Might want to raise your TA a bit, instead. It's easier to adjust, than calcium.
Might want to raise your TA a bit, instead. It's easier to adjust, than calcium.
But isn't CH more related to possible surface damage that TA?
In-ground gunite 16 x 30 13,000 gal. Full screen enclosure. 120 sq ft. Filter cartridge, 1-1/2 HP pump. Master Pools In-floor cleaner. Taylor K-2006.
Actually, by far the most important factor is pH, or rather, pH + temperature. After that, it's alkalinity, and then calcium. There is a sort of exception: because of the way the process of dissolution or precipitation works, if either alkalinity or calcium are near zero, or even less than 60 ppm, THEN their significance goes way up.
Water, in the presence of calcium materials, will NOT stay near zero in calcium long!
PoolDoc / Ben
Thanks Doc. It's interesting though. It's been about 6 weeks since I got my Taylor test kit and was able to get my water balance in some kind of control. I also assumed PH was an important factor, and based on the advice I got here, I immediately raised it, and have maintained it, in the appropriate range since I got my test kit. But I still had "sand" in similar amounts compared to before I sought your advice. I finally found a source for CaCl, since it's pretty rare in Florida, (Fastenal) only two weeks ago. Once I had it, I raised CH from 180 to 250 over a three day period. Since then, it seems that the amount of "sand" has lessened. Of course this is a perception, since I have not measured the amount in any way. The smoothness of the sides also improved since raising CH (again a perception). Maybe this is just the result of having the PH in the proper range for that 6 weeks rather than the result of having the CH raised for 2 weeks. Or maybe a combination of both?
I don't think either CH or TA ever got anywhere near zero, or even less than 80 at any time. My fill water has a TA of 180 and CH of 110.
In-ground gunite 16 x 30 13,000 gal. Full screen enclosure. 120 sq ft. Filter cartridge, 1-1/2 HP pump. Master Pools In-floor cleaner. Taylor K-2006.
I'm not aware of any careful studies of pool surfaces, but from what data I have seen, and from my own field experience it's my judgement that if:
(a) the pH remains between 7.2 and 8.0;
(b) the alkalinity remains above 80;
(c) the calcium remains above 100;
then you are unlikely to see erosion of the pool surface . . . caused by water quality.
BUT . . . there's a huge controversy in the pool industry due to problems that appear in concrete surfaces -- plaster (Marcite) + all the other newer surfaces, like DiamondBrite, etc -- with blame by applicators being directed at chemistry, and blame by pool service guys (responsible for chemistry) being directed applicators.
Again, there are no indisputable studies. But it appears to me that there are LARGE variations in surface application quality, and that poor surfaces will deteriorate even in good water. Some of the blame appears to rest on variations in material quality, but much seems to rest on applicator skill and dedication. Unfortunately, it's very hard to define either what makes up "high materials quality" or "professional application technique".
The only real test seems to be that of time: applicators with a decade-long track record of successful and durable applications are MUCH to preferred than those with less time or history.
PoolDoc / Ben
Thanks, I get it. Certainly one of your three conditions were violated in my pool for an unknown length of time. The best I can do at this point is keep my water balanced and see if there are further improvements in the amount of "sand" I get. I'll raise the TA a bit and adjust to get a fairly neutral saturation index - definitely non-negative.
I can't speak with any certainty about the type or quality of either the material or applicator, since they were before my time. I know the surface was re-done since the pool was built in '85. It's a quartz aggregate of some type. Some of the in-floor pop-up's for my in-floor system now sit in "pockets" created when the finish was applied. I would have expected the old finish to be ground away in these areas so that they were fairly flat. I think that's an indication of the "applicator quality". I agree with comments made by you and others that the quality of the applicator is the most important factor.
Thanks again for all the great advice. You and you other Mods have made pool ownership much more rewarding.
In-ground gunite 16 x 30 13,000 gal. Full screen enclosure. 120 sq ft. Filter cartridge, 1-1/2 HP pump. Master Pools In-floor cleaner. Taylor K-2006.
Glad we could help!
PoolDoc / Ben
Bookmarks