|
Thread Number: 84789
/ Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Wet Clothes |
[Down to Last] |  |
Post# 1092486 10/8/2020 at 22:10 (1,294 days old) by chetlaham  (United States) |
||
 | ||
|
|
Post# 1092493 , Reply# 1 10/8/2020 at 22:31 (1,294 days old) by SudsMaster (SF Bay Area, California) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 1092497 , Reply# 2 10/8/2020 at 23:18 (1,294 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092504 , Reply# 3 10/8/2020 at 23:58 (1,294 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 1092508 , Reply# 4 10/9/2020 at 00:18 (1,294 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092509 , Reply# 5 10/9/2020 at 00:34 (1,294 days old) by petek (Ontari ari ari O ) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 1092522 , Reply# 6 10/9/2020 at 03:21 (1,294 days old) by thomasortega (El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora de Los Angeles de Porciúncula) |
||
|
Extremely wet, dripping I've actually tested that when I made the Niagara (15 minute tumble) and it indeed removed some water, like 2 cups. | ||
|
Post# 1092523 , Reply# 7 10/9/2020 at 03:26 (1,294 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092533 , Reply# 8 10/9/2020 at 04:55 (1,294 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092789 , Reply# 9 10/10/2020 at 21:25 (1,292 days old) by SudsMaster (SF Bay Area, California) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092804 , Reply# 10 10/11/2020 at 04:02 (1,292 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
In the 1960s it was not that uncommon here to have an automatic (usually a TL but with a drum that tumbled) that did not spin at all as a cheaper alternative to a "Vollautomat" (fully automatic washer)
Some people still had a separate spin dryer anyways from the days where clothes were washed in a pulsator washer or with a brush on a wash table and then boiled in a wood fired copper. Early fully automatic`s spin speeds were rather poor which was another reason to go with just an automatic that did not spin at and take advantage of a separate spinner. Washers also did not always offer a short spin after the rinse hold of a delicates or easy care cycle, sometimes you could only choose to pump out the water and hang things to drip dry or give them a full spin which kind of negated the purpose of a special cycle in the minds of engineers back then. I don`t think those cycles saw much use if someone had a BOL washer without the option of a short spin. But anyways it really doesn`t make a lot of difference if a washer tumbles while draining or not, if there`s no spin cycle it`s always a terrible mess to unload the soaking wet clothes whether you hang them on the line or put them in a spinner. | ||
|
Post# 1092838 , Reply# 11 10/11/2020 at 12:24 (1,292 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092840 , Reply# 12 10/11/2020 at 13:02 (1,292 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
I've mentioned my Constructa before. Here's a thread about it:
www.automaticwasher.org/c... You can also use the search function on this website for the most famous German twintub, the Turnamat. It's similar but with a built on centrifuge. | ||
|
Post# 1092847 , Reply# 13 10/11/2020 at 14:21 (1,292 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1092889 , Reply# 14 10/11/2020 at 22:32 (1,291 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
Is there a wiring diagram to this machine by chance? | ||
| Post# 1092989 , Reply# 15 10/12/2020 at 19:35 (1,290 days old) by jeb (Mansfield Ohiio) | ||
|
Didn't Okeefe & Merrit make a combo in the 50's without a spin but very high drying temp to make up for it? | ||
|
Post# 1093114 , Reply# 16 10/13/2020 at 21:58 (1,289 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
Yes  It was a 36" wide combination, it was first sold under the name Automatic Washer Company and later showed up on the west coast under the Okeefe & Merritt name in the late 50s and into the early 60s.
It did not spin at all, they were built only in gas heated models for drying, it had a 29,000 BTU burner, it did not run any hotter than most dryers, but probably ran a lot longer with heavy loads.
We have a pink one at the museum thanks to Kevin B in California, I did most of the restoration on it but never hooked it to gas to fully test.
John L. | ||
|
Post# 1093170 , Reply# 17 10/14/2020 at 12:59 (1,289 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
Distribution tumbles have absolutely nil to no effect on water retention of fabrics. Their purpose is to get wash broken up evenly so water drains faster, and to make spinning a bit easier (no big knots of wash). Other than that things tumbling to and fro for five, six, ten or whatever minutes will be just as wet as they where after final rinse.
