Pipe sizing for water softener with 3/4" pex water main. Outdoor depth.

[NguyenA1]

1. My main water line is 3/4". I'm going to tap into it right before it enters the house. Is there any advantage to having all the pex piping after that tap 1" in size? My water softener will be right next to the main water line so no long distance travel. I read in a forum that even though the main is 3/4", he recommended doing 1" but didnt explain why. If you look at the picture i attached, im talking about the green piping. The water softener has 1" input and so can the filter cans. I normally wouldnt mind the added cost but im planning on using sharkbite for all the pressure gauges, the water softener hose, and those are all 3/4" fittings.

2. I live in Austin and am planning to install my water softener outdoors due to the cost to trench and burrow piping to get to my garage. How deep would you dig to put the water softener in? My initial plan is, dig 2.5 feet deep , put in 4 inches of paver base or someting, then cinder blocks on top of that, and put the water softener on top of that. Then build a custom cover and put insulation on the inside. Ideally I'd like to buy a premade cover thats already insulated but I cant find any for sale on the internet. I bought a box store water softener since they're so cheap and can see how this outdoor idea of mine pans out without a huge loss if the water softener goes bad.

 

[speedbump]

It won't make a lot of difference using 3/4" instead of 1". Your only talking a couple of feet at most.

Why a sediment filter. It's just added friction, won't help anything but will get into your wallet. The carbon filter isn't a bad idea if you want to remove chlorine, but one that size will have to be changed at least once a year. If you have chlorimine, the carbon filter won't touch the ammonia or fluoride.

Big box stores are either cheap or over priced. At Lowes the other day, they have three on display. They are all between $800.00 and $1200.00. I can beat that price with a very high quality unit. Their cheap ones are just that. Cheap!

You lost me on the install. If your where it won't freeze, I would bury the tanks about 2' in the ground. They don't look bad that way and are impossible to knock over.

 

[NguyenA1]

@Speedbump
Okay I won't upsize that section to 1" since it sounds pointless.

Why a sediment filter? I guess I'm jumping on the bandwagon? When I googled water softener installations, I saw most with a filter in front and debates on whether a sediment filter was needed before a water softener.

I live in cedar park and they use chloramine I believe based on this water report.
http://www.cedarparktexas.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=4872

I read on some water softener sites that carbon filters do remove chlorine from chloramine but at a reduced amount. However based on chloramine's own website, theres a section on filtration that says you would need an advanced whole house filtration system that would cost 10k - 15k with 1.2k in maintenance per year.
http://www.chloramine.org/chloraminefacts.htm
So if you don't think a sediment filter is necessary before the water softener then I have no need for any filtration.

I got a whirlpool 33k grain water softener from lowes for $321 before taxes. It was on sale plus a coupon. I've used these cheap ones in my older house, just had to replace them every 4 years which wasn't hard since it's plug and play with the hoses.

It does freeze in Austin, can get down to 20 F on the rare occasion. So I was aiming to have it 2' in the ground for SOME warmth from the ground, and to have it not stick up so much. And I will put a cover over the whole thing to protect from UV and cold. Problem is I would rather buy a cover thats already insulated than try to build one and insulate it my self.

 

[KULTULZ]

General thought regarding PEX is to use one size larger than normally plumbed with other materials, i.e. if 3/4" copper then use 1" PEX as the I.D. of PEX is reduced because of wall thickness. You also have to take into consideration the restriction fittings and couplings present.

The filtration circuit will continue to supply the house distribution system, so you need the increased flow with no restrictions.

If you decide to not filter, the softener will become the filter(s) with increased back-washing and salt usage.

 

[speedbump]

I read on some water softener sites that carbon filters do remove chlorine from chloramine but at a reduced amount. However based on chloramine's own website, theres a section on filtration that says you would need an advanced whole house filtration system that would cost 10k - 15k with 1.2k in maintenance per year.
http://www.chloramine.org/chloraminefacts.htm
So if you don't think a sediment filter is necessary before the water softener then I have no need for any filtration.

No the sediment filter is useless. Ant that is typical government. If it normally costs less than $1000.00 the gubment will estimate it at ten times that amount. Chlorimine can be removed with another mineral similar to carbon. It is more expensive than carbon, but not that much more!

 

[KULTULZ]

No the sediment filter is useless.

You really need to add to that statement that it is IMO. My well water is filthy and the sediment filter (pre-filter actually - a sediment filter/seperator is an entirely different animal) does its' job. It saves the filtering system, which it is designed exactly to do.

If one decides to not use a pre-filter, the water softener will catch the impurities and use more salt and flush cycles to rid itself of them. If one also wants to use a softener as a filter, it usually requires a larger capacity unit to deal with all the impurities it is going to be exposed to. A too small softener may simply be overwhelmed depending on water condition(s).

All of this depends on water condition found in a proper water analysis. You cannot guess or estimate filtering needs or softener capacity without knowing what is in the water.

Chloramine Removal

One of the big myths about chloramine is that it can't be removed. Actually, it is removed with filter carbon (often called charcoal), the same filtering agent that very effectively removes chlorine.

