Doctor Drivel wrote:

... A foolproof way is have a tee inside the tank on the hot pipe from
the panels. From this tee take a small bore pipe up to the same height
as the top of the panel...

There's no need to go that high. A foot would suffice.

It "probably" would, but I said "foolproof".

No accounting for those who doubt gravity :-)

Nick

Doctor Drivel wrote:
wrote in message

If you have any reference or link to sandblasting dishwashers I'd be
curious to see it, but I'm doubtful.

Did you ever feel that powder? My first dishwasher would clean the chrome
over grills and shelves spotless, as it sand blasted them. The powder was
course and took a long time to dissolve. The new one does not. But the
crockery is much cleaner.

a mild abrasive maybe, thrown out by the pssive plastic arms sure, but
a fair way from sandblasing Maybe if I motorise the arms the
ovenware will come out better!


NT

Rob Dekker wrote:
Just out of curiousity, how do you get away paying only 20 UK pounds/year?

David Hansen wrote:
On 9 Mar 2006 19:10:56 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

When are folks going to wake up and notice the £20 was a solar system
saving figure, not an annual HW spend figure.

Some people did notice that it was a saving figure. In fact I
suspect that everyone noticed it.

However, several people thought it was a very low figure.

You also need to wake up before posting. Read the bit you snipped.
Honestly!


NT

Neurotic imbecile!

PLONK

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Gooey TARBALLS" wrote in message
news:YQkQf.3744$wH5.3216@trnddc02...
Yes, well said. Let's cater to those active folks following the
threads.

Top poster

** PLONK **

If correct trimming is used then posting style doesn't matter on iota.

Top posting is much more tolerant of poor trimming or no trimming and
much easier to follow and read. The start poition is always the same
unlike bottom or interlaced confusion.

Your browser is not capable of bottom posting totally. Have a look at
what you posted in both places.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...
So you use intelligence. If all top post you follow, if all bottom
post you
follow. But some dickheads are told of their unconformity and still
ignore
the majority and screw up threads. These should all be killfiled by
the
group users, then they will **** off.

LOL. Best of luck.

Let's face it there are no Usenet rules and never was any.

Reality prevails whether you like it or not.

"Steve O'Hara-Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 20:52:33 -0500
"Solar Flare" wrote:

Welcome to the 90s. Which text was yours now and why isn't it with
your header identifying it?

Hard to tell some moron stripped the conventional quote marks
while leaving the attributions.

Did you know that Usenet convention say that more than 3 lines of
signature is considered rude and spamming or advertising?

4 lines - read the RFCs.

--
C:WIN | Directable Mirror
Arrays
The computer obeys and wins. | A better way to focus
the sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licences available
see
|
http://www.sohara.org/

LOL.

To each his or her own I guess. I drink beer occasionally to refresh
myself not foam at the mouth.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Solar Flare" wrote in message
.. .
Cold showers and warm beer

Why freeze the flavour of good British beer?

Nice one Mary, spoken like a true Yorkshire Lass. Bitters are
supposed to
be drunk at just below room temperature, not with ice forming on the
top.
One way to ruin a bitter, is over chill it. The Yanks are more into
fine
beers these days, as pale ale is big over there, so all is not lost.
The
Aussie are still way behind though. They don't know the meaning of
beer that
is why they call it XXXX.

Don't blame me, I ran the Kerry effort in my town.

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , "Andy Luckman
(AJL Electronics)" writes
In article Zz3Qf.6150$sp4.4886@trnddc01, Gooey TARBALLS
wrote:

And, I suspect I am an A.S.S. (American Senile Sitizen)

Possibly, but a troll certainly. Even an American can't
really be that stupid.

The fact that Bush got re-elected proves that a significant proportion of
them are ...

--
geoff

In article , raden
wrote:

Possibly, but a troll certainly. Even an American can't
really be that stupid.

The fact that Bush got re-elected proves that a significant proportion
of them are ...

Fair comment, but then maybe a bit hypocritical? Look who the UK electorate
put into power. :-)

Just how *do* you spell hypocritical?

--
AJL Electronics (G6FGO) Ltd : Satellite and TV aerial systems
http://www.classicmicrocars.co.uk : http://www.ajlelectronics.co.uk

In article ,
David Turner, Island Computers US Corp wrote:

Figure it out

Figure WHAT out? You posted upside down and so provided no trimmed
context.

--
AJL

In article , Solar Flare
wrote:


Many group top post completely and more are following suit because of
the ridiculousness of some old paradigms.

Looks like trolling season has started.

*plonk*

--
AJL

On 10 Mar 2006 16:49:59 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

You also need to wake up before posting.

Not only can you read my mind, but you can read it back in time.
That would be fascinating, if you were able to do it.

Read the bit you snipped.

I did. However, the figure remains a low one, no matter where it
came from.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)" wrote in message
. ..
In article , raden
wrote:

Possibly, but a troll certainly. Even an American can't
really be that stupid.

The fact that Bush got re-elected proves that a significant proportion
of them are ...

Now Maxie!!! They voted in Arnie!!! Fabulous.

Fair comment, but then maybe a bit
hypocritical? Look who the UK electorate
put into power. :-)

I know. Thatcher for all that time when poverty, deprivation, waste and
destruction was all around.

I know you can't read this so it won't matter

PLONK

"Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
David Turner, Island Computers US Corp
wrote:

Figure it out

Figure WHAT out? You posted upside down and so provided no trimmed
context.

--
AJL

"Solar Flare" wrote in message
...
LOL. Best of luck.

Let's face it there are no Usenet rules and never was any.

There are, however, rules of grammar.

Farewell.

Are the rules for both, grammar and grampar?

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Solar Flare" wrote in message
...
LOL. Best of luck.

Let's face it there are no Usenet rules and never was any.

There are, however, rules of grammar.

Farewell.

Andrew Heggie wrote:
wrote:

I'm not really following you there, but theres no need for any valve or
air hole on the pump side. The pump will be an impellor type, not a
piston, so the water drains back through it once stopped.

It's a bit like those bird drinkers where the reservoir of water is inverted
and the column of water only allows water into the drinker when the level
in the drinker drops and allows a bubble of air in. In this case we have a
loop of pipe and panel filled with water, the legs of the loop will not
drain as there is nothing to replace the water column, so you need a way of
bleeding air into the top of the loop to break the stagnant syphon.

The panel output leg has a 1/4" hole near the top of the tank. As soon
as water stops flowing, the water in the output leg is replaced by air
that enters this hole. At this piont you then have a panel full of
water, and one leg full of water, one empty. The lot empties back
through the pump. There is no need for any hole high up. The one must
is the panel output piping must be at least half inch, not quarter
inch, so that air can go up and water down at the same time.


This falls apart if the height difference of the solar circuit top to
bottom exceeds about 9m.

not many lofts that high

No but you may be tempted to house the pump and F&E tank on the ground floor
or basement with the panels at the top. As someone pointed out if pumping
power is high the electricity cost could negate the value of the solar
input.

There are no doubt many ways to cock a design up. It seems logical to
confine our examinations to competently designed setups.


£63 per panel? Use a few, space heat in winter, water in summer. Run
the numbers to see how many gets you best result.

Yes that's what I thought, maybe worth considering for a new build, pitched
roof with a few cms of celotex underneath, I'd have to review the nuances
of "warm" roofing again.

You wont get 75% efficiency for hot water, but can for hot air.

It looked like this was possible from the SAP pdf, what makes you think it
will be worse on water and better on air?

Air target temp is low, the output air need only be mildly warm, low
temp panel operation equals good efficiency. With hot water the target
temp is close to the stagnation temp of the panel, so once the water is
halfway hot the panel efficiency is way down. If the water ever reaches
panel stagnation temp, efficiency has by then dropped to zero. This is
one of the various plusses of hot air panels.

Curious how you plan to use the same panels for both water and air


NT

wrote in message
oups.com...
dennis@home wrote:
wrote in message

PS maybe 'mericans arent familiar with the fact that British washing
machines dont use a hot water feed.

Most of them do.
There aren't many cold feed only machines in Currys.

Pedant mode: they dont use the hot fill for most washes, only for the
boiling washes will they use it.

There isn't a 'boiling wash' on our machine, I've never had one which had -
since the gas boiler but that was hardly a machine.

I doubt that there are any 'boiling washes'. They're not necessary and
harmful to some fabrics.

Well, you said you were here to learn.

Mary

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out with PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet. There,
replies were required to be top posted, and so the habit was formed and
works for me. It seems a waste to have to search the bottom of the previous
message to read the reply.

"Gooey TARBALLS" wrote in message
news:1g6Qf.29262$G%2.7859@trnddc07...
Nope. I'm a top poster and wish all of you were. Its just much easier for
me
to read top of posts in my outlook. These posts are a temporal thing. You
read the first post, then read the Reponses one after the other in the
order
they arrived. You already read the "subject post" or "original," and are
looking to read the replies/responses. Why would you want to have to
re-read
the original question/post before being able to read each response?

Now you bottom feeders may be using some other mail reader. And maybe you
can recommend one better suited to the task than Outlook. But, as I said,
from this perspective it seems everyone should change and do it (respond)
my
way.

============================================
"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:16:57 GMT, "Gooey TARBALLS"
wrote:

I'm new to these groups. And I think I "top post." That is, add my
comments
above the text that inspired my response in the first place. From my
perspective (using MS Outlook) it makes it easier to follow the threads
reading the top thread and clicking on the various responses if the
respondents "top post."

If they post under a copy of the original, I have to read it again
scrolling
down to find the response. Not the easiest approach (again, from my
perspective).

And, I suspect I am an A.S.S. (American Senile Sitizen)

Enjoy

You seem reasonable, so I suppose I could try to explain all the
things you haven't considered. But the subject has already been beaten
to death. Since you're new, you might want to set aside a few months
to read all about it in the archives. :-) Or save yourself some time
and consider this: it's the Solar Flare's (AKA Gymmy Bob and John P
Bengi) favorite subject, and he's an intractable nitwit top poster.
That ought to be enough to scare any sensible person into bottom
posting.

Wayne

Mary Fisher wrote:

There isn't a 'boiling wash' on our machine, I've never had one which had -
since the gas boiler but that was hardly a machine.

I doubt that there are any 'boiling washes'. They're not necessary and
harmful to some fabrics.

My machine has an almost-boiling wash - 90C/194F.

On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:39:51 UTC, "EXT" etonks@sunstormADD-DOT-COM top
posted:

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out with PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet. There,
replies were required to be top posted, and so the habit was formed and
works for me. It seems a waste to have to search the bottom of the previous
message to read the reply.

What you're telling us is that you're too old to learn new tricks..

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
Avenue Supplies, http://avenuesupplies.co.uk

"too old to learn new tricks"

All these insulting comments. He is telling you "it works for me," and, I
believe, "its a better approach." I agree.

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:39:51 UTC, "EXT" etonks@sunstormADD-DOT-COM top
posted:

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out with
PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet. There,
replies were required to be top posted, and so the habit was formed and
works for me. It seems a waste to have to search the bottom of the
previous
message to read the reply.

What you're telling us is that you're too old to learn new tricks..

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
Avenue Supplies, http://avenuesupplies.co.uk

In article
Bob Eager wrote:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:39:51 UTC, "EXT" etonks@sunstormADD-DOT-COM top
posted:

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out with PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet. There,
replies were required to be top posted, and so the habit was formed and
works for me. It seems a waste to have to search the bottom of the previous
message to read the reply.

What you're telling us is that you're too old to learn new tricks..


This Internet thing will never catch on anyway.

Bob Eager wrote:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:39:51 UTC, "EXT" etonks@sunstormADD-DOT-COM top
posted:

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out with PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet.

PORFS?

A Porfs is a porfs, of course, of couse
And no one sends mail through porfs
That is, of course, unless the porfs
is the hapless IBM.

Go right to the source
And ask the porfs
It's not like morse,
where a standard's enforced.

In message s.com, EXT
writes
I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out with PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet. There,
replies were required to be top posted, and so the habit was formed and
works for me. It seems a waste to have to search the bottom of the previous
message to read the reply.

Waste of time talking to you then

If you can't understand the difference between replying to an email
where the recipient knows what you're talking about and wants to access
your reply quickly and a thread in a newsgroup where there is a natural
progression where one needs to follow hot the thread develops


"Gooey TARBALLS" wrote in message
news:1g6Qf.29262$G%2.7859@trnddc07...
Nope. I'm a top poster and wish all of you were. Its just much easier for
me
to read top of posts in my outlook. These posts are a temporal thing. You
read the first post, then read the Reponses one after the other in the
order
they arrived. You already read the "subject post" or "original," and are
looking to read the replies/responses. Why would you want to have to
re-read
the original question/post before being able to read each response?

Now you bottom feeders may be using some other mail reader. And maybe you
can recommend one better suited to the task than Outlook. But, as I said,
from this perspective it seems everyone should change and do it (respond)
my
way.

============================================
"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:16:57 GMT, "Gooey TARBALLS"
wrote:

I'm new to these groups. And I think I "top post." That is, add my
comments
above the text that inspired my response in the first place. From my
perspective (using MS Outlook) it makes it easier to follow the threads
reading the top thread and clicking on the various responses if the
respondents "top post."

If they post under a copy of the original, I have to read it again
scrolling
down to find the response. Not the easiest approach (again, from my
perspective).

And, I suspect I am an A.S.S. (American Senile Sitizen)

Enjoy

You seem reasonable, so I suppose I could try to explain all the
things you haven't considered. But the subject has already been beaten
to death. Since you're new, you might want to set aside a few months
to read all about it in the archives. :-) Or save yourself some time
and consider this: it's the Solar Flare's (AKA Gymmy Bob and John P
Bengi) favorite subject, and he's an intractable nitwit top poster.
That ought to be enough to scare any sensible person into bottom
posting.

Wayne





--
geoff

In message , "Andy Luckman
(AJL Electronics)" writes
In article , raden
wrote:

Possibly, but a troll certainly. Even an American can't
really be that stupid.

The fact that Bush got re-elected proves that a significant proportion
of them are ...

Fair comment, but then maybe a bit hypocritical? Look who the UK electorate
put into power. :-)

By an electoral minority


Just how *do* you spell hypocritical?

See my sig

--
geoff

In message , "Andy Luckman
(AJL Electronics)" writes
In article , Solar Flare
wrote:


Many group top post completely and more are following suit because of
the ridiculousness of some old paradigms.

Looks like trolling season has started.

Rather, someone opened the door to Septics and we're still all x-posting

--
geoff

In message , S Viemeister
writes
Mary Fisher wrote:

There isn't a 'boiling wash' on our machine, I've never had one which had -
since the gas boiler but that was hardly a machine.

I doubt that there are any 'boiling washes'. They're not necessary and
harmful to some fabrics.

My machine has an almost-boiling wash - 90C/194F.

I don't even have a clue how to start my washing machine, that's what a
wife's for


--
geoff

No! This proves that most bottom posters love to troll for things that
don't mean **** to them.

Ignorance breeds ignorance.

Oh look! The headers are all with their respective text from the top
posters and all mixed up from the bottom feeders! What a concept.

"Gooey TARBALLS" wrote in message
news:tqEQf.9904$CI6.5525@trnddc07...
"too old to learn new tricks"

All these insulting comments. He is telling you "it works for me,"
and, I
believe, "its a better approach." I agree.

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:39:51 UTC, "EXT"
etonks@sunstormADD-DOT-COM top
posted:

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out
with
PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet.
There,
replies were required to be top posted, and so the habit was
formed and
works for me. It seems a waste to have to search the bottom of
the
previous
message to read the reply.

What you're telling us is that you're too old to learn new
tricks..

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
Avenue Supplies, http://avenuesupplies.co.uk

Usenet has no standards and publishes no "nettiquette"

"nettiquette" websites have been created to flush out all the anxiety
ridden, whiny posters that cannot handle reality...LOL


"Tony Wesley" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bob Eager wrote:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:39:51 UTC, "EXT"
etonks@sunstormADD-DOT-COM top
posted:

I have been top posting all my computerized life. I started out
with PROFS
which was an IBM mainframe email system, predating the internet.

PORFS?

A Porfs is a porfs, of course, of couse
And no one sends mail through porfs
That is, of course, unless the porfs
is the hapless IBM.

Go right to the source
And ask the porfs
It's not like morse,
where a standard's enforced.

On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:44:20 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , S Viemeister
writes
Mary Fisher wrote:

There isn't a 'boiling wash' on our machine, I've never had one which had -
since the gas boiler but that was hardly a machine.

I doubt that there are any 'boiling washes'. They're not necessary and
harmful to some fabrics.

My machine has an almost-boiling wash - 90C/194F.

I don't even have a clue how to start my washing machine, that's what a
wife's for


Absolutely. Washing, Ironing, Food, Etc.


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:44:20 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , S Viemeister
writes
Mary Fisher wrote:

There isn't a 'boiling wash' on our machine, I've never had one which
had -
since the gas boiler but that was hardly a machine.

I doubt that there are any 'boiling washes'. They're not necessary and
harmful to some fabrics.

My machine has an almost-boiling wash - 90C/194F.

I don't even have a clue how to start my washing machine, that's what a
wife's for


Absolutely. Washing, Ironing, Food, Etc.

Especially etc.

I'm off to bed now.

Mary


--

.andy

That's why women have smaller feet!


So they can get closer to the sink and stove.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...


I'm good in bed now.

Mary

The message
from Andy Hall contains these words:

I don't even have a clue how to start my washing machine, that's what a
wife's for


Absolutely. Washing, Ironing, Food, Etc.

That's why brides wear white - it's to signify their new status as a
domestic appliance.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Gooey TARBALLS wrote:

Don't blame me, I ran the Kerry effort in my town.


oh geez ....

--
Steve Spence
Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org
Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net
http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html

In article tqEQf.9904$CI6.5525@trnddc07,
Gooey TARBALLS wrote:
"too old to learn new tricks"

Senile & a troll. Just kill-file it please.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

wrote:

PS maybe 'mericans arent familiar with the fact that British washing
machines dont use a hot water feed.

NT


Many Americans don't wash clothes with hot water.


--
Steve Spence
Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org
Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net
http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html

How many women does it take to start a laundry machine?


Who cares? That's women's work.

"Guy King" wrote in message
...

That's why brides wear white - it's to signify their new status as a
domestic appliance.

You can usually pick them out with their greyed out white clothes.

"Steve Spence" wrote in message
...
Many Americans don't wash clothes with hot water.

Solar Flare wrote:
You can usually pick them out with their greyed out white clothes.

"Steve Spence" wrote in message
...
Many Americans don't wash clothes with hot water.




hmm... really? nope, not quite right. It's been a long time since
detergent required hot water. Saves a lot of energy as well.


--
Steve Spence
Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org
Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net
http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html