You need to be a member of Pool Genius Network to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
If you are a member of the "pool industry" community, you have found your home.
This is a network of pool builders, service professionals, retailers, and pool sales reps,…
For…
Swimming pools are often associated with luxury, relaxation, and endless summer fun. But there's more than just the allure of crystal-clear water that leads a…
The Journal of the Swimming Pool and Spa Industry is coming back! JSPSI, a peer-reviewed technical journal, began in 1995 as a subscription-supported print-based publication. It contained articles at a technical…
All pool plaster finishes should last 20 years or more. However, some last only 5 to 7 years, and some less than a year before the plaster surface deteriorates, discolors, and looks terrible.
Why the difference? Very often, plaster…
For 50 years, the pool industry has considered pool water within an LSI of -0.3 and +0.5 to be acceptable and balanced. But recently, and without providing any supporting science or research, the NPC is trying to convince the industry that any…
There are two important issues involved when trying to achieve quality colored pool plaster that will remain durable, attractive, and the proper shade for many years.
The first issue is to utilize superior workmanship practices to achieve…
Replies
Kevin,
Thanks for your quick response. Being a city pool explains a lot. You are in St Paul, right? I assume that the decision for the switch from liquid to Pulsar was up the ladder from your position…maybe from Lynn Waldorf. Many of the St Paul city run pools are on Pulsar, and from the appearance of the racing lines on some of them, (Highland Park and RiverWalk for example), have been on them for some time. It’s supposed to be a benefit of High Calcium Chemistry, but I see it as a negative trade off. It’s not a clarity issue, as they are ultra-clear from the moss treatment, it’s the dullness of the dark blue paint/tile lines on the pool bottom. Are the contracts up with Pulsar citywide, or just with your pools? I thought that this past year, all the St Paul pools were going on the moss treatment.
If you ever get to Eau Claire, stop in at the Chaos Water Park. They are on the HCF systems, without UV, and no issues with CC getting out of hand. They have just started on the moss about a month ago.
So are we back on track of this discussion, and if so, I’ll await your response to the earlier questions.
Sorry I have not answered the questions. Truth is I also run a multi sheet ice arena. The pool aspect of my job is less than 5 months out of the year. We being a city owned business have been hit hard by budget cuts. We have went from 3 employees in my position to just one, and that has me stretched pretty thin these days.
As per liquid chl. I personally have never used it, but this pool was running on it the first two years it was open. Why they went away from it in the first place I do not know and no one else seems to know either. I personally would rather switch to gas, but do to safety concerns by other that will not be happening. I safetly used gas for more than 5 yrs at my previous pool.
Sorry about the lack of answers, but I have a tendency to tune out the pool aspect of my job until it is time for me to get the season started up. I will try and check back and answer more when I have a few moments again.
Al Neumann said:
Kevin,
Apparently I asked too many questions, as you have appeared to have lost interest in continuing this conversation. Once again I hit a dead end on discovering why some facilities SAY they are happy with Pulsar. My opinion is that it has to be that the contracts appear to be enticing enough to offset the hassles involved in the frequent cleaning of the feeders.
You know I’m pretty much in agreement with many of the other comments given in this discussion, which is against Cal Hypo in general, and for liquid chlorine. Well actually, I’m against the standard use of liquid chlorine too. I’m more in lined to using liquid chlorine smarter, which is totally different.
I strongly believe in the following statement
I would have like to have everyone go through the process for themselves, as I think it would have been a good learning experience. Maybe I should start a new discussion on the topic HCF vs Cal Hypo.
Kevin, as far as your upcoming decision on Pulsar vs. PPG, and maybe vs. using liquid smarter, and would be more comfortable to do this less public, then feel free to email me direct. here
If not, then I hope my other comments were of some help.
Kevin,
Thank you for your participation in this endeavor of mine to learn just why many facility managers, and some operators frequently say they are happy with using Pulsar. I often wondered if it was Pulsar specifically they were happy about, or if it was Cal Hypo in general, or if anything would be better than messing with standard practice of dealing with hassles of liquid chlorine, and were just so fed up...or if it was something else all together that is totally unrelated. Something has apparently overridden the newly acquired hassle of frequently cleaning the Pulsar feeders for these facilities. I have a hunch on what it might be, but I’m not sure.
I’m assuming your experience with using Pulsar was so-so. Some things were positive… some things could be better. I sense this because if it weren’t so, then the PPG vender wouldn’t have enticed you to explore a different option. Perhaps together we can come to a consensus if the positive aspect of your 1st season of using Pulsar in your facility was due specifically with using Pulsar; or was just due to the difference of just using tablets over liquid, (standard use of liquid can be a pain and a challenge…if you used liquid before, you know what I mean. We all have our own experiences), or something else, (for instance, the terms so of your contract which are sometimes very competitive). Finding out which is which could help you with your decision of staying with Pulsar or switching to PPG for this coming season…or neither.
So what have we learned so far? You have 2 seasonal pools, one is 325,000 gal, and the other is 285,000 gal. Your fill water is high in Calcium Hardness, but you are not having issues with scale in the pools. You keep your pH at mid-sevens. You have just completed your 1st season using Pulsar. Your contract is up this year with the Pulsar vender. You didn’t choose to use Cal Hypo, (Pulsar), or have any say in the terms of your contract. Because you are new at this facility, you do not know why the switch was made from liquid chorine, but you thought the primary reason was for safety.
You sort of agree with the safety aspect, as you mention ease of use, (for filling feeders), safety, and stability, (I assume that is for maintaining the 5-7 PPM of FC), as your highest rated positive aspects of using Pulsar. The only negative you mentioned was the safety and hassle aspect of cleaning the Pulsar Feeders every other week.
I was a little surprised of what was omitted from your favorites.
1. Cal Hypo proponents often claim clearer water, longer storage life, fewer deliveries, less handling, easier balance, less maintenance, and ease of use. It’s newer technology, it’s concentrated, and it’s better for your pool because it adds Calcium…everybody is doing it! In simplistic terms, it’s the next best evolution in how to chlorinate our pools, and as such, should be expected to be a little more costly. Are any of these among your favorites? Are there any that are overstated?
2. Here’s is my hunch for the #1 reason why many facilities say they are happy with Cal Hypo, and that is the contract. It may not be why the operator is happy, but it appears to be why the decision maker is happy. Around here, the contracts are very competitive. A typical Pulsar contract leases the feeder, the controller, supplies all the balance chemicals supplies all the acid, (or acid magic), and supplies all the test reagents for a very competitive price. Contracts are usually for 3 years, and vary considerably depending on the facility. Service is usually pretty good, because it is in the vender’s best interest to use as little chemicals, tablets, and acid as possible, so keeps tight tabs on controller settings etc. If there is no contract, then the opposite is true. They charge a much higher price for the tablets, and won’t help you much. The more you use, the more they make.
So a very decisive question might be: how important is the contract for your facility? Does a 3-month season even make a contract that important? Does PPG offer a contract…and is it as enticing as the Pulsar contract?
3. This is an optional question, but how many pails (pounds) of Pulsar do you use in a season? The reason why I ask is because you stated that your fill water is already rather high calcium. Did you know that for every 3- (50# pails) of Pulsar that you use, you are in effect putting about 50 # of calcium in your pool? Do your pools really need the cumulative effect of the additional calcium?
Now I’m going to overwhelm you a little bit with some more questions. Please bear with me, as I think this could all be a good learning experience for both of us, as well as some other members here.
I was going to do this in small steps, but that maybe could take a long time, and I’m afraid you might lose interest. So I’m going to take a chance and speed things up a bit.
Here is what I don’t know yet, but is equally important. They are general questions pertaining to the pools themselves. I’m not trying to be nosey…answer maybe those questions that you are comfortable with. These questions will help in determining if Cal Hypo is even the right choice for you, regardless of the vendor.
1. Do your pools have a lot of water features? Is there a lot of aeration? Do the features look duller than what you might expect…meanings are they faded, not as vibrant? Any whitish coloration along water tracks?
2. If your pool has blue tile/paint racing lanes, do they appear vibrant in color, or are they somewhat faded also. By vibrancy, I mean crispness…do they look like this picture here? It is not a question of clarity.
3. What kind of filters are you using? How often do you have to backwash? What color is the initial backwash water?
4. You mentioned that the fill water is high calcium. That’s a relative term. What do you consider as being high? What levels do you try to maintain in your pool for balance equations? Are you doing the Langelier, or the Rhyzner for balance?
5. What is your make up water alkalinity? Where do you try to keep it? Are you using muriatic acid, (perhaps acid magic for safety), or are you using bulk CO2?
6. Being Pulsar, is your controller one of the Bec’s…perhaps a Sys 3 or a Sys 5? What Pulsar unit are you using?
I apologise to everyone for the length of this , but I do ramble. Also, there's got to be someone who likes Cal Hypo and have their own to share. Help me understand why I'm finding a lot of facilities happy with Pulsar.
Scott,
You're my hero! Really! It's very refreshing to know that there are still some sales folks out there that are totally about their customers. Kudos to you!
Robert, SureWater Technologies
Scott Heusser said:
The cal hypo adds calcium (among other things) to the pool, and will most likely show itself in the feeder as well. Sounds like you might be going down the same path you've already been on.
Do you not have a liquid option that would work for you? Adding water, chlorine and a small amount of salt seems to be a good option by using liquid!
We have very high levels of CH in our supply water. I keep the ph in the mid 7's and our chl level between 5 and 7 ppm.
We dont have scaling issues in the pool, just in the chl hoppers.
Bruce Wettstein said:
1. Pulsar was there when I started. It was the end of the first season of using it. I am not sure the reason they originally switched from bleach, but I think it was with safety.
2. Ease of use for part time employees is a big benefit. When the hopper gets low anyone can take the lid off of a bucket and put more tablets into the hopper.
3. Ease of use and stability are the top positives of Pulsar for me.
Al Neumann said:
Kevin-Why the high scale content? What are your CH and pH levels? Unless you have very high CH fill water, or are allowing your pH to drift up too high, I don't see why you should have scale issues.
Maybe I am missing something but I have always experienced limited scaling, if any, if my CH was 200-300 ppm and my pH was in the mid 7's. Different areas may have different conditions that I am not familiar with, but water can be maintained if you keep these levels in check and minimize scale issues.
Kevin,
The sun is shining; the temp is almost 20, and its Friday. What more could one ask for on a January day in Wisconsin or Minnesota? I hope your day is going as good as mine. If it is, then I have a question for you, or maybe a proposal for you…sort of a quest. It may take this thread on a little bit different course, but then again, it may be a good learning experience for you, and others to come to a conclusion as to what type of sanitation system is best for you and your facility at this time.
It is my goal to learn as much as I can about my competition, which for right now is Pulsar. There are a lot of facilities here in Wisconsin that are using Cal Hypo, mostly Pulsar, and I assume the same maybe true in the ST Paul area. Now being a fan of using liquid chlorine smarter, I assumed that many long time users of Cal Hypo would have realized by now that there has got to be a better way of doing this, and would be open to a change for something that is less maintenance and more cost effective.
Surprisingly, what I’ve been finding is that when confronted, most will initially say they are very happy with Cal Hypo. Now most is a lot more than I expected to here about, considering the maintenance issues with the Pulsar feeders, are a pain for many operators to deal with, and are a lot more intensive than what the dealers initially told them it was going to be...yet, they’re happy.
So to help me reach my goal, I need to find out why everyone is supposedly so happy with a product whose tradeoffs I feel make it a poor choice in the long run? In return for your help on this, you may get a better incite as to whether you should stay with Pulsar, or switch to PPG, and be pretty comfortable in your decision. This is not about using liquid chlorine smarter, (although I think that that would be an excellent choice). It’s about why you chose Pulsar in the first place.
So the initial 3 questions I have is
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next