It seems most if not all front loaders sold for home use today, still use a variant of the Bendix "scoop and ladle" tub design. Here four "paddles" (either SS and part of the tub, or plastic and attached)fill with water from between the tubs at 6 o'clock, and pour this water over the laundry at 12 o'clock. Theory behind this, IIRC was the water forces dirt/muck out in washing and detergent/much out when rinsing.

My mind wondered about this as have never seen a commercial or laundromat washer with the same design. They seem to have three fins/bars without any holes to scoop up water. Rather laundry is lifted and dropped/slapped back down against the tub. Is there a reason why commercial units are different? Also why only three fins instead of four? Is more better or less?

Launderess

I am thinking no scoop /ladle in commerical untis in that IMHO those holes would weaken the paddles and are a good place to trap foreign objects. I see lack therof as a relibility "improvement".

Who has four paddles? Comm'l or domestic?
My machines (both W&D) have three each.

I am guessing that you bleieve com;l machines have four.
I am thinking less motor strain when hugely oveloaded, as people who pay per load are inclined to do.

Anyone agree or disagree with that?

Actually, the home machines are doing BOTH actions, pouring the water over the clothes AND lifting/dropping the clothes.

As for motor strain, you really can't strain the motor on an FL machine like one cxan on a TL machine. The tub and clothes would simply turn as a unit. The motor probably will draw SOME extra current, but would be due to more weight, which wouldn't be as hard as trying to make an agitator fight its way back and forth through a stuffed tub.

I agree Jaune.

And many comm'l washers use three-phase "stall-proof" motors.

In fact the tub of a FL will turn with *less* power when it's crammed full and the whole load is rotating with the tub.

The greatest power consumption should occur when the unit is loaded at about 40% full (as seen when the load is soaked) since the drum rotation has to lift the wet clothes up to the point where they slide off the paddles, and there is not equivalent weight on the opposite side of the axis to act as a balance.

Agreed, the paddles that sprinkle water on the load are a potential risk for objects or even lint buildup causing cloggage over time. Whether this ever actually becomes a problem remains to be seen; time will tell.

The number of paddles needed is a function of the interior diameter of the drum. The larger the diameter, the more paddles you are likely to find.

"Agreed, the paddles that sprinkle water on the load are a potential risk for objects or even lint buildup causing cloggage over time. Whether this ever actually becomes a problem remains to be seen; time will tell."

Until now I don't have that problem with my frontloaders. My Miele is 15 years old and the paddles still sprinkle the water on the load. My AEG is a bit younger, no clogged paddles here either. If there would be any lint in the paddles, I'm sure it will come out during the spin cycle.

I was implying more of a problem in a commericial setting where the numb-nut customers "forget" to empty their pockets of all manner of S- - T.

Don't you just LOVE gum in a commerical dryer, or stickers or safety pins, etc.

I'm Sure Peter H of Atlanta can chime in here with some commerical machine "accessories" he has found in the drums and tubs.

How can lint build ip in the sprinkler baffels? Every wash, every rinse and every spin, lint is removed. The first mieles with sprinklers where very water efficient.
In school we have 2 mieles, household machines, I suppose they were from 1985. They are so easy to use. We do mostly sanitizing cycles to wash our kitchen towels we use in the cook classes. We are now 20 years later and they are still washing, doing every day a full load. I use a quart of the recommended quantity of poudre. Because of the sprinkler baffels they creat a bunch of suds when using the full amount. Once I plugged the laundrytub in and there was not even 3 gallons in it even after a 1600 rpm spin.

Hmmmmm a quart of poudre. (Where poudre means powder).

[Funny the Greeks borrowed the French word *Poudre* to mean powder as well.]

A quart would be about a litre or 1,000ml.
Do you mean a cup=> 250ml +/- ?

My WW Dual-Tumble (1993 model) has holes strategically placed in the 2 plastic vanes to help with lint removal. They do "shower" the clothes with water and suds during wash, though it's hard to see with the water splashing around!

My GE combo has 6 baffles. Now that really gets things moving, it looks like Niagara Falls in there.

Bendix used and patented 4 baffles in 1937. There were and always was in a Bendix 2 sets of one height and 2 sets of another height.
The different heights broke up the tumbling pattern and prevented the wash from balling up just like in a Slant front Westinghouse.
Westinghouse ended up with 3 baffles on the slant front but started with 5, my 1949 Streamliner has 5 baffles.


All very baffleing!

Toggle: Askomiele means he uses a quarter of the powder.

I have not checked out a Milnor recently, but all through the 50s & 60s, the Milnors had holes in the 3 vanes. Often they would pause in the reverse tumbling with one vane at the 12 o'clock position and the water in the vane poured out through the holes in it.

Austin, the holes in the lint filter vanes of the WWH front loader are arranged to force water through them as they pass through the water to force lint out of the inner tub and into the outer tub, where through some magic or delusion of the marketing staff, it is said to never get back into the tumbling clothes. The way that they are aranged in our machines, which is the same positioning that Westinghouse used from the start of the non-slanted tub, can cause them to grab the laundry in the transition from tumble to spin in an uneven way making for unequally distributed loads and noisy spins. At least it spins. It does not stop for much like more modern machines with all of the electronic sensors. In the early 60s when the Lint Ejector first appeared, it was red and the other vane was gray.

The thing about the tub vanes is that their height is inversely related to the tumble speed. Higher vanes mean that the tub can revolve slower to achieve the same lift of shorter vanes revolving faster. That is why the Whirlpool dryer drum with the two bumps and the taller plastic Variator Baffle benefits so much from the speed control that some older TOL models have. The highest tumble speed kept sheets and other large items pulled more to the sides of the drum so that they did not fall into the center where they would ball up. Small loads or light weight fabrics tumbled slower. They had the same lift to keep them in the air stream, while not holding them against the side of the drum so that they did not tumble at all. Since you could not change the vanes, you changed the speed. The super duper capacity 29" WP, KM and KA dryers have three fixed vanes, but not as much tendency to roll up sheets.

All four FL units I've had over the years 'shower' the clothes via holes in the paddles. I've never believed they actually do much. Generally, the only time I can really see the shower happening is if a paddle stops at the top of the tub during a pause. Otherwise, it looks like the clothes are stopping most of the shower effect since they're pushed up against the paddles during tub rotation. I doubt there'd be much difference in cleaning if the paddles were solid...

Of course I never thought rational people in the 21st century would believe the earth is only 10,000 years old, either, so what do I know?

Here's a page that shows how a frontloader is working. It's in German, but the animation are interesting. If you scroll down the page you see an animation of a tumbling drum. The drum is almost empty, but you can see how the spraying works. If the drum is full with clothes, this system still works. What this animation doesn't show is that Miele's tumble at two speeds. The slower phase is for wetting the clothes, the faster one to really wash them. This is how it goes: Clockwise 40rpm, clockwise 55rpm, pause, counter clockwise 40rpm, counter clockwise 55rp, pause etc. etc. On the slower speed the laundry doesn't get lifted as high ofcourse as on the faster speed, therefor the clothes are saturated better by the sprays at the slower speed and get washed more thoroughly at the higher speed. Ingenious, isn't it?

-

Honestly, I think scoop-n-ladel, just like HE detergents are a crock. I have yet to see it really work effectively for anything. I think it is a marketing thing to brag on that really does nothing.

Last year, Maytag introduced in their commercial machines "Turbo Wash". According to them, they use less water and do better cleaning. When talking with the reps, I asked them to specifically tell me what Turbo Wash is. They told me that they pack a miniature Tom Turbomatic in every machine! KIDDING!!! No, they said that the new holes in the lifting vanes cause more water turbulance which makes for better cleaning. RIIIIIIGHT!!! Utter nonsense.

Wascomat put holes in their vanes with the Gen 6 models but couldn't give me a reason why they decided to do so. At least they were honest.

Before I got my Miele, I read all I could about it and couldn't wait to see it in action, thinking I was getting something really special, especially for the wool and delicates. Either the tub turns too fast and centrifigal force doesn't allow the water to "shower down" on the load, or the tub turns too slow so that any water in there has slipped out by the time the vanes are at a 10 or 2 o'clock position, or the tub stops for reversing before any vane gets up high enough to shower.

Whatever...

Louis;

My Miele (at least) does the same two speed tumbling; but does it in reverse - i.e. the tumble starts at 50rpm, slows down to 40rpm halfway through the tumble, then reverses almost instantly at 50rpm, slows down to 40rpm halfway through, reverse and tumble 50rpm again etc.

A few other manufacturers have adopted this system now too, albeit a fair few years after Miele introduced the Hydromatic system. I believe non-Jetsystem Electrolux machines do 2-speed tumbling, as well as Hoover/Candy, and some pre-WMA series Hotpoint I have seen. My old Hotpoint; however; would pause between the two tumble speeds - i.e. fast tumbling for 10 seconds, pause, slow tumbling for 10 seconds, pause, fast reverse tumbling for 10 seconds, pause, slow reverse tumbling for 10 seconds and so on.

Jon

Jon

Jon & Louis: My W1986 definitely slows during tumbling. It starts fast and really throws towels in a nice arc and then as it gets into the second half of the 14 seconds or so of tumble, it slows so that things just roll around until it reverses. I don't know why, but I don't notice it as much in the W1918, but in both, I have noticed that if the tub stops with a baffle up at the top, some water flows out of it. The other, maybe more important thing is the shape of the baffles. They are not simple triangles with holes on the sides like in the Creda. In the Miele, they start up as if forming a triangle, but they break the angle and straighten or flare very slightly before forming the apex, which is a flat top with holes in it. I think that the shape of the baffle allows the angle on the inside of the solid part of the baffle to carry water up with the clothes and drop it on them as it heaves them over.

After seeing the animation, I see the holes are not at the top of the baffle, but just below it. I guess it is still possible for the solid part to carry some water up, especially when the clothes are covering the holes on the way up.

My 1918 starts with the medium tumble for the first 5 minutes or so of the cycle (Cottons & PP), then it shifts to the 2 speed tumbling for the majority of the cycle. About the last 20 minutes of the cycle, it is all fast tumble. Rinses are medium tumble. When selecting the Rapid cycle, after the meduim soaking tumble, the whole cycle is fast tumble.

With my Malber it does a fast/slow/fast rotation during the wash. By doing this it allows what's in the center of the tub to rotate towards the outside. It's hard to explain, but it does work like this when I don't add extra water to the cycle.
I hate the frugil water level for the main wash!

JLA washing machines do have a scoop and ladle design. Used these in Leeds at a laundromat.
I looked a bit of a fool with my head in the window when I noticed the action!!!
The first thing I noticed was the very slow ramp up to spin after the rinses and final spin. Good fluff at the end of cycle and not bad results from a commercial wahser..

The washers look like Ipso, and the dryers are definitely ADC.

Ipso. Does anyone remember Archie Bunker, maybe, although I think Jackie Gleason and Art Carney made the same joke of saying ipso fatso for ipso facto, (by the fact itself)?

I was not completely wrong about the holes in the baffles. The W1986 has baffles that do end up with a square top, but the holes are just along the sides near the end. The W1918 has holes on the sides and in the end of the baffles. Both drain whatever water they carry up if the machine pauses with a baffle near the top.

My Creda, on the regular wash cycle, goes through periods during the heating phases where it barely tumbles and has long pauses between the tumble periods, but before and after each heating period it tumbles at its fast speed. When it is pausing, if you listen closely, you can hear the sound of water heating as steam forms on the hot surfaces of the heating elements. That same sound that is heard when you heat water in a pan on an electric surface unit. The sound stops when the boiling starts because the steam can can escape from the bottom of the pan instead of being held down by and condensing in the cooler water above the hot base of the pan. Sometimes, this energy is transferred from the pan, down through the surface unit and trim and will cause vibration on the cooktop if an element or reflector pan is not sitting snug in its position.

In the mid 90s MERLONI introduced the Servis Rainwave machine, of which had 4 paddles, the system always appeared to be 'hit or miss' to whether it did anything or just another gimick!! I'm sure there are many out there who would agree that Zanussi's Jetsystem was the way forward with a recirc pump operating throughout the wash dropping water back into the drum thus reducing water and detergent consumption. Early version as FL1011 carried out a pulse spin during wash and seemed to work well. I must add though that German manufacturers such as Miele, AEG and BSH group really seem to have got front loaders right, but then maybe i'm bias working for BSH!!!!!!!!!!!

Steve - welcome to the club! Great to see another UK member on here :-).

Those Servis Rainwave machines look hopeless to me - can't see how the paddles can pick up laundry at all!! They're literally just bumps in the drum aren't they? I agree with you about the Jetsystem, it is a good system although I have found that it certainly doesn't help with sudsing regardless of how much detergent you've used. Have found that the ART system on my AEG (which is similar to the Jetsystem) is, whilst fun (especially when it fills for the rinses whilst turning at distribution speed, even to the high levels if you press Sensitive), it really does hinder rinsing performance, and I feel it doesn't rinse as well as my Miele with it's deep rinses; although the AEG is still miles ahead of that dang Bosch that lives in my mother's laundry room downstairs which just seems to refuse to use any water!

Tom,

What year is your Creda from? They certainly were fun machines - although not too great at washing or rinsing. The identical Hotpoint machines from the 80s to mid 90s are very popular here - they were about as popular as Whirlpool DD's are in the USA so everybody knows at least 2 or 3 people that have one. The separate heating phases on the timer; as well as allowing it to heat to different temps (a lower temp as the cycle goes on etc), it also gives a profile washing effect - i.e. heat a little, tumble, heat a little more, tumble, heat even more, tumble. The drums on those machines though were infamous for ripping and snagging things - they were on Watchdog (a consumer TV programme ove rhere) about 10 years ago with a Washing Line of Shame, where people would keep sending in all their clothes damaged by Hotpoint/Creda washers and washer dryers until Hotpoint sorted it out! Of course, it never got sorted out (GEC, who owned Hotpoint at the time, had a lot more power over a tiny consumer programme on BBC1) and our 1998 Hotpoint with the same drum still snagged & damaged quite a lot of fabrics. They are also infamous here for leaving oily marks on whites!

My Miele doesn't have holes in the end of the paddles; however it has them on top of the slopes just before the tips square up, if that makes sense - I think from what you're saying it's the same as your W1986. I must say that Miele's Hydromatic scoop and ladle system seems to be the best out there so far - there is definitely a lot more splashing and with smaller loads you can see the water being brought up to the top and dropped. My AEG paddles are sort of funnel shaped, with holes in the end and that seems to be fairly good at picking and throwing up water too; although not as good as the Miele, but then the Advanced Rinse Technology recirculation pump probably makes up for that somewhat.

Bearpeter,

All the high-spin commercial washers sold here seem to have a wash & shower system as such; although for some reason bolt-down standard spin machines don't. I have seen high-spin Ipsos before and really do like the way they go up to spin - just start tumbling slowly and gradually increase speed over a minute whilst it drains, and by the time it's reached 500rpm and still speeding up the water has gone. Very impressive.

Take care all,

Jon

I'm surprised nobody's even mentioned the original Neptune design, which has six half-paddles that Maytag calls "Waterfall Baffles". These have no holes at all, but are molded with little channels. Maytag's animation shows the baffles scooping up water and showering it on the laundry. However, since Maytag decided to fit this washer with a solid door, for all I can tell there really might be tiny baffled Tom Turbomatics in there doing all the work.

Miele's literature makes much of "fall height" which it says is lost in tilted drum designs. Personally I think all these designs have their pros and cons; the main thing is that the primary mode of FL cleaning is tumbling, where the clothes are more gently sloshed around in a puddle as opposed to being dragged around in a pool of water in a traditional top loader agitator design. Miele makes the apt comparison of tumble washing to the original method of doing laundry: dipping the item in a river and slapping it on a smooth rock. However, to date, nobody had introduced a machine that incorporates smooth rocks.