Thread Number: 1169
7 RINSES???!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! 		[Down to Last]

automaticwasher.org's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items --- [As an eBay Partner, eBay may compensate automaticwasher.org if you make a purchase using any link to eBay on this page]
Post# 55786   2/2/2005 at 21:10 (7,014 days old) by compwhiz ()        

WHAT??? the 1952 whirlpool automatic washer did seven rinses???!!!!

THat had to use tons of wa wa

What a waste




Post# 55788 , Reply# 1   2/2/2005 at 21:21 (7,014 days old) by jasonl (Cookeville, TN)        
NOT

 3 spray rinses, 1 deep rinse, and 3 more spray rinses.

I don't know how many gallons but it's not what you think. I don't think any front loader ever did 7 rinses. Mine does 4 with extra rinse turned on.

Post# 55801 , Reply# 2   2/2/2005 at 23:04 (7,014 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii)        
7 rinses

 laundromat's profile picture
The Askos have seven rinses.

Post# 55802 , Reply# 3   2/2/2005 at 23:37 (7,014 days old) by geoff (Cape Coral, FL)        
Huge Water consumption, although no Filter -Flo

 geoff's profile picture
My 70's Whirlpool does 4 spray rinses, a deep rinse, then 4 more spray rinses. On the "Extra Large" load setting, all in all. A total of about 65 gallons is used.

Post# 55813 , Reply# 4   2/3/2005 at 03:31 (7,014 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        
65 Gallons of Water?

 launderess's profile picture
Try getting that past the Feds/California today! *LOL*

Post# 55829 , Reply# 5   2/3/2005 at 08:45 (7,014 days old) by designgeek ()        

Yow!

If I understand correctly: what's going on with a rinse is that detergent is diffusing from an area of high concentration (in the water trapped in the fabrics) to an area of lower concentration (the water introduced for rinsing). This happens pretty quickly with relatively little agitation.

Also having more water in one cycle doesn't make it go much faster, becuase as the concentration of detergent in the clothes decreases and in the water increases, each further degree of change will take longer than that which preceded it (think of an asymptotic curve), until you change the water in the container.

So the fastest rinse cycle is also the most efficient: horizontal agitation, add just enough water to have a little bit of surplus pooling in the machine, agitate briefly, then spin/extract at high speed, then repeat as needed.

Post# 55831 , Reply# 6   2/3/2005 at 09:04 (7,014 days old) by westytoploader ()        
Water hogs are good

 Wow, 65 gallons, amazing, I never knew how much water my large-capacity BD Kenmore used until now!

From what I've read, the solid-tub machines of the 50's and 60's tended to be pretty water-efficient compared to their perforated tub counterparts. And with the overflow rinsing, nearly all of the soap was flushed out. Why don't they bring this effective design back? I'm not much of an efficiency person mainly because my machines, which aren't exactly water thrifty, do a good job, and machines that are water/energy efficient don't, IMHO. Even on the GE Portable, which has no first spin, the rinse is relatively suds-free. Same goes with the Maytag, DD Kenmore, BD Kenmore, etc...

And yes, when I used my aunt/uncle's Frigemore, there was a stronger scent of detergent than I was used to with a TL when I pulled the load out. Makes me wonder if that machine rinses effectively or not...

Post# 55843 , Reply# 7   2/3/2005 at 10:33 (7,014 days old) by lavamat_jon (UK)        

I agree with you Austin!

Washers (both top and front loaders) simply rinse better with more water. What really annoys me nowadays about a lot of today's frontloaders is the fact that they claim to use 40 litres of water to wash and multiple rinse laundry. Matter of fact is, this simply isn't going to rinse the laundry! That's why all the time I use the "Sensitive" option on my AEG, which ups the rinse level to a 1/3 or 1/2 up the window (depending which rinse it is - they get deeper as the cycle moves on). And from this you see suds disappear almost instantly, whereas if I use the low water level rinses (and I sometimes do for sheets) the suds don't disappear until the 2nd rinse at the earliest. These deep rinses combined with up to 1600rpm interim spins make for greatly rinsed laundry. Whenever I do a load of laundry in the Bosch (which doesnt do deep rinses), I can most often always smell the detergent afterwards.

Unfortunately I haven't had much toploader experience so I can't comment on the rinsing results on them, but as it goes it seems that those people who have got rid of their old Tls over on That Home Site seem to be exaggerating about how their new washers rinse. Some even go to claim that they didn't have to use detergent for the first few loads they did because there was enough detergent residue left from their old toploader! Of course, I'm very skeptical about that claim...

Jon

Post# 55847 , Reply# 8   2/3/2005 at 11:47 (7,014 days old) by hoovermatic (UK)        

I used to have an Ariston FL and it used so little water that you would almost think there was none in the machine. It had no deep rinse facility and ran three rinses on all cycles. I used a regular detergent (Sainsbury's/Waitrose own brand) and NEVER had cause to re-rinse a load of laundry. I think something is wrong with your machine or the amount of detergent used. I NEVER use the recommended dosage as it is always way over the top, for obvious reasons. I rarely pretreat apart from the odd spray of Vanish and never have a problem.

Post# 55849 , Reply# 9   2/3/2005 at 11:57 (7,014 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)        

unimatic1140's profile picture
They are using the word "rinse" quite loosely. The reason they say seven rinses is because the early Whirlpool and Kenmore had four spray rinses during the first two timer increments of the first spin cycle, one full deep rinse and two more spray rinses for the first increment of the final spin. The later machines with the two minute increment timer would have had 9 "rinses" total!

While its perfectly fine in the UK, us Americans wouldn't want to use Vanish for pre-treating stains on clothes. Vanish would probably eat through fabrics on this side of the pond! LOL

Post# 55854 , Reply# 10   2/3/2005 at 12:34 (7,014 days old) by partscounterman (Cortez, Colorado)        
Solid Tubs

 I don't think we should go back to solid tubs. Can you imagine the sand nightmare I would have after washing beach towels and swimsuits? I'd have to shop-vac that sucker out every time!

Post# 55856 , Reply# 11   2/3/2005 at 12:47 (7,014 days old) by lavamat_jon (UK)        

Hoovermatic,

We have fairly hard water here, and I use a 1/4 scoop of fairy or 25ml of Persil non-bio liquigel, depending on what I'm washing. (I use Fairy powder for most things, and the Persil liquigel if I'm using the Handwash cycle). I never follow the recommended dosages either (they just want you to pour lots down the drain so you have to buy more). I just feel that rinsing needs to be done with water - and plenty of it. Trying to wash and rinse a load in just 39l is a joke IMHO.... I must use at least 39l PER rinse when I use the sensitive option :-).

Take care,

Jon

PS - Robert - how do you get those smilies?

Post# 55863 , Reply# 12   2/3/2005 at 14:27 (7,014 days old) by frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)        

frigilux's profile picture
On rinsing in front-loading washers: I think part of the reason we tend to see more suds in the final rinses of FL'ers is because there is so much raucous splashing/ vigorous water action. The waters of your average TL'er are fairly calm during agitation by comparison.

The softness of the water makes a big difference, too. I once ran 6 rinses with a big load of towels just to see when the last of the suds would disappear. I have mechanically softened water. After 6 deep rinses, there were still some (albeit weak) suds hanging in there.

I think the vintage orbital agitation Kelvinator/ABC-o-Matics would be the only machines to rival the water splashing of a FL'er. (Ok, you 60's GE/Frigidaire owners, begin posting now, LOL!)

Post# 55868 , Reply# 13   2/3/2005 at 15:27 (7,014 days old) by Neptuneguy27 (Baltimore,MD)        
My two suds worth....

 With my Neptune I have never had a problem with excess suds left in my clothes after the rinse cycle. I have taken the drain hose out of the stand pipe and placed it in the utility sink. Using regular Tide with a full load of wash, there was quite a bit suds that came out with the wash water. After the first rinse there were still suds present. After the second rinse, a faint trace, and after the third rinse there was not a trace of foam anywhere. I noticed that with the Neptune it seems they fill with a greater amount of water during the final rinse ( up to the bottom of the door, litteraly! ) then it does when it fills for the wash. It has a very pronounced "sloshy" sound during the rinse. More so then it does the in the wash cycle. Tnis may be why we notice a strong detergent smell after the cycle is complete. With so little water being used in the wash cycle and with a regular dose of detergent, it is being concentrated greatly. Well that was my two suds worth.

Christopher

Post# 55873 , Reply# 14   2/3/2005 at 17:05 (7,014 days old) by Kirk280980 ()        

Hi all,

Do agree that, generally speaking, the more water used for rinsing the better the end result is. I don't see any sense in sending gallons of water down the drain for no practical reason, but you do have to strike a balance between conservation and performance. Using enough water to get the job done to an acceptable degree is not wasteful IMHO.

The washer we have only gives a so-so rinse on the cottons cycle, despite my frugal use of detergent. On many occasions I have observed the recirculation pump running dry due to the tiny amount of water used being fully absorbed by a load of towels or suchlike. Only work-around I've found so far is to wash everything on the synthetics cycle, which has deep rinses, and then reset the controls again afterwards to get a fast spin. Something I really shouldn't have to do, but at least it's workable in the meantime while we still have the machine.

Regarding TLs, the Maytags, Speed Queens and Whirlpools I've used have all rinsed just fine, no complaints here. Personally I think it's all down to how the machine is used. Having seen people pour big globs of liquid detergent into a TL without measuring, I can very well understand why they later complain of soapy clothes! If they did the same with a FL the results would be similar, there's no magic involved here.

Post# 55880 , Reply# 15   2/3/2005 at 17:52 (7,014 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        

gansky1's profile picture
I know a lady who has her Maytag Performa washer set for auto-second rinse always and told me for towels, she runs it through a complete cycle with detergent and 2nd rinse, then resets the washer for another complete cycle, sans detergent with 2nd rinse (now the 5th rinse, actually) before she feels they are rinsed properly. I don't know how much water the Maytag uses in a regular cycle, but six changes of water at 25 gallons per fill comes to well over 150 gal. including the spray rinses...

Now those are rinsed towels but to add a little irony to the decadence, she throws a couple of dryer sheets in with the load! Gets them perfectly free of all detergent residue, then smears perfumy schmeg all over them in the dryer...

Post# 55882 , Reply# 16   2/3/2005 at 17:57 (7,014 days old) by westytoploader ()        

I can understand a machine that guzzles water, but to do another cycle with a second rinse to rinse the towels out is a little much...

Post# 55927 , Reply# 17   2/4/2005 at 08:37 (7,013 days old) by designgeek ()        

Ahh, but the fun part of engineering is working right up to the limits.

Agreed about "too much detergent." I have no idea how the detergent producers manage to convince people to put in such enormous quantities per load, since the results are so self-evident ("hey Mom, Bobby just sprayed me with the hose and now my clothes are all full of suds!"). While suds can be fun, seems to me that lots of suds are just evidence of too much detergent in the load.

A few years ago I did a lengthy design project on hand-washing methods (okay, having said that I know I'm about to be dismissed as a masochist or a troglodyte!:-). I found that a plain flow-through rinse used enormous quantities of water before the suds were gone, but any kind of agitation with smaller quantities of water did a much better job, and was faster as well.

At present I'm looking to zero in on the weight and volume ratios between clothing and rinse water, and the agitation and spin times required to get an effective rinse. The other independent variable is ratio of detergent weight to clothing weight on the wash cycle.

What seems to be emerging so far is, horizontal axis agitated rinse with just enough water to allow some to pool in the container after the clothes are saturated. Followed by high speed vertical axis centrifuging, followed by one deep-water rinse and a final high speed vertical axis spin. Result is: no suds, hardly a bubble on the surface of the final rinse water (vertical axis agitation) and clothes come out clean with no detectable detergent smell. The final rinse water can then be used as wash water for the subsequent load, with the usual amount of detergent. I'm going to try a confirmation run with this week's wash, and then next week start figuring out the exact quantities of the inputs.

Post# 55932 , Reply# 18   2/4/2005 at 08:58 (7,013 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)        
The real test is how cloudy the water is not how sudsy.

 unimatic1140's profile picture
I could be wrong, but I don't think the real test of rinsing comes from looking at the amount of suds in the sink during the drain cycle. Low sudsing detergent could still leave lots of residue in the clothes without suds in the sink.

Try this:
1. Wash a load of towels in the machine of your choice using the detergent of your choice.
2. Dry the towels.
3. Fill a new or very clean bucket with very clean water (run the tap a few minutes), take one of the towels and agitate it in the clean water.
4. Take a new clear jar and fill it with water from the bucket. How clear is this water in your jar?
5. Label the jar with the washer name and detergent name. Save it to compare it with other machines and detergents later.
6. Now wash and rinse the same towels in an automatic washer without any detergent. Check the final rinse water in a clear jar to make sure its clean.
7. Repeat using the same detergent in a different washer or same washer--different detergent. The real test is how cloudy the water is.

Post# 55935 , Reply# 19   2/4/2005 at 09:14 (7,013 days old) by designgeek ()        

Unimatic, yes, good point about water turbidity. In the case I mentioned above, the water is basically clean. Not quite clear, but certainly not the darker gray you see in the wash cycle. Clear enough to make out the details of the agitator at the bottom of 12" to 14" of standing post-rinse water in the tub.

I was thinking of getting a turbidimeter to do that specific test, but $800 is a bit out of my range for a specialized component for this project. Though I could make one from scratch using an LED and photocell assembly. Another version would be comparison with standardized halftone grays that could be printed on a laminated card and placed at the bottom of a given depth sample of water, or compared with water in a test tube.

Post# 55979 , Reply# 20   2/4/2005 at 13:50 (7,013 days old) by kenwashesmonday (Carlstadt, NJ)        

One reason the rinse water is not as dark as the wash water is that cold water does not make the dyes run like warm or hot water does. If you're doing a test for rinse water opacity, make sure the temperatures are consistant.

Ken D.

Post# 55980 , Reply# 21   2/4/2005 at 14:22 (7,013 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)        

unimatic1140's profile picture
Good point Ken, and it probably would be best to use only white, dye free towels for a true test.

Post# 56052 , Reply# 22   2/5/2005 at 14:18 (7,012 days old) by lavamat_jon (UK)        
Different Types of Detergent

 I have also noticed there are certain brands of detergent which will just not rinse out fully, no matter what brand you use. I tried Persil liquid once on my towels, and even on the 5th deep rinse there was visible suds and cloudy residue. The next day, when submerging a flannel (facecloth) that had been washed in Persil in the sink, the water in the sink instantly turned cloudy. However, with other detergents I use (such as Fairy or Ariel), I have noticed that the rinse water is just about clear by the 3rd of 5 rinses; and that the water in the sink doesn't turn cloudy if I submerge a flannel in it.

However I've heard from over at THS that a capful of vinegar in place of fabric softener both softens clothes and reduces detergent residue... never tried that myself so I can't comment on how effective that is.

Jon

Post# 56103 , Reply# 23   2/6/2005 at 04:22 (7,011 days old) by hoovermatic (UK)        
Residue

 I have read somewhere that it is normal for a certain amount of suds to be evident in the final rinse water using modern detergents. I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with this as I haven't really given this subject that much of my energy. However, I think this statement was made by a detergent manufacturer so could be pretty worthless justification for using a third of a box of detergent to wash a few towels that really only need freshening up anyway.

Post# 56104 , Reply# 24   2/6/2005 at 04:28 (7,011 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        
Suds in Final Rinse

 launderess's profile picture
Don't know about powders, but beginning to think small amounts of foam left in the rinse when using liquid/gel detergents is normal. IIRC read on a surfactant supplier website or maybe it was a detergent maker's that seeing small amounts of foam in the rinse was normal, to a customer query.

Do know I could never get Wisk HE to "rinse" clean. Cheer HE is a bit better and believe it or not Cheer Free & Gentle liquid (long as one uses very small amounts). Mainly use Cheer Free liquid on sheets and other lightly soiled items I'm laundering in cool/cold or warm water.

Post# 56105 , Reply# 25   2/6/2005 at 04:35 (7,011 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        
Front Loaders and

launderess's profile picture
Went to the locallaundrette last week to use their SQ 50lb washer and noticed something interesting. It seemed the washer was tumbling (one way)while water was coming into the unit and being drained away (flushing), for a period before each rinse.

At least this is how it seemed to me as the water level did not start to rise (indicating filling) for an interval awhile after water began to enter the wheel. Could see and hear water coming through the detergent dispenser, but peering down into the drum there was little water there. Again it just seemed as if the drain was open and the water was merely flushing down the drain.

If SQ home front loaders have this feature, it would make for interesting rinsing action.

Launderess

Post# 56115 , Reply# 26   2/6/2005 at 07:43 (7,011 days old) by lavamat_jon (UK)        

Launderess,

I believe that's their "spray rinse" action. Ipso front loaders in my local launderette fill for the last few seconds of the interim spin, and continues to "flush" for another 30 seconds or so before the water level begins to rise. So maybe this is either to give a "spray rinse" or to flush any suds from the spin down the drain. My AEG does a flush fill before each rinse to serve the exact same purpose.

This is an excerpt out of my AEG washer manual:

"If after the last rinse foam is still visible:

* Modern detergents can still cause foam in the final rinse cycle. However, the washing is still sufficiently rinsed."

So, maybe that links in with the point you brought up Launderess, that foam in the last rinse is supposedly normal.

Of course, as I've mentioned before, my last rinse water is always clear of cloudy residues/suds unless I am using Persil liquigel.

Jon

Post# 56214 , Reply# 27   2/7/2005 at 08:27 (7,010 days old) by designgeek ()        

Good information, thanks.

This weekend, with a load of whites and two light-colored towels, I noticed that the final rinse water was entirely clear while filling the tub, so apparently there wasn't enough detergent left in the clothes to immediately start diffusing into the water. At the end of a 9-minute agitation it was slightly cloudy, such that I couldn't quite make out the bottom of the agitator, however there were no suds evident during agitation. Wash and rinse temps were lukewarm, about 100 - 105 degrees.

Re. excess detergent: I think what's going on here is the detergent manufacturers are trying to optimize for "most consistent dirt removal" rather than for "most efficient use of detergent," no cynicism or sarcasm implied. With an excess of detergent, every detergent molecule grabs hold of some dirt at one end and a water molecule at the other and, and gets rinsed out, taking all the dirt with them. However the excess detergent molecules don't have any more dirt to grab, so they grab something else: the cloth. Then in the rinses, some of this detergent gets loose again and turns into visible suds or graying of the water.

The outcome is, no dirt in the clothes, but a variable amount of detergent in them. Presumably detergent makers have tested to be sure the amount remaining isn't going to cause skin irritation for the vast majority of users, and of course the added perfumes give you the scent that "confirms" that your clothes are clean.

I don't know if there's any way to judge what detergent level *in advance* will result in all the detergent molecules are doing useful work grabbing dirt and few or none being left over to stick to the cloth. It's more a matter of skill and experience, i.e. being able to judge "how dirty this load is" and therefore estimate more closely "how much detergent to add," in which case, using the same brand of detergent and the same washer and cycles consistently over time probably helps.




Post# 56219 , Reply# 28   2/7/2005 at 08:41 (7,010 days old) by designgeek ()        

This weekend I also noticed something else that I found interesting.

Pouring water into a spinning spin tub (1400 - 1600 rpm) does not really do the trick in terms of a good extract-rinse. Reason is, the water centrifuges out before it has a chance to soak through to the clothes at the bottom of the tub.

So the question for people who have Hoovermatics and suchlike, with the continuous rinse/spin function: How much water and how fast does it pour in there; and have you noticed whether the clothes at the bottom of the spin tub have gotten their fair share along the way?

Also, pouring water into clothes that have spun out but are still in the spin tub, is a big no-no: consistently produces a serious out-of-balance where the spinner bops against the wall of the spin tub (which, needless to say, I open the lid to shut off immediately this starts to occur).

However, what does work is to take the clothes out of the spinner and soak them in another container (with or without agitation), and then put them back in the spinner. That consumes minimal water and results in a decent extraction such that the final rinse water is much less cloudy than if this procedure wasn't done.

Design implications:

The vertcal-axis automatics that use a spin/extract cycle where water is sprayed at the agitator as the tub is spinning, are definitely on the right track here. Spraying water onto the agitator does the best possible job of getting it to splash out evenly across the clothes that are stuck via centrifugal force to the sides of the spinning tub, so the extraction is as evenly distributed as possible.

For comparatively smaller diameter high-speed centrifuges generally, whether in twin-tubs or in stand-alone units, a vertical tube at the center of the spin tub could be provided, with perforations, and with means of introducing water through the tube. A relatively narrow-gauge tube could be used, with perforations, and with a non-pressurized or neutral-pressure water inlet. Water would enter the tube at the rate at which it was sucked out by passing into and through the clothes as they spun.

Given the speeds and inertial masses involved, this is not an experiment I'm likely to try:-).

Post# 56222 , Reply# 29   2/7/2005 at 08:59 (7,010 days old) by westytoploader ()        

Interesting information! If I remember correctly, the Hoovermatics with the Auto-Rinse feature fill the stationary spin tub to a certain level, then spin the water out, repeating the process. Since I've never used one (this information is based on the March 1971 Which twin-tub report in the UK), I'm not sure if it can spray rinse during spin or not. Any UK member or twin-tub afficionado will be able to answer that. In the Which tests, none of the twin-tubs rinsed effectively in the spin tub.

When I had my Maytag TT, I would just fill the wash tub up and do an agitated rinse, then go ahead and spin the clothes out. Since it had no fill flume or auto-rinse feature, it was VERY time-consuming and ineffective to rinse in the spinner. Would have rather had a Hoover...:(

--Austin


Forum Index:       Other Forums:                      


Comes to the Rescue!

The Discuss-o-Mat has stopped, buzzer is sounding!!!
If you would like to reply to this thread please log-in...

Discuss-O-MAT Log-In



New Members Click Here To Sign Up.



                     

automaticwasher.org home
Discuss-o-Mat Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Fun Vintage Washer Ephemera
See It Wash!
Video Downloads
 Audio Downloads
Picture of the Day
Patent of the Day
Photos of our Collections
The Old Aberdeen Farm
Vintage Service Manuals 		Vintage washer/dryer/dishwasher to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy