Ansi Standard Interpretations

[Spa User Guy]

I see some recent topics referencing ANSI standards. These standards are written in such a manner that they are not easy to understand and can be mis-interpreted. I can tell you from personal experience working with ANSI standards (I was a former member on the rulemaking committee for N14.1). Interpretation questions can be easily answered by the Board Chairman for the specific standard in question. The contact information for the Board Chairman is should be found in a copy of the standard. The Board Chairman can answer questions and tell you whether something either meets the standard or the intent of the standard. In many cases that I know of personally if something is manufactured and meets the intent of the ANSI standard then ANSI recognizes that it is in accordance with the standard. You can't always easily look at something and say it either meets or does not meet the standard, ANSI is the only governing agency that has the final judgement. What they say goes no matter what an individuals interpretation may be. When in doubt ask ANSI, only they can settle any arguments regarding the standard in question.

[Jim_The_Jim]

I see some recent topics referencing ANSI standards. These standards written in such a manner that they are not easy to understand and can be mis-interpreted. I can tell you from personal experience working with ANSI standards (I was a former member on the rulemaking committee for N14.1) these interpretation questions can be easily answered by the Board Chairman for the specific standard in question. The contact information for the Board Chairman is should be found in a copy of the standard. The Board Chairman can answer questions and tell you whether something either meets the standard of the intent of the standard. In many cases that I know of personally if something is manufactured and meets the intent of the ANSI standard then ANSI recognizes that it is in accordance with the standard. You can't always easily look at something and say it either meets or does not meet the standard, ANSI is the only governing agency that has the final judgement. What they say goes no matter what an individuals interpretation may be. When in doubt ask ANSI.

Except that every spa company other than Hot Spring, interpret it exactly as stated. Did you look at the photos of all those spas. They all have a combination of a skimmer/filter housing and multiple suctions at the bottom.

I think it is very clear what is going on.

[Chas]

I think it is very clear what is going on.

Therein lies the problem. Your opinion differs from the rest of us, and more imortantly, from the ANSI/UL standard which is what ETL used to certify this design.

A flter makes a very safe suction: you couldn't get trapped on it if you tried, and I have said it before and I'll say it again: I would dearly love to see you try.

[Spa User Guy]

Except that every spa company other than Hot Spring, interpret it exactly as stated. Did you look at the photos of all those spas. They all have a combination of a skimmer/filter housing and multiple suctions at the bottom.

I think it is very clear what is going on.

Jim,

I see your point of view on this, the other spa designs certainly appear to meet the standard requirements. All I am saying is that the other design although it appears to the average person as being a deviation to the standard. Only ANSI actually has the authority to look at the design and determine whether or not it meets the intent of the standard. That is the only point I had with the original post, ANSI would have to look at this one and decide.

[Jim_The_Jim]

Therein lies the problem. Your opinion differs from the rest of us, and more imortantly, from the ANSI/UL standard which is what ETL used to certify this design.

A flter makes a very safe suction: you couldn't get trapped on it if you tried, and I have said it before and I'll say it again: I would dearly love to see you try.

My opinion is substatiated by the fact that all the other spa companies build exactly as the Standard is written, with no deviation.

Quoted:

8.0 RETURN INLETS AND SUCTION OUTLETS

8.2.2 A minimum of two (2) suction outlets shall be provided for each pump and the suction outlet system, separated by a minimum of three feet (3) [91.44 cm] or located on two (2) planes; i.e., one (1) on the bottom and one (1) on the vertical wall, or two (2) separate vertical walls. These suction outlets shall be plumbed such that the water is drawn through them simultaneously through a common line to the pump.

Unquote.

It is plain english and any spa builder knows exactly what it means. That is why ALL of the other companies build to the ANSI standard exactly as it is written.

Therein lies the problem. Your opinion differs from the rest of us, and more imortantly, from the ANSI/UL standard which is what ETL used to certify this design.

A flter makes a very safe suction: you couldn't get trapped on it if you tried, and I have said it before and I'll say it again: I would dearly love to see you try.

Chas; That is not the point if it is safe or not. The point is your company helped to write the standard, and basically forced all the other companies to comply with it, IF THEY WANT A UL, BECAUSE UL HAS TO USE EVERY ANSI STANDARD IN THEIR listing.

