Aerator Pumps & Electric Valves Controlled Test

[h20king 794]

wow valves are expensive it seems to me it would almost cost the same to give each sack it's own impeller pump.I would like to see a flow test with an impeller pump feeding two valves at the same time. great tests thanks for sharing......H

[Foiler 1]

I am surprised that you didn't run one of the aerators with the new 1 inch valve since I thought your original plan was to try and use an aerator but it wouldn't work well with the sprinkler valves, seems like it would work fine with the 1" valve that you bought.

 

Heres the thing, if you use impeller pumps, you only need valves if you want to run more than one sac per pump because water doesn not flow through them. So in my opinion if you want to run Impeller pumps the best route will be run the original water puppy to the center tank with no valve. (super easy, just pull the pump line and center tank line off of the sprinkler vavle assembly and hook them together) Buy 2 Johnson impeller pumps, 1 for each rear sac and do it like H20kings system or BigCapt.

 

Of you can do it like I am and leave all the out pumps like they are and use a new aerator for the in on each tank and use no valves. There are a few more complcations in a system like this though because aerator pumps will allow water to flow through them as impeller pumps will not so you have to do some special things. You can't have a scupper intake because it will force feed water right past the aerator into the bag and you have to have check valves or vented loops or when you turn the pump off the water draining out of the intake line will start siphoning the water out of the tank.

 

Both systems have pros and cons. I am going with aerators because they are cheap (I allready have 5 pumps), make less noise and draw less power. I feel like I will be able to run my stereo pretty loud while the pumps are running without the engine running and this will be great since we often drive out to a spot on the lake shut off the boat and jump in and float for a little while. I have a substantial amount of batteries so I know I won't have a problem and aerators just take way less power to run. I think the impeller pumps may be an easier system to design and install and may be a better option if starting from scratch but we are not starting from scratch, we all ready have 3 aerator pumps on the out and just need the 3 for the in and they can easily be wired to the existing wires that go to the sprinkler valves, not sure you could do that with the impellers because they would probably require larger wire.

 

I still haven't completely made up my mind and I am still researching but so far I am set on the aerators. Thanks for running the tests!

[volzalum 280]

What about valves like this?

 

http://assuredautomation.com/VAX/buy_VAX.php

 

-Dax

[h20king 794]

dax at that price forget the valves and use one reversible pump per sack jabsco's can be found on e-bay for $199 and the Johnson's can be had for $169

[volzalum 280]

Yes, I agree there. What about testing this: two impeller pumps in parallel to the same sprinkler valve. The reason I ask is I currently have one jabsco pump feeding four sprinkler valves for the four ballast. I am thinking about adding a second pump to just feed into the manifold before the sprinkler valves and curious if the additional pressure from two pumps would make the sprinkler valve perform better. That way I wouldn't have to re-plumb the manifold and still be able to fill any of the locations.

 

So real question would be:

 

A) 1 jabsco feeding four sprinkler valves (current)

B] 2 jabsco feeding four sprinkler valves (pumps in parallel but feeding common header before valves)

C) 2 jabsco feeding two sprinkler valves (pumps in parallel feeding common header)

D) 2 jabsco feeding one sprinkler valve (pumps in parallel feeding inlet)

 

I am planning to replace the 4 hard tanks with two sacs. If the parallel header improves the sprinkler flow (closer to rated two pump flow than single pump to single pump flow) then I could just take the current ballast inlets to the sacs (two lines from separate valves to each sac) (B above). If C was good improvement over B then could use just one inlet on sac and take 1 valve out of manifold. If D was best, plumb similar to C but fill would be improved over filling both sides together (better for surfing fills).

 

This might also make it possible to use the current lower gpm jabsco and add a higher gpm impeller pump without needing them to match.

 

-Dax

Edited March 6, 2010 by volzalum

[volzalum 280]

Another way of describing the parallel question is as follows (note the numbers are just examples and would be what I would like to know from your testing:

 

1) Pump A (P-A) rated at 6 gpm flows 4 gpm through Sprinkler Valve A (SV-A) or 2 gpm through SV-A and 2 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

2) P-B rated at 11 gpm flows 8 gpm through SV-A or 4 gpm through SV-A and 4 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

3) P-A (6 gpm) and P-B (11 gpm) rated at 17 gpm total flows 15 gpm through SV-A or 7.5 gpm through SV-A and 7.5 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

and so on for 4 SV's to determine if parallel pumping to a common header increase SV throughput. In my example 15 gpm together versus 12 gpm separately.

 

-Dax

Edited March 6, 2010 by volzalum

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

What about valves like this?

 

http://assuredautomation.com/VAX/buy_VAX.php

 

-Dax

 

Yep very expensive and doesn't list a 12 vdc version. From that web site select 1" and 24 vdc from and the cost is $448 per valve. Ouch, too cost prohibitive for me, but I like the way you're think. Please let us know if you find anything more.

 

Cheers

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

if you use the jabsco or johnson reversible pumps use 1" hose and slip them over the intake / output and use a hose clamp rather than use a inside diameter threaded connection. The threaded connection will decrease water flow.

 

 

Slid them over the outside as suggested. Thanks for the tip

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

Howdy Folks,

 

Follow up to the follow up. For the ex-military folks, please pay attention because there will be a test following this presentation. Sorry folks I didn’t have enough time last night to complete all of tests I wanted to. So today I ran a test utilizing the two aerator pumps (Mayfair 1000 & Tsunami 1200) with the 1” brass 12 vdc valve as suggested by Folier. I also ran a test on all three pumps with the 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve after removing the internal spring as suggested by CenturionSkier.

 

My first concern with removing the spring from the 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve was that with no power applied to the valve (valve closed) that there may be a possibility of the inlet pressure unseating the diaphragm and allowing water to pass through the valve. To my surprise the valve remained closed and no water passed through. For those wondering, the Jabsco Ballast Puppy pump came with the green colored impeller installed. Also I for those wondering, I did recharge the battery between test sets.

 

To conduct this test I had the following:

- Swimming pool (unrestricted water source)

- 12 vdc Lawn & Garden Battery with 160 cold cranking amps from Pep Boys

- Jabsco Ballast Puppy Advertised @ 11 GPM

- Mayfair 1000 aerator pump

- Tsunami 1200 aerator pump

- 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve with the internal spring installed

- 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve without the internal spring installed

- 1” brass 12 vdc valve

- 1.25” OD x 1” ID vinyl hose (no kinks)

- 4 orange Home Depot 5-gallon buckets measured at 1-gallon increments

- Stop watch set to count down 1 minute with alarm

 

Each setup was tested three separate times to validate the accuracy of the test and test was not begun until a maximum stream of water had commenced.

 

Here are the results for the Jabsco Ballast Puppy pump:

Unrestricted: 11.5 GPM or 690 GPH

1” Orbit Jar Top Valve with internal spring: 8.0 GPM or 480 GPH

1” Orbit Jar Top Valve without internal spring: 9.5 GPM or 570 GPH

1” brass 12 vdc valve: 10.0 GPM or 600 GPH

 

 

Here are the results for the Mayfair 1000 aerator pump:

Unrestricted: 10 GPM or 600 GPH

1” Orbit Jar Top Valve with internal spring: 3 GPM or 180 GPH

1” Orbit Jar Top Valve without internal spring: 6.5 GPM or 390 GPH

¾” brass 12 vdc valve: 6.5 GPM or 390 GPH

1” brass 12 vdc valve: 7.5 GPM or 450 GPH

 

Here are results for the Tsunami 1200 aerator pump:

Unrestricted: 13 GPM or 780 GPH

1” Orbit Jar Top Valve with internal spring: 3 GPM or 180 GP

1” Orbit Jar Top Valve without internal spring: 6.5 GPM or 390 GPH

¾” brass 12 vdc valve: 6.5 GPM or 390 GPH

1” brass 12 vdc valve: 7.5 GPM or 450 GPH

 

As can be seen above, removing the spring from the 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve had a significant affect on water flow without any bypass (way to go CenturionSkier!). It also appears from the test that when utilizing either of these two aerator pumps that the diaphragm type valves will limit max water flow as the flow rates are exactly the same with each valve. The valves also had an impact on the max flow rate of the impeller pump, but to a lesser degree.

 

As Bigshow pointed out, we can probably expect to get a slight increase in output from these pumps if they are being feed 14 vdc from the boats. I sure would like to run a test of the Johnson Ultra Ballast pump @13 gpm and see if there is an improvement in flow rates, but I’ve exhausted all of my means to no avail.

 

So after reviewing the results of this test here is my plan. I’m planning a five sac system; (2) Enzo Sacs (1450#), (2) bow sacs (~ 400# each) and a factory center mid-ship tank (~ 250#). I still want it all automatic as possible so I plan to utilize seven 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve without the internal spring and feed two valves to each Enzo sac. I am leaning toward two of the Johnson Ultra Ballast pump @13 gpm and hope to get better than 9.5 GPM per valve. Even at 9.5 GPM per valve that’s 19 GPM feeding a single Enzo sac, 180 gallons (1450 #) divided by 19 GPM = 9.47 minutes. My goal was to fill an Enzo sac in less than 10 minutes and this setup should work.

 

I prefer the 1” Orbit Jar Top Valve without the internal spring over the 1” brass 12 vdc valve due to the availability of replacement parts (Home Depot around the corner) and the added safety feature of having ignition protection certification.

 

Many thanks to the great folks at Texas Sport Boats. Without their help in lending a Jabsco Ballast Puppy we would have a very limited test data set. It’s awesome to have such great dealer support. I’ll keep you posted if I get my hands on a Johnson pump.

 

Best of luck in your ballast build,

 

 

Cheers

[volzalum 280]

It might also be worthwhile to try connecting an aerator and the jabsco in parallel to see if once the jabsco has opened the valve if the aerator pump will kick more flow in ... connect both through a Y into the valve similar to what I was suggesting with two jabsco pumps.

 

-Dax

[volzalum 280]

also, what was the part number on the ballast puppy? The jabsco website only lists 9 gpm as the max.

 

-Dax

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

Another way of describing the parallel question is as follows (note the numbers are just examples and would be what I would like to know from your testing:

 

1) Pump A (P-A) rated at 6 gpm flows 4 gpm through Sprinkler Valve A (SV-A) or 2 gpm through SV-A and 2 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

2) P-B rated at 11 gpm flows 8 gpm through SV-A or 4 gpm through SV-A and 4 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

3) P-A (6 gpm) and P-B (11 gpm) rated at 17 gpm total flows 15 gpm through SV-A or 7.5 gpm through SV-A and 7.5 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

and so on for 4 SV's to determine if parallel pumping to a common header increase SV throughput. In my example 15 gpm together versus 12 gpm separately.

 

-Dax

 

Dax,

 

I'm sorry but I don't know the answer to your question. But attached is a picture I took of another Enzo 240 with the five valve manifold which is supplied by two pumps. Notice the factory plumbs in a seperate pump and hose to each side of the manifold. This seems to be the most simple way to tackle what you are describing. This way you can wire your switches to open a combination of pumps and valves.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Cheers

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

Another way of describing the parallel question is as follows (note the numbers are just examples and would be what I would like to know from your testing:

 

1) Pump A (P-A) rated at 6 gpm flows 4 gpm through Sprinkler Valve A (SV-A) or 2 gpm through SV-A and 2 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

2) P-B rated at 11 gpm flows 8 gpm through SV-A or 4 gpm through SV-A and 4 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

3) P-A (6 gpm) and P-B (11 gpm) rated at 17 gpm total flows 15 gpm through SV-A or 7.5 gpm through SV-A and 7.5 gpm through SV-B in parallel

 

and so on for 4 SV's to determine if parallel pumping to a common header increase SV throughput. In my example 15 gpm together versus 12 gpm separately.

 

-Dax

 

 

Dax,

 

Sorry I don't know the complete answer to your question. Attached is a picture of another Enzo 240 with a five valve-two pump setup. Notice the factory connects the pump lines to the ends of the five valve manifold. this would be the most simplistic setup and would give you control over which pump-valve combinations depending on how you wire your switches.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Dan

[volzalum 280]

Has anyone tried these pumps? They look like they are a little larger, but draw less amps than the water puppy's ...

 

http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Jabsco+3460...Bilge+Pump.html

 

or

 

http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Jabsco+3660...Bilge+Pump.html

 

-Dax

[volzalum 280]

I know I've hijacked this thread with some questions, but I have another one:

 

Is it better to have the sprinkler valves at the same level as the impeller pumps (near floor level height where sacs will sit) and subsequently the same level as the sac input (bottom of locker height) or does it lose much flow going up from pump to sprinkler valve (near top of rear deck) like factory setup and then back down to sac fill location?

 

-Dax

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

also, what was the part number on the ballast puppy? The jabsco website only lists 9 gpm as the max.

 

-Dax

 

The model number for the Jabsco pump I used is 18220-5127 and here is a link:

http://www.jabsco.com/files/18220_ballast_puppy.pdf

[CenturionSkier 43]

Has anyone tried these pumps? They look like they are a little larger, but draw less amps than the water puppy's ...

 

http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Jabsco+3460...Bilge+Pump.html

 

or

 

http://www.starmarinedepot.com/Jabsco+3660...Bilge+Pump.html

 

-Dax

 

 

Take a look at this page http://www.jabsco.com/files/34600_43000_0106_10_02.pdf. From what I can read this is a bilge pump not a ballast pump. You can see where they warn against any restriction in the out flow. Also it looks like it would be a real hassle to winterize and has a lot of parts to maintain. Not to mention it is 3 times as expensive as the stock Jabsco pump.

 

I guess it would be interesting to test if someone has some extra money to maybe waist on this pump.

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

dax at that price forget the valves and use one reversible pump per sack jabsco's can be found on e-bay for $199 and the Johnson's can be had for $169

 

 

h20king,

 

Can you post or pm where you found the Johnson's for $169 and if you ordered your pumps from that distributor did you experience any difficulties?

 

Thanks

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

dax at that price forget the valves and use one reversible pump per sack jabsco's can be found on e-bay for $199 and the Johnson's can be had for $169

 

 

h20king,

 

Can you post or pm where you found the Johnson's for $169 and if you ordered your pumps from that distributor did you experience any difficulties?

 

Thanks

[Live Laugh & Surf 0]

h20king,

 

Can you post or pm where you found the Johnson's for $169 and if you ordered your pumps from that distributor did you experience any difficulties?

 

Thanks