Advice on getting an Electronic Descaler
These electronic descalers that wrap around your pipe sound feasible, but almost too good to be true. Anyone out there have any experience with them? Do you have a scale problem? How are you able to determine this without taking the plumbing apart? What are your water conditions? Have you had any tests done? Feasible I suppose is the key word in their marketing concept. They base it on a few aspects: 1. low price (when compared to a softener but high when compared with air) and, 2. maintenance free, 3. NO salt, 4. lasts forever, 5. No waste water, 6. Beautiful to look at..... So yes, it is a rather attractive piece of hardware. The only question would be: Does it work? Yes we have a scale problem. Scale bad enough on the humidifier that the valve wouldn't shut off, so I had to shut that down. Yes, we had water tests done a few years ago, but I can't find the results and don't remember what was in the water. I realy and truly wish that someone could develop a credible, viable, legitimate scale control system that is non-intrustive. I have yet to see one that works as claimed or that is able to pass credible testing protocol like DVGW. One day someone will create that magic device, and if it works and can be PROVEN as such, I'll be first in line with my money to buy one. Greg Reyneke CWS-VI Originally Posted by chuckret These electronic descalers that wrap around your pipe sound feasible, but almost too good to be true. Anyone out there have any experience with them? Yes, these electronic descalers do work. We have pioneered their development since 1989, with the Scalewatcher Enigma. We mainly sell to industry, see our website, electronicdescaler.com. The test referred to (DVGW) is a test for water softeners, which rely on removing calcium from the water. As SWE does not remove calcium but prevents it adhering to surfaces it fails the test. We have sold 10's of thousands of units with a performance guarentee and get very few returned. As these units actually remove existing scale it is easy to see if they have worked during the guarantee period John Thompson And yet I have removed one of these devices and check the pipe before and after (unit installed for 3 years) and could not see any difference. Hence, this is why I was installing a softener. They just don't work. The DVGW test I referenced is definitely NOT a softener test. It tests the effectiveness of a device in preventing adhesion to a heated surface. DVGW's official title for this test is “Verification of a water treatment device for the reduction of scale formation” Two test rigs are constructed with the following key components: -Water heater -Recirculation Pump -Water conditioning device Two additional blid test rigs are constructed with the same configuration above with the exception of the water conditioning device. The protocol is as follows (excerpting directly from the DVGW) 3.3 Test Procedure A total of 130 l of water must pass through each testing facility each day. This amount is to be taken in intervals within a time period of 16 hours. In addition, the flow rate amounts to at least 5l/min. Furthermore, the entire supply of water in the drinking water heating system is to be exchanged during two daily samplings. The samplings are to be carried out within the 16 hours as follows: At 0h; 2h; 2.5h; 3.5h; 4h; 4.5h; 5h; 6h; 6.5h; 7h; 7.5h; 8h; 9h;9.5h;10h; 11h; 11.5h; 12.5h; 13h; 13.5h; 14h and 16h - 5l each time, at 3h and 12h 10l each time. After the 16 hour operating phase, an 8 hour standstill time (without sampling) is to be ad-hered to. The water temperature in the drinking water heating systems is 80*C +/-3C. If a water condi-tioning device which, according to the manufac-turer’s specifications, has a lower temperature (tolerance +/- 3C), is tested, then this informa-tion is to be taken from the product documents and the installation and operating directions. 3.4 Test Implementation For all tests, the treated test rigs and untreated or blind test rigs are to be operated simultane-ously using the same test water. The length of the test is always 21 days. After ending each test, the drinking water heat-ing systems are to be opened and the heating spirals are to be removed. The deposits remain-ing in the container are to be passed through a sieve with a mesh size of 0.5mm. The residue in the sieve is to be dissolved in dilute nitric acid. The sediments on the heating spirals and on the insides of the containers are to be removed with dilute nitric acid. The combined solution of the sieve residue and the deposits taken from the heating spirals and the insides of the contain-ers is to be checked for calcium and magnesium according to DIN 38406-3. Then the drinking water heating systems and the heating spirals are to be cleaned again with dilute nitric acid and rinsed with demineralized water, before the drinking water heating systems are reassembled (the components must not be switched among the systems) and installed for the next series of tests. The cleaning procedure is to be carried out in the same way for all drinking water heating systems. 3.5 Blind tests The test set-up is to be tested using blind tests where intermediary pieces are installed in place of the drinking water conditioning devices which are to be built in later. The blind tests are to be carried out under the conditions described in 3.1 to 3.4. Every test series is to be carried out at least three times.Every test series gives four separate results. The arithmetic mean for the test series is calculated from these established separate results. In addition, the separate results from within a test series may not deviate more than 20% from the arithmetic mean. Within the three consecutive test series, the separate results may not deviate more than 30% from the arithmetic mean of all the separate results.If the two above-mentioned criteria are not met, the testing facility must be readjusted. 4 Assessment of the results As defined by this worksheet, a sufficient effectiveness of the water conditioning device is given when the effectiveness factor fE * 0.8. This value is to be met with a confidence level of 95%. Therefore, using the number of the tests trials as given, a single measuring value with a minimum effectiveness factor of 0.66 will be accepted. The effectiveness factor fE is defined as follows: fE = M[Ca2+ +Mg2+]untreated – M[Ca2+ +Mg2+]treated / M[Ca2+ + Mg2+]untreated Where M[ ] are the respective amounts of the substance in Mol. M[ ]untreated are the arithmetic means obtained in the blind test rigs and M[ ]treated are the means of the “active” test rigs 5 Test report After carrying out a test series, a test report, which must contain the following information, is to be drawn up : a) description of the composition of the test water b) temperature of the test water in the drinking water heating systems c) test length, in days, for each test series d) water flow rate for each test rig e) electrical work in kWh for each test rig f) results of the analytical evaluation for the separate test series g) results of the analytical evaluation for the corresponding blind tests h) evaluation and statement of the determined effectiveness factor i) remarks (e.g., peculiarities during the course of the trials) So...what is the scale removal effectiveness of the Scalewatcher Enigma when tested to the DVGW test protocol listed above ? Many of the alternative technologies have a basis in fact and in certain application will work, but there are far more instances where they just don't work. Ion exchange softening works 99.9% of the time and is easy to test for in the field, there is still NO in-field test for alternative technologies, this is a major problem. To clarify my position - I design and distribute water treatment water treatment devices for residential, commercial and industrial applications- everything from macro filtration to ultra pure water. I WANT alternative technologies to work. I have found one that I believe does work, but in accordance with the terms of service of this forum, I won't reference it's name. Best regards, Greg Originally Posted by enigmaetc Yes, these electronic descalers do work. We have pioneered their development since 1989, with the Scalewatcher Enigma. We mainly sell to industry, see our website, electronicdescaler.com. The test referred to (DVGW) is a test for water softeners, which rely on removing calcium from the water. As SWE does not remove calcium but prevents it adhering to surfaces it fails the test. We have sold 10's of thousands of units with a performance guarentee and get very few returned. As these units actually remove existing scale it is easy to see if they have worked during the guarantee period John Thompson Greg....unless you sell it or designed it and will make a profit from it...I think you can at least mention the name of the unit you believe to work. Helo Greg and others yes I am fully aware of the DGVW protocol, as Vice Chairman of the UKPWCA, we fought successfully to prevent this test being adopted by the Members of The European Union. It was proposed by someone who has been opposed to physical devices for over 20 years and represented a chemical water treatment company. The 3 main reasons we opposed it were 1. The tes rig involved bubbling air though the incoming water in a tank, which anyone knowing about water treatment would know that this encourages CO2 to come out and when it does scale formation takes place. No water system I have come across in 20 years treating water and 25 years maintaining weapon systems in the Royal Navy, that used water for cooling, ever used such a technique 2. The original test rig, when it WAS used for water softener testing, had the heater element in a vessel whereby the water came in the top and left (hot) at the bottom. For some mysterious (or more likely, MISCHEVIOUS) reason, this vessel was now turned on its side and the water came in the top and left at the top. Thence any calcium that settled to the bottom of the vessel was trapped and could then be used as evidence of non-effectiveness on treatment, even though the heater element actually remained clean! - surely the objective! 