Aquatic Tech

When a homeowner or service tech gets a wonky reading on a water test, it’s easy to assume one of two things: the water chemistry has gotten way out of whack or the equipment is faulty. While these things do happen, it’s more likely the tester that’s to blame.

More-experienced water testing professionals may feel they’re the exception to that rule, and that their time-tested methods ensure accuracy and consistency. But whether it’s a homeowner dipping her first strip or a CPO working his thousandth titration test, it pays to begin the process with a little humility. Take Claudio Azurmendi’s lead. In his role as technical services analyst for chemical giant BioLab, Lawrenceville, Ga., Azurmendi makes it his business to test water carefully. If he has occasional lapses in technique (“I’ve caught myself holding reagent droppers at an angle in the field,” he confesses.), then just about everyone could use a refresher on the fundamentals.

“If you want the best pool experience, then following proper technique and using good reagents or test strips is important,” he says. “We just recently went over some basic techniques with our sales team, to give them a little refresher. There are always little things that you do without thinking. You may have been doing something wrong for 10 years without even being aware of it.”

Here, then, are the top four ways to ensure accurate test results. Adhere to these principles and you’ll avoid common pitfalls that can lead to balky readings and bad remedies.

1. Carefully collect and care for the water sample.

When approaching a 20,000-gallon pool to collect a testing sample, it’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that the water on one end is the same as the water on the other. Or, that the water near the surface is chemically identical to the water down deeper. Don’t make this mistake.

“Before you even get to the testing, the sampling technique and sample handling are big factors,” Azurmendi says. “You want to get a sample that’s representative of the whole body of water so you’re not taking in a sample that’s higher or lower in chlorine, for example, than the rest of the pool.”

So where is this water? You’re not going to find it near the top step, nor are you likely to find it by randomly dipping a vial into the water. Your best bet, experts say, is at least a foot deep, midway between the shallow and deep end, away from return lines and skimmers. In addition, if the water’s been treated recently, make sure it’s turned over a couple of times.

This water should be collected in a clean vessel that’s been rinsed with the water you’re about to collect. The goal here is to avoid cross contamination.

“Use a clean plastic bottle. Insert it bottom-side up so the trapped air keeps out the water momentarily,” says Patricia Fitzgerald, vice president of marketing for Sparks, Md.-based Taylor Technologies. “Turn the bottle rightside up when you get to elbow depth and let it fill.”

The collection technique is the same whether you’re collecting for a reagent test or you plan to take a reading with test strips. In either case, on-site testing ensures that the water you collect has the same makeup as the water you test. Often, though, samples are brought back to a retail store or service center for analysis there. In that case, careful handling is your ally against the enemies of excessive heat and passing time.

“This is something that gets botched a lot,” says Joe Sweazy, national sales manager, AquaChek Pool and Spa Test Strips, based in Elkhard, Ind. “The water sample is a smaller volume of water, and as such it has a tendency to change more rapidly than the huge pool.

Sweazy hears about people collecting the sample correctly, then tripping up and affecting the test by tossing the bottle into the back of a truck or onto the passenger seat of a car and driving around on errands. The results of this carelessness, according to Sweazy, are significantly altered and therefore unreliable test results. The sanitizer level is particularly apt to drop over time.

2. Use only as directed.

After a sample has been collected and transported with forensic precision and attention to detail, mistakes can still be unwittingly made by even the best of service techs when it comes to using the testing products. The problem? They simply fail to follow directions. Homeowners, needless to say, are a good deal more likely to drop the ball at this stage.

“The big thing we always try to reiterate to our customers is to read the instructions,” Sweazy says. “It’s simple, and obvious, but that’s what leads to the majority of complaints we hear.”

Sometimes a tester switches from Brand A test strips to Brand B, but fails to account for differences in testing procedures. One test may call for a quick dip, another a slow swirl. These instructions aren’t made up by creative copywriters, but rather by scientists who prescribe specific steps based on the chemistry of the strips. There simply isn’t one right way to perform a water test, and to perform one after another, possibly switching brands or getting careless with procedures is to invite inaccurate results.

Liquid reagent tests require precise timing, too. Fitzgerald cautions that copper, iron, manganese and nitrate tests often need a little extra time for proper color development. That’s why the instructions call for the results to be read in a certain order — as those at the end of the sequence require the longest reaction time.

“Even if it is the same test equipment from the same manufacturer, something important in the procedure may have changed since you last bought it,” Fitzgerald cautions. “The takeaway here is that if a ‘simple’ test strip has a required technique for successful use, you can bet the farm all your other testing supplies do, too. Stay informed by reviewing the instructions.”

In addition, it should be pointed out that tests don’t last indefinitely (replace them at least once a year, Sweazy advises), dirty or broken equipment isn’t reliable and there are specific care instructions for the different types of tests. Thankfully, manufacturers are good at spelling all this out in the instructions. Make sure to read them whenever you buy a new set.

3. Be careful with color and light.

“Doing color matching tests in artificial light, or with your sunglasses on, is a no-no,” Fitzgerald says. Tests are meant to be read in natural light, but if you must do it indoors, consider a portable daylight simulator.

Even given ideal conditions, there are factors that can interfere with accurate readings. Some people have what’s known as low color discrimination, and as a result will have trouble matching color blocks.

“Even those with average or above-average discrimination can make mistakes from time to time,” Sweazy says. “So it’s important to know the trends of your water, and so when something doesn’t look right, maybe it’s got to do with your color matching, and maybe it’s time to take another test.”

Even in-store testing stations aren’t foolproof color matching machines if not used properly.

“With our systems, you need to start the time on the computer at the same time that you dip the test strip so that the instrument knows exactly when it’s supposed to read the color blocks,” says Sweazy. “If you dip the strip and then put the strip on the tray, and that takes five or six seconds, and then you start the timer? Unfortunately you’ve already lost those few second of color development, so it’s going to be past the prime time to get the appropriate test result.”

4. Clear-up chemical interference.

Let’s now assume there’s been a clean chain of custody for the water sample. The water was properly procured in a clean plastic container, it was kept out of the sun and either tested immediately or taken straight to the store, and all equipment was used in strict accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. What could possibly go wrong now? Plenty, according to Fitzgerald.

“There could be interferences in the water that cause the wrong color to develop, or color not to develop,” Fitzgerald says, citing examples such as a high level of sanitizer, the presence of monopersulfate-based oxidizer, copper from an algaecide or iron from fill water.

Here’s a common problem: chlorine that exceeds 10 ppm or bromine over 20 ppm can bleach the pink color of a conventional DPD color-matching sanitizer test, and can cause the pH and total alkalinity tests in both liquid kits and test strips to give false readings.

“Generally speaking, if a tester gets odd results, it’s important to be aware that there are ranges for all of these tests,” BioLab’s Azurmendi says, “and that if the sample is out of range for any one parameter, most often for chlorine and bromine, you should remember to retest and look for things like a high chlorine residual or pH.

“It’s really common to not understand the limitations of the test you’re using. You need to know that if you have an excessive level in one parameter, you might want to retest the water once you’ve got that parameter under control.”

Final examination

In the end, you should keep in mind collection, care, strict adherence to prescribed protocol and a good working knowledge of pool chemistry are all important factors in keeping pool water clean. Failure in any one of these areas can foul up test results and lead to frustration, or worse, unnecessary chemical remedies to problems that may not even exist.

“It’s really important to us that the people who are using our products are getting accurate test results,” says Sweazy. “We are more than willing to help if people have problems. We’re a good source of information, and can help with troubleshooting.”

Taylor, BioLab and the other chemical manufacturers offer similar help on websites, through toll-free numbers and, of course, on the printed instructions that are too often discarded by the user.

http://aquamagazine.com/content/post/The-Four-Habits-Of-Highly-Effective-Water-Analysts.aspx

In 1904, Olympic swimming competition took a bold step into the future. Whereas swimmers in the Greek-hosted events in 1896 and those in France in 1900 competed in coastal sea waters, athletes in St. Louis plunged, for the first time, into waters held within a man-made facility. Granted it was part of a network of boating lagoons created for the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition, but still, a standard was established and progress became irreversible.

Since those early days, swimming competition venues for the Games have undergone a substantial evolution. The playing fields have evolved into tightly regulated, extremely technical and sophisticated facilities.

And because the Olympics focus world-wide visibility on the host sites, cities often choose to elaborate upon the technical requirements, creating showcases to represent themselves.

