On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 9:06:06 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/28/2016 8:44 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 7:47:29 AM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/27/2016 11:25 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 1:25:52 PM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 1/27/2016 11:01 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
The main problem with the hot water spigot is that it is at house
pressure, while the cold is at street pressure. You can't really
use the hot water spigot for rinsing because the pressure is so
low. When mixed with cold, you have to keep the cold at a minimum
or it overpowers the hot.
The other thing it does is that under certain conditions it causes warm
water to come out of the cold taps and toilets in the house. I have
a Y-hose connected to the hot and cold spigots. When both spigots are
open and the hose itself is closed at the spray handle, there is more
pressure on the cold side than the hot. If an inside cold tap is opened,
the back pressure pushes hot water into the cold water pipes.
This first time this happened I was really confused. It took a couple
of times of the hose being used with hot water and the problem occurring
for me to realize that it only happened when both spigots were open. That's
when the light came on and I understood what was happening.
Since the cold is higher pressure than the warm,
maybe there is cold going into the hot side?
Street pressure at cold spigot.
House pressure at hot.
Open a cold faucet in the [That's bizarre. I never did understand that.] house when the hose nozzle is closed.
Street pressure from cold side forces hot water back into tank.
Cold water mixes with hot in WH and goes out through the WH's incoming cold water pipe.
Warm water comes out of cold faucet.
My Dad put in a mixing valve in the darkroom
of the old house, and we had cold hot inversions.
Until he put in check valves. I'm not all sure
why that happened, but I do remember it.
--
.
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
. www.lds.org
.
.
Center posted, as your reply was.
--
.
Not true.
How do you describe it when you post text in
the center of an existing post?
--
Pay attention...I've got a few things to say about your recent obsession
with what you incorrectly call "center posting".
First: It's called "interleaved" or (more commonly) inline posting, not
"center posting".
Stolen without permission from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
"Posting style
When a message is replied to in e-mail, Internet forums, or Usenet, the
original can often be included, or "quoted", in a variety of different
posting styles.
The main options are interleaved posting (also called inline replying, in
which the different parts of the reply follow the relevant parts of the
original post), bottom-posting (in which the reply follows the quote) or
top-posting (in which the reply precedes the quoted original message)."
So you are suddenly complaining about an accepted posting style as if
it was something new and as if there was something wrong with it. I have
a theory as to why you have recently started complaining about it, but
I'll get to that later in the post.
Second: You said "Center posted, as your reply was."
My reply was not posted smack in the middle of a sentence like yours
was and enclosed in brackets.
"Open a cold faucet in the [That's bizarre. I never did understand that.]
house when the hose nozzle is closed."
That makes "as your reply was" *not true* since I did not do that.
Inline posting, while completely acceptable in the Usenet environment, is
not typically done in the manner that you used. Comments relevant to a given
section of a post are posted as new lines directly after the section. If a
sentence does need to be split for some reason, then it should snipped or
split but left as a quoted section following the new inline comment.
Finally: The practice of inline replies have been used in this a.h.r for as
long as I have been subscribed, which now exceeds 30 years. However it seems
that you have just started to complain about it. Why is that? Is it because I
recently pointed out to you that posters from the web-based forums never saw
your ridiculous admonishments because the admins have the good sense to filter
you? Having lost that practice as a means to show us how smart you think you
are, have you now (incorrectly) started to complain about another acceptable
practice in the Usenet arena? Just curious...