UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
nog
 
Posts: n/a
Default Central Heating Programmer - Which To Choose?


The electro-mechanical switch that controls our heating has become
unreliable so it's time to fit a replacement.
Which of the electronic alternatives would be a good choice?
Would like the usual features - separate timings for each day of the week,
ability to separately control h/w & heating, override, etc.
TIA.
  #2   Report Post  
Dave Plowman (News)
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
nog wrote:
The electro-mechanical switch that controls our heating has become
unreliable so it's time to fit a replacement. Which of the electronic
alternatives would be a good choice? Would like the usual features -
separate timings for each day of the week, ability to separately control
h/w & heating, override, etc.


I'd get a basic one that allows off, once, twice and continuous. And
replace (or fit) a programmable room thermostat. That allows the
temperature to be set for different values throughout the days over a 7
day period.

If you don't already have a room stat somewhere and decide to fit one
you'll have to remove or disable any TRVs in that room.

The two units should cost under 100 quid.

--
*If God dropped acid, would he see people?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #3   Report Post  
John Rumm
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I'd get a basic one that allows off, once, twice and continuous. And
replace (or fit) a programmable room thermostat. That allows the
temperature to be set for different values throughout the days over a 7
day period.


I found that if you get the programmable stat, then there is no real
need for a timer type programmer as well. I fitted one of these, which I
have been pleased with:

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...12157&ts=14198



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/
  #4   Report Post  
Dave Plowman (News)
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
John Rumm wrote:
I'd get a basic one that allows off, once, twice and continuous. And
replace (or fit) a programmable room thermostat. That allows the
temperature to be set for different values throughout the days over a 7
day period.


I found that if you get the programmable stat, then there is no real
need for a timer type programmer as well.


Presumably you'd still need to be able to switch hot water and heating on
or off? So I think you'd end up with a basic programmer to do this anyway
- unless you made something up.

Even with a programmable thermostat I still switch off overnight. And set
it to twice on working days as I'm single. Then flip it to 'once' when I'm
in all day.

--
*Some people are only alive because it is illegal to kill.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #5   Report Post  
John Rumm
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Presumably you'd still need to be able to switch hot water and heating on
or off? So I think you'd end up with a basic programmer to do this anyway
- unless you made something up.


Good point... I was forgetting about the HW side of things. (in my case
I changed from that type of programmer on my stored water system, to
having just the programmable stat, but on a combi system)

Even with a programmable thermostat I still switch off overnight. And set
it to twice on working days as I'm single. Then flip it to 'once' when I'm
in all day.


I did wonder whether I would miss having that type of control, but I
found that with a temperature profile set that drops the demanded
temperature to 16 degrees overnight, the vast majority of nights the
boiler does not fire at all during this time. During the warmer months
the house tends to stay naturally warm enough to keep the stat satisfied
without calling for heat. So "off" states are achieved simply by setting
the program to a low enough demand.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/


  #6   Report Post  
Colin Irvine
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:14:04 +0000, John Rumm
squeezed out the following:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Presumably you'd still need to be able to switch hot water and heating on
or off? So I think you'd end up with a basic programmer to do this anyway
- unless you made something up.


Good point... I was forgetting about the HW side of things. (in my case
I changed from that type of programmer on my stored water system, to
having just the programmable stat, but on a combi system)

Even with a programmable thermostat I still switch off overnight. And set
it to twice on working days as I'm single. Then flip it to 'once' when I'm
in all day.


I did wonder whether I would miss having that type of control, but I
found that with a temperature profile set that drops the demanded
temperature to 16 degrees overnight, the vast majority of nights the
boiler does not fire at all during this time. During the warmer months
the house tends to stay naturally warm enough to keep the stat satisfied
without calling for heat. So "off" states are achieved simply by setting
the program to a low enough demand.


We've adopted the opposite approach. Our boiler has a decent
programmable timer, which is what we normally use. If it's freezing we
flick the boiler to "always on" and let the programmable thermostat do
its stuff.

--
Colin Irvine
  #7   Report Post  
nog
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:08:17 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
nog wrote:
The electro-mechanical switch that controls our heating has become
unreliable so it's time to fit a replacement. Which of the electronic
alternatives would be a good choice? Would like the usual features -
separate timings for each day of the week, ability to separately control
h/w & heating, override, etc.


I'd get a basic one that allows off, once, twice and continuous. And
replace (or fit) a programmable room thermostat. That allows the
temperature to be set for different values throughout the days over a 7
day period.

If you don't already have a room stat somewhere and decide to fit one
you'll have to remove or disable any TRVs in that room.

The two units should cost under 100 quid.