No matter how successfully these venues performed their functions during the Olympic Games, though, a world tour of the once-glorious aquatic venues reveals the difficulty of retaining the glitter following the Games.

Paris, Berlin, Helsinki, Melbourne, Rome, Tokyo, Mexico City, Munich. In their days, many of these Olympic cities created veritable palaces to host aquatic events for the Games.

Sadly, in most cases, the once state-of-the-art facilities now are in various states of disrepair – some completely boarded up and abandoned, other exacting significant financial costs from their communities.

It’s not just the glitz and glitter that creates the problem. Today, because of ever more demanding international regulations, even the most utilitarian of facilities can be costly. Seating requirements, media accommodations and technical support for Olympic events result in facilities that are, by necessity, very large.

This is particularly true of aquatic venues. They typically seat 15,000 to 16,000 people and require tremendous office spaces, wide decks for line of sight, a tall ceiling to accommodate the 10-meter tower; and, unlike track and field structures, aquatic centers cannot easily be converted to another use after the world goes home.

At its heart, an aquatic center is a collection of tanks with water in them, and this most likely is what it will remain.

What happens, then, to Olympic swimming facilities after the flame of the Olympic caldron goes out? Are these facilities destined to rain the local economy, falling into disuse and disrepair? Or is it possible for them to function as viable community assets?

Because of the different issues and challenges that come to bear on Olympic preparations throughout the world, there are no all-encompassing answers.

A look at some recent Olympic aquatic venues reveals how owners have avoided financial quagmires. In some cases, researching capital and long-term operating costs has helped planning for the legacy period.

Olympic Gold
Although there are many complex issues that shape the finished design of an Olympic aquatic facility, the two that most directly affect long-term viability in the community are capital costs and operating costs.

Capital costs are ones that will go into building the actual structure. They will be determined by the specific requirements for Olympic competition; pool depth and surface dimensions, lighting requirements, temperature control, seating requirements, services for media coverage, etc.

Additionally, there are capital construction costs for facility specifications that have nothing to do with competition requirements, but are designed with the legacy period in mind. These might include movable bulkheads and pool floors, and other pool and building features designed to enhance long-term programming flexibility.

Operating costs are the ongoing expenses of utilities, staffing costs, maintenance and repairs that re necessary to keep the facility in good condition and the programming fully staffed.

Conducting a design program to determine the best facility design for short-term Olympic requirements and long-term community use takes time, and unfortunately, time is usually at a premium when bringing an Olympic facility on line.

Between the time the Olympic site is awarded and announced, and the time the facility has to be operational for the Games, there is little time remaining to study a broad range of potential sites, designs and other issues.

Let the Games ….Continue
In the United States, most Olympic swimmers rise through a strong network of club, then intercollegiate, competition. Because there is this long-standing tradition and highly developed organization for competitive swimming at the university level, many large schools find it desirable to support a world-class facility on their campus. They do so with little concern for ongoing operational costs, since the money comes out of the universities general budget and benefits are available to the whole student body.

Consequently, the most logical and practical sites for aquatic facilities at the two U.S.-hosted Olympic Summer games since 1904 have been at universities.

Despite having the luxury of maintaining the aquatic facility as a competitive arena after the Olympic Games, the owner in each case planned their aquatic facility with a cautious eye on construction and operating costs.

In Los Angeles for the 1984 Summer Games, the University of Southern California was the site of the aquatic competition venue.

Following on the heels of the expensive lessons learned at the previous Olympics in Montreal, the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee chose a bare-bones approach to all its site developments, using existing facilities wherever possible and upgrading them only as necessary to meet Olympic standards.

The resulting aquatic center at USC was completely outdoors, and the required swimming and diving tanks were surrounded entirely by temporary seating and office spaces. As a result, not only were construction costs held to a minimum, but ongoing operation costs also have been kept in check.

After the completion of the Games, all temporary structures were removed, leaving USC with a competitive aquatic center that met all requirements for intercollegiate competition, yet was completely manageable for the down-sized needs of post-Games usage.

The facilities in place to host the 1996 Olympic Games at Georgia Tech also were planned with a frugal eye toward the legacy period, yet a significantly different approach was taken to ensure long-term operational viability. Although temporary facilities will play an important role (nearly two-thirds of the seating available for Olympic competitions will be temporary), there was nothing skimpy about the design.