There are two basic ways of doing laundry; either you shift the water, or you shift the wash. Early washing by hand, semi-automatic or in case of commercial "washers" (but not extractors), did the latter. At end of things you had to remove wash and put it either through a mangle or into an extractor. That or wrung things out by hand. Either way it was laborous, hard, work and often left wash area with wet (and dangerous) floors. Second method is what came in after fully automatic washer/extractors arrived. The machine does both functions of cleaning and removing water. Braun was first to offer washer/extractors to commercial laundries (IIRC), and one of their selling points was that it reduced labor and equipment costs. But also promoted safety as put an end to sopping wet floors. Early twin tub washers (Easy, GE and others offered them), weren't a huge success . This even though spinning removed more water than best power wringers (mangling equals about 230 rpms), so American housewives stuck with wringer washers (for many reasons) until post WWII when fully automatics began taking over. There is no benefit to taking things sopping wet out of wash and hanging or whatever to "drip dry". Well maybe for synthetic fabrics which are hydrophopic and thus don't absorb much water anyway, but for everything else... Extraction either by spinning, wringing, mangling is the second part of cleaning wash. It forces out muck, soils, soap/detergent, etc... giving a better result. Early washers both commercial and domestic that didn't spin between rinses used far more water because more rinse cycles were needed to dilute and flush out things. Machines that only washed presumed things were going to be extracted some how elsewhere. One reason spin dryers never really took hold in USA was American housewives went from wringer washers to fully automatics. Aside from things like Hoover twin tubs no one bothered with hauling wet laundry to a different machine to remove water. If people wanted to do that they would have remained with mangles. Have done a fair amount of hand wash loads when there isn't enough to warrant using Miele or other washers. And am here to tell you jeans, bed linens, clothing, etc... are heavy when sopping wet. You won't be hanging them to dry on anything but the strongest contraptions because weight if just a few items will cause lines to sag if not collapse. Also when said sopping wet laundry is bunged into spin dryer you can see how much muck/residue was still trapped in wash. This even after two, three or four deep tub rinses and water was dripping away clear. | ||
|
Post# 1093211 , Reply# 18 10/14/2020 at 22:36 (1,288 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
The Reason Twin Tub Washers Did Not Catch On In The US Was cost and the fact that machines like Easy Spin Dryer machines were also larger.
Almost everyone agreed even before WW2 that spin dryer type washers were much better, there no no love of Wringer washers, everyone that used them knew how dangerous they were and how hard on clothing they were.
Once the Bendix automatic arrived on the seen with others soon following few people would buy machines like an Easy if they could have an automatic for just a little more.
The only reason WWs sold so well was they were cheap and reasonably compact.
John L. | ||
|
Post# 1093312 , Reply# 19 10/15/2020 at 23:01 (1,287 days old) by Chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1093316 , Reply# 20 10/16/2020 at 00:10 (1,287 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
250 rpm is extraction/spin | ||
|
Post# 1093481 , Reply# 21 10/17/2020 at 00:07 (1,286 days old) by Chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1093806 , Reply# 22 10/20/2020 at 05:26 (1,283 days old) by thomasortega (El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora de Los Angeles de Porciúncula) |
||
|
"Would a washer that tumbled at 250 rpm be able to clean clothes?" Chetlaham, Pleas ehelp me understanding what kind of frankenstein you're trying to make. 250rpm wash, no spin, tumble dry. Will it also release fabric softener on wash and detergent on final rinse "just to be different"? I'm really not understanding your concept... | ||
|
Post# 1093808 , Reply# 23 10/20/2020 at 06:31 (1,283 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094022 , Reply# 25 10/21/2020 at 23:37 (1,281 days old) by SudsMaster (SF Bay Area, California) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094031 , Reply# 26 10/22/2020 at 04:30 (1,281 days old) by Chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
I see you're triggered again John. Which customer did you upset this time around? I'd take your very own advice of not taking it out on other people. In addition to letting Jason run the business, negative reviews regarding behavior aren't coming from him.
"Again this is beyond our control. Please do not take it out on our staff!" www.alcoappliance.net/... @Thomasortega: Don't listen to John, or anything he says about me. Its all made up. I'm simply another person that he wants to ride off this site. I'm thinking of a combo machine. In so far I'm abandoning the 250 rpm idea. It won't wash well enough in addition to pushing water up into vents made for drying. | ||
|
Post# 1094033 , Reply# 27 10/22/2020 at 04:55 (1,281 days old) by Chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
250 RPM | ||
|
Post# 1094093 , Reply# 28 10/22/2020 at 20:27 (1,280 days old) by thomasortega (El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora de Los Angeles de Porciúncula) |
||
|
"...in addition to perhaps allowing the machine to get away without having a suspension." No way at all.... Using the Niagara as an example.... even tumbling with no water would make the washer start dancing like Paula Abdul. The water weight helps keep the washer in place during wash... and... sometimes it moves sideways depending on the load and how the load "fell" in one specific revolution. | ||
|
Post# 1094094 , Reply# 29 10/22/2020 at 20:29 (1,280 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094124 , Reply# 30 10/23/2020 at 01:33 (1,280 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094125 , Reply# 31 10/23/2020 at 02:38 (1,280 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094134 , Reply# 32 10/23/2020 at 06:17 (1,280 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094135 , Reply# 33 10/23/2020 at 06:34 (1,280 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094136 , Reply# 34 10/23/2020 at 06:38 (1,280 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094152 , Reply# 35 10/23/2020 at 08:17 (1,280 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Energy Restriction | ||
|
Post# 1094174 , Reply# 36 10/23/2020 at 11:02 (1,280 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
250 RPM spin Combination with no suspension ?? It not worth commenting on, she is just an anonymous troll vying for attention dreaming up silly ideas that have no possibility of ever being built, the lack of consideration of energy consumption in all your ideas shows how unlikely any of these ideas make any sense let alone will ever be built by anyone.
John | ||
|
Post# 1094189 , Reply# 37 10/23/2020 at 12:50 (1,280 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. This post was last edited 10/23/2020 at 15:33 | ||
|
Post# 1094214 , Reply# 38 10/23/2020 at 16:58 (1,280 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Energy Consumption
Such ideas are being built everyday in China for better or for worse, and soon or later, nuclear energy will take over making electrical consumption a none issue.
There is also the fact you fail to take other threads into consideration where I'm actually trying to save water on a high efficiency design where there is little carry over water in the sump and pre-washing only where needed. Further I have a thread on a catalyst type machine that concentrates detergent complemented with an impeller like wash action. Concepts and ideas worth trying. | ||
|
Post# 1094290 , Reply# 39 10/24/2020 at 00:58 (1,279 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094301 , Reply# 40 10/24/2020 at 07:40 (1,279 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 1094302 , Reply# 41 10/24/2020 at 07:54 (1,279 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
Nuclear Power Is Over There will likely never be a new NPP planned and built in the US in my lifetime.
NP is the most EXPENSIVE way to generate power ever conceived that has been used on a significant scale.
To even still suggest NP as solution to global climate change shows a great lack of current knowledge of energy related matters.
John L. | ||
|
Post# 1094328 , Reply# 42 10/24/2020 at 10:03 (1,279 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Nuclear
Most industry looking into the horizon experts disagree with you. Natural gas isn't going to be around forever, it still emits CO2, and relies on a few major pipelines. Wind and solar are not only intermittent but rarely match demand curves- but thats not even the real problem- they severally lower the critical clearing time of the bulk power system so much so that spinning base-load turbines are needed so a 5 cycle fault on a transmission line doesn't plunge the US or another country into darkness.
Coal is dirty and also pollutes. Scrubbers help but add cost. Hydro is limited. There is nothing that comes even close to which produces more power per square foot. Zero carbon, safe, reliable, and has the lowest fatality rates of even green energy. Don't take my word for it: Batteries- even the largest battery farms in world can only stores enough power to light a city for a minutes at most. At most. There is no way batteries or even ultra capacitors can store enough energy for a 24 hour period to compensate for a lack of sun or wind. This guy explains it better than I can: Whats left as the only viable solution is nuclear. Yes nuclear. I'm well aware gas, solar and wind are all the rage right now being cheap as dirt compared to running a 60s-70s nuclear reactor let alone building one today. Thats true. But a decade or two from now advancements in nuclear tech will bring cost down while the short falls of gas and renewables will cause cost spikes such that these forms of generation will not longer be practical. To the doubters I say look at France which is happily generating most of its electricity though nuclear. BTW, I left out all the oil, coal and gas needed to make solar panels and wind turbines. Hint, its not eco friendly on any level. | ||
|
Post# 1094329 , Reply# 43 10/24/2020 at 10:04 (1,279 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094341 , Reply# 44 10/24/2020 at 11:58 (1,279 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
NP Is too expensive and far too dangerous and if we keep building better better homes and more efficient appliances there is just no need to go down that road.
You should read up on the videos you post and you can see the biased views of the people on them and their connection to the NP industry.
If NP made any sense there would be a move to built it, hopefully next to your house, LOL
Do note that your homeowners insurance does not cover any damages from a NP accident.
John L. | ||
|
Post# 1094434 , Reply# 46 10/24/2020 at 23:31 (1,278 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
It doesn't matter how efficient homes get. Coal, gas and oil won't be around forever and still emit CO2. There is no way around that. Wind and solar have over a dozen limitations some of which I covered above. Solar and wind will never provide all the energy needed or be 100% sustainable in the long run.
Many of those so called "biased views" come from people who are career experts with degrees (and work experience) in testing, engineering, construction and physics. I'd like to see you build a working nuclear reactor and its associated controls driving a steam turbine John. Lets see it. I'd gladly live next to a nuclear generating plant if it were designed to survive a total station blackout indefinitely. You assume I'm afraid of nuclear, but I'm not. It doesn't matter that HI insurance doesn't cover nuclear accidents, because with modern thorium reactors there are simply no accidents whatsoever. Its clear you've drunken the so called kool-aid. Do you even know anything about your three boogy men Chernobyl, 3 mile Island and Fukushima? Chernobyl was USSR reactor that 1) had the ability to carry a run away nuclear reaction 2) had no containment dome. Both of which have always been illegal in the United States. So that scenario isn't legit for any US power plant let alone should a modern reactor be built in the US. 3 mile Island and Fukushima- these are old style reactors requiring running electric pumps to keep the core cool. Lose the pumps and the concrete around the reactor core melts. That issue has been well known for years and years hence why modern reactors are being designed and pro-type tested around surviving a total loss of cooling without melting down. As such all the dooms day scenarios played out in movies like the China Syndrome will be none existent. So with that said yes I'll gladly live next to, even work in a nuclear generating facility. I know the truth, you do not. | ||
|
Post# 1094438 , Reply# 47 10/24/2020 at 23:49 (1,278 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
@Gizmo: In your haste to paint me as a clown, you deliberately took my statement out of context by leaving this out of your quote: "Batteries- even the largest battery farms in world can only stores enough power to light a city for a minutes at most..."
The power needs of an individual home can not compare to entire towns, cities or states. A home isn't running millions of square feet of server racks, smelting aluminum, cooling auditoriums with 10,000 people inside them, pushing subway cars, treating hundreds of thousands of gallons of water per day, running tens of thousands of 150+ HP motors, mining minerals, building consumer goods, hydroponically growing food, running farms, flash freezing, charging thousands (one day millions) of electric cars... just to name a few. Batteries at most could power NYC for a minutes, maybe an hour or two if we put resources we don't have into massive battery farms. You need at least 24 hours, realistically 96 hours of batteries to ride through the lack of wind and sun. Now try doing the same with all 3 interconnection in the US. Its just not physically possible. So yes, going beyond single family homes and some businesses it is indeed your imagination. | ||
|
Post# 1094444 , Reply# 50 10/25/2020 at 03:14 (1,278 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
Not only moved... But it sounds like ALL of you need MORE FIBER in your diets!
This post was last edited 10/25/2020 at 06:26 | ||
|
Post# 1094446 , Reply# 51 10/25/2020 at 03:23 (1,278 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
You miss the point that a smelter uses on orders of magnitude more power than a house, so much so batteries become impractical. Yes batteries help the grid retain frequency during unexpected events for a short period or through normal peaks and troughs but nothing long term. Batteries will never be able to makeup for 24 hours without solar and wind, so you need spinning reserves which are usually coal, gas and oil in most places where hydro isn't present.
My apologies if I read your comment the wrong way. The issue for me is that there is a member here who is very upset with some of the views I have expressed (toward appliances) and as such I am constantly out into a position where I have to defend my point of view. Don't worry about going off topic. This is a great discussion and I'm learning new things. :) Any replies which don't involve making fun of LGBTQI issues or "being off my meds" I consider to be on topic. With that said I see no issue in a low cost Combo washer that just happens to not spin. | ||
|
Post# 1094454 , Reply# 52 10/25/2020 at 07:19 (1,278 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
No matter what energy you use, it all costs money. So energy saving always is always a goal when you design a new machine. The cost of a suspension in a machine is much less than the cost of the energy it costs when a machine doesn't spin and therefor needs way more energy to get the clothes dry. No sensible consumer would invest in a such a machine. And consumer organisations would always give it a low rating for that matter.
| ||
|
Post# 1094458 , Reply# 53 10/25/2020 at 08:03 (1,278 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Maybe, maybe not with all consumers. Remember GE? Filter Flo washers that had all that water in the outer tub and dishwashers that used 12-16 gallons of water due to half a gallon in the sump? Modern BOL GE DWs still hold several cups. Often things are a balance between cost, performance and energy. A strong of one sometimes allows lesser of the other.
But you are correct none the less. A suspension system cost less after just a few months of ownership. | ||
|
Post# 1094548 , Reply# 54 10/25/2020 at 20:31 (1,277 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
The 42 Solar panels on my home are generating almost twice the power I am using with my 5 refrigerators and 5 A/C systems that my home has not to mention about 20 other major appliances.
Chelse you need to think ahead, although have you thought about investing in incandescent light bulbs, they make about as much sense as NP does today.
John | ||
|
Post# 1094604 , Reply# 55 10/26/2020 at 06:53 (1,277 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
And in the future a set of 42 solar panels will generate near double what your panels are outputting today. The issue at hand being there is no practical way to store that energy for days when the sun isn't shinning. Yes you can invest in a battery system that will could get you through 3 days without sun however multiply that number for every home, every business, every office, every factory, ect and the cost + materials will be millions of times the cost of 300 new NP in the US. Not to mention batteries have a relatively short life expectancy. Whose going to recycle billions and billions of rechargeable batteries?
Cheap gas is making nuclear very unattractive (along with unsubstantiated fear) so yes you're right NP will be delayed in the foreseeable future. However, soon or latter those plants will have be built absent some quantum leap in energy storage. | ||
|
Post# 1094614 , Reply# 56 10/26/2020 at 08:41 (1,277 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094630 , Reply# 57 10/26/2020 at 10:01 (1,277 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Wet clothes are fun to think about, makes for a simpler machine. Less intellectual expenditure on my part. Not much to screw up with a tub solidly connected to the cabinet, single 16 pole motor, 2 pumps, three glowing calrods below the inner basket and a blower. Two channels, one which doubles as a full flume. EM timer. Simple, long lasting, reliable... why not?
| ||
|
Post# 1094637 , Reply# 58 10/26/2020 at 11:16 (1,277 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094643 , Reply# 59 10/26/2020 at 12:15 (1,277 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094645 , Reply# 60 10/26/2020 at 12:55 (1,277 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
"but I can't see someone taking the clothes out, putting them in a spin dryer than putting them back in to dry."
I have shown you this machine before. That's exactly what was done in it in the 70's in Europe. The text says: From the laundryroom to the drying attick is only 11 centimeters.
View Full Size
| ||
|
Post# 1094646 , Reply# 61 10/26/2020 at 12:57 (1,277 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094651 , Reply# 62 10/26/2020 at 13:29 (1,277 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094746 , Reply# 64 10/27/2020 at 02:22 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
I agree it will need more water for better rinsing. There is no way around that hence why I was asking about a 250RPM spin which will help at least some.
However, respectfully, how do you know it wouldn't sell? The incredibly low cost will appeal to a certain percentage of the market who are purely price conscious. The reduced weight from not having counter weights will further lower the price. A $300 combo is a killer deal. For some water usage will not matter since they are used to top loads anyways. Energy usage will be a bit perky, yes. Thats the sacrifice. I've seen plenty of singer timers last 30-40+ years without issue. If it worked back then it will work today. | ||
|
Post# 1094748 , Reply# 65 10/27/2020 at 04:21 (1,276 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
"The reduced weight from not having counter weights will
further lower the price"
Don`t you get it, there cannot be a reduced weight if you build a washer without suspension even at 250 RPM unless it`s bolted down. They have been around in the past and vanished for a good reason. Was thinking about a Cordes machine where I changed the belt for a friend eons ago, but decided to delete my post because I saw myself dragged into a stupid political discussion which is not only pointless if someone ignores the facts but also against the rules. There`s also a Zanussi in the Pink Forum that spins without suspension and it certainly hasn`t a reduced weight at 194 lbs. CLICK HERE TO GO TO mrboilwash's LINK
View Full Size
| ||
|
Post# 1094749 , Reply# 66 10/27/2020 at 05:41 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094754 , Reply# 67 10/27/2020 at 05:52 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Ignoring Facts
I'm not ignoring anything. I understand this concept will take more water and energy, I never once disputed that fact.
I also know high speed spin need a suspension or a bolt down. Low speed spin will not work on a smaller plastic washer. I know the old combos spun without a suspension at 250 rpm and thus I assumed the weight of the washer itself kept them stationary but now I get the feeling those had counterweights in them? I wouldn't call this discussion political pointless. Most threads here center around energy efficiency and government involvement. There is also the fact that when I do post in regards to subjects I deal with day in and day out my posts are skimmed over and not taken seriously simply because I don't pass the appliance knowledge test. I don't have a collection of major appliances, I don't service appliances for a living, and I've restored only a handful of machines. So yes I have absolutely no clue in some regards especially when it comes to vintage FL and combos. | ||
|
Post# 1094761 , Reply# 68 10/27/2020 at 06:15 (1,276 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094762 , Reply# 69 10/27/2020 at 06:20 (1,276 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
Sorry for not being clear on this one but I was referring to those biased, lobby driven "facts" about nuclear power which I decided better not to be involved in. Not in the Blue Forum at least.
Considering how well you know how to trigger Louis, John, me and many others again and again all the credit goes to you! | ||
|
Post# 1094765 , Reply# 70 10/27/2020 at 06:35 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Thats what you don't understand. Those statements regarding NP are neither biased nor are they lobby driven. They are rooted in physics and practicality. Same physics that has the sun splitting atoms instead of burning coal. NP doesn't take idiots, it takes the best and brightest humanity has to offer.
Once NP becomes dominate, energy consumption will no longer be an issue. Minus capitol and maintenance (which will be less in the long run compared to renewables and batteries), NP is 100% free and 100% carbon free. | ||
|
Post# 1094766 , Reply# 71 10/27/2020 at 06:37 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094769 , Reply# 72 10/27/2020 at 06:48 (1,276 days old) by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094771 , Reply# 73 10/27/2020 at 07:06 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
There is enough thorium and uranium in the earths crust to last for millennia. By then I'm sure we will find other sources of energy like using space vehicles to harvest power from stars assuming we don't create one on earth.
Newer designs use fuel more efficiently, and there are experiments being conducted in recycling the fuel down to something more safe/manageable. Still then caskets of spent fuel rods + generating stations take up a small fraction of space compared to solar and windfarms of the same MW output. | ||
|
Post# 1094773 , Reply# 74 10/27/2020 at 07:15 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094777 , Reply# 75 10/27/2020 at 07:49 (1,276 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094778 , Reply# 76 10/27/2020 at 08:04 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094779 , Reply# 77 10/27/2020 at 08:14 (1,276 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Modern Combo Washer
John, I want you to see this:
www.whirlpool.com/content... If we could just remove the condenser for a top access filter and exhaust we'd be half way there. Ditch the springs and shocks, adds a 16 pole motor and belt, get rid of the detergent pumps, cold water fill only, mechanical timer (the electronics in this washer aren't my cup of tea) , and we'd be all set. An entry level model could have no dispenser to save on cost. The timer would determine water temps by adding more wash time. 10 minutes for cold/delicate, 50 minutes for a heavy duty boil wash. I'd make the water heater stats cut out at 186*F-192*F. No an actual boil but high altitudes taken into consideration. I wish I could actually play with the machine. | ||
|
Post# 1094859 , Reply# 78 10/27/2020 at 19:40 (1,275 days old) by thomasortega (El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora de Los Angeles de Porciúncula) |
||
|
"...I know it was done in Europe, but modern day 2020 I don't think people will settle with a spin dryer." The Laundry Alternative sold 43.376 spin dryer units from January 1st 2020 to 5:38pm (PT) 10/27/20. 1 more while I was typing this. | ||
|
Post# 1094882 , Reply# 79 10/28/2020 at 05:20 (1,275 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
Thats still a small number compared to global laundry sales.
My point is I can't see someone buying a combo, having it shut off middle cycle, take the clothes out, spin them, then putting them back into the drum. Just have the machine run through the cycle for an hour and 20 minutes and you're done. | ||
| Post# 1094887 , Reply# 80 10/28/2020 at 07:18 (1,275 days old) by gizmo (Victoria, Australia) | ||
|
after 1 hr 20 minutes the wash will still be dripping wet if it hasn't been spun out. | ||
|
Post# 1094889 , Reply# 81 10/28/2020 at 07:59 (1,275 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1094894 , Reply# 82 10/28/2020 at 08:51 (1,275 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
Reply # 81 | ||
|
Post# 1094898 , Reply# 83 10/28/2020 at 09:23 (1,275 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
|
All I can say is.... | ||
|
Post# 1094906 , Reply# 84 10/28/2020 at 09:52 (1,275 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
Just have the machine run through the cycle for an hour and 20 minutes and you're done.hour + 20 mins = 80 mins total cycle, with 80 mins total - 45 mins washing/rinsing/draining = 35 mins drying time When will you have this machine built? The people are eager to see it run a variety of loads ... jeans, sheets, bath towels & socks & kitchen towels, quilts, comforters, lingerie, shirts & trousers, knit/synthetic garments, throw rugs, curtains, woolen items, shower curtains, etc. | ||
|
Post# 1094907 , Reply# 85 10/28/2020 at 10:07 (1,275 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
I wish I could build it as a test concept, but have no means to do so. Ideally if I could get my hands on a combo washer and rig the motor for manual control- ie just tumble.
@John- Where are you getting that 3 hour figure from? This combo will be on a 240 volts, 30 amp circuit. Do an experiment. Drain a Speed Queen Classic Clean washer with a tub full of clothes. Let the clothes drip for about half an hour or so. Place them in a Whirlpool top mount filter dryer. I can't see it taking 3 hours. But that is going by what I did 10 years ago when my DD stopped spinning. @Dadoes: good catch. I was thinking about the timer increments. That machine will have a thermostat on the exhaust that will re-start the timer when the exhaust temps go above 140*F-160*F. Here is an example of an old Combo that appears to do the same in regards to having stats that advance the timer when exhaust temps go up: This post was last edited 10/28/2020 at 10:31 | ||
| Post# 1094928 , Reply# 86 10/28/2020 at 12:38 (1,275 days old) by murando531 (Augusta, Georgia - US) | ||
Putting soggy clothes into a dryer is going to ruin the dryer.... what sense does any of this make. Not even in the hanging-out-to-dry days did people just hang clothes up sopping and dripping wet... they got as much water out by hand or they ran each item through a roller wringer. My grandparents grew up as kids without even a wringer washer, just a big barrel and a stick to wash clothes, and they still squeezed everything out as best they could.
Idk who needs to hear this but put soggy clothes in your dryers at your own risk, because once that water starts sloshing through the felt drum seals and into the blower and onto the motor and heating elements, I don't think I have to illustrate the outcome. | ||
| Post# 1094957 , Reply# 87 10/28/2020 at 15:17 (1,275 days old) by johnb300m (Chicago) | ||
 | ||
|
Post# 1094959 , Reply# 88 10/28/2020 at 15:39 (1,275 days old) by luxflairguy (Wilmington NC) |
||
|
I'm lost! What's the point of this thread again? | ||
|
Post# 1094985 , Reply# 89 10/28/2020 at 19:43 (1,274 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1095032 , Reply# 90 10/29/2020 at 07:43 (1,274 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
|
Chelaham, how about this idea... It's just my opinion, but I dreamed up a way Maybe Whirlpool could make a combination machine: Have a Duet washer on top of a pedestal that does not have the drawer but is empty. The dryer apparatus could then be located in the pedestal. It might even be possible to have a moisture sensor in the exhaust that would come from the drum of the duet to the vent outside. All that would be needed would be large hoses to direct the hot air into the drum, so would not cost so much. What say you? | ||
|
Post# 1095043 , Reply# 91 10/29/2020 at 09:39 (1,274 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1095044 , Reply# 92 10/29/2020 at 09:42 (1,274 days old) by ozzie908 (Lincoln UK) |
||
Washer dryers  | ||
| Post# 1095047 , Reply# 93 10/29/2020 at 10:19 (1,274 days old) by murando531 (Augusta, Georgia - US) | ||
|
Combo unit
Okay that makes sense then. You said “top lint filter Whirlpool dryer” and that’s where I was confused.
I’ve no experience with combo unit washer-dryers but I’d imagine the reason traditional standalone units can’t easily be converted to such functions is for one, the space available inside the cabinet, and two, exposing the traditional seals in a front load washer to higher, dry heat on a regular basis would very quickly cause them to brittle and dry rot. Combos, from visual inspection, seem to have seals that are designed to withstand the heat but this may also make them more expensive, which would be impractical in a stand alone washer for how infrequently consumers would want to “convert” their machine. On top of that, from what I understand, the drying components of a combo unit are also quite underpowered because of how small and space saving they have to be, which also explains why drying times for combos are notoriously long considering how small the usable capacity is for these machines. Just at a glance, combo models from WP, LG, all the Midea/Chinese knockoffs and such, they all basically have a small shaded-pole fan motor and a tiny little heating element ring. There’s no way that can compete with a full-size dryer blower and heating element duct. I’d say the experiment to set a combo washer to “No Spin” and let the load sit and drizzle the excess out, and then set it separately to dry, if the machine will allow such a function, would be neat just to see how comically long it would take to adequately dry the load, but it also seems like it’s going to be a tremendous energy hog doing so. You might as well put a stock pot of water on the stove and see how long it takes to boil the pot dry at that point. | ||
|
Post# 1095050 , Reply# 94 10/29/2020 at 10:51 (1,274 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
|
That is what I was thinking... | ||
|
Post# 1095059 , Reply# 95 10/29/2020 at 12:38 (1,274 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
| Post# 1095065 , Reply# 96 10/29/2020 at 13:53 (1,274 days old) by Aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
And now after all the claptrap about power supplies
Let me put the final nail in the coffin of Chelatams moronic idea...
No thought to fabric care has been given whatsoever. The whole load is going to have most of its water still clinging to it while these powerful heaters heat it up to near boiling point. Then it’s going to spend a good while evaporating off, shrinking all fabrics, slopping water with loose dye around the whole load, then baking said dye into things. The whole point of an efficient dryer is that the balance between the point everything is hot and wet, to flash removal of said moisture to avoid shrinking and dye contamination is at its absolute minimal. And that folks is why a spin is needed. The slowest spinning machines on the market already - 600rpm and above still completely lessen this issue to it being non existent. What are you going to do? Tell folks they can only wash certain garments in one load when the entire world has systems that means they don’t have to? LOL OK. Chasing the budget demographic to sell them telling them they need to wash more loads equating to higher running costs and severe fabric degradation. Ps. Not bothered how my post comes across. At what point will you realise this idea is moronic? | ||
|
Post# 1095126 , Reply# 97 10/29/2020 at 21:45 (1,273 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1095145 , Reply# 98 10/30/2020 at 07:33 (1,273 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
35 minutes drying time | ||
|
Post# 1095147 , Reply# 99 10/30/2020 at 08:02 (1,273 days old) by chetlaham (United States) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 1095148 , Reply# 100 10/30/2020 at 08:27 (1,273 days old) by henene4 (Heidenheim a.d. Brenz (Germany)) |
||
|
??? Miele lists the hourly evaporation rate on commercial dryers. A 12 pound load of dripping wet clothes will weigh up to 36 pounds. That is a good 12kg of water, approximatley of course. With Miele, that would need about 14kW of heating power if to be evaporated in 1h, or about 25kW in a higher airflow design for 30min drying time. You know how much 25kW is? | ||
|
Post# 1095150 , Reply# 101 10/30/2020 at 09:33 (1,273 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands) |
||
|
| ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}