new burner for old boiler?

jpf321

With late August rolling around, I find myself unable to swing a new SF Intrepid that I had hoped for. So I was wondering if it would be helpful to get a new oil burner for my old Fitzgibbons 402?



I have 4 desires for a new gun:

 1) It should be more technologically advanced than my current Beckett SR

 2) It should be more efficient than my current Beckett SR

 2) It should be suitable for use with my Fitzsy 402.

 3) It should be suitable for use with a new Intrepid TR-30 when I can get into one, perhaps with slight/cheap changes such as Nozzle or tube length.



perhaps no burner is able to go from my Fitzsy 402 to an Intrepid..in which case, the answer is clear .. no new burner at this time.



I currently have:

 A Beckett "SR" Series burner with a 1.75GPH 60deg SemiSolid Nozzle (was noted on my service tag)

 <strong>Primary Controller:</strong> R7184A-1075 Honeywell

 <strong>Pump:</strong> Suntec A1VA-7112

  <strong>Chimney:</strong> Natural Draft Unlined Brick & tile lined

  <strong>Burn Chamber:</strong> Round 25-5/8" diameter



According to the SF Intrepid I&O Manual (pg 14-20) <a href="http://www.slantfin.com/documents/240.pdf">http://www.slantfin.com/documents/240.pdf</a> .. the Packaged TR-30 will support (presumably in the future I would get a Knockdown boiler):

  + Beckett AFG-SF-11-07

  + Riello 40 Series F-5 with Short Tube

  + Carlin 71357 99-FRD



Today I installed a Tigerloop and that's doing fine. I want to consider a new burner prior to having an annual burner tune-up and inspection.



I appreciate any and all links, recommendations, etc. I'm happy to answer any other questions that may be necessary prior to recommendations. Here is a link to my boiler sizing and specs: <a href="http://is.gd/eHLGC">http://is.gd/eHLGC</a> from Beacon Hydronics Data Book.



THANKS!

Steamhead

The Beckett SR

is a high-efficiency flame-retention burner. It uses the same heads as the AF/AFG series, though it runs at 1725 RPM. It's probably as good a match for your Fitzgibbons as anything, so I'd just make sure it's properly tuned and let it go at that. The 60° nozzle makes me wonder though, generally these burner heads take 80° nozzles unless a long flame is desired. If the flame is hitting the firebox liner, that's a problem, and the flame pattern should be changed.



We have a couple of SR burners in older boilers where there is no back pressure thru the unit, and when set up properly they run fine, with good efficiency and no soot.

jpf321

great thanks!

Thanks for the input .. I will ask my tuner about the nozzle and leave the SR in place. I was trying to make some improvement if I couldn't do an entire new boiler. I guess I'm sufficiently improved at this point. 

jpf321

current fire pics

Below are some clickable pics of my current fire. While watching it, it does seem to be hitting the back wall but it's hard to see in the photos. I'm guessing that these might also be inaccurate since the boiler door is wide open and might be creating strange drafts. I'm expecting a Tune-Up on Tues .. I will let you know what happens.

Steamhead

We'll be interested

in the results!

billtwocase

I'll agree with steamhead

That should have an 80 degree nozzle. You can also see that by the pics of the end cone. The fire is floating away, and not burning at the cone. Have them check pump pressure also. Narrow spray patterns will do this, along with a few other situations. Let us know

Steamhead

I thought so too, Bill

but another set of eyes never hurts.



Might also try using a 1.50 nozzle and cranking the pump to 140 PSI. Have to check, but I believe we have at least one SR running at 140. The higher pressure gives better atomization and a cleaner flame, and the smaller nozzle rating maintains the original firing rate when used with the higher pressure.



On that one I'd first make sure the "Z" dimension was correct, and seal around the burner head better if possible, then start with a 1.50x80° solid nozzle at 140. If that produced an unstable flame or one that slammed into the rear of the chamber (rather than just licked it occasionally) I'd go to a semi, then to a hollow, still with the 80° spray angle. Only if the 80° just would not produce a good flame, would I try a narrower spray.



In all cases we're looking for good combustion as measured with a digital analyzer, so one pattern or the other may prove to be the best choice.



Also- do the tubes in that boiler have spiral baffles in them? I believe they should for best heat transfer, as long as they don't kill the draft.



Setting up a newer burner in an older boiler properly is always a bit of a challenge. But our predecessors did it all the time. Then, as now, a completely new boiler wasn't going to happen each and every time. The old-timers came up with a lot of techniques that we sometimes still use today.

jpf321

today's the day

The tune-up is scheduled for today .. I hope the guy is cool and interested in not being a knucklehead. It's gonna be kinda hard as a HO to suggest how he adjust the flame.



