Over the years, the pool and spa industry has mandated many building standards, but very little on the circulation systems for pools and spas as it relates to hydraulics and energy efficiency. California was the first with Title 20 and Title 24. Florida, Arizona and Connecticut have followed with their own standards.
Title 20 and 24 standards speak to the appliance and building industry in California with a small section dedicated to swimming pools. Title 20 specifies the type of motor and pump
that can be installed on residential swimming pools for circulation, while Title 24 outlines hydraulic requirements. Both standards were put into place to reduce energy usage of pool and spa circulation pumps.
Title 20 requires pumps to be one of the following:
- Single speed pumps – less than 1 total horsepower (THP) which is calculated by multiplying labeled HP x the labeled service factor (SF)
- Two speed pumps
- Variable speed pumps
Title 24 set up parameters for pipe size, flow, turnover and velocity limitations. The whole idea was to increase the pipe size used, which reduces the velocity of the water through the system, thus allowing for the smallest pump or lowest speed to turn the water over. The end result is energy savings.
The Association of Pool & Spa Professionals (APSP) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) have conferred with industry-wide leaders and come up with ANSI/APSP/ICC-15 2011 or as many call it, APSP 15. According to Scott Petty, Hayward’s Product Manager for Pump and Above-Ground Equipment and who served on the APSP-15 committee, “The primary benefit of APSP-15 is that it gathered all of the pool-specific aspects of California’s Title 20 and Title 24, which cover a broad array of products and applications, into one standard, thus making it much easier for state and local agencies to adopt and implement energy efficiency requirements for residential pool products. From an industry perspective, this, in turn, will help prevent the potential for varying requirements for different states that could have resulted in product customization, reducing manufacturers’ efficiencies and likely increasing confusion throughout the channel, including OEMs, distributors, and dealers”.
More on Title 20 and 24 and APSP-15: