Well, I love the idea of a Purasan EX with a hold-n-treat system. However, since the Washington State Dept of Ecology is planning on petitioning the EPA to make essentially all WA waters East of the New Dungeness Lighthouse a NDZ, it would likely be a waste of money. Even if the EPA doesn't approve the request this time around, they will likely do it eventually, making a MSD1 installation pointless.
Chris...you said, The best (I think) place to install the system is not particularly near the head; it'd be closer to just forward of and slightly under the holding tank, lot o' space, very near the existing discharge thru-hull... essentially in the place where the existing macerator pump lives.
Unless you also plan to only flush the toilet directly into the tank and use the PS or ES only to empty the tank (see my comments about THAT idea immediately above!) that prob'ly won't work, because the treatment tank not only needs to be within 6' of most toilets, and also no further from it's discharge thru-hull than it is from the toilet. With few exceptions, work-arounds only create major "head" aches. There's an old saying that I think might apply here: "if you think a pro is expensive, wait till you find out how much an amateur costs!"
Look fellas...There's only one reason why anyone should spend the money to install a treatment device: Because the idea that you can be free from the aggravation of using and maintaining a tank except for the rare occasions when you visit an NDZ is a dream come true. If that's not true for you, don't spend the money for one.
Well, I love the idea of a Purasan EX with a hold-n-treat system. However, since the Washington State Dept of Ecology is planning on petitioning the EPA to make essentially all WA waters East of the New Dungeness Lighthouse a NDZ, it would likely be a waste of money. Even if the EPA doesn't approve the request this time around, they will likely do it eventually, making a MSD1 installation pointless.
Good perspective Peggy. As of this month, the WA Dept of Ecology is still planning on filing the petition with the EPA with April 2016 being the earliest possible filing date. No idea how long the EPA will take to review the petition once they get it.
Unless a couple of the other dealer/installer contacts suggest a more manageable amount of $$$s (and also due to some other projects I've got going on), I may just have to continue mulling this over for another year or so...
-Chris
I shared and contributed to Chris's confusion I'm afraid and I did read through the instruction for the Purasan and the HNT module. Of course, my reading skills aren't the best. Your explanation above helped clarify it for me.
Just to make sure I get it....
Purasan is connected to the marine toilet, treats the waste for each flush, and then holds it within the Purasan until the next flush. At that point, the toilets pump fills the Purasan with new waste, forcing the now treated waste out through the existing through hull.
The hnt is simply a controller that senses when the holding tank is sufficiently full, then uses the boats existing macerator pump to transfer one "flush equivalent" of holding tank waste to the Purasan and tells it to treat it the same as if the toilet was flushed.
Is that closer to what actually is going on?
I assume now that there are a couple of piping modifications that have to be made to use the HNT. Waste normally would be directed to the Purasan during a flush, but in the case of a NDZ it would be directed to the holding tank instead, bypassing the Purasan. Likewise the holding tank macerator pump needs to direct waste to the Purasan rather than simply overboard as it does now.
I often get the feeling that I would fail the big boat owner intelligence test if such a thing were developed.
Or when they'll open public comments and hearings...or whether they've only come up with another plan that can't work...which is highly likely if that bunch of enviro thugs who call themselves the "Soundkeepers" have anything to do with it.
Chris....unless you spend a LOT of time at Herrington Harbor, you won't use the tank enough to justify the HmT system because Herring Bay is the only NDZ on the whole Chesapeake Bay. So if I were you, my first step would be install a PS so you CAN stop using the tank. THEN I'd add the HnT controls IF you really need 'em...'cuz you can use the rest rooms at Herrington Harbor while you're there (whether you'd go ashore, use the lee rail or flush through the PS if you have to get up in the middle of the night, is up to you!
To answer this question:
(Not sure I get why a PS HnT would need to be X close to the toilet. Given that the toilet shoots waste to theholding tank (H), and then the HnT draws waste from the holding tank (H), I'dhave thought proximity to the holding tank would be the more important factor?)
First, the PS and the HnT are not a single system. The PS is a device designed to be connected to the tilet...a device that treats each flush and sends overboard or--only if absolutely necessary--to the tank. The tank isn't a part of the PS installation, nor does the PS DRAW waste from the tank (if you'd read the manual you'd know that there's no way it could!). Apparently you also missed the part in the promo sheet that says "waste is drawn out of the tank by a "transfer pump"" that can be your existing overboard discharge pump. The HnT controls are a just an add-on--a separate system of switches and relays that allow you to use the macerator pump that you now use to dump your tank to send tank contents to the PS where it's treated and discharged overboard. The tank is NOT factor in where the PS has to be installed relative to the tank.
So unless your toilet IS one of those "thrones" it's not "shooting" the waste to the tank, it's only moving it through the head hose for as long as you leave your finger on the button.
You haven't actually read and studied the installation and operation instructions for the PS or the HnT system, all you've done is skim over the high points and jump to conclusions about how you want it to work tha aren't even close to how it needs to work. So I'm afraid I have to be done with this thread unless someone else has questions that don't make it obvious they haven't read the instructions either.
Chris,
Not trying to pry into your finances... but... what do you consider as a "manageable amount of $$$s" in this sanitation case? I know... Boats can eat "Boat-Bucks" alive in many ways; but; correct toilet operation IMO is not something to chinch on.. As Peggie mentioned"... wait till you see how much a novice installer costs" (or something to that effect).
If you spend now for a really good professionally installed set up then you should have years ahead with no problems. Also, really good sanitation system helps sell a boat when the time comes.
Best Luck!
...
That is because with a normal purasan or electroscan installation there is a signal from the MSD to the head's electric flush when you trigger a treatment cycle which lasts approx 2 minutes. Additional flushing cannot occur during the treatment process. Double flushing of poop for example requires waiting for a treatment cycle to end. Two heads will compound this issue.
Kevin,
That is not the way my Electoscan or Purasan works. Now I am talking about the NON nht or the system you have. I have the conventional treatment tank that is connected to thru hull or holding tank, depending on Y valve.
But electronically, both systems will allow simultaneous flushes, in fact, the Atlantes has a continuous flush mode which I use to run hot water thru the system which does wonders to keep everything flowing well.
THe manual does say to let the cycle end before you flush again, but you can flush again at any time.
Also, thanks to your advice I changed from the Electroscan to the Puriscan EX. Even though you do not follow your own advice, I am very happy and it was very well thought out advice you gave. Thanks.
Despite the obligation of boaters to convert their vessels to functioning floating sewage treatment plants, as well reflected in this thread, Sydney Water, which runs sewage collection and treatment, is setting up more overflow pipes to direct untreated raw sewage into Sydney Harbour when the system experiences overloading. As it does whenever we experience significant rain. Tambourine Bay, where we used to moor, regularly shows evidence of sewage.
That still leaves me with some doubt about a need for mounting the PS in near proximity to the toilet, in this kind of installation. Seems superfluous, given that toilet discharge is going to the holding tank first anyway. Not an argument, just a puzzle.
Chris you still seem to consider the PS to be an add-on the holding tank, when it's actually an add-on to the toilet that's supposed to free you from the need to use the tank! Why would you send EVERY flush to the tank first when the only times you'll have to do that are when you visit Herring Bay? That might make sense if your only cruises are from your slip in the South River to a guest slip in Herrington Harbor South for the weekend, but it would certainly be a waste of a $1500 device.
[/I]Why would you send EVERY flush to the tank first when the only times you'll have to do that are when you visit [an NDZ]?
Well, we assume we'll end up passing through other NDZs eventually, too. Most of our boating is here on the Chesapeake, but we do like to go other places, too. And of course we have a boat with a head on it so we can use it everywhere (no 3 am trips to shore, no matter where we are).
Now that I'm seeing what overall costs might be, I suspect you're right: too much $$$ and not enough time to amortize that.
In answer to that question, though: because that's the way Raritan describes the HnT path. I have their document L435v0813 -- Hold 'n' Treat Holding Tank component system -- with a nifty illustration that shows flow from toilet to holding tank to PS or ES to overboard. Another Raritan doc, L519v0815 -- PURASAN EX Hold n' Treat (Operations, Maintenance, and Installation Instructions) -- that Greg sent me last September has a different diagram that illustrates the same flow path.
(Can't find these on their public site o include link,s and don't have a way to upload a pic here... but that's pretty much the way Mac and Greg described it to me.)
The latter doc also has a pic of the "Tablet Dispenser, hence my previous use of the word "tablets." As I look at it now, I'm reminded that I knew (last September) about needing a pressurized water source. I've heard memory is a wonderful thing; sometimes wish I had one.
-Chris
I remember discussing the option of either flushing direct to Type I or Type III. On my power cat I set the system up to go to the Type III first (tank). When convenient I turn the Hold n' Treat system on and empty the tank. I certainly see the advantages by-passing the tank but here are reasons to flush to the tank first:
1 - When in an NDZ (of course).
2 - The Marine Elegance heads I have only use about a quart of water (I think) when flushed in "water saver" mode. Why run a Type I treatment cycle for that little bit of waste?
3 - When anchored I, or others, may want to swim. Even with treated waste I wouldn't want to discharge at such a time.
I'm also thinking that using HNT cycles only will prolong the life of a Type I device as it is running the optimum amount of waste per cycle (my second point above). It is more wear and tear on the transfer pump, but those are much cheaper to repair and easy to swap out.
Art, while your method of locking out one of the heads on your boat might work for you, the very concept goes against the first basic design criteria that I used when designing my sanitatation system. That is that both heads needed to be available for use 100% of the time.
...because that's the way Raritan describes the HnT path. I have their document L435v0813 -- Hold 'n' Treat Holding Tank component system -- with a nifty illustration that shows flow from toilet to holding tank to PS or ES to overboard.
So if a promo piece for a kitchen skillet shows it full of chicken parts, that means that makes it a promo for a skillet that only cooks chicken?
That illustration only shows how the Hold 'n' Treat system works...it only shows how it works to empty a tank. It doesn't address the normal PS or ES installation, it's not to scale, nor does it imply that emptying the tank is the only use or even the primary use for the treatment device. But you've decided that because the promo sheet for Hold 'n' Treat system only show it doing what the H 'n' T system does, that's the only use for the treatment device, which simply isn't true.