A movable floor and bulkheads in the pool will allow for programming versatility following the Games; and the open-air roof design reduced construction and operational costs. It should be able to attract national and international aquatic competitions; yet, it also should be flexible enough to accommodate instructional and recreational programming.

The ultimate community pool
The key to both U.S. facilities’ long-range viability remains the support of their competitive programming through the university ownership.

In most other countries around the world, that luxury is not available. There are no highly organized competitive swimming programs at the collegiate level in Europe and Asia, as there is in the United States. There is no 50-meter pool at the Sorbonne, no 10-meter diving facility at Berlin University.

Consequently, in recent host cities like Munich, Montreal, Seoul and Barcelona, Olympic aquatic centers invariably became public recreation facilities after the Games were over. Their success at achieving long-term viability has varied, and the variable has inevitably been how successfully construction costs were controlled, and how well the facility was designed to operate in a fiscally responsible capacity in the legacy period.

Sometimes the challenges weren’t met successfully. Munich is home to one example. The entire Olympic complex for the ’72 Games was conceived to continue as a new town in the post-Games period. As part of that plan, the Munich aquatic facility was a very beautiful complex, but also a ver high maintenance facility.

Unfortunately, although the town did slowly develop as conceived, no strong economic tax base was ever established because no industry ever developed. As a result, the community cash flow fell short, and the swimming pool complex–as well as, undoubtedly, other facilities from the Games—struggled to maintain its physical condition.

Montreal’s experience in Olympic history has been well documented, its fervor leading the city into cash flow problems.

The aquatic venue was caught up in the same exuberance, with seemingly little concern for the legacy period. The spaces were designed solely for the requirements of their 10 days of use during the Games. Today, the primary source of revenue for the natatorium comes from guided tours.

Seoul seemed to be following the same slippery slope as Montreal for the ’88 Games, building elaborate indoor facilities with substantial ongoing operational costs. But increased tourism and increased interest in sports caused by hosting Olympic Games has created a continuing demand for use of the facilities well into the legacy period.

The Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Foundation assumed ownership of the aquatic facility, as well as five other sports facilities constructed for the Games, operating them on revenue funds and surplus money generated from the Olympics.

More than 1 million people use the facilities each year, the foundation reports, helping support operating costs and endowing a fund to promote youth sports and support Korean Olympic teams.

Using an approach modeled upon that of Los Angeles, Barcelona’s organizers took advantage of many existing facilities, modifying them to bring them up to Olympic standards.

The aquatic venue was an existing outdoor complex in a “dotted i” arrangement, a 50 meter x 21 meter competition swimming tank alongside a 21 meter diving tank. Federation Internationale de Nation Amateur (FINA) requirements demanded the competition swimming pool be widened to 25 meters. Another 50 meter indoor warm-up tank was added, and the existing diving tank was drained and covered with temporary seating.

The resulting U-shaped seating arrangement surrounded the pool like a tight-fitting pocket, and at first glimpse looked crowded. But the athletes’ response was overwhelmingly favorable – they liked the closeness of the cheering spectators.

The new diving venue was built on the other side of a mountain, more than a mile away from the swimming venue. The resulting backdrop for television coverage created one of the most lasting images of the ’92 Olympics, that of divers gracefully spinning and flipping in front of the historic Barcelona skyline.

Following the Games, all temporary seating was removed, the original diving pool was restored, and today, the Barcelona parks and recreation department runs the very manageable facility as a youth aquatic training and recreation center.

The Olympic Games represent a rare opportunity for host cities to show their best faces to a world-side audience. But past experience has shown the folly of rushing into a development frenzy with no thought given to exorbitant construction costs and long-term operating costs that far exceed any realistic revenue expectations.

The worldwide attention that focuses every four years on the chosen Olympic Host City should be a beginning, not an end. The enthusiasm, pride and physical development should live on as positive legacies of the Olympic experience long after the athletes, the television cameras and the ticket holders have gone.

If facilities can be designed so they can be used in the post-Games period with minimal operating costs in an ordinary ratio to the amenities provided, then the legacy period can provide substantial benefits to community long after the Olympic flames have been extinguished.

