Whole House Filteration


  #1  
Old 09-08-09, 04:54 PM
clockmaker's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 178
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Whole House Filteration

I need some advise...I would like to put in a whole house filteration unit. This is the unit I have in mind, Aquasana Whole House Water Filtration System, $800.00 - Rhino Model, will this get out the pharmaceuticals? thanks george
 
  #2  
Old 09-08-09, 05:08 PM
A
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,478
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by clockmaker View Post
I need some advise...I would like to put in a whole house filteration unit. This is the unit I have in mind, Aquasana Whole House Water Filtration System, $800.00 - Rhino Model, will this get out the pharmaceuticals? thanks george
The first advice is the realize what it is in your water that you wish to treat. Only then can a reliable treatment system be suggested. Hav eyou tested your water/ Are you on city or well water? Any other concerns?

As far as pharmaceutics in the water, have you received a report of issues in your water or some other indicating factor? A Rino will not remve drugs found in today's wter suppies. An RO would more very effective in doing that.

The Rhino is a very good filter for what it is designed to do, but when you need to replace the media, you will not be able to do that; you need to replace the whole tanks.

Get a thorouh water exam.
Andy Christensen, CWS-II
 
  #3  
Old 09-08-09, 05:21 PM
B
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 712
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
I presume that you are referring to the "RHINO" unit.

The Aquasana website lists no details about the actual materials used in the filter. The posted test results speak only to chlorine removal. I suspect that a primary filter material is some sort of carbon--GAC or Centaur, or perhaps a mix.

If you want to remove a particular constituent from your water I believe you would be best served by finding a treatment method/filter with demonstrated capabilities for what you want to remove.

Another factor to consider is that the filter is rated at 7 gpm--a low rate for a "whole house filter". Running a shower, flushing a toilet and running a dishwasher at the same time will probably exceed the rated capacity.

On the other hand, if you simply want a carbon filter you can buy a higher flow rated backwashing carbon filter from an online dealer for $800 or less. The expected life of the media in a backwashing filter is typically greater than three years and the filter media can be replaced for less than the listed price for the Aquasana filter replacement.
 
  #4  
Old 09-08-09, 05:40 PM
A
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,478
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob999 View Post
I presume that you are referring to the "RHINO" unit.

The Aquasana website lists no details about the actual materials used in the filter. The posted test results speak only to chlorine removal. I suspect that a primary filter material is some sort of carbon--GAC or Centaur, or perhaps a mix.

Another factor to consider is that the filter is rated at 7 gpm--a low rate for a "whole house filter". Running a shower, flushing a toilet and running a dishwasher at the same time will probably exceed the rated capacity.

On the other hand, if you simply want a carbon filter you can buy a higher flow rated backwashing carbon filter from an online dealer for $800 or less. The expected life of the media in a backwashing filter is typically greater than three years and the filter media can be replaced for less than the listed price for the Aquasana filter replacement.
The top filter is a KDF media, either KDF-85 (well) or KDF-55 (for chlorinated city water). The bottom filter has GAC carbon media.

Using a dishwasher and flushing a toilet would not create a noticeable pressure drop, or at least enough to cause concern.

What to suggest is still a moot point as the water quality issues are unknown. For city dechloriantion, I prefer an upflow carbon tank (+- 1 cuft) with a sediment prefilter for a number of good reasons.

Andy Christensen, CWS-II
 
  #5  
Old 09-09-09, 06:28 AM
B
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 712
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
Using a dishwasher and flushing a toilet would not create a noticeable pressure drop, or at least enough to cause concern.
Andy Christensen, CWS-II
I agree. However if you add a shower and are considering the flows compared to the ratings of the RHINO filter, as my original post did, then the 7 gpm rating of the filter is almost certainly exceeded--and this assumes modern low flow fixtures.
It is important not to exceed the flow ratings on filters if you want the fillter to perform up to specifications--in the case of the RHINO filter the effectiveness in removing chlorine would degrade if the 7 gmp flow rate is exceeded. This may not cause an unacceptable pressure drop, as Andy notes, but it will degrade filter performance.
 
  #6  
Old 09-09-09, 09:16 AM
A
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,478
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob999 View Post
This may not cause an unacceptable pressure drop, as Andy notes, but it will degrade filter performance.
Well, again, not knowing the water test results, anything is a guess. Is his water 0.5 ppm or 3.5 ppm chlorine? KDF removes chlorine at a rate 6 to 12 more effective than GAC. The Rhino has a rather large quantity of KDF so water can pass through rather quickly and still no trace of chlorine will be detected. Whatever chlorine may seep through the KDF, will certainly be zapped by the GAC media following it.

The reason for the sequence is to let the KDF focus on the chlorine removal (conversion) so the carbon is not exhausted and can do all the other wonderful things that carbon does.

KDF has its place in water treatment (it can be very badly applied) and this particular filter is pretty good. I have my reservations, as stated before, but a pressure drop significant to cause concern, I don't think so. But, everything is relative and volume CAN exceed design. Parallel system can be installed.

I have a small, refillable 10x2.5" filter with KDF (about 5 lbs.), which is almost two-years old, and with water running at all faucets, and dishwasher going, I still get no trace of chlorine, which is typically 1.5 - 2.0 ppm in my town. Replacing KDF is ot as difficult as it is expensive. But when my carbon filter lasted about three months, I am happy with the improvement.

I don't deal in Rhinos but have looked at them and talked to a couple of owners and they are very happy with service on city waters. Well water...the jury is out, and I would not recommend as a stand-alone system, typically, at least in my area.

There is a science on water pressure and what affects the pressure. Every elbow, foot of pipe, filter, type of shut-off valves, overhead length and so on will change water pressure. So yes, there will be a drop as water passes through the media. The question is a matter of value: Is the treated water worth the small amount of pressure loss. With all water treatment there is a trade off.

Andy Christensen, CWS-II
 
  #7  
Old 09-09-09, 09:54 AM
B
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 712
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
Well, again, not knowing the water test results, anything is a guess. Is his water 0.5 ppm or 3.5 ppm chlorine? KDF removes chlorine at a rate 6 to 12 more effective than GAC. The Rhino has a rather large quantity of KDF so water can pass through rather quickly and still no trace of chlorine will be detected. Whatever chlorine may seep through the KDF, will certainly be zapped by the GAC media following it.

The reason for the sequence is to let the KDF focus on the chlorine removal (conversion) so the carbon is not exhausted and can do all the other wonderful things that carbon does.

KDF has its place in water treatment (it can be very badly applied) and this particular filter is pretty good. I have my reservations, as stated before, but a pressure drop significant to cause concern, I don't think so. But, everything is relative and volume CAN exceed design. Parallel system can be installed.

I have a small, refillable 10x2.5" filter with KDF (about 5 lbs.), which is almost two-years old, and with water running at all faucets, and dishwasher going, I still get no trace of chlorine, which is typically 1.5 - 2.0 ppm in my town. Replacing KDF is ot as difficult as it is expensive. But when my carbon filter lasted about three months, I am happy with the improvement.

I don't deal in Rhinos but have looked at them and talked to a couple of owners and they are very happy with service on city waters. Well water...the jury is out, and I would not recommend as a stand-alone system, typically, at least in my area.

There is a science on water pressure and what affects the pressure. Every elbow, foot of pipe, filter, type of shut-off valves, overhead length and so on will change water pressure. So yes, there will be a drop as water passes through the media. The question is a matter of value: Is the treated water worth the small amount of pressure loss. With all water treatment there is a trade off.

Andy Christensen, CWS-II
Andy--I didn't raise the pressure drop issue--you did. Rather I noted that the RHINO filter is rated at 7 gpm and stated that the filter performance (ie ability to remove chlorine) will degrade at higher flow rates.

Do you disagree with my statement?
 
  #8  
Old 09-09-09, 03:31 PM
A
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,478
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob999 View Post
Andy--I didn't raise the pressure drop issue--you did. Rather I noted that the RHINO filter is rated at 7 gpm and stated that the filter performance (ie ability to remove chlorine) will degrade at higher flow rates.

Do you disagree with my statement?
Not sure if I disagree yet. I went to the website and I DO see what media they use (not sure how you missed that) and didn't see where it said perfoemance drops after 7 gpm (not sure how I missed that). Um.

Maybe you can send me that link, please.

When you spoke about "7 gpm" and "exceeding capacity", I was assuming flow rate as a typical correlation. I find that chlorine leakage appears near the end of the carbon life more than high flow rate, unless the media is very thin such as in cartridge filters.

Andy Christensen, CWS-II
 
  #9  
Old 09-10-09, 06:35 PM
clockmaker's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 178
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
I sure didn't mean to stir up anything...I'm trying to get the analytical results of our drinking water from the city, I will post the results ASAP. My intentions were only to get the cleanest water possible and stop buying bottled water, the 5 gallon bottles from Home Depot. With all of the issues with containments and pharmaceuticals that are apparently in the water from the waste water and that is what I wanted to filter out if it is present. I certainly don't want to be taking a shower or drinking unclean water, though it is treated. Lake Martin is suppose to be one of the cleanest lakes in Alabama, However, it has been the focal point many times for EPA investigation issues and law suites. Thanks gk
 
  #10  
Old 09-11-09, 10:31 PM
S
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: michigan
Posts: 43
Upvotes: 0
Received 0 Upvotes on 0 Posts
Not sure how hard your water is , but if it was me i would run my water though a water softener, then a carbon filter, and for my drinking water i would use a reverse osmosis filtration system. if the water has little hardness forget about the softener.
 
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
 
Ask a Question
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: