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  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.

I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.

Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?

As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH
boiler retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

On 10 Jan, 11:40, Tim Lamb wrote:
Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.

I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.

Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?

As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH
boiler retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb


Hi Tim
I fitted one some 15+ years ago. It's a challenge plumbingwise if
you've got only a small space; a plumber doing it would take in a long
suck of air and warm up his calculator. May well be easier with
modern plastic pipes.

My ceiling height is nominally 9ft and I've got the tank on a frame
such that it's base is 6.5ft above the floor and it just pokes through
the attic floor (with a cupboard above for wine making and the CH
header on top of that!). I'm not sure quite what counts as the head
above the stove but the bottom of the saddle tank is about 10" above
floor level.

Does that help - by all means come back with any questions.

Rob
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message
,
robgraham writes
On 10 Jan, 11:40, Tim Lamb wrote:
Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.

I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.

Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?

As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH
boiler retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb


Hi Tim
I fitted one some 15+ years ago. It's a challenge plumbingwise if
you've got only a small space; a plumber doing it would take in a long
suck of air and warm up his calculator. May well be easier with
modern plastic pipes.

My ceiling height is nominally 9ft and I've got the tank on a frame
such that it's base is 6.5ft above the floor and it just pokes through
the attic floor (with a cupboard above for wine making and the CH
header on top of that!). I'm not sure quite what counts as the head
above the stove but the bottom of the saddle tank is about 10" above
floor level.

Does that help - by all means come back with any questions.


I'm grappling with the idea of 9ft. high rooms!

This is a two storey farmhouse with an *included attic* construction so
in most places upstairs I can easily lay a hand flat on the ceiling.

The intended boiler position is almost directly below the airing
cupboard and, at a pinch, I can bring the gravity riser in at floor
level.

My existing hot tank stands on the floor and terminates just below the
ceiling! Immersion heaters have to be fitted from the loft.

My first stumbling block is failing to understand the neutraliser
installation instructions downloaded from their website. For instance
boilers are categorised into 4 classes without explaining whether this
refers to the existing boiler or the one you wish to add!

As Dunsley seem willing to get involved in the system design, I should
perhaps write to them explaining my intentions and see if they can
clarify things.

It is reassuring to know that someone has a successful installation:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

On 10 Jan, 21:32, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message
,
robgraham writes



On 10 Jan, 11:40, Tim Lamb wrote:
Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.


I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.


Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?


As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH
boiler retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)


regards
--
Tim Lamb


Hi Tim
I fitted one some 15+ years ago. *It's a challenge plumbingwise if
you've got only a small space; a plumber doing it would take in a long
suck of air and warm up his calculator. *May well be easier with
modern plastic pipes.


My ceiling height is nominally 9ft and I've got the tank on a frame
such that it's base is 6.5ft above the floor and it just pokes through
the attic floor (with a cupboard above for wine making and the CH
header on top of that!). *I'm not sure quite what counts as the head
above the stove but the bottom of the saddle tank is about 10" above
floor level.


Does that help - by all means come back with any questions.


I'm grappling with the idea of 9ft. high rooms!

This is a two storey farmhouse with an *included attic* construction so
in most places upstairs I can easily lay a hand flat on the ceiling.

The intended boiler position is almost directly below the airing
cupboard and, at a pinch, I can bring the gravity riser in at floor
level.

My existing hot tank stands on the floor and terminates just below the
ceiling! Immersion heaters have to be fitted from the loft.

My first stumbling block is failing to understand the neutraliser
installation instructions downloaded from their website. For instance
boilers are categorised into 4 classes without explaining whether this
refers to the existing boiler or the one you wish to add!

As Dunsley seem willing to get involved in the system design, I should
perhaps write to them explaining my intentions and see if they can
clarify things.

It is reassuring to know that someone has a successful installation:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb


Tim

Firstly I've found the boiler classification from my old datasheet:-
1 Solid fuel boiler not controlled by a water sensing thermostat
2 Ditto controlled
3 Conventional gas/oil fired boilers with low resistance heat
exchangers
4 Low water content, high resistance gas boilers.

I'm a bit puzzled as to your concern about the height of your tank
coil; I haven't explored the Dunsley website extensively and I may
have missed something but what I did see was that a head of 350mm is
quoted as the minimum. On the basis of that I think it is reasonable
to assume they mean above the top of the stove, or at least the centre
of the output pipes

If I understand your house description the tank is sitting on the
upper storey floor, ie some 7/8 ft above the ground floor where the
wood burner will be. I've measured my set up and there's 1.25m from
the stove outlet to the bottom of the R type Neutraliser.

I was advised against the complex plumbing arrangement that Dunsley
show on their site and in the leaflet I have. They are keen in both
on the accelerated gravitational flow system involving an injection
T. I just used 28mm pipe - mine's a type 1 boiler so I rely on the
ordinary vented tank to be the dump - over 20 years use and there's
never been a problem. What I do have is a home brewed differential
thermostat on the stove and some electronic logic to shut off the oil
burner when the wood stove is up to temperature.

Hope that helps a bit

Rob
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message
,
robgraham writes
Does that help - by all means come back with any questions.


I'm grappling with the idea of 9ft. high rooms!

This is a two storey farmhouse with an *included attic* construction so
in most places upstairs I can easily lay a hand flat on the ceiling.

The intended boiler position is almost directly below the airing
cupboard and, at a pinch, I can bring the gravity riser in at floor
level.

My existing hot tank stands on the floor and terminates just below the
ceiling! Immersion heaters have to be fitted from the loft.

My first stumbling block is failing to understand the neutraliser
installation instructions downloaded from their website. For instance
boilers are categorised into 4 classes without explaining whether this
refers to the existing boiler or the one you wish to add!

As Dunsley seem willing to get involved in the system design, I should
perhaps write to them explaining my intentions and see if they can
clarify things.

It is reassuring to know that someone has a successful installation:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb


Tim

Firstly I've found the boiler classification from my old datasheet:-
1 Solid fuel boiler not controlled by a water sensing thermostat
2 Ditto controlled
3 Conventional gas/oil fired boilers with low resistance heat
exchangers
4 Low water content, high resistance gas boilers.


Right! Does this refer to the existing CH boiler or the one you are
trying to link up? My existing is a Potterton Profile which I guess
comes into the conventional gas/oil fired boiler with low resistance
heat exchanger category 3.

I'm a bit puzzled as to your concern about the height of your tank
coil; I haven't explored the Dunsley website extensively and I may
have missed something but what I did see was that a head of 350mm is
quoted as the minimum. On the basis of that I think it is reasonable
to assume they mean above the top of the stove, or at least the centre
of the output pipes


Yes. I will have a gravity head of about 6ft.

If I understand your house description the tank is sitting on the
upper storey floor, ie some 7/8 ft above the ground floor where the
wood burner will be. I've measured my set up and there's 1.25m from
the stove outlet to the bottom of the R type Neutraliser.


OK I am a bit concerned that the return from the tank coil is very close
to the floor. Fitting a towel rail would be simple enough.

I was advised against the complex plumbing arrangement that Dunsley
show on their site and in the leaflet I have. They are keen in both
on the accelerated gravitational flow system involving an injection
T. I just used 28mm pipe - mine's a type 1 boiler so I rely on the
ordinary vented tank to be the dump - over 20 years use and there's
never been a problem. What I do have is a home brewed differential
thermostat on the stove and some electronic logic to shut off the oil
burner when the wood stove is up to temperature.


er... do you not have motorised valves routing water into the coil or CH
or both? I suppose this is their fancy electrically fail open valve.

I really need to study this much more carefully in order to ask sensible
questions. Thanks.

regards

--
Tim Lamb


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.

I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.

Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?

As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH boiler
retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)

regards
--
Tim Lamb


They are a total and utter waste of expensive time. Get a heat bank
/thermal store which does the same, a neutral point, but far more.

For explanation:
http://www.heatweb.com

These do bespoke stainless steel versions.
http://www.advanceappliances.co.uk/g...e_systems.html


  #7   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

On 12 Jan, 00:22, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
"Tim Lamb" wrote in message

...

Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.


I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.


Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?


As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH boiler
retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)


regards
--
Tim Lamb


They are a total and utter waste of expensive time. *Get a heat bank
/thermal store which does the same, a neutral point, but far more.

For explanation:http://www.heatweb.com

These do bespoke stainless steel versions.http://www.advanceappliances.co..uk/...e_systems.html


Yes,DD, you're probably right, but 20+ years ago the concept of
heatbanks wasn't universal and this was the accepted solution AFAIK.
It works for me. BUT, and this may well be relevent to the OP too,
the problem is the lack of head generally in small older properties to
drive hot water at a useable pressure.

I have been looking at converting my system to a heatbank
configuration, as the electric shower is only just acceptable in the
winter and the extending mixer tap in the kitchen is a joke, all
because this is a single storey farm cottage.

Rob
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"robgraham" wrote in message
...

Yes,DD, you're probably right, but 20+ years
ago the concept of heatbanks wasn't universal
and this was the accepted solution AFAIK.
It works for me.


Cable brakes on cars work to a degree too. I don't see makers using them
any more.

BUT, and this may well be relevent
to the OP too, the problem is the lack
of head generally in small older properties to
drive hot water at a useable pressure.


Well use the mains. Their pumps are free.

I have been looking at converting my
system to a heatbank configuration, as
the electric shower is only just acceptable in the
winter and the extending mixer tap in the kitchen
is a joke, all because this is a single storey farm cottage.


Good idea. Keep it on the cold mains.

  #9   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


Firstly I've found the boiler classification from my old datasheet:-
1 *Solid fuel boiler not controlled by a water sensing thermostat
2 *Ditto controlled
3 *Conventional gas/oil fired boilers with low resistance heat
exchangers
4 *Low water content, high resistance gas boilers.


Right! Does this refer to the existing CH boiler or the one you are
trying to link up? My existing is a Potterton Profile which I guess
comes into the conventional gas/oil fired boiler with low resistance
heat exchanger category 3.


Oil CH boiler (type 3) goes in one set of ports, uncontrolled wood
burner (type 1) goes in second set of ports.

er... do you not have motorised valves routing water into the coil or CH
or both? I suppose this is their fancy electrically fail open valve.


One motorised valve in feed to tank only - driven closed when CH is
called for and the CH pump is running. If I remember rightly the
logic makes sure that all heat using sources are available if the wood
burner gets hot. I seem also to remember that 'electrically fail open
valve' is the norm.

I would support DD's comment that you might well also consider the
heatbank arrangement. The Neutraliser is a mini heatbank in reality,
and the cost and complexity of fitting might well be put to giving you
mains pressure ho****er too.

Rob
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
.. .
Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.

I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too
low for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.

Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into
the loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?

As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH
boiler retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)

regards
-- Tim Lamb


They are a total and utter waste of expensive time. Get a heat bank
/thermal store which does the same, a neutral point, but far more.

For explanation:
http://www.heatweb.com


An interesting site. A minor criticism is that the descriptive notes to
their explanatory diagrams do not display legibly in my version of
Explorer.

Prevention of *boiling* is fundamental to any unattended solid fuel
appliance but this is the first time I have seen mains cold water, run
to waste, suggested as an overheat prevention measure.

An initial reaction is concern at the number of additional pumps! I find
my existing system, run all year on demand, needs a new pump every 6
years. Currently I am changing to the adaptive version in the hope of
quieter operation near control temperature and better pump life.

These do bespoke stainless steel versions.
http://www.advanceappliances.co.uk/g...e_systems.html


I'll have a closer look when I have more time. An initial reaction is
that a simple neutraliser and associated controls is likely to be much
cheaper as a retro-fit. Where was your system when we were making
decisions in 1994?

regards



--
Tim Lamb


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message
,
robgraham writes

Firstly I've found the boiler classification from my old datasheet:-
1 *Solid fuel boiler not controlled by a water sensing thermostat
2 *Ditto controlled
3 *Conventional gas/oil fired boilers with low resistance heat
exchangers
4 *Low water content, high resistance gas boilers.


Right! Does this refer to the existing CH boiler or the one you are
trying to link up? My existing is a Potterton Profile which I guess
comes into the conventional gas/oil fired boiler with low resistance
heat exchanger category 3.


Oil CH boiler (type 3) goes in one set of ports, uncontrolled wood
burner (type 1) goes in second set of ports.


Right.

er... do you not have motorised valves routing water into the coil or CH
or both? I suppose this is their fancy electrically fail open valve.


One motorised valve in feed to tank only - driven closed when CH is
called for and the CH pump is running. If I remember rightly the
logic makes sure that all heat using sources are available if the wood
burner gets hot. I seem also to remember that 'electrically fail open
valve' is the norm.


Ah. So gravity water can circulate through tank coil unless CH
operating. Are you unable to assign priorities?

I would support DD's comment that you might well also consider the
heatbank arrangement. The Neutraliser is a mini heatbank in reality,
and the cost and complexity of fitting might well be put to giving you
mains pressure ho****er too.


Yes. I really need to give this much more thought!

regards

--
Tim Lamb
  #12   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
. ..
Does anyone have practical experience of fitting one.

I have been trepidating over ordering a log burner with CH boiler
basically because I suspect the coil on my existing hot tank is too low
for either version of the neutraliser to work under gravity alone.

Raising the tank is not very practical as it would then bulge into the
loft. A second hot tank could be installed but with what benefit?

As a sideways step I have ordered a log burner which can have a CH
boiler retro-fitted while I seek counsel:-)

regards
-- Tim Lamb


They are a total and utter waste of expensive time. Get a heat bank
/thermal store which does the same, a neutral point, but far more.

For explanation:
http://www.heatweb.com


An interesting site. A minor criticism is that the descriptive notes to
their explanatory diagrams do not display legibly in my version of
Explorer.


Update explorer or down Firefox for free.

Prevention of *boiling* is fundamental to any unattended solid fuel
appliance but this is the first time I have seen mains cold water, run to
waste, suggested as an overheat prevention measure.


The intial stage is run the DHW pump through the plate heat X as this takes
hot water from the top of the cylinder to the bottom.
Next stage can be running the CH.
Third, dumping mains water. (this is poorly mechanical so should work when
electrical outage)

An initial reaction is concern at the number of additional pumps! I find
my existing system, run all year on demand, needs a new pump every 6
years. Currently I am changing to the adaptive version in the hope of
quieter operation near control temperature and better pump life.


A good pump should last 10 years minium if fitted properly. Cheap pumps
dop't last.

These do bespoke stainless steel versions.
http://www.advanceappliances.co.uk/g...e_systems.html


I'll have a closer look when I have more time. An initial reaction is that
a simple neutraliser and associated controls is likely to be much cheaper
as a retro-fit. Where was your system when we were making decisions in
1994?


There were there. By fitting one now, or converting the existing cylinder
which is a cheap way, you instantly get a state-of-the-art system and bang
up to date. The benefits are immense. Do not underestimate the buffer
effect for CH, of a heat bank. A Dunsley is not cheap and does little. The
DHW was taken off via an immersed coil. Look at the Navitron web site and
forum. They have many there who use solar panels and solid fuel with heat
banks.
http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php
Type the words, heat bank, into the search and lots comes up.

  #13   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

An initial reaction is concern at the number of additional pumps! I
find my existing system, run all year on demand, needs a new pump
every 6 years. Currently I am changing to the adaptive version in the
hope of quieter operation near control temperature and better pump life.


A good pump should last 10 years minium if fitted properly. Cheap pumps
dop't last.


Huh! These are Grundfoss and far from cheap.

These do bespoke stainless steel versions.
http://www.advanceappliances.co.uk/g...e_systems.html


I'll have a closer look when I have more time. An initial reaction is
that a simple neutraliser and associated controls is likely to be
much cheaper as a retro-fit. Where was your system when we were
making decisions in 1994?


There were there. By fitting one now, or converting the existing
cylinder which is a cheap way, you instantly get a state-of-the-art
system and bang up to date. The benefits are immense. Do not
underestimate the buffer effect for CH, of a heat bank. A Dunsley is
not cheap and does little. The DHW was taken off via an immersed coil.
Look at the Navitron web site and forum. They have many there who use
solar panels and solid fuel with heat banks.
http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php
Type the words, heat bank, into the search and lots comes up.


OK. At some future stage we may want to let the main farmhouse so I am
anxious to keep the heating system understandable.

regards


--
Tim Lamb
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

On 12 Jan, 09:32, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
"robgraham" wrote in message

...

Yes,DD, you're probably right, but 20+ years
ago the concept of heatbanks wasn't universal
and this was the accepted solution AFAIK.
It works for me.


Cable brakes on cars work to a degree too. *I don't see makers using them
any more.

BUT, and this may well be relevent
to the OP too, the problem is the lack
of head generally in small older properties to
drive hot water at a useable pressure.


Well use the mains. Their pumps are free.

I have been looking at converting my
system to a heatbank configuration, as
the electric shower is only just acceptable in the
winter and the extending mixer tap in the kitchen
is a joke, all because this is a single storey farm cottage.


Good idea. Keep it on the cold mains.


Hey, hey - cable brakes ***were** a joke; I don't know how old you are
but I'm old enough to have driven all over the continent in a car with
cable brakes and you had to tweak them up every other day to avoid
going over the edge on an Alpine pass.

The Dunsley may not be the most elegant solution from your point of
view but it does the job that is required of it - without any
adjustment.

Rob
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

DD writes "A good pump should last 10 years minium if fitted
properly. Cheap pumps
dop't last."


Well I've been lucky then, or by good fortune fitted the pumps
properly, as I've just been back to my old notebooks and the pumps
have been in now since late 1988, and I wouldn't have had the cash
then to go for gold plated ones.

It could of course well be that operating to and from the neutral
point of the Dunsley reduces stress on the pumps .... possibly!!

Tomorrow of course now they will both fail!

Rob


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser



OK. At some future stage we may want to let the main farmhouse so I am
anxious to keep the heating system understandable.

regards



--
Tim Lamb


In that case I would suggest you duck out of this complication - in
fact having seen what inexperienced users do to log burners, I would
duck out of that too; recently been to two places where the log stoves
had been b******d by users not knowing how to use them.

Rob
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"robgraham" wrote in message
...

The Dunsley may not be the most elegant solution from your point of
view but it does the job that is required of it - without any
adjustment.


They area waste of time and I don't remember cable brakes.

  #18   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

An initial reaction is concern at the number of additional pumps! I find
my existing system, run all year on demand, needs a new pump every 6
years. Currently I am changing to the adaptive version in the hope of
quieter operation near control temperature and better pump life.


A good pump should last 10 years minium if fitted properly. Cheap pumps
dop't last.


Huh! These are Grundfoss and far from cheap.


Sounds like they are not fitted right.

These do bespoke stainless steel versions.
http://www.advanceappliances.co.uk/g...e_systems.html

I'll have a closer look when I have more time. An initial reaction is
that a simple neutraliser and associated controls is likely to be much
cheaper as a retro-fit. Where was your system when we were making
decisions in 1994?


There were there. By fitting one now, or converting the existing cylinder
which is a cheap way, you instantly get a state-of-the-art system and bang
up to date. The benefits are immense. Do not underestimate the buffer
effect for CH, of a heat bank. A Dunsley is not cheap and does little.
The DHW was taken off via an immersed coil. Look at the Navitron web site
and forum. They have many there who use solar panels and solid fuel with
heat banks.
http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php
Type the words, heat bank, into the search and lots comes up.


OK. At some future stage we may want to let the main farmhouse so I am
anxious to keep the heating system understandable.


What is not understandable about a heat bank?

  #19   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message
,
robgraham writes


OK. At some future stage we may want to let the main farmhouse so I am
anxious to keep the heating system understandable.

regards



--
Tim Lamb


In that case I would suggest you duck out of this complication - in
fact having seen what inexperienced users do to log burners, I would
duck out of that too; recently been to two places where the log stoves
had been b******d by users not knowing how to use them.


As you know, I am trying to proceed cautiously:-)

The original purpose of the log burner was to offset some of the cost of
gas heating; by putting heat into an open plan area. At present, the
rambling nature of a T shaped development, lots of external wall and
insulation to mid '90's standard mean that a conventional 100.000Btu
boiler struggles to change the building temperature.

Clean burn with wood and a *wrap around* boiler is a bit of a
contradiction that even the manufacturers hint at. The original plan to
provide most of DHW and CH during the evening from logs looks very
uncertain. Expecting tenants to return from work and light log fires is
hopeful in the extreme:-)

At present, we inefficiently burn logs on an open fire for Winter
evenings. The immediate plan is to instal a large log burner in the
centre of the house and gain some experience of whether this makes that
particular room untenable and how heat dissipates elsewhere in the
building. With the benefit of advice from here, consider retro-fitting
either a 10,000Btu or 27,000Btu boiler and linking to the existing
system.

By the time we get to tenants, the main boiler will probably be
condensing, some of the load will have been diverted due to building
alterations and BG will have lowered their tariff:-)

regards

Rob


--
Tim Lamb
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

A good pump should last 10 years minium if fitted properly. Cheap
pumps dop't last.


Huh! These are Grundfoss and far from cheap.


Sounds like they are not fitted right.


Hmm.. This is a fairly big system; 21 radiators all fitted with TRV's
except two on bypass. The pump becomes noisy as the system reaches
temperature, particularly on overrun and hence the change to the
adaptive type.


By fitting one now, or converting the existing cylinder which is a
cheap way, you instantly get a state-of-the-art system and bang up to
date. The benefits are immense. Do not underestimate the buffer
effect for CH, of a heat bank. A Dunsley is not cheap and does
little. The DHW was taken off via an immersed coil. Look at the
Navitron web site and forum. They have many there who use solar
panels and solid fuel with heat banks.
http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php


They are pretty negative about wood burning boilers:-(

Type the words, heat bank, into the search and lots comes up.


OK. At some future stage we may want to let the main farmhouse so I
am anxious to keep the heating system understandable.


What is not understandable about a heat bank?


Pass.

regards


--
Tim Lamb


  #21   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

A good pump should last 10 years minium if fitted properly. Cheap pumps
dop't last.

Huh! These are Grundfoss and far from cheap.


Sounds like they are not fitted right.


Hmm.. This is a fairly big system; 21 radiators all fitted with TRV's
except two on bypass. The pump becomes noisy as the system reaches
temperature, particularly on overrun and hence the change to the adaptive
type.


A Smart pump is the way, but it seems the pump would have been better on the
cool return and with adequate flow, which it appears it was not getting. I
have seen pumps that are well installed last 20 years and more. Also
cycling does not help at all. Pumps running as cool possible, no cycling
and without stress just last. The boiler pumps on heat bank when on the
return do not cycle, when anti-cycle stats are installed, and just last.

Look at the Navitron web site and forum. They have many there who use
solar panels and solid fuel with heat banks.
http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php


They are pretty negative about wood burning boilers:-(


They do talk about how they are connected.

What is not understandable about a heat bank?


Pass.


They are simple and highly effective.

  #22   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,175
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser

On 12 Jan, 00:22, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
They are a total and utter waste of expensive time. *


Thankyou for that resounding recommendation for them.

Plantpot.
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,508
Default Dunsley/Baker neutraliser


"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
...
On 12 Jan, 00:22, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
They are a total and utter waste of expensive time.


Thankyou for that resounding recommendation for them.


Wurzle, any time.

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
Dunsley Neutralizer ???? bell UK diy 12 October 26th 04 10:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:09 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"