Over 698,000 strictly plumbing related posts
Plumbing education, information, advice, help and suggestions are provided by some of the most experienced plumbers who wish to "give back" to society. Since 1996 we have been the best online (strictly) PLUMBING advice site. If you have questions about plumbing, toilets, sinks, faucets, drains, sewers, water filters, venting, water heating, showers, pumps, and other strictly PLUMBING related issues then you've come to the right place. Please refrain from asking or discussing legal questions, or pricing, or where to purchase products, or any business issues, or for contractor referrals, or any other questions or issues not specifically related to plumbing. Keep all posts positive and absolutely no advertising. Our site is completely free, without ads or pop-ups and we don't tract you. We absolutely do not sell your personal information. We are made possible by:
Author:
DavidT (MD)
Hi. I'm installing two whole house water filters. They'll be in parallel, not in series, so I'll install two T's on the main line to source the filters, then two more T's farther up the main line where they'll feed back in. There will be a valve between the sets of T's in case I need to bypass the filters and to redirect the source water the filters. Is there a minimum distance for spacing between the T's or do I just need enough pipe between them to make a good solder joint?
I don't know if two feeds close together would cause any kind of swirling or cavitation.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
m & m (MD)
Being in parallel, the filters should load equally, so the pressure drop thru them should also remain equal. I would keep the tees close to the filters and each other.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
andy12355 (OR)
From an engineering stand point: You want equal flow in both pipes - we normally enter a tee, then rise and drop with identical nipples so all pipe lengths are the same - rising up, and down, or down and up, has no impact on the flow. For looks, locate valves in identical locations, Normally a wye strainer with blow down and 80 mesh stainless steel strainer prior to each filter. Then follow wye strainer with a union so you can take either the strainer or filter out in the future.
finally - W/ a black permanent marker, mark the filter housing with the size and filtering capability for future reference! i.e. 3" dia x 10" - 5 micron.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
DavidT (MD)
I don't have a lot of room to play with where all these connections will be made. The main comes in through the basement wall then goes vertical up the floor joist above. It's already got two ball valves and a pressure reducer and now I'll be adding these 4 T's plus an additional T that will branch off and directly feed the exterior faucets. No point in filtering them. So it would be beneficial (necessary) if I could put the T's close together.
I assume trying to keep the pipe lengths the same would be to ensure equal water flow through the two filters. Since they're mounted on overtop the other the pipes will need to vary some in length, but not too much. I'm using two since I have pretty good water pressure, about 20 gpms. The carbon filters really cut down on the volume and I figure with two of them I shouldn't lose any. If it turns out I can get away with just one without losing volume then I may just rotate them - using only one at a time.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
andy12355 (OR)
THE DIFFERENCE IN FLOW WILL BE MINIMAL AND OF NO COCIQUENCE AS THE MAJOR PRESS DROP OF THE SYSTEM IS ACCROSS THE FILTERS.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
packy (MA)
I may be all wrong on this but if you used one tee on the cold water riser and set that tee so it looked like the letter "T". put one filter to the left and one to the right.
elbow up out of each filter and elbow back towards the main. have an upside down "T" picking up filtered water from the filters.
if all the piping is identical, wouldn't the water flow be identical?
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
hj (AZ)
quote; if all the piping is identical, wouldn't the water flow be identical?
It would be in a "free flowing" system, but since these are filters, which will accumulate "debris", the flow will favor whichever does not have the most restriction. Which will then cause it to remove more particles, which will slow down its flow and transfer the higher flow to the other one. In other words, it would be a "self regulating" system over the long time.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
DavidT (MD)
I wanted to ask a followup question and I think it's what Packy is recommending. To make sure we know my plan is... Try to picture this.. I'm planning on taking two T's and soldering them together with a 2 inch piece of copper pipe. When soldered together you'd be able to look through the pipe. I'll then cut the main line and insert this new piece. I'll connect one of the remaining openings to one filter, and the other opening to the other filter.
So now the question is, am I costing myself more time and money doing it this way? Should I instead just put one T on the main line, then another T from that one to feed each filter? When done, this would look like the letter "H". One vertical line of the H would be the main, the top and bottom of the other vertical line of the H would each connect to a filter.
I'm having to put in a lot of 90 degree elbows, plus with the T, or T's on the main line I'm making the water redirect 90 degrees as well. I figure if I put two T's directly on the main it might reduce or eliminate any restriction since the water would have two paths to flwo instead of just one.
What's the better choice? I'm not much worried about additional expense. I just don't want to lose volume or pressure. If I put two T's on the main, could I wind up in some way over-sizing the pipe?
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
hj (AZ)
YOU cannot "oversize" the pipe by installing fittings in it. There are easy ways to do it and there are difficult ways, but without seeing YOUR situation, we cannot tell you which one you are considering, although it does seem like your design is "over the top" for what you want to accomplish.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
DavidT (MD)
Not sure of how what I'm doing would be over the top. One filter will cause a reduction in volume. They're 10 gpm filters and my house has better than 20 gpm flow. Even with two there's a chance I'll reduce my flow.
By 'over-sizing' I'm referring to the fact that I'll be taking water from a 3/4" pipe and then push it through two 3/4 inch pipes, then through the filters, then back into one 3/4" pipe.
Edited 2 times.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
hj (AZ)
I am not sure what you are using the water flow for, but there is NOTHING inside your house that uses 20 gpm. Unless you are extremely sensitive, you would probably not notice the difference even with 10 gpm. You can connect a 3/4" pipe to a 6" one, and then reduce back to 3/4" and it would NOT be "oversized".
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
DavidT (MD)
It would appear that a double quote followed by the capital O creates a teary face. lol
It's nice to have high volume when filling the whirlpool tub. But other than that, true, I don't otherwise need that much volume, since I'll bypass the filters for exterior faucets (filling the swimming pool, etc...).
My main is 3/4" copper. I ran 250 feet of PVC underground out to the pool. I used 1" PVC. After doing it I was told it may have been a mistake to use the larger diameter PVC. Something about the greater volume of the water in the larger pipe impacting flow rate. Is that not the case? I was told you should not step up to a larger diameter.
|
Post Reply
|
Author:
hj (AZ)
You must have been told that by someone at a "big box store", because no "plumber" would ever make such a ridiculous statement. There are as many instances of the pipe size being increased as there are which keep the original size. Any time there is a "long section" of piping, and your pool might have qualified as one, the size may be increased to reduce pressure loss due to friction and maintain flow volume. In other words, increasing the pipe size may, or may not, be beneficial, but there is almost no way it would be detrimental, other than possibly wasting some money for the more expensive materials.
Edited 3 times.
|
Post Reply
|
Please note:
- Inappropriate messages or blatant advertising will be deleted. We cannot be held responsible for bad or inadequate advice.
- Plbg.com has no control over external content that may be linked to from messages posted here. Please follow external links with caution.
- Plbg.com is strictly for the exchange of plumbing related advice and NOT to ask about pricing/costs, nor where to find a product (try Google), nor how to operate or promote a business, nor for ethics (law) and the like questions.
- Plbg.com is also not a place to ask radiant heating (try HeatingHelp.com), electrical or even general construction type questions. We are exclusively for plumbing questions.
Search for plumbing parts on our sponsor's site:
Special thanks to our sponsor:
|