I have a friend who's building a pool and is considering the in-pool floor jet system for doing pool cleaning ( it's called A&A In-floor QuikClean/MagnaSweep). Apparently creates some kind of "vortex" that collects debris into a central location on the pool floor where it can be sucked into a filter. Anyone using this kind of system? Any pros/cons to be aware of? Appreciate any insight you have!
Any experience with InPool Floor cleaning apparatus?
- Thread starter tmarks66
- Start date
- May 3, 2007
- 16,878
- Pool Size
- 20000
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Hayward Aqua Rite (T-15)
Some people like them, others have had nothing but trouble with them. But personally, I would NEVER install an in-floor cleaning system given the myriad of things that can go wrong with them plus, they are energy hogs and significantly reduce the efficiency of the pump and plumbing system.
Dittos.mas985 said:
There are those who really like the in-floor systems - I will not deny that. However, the consensus of the majority of posts I have read on the subject is that they are not worth the trouble or expense if you are building a new pool. Robot and pressure-side cleaners are lower cost alternatives that will get the job done and they are much easier to fix if something goes wrong. Plus, you have to run the pump on high-speed in order for the in-floor system to work properly and that negates much of the energy savings that a 2-speed or variable-speed pump provides.
Here are some thoughts from somebody who has one...
http://www.troublefreepool.com/threads/23997-Review-A-amp-A-in-floor-cleaning-system
http://www.troublefreepool.com/threads/23997-Review-A-amp-A-in-floor-cleaning-system
- May 3, 2007
- 16,878
- Pool Size
- 20000
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Hayward Aqua Rite (T-15)
My PB put it this way - if your pool is not going to see any leaf debris, then in floors work great for pushing sand and dust around. If you're going to have any leaf debris whatsoever, in-floors are going to have a hard time pushing the leaves around.
And yes, definite pump hogs. My PB said he always has to upsize the pumps for in floor systems. As well, the multi-port valves add to the cost and the headache of the plumbing installation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And yes, definite pump hogs. My PB said he always has to upsize the pumps for in floor systems. As well, the multi-port valves add to the cost and the headache of the plumbing installation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep, since we planted a pomegranate near the pool, we always have a mess of little leaves around. It doesn't get 'em.
I would have to respectfully disagree.
Myriad of things that can go wrong - These systems are actually very simple. A single 2.5 inch return pipe feeds a distribution valve which alternates the zones within the pool. The plumbing is typically encased in gunite and feeds rotating heads. These heads have no moving parts.
Some people will say that having all that plumbing is the floor is risky, etc, what if its fails, blah blah blah. But the facts are that this RARELY ever happens. Not to mention, many many builders are encasing return plumbing in the gunite anyway
The heads, distribution valve, and leaf canister are all covered by a lifetime warranty. The heads can be changed easily - a 1 minute procedure. If one were to fail, just call A&A and they overnight a new head. Simple.
Now, as far as in floors being an energy hog. Also, not true. The newer systems use 3 inch suction side plumbing and 2.5 inch plumbing on the return to the water distribution valve. The A&A system (the one I own) uses a new style of head called G4V. Essentially, it is a venturi style head which allows more flow and lower GPM. I run my system for 3 hours per day at 2800 RPM. With an intelliflo pump, these systems are actually fairly efficient. Much more so than polaris suction side cleaners with the independent pump. Obviously, robots are best in terms of energy, but they have there own sets of cons.
As far as efficiency of the plumbing system - I would say its the most efficient plumbing system around. Most in floor systems also make use of venturi style skimmers, meaning they receive all of their suction from a return (no active suction from the pump required). This allows 100% suction power to be allocated to the drain for maximum debris removal. I have personally tested many pools and I can tell you at 1500 RPM, the venturi skimmers are MUCH more effective that typical skimmers at low RPMs.
And of course, the benefits of increased circulation and more efficient heating should not go unmentioned.
In my opinion, hands down, in floor is superior.
I guess I'd have to say that this is one of those things that really depend on the situation you're in. If you have the choice then you have to make the call as to whether or not the perceived benefits outweigh the additional costs (in some cases, an in-floor system can raise your pool build cost by as much as $10,000).
I know a couple who bought a home with an in-floor system in the pool. They are both professionals and work away from home A LOT. They simply do not have time to play with hoses and equipment (suffice it to say they layout $1500 per year for the pool guy). They LOVE their in-floor system. They have no trees or leafy landscaping anywhere near their pool. So for them and their situation, it makes sense.
I'm a do it yourself kind of person who has no problem spending an hour per day fiddling with my pond. We built our pool and I could have had my PB do an in-floor system but we have lots of trees in our yard. It made much more sense for me not to do an in-floor system and the savings allowed us to put that money towards other things, like our beautiful stone waterfall.
To each his own...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I know a couple who bought a home with an in-floor system in the pool. They are both professionals and work away from home A LOT. They simply do not have time to play with hoses and equipment (suffice it to say they layout $1500 per year for the pool guy). They LOVE their in-floor system. They have no trees or leafy landscaping anywhere near their pool. So for them and their situation, it makes sense.
I'm a do it yourself kind of person who has no problem spending an hour per day fiddling with my pond. We built our pool and I could have had my PB do an in-floor system but we have lots of trees in our yard. It made much more sense for me not to do an in-floor system and the savings allowed us to put that money towards other things, like our beautiful stone waterfall.
To each his own...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have a ton of trees in my yard including crepe myrtles which drop all kinds of leaves and flowers in the pool. Pool is always spotless with the exception of a dead spot in one corner of the deep end where sand collects.
In floors are actually best with leaves, and don't do so well with sand. The manufacturers (paramount, a&a) will also tell you this.
In floors almost never cost 10k. Mine was 4k for a 720 sq ft pool with over 25 heads. Sorry folks - just stating the facts
In floors are actually best with leaves, and don't do so well with sand. The manufacturers (paramount, a&a) will also tell you this.
In floors almost never cost 10k. Mine was 4k for a 720 sq ft pool with over 25 heads. Sorry folks - just stating the facts
I have one, it sucks, I would never do it again. It has never worked correctly and when I replaster I plan to delete it and install a Polaris. don't do infloor.
To be more specific, I have lots of mesquite trees (leaves, flowers capsules, needles, and bean pods all of which float). My landscaping produces pool debris 24/7 x 365. Absolutely no way an in-floor system would help with any of that and my PB at the time said the in-floor would have cost me a minimum of $8k but probably more as he would have had to put on a bigger pump.
So at the end if the day, in-floor or no in-floor really depends on the specifics of your pools location and what finds it's way to the bottom of your pool. It also adds to the cost of a pool build so only the individual can tell if the marginal cost increase is worth the possible benefit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And you know this, how? Personal experience? Data you've collected from a variety of installs?
Sorry, but your pool builder was ripping you off. Modern day in floor systems use variable speed pumps, so the larger pump thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Also of note, the skimmers do a lot of the work on debris before they actually make it to the bottom
Sorry, but your pool builder was ripping you off. Modern day in floor systems use variable speed pumps, so the larger pump thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Also of note, the skimmers do a lot of the work on debris before they actually make it to the bottom
- May 3, 2007
- 16,878
- Pool Size
- 20000
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Hayward Aqua Rite (T-15)
Rotating heads are moving. But you only need to search the forum for the many complaints and problems with in-floors. You can disagree if you want but the evidence supports the premise.I would have to respectfully disagree.
Myriad of things that can go wrong - These systems are actually very simple. A single 2.5 inch return pipe feeds a distribution valve which alternates the zones within the pool. The plumbing is typically encased in gunite and feeds rotating heads. These heads have no moving parts.
The Intelliflo at 2800 RPM still uses a lot of energy (~1300 watts) compared to about 140 watts at 1000 RPM or close to 10:1 difference. So even though you think it is efficient, it is still far from it.
- - - Updated - - -
I've read them all. And can point out a number of flaws with many of the installations as well as most installs using 1st/2nd generation designs. A lot of the installs are using 2 inch plumbing on the suction (big no no). No venturi skimmers, builder diverting from engineering plan, distribution valve not located close to pool, and 1.5 inch return lines. Today's systems are not a 1:1 comparison of what has been reviewed on this forum.
1000 rpm wont get the job done with the skimmers or activating the flow sensor on a salt cell. Not a fair comparison. Slight basis when talking about 25 to 30 cent a KW hour, not so much when talking about 10 cent a KW hour - cost difference is marginal. I guess it depends on where you live and what electric rates are.
I've read them all. And can point out a number of flaws with many of the installations as well as most installs using 1st/2nd generation designs. A lot of the installs are using 2 inch plumbing on the suction (big no no). No venturi skimmers, builder diverting from engineering plan, distribution valve not located close to pool, and 1.5 inch return lines. Today's systems are not a 1:1 comparison of what has been reviewed on this forum.
1000 rpm wont get the job done with the skimmers or activating the flow sensor on a salt cell. Not a fair comparison. Slight basis when talking about 25 to 30 cent a KW hour, not so much when talking about 10 cent a KW hour - cost difference is marginal. I guess it depends on where you live and what electric rates are.
Enough said. You're opinion is clearly obvious.
My PB is a family friend, a second generation pool builder from a family of PB's and someone with 20 years of pool building experience in our local market. He also had over 10 years of pool sales experience with a big regional pool builder where they were aggressively pushed by managers to sell things like in-floor systems even when it was not in the best interest of the customer (which is why he left that and started his own company).
My PB did a careful survey of my property and took into account many factors (prevailing wind patterns, orientation to sun light, growth and vegetation, neighbors landscaping, etc) and, in his opinion, an in-floor system would have done me no good and only add to the cost and complexity of my pumping station.
So who's opinion do I trust? I think that's clearly obvious....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk