Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
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 | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Solid fuel stove and disconnected back boiler
An octogenarian lady who lives near me has recently had full oil-fired
central heating installed in her house for free by the local authority. Sounds like a really generous scheme and indeed it is - but... Before the central heating she had electric heaters and a solid fuel Raeburn stove in the kitchen. This stove had a back boiler to give hot water. The back boiler has been "disconnected" and she was told not to use the stove any more. She recently experienced a 3 day power cut - we are in deepest rural East Lothian - but these things happen often enough. During those 2 or 3 days she had NO HEATING AT ALL. Fortunately the weather was reasonable and she is a very determined lady. Apologies for the longish introduction. Is it not quite safe to run the stove with a totally empty back boiler system? The metal will get hot but will that matter? There are copper pipes leading up to the attic where, presumably, there is an empty hot water tank. It would be a job of only a few moments to disconnect these - there are very accessible joints just above the stove level. Would such a system be safe to run? Frank |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I don't think so. you need a way of connecting the back boiler into a
circuit that can safely dissipate its heat, maybe something on the return side to the oil boiler but I'm no plumber. A Dunsley neutraliser would work, although this might not be compatible with the oil boiler, if it requires sealed pressurised operation. It would have the additional advantage of actually using the solid fuel to heat the water. An alternative, although probably too late to consider now, is to use a heat bank in these situations. The oil/gas sealed pressurised boiler heats the tank up through the indirect coil in the normal way. The solid fuel range heats through direct water circulation with the heat bank water (no valves or restrictions required) and the DHW is mains water heated off the plate exchanger. A byproduct of this design is to provide mains pressure hot drinking water. Christian. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:05:40 +0100, Frank Stacey wrote:
Sounds like a really generous scheme and indeed it is - but... They didn't do a proper job. IMHO they should have left the Rayburn still functional as a secondary heat source for HW and heating. It should be possible to retro fit a "Dunsley Neutraliser" this allows a oil/gas boiler and solid fuel boiler to co exist on the same system. Is it not quite safe to run the stove with a totally empty back boiler system? Others have pointed out that the boiler will probably burn through or the filling with fine dry sand. No experience, talk to Rayburn? There are copper pipes leading up to the attic where, presumably, there is an empty hot water tank. What sort of system has been installed? Combie (oil combies exist but are rare), presurised or normal open vented? Not sure if a Dunsley Neutraliser can be fitted to anything other than open vented... -- Cheers Dave. pam is missing e-mail |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Frank Stacey wrote:
An octogenarian lady who lives near me has recently had full oil-fired central heating installed in her house for free by the local authority. Sounds like a really generous scheme and indeed it is - but... Before the central heating she had electric heaters and a solid fuel Raeburn stove in the kitchen. This stove had a back boiler to give hot water. The back boiler has been "disconnected" and she was told not to use the stove any more. She recently experienced a 3 day power cut - we are in deepest rural East Lothian - but these things happen often enough. During those 2 or 3 days she had NO HEATING AT ALL. Fortunately the weather was reasonable and she is a very determined lady. Apologies for the longish introduction. Is it not quite safe to run the stove with a totally empty back boiler system? The metal will get hot but will that matter? There are copper pipes leading up to the attic where, presumably, there is an empty hot water tank. It would be a job of only a few moments to disconnect these - there are very accessible joints just above the stove level. Would such a system be safe to run? You are supposed to backfill the boiler with sand IIRC but apart from that its OK to use. I think the danger is the boiler side will overheat and melt, and the sand cools it and transfers the heat away. I simply left my Highlander stove water pipes unconnected, and have used it a few times since. No probs to date. Frank |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:05:40 +0100, "Frank Stacey"
wrote: An octogenarian lady who lives near me has recently had full oil-fired central heating installed in her house for free by the local authority. Sounds like a really generous scheme and indeed it is - but... Before the central heating she had electric heaters and a solid fuel Raeburn stove in the kitchen. This stove had a back boiler to give hot water. The back boiler has been "disconnected" and she was told not to use the stove any more. She recently experienced a 3 day power cut - we are in deepest rural East Lothian - but these things happen often enough. During those 2 or 3 days she had NO HEATING AT ALL. Fortunately the weather was reasonable and she is a very determined lady. Apologies for the longish introduction. Is it not quite safe to run the stove with a totally empty back boiler system? The metal will get hot but will that matter? There are copper pipes leading up to the attic where, presumably, there is an empty hot water tank. It would be a job of only a few moments to disconnect these - there are very accessible joints just above the stove level. Would such a system be safe to run? Hi, Get the council to reinstate the back boiler as was, and make the new system run in parallel with the old. cheers, Pete. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Apologies for the longish introduction. Is it not quite safe to run the stove with a totally empty back boiler system? The metal will get hot but will that matter? There are copper pipes leading up to the attic where, presumably, there is an empty hot water tank. It would be a job of only a few moments to disconnect these - there are very accessible joints just above the stove level. Would such a system be safe to run? Frank I undersatnd that there are firebricks that can be used to replace the boiler, it's not a technically difficult job, but if the rayburn is 'well embedded' this may not be an option. I have a single panel radiator and a pump on my rayburn (vented to a header tank in the room above), keeps the kitchen toasty. I looked into a dunsley neutraliser, but the cost and PITA factors were too much for what is, after all, a secondary heat source. NUJ |
#9
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Solid fuel stove and disconnected back boiler
replying to The Natural Philosopher, Dani wrote:
Did you fill the boiler with sand ? -- for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/uk-diy...er-113131-.htm |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Solid fuel stove and disconnected back boiler
In message , Dani
m writes replying to The Natural Philosopher, Dani wrote: Did you fill the boiler with sand ? Well, that was 16 years ago, but yes, when my Stanley stove/boiler was disconnected from the water, I filled the water tank with dry sand, and it was fine. The stove part was used all year, only closing down briefly in the summer for annual cleaning. -- Graeme |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Solid fuel stove and disconnected back boiler
On 06/11/2018 11:44, Dani wrote:
replying to The Natural Philosopher, Dani wrote: Did you fill the boiler with sand ? No. 18 years later, its fine -- Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|