Fiber product versus de

[ChuckD]

Just wondering why it's better than DE?
[edit: yes, I see why that's a stupid question since poolman1 spelled it out already. But the rest of my post stands]

Also I know DE is a naturally occuring substance and harmless if I just dump it off into the lawn and I can't imagine my water being clearer.

What's this fiber made of? And is it (could it possibly be) cheaper than DE?

C.

[Pool in Carolina Blue]

Chuck:

From my understanding, the fiber is 100% biodegradeable (comes from plant walls and is processed from wood pulp, cotton fiber etc.) whereas the DE is not. In fact, my DE filter has a seperation that was required by the municipality where I live. The purpose of the seperation tank is to catch all of the "used" DE during backwash so it does not get into the sanitary sewar. Apparantly, the DE does not break down readily and has caused clogged lines. Also, DE has been known to cause respiratory problems over extended exposure.

The fiber product is much lighter so you only use roughly 1/4 of what you would use in DE. It is supposed to coat the grids more evenly, filter more refinely, and you will not backwash near as often. I think the reason it is not popular is cost. A 3 lb. bag runs roughly $15. However, I have not done any analysis on the seasonal cost as you are not re-charging with it nearly as often as with DE. If cost does not matter, I think it is a better product from the reasearch I have read.

[Spensar]

Is this Zeobrite being discussed?

[tphaggerty]

Its not Zeobrite, that is for sand filters.

What is the brand name of this stuff (or at least one brand). I would like to research further.

[tphaggerty]

OK, found it myself. It is called CF-138 or Fiber Clear.

[ChuckD]

Chuck:

From my understanding, the fiber is 100% biodegradeable (comes from plant walls and is processed from wood pulp, cotton fiber etc.) whereas the DE is not. In fact, my DE filter has a seperation that was required by the municipality where I live. The purpose of the seperation tank is to catch all of the "used" DE during backwash so it does not get into the sanitary sewar. Apparantly, the DE does not break down readily and has caused clogged lines. Also, DE has been known to cause respiratory problems over extended exposure.

The fiber product is much lighter so you only use roughly 1/4 of what you would use in DE. It is supposed to coat the grids more evenly, filter more refinely, and you will not backwash near as often. I think the reason it is not popular is cost. A 3 lb. bag runs roughly $15. However, I have not done any analysis on the seasonal cost as you are not re-charging with it nearly as often as with DE. If cost does not matter, I think it is a better product from the reasearch I have read.

Thanks for that Pool.
I'm out in the country with 4 acres to spread it out and my water's clearer than I deserve so I think I'll stick with the DE.

BTW, I was able to find two interesting things: I found it for $60/25 lb. bag ($52 for quantities of 6 or more), and I found on the Pentaire website FAQ a comment that they found it requires 'many more backwashes'. Google on CF-138.

C.

[Pool in Carolina Blue]

Thanks Chuck. More backwashes would be a problem!

[matt4x4]

Well, if something is filtering properly, you would think it catches more dirt particles faster, meaning you have to backwash more frequently, so it would make sense, however, an earlier post mentioned less backwashing, would that possibly be because less material is used as a filtering agent, allowing for more dirt to be collected per backwash??

[tphaggerty]

If you do a google search on CF-138, you will get to the S.W.I.M. website. On that site, they have a link to a technical paper that they sponsored. It does address the higher requirement for backwashing, primarily (according to the paper) in commercial/public pools because the cellulose absorbs oils. The celluslose can also pick up a calcium "shell" if you have high calcium levels.

They also claim that the filtering is "mini-micron", so the media can filter out smaller particles than DE. The claim is that you will experience an initial period of requiring more backwashes as the stuff that DE left behind is filtered out. After that initial period, backwashing should be less frequent than DE.

I have a fresh 25lb bag of DE, so I'm not trying this out anytime soon, but might consider it as an experiment next season.

[Sumo1]

I switched to powdered cellulose about mid-season last year('05). Initially, backwashes were more frequent but within 4 or 5 backwash cycles, I was going up to 3 weeks between backwashes. Converted to SWG in spring '06 and had outstanding pool water all summer. I won't go back. In a season and a half, I've used about 20lb.