It is called "ANTI TRUST" and creating a monopoly by using their economic power with the now defunct

NSPI who created the ANSI standard and presented it to the ANSI.

It is basically pretty evil to do what they did.

[hottubdan]

My opinion is substatiated by the fact that all the other spa companies build exactly as the Standard is written, with no deviation.

Quoted:

8.0 RETURN INLETS AND SUCTION OUTLETS

8.2.2 A minimum of two (2) suction outlets shall be provided for each pump and the suction outlet system, separated by a minimum of three feet (3) [91.44 cm] or located on two (2) planes; i.e., one (1) on the bottom and one (1) on the vertical wall, or two (2) separate vertical walls. These suction outlets shall be plumbed such that the water is drawn through them simultaneously through a common line to the pump.

Unquote.

It is plain english and any spa builder knows exactly what it means. That is why ALL of the other companies build to the ANSI standard exactly as it is written.

Clearly, based on the information Spa User Guy posted, your opinion is exactly that, an opinion. I do not see any other spa builders joining in with you and your opinions. You are welcome to your opinions, just don't claim that your opinions are facts.

Chas is correct. The system that Hot Spring uses is safe, which is what the standard is all about...safety.

[Jim_The_Jim]

Clearly, based on the information Spa User Guy posted, your opinion is exactly that, an opinion. I do not see any other spa builders joining in with you and your opinions. You are welcome to your opinions, just don't claim that your opinions are facts.

Chas is correct. The system that Hot Spring uses is safe, which is what the standard is all about...safety.

Once again it is not totally a matter of safety but that Hot Spring wrote the ANSI using the NSPI power they have with giving the most money to the NSPI. Then they forced every other company to build spas differently if they want a UL.

Hot Spring had a UL until I turned them in to the Government and UL.

If you can find a single spa company that has an ETL or UL that looks like a Hot Spring, you would be a miricle worker, because it is what I do. I keep up on most every spa brand.

Don't go on blind faith in some greedy corporation. Before the high powered pumps, they were probably safe enough. Now, I don't think so and that is my opinion.

If the stand pipes were to break and the filters removed there is no second area of suction for the mitigation fo the suction so the child can pull off. It is purly dangerous as it sits in people's back yards for years and parts get broken. Even if the stand pipes are broken off and the filters are gone a child can get off the pipes if there is a second suction to relieve the suction from the one that the child is playing with.

[Jim_The_Jim]

Therein lies the problem. Your opinion differs from the rest of us, and more imortantly, from the ANSI/UL standard which is what ETL used to certify this design.

A flter makes a very safe suction: you couldn't get trapped on it if you tried, and I have said it before and I'll say it again: I would dearly love to see you try.

Why is it that every other spa company builds to the ANSI standard exactly, except for your BS greedy super high prifits company?

[Autoplay]

Why is it that every other spa company builds to the ANSI standard exactly, except for you BS greedy super high prifits company?

Is that your opinion/belief Conjuna,and/or is it fact? Can you provide some proof of the profit margin,and the over-all profit Watkins makes in a quarter/year etc?

What's considered SUPER high pri-fits? lol

Is that your opinion/belief Conjuna,and/or is it fact? Can you provide some proof of the profit margin,and the over-all profit Watkins makes in a quarter/year etc?

What's considered SUPER high pri-fits? lol

"And sorry for getting off topic,but I can't control myself and my beliefs for the evil empire know as Hot-Springs/Masco. Jimbo Conjuna,2006" Did I mention I'm possessed/consumed over this?

[Dr. Spa]

I have an actual copy of the standard, and it SPECIFICALLY says;

"The use of American National Standards is completely voluntary; their existence does not in any respect preclude

anyone, whether he has approved this standard or not, from manufacturing, marketing, purchasing or using

products, processes or procedures not conforming to the standards."

It then goes on to say;

ARTICLE 1.1.1

The provisions of this specification are not

intended to prevent the use of other designs

provided that any variation from the

specifications in this standard provide the

required quality, strength, durability and

safety for the intended use and are approved

by the authority having jurisdiction.

The intent of the standard is to reduce the possibility of suction entrapment. Article 1.1.1 clearly says other varying designs are acceptable if they provide at least the same amount of safety. It further says design changes are acceptable if approved by the authority having jurisdiction. As I'm rather sure there's a Hot Spring Spa in EVERY jurisdiction in the USA (as well as most other parts of the civilized world), I challenge anyone to come up with one single spa that had been disapproved...... by an authority having jurisdiction.

[Jim_The_Jim]

I have an actual copy of the standard, and it SPECIFICALLY says;

"The use of American National Standards is completely voluntary; their existence does not in any respect preclude

anyone, whether he has approved this standard or not, from manufacturing, marketing, purchasing or using

products, processes or procedures not conforming to the standards."

It then goes on to say;

ARTICLE 1.1.1

The provisions of this specification are not

intended to prevent the use of other designs

provided that any variation from the

specifications in this standard provide the

required quality, strength, durability and

safety for the intended use and are approved

by the authority having jurisdiction.

The intent of the standard is to reduce the possibility of suction entrapment. Article 1.1.1 clearly says other varying designs are acceptable if they provide at least the same amount of safety. It further says design changes are acceptable if approved by the authority having jurisdiction. As I'm rather sure there's a Hot Spring Spa in EVERY jurisdiction in the USA (as well as most other parts of the civilized world), I challenge anyone to come up with one single spa that had been disapproved...... by an authority having jurisdiction.

Except for one thing, there Dr Spaaa, the UL does follow the ANSI exactly and on all the ETL spas it states

"conforms to ANSI and UL 1563".

I think you need to quit with the kiss ass crap with your friends. Really, when all this comes down on Hot Spring, I will be showing all of your stupid posts to the world, so they know that it is not about safety with you, it is about kissing ass for money.

And if you read what Chas has to say, you will see that he is directly opposed to your hot tub sales. I find it strange that you would want that????

[Roger]

Except for one thing, there Dr Spaaa, the UL does follow the ANSI exactly and on all the ETL spas it states

"conforms to ANSI and UL 1563".

I think you need to quit with the kiss ass crap with your friends. Really, when all this comes down on Hot Spring, I will be showing all of your stupid posts to the world, so they know that it is not about safety with you, it is about kissing ass for money.

And if you read what Chas has to say, you will see that he is directly opposed to your hot tub sales. I find it strange that you would want that????

Come on Jim. Doc shows how the standerd is writen and it clearly says that any design that is approved and meets the criteria, quality, strenght, durability and safety, it is then an exceptable alternative to the standerd as it is written and you keep pointing out to try and defame a different brand that you have it in for.

Take it like a man and find something else to pitch your spas on. I know this will require you to rewrite your entire web site as if you steer someone over there that has been here first and knows just a little bit they may see that you have some misstruths in there and some skewed facts...oh wait, thats how you sell spas and thats what I have been saying for years. Dang this idiot musta got lucky huh Jimmy?

[Jim_The_Jim]

"The intent of the standard is to reduce the possibility of suction entrapment. Article 1.1.1 clearly says other varying designs are acceptable if they provide at least the same amount of safety. It further says design changes are acceptable if approved by the authority having jurisdiction. As I'm rather sure there's a Hot Spring Spa in EVERY jurisdiction in the USA (as well as most other parts of the civilized world), I challenge anyone to come up with one single spa that had been disapproved...... by an authority having jurisdiction."

Why don't you call UL and ask them why they disapproved the design? As far as I am concerned they are the authority and they dropped Hot Spring spas. They wrote the UL standards for hot tubs. They follow the ANSI exactly as stated.

The other problem is this. This new Hot Spring design is no where near as safe as the older previous models. That is because the older models had two 30 sq ft filters and the pumps were running under 60 GPM when Watkins designed them.

Our Low speed filter pumps run at 60GPM so there is no way I am not going to put on dual suctions on our spas.

Now, Hot Spring has upped the horsepower and is still trying to make a design from 1982 work. So, they took out the real filters and put in some screens to let the water pass with less restriction.

It is still hydraulically a poor design. It is much better for the efficiency of the pumps to get the water from the bottom of the vessel where there is the most natural "head".

Hot Spring is a pretty lame design all the way around, from the tiny jets, the poor hydraulics, the diverter valves that are now splitting up the seats three ways. It is a bunch of poor engineering all the way.

Now they are making mistakes of putting a lot of water being sucked in at one location in the spas, with no second suctions.

Quoted:

8.0 RETURN INLETS AND SUCTION OUTLETS

8.2.2 A minimum of two (2) suction outlets shall be provided for each pump and the suction outlet system, separated by a minimum of three feet (3) [91.44 cm] or located on two (2) planes; i.e., one (1) on the bottom and one (1) on the vertical wall, or two (2) separate vertical walls. These suction outlets shall be plumbed such that the water is drawn through them simultaneously through a common line to the pump.

Unquote.

I gotta go to work, but my posts today should give a lot of food for thought.

[Roger]

I gotta go to work, but my posts today should give a lot of food for thought.

Ahhhh....Ummmm nope didn't do it, just the same ole same ole

[tumbleweed]

(Post deleted by Tumbleweed)

[Roger]

I see some recent topics referencing ANSI standards. These standards are written in such a manner that they are not easy to understand and can be mis-interpreted. I can tell you from personal experience working with ANSI standards (I was a former member on the rulemaking committee for N14.1). Interpretation questions can be easily answered by the Board Chairman for the specific standard in question. The contact information for the Board Chairman is should be found in a copy of the standard. The Board Chairman can answer questions and tell you whether something either meets the standard or the intent of the standard. In many cases that I know of personally if something is manufactured and meets the intent of the ANSI standard then ANSI recognizes that it is in accordance with the standard. You can't always easily look at something and say it either meets or does not meet the standard, ANSI is the only governing agency that has the final judgement. What they say goes no matter what an individuals interpretation may be. When in doubt ask ANSI, only they can settle any arguments regarding the standard in question.

bump

[tumbleweed]

(Post deleted by Tumbleweed)

[Trigger]

Jim you should focus on fixing your own problems rather than whine about the accepted and safe design of Hot Spring, that has been on the market and proven in the field by hundreds of thousands of real applications. Your whining is annoying. You should put half as much effort that you do into your BS whining and work on fixing your own 2 bit product. Are they UL listed? ETL? anything....? I mean you must have some listing? Anything? Come on, you make such a big thing out of this, then at the VERY LEAST, you would think your manure tubs would be UL listed. ETL listed? Why not?

Your posts are a joke and you are sounding sillier by the day.

Jim's own customers reports serious flaws in HAVEN tub designs:

When one of the plastic dishes or tubs or whatever the kids are playing with get sucked over one of the intakes, the affected pump starts making all kinds of hurtful noises and the plastic toy gets crushed and is impossible to remove without turning off the pump (or whole spa if it is in the filter cycle).

The above is an actual situation, reported in Aug of this year (06) From one of Jim's customers. It is the exactly the situation that ANSI is trying to avoid. A tub that exhibits this is deadly.

So folks, just becasue some people can copy a paragraph out of a book, that doesn't mean they understand it.

Reminds me of the movie " A Fish Called Wanda"

Wanda: To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people. I've known sheep who could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs, but you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto, they just don't understand it.

You want a banana Jim?

[flibotte]

talk about beating a dead horse.

[Trigger]

talk about beating a dead horse.

More like kicking a dead donkey.

and his carcass is begining to stink.

[Jim_The_Jim]

More like kicking a dead donkey.

and his carcass is begining to stink.

Trigger, you dumb ass, go look at the hot tub you own. It is done the same way.

[tumbleweed]

Jim you should focus on fixing your own problems rather than whine about the accepted and safe design of Hot Spring, that has been on the market and proven in the field by hundreds of thousands of real applications. Your whining is annoying. You should put half as much effort that you do into your BS whining and work on fixing your own 2 bit product. Are they UL listed? ETL? anything....? I mean you must have some listing? Anything? Come on, you make such a big thing out of this, then at the VERY LEAST, you would think your manure tubs would be UL listed. ETL listed? Why not?

Your posts are a joke and you are sounding sillier by the day.

Jim's own customers reports serious flaws in HAVEN tub designs:

When one of the plastic dishes or tubs or whatever the kids are playing with get sucked over one of the intakes, the affected pump starts making all kinds of hurtful noises and the plastic toy gets crushed and is impossible to remove without turning off the pump (or whole spa if it is in the filter cycle).

The above is an actual situation, reported in Aug of this year (06) From one of Jim's customers. It is the exactly the situation that ANSI is trying to avoid. A tub that exhibits this is deadly.

So folks, just becasue some people can copy a paragraph out of a book, that doesn't mean they understand it.

Reminds me of the movie " A Fish Called Wanda"

Wanda: To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people. I've known sheep who could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs, but you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto, they just don't understand it.

You want a banana Jim?

Trigger, you d--- --s, go look at the hot tub you own. It is done the same way.

Dodge, insult, sidestep.

[Trigger]

Trigger, you dumb ass, go look at the hot tub you own. It is done the same way.

Jim you puppy licker, done the same way as what? Your non listed tubs? Abosluetye positively 100% not. Same as the HS tubs? Nope. We've dicussed that to the point of ad-nasuiem,yet you cannot reply to it. My tub is not the same. What the hell are you talking about? My tub is made like a vast majoity of the other quality tubs. But I have no idea what your point is.

English, Jim. Do you speak it?

Anyhow Jim you moron, my tub is ETL listed. Are yours? No? Why the hell not? UL? Anything? Come one monkey breath, explain to us why, since saftey is your biggest concern:

Why are your rejected Pheonix tubs void of ANY safety certification? Why is that?

IF educating consumes about sleezy sales folks is also one of your noble concerns, can you explain why you liedabout ETL listings in the past? Why did you claim your tubs were ETL listed, and now say they are not? Were you confused? Did you not understand it? Were you lying? We pointed this out to you many times. We put you in touch with the appropriate folks. Yet you insulted us, called us liars. You swore at us. You ranted and raved. It seems like you were the liar. Simpley trying to decieve people about your factory reject tubs. Why did you do that Jimmy? $$$$

As you said, it's not what an individual thinks, it's what the certified experts say. What do they say about your barnyard bed pans? Nothing? Ohhh. I guess then you're just full of crap. Yup. I guess you're right when you say the obvious isn't obvious until it's obvious. Despite your years of hustleing, insulting, phoney enigneering, and dancing around the law, when it all comes down to it, it's obvious you've got crap. You've got crap in spades there Jim. Obvious. Obvious. Obvious.

My tub does not create a deadly vacuum on the intakes when kids play in it. I can cover my intakes and the pumps don't howl, I don't need to shut down the tub. IT's all balanced and egineered corretly. Unlike yours. See, my tub was desinged and built by real engineers who have been educated, certified, traind and can apply solid prinicples to their designs. Then, (and this is the cool part) indepedent saftely labs review the product and certify it. Yea. It's pretty neat. I think they also have "offices" and "labs" and a "pro-duc-tion" (can you say that? "production". ) line and quality control, and have shiney new tools and books, and all sorts of neato things. They're not sitting in some old lumber yard, or poop infested barnyard making things up based on being an associate in a flunky job 40 years ago.

They don't run around the internet playing make belive., or write drunken rants on the web.

Here's a fact reported by your own victims:

whatever the kids are playing with get sucked over one of the intakes, the affected pump starts making all kinds of hurtful noises and the plastic toy gets crushed and is impossible to remove without turning off the pump (or whole spa if it is in the filter cycle).

.

This is clearly is a result of poor engineering and despite your regurgitating ANSI statements, you don't understand it, you cannot apply it. Not only does that make you a fool, it places people in danger. So I guess that also makes you a hypocrite.

AS you like to say. That's a fact.

Let's repeat this. "...the plastic toy gets crushed and is impossible to remove without turning off the pump.

"Impossible to remove."

"Crushed"

A FACT.

Can you say that Jimmy, "A FACT" ? Can you ? Huh? There you go. I can see your lips moving as you read it...say it... "A FACT" Sure. There you go..I knew you could.

oh yea...My tub is backed with qualifed service techs across the country. Too bad you have none.

You've become a joke Jim. A paraody of yourself. If you weren't such an ass, I'd feel sorry for you. But the honest truth is, your idotic rantings have become quite amusing since you don't answer questions , you are basicaly a court jester. Why don't you write a song about that, you confused creepy old man?

Dance some more!