And what's it been ranged down to ? If it's been left at full output then (unless it's a very unusual installation) whoever is responsible for the design is not competent - I know it will rankle with some of you to hear suggestions that there are professionals who aren't competent at their job, but then the truth sometimes isn't palatable.Whether the burner is running @ low modulation or high modulation then design criteria has to be catered for the latter and not the former.
I didn't suggest using a larger one wouldn't be preferable, but I question whether "low loss" is strictly necessary. Ultimately, the design criteria is to ensure adequate flow through the boiler under all conditions, and unless there's something very unusual then it's hard to see how a short length of 28mm and a couple of short lengths of 22 are going to produce less flow than a whole system with various points where the flow is throttled down.Using the correct size header won't exactly break the bank as opposed to fabricating using a smaller diameter , or are you suggest a low loss header is not necessary on this particular boiler?
If you are going to make statements like that, please specify what "that" is referring to - otherwise it makes no sense !If that were the case SH2 one would only need 1 pump not 3.
May I bring you to the attention an electrical ring main. It is designed for average use. If a 3 kilowatt heater is plugged into each outlet the mcb would trip. If these "plumbers" designed an electrical circuit they would design it to take a 3 kilowatt heater from each socket - total overkill. A modulating boiler is like having a auto variable mcb.Now repeat with more sensible values. As usual, 40kW is the high power needed to make a combi vaguely usable and it pretty irrelevant to heating requirements - the heating load for most properties is much much less than that, if it isn't then it's unlikely to be a property where a combi is sensible ! So say 10kW tops (note he said he has the primary pump on it's lowest setting), and probably much less than that most of the time.Shall I work it out for him?
Flow rate for a 40 kW boiler with a 20C differential is 40/(4.18x20) = 0.478 litre/sec or 478 cc/sec.
Inside diameter of 28 mm pipe = 26 mm or 2.6 cm. So area of pipe = (2.6/2)² x π =5.31 cm².
Velocity = 478/5.31 = 90cm/sec = 0.9 m/s.
Whatever you may say about terminology and whether this is a "low loss header" or not - it's a system that works and it's a system I'd consider (where I couldn't fit in a thermal store, or at least a buffer tank).
How wrong can one be..
Whether the burner is running @ low modulation or high modulation then design criteria has to be catered for the latter and not the former.
But he has common engineering sense, which most here are bereft of.As your signature suggests you are an enthusiast and not a professional.
The header I used was determined by experimentation. My intention was to use a 35mm header, maybe be with a pipe stat in the header to prevent any cycling. The pipe stat was unneeded as the boiler controls modulated down the burner rate and then switched out the burner for long periods. The weather compensator lowered the flow temperature the vast majority of run time. But I found a 28mm header worked very well. I gave the results of my findings. I never made them up. I advise all to adopt this route. I did write I advised a 35mm header to anyone who does go this route just to be sure.Using the correct size header won't exactly break the bank as opposed to fabricating using a smaller diameter, or are you suggest a low loss header is not necessary on this particular boiler?
I do because I did it and tested it. You never, I did.'Just to be sure' , you sound like you have every confidence within yourself.
What this "plumber" does not understand is that by the time a boiler starts to cycle the property is up to temperature and the controls switch the lot off until it cools off. It does not run away with itself and cycle like crazy. Boilers also have integrated anti-cycle control. That is how heating controls work.Yes but what your (Mr Crap) fragile little mind can't seem to understand is that if the minimum rate of the burner is more than the maximum requirement of the property then the system is fooked from day one.
This sounds like it is designed and/or not fitted properly. I gave the results of mine. and no such thing occurred.I have data logs showing my poor boiler - which I persuaded to modulate down to 4kW or so going on and off like a tarts draws.
I used high output DHW combi. You could take a fixed rate pump off the header to heat a cylinder.What about hot water recovery if the place has an old cylinder?
A wonderful technical response. That is all you ever have responded like. I pity the people who allow you to walk into their homes.You're an idiot.
A wonderful technical response. That is all you ever have responded like. I pity the people who allow you to walk into their homes.You're an idiot.
You are a poor heating man then.I'm not a plumber numbnuts
No. That is what the low-loss header puts right. Each heating zone can have very different heating demand and flows, yet they do not affect the flow through the boiler or the other heating zone.Do you think a property heats up linearly?
Do you think that every room (with TRVs especially) will self regulate to ensure that the absorption of the boiler is precisely its minimum output
A wonderful technical response.You ******.
I gave my findings. It was clear enough.Like I said - until you answer questions directly,
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local