BY: D. Joseph Hunsaker, Counsilman Hunsaker, St. Louis, designers and engineers for the Georgia Tech Aquatic Center.

It was a summer evening in 2010, and Jovita Ibeagwa was getting ready for her night shift as a nursing assistant in Jacksonville, Fla.  Before leaving the house, she called her husband, at work, who said he would come home and watch the kids, Jovita later told police.  However, Markanthony Ibeagwa decided instead to remain at his job to “get more hours [of pay],” according to police reports, and the couple’s children — Gerrard, 6, and Blessing, 3 — were left alone.  By 10 p.m., both had drowned in a neighbor’s pool.   The Ibeagwas admitted to authorities that they had failed to properly watch their children, who subsequently died due to a lack of supervision.

In July 2010, the State Attorney’s Office charged the Ibeagwas with aggravated manslaughter and child neglect.

In discussing the decision to press charges, a state prosecutor said, “When parents and caregivers fail in [their] obligation, it is the duty of law enforcement to investigate and charge those responsible. We are mindful of the great loss these parents have suffered, but the facts and circumstances of this case demand the filing of criminal charges. Parental responsibility for the safety and supervision of their children has been, and will remain, a bedrock principle of the State Attorney’s Office.”

This philosophy represents a gradual, yet definitive, sea change in the American mindset on childhood drowning. In the past, the concept that beleaguered parents had “suffered enough” often dictated how these cases were handled. But new data has emerged connecting fatal submersions to child abuse and neglect, a link that is helping to transform the way drownings are approached and investigated.

Across the country, advocates are lobbying for more comprehensive probes into childhood drownings, which they believe could help prevent future tragedies by identifying those groups that are most vulnerable.

Yet despite tangible results, these efforts continue to meet roadblocks along the path to widespread acceptance.

Scope of the problem
Every year, nearly 500 American children under age 5 drown in a body of water, with approximately 70 percent of those incidents occurring in a swimming pool or spa, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Drowning Prevention Alliance. Another estimated 4,000 are treated in emergency rooms for non-fatal submersions.

Although drowning occurs at all ages, young children are the most vulnerable demographic, particularly in pools and spas. This is due to a number of factors: Toddlers are extremely curious, have no ability to comprehend danger, and generally, upon falling into water, do not splash or call for help.

Sadly, most child drownings occur when a parent or caretaker is distracted. In a 2004 review of drowning deaths sponsored by the National Safe Kids Campaign, nearly 90 percent of incidents took place while the child was allegedly being supervised. Yet in nearly 35 percent of cases, the victim was last seen in a location other than the pool.

Another study, this one released in the journal Pediatrics in June, spotlights the same problem. In examining portable pool drownings and near-drownings from 2001-2009, the study’s authors cited numerous instances of parents distracted by activities ranging from phone calls to household chores.

Scope of the problem
Every year, nearly 500 American children under age 5 drown in a body of water, with approximately 70 percent of those incidents occurring in a swimming pool or spa, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Drowning Prevention Alliance. Another estimated 4,000 are treated in emergency rooms for non-fatal submersions.

Although drowning occurs at all ages, young children are the most vulnerable demographic, particularly in pools and spas. This is due to a number of factors: Toddlers are extremely curious, have no ability to comprehend danger, and generally, upon falling into water, do not splash or call for help.

Sadly, most child drownings occur when a parent or caretaker is distracted. In a 2004 review of drowning deaths sponsored by the National Safe Kids Campaign, nearly 90 percent of incidents took place while the child was allegedly being supervised. Yet in nearly 35 percent of cases, the victim was last seen in a location other than the pool.

Another study, this one released in the journal Pediatrics in June, spotlights the same problem. In examining portable pool drownings and near-drownings from 2001-2009, the study’s authors cited numerous instances of parents distracted by activities ranging from phone calls to household chores.

“It’s this prevailing attitude that it’s not going to happen to me,” says El Paso County (Texas) Assistant District Attorney Penny Hamilton, who heads up the office’s Rape & Child Abuse unit.

“People fool themselves into thinking their children are safe,” she continues. “Even if it’s just a 2-year-old, there’s too much responsibility placed on toddlers.”

