SWG run time calculations assistance

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Not the pool in sig:

So one of the pools although not exactly sure of its chlorine production but at least it gives me the challenge balancing pump run time versus % output which means I can get the FC up there if I want as this weekend I checked on it and it had 11 FC.
The other pool is having similar issues other members are seeing with FC production. At 1 am I checked FC after turning pump on for 15 minutes with the SWCG powered off and I had 3.5 FC. Then powered up the SWCG and set it at a random 90% and checked again at 9am with the solar cover on with the FC 5. That's 1.5 gain in all these hours which doesn't look right. The average salinity shows 3100 ppm and actual shows 3200+. Did a salinity test right there with the K-1766 and got 2800 ppm doing it twice to make sure there's no error. Here's my plan, I'll up the salinity to 4000ppm like the other pool and do a OCLT with liquid and see my results. If the OCLT fails then I know the chlorine production isn't keeping up due to algae even though water looks clear but I did observe what I thought was a slight algae clouding when I pushed the brush in two places. I may do a slam to rule all else out and then see again. The cell is working from what I can see through the clear casing which is a good cloudiness from chlorine production.
 
wireform said:
The other pool is having similar issues other members are seeing with FC production. At 1 am I checked FC after turning pump on for 15 minutes with the SWCG powered off and I had 3.5 FC. Then powered up the SWCG and set it at a random 90% and checked again at 9am with the solar cover on with the FC 5. That's 1.5 gain in all these hours which doesn't look right.
Click to expand...
If this pool is around 20,000 gallons then you're seeing almost exactly the same production I'm seeing, and it seems to correspond to Dave_NJ's numbers as well.
 
cowboycasey said:
The only thing I can say is we have always said SWG do not raise the chlorine level effectively.. They work by keeping the FC at the level they are set to.. If I take my FC level to 12, I can keep it there with my SJ40.. I can almost keep my FC level to SLAM levels (31 for me) with only adding a little extra LC... I have done 2, 2 day SLAMS in the last 3 years...

I am not sure what is happening, I do know with your low CYA the sun is eating your FC during the day and the SWG can not add it back fast enough at night...

My recommendation would be:

1. raise your CYA to recommended levels ( 70 or 80 CYA)
2. raise your chlorine to 8
3. set your SWG to run 8 hours at 100%
4 see if it keeps your FC at 8
5. if it does, sit back, relax, and drink your favorite beverage... If it does not add more run time, if it raises your FC drop your run time...

I do this 3 to 4 times a year to adjust my output :)
Click to expand...
8 hours a day run time is $91.25 a month for electricity if run during off-peak hours. If that 8 hour runtime includes the 5 hours of peak electricity prices the bill will be $131.63 a month.
 
Brett S said:
This seems to suggest that it is possible to get that much chlorine generation from 22V and 6.4 amps.
Click to expand...
Go back to Post 91 where @JoyfulNoise describes how the RJ-60 bi-polar cell design achieves 3 lbs production rate with 6.4 amps and 22 volts. Also take a look at this thread from 2007 which explains bi-polar cells in more detail. These along with the test that I did on my cell tell me that a 3 lbs per day production rate is real and not some marketing exaggeration. I think that @sbcpool has a problem with his cell.
 
sbcpool said:
8 hours a day run time is $91.25 a month for electricity if run during off-peak hours. If that 8 hour runtime includes the 5 hours of peak electricity prices the bill will be $131.63 a month.
Click to expand...
The first thing I would do is get a VSP pump on that pool so fast it would make your head spin... My whole electric bill is 130 a month, my 2 speed pump run on low 8 hours a day is about 6 dollars of that, maybe 7... no way would I have a 1 speed pump (is it a 2 speed?) with those rates, you could pay off a VSP pump in 1 season and run the VSP pump 24/7 for 8 to 15 dollars a month... :)
 
laprjns said:
Go back to Post 91 where @JoyfulNoise describes how the RJ-60 bi-polar cell design achieves 3 lbs production rate with 6.4 amps and 22 volts.
Click to expand...
That is at 100% efficiency. Actually it is 2.73 lbs/day for 6.5 amps at 100% efficiency. Nothing is 100% efficient. As I posted earlier, the T-15 is about 50%-60% efficient depending on the current. The RJ-60+ would have to be 92% efficient to get to 3 lbs/day @ 8 amps. Why would their cell be that much more efficient than the T-15? Having said that, there are techniques in electrolysis to improve efficiency. However, I would think all the manufactures would use those if available (not under patent).
 
cowboycasey said:
The first thing I would do is get a VSP pump on that pool so fast it would make your head spin... My whole electric bill is 130 a month, my 2 speed pump run on low 8 hours a day is about 6 dollars of that, maybe 7... no way would I have a 1 speed pump (is it a 2 speed?) with those rates, you could pay off a VSP pump in 1 season and run the VSP pump 24/7 for 8 to 15 dollars a month... :)
Click to expand...
Not at my electricity rates. Even at 600W, a 24x7 runtime would cost $131.92 per month.
 
Last edited:

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
Measured FC of 6.5-7 (sample was very slightly pink after 13 drops) at 7:30 pm which indicates a daily FC loss of around 2-2.5.

To summarized my amateur testing results:

Water test
CYA 70
Salt 3200 as per Taylor k-1776 test (3500-3600 as per CircuPool display)
Temp 84 degrees

Equipment
rj-60+ set to run from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm at 50%. Manufacturer says this unit generates 3.1 lbs/day which equates to an increase of .6 FC per hour for my 24k gallon pool according to the pool math app.

While generating the display indicated a current draw of 5.75-6.25 amps and 22.2-23.0 volts.

FC tests
Running the cell overnight for 9.5 hours (9:30 pm to 7:00 am) at 100% generated a FC increase of 2.5. This equates to an hourly output of .26 ppm FC or 3.16 ppm FC during my 12 hour scheduled run time.

Shutting down the cell and testing the FC loss during the day, between 7:00 am and 7:30 pm I lost between 2-2.5 ppm.

Summary
In my opinion the cell is not generating the advertised chlorine amount. Even taking into account CircuPool's claim the water is sanitized in the cell and the remaining chlorine is discharged out of the return jets that would mean approximately 57% of the FC generated by the cell is being consumed prior to exiting the returns. I've run the oclt and my overnight loss is less than .5 ppm which is no where near what it would need to be to consume the generated chlorine and satisfy the manufacturer's specs.

Having said that, I'm able to sanitize my pool while only using 25% of the SWCG daily capacity (50% for twelve hours a day).

If I had this info ahead of time I would have researched other options more in depth before purchasing the CircuPool SWCG.

I still don't quite understand how the 60+ cell differs from the 30+ cell since the chlorine generation amount seems to be the same. Maybe the 60+ cell will last longer given the greater surface area but that's all I can think of.
 
We have several people with Circupool models that see similar results. Now I'm interested to hear from owners of other large SWG systems, like the Pentair IC-60. That would help inform us whether this is typical SWG behavior or if it's unique to Circupool's RJ60+.
 
sbcpool said:
We have several people with Circupool models that see similar results. Now I'm interested to hear from owners of other large SWG systems, like the Pentair IC-60.
Click to expand...
You already have the results of my testing on my Crystal Pure 60,000 SWG which appears to be producing near its published production rating of 3.18 lbs per day. Also note that the Pentair IC-60 publish production rating is 2.0 lbs per day so you really can't go by the pool size rating.
sbcpool said:
That would help inform us whether this is typical SWG behavior or if it's unique to Circupool's RJ60+
Click to expand...
Your testing clearly shows that your RJ-60 is producing at a rate that is similar to the RJ-20 published production rate of 0.9 lbs per day. Circupool also sells RJ-30 at 1.5 lbs per day and the RJ-45 at 2.0 lbs per day. Why would Circupool knowingly sell a cell that producing at a third of it published production rate and is even lower that two other models that they sell? That would be truly fraudulent.
 
laprjns said:
You already have the results of my testing on my Crystal Pure 60,000 SWG which appears to be producing near its published production rating of 3.18 lbs per day. Also note that the Pentair IC-60 publish production rating is 2.0 lbs per day so you really can't go by the pool size rating.

Your testing clearly shows that your RJ-60 is producing at a rate that is similar to the RJ-20 published production rate of 0.9 lbs per day. Circupool also sells RJ-30 at 1.5 lbs per day and the RJ-45 at 2.0 lbs per day. Why would Circupool knowingly sell a cell that producing at a third of it published production rate and is even lower that two other models that they sell? That would be truly fraudulent.
Click to expand...
I'm not advocated for or against Circupool, just reporting that they don't believe it's possible to measure an SWG's chlorine production by measuring FC in the water. I am interested to know what they feel is the acceptable method of measuring a unit's output.

I'm also curious to see if that's a thing that holds across manufacturers and models. Your data point is helpful, as is mas985's with the Hayward cell. I'm just interested to see if it's common that units rated for x lbs per day do not raise FC as would be predicted by the rating. If a few people with an IC-60 confirmed that those units are adding the expected FC to their pool in the expected amount of time I would switch in a second.
 
DAB942 said:
I can only assume they don't use FC as a metric for output as there are too many variables outside their control. However, it's difficult for end users to know whether the device is working.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day we need FC in the water, so to my mind other theoretical measurements are irrelevant. When I buy a product that is supposed to do something, I want to know how much of that thing it will do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: laprjns and revitup

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply