Thread Number: 75703
/ Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Everything old is new again |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 995278   5/26/2018 at 16:07 (2,133 days old) by cuffs054 (MONTICELLO, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I speak from total ignorance, but wouldn't going back to a single solid tub same water overall? |
|
Post# 995307 , Reply# 1   5/27/2018 at 02:38 (2,133 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 995311 , Reply# 2   5/27/2018 at 05:10 (2,133 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
No, it wouldn't really save much water as overflow and long spray rinses would likely be needed I shouldn't wonder.
Then consider even though many do use a dryer, for top loaders filters do help in fluff removal. Granted some more than others, but there you are. Suppose you could design something like Maytag's sediment filter used on their wringer washers. Oh and IIRC one issue with solid tub washers was that Madame had to clean the thing out (just like a wash tub) after use. With many modern front loaders holes for inner tub have become much smaller than in past; this IIRC helps keep water consumption down as less is needed between the tubs. Could be wrong but think top loading washers are moving that way as well. |
Post# 995312 , Reply# 3   5/27/2018 at 05:11 (2,133 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
|
Post# 995334 , Reply# 4   5/27/2018 at 12:08 (2,132 days old) by Johnb300m (Chicago)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 995340 , Reply# 5   5/27/2018 at 13:34 (2,132 days old) by IowaBear (Cedar Rapids, IA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 995342 , Reply# 6   5/27/2018 at 14:17 (2,132 days old) by appnut (TX)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 995358 , Reply# 7   5/27/2018 at 16:14 (2,132 days old) by cuffs054 (MONTICELLO, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I meant this more for top loaders. I was watching my TAG and thought about all the water in the outer tub doing jack while my clothes rubbed themselves raw in no water. Wouldn't spray rinses work with this idea? Or maybe one real deep rinse? |
Post# 995380 , Reply# 8   5/27/2018 at 19:06 (2,132 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
That is how things were done until rather recently. It has only been since the 1960's or maybe 1970's in the post "women's liberation" generation that things changed.
Hence that famous opening of and film "The Women" of 1939, which pre-dates the Betty Furness clip by only < two decades. For centuries a married woman's legal name was "Mrs. Albert Windsor", signifying she "belonged" to her husband. Socially a married women could use "Mary Haines" or "Mrs. Haines". The latter was also used formerly say by trades/service people and or others not intimate and or same social level as a married woman. In that famous scene after that manicurist finishes spilling all that dirt about Crystal Allen and Mr. Haines and says "I'll tell Mrs. Fowler you were in... what did you say your name was...?" Mary pulls herself up to her full height and grandly says "Mrs. Stephen Haines", as if she were the Queen of England or something. |
Post# 995387 , Reply# 9   5/27/2018 at 19:20 (2,132 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
IIRC the idea behind solid tub automatics is they worked well (as did wringer washers) when soap was still dominate for laundry day.
The overflow rinses pushed scum laden water up and over the tub so it wouldn't be strained through the wash. Detergents don't have same issues as soap and perfectly well can keep muck in suspension (in theory). Thus you can have two tubs and get that newfangled features, recirculating water and lint filters. Remember automatic washing machine sales early on vastly outstripped tumble dryers. If a family could only afford one laundry appliance Her Indoors would go for a fully automatic washing machine. The addition of lint filtration meant (again in theory) a cleaner wash that was hung up on the lines to dry. Filtering wash and rinse waters presumably means less of the latter would be required since (hopefully) less fluff and whatever would be deposited on wash. It does seem as if some solid tub washers did have recirculating water/filter systems: Blackstone: But not Speed Queen: This post was last edited 05/27/2018 at 22:35 |
Post# 995391 , Reply# 10   5/27/2018 at 19:29 (2,132 days old) by cuffs054 (MONTICELLO, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Launderess, couldn't it be achieved by self clean tech like we have now? Or pull from small sump and 'filter flow' it? |
Post# 995399 , Reply# 11   5/27/2018 at 20:51 (2,132 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
But why go through all that trouble reinventing the wheel so to speak when tweaking automatics with two tubs gives same benefits in terms of water/energy savings. That is keeping of things consumers like such as spray rinses and recirculating lint filtration.
For the record there are single tub washing machines out there, however IIRC they are all mostly various semi-automatic twin tubs and such. My Maytag wringer (solid tub) has a "sediment zone" and indeed the thing does trap much muck. However quite a lot of lint and whatever still moves in the water as one can see it when filling tub and water is moved about by the agitator. Did a load of black t-shirts in the Maytag wringer that came out covered in hairs and lint. |
Post# 995488 , Reply# 13   5/28/2018 at 20:15 (2,131 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
But has have said often in this forum; traditional top loading washers that Americans long have loved are dead or dying out like the Dodo. It just isn't possible to have them with ever more puny energy restrictions.
This is why don't think manufactures are going to pour heaps of R&D into making a "better" top loader. SQ has done so and by all accounts ticked many off. Top loading washers need water, a good amount of it; otherwise you are just beating things about. |
Post# 995516 , Reply# 14   5/29/2018 at 02:55 (2,131 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I`m not entirely sure on this one, but I could imagine that all the TLs we see in the Westinghouse commercial might have been solid tub automatics.
This would explain their struggle on heavy sediment removal. Tow cups of "dirty" sand... *LOL* Would expect every sane person to shake their beach towels thoroughly before washing so at first glance solid tubs still seem to be a better way to save resources than SQ`s grey water rinses or lots of the other horrid things that have been done to each and every traditional TL washer in recent years. Or maybe it`s even worse that HE washplate TLs appeared on the market which again seem to work best only if you override the HE fill level. I think the worst disadvantage of solid tubs apart from bad sediment ejection was no accurate ability to take control of the water level for partial loads. This problem has never been solved, has it ? And even if water level control could be done I have my doubts that two full solid tubs of water would still meet current energy and water requirements for an eco cycle. |
Post# 995522 , Reply# 15   5/29/2018 at 05:56 (2,131 days old) by tolivac (greenville nc)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Sand+water=ABRASIVE SLURRY!!Think of this going thru your washer's pump!!!Yes,try to REMOVE the sand from things BEFORE loading into the washer!! |
Post# 995523 , Reply# 16   5/29/2018 at 05:57 (2,131 days old) by tolivac (greenville nc)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Forgot to put in my previous post-Sand pumpted into your plumbing----CLOGS!!!since sand doesn't "float" thru plumbing as other waste does. |
Post# 995535 , Reply# 17   5/29/2018 at 09:28 (2,131 days old) by johnb300m (Chicago)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
I honestly don't think a perf tub in a solid tub wastes that much water at all.
Considering the improvements a perf tub gives you, that added water is minimal. The only design that was grossly wasteful were the GE FilterFlos because of the enormous difference in diameter between the perf tub and solid tub. They needed lots of extra room for the basket to oscillate inside the solid tub, requiring insane wall clearance. Other brands had very little clearance between their tubs because they oscillated together on the suspension. |
Post# 995579 , Reply# 18   5/29/2018 at 18:52 (2,130 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Show that on average solid tub washers (Frigidaire, Blackstone (?), etc...) used only about two gallons less water than perforated for an average 8lb wash.
This would make sense when you consider all overflow and perhaps extra rinsing needed to ensure muck and lint were flushed off laundry. Even extrapolating that out for an 18lb or whatever top loader don't think needle will move much in terms of energy/water savings. As duly noted washers both top and H-axis for some time now have reduced the space between inner and outer tubs. |
Post# 997760 , Reply# 19   6/19/2018 at 18:09 (2,109 days old) by wft2800 (Leatherhead, Surrey)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Could you elucidate on the design of the GE FF and why it was so much more of a water-hog? |
Post# 997769 , Reply# 20   6/19/2018 at 18:46 (2,109 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
GE was a water hog because, like the older solid tub models, the inner tub was suspended within the outer tub rather than both being suspended together. As such, there needed to be quite a large gap between the two tubs for movement during spin which in solid tub models wouldn't have water in it until spinning, but in perforated tub models was filled as well for washing and rinsing.
Why this happened was quite simple, GE, always ones to cut costs, wanted a perforated tub and made no real effort to actually redesign the machine, they just put a tub with holes in and called it done. Don't even get me started on the terrible quality of GE's electronics, but to say simply, you will never find a 1960s GE color TV as they hardly lasted 2-3 years let alone 50 like the RCA in my living room. |
Post# 997804 , Reply# 21   6/20/2018 at 00:45 (2,109 days old) by beekeyknee (Columbia, MO)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|