The difference is that chloramine is much harder to remove. Therefore, it takes more carbon and water must be given more residence time in the carbon. In other words, you need a considerably larger carbon bed and a significantly slower flow rate to remove chloramine with standard carbon.

SOURCE- http://www.purewaterproducts.com/chloramine-catcher?gclid=CI7BkePIis0CFUEfhgod5rYPvw

Now the above is IMO and your mileage may differ...

 

[speedbump]

I am still agreeing to disagree. And supplying a link to a site that sells water treatment equipment is not what I would call laboratory tested results. It's simply In their opinion.

 

[KULTULZ]

I am still agreeing to disagree.

That's OK...

But, you cannot condemn filtration as a whole. Different filters for different problems and sediment/turbicity is a problem you don't want to reach any main filtration as it will reduce their effectiveness/service life. My pre-filter also stops large particles of magnesium. Better there than at the carbon filter/water softener.

And supplying a link to a site that sells water treatment equipment is not what I would call laboratory tested results. It's simply In their opinion.

I gave that as a hurried response to your statement-

The carbon filter isn't a bad idea if you want to remove chlorine, but one that size will have to be changed at least once a year. If you have chlorimine, the carbon filter won't touch the ammonia or fluoride..

A proper carbon filter will limit the amount of chloramines in your drinking water.

Safety

US EPA drinking water quality standards limit chloramine concentration for public water systems to 4 parts per million (ppm) based on a running annual average of all samples in the distribution system. In order to meet EPA-regulated limits on halogenated disinfection by-products, many utilities are switching from chlorination to chloramination.

While chloramination produces fewer regulated total halogenated disinfection by-products, it can produce greater concentrations of unregulated iodinated disinfection by-products and N-nitrosodimethylamine.[24][25]

Both iodinated disinfection by-products and N-nitrosodimethylamine have been shown to be genotoxic.[25]

Chloramine has been implicated as a mutagen and as a toxic agent for aquatic life, hence the US EPA proposes to prohibit its use in drinking water.[4]

SOURCE- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloramine

Now that is a whole bunch of big college words warning of chloromine ingestion.

 

[NguyenA1]

General thought regarding PEX is to use one size larger than normally plumbed with other materials, i.e. if 3/4" copper then use 1" PEX as the I.D. of PEX is reduced because of wall thickness. You also have to take into consideration the restriction fittings and couplings present.

The supply line coming in is 3/4" PEX. I will not be using the smaller crimp fittings. I'll be using sharkbite which technically has a thin inner liner but its pretty darn thin so I dont think it matters that much. So then it wouldn't make sense to upsize to 1" at the prefilter and water softerner portion since its all going back into 3/4" PEX that I'm tapping into right?

The water pressure coming into my house is actually 120 PSI. So I'm installing a pressure reducing valve and I can tune that closer to 80 so that IF i do go down the filter route, even with the drop in pressure from prefilters and water softener, I can still have nice pressure after the system.

I can't find the truth about chloramine. The only places I see that say carbon filtration work on chloramines are water supply company websites. And the only places I see that say carbon filtration WONT work are sites that are specifically ANTI-chloramine. So I cannot find an unbiased study.

Chlorimine can be removed with another mineral similar to carbon. It is more expensive than carbon, but not that much more!

Can you provide a link to that? I'd like to have it in a 4.5" x 20" canister or 10" canister. I'm looking on amazon and I mainly can only see the regular carbon filters.

 

[KULTULZ]

The supply line coming in is 3/4" PEX. I will not be using the smaller crimp fittings. I'll be using sharkbite which technically has a thin inner liner but its pretty darn thin so I dont think it matters that much. So then it wouldn't make sense to upsize to 1" at the prefilter and water softerner portion since its all going back into 3/4" PEX that I'm tapping into right?

So supply is 3/4" PEX? I doubt over-sizing will help then. But let a professional comment on size and the SHARKBITE fittings.

I have 1" PE supplying mine. I originally plumbed the filter set with 3/4" SCH 80 PVC. But after discovering problems with PVC/CPVC, will re-plumb the house with 1" PEX (UPHONOR).

The water pressure coming into my house is actually 120 PSI. So I'm installing a pressure reducing valve and I can tune that closer to 80 so that IF i do go down the filter route, even with the drop in pressure from pre-filters and water softener, I can still have nice pressure after the system.

80 PSI is a lot of pressure. Most fixtures are pressure rated at or about that pressure. And, if done properly and maintained correctly, you will not notice a huge pressure/supply drop from the filter set. I personally experienced little and used multi-gauges to monitor it (60 PSI).

I can't find the truth about chloramine. The only places I see that say carbon filtration work on chloramines are water supply company websites. And the only places I see that say carbon filtration WONT work are sites that are specifically ANTI-chloramine. So I cannot find an unbiased study.

Can you provide a link to that? I'd like to have it in a 4.5" x 20" canister or 10" canister. I'm looking on amazon and I mainly can only see the regular carbon filters.

You might try the EPA sight. There has to be info there. I know I read that the EPA is considering banning it. Chlorine is bad enough.

The water filter sites (2) I reference from are very detailed regarding info/theory and I see no push to sell as other sites do.

