CDL Nano RO

[thedeer2]

Anyone else see the new Nano Ro in the 2021 CDL catalog. I’ve never used RO and I am super unfamiliar.
I am confused by the specifications, and I am trying to figure out how many gallons of raw sap it the 3 membrane unit will process.
The specs list Water Removal at 10-13gph @5-6 brix. Is this spec the amount of concentrate per hour produced? Or amount of raw sap processed?

For those familiar with RO, does this new CDL unit seem promising for $700 bucks or is the RO Bucket a better investment?
https://www.cdlusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Nano-RO_manual.pdf

[DrTimPerkins]

From the manual, it appears that the 3-membrane unit will produce 10-13 gph permeate @ 5-6 brix at a ratio of 65 (water): 35 (concentrate) -- assuming 2 Brix incoming sap at 42 deg F at 100 psi.

So if it is producing 10-13 gph permeate, the 3-membrane unit would generate 3.5-4.5 gal concentrate per hour (10-13 gph x .35) given a 65:35 reduction).

The 2 membrane unit would produce 3-4 gal of 4-5 Brix concentrate per hour and 6-8 gph of permeate (50:50 reduction) at 70 psi at 42 deg F.

RO buckets do a 50:50 reduction (permeate:concentrate) at 40 deg F at a 8, 12, or 20 gph sap processing rate, so producing 4, 6, or 10 gph of both permeate and concentrate depending upon the model.

[ecolbeck]

I have to respectfully disagree slightly with the numbers for the CDL unit reported by Dr. Tim (sorry).

With a 65:35 ratio of permeate to concentrate, an output of 10 - 13 gph of permeate would yield an output of 5.4 - 7 gph of concentrate.


65/35 = 10/x

350 = 65x

x = 5.4


When comparing the products the larger CDL version seems to have the advantage of a recirculation pump and both versions have a built in pressure gauge as well as frames. However by comparison, the ROBuckets seem to process greater amounts of sap for their cost albeit at a lower concentration.

[steve J]

I am trying to learn about these 2 RO's? And I have zero knowledge of RO in general. It appears the cdl unit removes 15% more water but at a max output of 7 gpr? So it would take longer to fill my 30 gallon head tank but since sugar content may higher It would produce syrup faster?

[ecolbeck]

The larger CDL unit will produce a stronger concentrate than the ROBucket units. However, that really only matters if you’re willing to pay a high price for it and accept it’s slow rate of production.

[maple flats]

I have to respectfully disagree slightly with the numbers for the CDL unit reported by Dr. Tim (sorry).

With a 65:35 ratio of permeate to concentrate, an output of 10 - 13 gph of permeate would yield an output of 5.4 - 7 gph of concentrate.


65/35 = 10/x

350 = 65x

x = 5.4


When comparing the products the larger CDL version seems to have the advantage of a recirculation pump and both versions have a built in pressure gauge as well as frames. However by comparison, the ROBuckets seem to process greater amounts of sap for their cost albeit at a lower concentration.
I think you have it backwards. the 65% is permeate, the 35% is concentrate, anyone can correct me if I'm wrong. It is saying 10-13 gph water removal

[carls47807]

The RO Buckets with 3 or more membranes can easily concentrate to 6% in a single pass by running the concentrate 35% and 65% permeate. Flow rates would be the same as the cdl nano when doing that (using the standard correction factors for sugar percentage).

The recommendation on these smaller units has always been to run them at 50/50 because it was difficult to know what they were capable of when the instructions were written, and a lot of smaller folks don't test or know their input sap concentration. You wouldn't want to run past 50/50 when you are starting with 3 or 4% (which isn't uncommon).

[thedeer2]

I have to respectfully disagree slightly with the numbers for the CDL unit reported by Dr. Tim (sorry).

With a 65:35 ratio of permeate to concentrate, an output of 10 - 13 gph of permeate would yield an output of 5.4 - 7 gph of concentrate.


65/35 = 10/x

350 = 65x

x = 5.4


When comparing the products the larger CDL version seems to have the advantage of a recirculation pump and both versions have a built in pressure gauge as well as frames. However by comparison, the ROBuckets seem to process greater amounts of sap for their cost albeit at a lower concentration.

Thanks for all the help. So to summarize and clarify. Assuming Sap begins at 2 Brix...

At maximum capacity the 3 membrane Nano ($709) can process 20gph of sap outputting 13gph of permeate and 7gph of concentrate @ 6Brix. This is a 4 brix increase per Pass through the system. Do I have that correct?

A comparable RO bucket would be the RB 15 ($525), which can process 20gph of sap into 10gph of concentrate @ 4brix. This is a 2 brix increase per pass through the system.
To get an equal 6brix output would require a second pass through the RO bucket. So to recirculate and get an equivalent output of 6 brix the RO bucket is really processing sap at 10gph. Correct?

Looking at the materials used in their construction, I would assume the Nano is superior due to it using 600gpd membranes vs RO Bucket's 400gpd, and the Nano having the added recirculation pump. But, is this worth the additional cost...?

[mainebackswoodssyrup]

Read Carl's post above. He's the RO bucket guy. Looks like they are identical in capability but you should know what sugar content before you start up.
Look at the RB25 kit as well. It's not the bucket setup but can do more GPH than either. It likely comes down to what you want.........gph, % sap, cost, nearby parts convenience, etc.

[carls47807]

Thanks for all the help. So to summarize and clarify. Assuming Sap begins at 2 Brix...

At maximum capacity the 3 membrane Nano ($709) can process 20gph of sap outputting 13gph of permeate and 7gph of concentrate @ 6Brix. This is a 4 brix increase per Pass through the system. Do I have that correct?

A comparable RO bucket would be the RB 15 ($525), which can process 20gph of sap into 10gph of concentrate @ 4brix. This is a 2 brix increase per pass through the system.
To get an equal 6brix output would require a second pass through the RO bucket. So to recirculate and get an equivalent output of 6 brix the RO bucket is really processing sap at 10gph. Correct?

Looking at the materials used in their construction, I would assume the Nano is superior due to it using 600gpd membranes vs RO Bucket's 400gpd, and the Nano having the added recirculation pump. But, is this worth the additional cost...?

Although I am slightly biased.

The RO Bucket can get to a higher sugar percentage overall because it runs at 150psi (vs. the nano running at a max of 70-100psi). As sugar concentration goes up, osmotic pressure also goes up, making it more difficult to separate the water out. The 3 membrane thru 5 membrane RO Bucket systems can run a single pass up to 6%. For single and 2 membrane systems it's best to run a 50/50 pass.

[dmichel]

Does anyone else think this looks like a rip-off of the RO bucket concept? I almost bought an RO bucket but shipping to canada killed it.

[PaulRenaud]

I bought the 3 membrane CDL Nano model last summer (2021) and am using it for the first time this year.

But to my horror, it is performing like the 2-membrane system, producing 1/3 permeate and 2/3 concentrate (at 4 Brix) from sap entering at 2.5 Brix when operating at 100 psi. It is as if one of the membranes is bad since this is exactly the performance of the 2 membrane system. (Yes the recirc pump is running.)

Any thoughts on how to test the membranes individually? Or other troubleshooting tips?

[LMP Maple]

Bought the Nano 3 membrane unit at bascoms pre sale. I have been pleased with it. I have a lot to learn about getting it dialed in but overall it is a nice little unit. I don't think you can go wrong with the R/O bucket the service is great from what I hear and I have yet to hear of anyone not thinking it was a great unit. I liked the looks of the nano and the extra money did not sway me. If I was trying to save money doing this I would have moved to Florida years ago. This sounds dumb but I did not want another bucket in the sugar house. I liked the look of the nano with the pressure gage and it seemed pretty foolproof. I don't get too jazzed up with the numbers. I run the sap through it and the sugar content comes out higher and it takes out a lot of water. I test the sap and test the permeate to make sure there is no sugar. When I start thinking about ratios, this to that you lose me.
As far a knocking everyone off. Yep, they all do. Leader has a small unit now basically the same thing. Leader will tell you the CDL one is awful. CDL will say the same about Leader and R/O bucket will say they both are bad. The bucket r/o guys came out with a post version like the big guys. I think this is great. They are really paying attention to the little guys because they figured out that we will spend money. You have a lot of great options.
At the end of the day I don't think you can go wrong with any of these units. I don't know what the leader one goes for but I like the looks of that one as well. Looks like it has the dials like the big boys have. Good luck! You will love it regardless.

[carls47807]

I am not going to knock the competitors, but our system is the best (kidding). Truth is they all save folks boatload of time and most people would be happy with ANY RO system.

If you are limited to 100psi, you are probably only going to get 1/3 permeate. At 50/50 flow most sap is going to run at 120-130psi. The issue is that the recirc pump on the 3 membrane nano limits overall system pressure. That is a residential water circulation pump and is not made for high pressure.
https://www.amazon.com/Youwise-Electric-Stainless-Automatic-Application/dp/B094QWP65W/ref=sr_1_8?crid=3VKCFK0HB796E&keywords=water+pressure+booster+automatic&qid=1647971258&sprefix=water+pressure+booster+automati%2Caps%2C69&sr=8-8

You can run the 2 membrane nano higher than 100psi since it doesn't have the recirc pump (that pump has the lowest psi rating of anything else in the system, everything else is probably rated to 150psi or higher).

[ecp]

Lets be honest here. If it is a leader products it is most likely not going to perform against any of the competitors and will break down in 2 years.

On a side note what I would really like to see is the RO Drum. Who wouldn't want a 55 gallon drum RO on wheels?

[PaulRenaud]

After speaking with the inventor of the Nano at CDL, it is clear that the Nano-3 is not designed for single pass usage. It processes at a rate of 13 - 15 gal/hr and multiple passes are required to raise the Brix beyond 3 Brix.

Running it in batch, as he recommended, is the only way to achieve 5 - 6 Brix from sap starting at 2.5 Brix. So basically I need to run it in a batch mode for a couple of hours and then do a pass that pushes the concentrate into a separate tank so that I can take in more sap to reduce.

Too bad they market the Nano-3 as being capable of both batch and single-pass, as I would have configured by plumbing to optimize for batch intermediate processing.

[DRoseum]

Interested to know...did you buy the cdl nano, the ro bucket or build your own? How did it work out?

[Bullet]

I have had my Nano for 3 years. One can go thru all the calculations, but for me one of the the most important things is support, and this is where CDL and the Nano fails miserably. Go with Carl and the RO bucket. I've been chasing CDL for 3 years with nothing but frustration. I will ultimately give up on my Nano and intend to either do a DIY or purchase the RO bucket.

[Bullet]

"Interested to know...did you buy the cdl nano, the ro bucket or build your own? How did it work out?".....Roseum

Bought it from CDL 3 seasons ago

[fireant911]

I bought the 3 membrane CDL Nano model last summer (2021) and am using it for the first time this year.

But to my horror, it is performing like the 2-membrane system, producing 1/3 permeate and 2/3 concentrate (at 4 Brix) from sap entering at 2.5 Brix when operating at 100 psi. It is as if one of the membranes is bad since this is exactly the performance of the 2 membrane system. (Yes the recirc pump is running.)

Any thoughts on how to test the membranes individually? Or other troubleshooting tips?

PaulRenaud,
My brother-in-law just recently bought the CDL Nano three-membrane system for the 2024 season. Due to our somewhat strange syruping window in Upper Michigan this year, he only set it up and tried it this past weekend. There was 150 gallons of sap to process that tested at 2.0 Brix. I came by to see this machine in operation and was immediately shocked to see how small the ratio of permeate to concentrate was produced! - it was much less than the 1/3:2/3 you experienced. Without precisely measuring, it was more in the neighborhood of 1/5 permeate to 4/5 concentrate. The concentrate, as you can easily imagine, was less than 3 Brix (while running at a pressure of 100 psi). Each bucket of 'concentrate' was re-run at least once and ...finally... we saw a maximum of 4.0 Brix. The recirculation pump was running in auto and all other parameters looked fine yet he experienced these rather disappointing results for a not-so-inexpensive setup. The RO machine that I built and operated by a maple novice (me) easily out-performed this Nano system. My brother-in-law was not happy with his results.

In the time that has passed since you reported your disappointment, has anything changed/improved with the Nano 3's performance?

[whatever]

For what it's worth, any good ro setup properly maintained is a huge advantage. we have used the cdl nano ro for two full seasons now. we consistently have raw sap between 1.8 - 2.2 we adjust the pressure on the ro to maintain ~ 50/50 permeate to concentrate ratio. We dont get too caught up on the pressure on the gauge as we have found 1-2 psi change greatly affects the output volume of the the two lines (perm and conc.) Ours usually ends up running around 95-96 psi. (every gauge isnt going to read exactly the same). if we crank up to 100 on our gauge the conc. flow effectively stops)
we boil ~ 10 gallons / hr. and the ro conc. almost perfectly matches that rate feeding our pre heater. The conc. comes out 3.6 - 4.0. and we only run single pass. It works perfect for us. Set the pressure so both lines are close to same flow, cuts sap volume in half ( boil; half as long) and carry on. After all for us small guys most of us only look to decrease or time spent boilng. so half the time is good regardless of the flow rates , ratios , sap conc. etc.etc. We have found also that if the tank that the ro is drawing from is closer to the level of the ro it seems to produce better. we have the ro mounted ~ 6' off the floor and draw from a barrel directly below it. we try to keep the barrel 1/2 full or more because if it gets towards the bottom it seems to slow down ( not likely but thats what we have in our heads now, lol). The other main thing thats true of all ro's is proper maintenance, follow the instructions and dont skimp on flushes and washes of the membranes and replacing the sediment filter if so equipped.

[Bullet]

PaulRenaud,
My brother-in-law just recently bought the CDL Nano three-membrane system for the 2024 season. Due to our somewhat strange syruping window in Upper Michigan this year, he only set it up and tried it this past weekend. There was 150 gallons of sap to process that tested at 2.0 Brix. I came by to see this machine in operation and was immediately shocked to see how small the ratio of permeate to concentrate was produced! - it was much less than the 1/3:2/3 you experienced. Without precisely measuring, it was more in the neighborhood of 1/5 permeate to 4/5 concentrate. The concentrate, as you can easily imagine, was less than 3 Brix (while running at a pressure of 100 psi). Each bucket of 'concentrate' was re-run at least once and ...finally... we saw a maximum of 4.0 Brix. The recirculation pump was running in auto and all other parameters looked fine yet he experienced these rather disappointing results for a not-so-inexpensive setup. The RO machine that I built and operated by a maple novice (me) easily out-performed this Nano system. My brother-in-law was not happy with his results.

In the time that has passed since you reported your disappointment, has anything changed/improved with the Nano 3's performance?

I also have the Nano and my experiences have been identical to yours. Disappointing.

[fireant911]

Bullet,
Thanks. Yes, this is disappointing; however, it does somewhat ease the pain and frustration to know that my brother-in-law in not the only one that is experiencing these poor performance issues.