I have this item in my central heating system and want to confirm what
it does. is it a de-aerator?

Does anybody recognise the manufacturer and which is the inlet/outlet
port, upper or lower.

http://www.tecno.demon.co.uk/_photo/plumbing_item.jpg

On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 19:23:08 +0100, Tim
wrote:

I have this item in my central heating system and want to confirm what
it does. is it a de-aerator?

Does anybody recognise the manufacturer and which is the inlet/outlet
port, upper or lower.

http://www.tecno.demon.co.uk/_photo/plumbing_item.jpg


Yes that's exactly what it is.

I'm not sure who the manufacturer of this one is, but the concept is
the same as the Myson Aerjec. Look at www.bes.ltd.uk part number
11334

On yours, the feed expansion pipe would connect at the left (15mm
pipe) and the vent goes where you have marked it.

The purpose is to get the FE and vent pipes close together; then the
other 22mm pipes are on the main circuit. The water swirls in the
cylindrical pot and even fairly fine air bubbles will tend to rise up
and out at the vent.


--

..andy

On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 19:23:08 +0100, Tim
wrote:

I have this item in my central heating system and want to confirm what
it does. is it a de-aerator?

It is a de-aerator for a vented home central heating system..

I had an identical one. There were others.


Does anybody recognise the manufacturer

It was bought unboxed from a builders merchant. Maybe 25 years ago.The
manufacturer was not indicated.

and which is the inlet/outlet
port, upper or lower.

I'd guess in at the top, out at the bottom so that the flow from the
inlet doesn't sweep the bubbles up and around the outlet such that
some go with the flow. Probably doesn't make a lot of difference
unless air is continually entering the system which cannot be
tolerated anyway.

They seem to have been de-emphasised now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding of pumping -over.

DG

They seem to have been de-emphasised now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding of pumping -over.

Thanks Andy & Derek. Curiously the heating installation had this
deaerator and a couple of those ball float designs, which seemed a bit
redundant to me.

Derek, I am curious of your remark about the 'better understanding of
pumping'. Could you clarify this or point me to a URL please?

Best Tim

On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 22:55:32 +0100, Tim
wrote:

They seem to have been de-emphasised now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding of pumping -over.

Thanks Andy & Derek. Curiously the heating installation had this
deaerator and a couple of those ball float designs, which seemed a bit
redundant to me.

Derek, I am curious of your remark about the 'better understanding of
pumping'. Could you clarify this or point me to a URL please?


I also had the Myson one that Andy mentioned. That one was new and
boxed and came with an propaganda leaflet that illustrated all the
myriad possible "wrong" ways of setting up the feed and expansion,
flow and return piping, and the siting of the pump in order to avoid
such nasties as "pumping - over" or negative pressure in parts of the
system.

The leaflet implied the one sure fire way of avoiding all the problems
was by using a Myson Aerjec.

Apparently this was an issue of concern at the time, this was 25 years
ago. Since one encounters these things so infrequently and most new
build houses since then have been built with wet c/h without a
proprietory de-aerator, I presume that eventually the optimum set up
became the norm.

I could find no mention of de-aerators on the Myson site and their
piping layout diagrams don't include them.

DG

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 09:27:44 +0100, Derek Geldard
wrote:

On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 22:55:32 +0100, Tim
wrote:

They seem to have been de-emphasised now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding of pumping -over.

Thanks Andy & Derek. Curiously the heating installation had this
deaerator and a couple of those ball float designs, which seemed a bit
redundant to me.

Derek, I am curious of your remark about the 'better understanding of
pumping'. Could you clarify this or point me to a URL please?


I also had the Myson one that Andy mentioned. That one was new and
boxed and came with an propaganda leaflet that illustrated all the
myriad possible "wrong" ways of setting up the feed and expansion,
flow and return piping, and the siting of the pump in order to avoid
such nasties as "pumping - over" or negative pressure in parts of the
system.

The leaflet implied the one sure fire way of avoiding all the problems
was by using a Myson Aerjec.

Apparently this was an issue of concern at the time, this was 25 years
ago. Since one encounters these things so infrequently and most new
build houses since then have been built with wet c/h without a
proprietory de-aerator, I presume that eventually the optimum set up
became the norm.

I could find no mention of de-aerators on the Myson site and their
piping layout diagrams don't include them.

DG

Yes, in terms of avoiding sucking down or pumping over, positioning
the vent pipe and FE pipe within 150mm of one another on the circuit
avoids the problem.

However, some people managed and still do manage to put one on each
side of the boiler (wrong because of boiler flow resistance) or worse
still on either side of the pump.

Air separators effectively force the plumbing to be done correctly.

The second aspect is that the design of the pot swirls the water and
helps get the air out after initial filling. I fitted one on a
system a few years ago that had has the FE and vent pipes simply
connected to the circuit within 150mm and it did make an improvement,
although not a vast one.

Better yet is to convert the system to sealed operation if the boiler
is OK for that.



--

..andy

In uk.d-i-y, Derek Geldard wrote:
On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 22:55:32 +0100, Tim
wrote:

They seem to have been de-emphasised now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding of pumping -over.

Thanks Andy & Derek. Curiously the heating installation had this
deaerator and a couple of those ball float designs, which seemed a bit
redundant to me.

Derek, I am curious of your remark about the 'better understanding of
pumping'. Could you clarify this or point me to a URL please?


I also had the Myson one that Andy mentioned. That one was new and
boxed and came with an propaganda leaflet that illustrated all the
myriad possible "wrong" ways of setting up the feed and expansion,
flow and return piping, and the siting of the pump in order to avoid
such nasties as "pumping - over" or negative pressure in parts of the
system.

The leaflet implied the one sure fire way of avoiding all the problems
was by using a Myson Aerjec.

Apparently this was an issue of concern at the time, this was 25 years
ago. Since one encounters these things so infrequently and most new
build houses since then have been built with wet c/h without a
proprietory de-aerator, I presume that eventually the optimum set up
became the norm.

We had one fitted here, in about 1997. We were having a new boiler
installed in a different room and going from a gravity-fed-hot-water
system to a fully pumped system. Pipe-routing and space considerations
meant that the layout was not what the plumber would consider ideal, and
the pump had to be located upstairs in the airing cupboard rather than
down by the boiler. The plumber expressed reservations about all this,
muttering something about air bubbles, and recommended a de-aerator.
This could all be complete ******** of course, but it made some kind of
sense to me in that a pump operating in "pull" mode instead of "push"
mode might cause air induction or make air come out of solution.

Anyway it's no trouble, and I don't imagine it cost very much. The
boiler has always made quite a lot of air-bubbling noises, though.

--
Mike Barnes

Better yet is to convert the system to sealed operation if the boiler
is OK for that.

I am not sure if I am up to that task just yet!

I found the manufacture of the device. It's a Tower Airjet Air
Seperator and there's a PDF app note with its manufacturer detail
he
http://www.tfc-group.co.uk/~sa_webapp/run.asp?page=200

"Derek ^" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 19:23:08 +0100, Tim
wrote:

I have this item in my central heating system and want to confirm what
it does. is it a de-aerator?

It is a de-aerator for a vented home central heating system..

I had an identical one. There were others.


Does anybody recognise the manufacturer

It was bought unboxed from a builders merchant. Maybe 25 years ago.The
manufacturer was not indicated.

and which is the inlet/outlet
port, upper or lower.

I'd guess in at the top, out at the bottom so that the flow from the
inlet doesn't sweep the bubbles up and around the outlet such that
some go with the flow. Probably doesn't make a lot of difference
unless air is continually entering the system which cannot be
tolerated anyway.

They seem to have been de-emphasised
now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding
of pumping -over.

Nope. They were not liked as they could accumulate sludge and block up.
Also, many did not understand how they worked which was the main problem.
This 3 port type, as opposed to the 4 port type, is used a lot with combined
vent and feed pipe systems (one 22mm pipe into the bottom of the F&E tank
and no vent pipe over the top). On boilers capable of being sealed systems,
combined feed and vent pipes can be used and I prefer them to two-pipe feed
and vent (no pump over or air being sucked in. Some boilers makers, such as
Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe, which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole system
too.

Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Derek ^" wrote...
Tim wrote:
I have this item in my central heating system and want to confirm what
it does. is it a de-aerator?
It is a de-aerator for a vented home central heating system..
they could accumulate sludge and block up.

They do that. I have had to remove a blockage in the top pipe
of one of these with a drill, it was totally blocked. Cut pipe,
drill out blockage, recouple. PITA.

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Derek ^" wrote...
Tim wrote:
I have this item in my central heating system and want to confirm what
it does. is it a de-aerator?
It is a de-aerator for a vented home central heating system..
they could accumulate sludge and block up.

They do that. I have had to remove a blockage in the top pipe
of one of these with a drill, it was totally blocked. Cut pipe,
drill out blockage, recouple. PITA.

Best to have the 4 port with the pipe out of the bottom. extend the bottom
and have removable cap to clear out sludge and debris. Solids will drop to
the bottom.

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:59:13 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Derek ^" wrote in message


They seem to have been de-emphasised
now with the advance of sealed
systems and a better understanding
of pumping -over.

Nope. They were not liked as they could accumulate sludge and block up.
Also, many did not understand how they worked which was the main problem.
This 3 port type, as opposed to the 4 port type, is used a lot with combined
vent and feed pipe systems (one 22mm pipe into the bottom of the F&E tank
and no vent pipe over the top). On boilers capable of being sealed systems,
combined feed and vent pipes can be used and I prefer them to two-pipe feed
and vent (no pump over or air being sucked in. Some boilers makers, such as
Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe, which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole system
too.


There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

--

..andy

On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:19:03 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe, which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole
system
too.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not ,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

If a system is badly sludged, then just using desludger is not good
enough anyway. It needs to be powerflushed or some equivalent to
that.

When a boiler is changed, it should be done using the Benchmark
procedures and these include filling with inhibitor.

I do not believe that that only amounts to 5% of installations.


3/10. Must try harder.


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:19:03 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for
loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe, which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole
system
too.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not ,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

** snip appalling Mattness **

On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 21:48:49 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:19:03 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for
loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe, which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole
system
too.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not ,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?


I don't buy that either. You are pulling numbers from parts of your
anatomy from whence the sun don't shine....


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 21:48:49 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:19:03 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for
loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the
air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe,
which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole
system
too.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not ,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

I don't buy that either.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 00:45:30 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 21:48:49 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:19:03 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for
loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the
air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe,
which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the whole
system
too.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not ,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

I don't buy that either.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

Do you really think, in your wildest dreams that if somebody isn't
going to be bothered to have their system correctly dosed with
inhibitor that they will bother with one of these or that the type of
fitter that they are likely to employ will bother either?

You're going to have to try a lot harder to win that promotional
flight of ducks set for your living room wall. Don't forget that
it's a new month now and time for a new boiler of the month...

--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 00:45:30 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 21:48:49 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:19:03 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

Baxi and Potterton, stipulate that these air ejectors should be on
the
combined feed and vent pipe to expel air. They work very well. With
combined feed and vent a very low head can be obtained, so ideal for
loft
fitting of boilers. To alleviate fears of sludge accumulating in the
air
ejectors it is best to fit a Maganclean on the boiler return pipe,
which
grabs magnetite that causes sludge. The Magnaclean protects the
whole
system
too.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not
,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

I don't buy that either.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

Do you really think, in your wildest dreams that if somebody isn't
going to be bothered to have their system correctly dosed with
inhibitor that they will bother with one of these or that the type of
fitter that they are likely to employ will bother either?

Matt, most people don't know that you need to redose, hence descaling and
powerflushing is big business.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 13:18:33 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
..

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not
,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

I don't buy that either.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

Do you really think, in your wildest dreams that if somebody isn't
going to be bothered to have their system correctly dosed with
inhibitor that they will bother with one of these or that the type of
fitter that they are likely to employ will bother either?

Matt, most people don't know that you need to redose, hence descaling and
powerflushing is big business.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?


No and neither have you.


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 13:18:33 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
.

There is no reason that this problem should happen or one of these
devices needed as long as the system is correctly dosed with
inhibitor. It is dealing with the problem in the wrong way.

Matt, on a boiler change a Maganclean I would say is essential as
desludger
never gets it all out. If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are
not
,
then the Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

This is bull****.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then
the
Magnaclean prevents blockages. Got it?

I don't buy that either.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

Do you really think, in your wildest dreams that if somebody isn't
going to be bothered to have their system correctly dosed with
inhibitor that they will bother with one of these or that the type of
fitter that they are likely to employ will bother either?

Matt, most people don't know that you need to redose, hence descaling and
powerflushing is big business.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?


No and neither have you.

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

Christian.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How any service engineers replace inhibitor? How many bother to
check if it has been replaced?

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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How any service engineers replace inhibitor? How many bother
to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should last many years despite what it
recommends on labels, the statistics you quote bear little resemblance to
reality.

I think many would agree in principle that inhibitor is often overlooked,
nevertheless inhibitor is only lost through leaks or work which required
draining where it wasn't replaced through negligence. I cannot believe that
only 5% of systems have sufficient inhibitor to prevent corrosion.

"Fred" wrote in message
...

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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How many service engineers replace inhibitor? How many
bother to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should
last many years despite what it recommends on labels, the statistics you
quote bear little resemblance to reality.

I haven't quoted ant stats.

I think many would agree in principle that inhibitor is often overlooked,
nevertheless inhibitor is only lost through leaks or work which required
draining where it wasn't replaced through negligence. I cannot believe
that only 5% of systems have sufficient inhibitor to prevent corrosion.

As you seen to think inhibitor has an amazing life expectancy, can you put a
time of its usefulness before it requires replacing? 10 years, 20 years, 30
years? And will you back this up please.

On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:00:04 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Fred" wrote in message
...

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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How many service engineers replace inhibitor? How many
bother to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should
last many years despite what it recommends on labels, the statistics you
quote bear little resemblance to reality.

I haven't quoted ant stats.

Yes you have. You said that 95% are not. Where is your source for
this statistic?



--

..andy

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:07:20 +0100, Fred wrote:


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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How any service engineers replace inhibitor? How many bother
to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should last many years despite what it
recommends on labels, the statistics you quote bear little resemblance to
reality.

I think many would agree in principle that inhibitor is often overlooked,
nevertheless inhibitor is only lost through leaks or work which required
draining where it wasn't replaced through negligence. I cannot believe that
only 5% of systems have sufficient inhibitor to prevent corrosion.

IME probably 20% have inhibitor (i.e I can detect it by the look and
smell when I drain down).

I'd about 10-20% of systems have dire faults and serious corrosion,
usually brought about by wrong pipework or a failed expansion vessel.

That leaves a large number which have neither faults nor inhibitor,
generally these don't seem to come to a lot of harm unless electrolytic
corrosion begins.



--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html
Choosing a Boiler FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/BoilerChoice.html

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:00:04 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .

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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in
message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then
the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is
there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How many service engineers replace inhibitor? How many
bother to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should
last many years despite what it recommends on labels, the statistics
you
quote bear little resemblance to reality.

I haven't quoted ant stats.

Yes you have. You said that 95% are not. Where is your source for
this statistic?

Me. I know these things.

On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 20:47:31 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:



I haven't quoted ant stats.

Yes you have. You said that 95% are not. Where is your source for
this statistic?

Me. I know these things.


Oh I see.

I think you are confusing knowing and being known.

It's a similar concept to "some men are discovered, others are found
out".

You might be confusing all of this with the conversation that you had
with Frau Farbissina.

Next time the magnawotsit rep comes in tell him that you're going to
place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly
elaborate and exotic death.

See whether he's willing to swap the Crackerjack pencil that he's
currently offering for a puffy anorak.

Realistically, on current sales volumes, even with bogus ststistics,
the marketing budget is not going to run to that holiday in Eyebyeza
that you so badly want.

You could try sticking out for the iPod Nano, but that is probably
push and go.


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 20:47:31 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:



I haven't quoted ant stats.

Yes you have. You said that 95% are not. Where is your source for
this statistic?

Me. I know these things.


Oh I see.

That's better

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

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:00:04 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Fred" wrote in message
. ..

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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in
message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then
the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is
there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How many service engineers replace inhibitor? How many
bother to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should
last many years despite what it recommends on labels, the statistics
you
quote bear little resemblance to reality.

I haven't quoted ant stats.

Yes you have. You said that 95% are not. Where is your source for
this statistic?

Me. I know these things.

They say 82% of statistics are made up on the spot.

"Fred" wrote in message
...

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

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:00:04 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .

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

"Christian McArdle" wrote in
message
...
Matt, again..."If the system is not re-dosed, and 95% are not, then
the
Magnaclean prevents blockages". Got it?

The same ignorance that would cause people not to replenish their
inhibitor
will predicate against the use of an expensive alternative.

If it is fitted on a boiler change or new installation then it is
there,
even when the house changes hands and the new owners are ignorant of
inhibitor. How many service engineers replace inhibitor? How many
bother to check if it has been replaced?


Given that in reality inhibitor should
last many years despite what it recommends on labels, the statistics
you
quote bear little resemblance to reality.

I haven't quoted ant stats.

Yes you have. You said that 95% are not. Where is your source for
this statistic?

Me. I know these things.

They say 82% of statistics are made up on the spot.

They don't. You made that up.