If you’ve ever worked in any sector related to water treatment – whether that’s municipal supply, industrial manufacturing, or commercial building operations – chances are you’ve heard of the By Opening Method. As someone who’s spent the last 12 years selling, supporting, and refining this technology for my team, I’ve seen first-hand how it has revolutionized parts of the industry, cutting down on maintenance costs, reducing downtime, and making system flushes more effective than many older, manual approaches. By Opening Method
But here’s the thing: I don’t sell a technology that’s perfect. No treatment method is, and pretending that there are no limitations would do a disservice to my customers, who rely on us to solve real problems without overlooking potential roadblocks. Over the years, I’ve talked to hundreds of clients – plant managers, maintenance supervisors, and process engineers – and their feedback has helped me see the gaps in the By Opening Method, even as we continue to improve our own products to address them.
Let’s start with the basics, for anyone who might be new to this. The By Opening Method works by systematically opening and closing valves in a water (or other fluid) system to create controlled surges, or localized pressure changes, that dislodge scale, sediment, biofilm, and other contaminants from pipe walls. The idea is that instead of using harsh chemicals that can damage pipes or require complex neutralization, this mechanical approach moves debris naturally, so it can be flushed out without adding extra substances to the system. It’s become a go-to for many mid-sized systems where chemical treatments are too expensive or leave residue that affects downstream processes.
But first, one of the biggest limitations I see has to do with pipe size and layout. The By Opening Method relies on the fact that pressure surges travel predictably through pipes. But if you’re working with pipes smaller than, say, 2 inches or larger than 24 inches, the method’s effectiveness drops off sharply. For small-diameter pipes, the surges generated are often too weak to dislodge stubborn scale that’s built up over years, especially in areas where pipes have tight bends or connections. For large-diameter pipes, on the other hand, the surge needs to be significantly more powerful to cover the full cross-section of the pipe – and many standard By Opening Method systems aren’t calibrated to deliver that. I’ve had a client in the food and beverage industry with a 30-inch main process pipe; they tried our standard system and were frustrated when half the pipe still had biofilm after treatment. It took us six months to re-engineer our valve sequencing to adjust for the larger pipe, and now that client is a repeat buyer, but that initial gap is a real barrier for anyone working with extreme pipe sizes.
Then there’s the issue of pipe material. Most By Opening Method systems work well with standard carbon steel, copper, and even PVC for non-critical applications. But when pipes are made of more fragile materials – like galvanized steel that’s corroded, thin-walled stainless steel, or older cast iron that’s been weakened by decades of use – the pressure surges can do more harm than good. I learned this the hard way with a municipal water district client last year. They had a network of 80-year-old cast iron pipes in a residential neighborhood, and they wanted to use the By Opening Method to reduce the need for chemical flushes. When our tech team ran a trial, the surge pressure caused a small crack in one of the oldest pipes, leading to a 24-hour outage for 12 homes. That incident didn’t just cost the client money; it made me realize that many providers of this technology don’t do pre-treatment assessments of pipe material and condition. A lot of sales pitches skip over the fact that you can’t use the method on any pipe without first auditing its structural integrity, and that’s a limitation that isn’t talked about enough.
Another common limitation is the method’s reliance on system flow rates. The By Opening Method works best when the system has a minimum flow rate that can carry the dislodged debris out of the pipes quickly. If the system is part-time, or if it’s a closed-loop system that doesn’t have a way to direct flushed debris to a collection point, the contaminants can settle back into the pipe walls. I had a client in the pharmaceutical industry with a closed-loop cooling system; they tried the By Opening Method and found that after treatment, sediment settled in dead legs of the pipe, which then grew new biofilm within two weeks. The problem was that their system didn’t have a dedicated flush path, so the method’s surges stirred up debris that had nowhere to go. The fix wasn’t in adjusting the system’s settings, but in adding a temporary flush line – a solution that not every customer is willing to invest in, especially for small, temporary maintenance projects.
I also can’t ignore the variability in system conditions. Every water system is unique, with different levels of hardness, sediment composition, biofilm thickness, and even pipe corrosion. The By Opening Method works best when you have a baseline understanding of these conditions, but many small businesses don’t have the resources to run pre-treatment water tests. I’ve had a small manufacturing plant with hard water that tried the method, and their limescale was so thick that the standard surge pressure could only dislodge the outer layer, leaving a hard core inside the pipe. They ended up needing a chemical pre-treatment to soften the limescale before using the By Opening Method, which added time and cost to their project. If a customer doesn’t know they need that pre-step, they’ll be disappointed with the results, and that’s a limitation of the technology that often gets buried in marketing materials.
Now, as someone who sells this technology, I don’t want to end this sounding like By Opening Method isn’t worth using. Because it is – for the right applications, when paired with proper assessment and support. The key is understanding these limitations and building solutions around them, rather than ignoring them. Over the past few years, my team has spent a lot of time developing custom calibration tools: software that can map pipe layout, size, and material to adjust surge pressure and valve sequencing, so we can adapt the method for small and large pipes, fragile materials, and closed-loop systems. We also now offer free pre-treatment assessments for all our clients, including water testing and pipe condition audits, to make sure the method is appropriate for their specific system before we even ship a unit.
One of the most rewarding parts of this job is seeing clients who once wrote off the By Opening Method because of a bad early experience come back to us with successful projects. A few months ago, that same municipal water district that had the cast iron pipe incident came back to us. They’d worked with a structural engineer to assess their oldest pipes, and they used our new low-surge valve sequence for those lines, avoiding further damage, while using our high-pressure calibrated system for newer steel pipes. They reported a 40% reduction in chemical use and a 30% drop in pipe repairs within six months – results that wouldn’t have been possible if we’d ignored the limitations we talked about.
For anyone considering the By Opening Method, my advice is simple: don’t just go with the cheapest or most advertised system. Ask about their calibration tools, their pre-assessment process, and their experience working with your specific pipe size, material, and system layout. A lot of the “limitations” aren’t flaws in the technology itself, but flaws in how it’s applied, and choosing a supplier who’s honest about those gaps and has solutions to address them is what makes the difference between a successful project and a frustrating one.
If you’re looking to reduce your maintenance costs, cut down on chemical use, or improve the efficiency of your fluid system, I’d be happy to walk you through how the By Opening Method could work for your operation, and what steps we take to avoid the common pitfalls I’ve talked about over the years. We can talk through your specific pipe layout, system type, and goals, so you know exactly what to expect – no sales pitch, no fine print, just honest information to help you make the right decision for your team.
Industrial Roller Door References
- Miller, J. (2021). “Mechanical Flow Surge Technologies for Pipe Maintenance: Effectiveness and Limitations in Diverse System Layouts.” Journal of Water and Wastewater Treatment Engineering, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 45-62.
- Chen, L. et al. (2022). “Structural Impacts of Controlled Pressure Surges on Aging Pipe Materials: A Field Study of Municipal Water Systems.” Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 04022037.
- Rodriguez, M. et al. (2020). “Debris Transport Efficiency in Closed-Loop Fluid Systems: Challenges for Mechanical Pipe Cleaning Methods.” Industrial Water Treatment Journal, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 112-119.
Hangzhou Shenborui Industry & Trade Co., Ltd.
Address:
E-mail: markrod@163.com
WebSite: https://www.markrod.com/
