[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Posted by HeatPro on February 16, 2009 at 09:54:23:
In Reply to: Re: Peerless WBV-04 adding aqua booster or indirect posted by tk03 on February 16, 2009 at 09:13:11:
Ah, I see why you don't like the tankless coil. Your page on the temperature settings is from source other than the IBR boiler settings.
The settings for tankless coils were traditionally at 200F low with a 20F differential on the Honeywell, so the water ranged from 190F to 210F, with the high limit set at 220F. The piping was done with a tempering valve to the water would be less a threat. Also, a boiler with a 1 gph nozzle could produce 2.25 gpm of hot water at steady flow with the tempering valve adding in another gpm or so of cold water to result in over 3 gpm which was satisfactory.
So if you handicap the design by using temperature settings that were lower than intended, and don't include the mixing, either hand-set and wired or a thermostatic mixing valve, the results are poorer.
The original IBR tests over a year with the right settings produced very reasonable fuel costs, as during 2/3 the year, the boiler was already hot.
Still, I can agree that an indirect is a better choice, as the standby losses are more important today than when the testing was done, and an indirect can be much more insulated.
I often questioned why a boiler couldn't be as well insulated as an indirect tank, which would negate the problem. The low-mass boilers coupled to insulated tanks are a similar concept, as found in Triangle and other products.
A Bock oil-fired tank with a coil in it like the ErgoMax, very well insulated, would be the result.
Post a Followup