3. The final, and most damning reason for the opposition was that only one device had ever passed the tested. This was a plumbed in system that claimed to be physical. It was made by the same company that sponsored the test rig and tried to get it accepted as a standard test. It contained a mysterious (because nobody would admit what it was) element that had to be replaced on a regular basis. This in itself was not an issue, however one of their competitors apparantly purchased one and dressed it up to look different and then submitted it for testing. IT FAILED!! The test rig does not represent a free-flowing hot water system, whereby precipitated calcium is carried out by water flow. If it does settle out, as it can in the bottom of a cooling tower, the soft calcium is simply hosed out, or a hydro-cyclone is employed to continuosly remove it We are in the process of designing our own test rig, to both be able to grade the performance of the various technologies, but for ourselves see if we can further improve the effectiveness Greg (and others) electronics can and does work, if applied correctly. That is why every single unit we sell follows a site-survey a professional installation by our engineers and more importantly, an agreement with the customer how the performance can be proven. ALL our sales come from repeat business and referrals and our largest customer is the UK Government One day you Guys over there will again catch up with us, but it takes open-minded people, not people trying to protect their own interests May I leave you with this famous quotation Logical thinking cannot yield us any information of the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends there. Propositions arrived at by a purely logical means are completely empty of reality Albert Einstein John Thompson When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge of it is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced it to the stage of science. Sir William Thompson, Lord Kelvin (1824-1907) John, I don't doubt your sincerity of belief in your product, but I still fail to see quantifiable data to prove that it works. I WANT your product to work, because if it could be proven to me that it worked, I could actually promote it with confidence through my dealer network that includes the entire continental USA parts of Canada Mexico. I'm about as open-minded as you'll ever find, but I can't rely on anecdotal evidence and testimonials to stake my professional reputation on. I am indeed familiar with the United Kingdom Physical Water Conditioning Association. I'm particularly entertained by their mission statement.... The principal role of the UKPWCA is to set the record straight by giving our customers the facts. Facts based on our combined years of practical experience, rather than vested interests and mischievous intent. Mischievous intent...so the raison d'etre of your association is to mitigate mischevious intent ?... is the whole world out to get you your peers ? So you're telling me that the DVGW testing protocol was designed to fail your entire industry ? I can think of THREE companies that have had their wares tested to this standard, (one is even from the good 'ol USA) and shown to be 90% effective against scale formation. Spectrum labs also performs the same test in the USA adherent to the DVGW guidelines. I'm not wanting to start an online p*****g match here, but if you and your industry want to be taken seriously, you need to have real tests that can show someone right now that the water quality is as desired/promised. You also need to be able to explain the technology in a manner that can withstand critical review from industry experts. When I specify an ion exchange softener, or a nanofiltration membrane separator, I can demonstrate physical removal of calcium/magnesium ions with quantifiable and repeatable tests. I can assure the client that the water quality is exactly as promised. This is not the case with Physical Water Treatment devices, so even when one does work, it is nearly impossible to actually show the customer that it works without extended operation periods under the right conditions. Of course, when it doesn't work, it is too easy to blame it on dissolved O2, CO2, curvature of the earth, planetary alignment, bad mojo etc... The best thing the PWC industry could do is to develop a real field-test and then publish functional operating criteria for the device to work properly - min/max CaCO3, min/max CO2, min/max pH, min/max Total Alk. , min/max iron, min/max copper etc... I mean you no harm, I want you to succeed. Next time I'm in Hampshire, I'll buy you a pint. Beer 4U2 Hello Greg many apoligies for delay in replying I have been out of the Office. I would like to continue our discussion away from this forum, the main reason being to be able to share information with you. Please use john@electronicdescaler.com address John Thompson Greg and John, I am a potential consumer of the product. I have heard about it a few times now and I am currious. That is why I am out looking at forums like this to try to get unbiased information. I for one would like to see the discusion continue in this fourm. Taking the discusion off-line makes me suspicious about what someone doesn't want me to know. Note: I am not in the plumbing industry. I have no vested interest in any water conditioner product. I am however trained in electrical engineering and can follow technical discriptions. Thanks Paul Hello Paul (and Greg) The reason is that I felt that I could privately share information with Greg that would make him begin to see that this technology does indeed work when correctly applied. We pioneered electronic water treatment, bringing the very first unit into the market in 1989. I am an ex-Royal Navy Weapons and Electronics Engineer (25 years service) and approached the water treatment market by wishing to solve people's scaling problems and NOT selling Boxes. We only sell to commercial, industrial and Government, (25% of our $1Million turnover is UK Ministry of Defence. We sell with a one year performance Guarantee and in 20 years I have had to give 3 customers their money back. We have built up a wealth of knowledge about applying this technology, including many non-water applications. Our knowledge is our value and I do not wish to share this with the world on a bulletin board. It is bad enough that so many unscrupulous people have ripped off our patented technology (incuding many american get-rich quick merchants)and I'm not about to make it easier for them to compete. I have not heard from Gary, so I assume he is now not interested in going any further with this thread John Thompson No one here has asked make a scalewatcher. The questions have been to provide some evidence of results. The responses by John Thompson are sadly inadequate, in particular for someone who has been selling the device for two decades, and yet still has no evidence that it works. For John Thompsom's information, I have the Enigma unit installed in three resturants in the USA. I have not removed any hardness deposits from the coffee makers in the five years they have been installed. I do believe in electronic descalers. I have John Thompson's unit installed in three resturants in the USA. I have not removed any deposits from the coffeemakers in the last five years. I believe in electronic descalers. Originally Posted by HWRUMBLE For John Thompsom's information, I have the Enigma unit installed in three resturants in the USA. I have not removed any hardness deposits from the coffee makers in the five years they have been installed. I do believe in electronic descalers. The water heater in this house lasted 29 years. I moved in when it was 10 years old, the end of it's usual life, and installed a 5 micron whole house filter housing where the water comes into the house. The whole house filter enabled the water heater to last an additional 19 years, beginning from the end of the usual life span of a water heater. The proof that this works is not only the lifespan of the water heater. Each 5 micron filter that I installed was white and clean. Each one that I removed was black and stuffed completely full of crud. Do you have an similar evidence or comparisons, besides that you have not removed any hardness deposits. Ok...whole house filters are nothing like the electronic water conditioners or descalers. A filter does not remove minerals, which is one of the major causes of WH and appliance failures. My WH is 20 y/o...works fine...no filter or softener...it will die eventually I know..but its a quality unit..I expect its replacement will last 8-9 yrs at the most. Originally Posted by Gunguy45 Ok...whole house filters are nothing like the electronic water conditioners or descalers. Exactly. The whole house filter works. A filter does not remove minerals, which is one of the major causes of WH and appliance failures. Sure it does. This is why prefilter sediment filters are used in reverse osmosis systems. If you did not use one then the membrane would rapidly clog. I have found big pieces of metal on and inside of the 5 micron filters. Maybe what you mean to say is the filters do not significantly reduce dissolved solids. But they do a great job removing the undissolved solids.
Related Posts:
Advice andersen vs jeldwen windows
Advice Andersen vs JeldWen windowsHello, we live outside of South Bend, IN, near lake Michigan. In case anyone wants to know, it gets really cold here so I'm looking for the best windows I can aff...
Chromalox t9 electronic thermostat
Chromalox T-9 Electronic ThermostatIn my 20 year old home there ae chromalox electric baseboard heaters with Chromalox model t-9 Electronic Thermostats. They are a low voltage thermostat of some t...
Clearwave water softener does it work
ClearWave Water Softener - Does it Work?An ad in Popular Science by TechnoScout claims that it solves hard water problems without salt, chemicals, etc. Their product is ClearWave and uses an elect...
Advice on picking a new boiler brand
Advice on picking a new boiler brandHello: I've read the sticky on the heatloss calcutions and done some basic research for replacing our 1983 Weil-McLain boiler. We have a few good bids in the $5...
Advice on buying a john deere x300
Advice on buying a john deere X300I was wondering what peoples take on John deere is specifically their modell X300. I spoke to a sales rep and he said not to go with the L modells as they were sp...
