time spent than fighting with the LQ every day, trying to figure out the "right" setting, cleaning the WS off of everything, and worrying about the possibility of this thing failing and causing damage to my pump.

I will hang on to the unit to see if eventually someone can come up with some good enough add ons to make this thing work the way its supposed to. However, as it stands now, it is one of the most disappointing products I have ever purchased.

Are you sure you have no air leaks on the outlet line? Perhaps the flow meter connectors? I don't recall anybody reporting draining from that side when the pump shuts off.
Please post your pH, TA and CH. Maybe the TA and the CH are very high.

 

[cruzmisl]

If he is having that much trouble with the WS I believe the WS has settled on the rubber seal for the floats which doesn't allow for a tight seal. I know this because the same thing happened to me. I soaked them in MA and haven't had the problem since.

 

[revstriker]

Are you sure you have no air leaks on the outlet line? Perhaps the flow meter connectors? I don't recall anybody reporting draining from that side when the pump shuts off.
Please post your pH, TA and CH. Maybe the TA and the CH are very high.

Yup, positive that the leak is from the valve. If I push down on the float, it stops the air completely. As for my readings, I test my PH every day and adjust it to 7.4. It will ride up to 7.8 sometimes before I adjust it. TA and CH are within normal ranges (around 100 for TA and about 220 for CH).

 

[revstriker]

If he is having that much trouble with the WS I believe the WS has settled on the rubber seal for the floats which doesn't allow for a tight seal. I know this because the same thing happened to me. I soaked them in MA and haven't had the problem since.

This is what I believe as well. I haven't taken the floats out of the LQ to examine them closer yet, but they do appear to have a significant amount of the WS on them. I would not mind taking them out to clean them periodically, but if they get this corroded in 3 weeks, I really don't think I want to be cleaning them every week or two. Again, it kind of defeats the purpose of having the LQ.

 

[Water_man]

Yup, positive that the leak is from the valve. If I push down on the float, it stops the air completely. As for my readings, I test my PH every day and adjust it to 7.4. It will ride up to 7.8 sometimes before I adjust it. TA and CH are within normal ranges (around 100 for TA and about 220 for CH).

My CH is 250 and my TA is 140, so if calcium carbonate is the culprit I should have been in a much worse situation than you are, had our pH been the same. My WS is visible, but so far it hasn't crippled the performance.
However, my pH is steady at 7.5, so perhaps your higher pH ("7.8 sometimes") may be the main reason for your problems. Why won't you lower your pH to 7.2 - 7.3 as Booker said, and see what happens.
But if you'd had the LQ drain issue (and losing prime) before the WS was visible, then you must have had a non-WS related line integrity issue.
Can you post pics of the system?

 

[Water_man]

Re: Possible solution and call for action

What is the source of the calcium deposits in the LQ? Does it come from the bleach or just your CH from your pool? I do not have any deposit problems.

My current numbers for our vinyl pool:
CH 70
TA 90
CYA 50
PH 7.6
FC 3

I am using 12.5% bleach in the 4gal LQ.

I wonder if the gunite pools, with their higher CH levels, are more prone to these deposits.

IMHO, joenj's post is the MVP post in this thread because it may indicate the solution to the WS. His pH is 7.6 but is CH is very low. No calcium - no deposits!
Free calcium ions level in the water can be lowered by chelating or complexing agents ( see for instance "Spa Defender".) The question is, what about plaster containing pools?
I tend to believe that bound (or "sequestered") calcium is no good for preventing corrosion of plastered pools, but this should be verified by someone who is more familiar with this subject.

In case bound calcium is as good as free calcium for these pools, then we can lower our calcium safely and run our LQ WS- free.

The only thing left is to verify the "calcium connection " and if indeed calcium is the main culprit, how far down it should go.

Therefore, I'm suggesting a poll for LQ users where you'll post these data:

1. Your pool chemistry.
2. How long does it take for your WS to be visible on your float valve, tubing, flow meter? How long does it take for it to cripple your float valve, flow meter, and flow control valve?
3. Are your flow devices installed on the inlet side or the outlet side.

If we get a large enough database we can see the trend more clearly and maybe come up with a solution, such as lowering calcium .

 

[revstriker]

My CH is 250 and my TA is 140, so if calcium carbonate is the culprit I should have been in a much worse situation than you are, had our pH been the same. My WS is visible, but so far it hasn't crippled the performance.
However, my pH is steady at 7.5, so perhaps your higher pH ("7.8 sometimes") may be the main reason for your problems. Why won't you lower your pH to 7.2 - 7.3 as Booker said, and see what happens.
But if you'd had the LQ drain issue (and losing prime) before the WS was visible, then you must have had a non-WS related line integrity issue.
Can you post pics of the system?

I do agree with you. I'm not sure why my PH keeps climbing as high as it does. I used about 2 gallons of MA last year, and so far this year, I've used 4 gallons. Even though I was using bleach before, the PH didn't start to climb high until I started using the LQ. Not sure if this was a coincidence or not.

I have taken my LQ system down, so I cannot take any pics. Sorry. However, without the LQ, I can test and see if my need of MA goes down.

 

[Sabot]

I have been told that chlorine will slowly increase the pH. I will yield to the smart ones here...

 

[JasonLion]

No bleach doesn't raise the PH. But the PH will tend to go up because of CO2 outgassing. Also trichlor lowers PH. So many people will see the PH start to rise once they switch from trichlor to bleach because the trichlor is no longer compensating for the CO2 outgassing.

 

[chrisexv6]

Took a closer look at my LQ, and all I see is a little white buildup in the funnel area. No buildup on anything else that is inside the LQ (I didnt remove the floats completely, but I didnt see any buildup on the outside of the "hinge" area, so Im assuming the valves are clear? Is that a good assumption?

Water test results:

FC - 2
CC - 0
TC - 2
pH - 7.6
Alk - 70
CH - 90
CYA - 20

The odd thing is that since the switch to 12.5% bleach, Im not noticing an increase in FC (if anything I see a decrease). Not sure if something is clogged on the LQ that I can see (dont think so, flow meter still reads 4), or if maybe the chlorine is fighting something (but CC is 0 ?) Today is a cloudy day, so Ill be checking the FC all day to see if it builds up without disappearing (and if it does build up, Ill know its the low CYA causing a low FC on sunny days)

This is without any bather load, BTW. No one swims in my pool, I guess I just like maintaining it for no reason (!!!)

-Chris

 

[DLSDO]

Since the pH inside the LQ is so high and most people eventually have the WS....could the calcium deposits be due to calcium precipitating out in the high pH environment? If so then how about adding MA directly to the LQ to lower the pH into an acceptable range?