While drowning-prevention advocates continue to call for stricter barrier requirements, it can be argued that pools and spas have never been safer. In fact, the industry has seen an exponential increase in regulation over the past decade, from isolation fencing to covers to pool alarms. Yet, according to the NSKC study, 63 percent of drowning victims entered through an open or unlocked gate. Moreover, “in cases where it was known whether the child was unattended at the time he or she gained access to the pool area through a gate, 39 percent of victims were known to have been alone upon entry,” the findings revealed.

Indeed, there is a single variable that transcends all other safety requirements. It is consistently identified as a primary factor in child drownings, yet is all too often understated when doling out blame. That factor is adult supervision.

“Supervisors should maintain continuous visual and auditory contact with children in or near water … and should not engage in distracting behaviors such as talking on the phone, preparing a meal or reading,” the NSKC study authors conclude.

http://www.poolspanews.com/2011/112/112accidents.html

The Northeast is continuing its movement toward industry-specific licensing with the introduction of a new state bill.

The Massachusetts legislature has introduced bills requiring pool and spa builders and service firms to be licensed. Meanwhile, Connecticut and Nassau County, N.Y., have hammered out key provisions for their new licensing laws.

Massachusetts Senate Bill 2091, states that no person can build, service or repair a pool without a license. It goes into effect on July 1, 2012.

Violating the law will be counted as a misdemeanor with fines up to $3,000. It is considered a violation not only to perform the work without a license, but also to hire an unlicensed individual to do so.

The bill was originally suggested by Chris Callanan, who represents Region 9 on the Association of Pool & Spa Professionals’ Board of Directors.

“There’s a sense of not being really professional out there,” said Callanan, who’s also president of North Shore Pool & Spa in Wakefield, Mass. “I want to raise the professionalism and image of our members [to] the public, and also make sure members are well-educated and certified, so they can continue to be more profitable in their own companies.”

The bill is currently in committee and may have to pass through one more committee before going before the full Senate.

In Connecticut, industry associations and the agency in charge of licensing have come to an agreement on the ideal requirements. These specifications must be reviewed by a legislative committee, posted for public comment and discussed at a public hearing to become official.

As it stands, the state would require that industry professionals make a statement saying they’re familiar with the regulations, show that the company they work for has a home-improvement contractor registration, prove five years’ experience, have an APSP Certified Building Professional designation or equivalent and take an exam.

The current language allows grandfathering, which would exempt long-standing professionals from the exam.

Grandfathering is only allowed until Dec. 31, 2013, after which all requirements must be met, including the test and CBP designation. “We have a lot of companies in Connecticut that are going to need to get certified, so we certainly have our work cut out for us,” said Lawrence Caniglia, executive director of the Northeast Spa & Pool Association.

To maintain the licensing, builders must complete at least six hours of continuing education. The state also has established enforcement for those violating the builder and existing service licensing.

“Penalties are going to be severe,” Caniglia said. “They took the language from the same penalty provisions that apply to plumbers, electricians, roofers and other contractors.”

Offenders can be charged $500 to $1,000 for each day working without an up-to-date license and lose their needed home-improvement contractor registration. Severe violators also can be criminally prosecuted. In Nassau County, N.Y., grandfathering has become available to obtain a builders license, which is currently in effect.

Grandfathering will be allowed for qualified professionals for the next two years, after which CBP certification will be required for renewal. No exam is required for Nassau’s license.

There’s no question that energy efficiency has become more important than ever. So every option should be explored. And when it comes to pools and spas, that means looking at heat — specifically how to retain it.

But there isn’t one magic bullet — several components go into those kinds of savings. Covers and energy-efficient forms of heating do the heavy lifting, but there is another method that makes sense in some situations — insulating inground pools and spas.

Part of the equation
When used alone, insulation can reduce energy usage by about 5 percent. But when included as part of a comprehensive energy-saving strategy — starting with a cover — insulation helps the dollars add up.

Spas are especially good candidates for insulation when they are in cold climates, or are placed in a raised setting without buffering by the ground.

Pools less frequently need insulating, but there are some exceptions, such as therapy pools that must consistently remain at a high temperature, or vessels heated with a solar system. When you’re dealing with solar, you’re dealing with a very low rate of climb. So solar needs all the help it can get containing heat, where if you have natural gas and you want to punch the pool up 10 degrees, you’re going to do that, whether the walls are insulated or not.

Insulation also can help with some indoor pools and spas, particularly those that are placed near an external wall, and which are more prone to heat loss.

The heat will go out through the soil and then go up. If the pool or spa is near an external wall, then it’s going to enter the colder ground outside. Conversely, builders should not add insulation when installing a vessel in a high water table, since the light material could make the concrete shell more prone to pop.

When installing the insulation itself, the most crucial part is to insulate the top 3 feet, because there’s a direct escape route for the heat at that level.  For best results, continue to apply the material 3 to 4 feet back under the deck to prevent heat from escaping out of the flatwork.

When looking for ways to save on energy costs, always begin with a cover.

Evaporation accounts for 70 percent of heat loss, and covers largely curtail it. Other measures such as insulation can augment the cover.

If you’re not covering your pool, don’t bother with insulation.

www.aquatic-tech.net

www.pool-bright.com

One of the industry’s leading manufacurers of pump motors and heating equipment just got larger.  In July, A.O. Smith Corp. agreed to purchase Lochivar Corp., a Lebanon, Tenn., manufacturer of high-efficiency boilers and heaters for a variety of residential and commercial applications.

z’The addition of Lochinvar expands our product offerings and gives us access to proven technology,” said Ajuta G. Rajendra, president of A.O.Smith Water Products Company.  ”We expect high-efficiency boiler products to continue to grow at an accelerated rate for the foreseeable future.”

A.O. Smith agreed to pay $418 million for Lochinvar in a transaction expected to close in the third quarter of  last year.  While the deal is an asset-only purchase, the company will coninue to honor Lochinvar’s existing warranties, according to mark Petrarca, senior vice president of human resources and public affairs at A.O. Smith Corporation in Milwaukee, Wis.

Leadership at Lochinvar is expected to remain in place as well.

www.poolandspanews.com

As of Sept 6, 2011 an APSP standard will take over for the long-standing ASTM language naming the parameters a drain cover must meet to comply with the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act.

The first-ever federal pool and spa safety law states that all commercial pools must have suction outlet covers adhearing to ASME A112.19.8 or a successor standard.  These drain-cover requirements have taken on even more significance of late.  Controversy regarding language and implementation spurred a historic drain-cover recall in May involving eight manufacturers.

Last month, the five CPSC commissioners voted unanimously to replace ASME A112.19.8 with ANSI/APSP-16.  For drain-cover producers, this does not amount to substantive changes.  All entities involved say the standard is the same as ASME A112.19.8 and two addenda that were released since 2008.

“From a technical standpoint, it is absolutely identical,” said Steve Barnes, APSP’s Technical committee chairman.  ”For a product to be listed to this standard, manufacturers would do absolutely nothing different.”  However, the ANSI/APSP-16 Committee is working on a refinement of the standard, which may be released later this year.  Many of the changes involve more detailed instructions for product testing.  Once the revisions are released, labs will be required to follow the new language.  Manufacturers will become beholden to the revised language when they seek next renewal of their third-party listings, which takes place annually.

For APSP, this means seeing one of its standards become part of a federal law for the first time.

Swimming Pools require proper maintenance for aesthetic and sanitary purposes.  High Alkalinity and dissolved minerals in pools develop calcium deposits on tile surfaces which appear dingy.  Dirt, Body Oils and debris combined with calcium deposits to produce scum and film on the pool tiles.  The longer the calcium remains on the tiles the more difficult it is to remove.  Clean tiles promptly with certain solutions to restore the pool’s appearance and provide a healthier swimming environment.

Instructions:

1. Scrub the tiles with a hand held brush.  Remove as much calcium buildup and scum as possible with the tile brush.
2. Fill a plastic bucket with 1 gallon of water and add 1 tsp. of powdered water softener to the water.  Mix the solution thoroughly to dissolve the water softener.
3. Dampen a clean rag in the softener solution.  Rub the rag over the tiles to remove calcium stains and soap scum.  Frequently dampen the rag in the solution.
4. Inspect the tiles for remaining calcium buildup and scum.  If stubborn buildup and stains remain, apply non-abrasive chlorine based liquid to the tiles according to manufactures directions.  Use a tool recommended by your pool builder or local pool store.
5. Scrub the tiles with a nylon scouring pad to loosen the remaining buildup.  Rinse tiles thoroughly with water.

