Converting Energy Kinetics to gas?

Steamhead (in transit)

figures from a combustion analyzer. I simply figured what percentage the gross output as published by the manufacturer (NOT including pickup factor) was of the rated input. That's thermal efficiency in a nutshell. You can do this with any manufacturer's boilers, since they've already done the necessary testing to arrive at these figures.

For example- one particular steam boiler that is popular with our local gas monopoly has a thermal efficiency of 80%: 112,500 BTU per hour input, 90,000 BTU/h gross output: 80%.

The Smith G-8 steam boiler in that size that we install has a gross output of 91,000 BTU/h from an input of 105,000 BTU/h: 86%. And it's not much more expensive, so it's a no-brainer to use the G-8 unless you're the gas utility.

The same goes for hot-water boilers, where we use the Solaia since it's a 3-pass design. We can't always find a proper place to vent a mod-con in older houses, and if there's no safe venting point then we don't install a mod-con. But we can still use something more efficient than an atmospheric boiler on these jobs by installing a wet-base boiler with a factory-supplied gas burner.

Whatever the type, if a boiler comes from the factory set up to burn gas, it's a "gas design".

<A HREF="http://www.heatinghelp.com/getListed.cfm?id=367&Step=30">To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"</A>

eric b

Converting Energy Kinetics sys 2000 to gas?

I'm about to buy a house that has a 1987 Energy Kinetics boiler. I know that there's been lots of discussion on this list about whether EK equipment is good or not, but my question is--is anyone powering them via natural gas? EK claims they sell a natural gas burner, but it seems to be mostly marketed by oil companies. Is it worth exploring a conversion? Or if I convert to gas should I just replace the whole thing anyway? (The gas company is offering me a direct-vent Burnham, relatively inexpensively...)

Thanks.

Robert O'Brien

An EK

with a gas burner is way more efficient than a standard gas boiler.I'd stick with the EK,if the pricing situation ever changes you have the flexibility to go back if desired.

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Matt_67

A conversion burner is NOT more efficient than a gas design. With the high costs of energy today, I would recommend a condensing boiler that would use plastic venting. If you go to gas, you would need a s/s (not alum) chimney liner. The difference in a s/s liner and plastic venting can make up some of the difference in capital costs of the condensing boiler. We have found here (Montreal) that the actual energy savings of condensing boilers over regular 82% efficiency, is much greater than the difference in AFUE. We did one series of 9 small apartment blocks of 7 units. The worst case saving was 35% and the best 55%.

Jim_139

EK is what is called "fuel neutral". It doesn't make any difference whether you burn oil, NG or LP in it. The gas burner used is a Carlin EZ-gas and is the same burner used if the system is ordered specifically for gas.

Robert O'Brien

\"A conversion burner is NOT more efficient than a gas design\"

Only if you're talking about a mod/con.An EK w/ a gas burner is vastly superior to any standard gas boiler by far!

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Matt_67

After several years testing conversion burners and gas design equipment both in the lab and in the field, a gas design has better overal efficiency. It is a no brainner. One needs only to look at the AFUE ratings of a Raypak Raytherm (83-84%) or Hi Delta (84%) or similar designs. Then count the standby and thermal losses of several gallons of water compared to a pint in the gas design. While I have gotten efficiencies of 83% in a cast iron Viking Junior, those were combustion efficiencies. System efficiency of a gas design is superior. Just ask the boiler manufactureres!

Jim_139

Why is the gas company offering a direct vent Burnham at reasonable cost?

Steamhead (in transit)

Henry, atmospheric boilers

are inherently less efficient than wet-base power-burner units. There are two reasons for this:

1- the atmospheric design is "dry-base" in which the burners are completely underneath the cast-iron sections. Kind of like a pan on a stove. These boilers lose a considerable amount of heat from their bases- you can feel it when standing next to one as it runs. A wet-base boiler surrounds the flame with water-backed cast-iron, so it can absorb more heat from the flame.

2- power burners can burn clean and safe with less excess air than atmospheric ones can. This is because they mix gas and air better.

The proof is in the ratings. A typical atmospheric has a thermal efficiency of 80-81%. This means the gross output is 80-81% of the input rating. A gas-fired wet-base boiler with a power burner has a thermal efficiency of 86% or so. Don't forget, these ratings come from the manufacturers (Smith and Solaia in our case), who have tested and certified their boilers with these burners. So technically, these are "gas designs"...there's no guesswork here, as there might be when converting an older boiler.

Thermal efficiency is part of the AFUE calculation, so even if both the atmospheric and the power burner unit have similar AFUE ratings, the power burner unit will use less fuel. It stands to reason that if the output of a certain boiler is the same but the input is less than that of other boilers, that boiler will burn less gas.

I find that the only ones who really prefer atmospherics are the gas utilities. The atmospherics' lower thermal efficiency insures that the utility will move more gas. Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching......

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Matt_67

Atmospheric cast iron boilers are a very lousy gas design! In this 21st century, we need a cast iron boiler like we need a cast iron big block V8. Just look up Laars, RBI, Lochinvar and Raypak atmospheric gas design. They are all above 82 AFUE and not 'thermal efficiency' which does not mean much. Vent assist gas design boilers have even higher ratings up to 87% near condensing (in fact the flue gases condense in the chimneys).

One cannot use what a combustion test gives for efficiency. We measured actual natural gas use, combustion gas make up, temeperature and quantaty, flow rates in and out and temperature of same. We then had an accurate picture of energy efficiency in a steady state. Uninsulated wet base boilers will loose over 6% of overall efficiency while insulated boilers around 3%. One really has to dig to get the actual losses atributed to jacket and water capacity.

You will note that very large boilers used in industry, do not show AFUE. The thermal losses due to water capacity and even radiation are to great!

[Deleted User]

Think again!

Any boiler that does not condense, leaves 7% of whatever it could save - on the table!

If your boiler does not condense, it is part of the problem - not a solution, regardless of how sexy the control strategy.

Changing burners on a boiler that is incapable of condensing is akin to putting fertilizer on a weed.

Robert O'Brien

Methinks

that is not TimS posting!

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Jim_139

You're right, Bob. Looks like a paraphrase of Ken's post on the Dragon's site.

Steamhead (in transit)

OK, \"TimS\"

what do you use when there is no good place to vent a mod-con?

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"