As for pre-filter size, you need a detailed water analysis to determine size needed. Of course the 20" canister will allow you greater service intervals. Make sure the canister is clear see through.

 

[KULTULZ]

Q: Can charcoal filters remove chloramine?

A: Charcoal or granular activated carbon (GAC) filter can reduce chloramine concentrations of 1 to 2 mg/L to less than 0.1 mg/L. The GAC filter may be followed by a reverse osmosis (RO) filter to remove the carbon fines. RO should not be used alone as chloramine will pass through the membrane and may damage the RO membrane elements (some RO units are resistant to
chlorine and chloramine). A GAC filter will remove chloramine, allowing RO to effectively remove other constituents.

Q: Are GAC filters certified and if so by whom?

A: As a public agency, the SFPUC does not test, endorse or recommend specific water filtration products. Contact the NSF International, a nonprofit organization that independently tests and certifies drinking water filtration products. Website: NSF International, phone: 800-673-8010.

The removal of chloramine is not necessary from a public health perspective; however, some customers may choose to remove either chlorine or chloramine for drinking purposes. Several units are certified and listed on the NSF International website http://www.nsf.org/Certified/DWTU/ (accessed
August 2013) for the removal of chloramine: smaller units certified at flows below 1 gpm (service cycle from 300 to 1600 gal) are appropriate for drinking water applications at a kitchen faucet, larger units certified at 5 gpm (service cycle from 15,000 to 84,000 gal) could be used for other uses if desired. NSF International verifies claims of 85% chloramine removal of 3 mg/L. GAC filters, if desired, need to be installed on the kitchen sink cold water tap as filter effectiveness decreases in warm or hot water.

The removal of disinfectant from the water may increase the potential of bacterial regrowth in plumbing.

SOURCE- http://www.sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=4125

Here is my opinion. I would rather be safe that sorry. What may/may not affect others may or may not affect me. The days' of GODS' WATER is well gone.

I had a home on municipal water and filtered only the kitchen sink faucet for chlorine. It made a huge difference. Had I known all the facts about chlorine ingestion (including bathing) at the time, I would have installed a whole house system.

BUT, if one removes the chlorine at house entry, the house distribution system will become fouled. Then you need to go to an H2O2 and/or UV system(s) to keep the crud from building up in various cracks and crevices.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't...

 

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by speedbump

Chlorimine can be removed with another mineral similar to carbon. It is more expensive than carbon, but not that much more!

Can you provide a link to that? I'd like to have it in a 4.5" x 20" canister or 10" canister. I'm looking on amazon and I mainly can only see the regular carbon filters.

Chloramine Removal

The challenge of chloramine and other difficult contaminants has led to the production of a modified carbon called catalytic carbon. Catalytic carbon is a specially processed filter medium designed to greatly enhance carbon's natural ability to promote chemical changes in contaminants.

Standard filter carbon reduces contaminants in two ways. It “adsorbs” chemicals by trapping and holding them, and to a smaller degree, it “chemisorbs” contaminants by changing them to something harmless. Chlorine, for example, can be “catalyzed” to harmless chloride.

Catalytic carbon retains conventional carbon's ability to adsorb contaminants but it also possesses greatly enhanced capacity to catalyze, to promote beneficial chemical reactions. It is by catalytic action that chloramine is reduced.

SOURCE- http://www.purewaterproducts.com/chloramine-catcher?gclid=CI7BkePIis0CFUEfhgod5rYPvw

 

[speedbump]

But, you cannot condemn filtration as a whole. Different filters for different problems and sediment/turbicity is a problem you don't want to reach any main filtration as it will reduce their effectiveness/service life. My pre-filter also stops large particles of magnesium. Better there than at the carbon filter/water softener.

Magnesium is hardness and should be dissolved in the water. A filter won't catch it.
I agree that in very few cases an inline filter could be beneficial, my problem with them is people thinking they are the cure all for their drinking water problems which they aren't and never will be.

Can you provide a link to that? I'd like to have it in a 4.5" x 20" canister or 10" canister. I'm looking on amazon and I mainly can only see the regular carbon filters.

I buy it in 1 cubic foot bags from my supplier. If you wanted to get rid of chlorimine you would have to put the cubic foot into a 9" X 48" tank. Depending on your water and your filtration, you may be able to use an in/out head instead of a backwashing head. You can't just put some in a 10" canister and expect it to work. It won't. The contact time and the amount of media the water has to flow through isn't large enough. Like I said before these filters were designed to be one faucet filters.
I agree that finding definitive info on chlorimine is nearly impossible on the Internet.

 

[Mr_David]

Very interesting conversation. Lernt sump'n today.
Filters and customer's questions about them are not something I encounter very often.

 

[KULTULZ]

Magnesium is hardness and should be dissolved in the water. A filter won't catch it.

I agree that in very few cases an inline filter could be beneficial, my problem with them is people thinking they are the cure all for their drinking water problems which they aren't and never will be.

I am due a pre-filter service. I will post photos.

A cartridge style filter is useful if sized and selected for the problem it is trying to resolve. Bigger problems call for larger and more complicated filtering.