dalehileman
-
Posts
37 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by dalehileman
-
-
Fourteen years ago the former property owner had left me a basic pool sweep that gave me 4 years of service before crapping out whereupon I replaced it with a Polaris 380, partly because it used the same booster. However the latter sweep was expensive and having many more moving parts proved somewhat unreliable but difficult to repair and because it's on its last legs I would like to replace it, possibly with its simpler predecessor
I'm not sure who made it or whether it meanwhile might have been discontinued. Like the 380 it had a swishing tail and was propelled by a rear jet but had no wheels nor leaf bag. Even so one advantage was unlike its replacement the rear jet was slowly rotated so as to ensure a more nearly random path
Its tail kept the bottom clean by reducing settlings to a size carried away by circulation, remarkably enough even sand and small rocks. Do you happen to know if it's still on the market and if so who makes it
Thanks all
-
-
I should have noted a requirement to mount the new bag with respect to its base in the same rectilinear plane as the original lest acting as a rudder it steer the sweep in circles
-
Golly PC I thought that one was emotionally quite neutral if not even somewhat helpful
-
After having replaced my Polaris 380 bag several times at a cost of $33 each I determined to fabricate an alternative. Fortuitously its assembly base is made in 2 parts that you can separate with a little difficulty then experiment with all sorts other of common household receptacles. A sock of various kinds didn't work very well, would pull loose or breach within a short time while its floppiness caused it to catch between wheel and body. A typical vegetable bag of the sort from your supermarket proved longer lasting but the weave was too coarse, releasing the smaller particles.
Finally my Better Half suggested rug non-slip padding, easily sewing me one Aug 2 in flat profile much like the Polaris. Owing to its rubberized finish it doesn't slip loose while it has since survived with no apparent damage nor being stiffer has it got caught as the sock above. Furthermore it's available in many weaves to suit your requirements
-
Wow Javert, your credentials are truly impressive
Though forgive me all once again for another totally OT remark to the effect that the Internet boards appear rife with the participant seemingly angry at all times about almost everything, grasping at any opportunity to disparage and criticize, mercilessly dragging his fellow contributor across the spectrum, thereby satisfying a felt lack of power is his everyday humdrum existence just as Javert barbarically pursues his prey Jean Valjean athwart the countryside
"Nothing is more unpleasant than a virtuous person with a mean mind"
--Walter Bagehot, English editor and economist (1826-1877)
I do hope however that Admin will terminate this thread, thereby sparing Javert from his endless plight of despair but nonetheless most profusely thanking PSF herewith for its heroic indulgence
-
.............. A pool can be designed to operate properly with one or without one but to eliminate the drain from a pool designed for one can cause problems in some cases. You might need to consider redoing the returns.........Copper pipes would be more problematic.........the new drains are designed to be anti-entrapment..........for the hydrostatic relief valve (although they can be located elsewhere). Not all pools have these.........
Now on to the nonsense:
If you use a vf pump at a very slow rate the bottom drain might promote circulation.
Base on what criteria?
*******The idea that flow into a bottom drain might promote circulation in its vicinity
Why would you need a variable speed pump at a slow rate to do this?
********You wouldn't. But most folk who switch over from the older less economical model replace it with a vf pump. There are some advantages of being able occasionally switch back to the higher rate: For instance after a windstorm the higher flow might more efficiently deposit flotsam into the skimmer
You do not have clue as to what you are talking about, do you?
********I apologize if my style offends or if in some cases I'm not perfectly clear
Ålso if you should elect a bottom tab dispenser, arguably touted to be 5 x as effective as one at the surface
What are you babbling about here?
************Though apocryphal a report by advertisers of the bottom tab dispenser claim it to be 5 x as effective as a surface dispenser
You REALLY don't have a clue as to what you are talking about! You just post to see yourself in print since you failed at getting your book published as documented in some of the links below.
********I am flattered by all your attention but surely the emotional state of mind required for such research and detailed response to posts meant essentially neutral if not sometimes helpful will surely curtail your longevity
(FWIW, he is referring to a Pentair 320 trichlor/bromine feeder that can either inlet at the top of the ersoion tube or at the bottom. He does not realize that most other erosion dispensers on the market are bottom feed and not top feed. He also does not realize that he has it backwards and a top feed dispenser is more efficient, it allow more sanitizer to dissolve in the same amount of time
********Perhaps I had misunderstood suggestions by various pool-board participants who had suggested the use of a surface dispenser. Certainly one would expect the flow at the surface to be faster than at the bottom, especially if there's no bottom drain. To this end, incidentally, for any tab user interested in increasing his FC that an even higher rate of dissolution might be achieved by placing tabs instead in the skimmer basket
This person is an internet troll and only posts to get attention.
*******To the contrary I have no such intention. Incidentally forgive the sudden loss of "quote" blue halftone. Admittedly I'm not good at this sort of thing and no doubt will be roundly taken to task by Javert for this unforgivable breach of protocol
His advice on pools is bad, his knowledge of pools is minimal and he has ignored advice given to him on this and a few other pool forums for the past two years.
***********I apologize profusely if my occasional skepticism upsets the occasional participant but I've found opinions proffered on pool boards pretty cut-and-dried and have often been disappointed at the lack of controversy therein
He only likes to create discord. His username has ended up in the Urban Dictionary as "an irritating, repetitive message board poster." and he seems to be proud of this. the first link is to that page.
********Sorry I can't comment on this owing to a pending lawsuit
[font="arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif"]Read this. (If you wonder why keep checking out the links).................(be sure to read down to the last three posts on page one and the posts at the top of page two, they say a LOT. This thread was locked also!))
There are many more examples.
do NOT feed the internet troll.
[/font]
Unfortunately he has invaded this board and refuses to go away. He continues to post nonsense and plain bad advice.
*********Regret any hard feelings but if it agrees with Javert above Admin is welcome to ban me
Do not feed the troll.
**I agree one shouldn't feed trolls. However I'd define a troll as someone who purposely sets about a task of annoyance, not the participant whose style inadvertently inflames the pent-up anger of the occasional board "authority" figure
*****Incidentally the visitor interested in linguistic aspects of this sort of personality are invited to the following link
http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=290676
Sorry Javert I just couldn't resist
-
Hi,.....we're in the middle of restoring an old cement pool and I would like to get opinions on whether or not we should have a main drain..............Thanks for any help.
burg yours is a good question indeed. If you use a vf pump at a very slow rate the bottom drain might promote circulation. Ålso if you should elect a bottom tab dispenser, arguably touted to be 5 x as effective as one at the surface
...although a sweeper such as the Polaris 380 etc probably would provide enough bottom circ
-
Wow spec I wish I could keep my pool that blue
My experience with PVC--at least as used on the surface--has been disastrous as exposure to the sun evidently causes it to disintegrate. So I wonder if the black tubing refried to above might actually be ABS and whether that kind is as easy to assemble and whether it might last longer at least where exposed
-
We have a pool twice the size of yours and living in the Mojave Desert where the conditions might approximate yours we run our 1 hp pump three hours a day. Using only a few tabs when needed and a weekly application of supermarket algi-clari the water has kept it mostly clear for well over a decade until finally after a pump failure we did have to to replace most of the water
We swim every day in the summer and it's crystal clear though slightly greenish but I don't think the color depends much on running time and while I had assumed it was reflection of surrounding vegetation it's been suggested instead our low FC level might be responsible
It's quite attractive though and we're curious about the danger of a little algae
At the suggestion of some participants we have also begun adding l lb of granulated shock weekly but consulting other experts we're not sure it's necessary
But get more opinions because my routines are cordially excoriated almost everywhere
-
"Does it bother you at all that you are considered an internet nuisance on so many forums that you ended up in the Urban Dictionary?"
Can't comment on account of pending lawsut
-
Just trying to be helpful
Really
-
sws yours are really a good questions, with a 35K pool I mull these things over too
For more than a decade with apparently pretty good luck we used nothing but pucks and and a weekly supermarket algi-clari to maintain an FC of about 0.5-1.5 until about the 12th year when other problems led me to add oxidizers, shock, and other products to gain its previous appearance, whereupon my Better Half and I as well as a couple of visiting swimmers experienced skin problems whereupon we replaced 2/3 of the water before returning to our previous routine
We did however cave in to certain board recommendations and now add weekly also 1 lb of shock though with some trepidation. Replacing the water though was probably a wise move as it brought down the CYA down from 100-150 to 30-50 as closely as I can gage
Thus I'm struggling with the question whether the recommended FC level of 1.0-3.0 is always necessary. So far so good but please don't follow my lead without more expert advice. I'd suggest bouncing your questions around in several different pool boards before proceeding as I have noted some of the "experts" are pretty set in their approach and deeply resent any skepticism
As one might presume given the following link
-
I am wondering in the meantime for participants using a supplementary algicide (various chlorides and dichlorides) on a regular basis, just how much lower than the usual 1.0-3.0 level can one let his FC safely get
Or am I totally wrong about this, whisk, and the usual FC measurement is also raised by that separate product; in which case tricolor and copper tabs as well as the separate algicide wouldn't be enough and to gain the desired FC then as bear suggests you'd have to add still another product such as bleach
Thus if you count a regular shock application, you'd be using four different compounds just to control FC
This could be pretty important to some of us who have experienced serious skin conditions after the addition of numerous chemicals so still wondering if 1.0-3.0 is the customary goal how far below this value (given a CYA of say 30-40) is it safe to allow your FC to drop
-
How far does the level recede every day
Reason I ask, some say even in the wintertime it can recede by evaporation 1/4 in./day
-
Aha! I had wondered why #2 wasn't in the same league with the rest. Whatever else you think of Javert, he does often come up with the right answer
-
Whisk, for what it's worth (which Inspector Javert above might assert isn't much) it's becoming increasingly clear that Kem-Tek's "5 steps" must be on the right track. For some 12 years I successfully (?) used only a weekly routine entailing replenishment of the tabs and the supermarket algi-clari that upon reading the label turns out to be their #4. However on the recommendation of several board participants here and about I now add the minimal dose of shock which by sheer chance turned out to be Kem-Tek's #3
However during that first decade or so I couldn't open my eyes under water so eventually began using soda ash in varying doses. Well, again by only the sheerest coincidence what my Better Half brought from Home Depot was their #1. Curious about the remainder I found in our garage an empty jar of Kem-Tek clari. Well, that's presumably included in our #4, leaving only #2 to pique our curiousity
A quick Googling immediately revealed the identity of #2 which--and believe it or not by the sheerest kind of accordance--turns out to be a phenol red I already had on hand and which I believe my Life's Companion had acquired from Lowe's
So whisk thank you for the opportunity to relate this story and if by the most unlikely happenstance it helps in your quest I would be much gratified
No doubt Javert will rend me limb from limb for not ending paragraphs with punctuation
-
whisk, I was very interested in your problem and bear's replies as it exactly parallels mine though my pool is huge in-ground. In fact, queries at various pool boards confirms my suspicion that tabs alone won't maintain the required FC and so you have to supplement it somehow
After 12 years accumulating a CYA of 100-150 at one point I had tossed in 19 tabs without a significant increase in FC subsequent to which my Better Half and I as well as a couple of visiting swimmers experienced skin problems whereupon we were advised to drain half the pool. Owing to a perhaps fortunate miscalculation I accordingly replaced 2/3 before routinely tossing in a half-dozen tabs and about 1/2 gal supermarket algi-clari
As suggested by several pool sharks, I now supplement the tabs weekly by 2 lb of Shock Quick, a tricolor (that's a minimum dose). After running the pump for the better part of couple of days it's now crystal clear and though it's still early, no skin rash, fingers crossed rigidly. To raise the FC a bit I had proposed to apply bleach as suggested by bear above but my Life's Partner nixed this approach and I listen to her as she's much smarter than I
My FC runs now somewhere between 0.4 and 1.0 which I realize is below recommended levels. However, I've been advised if you regularly also apply an algi you can tolerate a lower level of FC. But please don't take my word for this as the recommendation didn't give actual figures. Incidentally replacing 2/3 of the water has evidently reduced the CYA to somewhere between 30 and 100 just as one would calculate
While tabs are reputed to increase CYA I do intend to keep my eye on its concentration. Admittedly my tricolor shock is not widely approved as bear intimates but I have a large amount on hand from a recent sale but surely won't go another 13 years before again replacing the water
-
But Javert, Champmatgieu was probably just as guilty of something else
-
Thank you bear for that rundown. Other Polaris users may find it valuable also as the descriptions in Amazon are not so explicit
"dale, care to explain why you seem so unliked in this forum? "
No thanks
-
As my Polaris 380 is wearing out and I was interested to learn the 280 is much. much cheaper at the sale price of $432 and furthermore in spite of its vintage gets better Amazon rating than any of its followers such as 360, 380, and 3900
However the 165 is even less at $280 and having fewer moving parts so significantly less maintenance I'm wondering if any Polaris-using participants have tried this model and how do you like it, especially if you're able to compare it with some of the others
-
"A minor correction: it's high levels of chlorine at high pH, not low pH, that oxidizes cyanuric acid (as far as I know). This is described in Patent 4,075,094."
Thank you geek for that input. As I had been advised the only feasible way to reduce CYA was to replace the water. I am wondering if a feasible alternative to minimize one's water bill might not simply be to run with a prolonged shock so I wonder if that's so and if off the top of your head you might be able to specify the necessary FC concentration and for a given level of CYA how long one might have to maintain it
That's not meant to imply however that one ought to go 12 years as I did with the same water but thanks again geek
-
Wow such persistence! Well, I wish waterbear luck in his life's quest, whatever that is
For those lazy or forgetful folk such as I who wish to minimize the tasks of maintenance, by the sheerest luck I had stumbled upon the simple routine described in my first post that served me well for some 12 years, the supermarket algi-clari by Kem-Tek is descried as "Step 4 of 5-Step Pool Care," with a weekly application of about 1/2 gallon..
...whereas the Shock Quick by the same firm which I had only recently began using, with a recommended maintenance dose of 1 lb weekly, is described as "Step 3"
Don't know steps 1, 2, and 5
-
Slightly OT but I can no longer resist. Waterbear reminds me of Inspector Javert in Victor Hugo's Les Miserables who relentlessly goes after Jean Valjean (me) who had stolen a loaf of bread, following him from place (DBS) to place (TPF) to place (PSF) hounding him until he's a mental wreck
Can You Id This Sweep
in All Swimming Pools Types
Posted
Thanks waterbear for that rundown and no, txpoolguy, no I don't but wish I did