While I would like to move towards a more sophisticated system, we have an
old - and very crude - heating system, piped through ½in steel tube. This
means that even TRVs aren't an easily available option, let alone any form
of zone control.
The previous owner was in the habit of turning the heating on and off at
the non-functioning Sangamo time clock but we introduced the now-dying time
switch (which had been in my possession as a retired spare).
I just need to keep the present system functioning uintil we can afford to
replace it with a more effective alternative.
  #8   Report Post  
Dave Plowman (News)
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
nog wrote:
While I would like to move towards a more sophisticated system, we have
an old - and very crude - heating system, piped through ½in steel tube.
This means that even TRVs aren't an easily available option, let alone
any form of zone control.


If it uses 1/2" pipe, it means it must be pumped, so is amenable to
control by a programmable thermostat regardless of zoning or TRVs, etc.
Indeed might well give even greater savings...

The previous owner was in the habit of turning
the heating on and off at the non-functioning Sangamo time clock but we
introduced the now-dying time switch (which had been in my possession as
a retired spare). I just need to keep the present system functioning
uintil we can afford to replace it with a more effective alternative.


Replacing the mechanical timeswitch and adding a programmable thermostat
won't be wasted if and when you have a new system fitted - they can be
used with the new.

--
*On the seventh day He brewed beer *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #9   Report Post  
John Rumm
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Colin Irvine wrote:

We've adopted the opposite approach. Our boiler has a decent
programmable timer, which is what we normally use. If it's freezing we
flick the boiler to "always on" and let the programmable thermostat do
its stuff.


Errr, I think that is the same, rather than the opposite! ;-)

i.e. I leave the boiler permanently on (it has no programmer of its own,
other than the on/off switch), and set the programmable stat to control
everything.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/
  #10   Report Post  
Colin Irvine
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 21:38:40 +0000, John Rumm
squeezed out the following:

Colin Irvine wrote:

We've adopted the opposite approach. Our boiler has a decent
programmable timer, which is what we normally use. If it's freezing we
flick the boiler to "always on" and let the programmable thermostat do
its stuff.


Errr, I think that is the same, rather than the opposite! ;-)

i.e. I leave the boiler permanently on (it has no programmer of its own,
other than the on/off switch), and set the programmable stat to control
everything.


.... whereas most of the time we're relying on the boiler timer to
switch it on and off, and only rarely (in freezing conditions) leave
the boiler permanently on. That's the opposite to you - same as Dave.

--
Colin Irvine


  #11   Report Post  
John Rumm
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Colin Irvine wrote:

i.e. I leave the boiler permanently on (it has no programmer of its own,
other than the on/off switch), and set the programmable stat to control
everything.



... whereas most of the time we're relying on the boiler timer to
switch it on and off, and only rarely (in freezing conditions) leave
the boiler permanently on. That's the opposite to you - same as Dave.


Fairy snuff... same as me but only when freezing, otherwise same as Dave.

Any particular reason you switch methods like that?

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/
  #12   Report Post  
Colin Irvine
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 03:15:29 +0000, John Rumm
squeezed out the following:

Colin Irvine wrote:

i.e. I leave the boiler permanently on (it has no programmer of its own,
other than the on/off switch), and set the programmable stat to control
everything.



... whereas most of the time we're relying on the boiler timer to
switch it on and off, and only rarely (in freezing conditions) leave
the boiler permanently on. That's the opposite to you - same as Dave.


Fairy snuff... same as me but only when freezing, otherwise same as Dave.

Any particular reason you switch methods like that?


Not really, now I come to think of it! If I had to choose one method
I'd go for the programmable thermostat, but doing it our way I can
have the standby temperature not too far below the comfort setting
without feeling I'm wasting money when it's not freezing. Well it
makes sense to me, anyway!

--
Colin Irvine
  #13   Report Post  
John Rumm
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Colin Irvine wrote:

Any particular reason you switch methods like that?



Not really, now I come to think of it! If I had to choose one method
I'd go for the programmable thermostat, but doing it our way I can
have the standby temperature not too far below the comfort setting
without feeling I'm wasting money when it's not freezing. Well it
makes sense to me, anyway!


I figured that if I set (for example) the night time temp at the "a tad
below comfort level", then it would only actually cost anything when the
temp in the house fell below such level. The rest of the time the boiler
remains to all intents and purposes "off". On the occasions where it has
to do something, it ought to coincide with when I would like it to do
something ;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
No Central Heating Worcester Bosch 280 Paul Howls UK diy 3 October 11th 04 12:42 AM
central heating programmer re-wiring Mark Downey UK diy 1 October 4th 04 06:56 PM
remote control of a central heating system - possible? Chris UK diy 9 September 28th 04 11:00 AM
central heating installation (nottingham) Nick UK diy 1 March 3rd 04 12:39 PM
Feeble woman about central heating Anna Kettle UK diy 11 February 10th 04 09:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"