ozonaters?

[obi wan]

i have looked at several tubs recently, jacuzzi, HS, caldera, masters, and marquis. all but the jacuzzi are including an ozonater with the purchase and even use it as a great selling feature. jacuzzi will put one in for $199 but didn't seem to care either way from what i read,l the CD is the best type, or is it?
is this something that must be replaced every couple of years, or longer?
are they really beneficial in the long run?or is this more hype than functionality.
i want this $LARGE$ purchase to be a long term investment, and if the ozonater is very beneficial then i can factor the costs into cost of maintenance.

[hottubber]

kent,

The ozone systems that are used in MOST spas are an after market item. Whether the dealer includes it in the package or not, is not the question. Warrantees on these aftermarket systems usually are only one or two years. I believe that Marquis utilizes an ozone system that is warranteed for 5 years. Because it is factory installed. That is an Ultraviolet system. Most of the new aftermarket systems are Corona Discharge, this type of ozonator produces more than the UV bulb and it is supposed to last much longer and at a higher level of output.
We include ozone in every spa sale. It is a nice feature for those people that want to reduce the chemical need in their spas. Ozone will reduce chemical need by about 70%.
Good luck

[Steve]

kent,

The ozone systems that are used in MOST spas are an after market item. Whether the dealer includes it in the package or not, is not the question. Warrantees on these aftermarket systems usually are only one or two years. I believe that Marquis utilizes an ozone system that is warranteed for 5 years. Because it is factory installed. That is an Ultraviolet system. Most of the new aftermarket systems are Corona Discharge, this type of ozonator produces more than the UV bulb and it is supposed to last much longer and at a higher level of output.
We include ozone in every spa sale. It is a nice feature for those people that want to reduce the chemical need in their spas. Ozone will reduce chemical need by about 70%.
Good luck

I was with ya right up until the last paragraph. In all the years I've been around spas, I've heard ozone will reduce chemical usage by ____%. Mostly anything between 30 - 90%. I'm not sure where these numbers come from or how they're generated. Can you tell me how you came to that number tubber?

Ozone IS a chemical is it not?

I believe there's benefits to ozone but it's aways been unclear just how much it reduces chlorine use.

Steve

[HotTubMan]

I feel that ozone savings are often mirepresented. My guesstimate(since therte is no real data) is no more than 30%.

That said, the cost of new bulbs or chips should wash that saving away.

I do not present ozone as a money saver at all. It is a maintenance saver. It allows you to maintain a lower ppm of cl/br. Save money? I dont think so.

And yes it is a chemical, but we are all composed of chemicals. I find chemical to be a word most consumers equate with "anything I put in my spa besides people"

[Spatech_tuo]

I do not present ozone as a money saver at all. It is a maintenance saver. It allows you to maintain a lower ppm of cl/br. Save money? I dont think so.

Bingo. I simply say it will help keep the water cleaner/clearer, which means a lot if you've ever seen the frustration a person has when their water quality battle isn't going well. I have seen many spas with and without ozone and I'm sold on ozone as it seems like the people without have water quality issues far more often. You will use less chlorine but I don't like them to push this point and see people go too low. In the end, if it makes maintenance easier and keeps the water cleaner its worth it IMO.

I'm certainly more a fan of the CD type due to the added ozone (assuming the system is well designed and can handle it). You also need to know if your CD type needs a chip change (some do, some don't) and how much and we all know the UV needs a bulb change about every 1½ yrs so you should find out what your maintenance costs would be.

[poolboy34]

Ozone is an oxidizer.  It can reduce the amount of sanitizer and shock you need to maintain your tub's water.  Now granted this all depends on how often and how many people on average are going to be using the spa.  Overall i would say that anything that can reduce the amount of sanitizer and shock you need to put into a spa on a regular basis is a good thing.  Also there are manufacturers that include a factory installed water mgmt system in their spas complete with ozonators (D-1(Reflections & Bay Series), Marquis, Caldera(utopia series), and saratoga to name a few.  All of these manufacturers cover their ozonators under warranty.

Bottom line is that anything that makes maintaining a spa easier is a good thing.

Jason,
Store manager for a D-1 & caldera Dealer

[Mendocino101]

One thing about the UV and Corona discharge...

Marquis does use a UV....but unlike I think most or perhaps even all UV types....It  uses a Plasma cell instead of a ballast...it is the ballast that fails and with each use produces less and less ozone....by using the Plasma cell they have found that it puts out the same amount ozone from day one to day 2000 ( about 7 years ) in their testing....and requires no maintenance

[Dr. Spa™ Ret.]

Ozone is misunderstood more than just about anything else.

Ozone is just an oxidizer and will NOT sanitize or kill any bacteria. NONE.

Chlorine is both an oxidizer AND a sanitizer. HOWEVER, before it can sanitize anything it will FIRST oxidize everything in the water. If not enough chlorine is used it can get used up oxidizing all the dead organic stuff before it has a chance to sanitize (kill) anything.

Ozone, being an oxidizer, can take care of some/much of the required oxidizing. This would reduce the amount of chlorine needed to reach the desired 3ppm. YOU STILL NEED TO ATTAIN 3ppm OF CHLORINE for proper sanitizing.Additionally, ozone will break down combined chlorine, releasing the chlorine back to an effective state. Since combined chlorine has no oxidizing or sanitizing ability, AND actually consume more chlorine, this "could" reduce the required amount of chlorine needed to ACHIEVE 3ppm.

Finally, there has never, Never, NEVER been a properly conducted, peer reviewed study (released to the public) proving that ozone has ANY benefit to a spa.

I should also not, as Steve says, ozone IS a chemical. I've come across a fair number of people that are HIGHLY sensitive to it and have had anything from breathing problems to extreme asthma attacks associated with breathing small amounts of off gassing from their spa.

[Gary]

Are ozonators necessary? No, but they will help keep the cleaner from oxidation. But the has to be engineered for an ozone if not they are a waste of money. The must have a contact/mixing chamber to keep the ozone in solution or it just get wasted.

So a better question is does the spa you are looking at have a proper size contact chamber per the flow of water.

Also the solid state ozonators are the way to go. Ballast fired ones have a short life, Cd ones require maintenance. Solid State (sometimes called Plasma)last a long time and you do nothing to it ever.

[stuart]

Are ozonators necessary? No, but they will help keep the cleaner from oxidation. But the has to be engineered for an ozone if not they are a waste of money. The must have a contact/mixing chamber to keep the ozone in solution or it just get wasted.

So a better question is does the spa you are looking at have a proper size contact chamber per the flow of water.

Also the solid state ozonators are the way to go. Ballast fired ones have a short life, Cd ones require maintenance. Solid State (sometimes called Plasma)last a long time and you do nothing to it ever.

Gary,
What a great post! This is one of your better...I didn't know you still had it in you after all these years!!

[steve771]

I'm certainly more a fan of the CD type due to the added ozone (assuming the system is well designed and can handle it). You also need to know if your CD type needs a chip change (some do, some don't) and how much and we all know the UV needs a bulb change about every 1½ yrs so you should find out what your maintenance costs would be.

What would be the qualifications of a system "being well designed and able to handle it"?  I have a UV type installed now and was thinking of changing to a CD type when the bulb needs replacing.  

[HotTubMan]

Some will argue this point, but a well designed ozone system has a longer tube leading from the mazzei injector to the jet in the spa.

The mazziei injector is the first (or only) contact chamber. Some makes include a second contact/de-gasing chamber.

It is actually easier to explain a poorly designed ozone system. A poorly designed system only allows the ozone to mix with the water for 5-10 seconds before it is injected into the spa. The ozone bubble then makes its way to the surface and becomes and airborn gas. Once is airborn, ozone does nothing for your spa water and may do damage to your cover/pillows.

[Dr. Spa™ Ret.]

Some will argue this point, but a well designed ozone system has a longer tube leading from the mazzei injector to the jet in the spa.

 

*raising hand and waving it wildly in the air*

I'll argue it, I'LL ARGUE IT.

Once the water leaves the injector, or "mixing" chamber for that matter, the little bubbles of ozone quickly rise to the top of the pipe, leaving a pocket of air in the top of the pipe............ kinda like the pocket of air above the water of a spa and beneath the cover  

A longer pipe gives you.................................. just a longer pocket of ozonated air sitting on top of a longer pipe full of water.

Additionally, the slower the water is moving through the pipe, the quicker the lil bubbles will rise to the top of the pipe.

I'm still waiting to see the properly preformed, properly documented and peer reviewed study  

[HotTubMan]

I'm still waiting to see the properly preformed, properly documented and peer reviewed study  

You too?

[Mendocino101]

It is my understanding....that Marquis which uses  "Hi Flow" for filtering initially thought that a 25 second contact chamber was the way to go..but after testing felt they achieved better results shortening the chamber to I think about 18 seconds....