|
Thread Number: 71399
/ Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Neutral Drains... |
[Down to Last] |  |
|
Post# 944757 , Reply# 1 6/22/2017 at 21:12 (2,492 days old) by combo52  (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 944761 , Reply# 2 6/22/2017 at 21:56 (2,492 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
Neutral Drain
Its cheaper to build a neutral drain washer then a spin-drainer. Whirlpool for example created the neutral drain mechanism on their DDs because it wore down the clutches faster.
FWIW when most top load washer that were (ie Maytag) and still are (Speed Queen) spin drainers often get converted to neutral drain on the export market. No idea why, but somehow spin draining is not desired. With that said I like spin drainers. :) Maybe I am blinded by ideology, but I have always felt clothes come out with less lint and debris in a spin drainer. | ||
|
Post# 944763 , Reply# 3 6/22/2017 at 22:15 (2,492 days old) by Combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
It's cheaper to build neutral drain washers? That thought is totally wrong to have a machine do both a spin at a neutral drained requires extra complication an extra cost, whirlpool direct drive washers never had any problems with clutch where in either form.
And even if where were problem it would not effect the cost of building the washer.
Speed Queen washers are built with a more costly neutral drain system for export to Australia because they line dry clothing and all the lint left on the clothing [ from forcing all the dirty linty water through the clothing ] is objectionable when you don't use a dryer. | ||
|
Post# 944779 , Reply# 5 6/23/2017 at 00:24 (2,492 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 944792 , Reply# 6 6/23/2017 at 02:35 (2,492 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
Spin draining for automatic washing machines
IIRC grew out of the wash day habit of lifting laundry out of dirty water (wringers, hand washing, twin tubs and other semi-automatics), and of course when soap still was queen of wash day.
Idea was that between over flow rinsing and spin draining muck, soap and other residue would not be pulled down through the wash (as in a neutral drain) but sent out of the tub. Well that was the theory I suppose anyway. Old laundry practices called for never allowing mucky/soapy water to drain through laundry. That is you wouldn't pull the drain plug and let the water out of a tub allowing your washing to "strain" it like a sieve. When detergent replaced soaps and as the former improved its soil suspension capabilities in theory netural draining shouldn't matter. One of the reasons didn't really get on with the Whirlpool compact washer was the amount of lint/muck it left on my wash. Dark laundry especially looked like who did it and ran. Even after tumble drying things still needed a lint or clothes brush. | ||
| Post# 944818 , Reply# 7 6/23/2017 at 08:32 (2,492 days old) by jerrod6 (Southeastern Pennsylvania) | ||
|
What about front loaders? Do some have neutral drains and others don't? I guess in this case it would be that a neutral drain would be done with the tub stationary vs. the tub still tumbling? | ||
|
Post# 944849 , Reply# 8 6/23/2017 at 12:20 (2,492 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
There have been FLs with spin-drain in the past. They were rare but they existed.
Some brushless motor driven just went right into spin mode with still the tub half full of water (at rinse water level) and accerlerated slowly as the water drained. Others (the carbon brush type) had distribution spins at approximately 70 rpm which also started with all the water still in the tub. The purpose was to provide a more evenly distributed load at a time when electronic balance control was either not jet invented or still too expensive for use in lower end machines. Both systems did not always give the desired results and in the case of induction motors which gradually increased speed sudslocking was a common problem. All that "no dirty water should be drained through clean clothes" is just marketing blah IMO. At least in times of man made surfactants. As long as the detergent is sufficiantly dosed it should be capable to keep all soils suspended during the wash AND rinse. | ||
|
Post# 944861 , Reply# 9 6/23/2017 at 13:57 (2,492 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
@Combo
What extra cost? You need a beefier drive system and you need a clutch- that costs money. In the early 2000s onward GE was even able to eliminate the clutch as with most modern washers because they do not need to slip a tub full of water. There is also no need to design the outer tub cap as to prevent water from leaking out when spinning and in turn sloshing over.
As for DD going neutral drain thats what several repair men have told me. Perhaps its just a rumor- but its hard to argue the added over engineering needed to spin that much water. | ||
| Post# 944866 , Reply# 10 6/23/2017 at 14:47 (2,492 days old) by Iheartmaytag (Wichita, Kansas) | ||
I am not a repairman, don't work on appliances But I was told by a Maytag man in 1995 that the reason for the Neutral drain was that the motors were not strong enough to spin a full tub, hence they drained it then spun.
My vote: I hate neutral drain. My Maytag, Duet clone FL doesn't neutral drain, it distribute tumbles while draining and then spins. | ||
|
Post# 944875 , Reply# 11 6/23/2017 at 15:47 (2,492 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 944896 , Reply# 12 6/23/2017 at 17:14 (2,491 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
No 1/2 HP motor is strong enough to spin a tub full of water at full speed- its just that: only 1/2 HP max. Its not practical either, both in the sheer size of the motor required and the force of the water that would exist. You could of course try spinning directly with the 1/2HP (no clutch), but the load would slow down the motor to much, which would appreciably slow the pump out rate (perhaps preventing pump out with a tall drain) and prevent the motor from dropping its start winding which leads to over heating. Thus as such clutch is employed, either a slipping belt or shoe & drum. This allows the motor to reach full speed within half a second while gradually bringing the tub up to Speed, ie the full resistance of the tub is not just dropped on the motor.
Now modern washers like the VMW are different. Because there is no tub full of water to slip, and that permanent split capacitor motors can tolerate taking several seconds to gain speed (but minutes would still be to much)- the clutch can be eliminated all together. Not having to drive a pump, engage/disengage a break plus over coming a large transmission means a low torque motor can be selected without issue such as a permanent split capacitor instead of a high torque centrifugal start motor. But to be fair GE did have a clutch free washer with a transmission and brake. | ||
| Post# 944899 , Reply# 13 6/23/2017 at 17:29 (2,491 days old) by cornutt (Huntsville, AL USA) | ||
|
Wasn't the Unimatic direct drive for spin? | ||
|
Post# 944900 , Reply# 14 6/23/2017 at 17:31 (2,491 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey) |
||
not that they also didn't get out of balance at times.....
I always thought of the neutral drain on most machines was to lower the center of gravity of the load, as well as sort of help keep the unit leveled and balanced.. but one could argue, which would be better, a load spaced out and thinly placed against the tub for spinning, or bunched up along the bottom?..... there are pros and cons for each......but by todays standards, by proper washing techniques, most of all grime is contained in suspension until the drain/spin.... | ||
|
Post# 944902 , Reply# 15 6/23/2017 at 17:40 (2,491 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis) |
||
Yes Unimatic washers did it with a direct drive, along with early Norge belt-drive washers. They would spin the full tub of water out with 1/3hp motors and without the need for any sort of clutch or belt-slip. The pump out time is a non-issue in solid tub washers. Belt-drive Frigidaire Pulsamatic washers also had no clutch or belt-slip, Multimatic washers had sort of a clutch, but they were not designed to slip during spin-startup.
I prefer spin-drain washers overall, especially solid tub machines. | ||
|
Post# 944907 , Reply# 16 6/23/2017 at 18:31 (2,491 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
"no dirty water should be drained through clean clothes&
As one said, not draining mucky water through laundry was from the early days of laundry right through early to middle 20th century. All this was when things were done by hand and or semi-automatic washing machines *and* soap was still queen of laundry day. Furthermore top loading washers and or tubs with mangles dominated.
In fact one reason TSP and other participating water softening substances weren't *that bad* when used with soap back then was because of how wash was extracted. Things either were lifted out of mucky water and put into the mangle or spin drier. Either way much of the soils, hard water minerals and other gunk was left in the water. Better wringer washers like Maytag's had "sediment" zones/traps at bottom of tub to catch (in theory) much of the muck. Still users were advised at intervals to stop washing, lower the drain house/turn on pump to remove a bit of the dirty water. Things were then topped up with more clean fresh hot water, a bit more soap/detergent was added and then things carried on. Also as one said previously modern detergents are streets ahead of soap and even earlier versions in terms of soil suspension and anti-redeposit properties. Thus the matter of scum clinging to washing is less of an issue than in past. | ||
|
Post# 944918 , Reply# 17 6/23/2017 at 20:26 (2,491 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Unimatic | ||
|
Post# 944966 , Reply# 18 6/24/2017 at 03:15 (2,491 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
Louis, Zanussi (mostly sold as Privileg here) is another brand to complete your list. They used the accelerating spin drain for at least some of their induction typ machines and later went for a distribution spin drain at a fixed speed when those pesky carbon brush motors became the norm. Didn`t know about Constructa.
| ||
|
Post# 944971 , Reply# 19 6/24/2017 at 03:56 (2,491 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
Thanks! I didn't know about Zanussi. My grandmother's 1965 didn't do it, but I don't have much experience with other models.
Here's a Constructa going into spindrain. CLICK HERE TO GO TO foraloysius's LINK | ||
| Post# 944996 , Reply# 20 6/24/2017 at 08:46 (2,491 days old) by wishwash (Indiana) | ||
|
I was always under the impression that spin drainers sent lint, grass, etc over the wash tub to drain away rather than let it settle in the tub. It has been many years since I have used one. | ||
|
Post# 944999 , Reply# 21 6/24/2017 at 08:55 (2,491 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 945002 , Reply# 22 6/24/2017 at 09:31 (2,491 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 945004 , Reply# 23 6/24/2017 at 09:37 (2,491 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
And in turn | ||
|
Post# 945112 , Reply# 25 6/24/2017 at 21:37 (2,490 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Can I be honest here?
I feel misunderstood. :( When I wrote post #12 I specifically had perforated tub washers in mind. Just because I did not include solid tub machines does not render my post erroneous. If you have a perforated tub machine with a typical induction motor and typical pump you will need a clutch- there is simply no way around that. Solid tub machines can afford to toss their water out of the inner tub in a short amount of time quickly removing the strain off the motor then allowing the pump to remove the water at rated motor speed at a rate the plumbing can handle.
With a perforated tub machine water resistance to some degree or another is always present during the whole 1 minute to 1 minute 90 second pump out. Again, it is simply not possible to bring that tub up to 640 RPM with a 1/2 HP motor while the machine is full of water (and neither with a Unimatic, as you notice full 1140 rpm is only reached after the water has been thrown out), so the perforated tub will slow down the motor and in turn pump. The slow pump will only increase evacuation time, and the lowered motor speed will force the start winding to either drop back on or never drop off in the first place during the pump out. Neither are good conditions... If anyone is ever in the experimental mood the above can be verified. Take an automotive belt (that will not slip as well) and place it on a Maytag dependable care. Tension the motor carriage so it does roll back during start up with a full tub of water. I am willing to bet all the above will take place. | ||
| Post# 945121 , Reply# 26 6/24/2017 at 23:09 (2,490 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit) | ||
I can verify that it will trip the motor overload. My A207's motor carriage was rather rusty and while for a month or so, penetrating oil did the trick for getting the motor to slide in a bit, the thing started having issues again and I was forced to take the carriage base out, wire brush the rust away and put 4 coats of gray Rustolium paint on it. I greased the base upon reassembly, and it now runs like a dream.
| ||
|
Post# 945266 , Reply# 27 6/25/2017 at 20:24 (2,489 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 945348 , Reply# 28 6/26/2017 at 05:38 (2,489 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Tumbling shakes sand, etc., out of the load before spin..... | ||
| Post# 945383 , Reply# 29 6/26/2017 at 12:01 (2,489 days old) by HiLoVane (Columbus OH) | ||
|
I had an Asko that would stop tumbling, and neutral-drained before going into the spin. (It also didn't tumble when it was filling with water). | ||
|
Post# 945518 , Reply# 31 6/27/2017 at 05:22 (2,488 days old) by askolover (South of Nash Vegas, TN) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 945577 , Reply# 32 6/27/2017 at 13:09 (2,488 days old) by Gyrafoam (Wytheville, VA) |
||
|
What Betty failed to mention about the old Westinghouse machines was their ability to tangle the hell out of clothes. Can't get the sand out of those. Especially sheets. I'm thinking beach towels were a separate load! | ||
|
Post# 945605 , Reply# 33 6/27/2017 at 16:58 (2,487 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey) |
||
|
any given machine can have a hassle of some sort with sheets or items like long sleeve shirts....and apron strings are a given.....
show me a dryer that doesn't roll items like sheets, blankets/comforters into a ball.....we just adapt, and every so often, open the door, re-fluff the load, and place back in for even drying..... dryers that reverse tumble is a joke at best, good thought, but doesn't alleviate the issue...... sometimes I will pull the balled up load out, flip it, and place the ball back in the dryer, it will unroll, fluff, and roll back up in the opposite direction.....the mysteries of a dryer! mainly its the fitted sheets that cause issues, and worse for the ones that have elastic all the way around.... | ||
|
Post# 945616 , Reply# 35 6/27/2017 at 19:02 (2,487 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
|
Forward ... Reverse ... Mine runs 4 mins forward and 40 seconds reverse, repeated continuously throughout drying and cool down. The post-cycle wrinkle guard function reverses on each 30 second tumble (at 5-min intervals). It seems effective. Flat sheets, fitted sheets, quilts, etc. ... rarely have anything come out damp due to balling-up. The drum and baffle design may be related. Each of the three baffles has a "dip" in a different place -- left, center, and right. | ||
|
Post# 945624 , Reply# 36 6/27/2017 at 21:05 (2,487 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Interesting thing; never have issues with bed linen tangling when using large commercial/laundromat dryers. OTOH at home is another matter. Even the reversing AEG Oko-Lavatherm will tangle sheets.
Happily don't machine dry bed linens often so this isn't a major worry. One wonders if it large drums of commercial dryers have something to do with things not getting tangled for most part. | ||
|
Post# 945625 , Reply# 37 6/27/2017 at 21:22 (2,487 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN) |
||
I've always wondered if you could just slightly ramp the tumble speed up and down throughout the drying, if the harmonic that causes certain items to clump or ball would be broken. We have a new lathe at the shop and it has the ability to ramp the spindle speed up and down instead of running at a constant rate. This improves the finish by breaking any resonance between the tool and the work that causes chatter. This would likely work with laundry also, albeit at a slower RPM and not using a 40 horsepower motor!
| ||
|
Post# 945656 , Reply# 38 6/28/2017 at 03:16 (2,487 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
It`s not just your impression Launderess, the diameter of a dryer`s drum has definitely something to do with tangling or balling up larger things.
My first drier was a compact 3 kg capacity Creda non reversing one. One of those cheap toy dryers that vented through the door. It couldn`t handle anything larger than hand towels. After 3 minutes with sheets as soon as a heavy ball rolled up it would literally jump around because in addition to the small drum diameter it was such a light weight. Had occasional tangling problems with other regular 5 kg dryers as well but never to such an extreme extent. | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
