Has anyone seriously considered using Shade balls as an alternative....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Our pool is 14 x 18 feet. 252 ft x 12 = 3024 inches. if each ball is 100mm ~ 4 inches.
3024 / 4 = 756. Lets round up to 800 to be safe for now.
14 x 18 = 36,288 square inches of surface area.

A 4” diameter ball has a cross sectional area of 12.56636 square inches

So, you would need 2,888 balls to cover the entire surface.

The packing density at best is about 91% for circles on a plane.

So, you would need about 2,628 balls, which would leave about 9% open space.

At about $1.45 per ball, that’s $3,810.60.

We have 4, 96 gallon green bins from the city to throw away our green waste. 3 of the 4 of them never get used. I don't know why how we got 4. Each one of these bins HAS to fit at least 100, maybe even 200.
96 gallons is 22,176 cubic inches.

Each sphere has a volume of about 33.5103 cubic inches.

With 100% packing density, you would be able to get about 662 balls in a 96 gallon container.

However, the general packing density will be about 64%, so you would only get about 424 balls in a 96 gallon container.

You would need about (6.2) 96 gallon containers to store the balls.

1662774063067.png
 
Last edited:
Here’s a question for you:

If you have a gumball machine with a spherical glass globe that has an inside diameter of 1 meter, what diameter of gumball will have the highest packing density?

What diameter of gumball will have the lowest packing density?
 
Here’s a question for you:

If you have a gumball machine with a spherical glass globe that has an inside diameter of 1 meter, what diameter of gumball will have the highest packing density?

What diameter of gumball will have the lowest packing density?
Ok I'll bite...
Highest density (100 %) will be a single sphere 1M in diameter (exactly filling your gumball machine)
Lowest density will be epsilon larger the 1/2M (ie the smallest sphere that will still not fit two in the machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamesW
I have occasionally thought about adding a layer of 1" foam insulation panels on top of my auto cover to provide additional insulation when needed.
My pool is small -- 9'x23' so 6 4x8 panels (one cut down to 3' wide) would cover it pretty easily. With just the cover the pool is reliably about 10-15 degrees warmer than the mean temperature without any additional heating beyond the solar gain from the dark cover.

So if I were willing (or could automate) putting the additional insulation on and off twice a day there might be significant benefit. (On in evening and off in the morning during cooler but sunny weather and on in the morning and off in the evening during the hot spells).

However I don't have a place to store the panels when they are not on the pool, and the twice per day routine would be a lot of work.
 
Our pool is 14 x 18 feet.
Do you mean 14 x 28?

If yes, why not use (2) 14 foot diameter balls?

Or, (42,197,995) 1 mm diameter balls?

What about getting cubes instead of spheres so that you can get 100% coverage?

Maybe freeze the water into a solid block of ice?

Maybe convert it into a koi pond?

Maybe fill it with liquid argon and make a neutrino detector?

Maybe heat up the water until it becomes a quark-gluon plasma?

Maybe do something with scorpions?
 
Last edited:
What about flat black rectangles that you can lay on the surface?



 
14 x 18 = 36,288 square inches of surface area.
A 4” diameter ball has a cross sectional area of 12.56636 square inches
So, you would need 2,888 balls to cover the entire surface.
The packing density at best is about 91% for circles on a plane.
So, you would need about 2,628 balls, which would leave about 9% open space.
At about $1.45 per ball, that’s $3,810.60.
96 gallons is 22,176 cubic inches.
Each sphere has a volume of about 33.5103 cubic inches.
With 100% packing density, you would be able to get about 662 balls in a 96 gallon container.
However, the general packing density will be about 64%, so you would only get about 424 balls in a 96 gallon container.
You would need about (6.2) 96 gallon containers to store the balls.
I really wasn't concerned with the math to be perfectly honest. Cost wasn't an issue. Effectiveness and practicality are.

Yes, my math was not accurate.
But either were my pool dimensions. My pool is not a perfect rectangle. It's oddly shaped and I measured my pool by taking steps with my feet shortly after making this post. My shoe size is 11 inches and I inserted 1 in gap between each step. YES, I'm not joking. To compound that, I just measured again with a measuring tape and the pool was actually 14 feet x 28 feet. So I guess my brain fart made things even worse. With all the curves and the fact that the spa is separated. I would reduce whatever number I got by 20%.

If I was going to buy the balls directly from china. As someone pointed out, shipping might cost more than the balls. But this supplier is charging 6 cents a ball.

NOAZIOj.png


Some charge 14 cents, some 18 cents, some 24 cents. If you watch the original video, the city rep claimed the city paid around 30 cents per ball. So I'm assuming they didn't buy their spheres from a US manufacturer. But it's possible? since they bought so many balls, they might of got a massive discount. I believe they used almost 100 million balls. But I just sent an email to two supplies and i'm to hear back what they say.

In general, I think that the plastic idea is a bad idea.

I would go with a solid safety cover with an automatic cover pump.

Plastic, metal, rubber, I don't care what the object is, as long as it works. HDPE + Black is used as the material, was specially picked to avoid plastic leeching into the water. But? I guess your gut feeling that plastic is a bad idea is something I should consider. I also don't care if plastic leeching into the pool water, no one uses it! No one is also going to drink the water either. And if they did.... Jesus what isn't made out of plastic these days? Oh right, almost EVERYTHING.

And the cost of this project, if it truly reduces my water and chlorine consumption by even 50%, I would pay $4000 for these balls if the balls lasted at least 10 years. The only question is, are the claims made in this video... actually true? Which is the entire reason I made this thread.

It's the same way I would look at solar panels. Electricity is a household cost, the same way water and chlorine is a household cost for someone that owns a pool. I wonder how many pools in California alone never get used, are constantly being refilled. My city, THIS MONTH, sent us a notice that we were not allowed to water our gardens for the entire month of September.
For all of you living in the east coast, especially in the north, your water supply is plentiful. So easy to empty your pools and refill them when chemicals get out of wack. Here you need a permit, and the cost of refilling a 22,000 gal pool? Around $300-400, which 7-10 years ago, who knows what it would cost now. I heard Santa Barbara passed a law recently that every pool has to have a cover, and they are handing out tickets if your pool is not covered (while not used). I'm sure with the cost of chlorine also going by almost double, people are starting to rethink how to manage their pools in this economic climate. Hence someone suggesting I should switch to a salt water pool. Which is something I'm actually considering.

Do you mean 14 x 28?

If yes, why not use (2) 14 foot diameter balls?

Or, (42,197,995) 1 mm diameter balls?

What about getting cubes instead of spheres so that you can get 100% coverage?

Maybe freeze the water into a solid block of ice?

Maybe convert it into a koi pond?

Maybe fill it with liquid argon and make a neutrino detector?

Maybe heat up the water until it becomes a quark-gluon plasma?

Maybe do something with scorpions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: JamesW

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.