Water treatment - How to compare before/after - Page 2

Water analysis, treatment, and mineral recipes for optimum taste and equipment health.
tasseloff19 (original poster)

#11: Post by tasseloff19 (original poster) »

That's great to know!
Since I'm using a softener+carbon filter I probably won't have the same # as you after filtering, but if my current setup doesn't work at least I know bestmax will do the trick.
BaristaBoy E61 wrote:I'm also in Montreal, so I'm familiar with your/our water. We have a BWT Bestmax filter that has kept our machine from scaling. After 1-year the water still tests as when the filter was install with very low hardness. I still prefer the taste of the unfiltered tap water.

I would recommend installing the smallest size filter if you don't make a lot of espresso. The filter will expire long before it's exhausted.

tasseloff19 (original poster)

#12: Post by tasseloff19 (original poster) »

Pre-filtering numbers (at 17.8C)
KH: 116ppm
GH: 143ppm
Tds: 135ppm

Post-filtering:
KH: 116ppm
GH: 8.9ppm
TDS: 74ppm

Looks like my alkalinity isn't below 100 after all, though not all that far off.

If I didn't make any mistakes, it looks like I have a Langelier Index of 9 which would indicate scale will form, but if I understand correctly because of my chloride levels it might be overshot?

Correction my Phs is around 9, not the LI.

User avatar
homeburrero
Team HB

#13: Post by homeburrero »

tasseloff19 wrote:GH: 8.9ppm
That's excellent. I assume it was one drop on a stretched sample, so you have very low total hardness and calcium hardness down in the single digits.
tasseloff19 wrote:If I didn't make any mistakes, it looks like I have a Langelier Index of 9 which would indicate scale will form, but if I understand correctly because of my chloride levels it might be overshot? Correction my Phs is around 9, not the LI.
Might want to try calculating again. When I do TDS=135 ppm, alkalinity = 116 ppm as CaCO3, calcium hardness = 8.9 ppm as CaCO3, temp = 120 C, I get a pHs of 7.3, indicating little if any scale formation. And because much of your hardness is magnesium, your calcium hardness is actually less than your GH of 8.9. I don't think you will see any scale with this setup.

Forgive me if I'm repeating myself here, but the reason I tend to favor this setup over the Bestmax for your water is not about scale but about chloride corrosion. The Bestmax, like other WAC resin decarbnonizers, will do a good job of reducing scale, but that's partly because along with the hardness it also reduces the alkalinity and reduces the pH. Especially when you have chloride in the water, low alkalinity and low pH would be expected to exacerbate your corrosion risk.
Pat
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h

tasseloff19 (original poster)

#14: Post by tasseloff19 (original poster) »

Temp was 17.8C actually, you used 120C because it is the temp coming out of the boiler(or typo?). And the tds was 74.
I used (from the insanely-very-long-and-detailed-water faq):

44.15 + log(74)/10 - 13.12*log(17.8 + 273) - log(8.9) - log(116)

I really appreciate the time you've taken to look into my water composition and help me at least understand some of the basics. I installed the pressure regulator this morning and all seems to be working well, so I will keep an eye out for when the filters need to be changed and periodically check the mushroom head as well and should good I hope! Unless the chloride numbers from the 2016 are way off but I wouldn't think so.
homeburrero wrote:That's excellent. I assume it was one drop on a stretched sample, so you have very low total hardness and calcium hardness down in the single digits.

Might want to try calculating again. When I do TDS=135 ppm, alkalinity = 116 ppm as CaCO3, calcium hardness = 8.9 ppm as CaCO3, temp = 120 C, I get a pHs of 7.3, indicating little if any scale formation. And because much of your hardness is magnesium, your calcium hardness is actually less than your GH of 8.9. I don't think you will see any scale with this setup.

Forgive me if I'm repeating myself here, but the reason I tend to favor this setup over the Bestmax for your water is not about scale but about chloride corrosion. The Bestmax, like other WAC resin decarbnonizers, will do a good job of reducing scale, but that's partly because along with the hardness it also reduces the alkalinity and reduces the pH. Especially when you have chloride in the water, low alkalinity and low pH would be expected to exacerbate your corrosion risk.

User avatar
homeburrero
Team HB

#15: Post by homeburrero »

Your equation is right, and you would get a pHs of around 9 at a temp of 17.8 C. That tells you that scale should start to deposit rather than dissolve when the pH is greater than 9. (In other words, scale will dissolve at tap water temperature.)

Yes, I used 120 C because the water gets more scale-prone when it is heated. And that's the temperature to use for a 1 bar steam boiler, where you are concerned about scale deposits.

44.15 + log(74)/10 - 13.12*log(120 + 273) - log(8.9) - log(116) = 7.28
Tells you that at a temp of 120C or higher and a pH 7.3 or higher you might start to see some scale if all that 8.9 mg/L hardness were due to calcium.
Pat
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h

tasseloff19 (original poster)

#16: Post by tasseloff19 (original poster) »

Ahh obviously, that makes more sense! Thanks!