Installing Swimming Pool tile can provide years of summer fun for the whole family.  Installing new tile in the pool is a nice improvement enhancing the pools visual appearance.  Installing new colorful tiles and/or new mosaics can be fun and rewarding.

Installation Instructions: 

1. Drain Pool below your installation site or all the way down if re-coating the pool surface.  Always check ground table water.
2. Clean your installation surface with clean water and dish soap.  This will remove excess chemicals, dirt and other chemicals from the surface.  Allow to dry.
3. Spread a good un-sanded Thin Set over a 4-5 Ft. area in front of you.  If tile Manufacturer recommends a different adhesive follow their instructions.  Use a notched trowel tool to create ridges in the adhesive for better tile security.
4. Firmly push your tile into place in the designated area, work small areas so the adhesive does not dry on the surface before application of the swimming pool tiles.  If this happens scrape off and start over.
5. Cut any tiles for the edges or skimmer area with a tile cutter.  Draw a line on the back of the tiles where needed to be cut.
6. Apply adhesive, cut and lay tile, once completed let dry 24 hours.
7. Apply a waterproof, acid resistant pool grout between the lines, using a grout float.  Use a sharp angle to force the grout into the joints, do not leave spaces in the joints.
8. Wipe excess grout from tiled surface with a damp sponge & allow surface to dry 24-48 hours.

For a great selection of Swimming Pool Tiles & Mosaics go to:   www.pool-bright.com or www.aquatic-tech.net 

See below or visit www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml11/11230faq.html to read the consumer Product Safety Commission’s answers to questions that many people have been asking about the recall of drain covers by eight manufacturers.

Take special note of question 14, Florida DOH did-re-rate the covers; therefore, as long as the gpm through the cover is at or below the new ratings, the recall does not affect public pools in Florida.  However, note the new labeling requirements, FSPA is currently checking with DOH for how they will enforce this requirement.  The equipment room labeling requirement was addressed by the FSPA Commercial Advisory Group and a labeling form will be submitted for DOH to consider using.

1.  What is this recall about?  CPSC, in cooperation with several manufacturers, has announced a voluntary recall of various swimming pool and in-ground spa drain covers.  A replacement or retrofit of these drain covers may be required in certain cases.  A complete list of manufacturers involved can be found at CPSC’s recall website.  Check the individual manufacturer’s website for a list of the affected models.

2.  Why is a recall necessary?  CPSC staff conducted an extensive investigation of the adequacy of the testing and certification process used to evaluate the flow rates of pool drain covers.  We found that due to incorrect testing procedures, some swimming pool and in-ground spa drain covers were incorrectly rated for protection against body entrapment.

3.  What swimming pools or in-ground spas are affected by this recall?  This recall relates to certain models of drain covers manufactured by the these companies listed on the CPSC’s website:

• A & A Manufacturing:  www.aamfg.com
• AquaStar Pool Products: www.aquastarpoolproducts.com
• Color Match Pool Fittings:  www.poolfittings.com
• Custom Molded Products:  www.c-m-p.com
• Hayward Pool Products: www.hayward-pool.com
• Pentair Water Pool and Spa:  www.pentairpool.com
• Rising Dragon USA:  www.risingdragonplastics.com
• Waterway Plastics:  www.waterwayplastics.com

The recalled covers vary in size and shape, but each includes model number markings, a flow rating, and the manufacturer’s name.  It is important to identify the manufacturer of the drain cover in your pool or spa to determine whether your drain cover is affected by this recall.

Do not attempt to remove or alter your drain cover in anyway.  If a replacement or retrofit is necessary, it should be performed only by a qualified pool or spa professional.  It may not be necessary to remove your drain covers and removing the current cover to expose the drain will create a safety risk.

Contact the 24-hour, toll-free Recall Hotline at (866) 478-3521, where an operator can help you to determine if the drain covers in your pool or in-ground spa are covered by this recall and assist you in arranging for a professional to take whatever action is necessary.

In summary, if your drain covers were installed after Dec. 19, 2008 and:

• You have an in-ground spa, or
• You have a wading or kiddie pool, or
• Your pool has one drain,

you may need to participate in this recall and should take further action to ensure that your pool or in-ground spa is in compliance.