I read 2 docs cover to cover the other day:

http://www.beckettcorp.com/protect/techsuppt/product-manuals/RWB_Oilheat_Guide.pdf

  Beckett's Guide to Oilheat

ttp://www.ncoilheat.org/publications/OILClassManual2009.pdf  North Carolina's Combustion of No. 2 Fuel Oil -- based mainly on Beckett's but with a few extra bits.



I do have baffles (turbulators) installed .. we discussed this once before here: http://www.heatinghelp.com/forum-thread/128566/Baffled-by-baffles where you also suggested 1.50 @ 140psi (but not the spray pattern)



I'd really like to try to downfire the beast .. it's rated for 700sf of steam, but I only have 390sf installed. According to installed EDR I should be burning 0.95GPH .. if I look at my K-Factor theoretical optimal calc, I'm closer to 0.75GPH .. I know that it's all about the ability to get the combustion and draft correct and that it may be impossible to downfire that far (if at all) but I'd like to try 1.0GPH to start and work up from their.



I bought 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75 Delevan A nozzles in prep for my tune-up .. but now it seems that Steamhead is suggesting B instead. I will pick those up as well hopefully before he comes. I also got new F3 & F6 heads.



I'm afraid that the breech in my fluepipe is not in the perfect place according to the Beckett book (not 2 pipe diameters from elbow) in fact it's just a couple of  inches from elbow and it's a 9" pipe.



I did notice that my "bulk air band" is opened slightly (~1/4") .. but the one of the things I read (perhaps the SR manual) said to start with that closed. I think I'll close it before he comes.



below is a picture of my head as it sits now:





THANKS!

Steamhead

That's why

I carry all those sizes and patterns on my truck. That way if i need to do a substitution test I have everything I need. Any good tech will do the same.



If you try to downfire, start at about 80% of its rating and see how your combustion is. I wouldn't go lower than that since the stack temp may drop too far, causing the flue to condense, especially if you have an outside chimney.



80% of 1.75 is 1.4, which you can get with a 1.20 nozzle at 140 PSI.

jpf321

waste of my time...

so the guy came. he had no combustion analyzer equipment .. i wasn't happy...we were flying blind.



we replaced the nozzle with 1.0 x 80 Solid @ 140psi (which is firing at 1.18GPH according to the Beckett Nozzle Capacity table)



i checked the stack temp with my datalogger .. i max at 331dF which I know is below the 350dF recommended. and i'm not sure if that is NET since my indoor temp is about 80dF .. does that mean my NET is 330 - 80? = 250?



i told him I need someone to come with a combustion analyzer ... i will not run boiler until that person shows up.



FYI, according to Beacon Reference for the Fitzy 402 .. min firing rate is 2.3GPH .. (see Boiler link in Signature for Beacon Refernce)...



it was MY mistake to have handed him the 1.0 nozzle when I should have handed him the 1.25. But since we had no analyzer, I didn't feel that it mattered too much anyhow since likely we would be readjusting soon.



They air is adjusted as bulk-band #1 and shutter #5. The flame retention head that was installed was F22 .. we replaced it with F12.



I don't blame you if you have nothing nice to say .. without analysis, there's nothing to go on except my datalogger temp, which is likely waaay too cool.



New pictures of my fire below:

Steamhead

I'll say!

you need to find someone who has the right equipment. Try the Find a Professional page of this site.



The 402's listed firing rate was for an old-style burner. The SR can safely fire at about 80% of that since it can release more BTUs from each gallon of oil  80% of 2.3 is 1.84, slightly above the 1.75 you were using. As long as your stack temp is around 400-425 you should be OK at that rate. Time to break out the 1.50 nozzles for running at 140 PSI!

jpf321

and to top it off ....

I know I know .. I should get out in the field more and such .. but the docs I read .. specifically I believe the Beckett Doc, or maybe the Delevan Nozzle Doc (http://www.delavaninc.com/pdf/total_look.pdf) .. definitely said NEVER blow into your nozzle nor grab it by the strainer end with your grubby paws .. this guy did both .. my stomach particularly turned when he blew in the supply end of the nozzle assembly to "clear" the nozzle .. now I know in a live setting, their is going to be oil shot through the thing at 140psi .. but when the docs say don't blow .. i figure, don't blow.



ah yes! .. here it is from the Delevan Doc ..

jpf321

Find A Pro Listings

I have reached out to several of the Pros listed here before .. although we are in the same city .. they have more lucrative business in Brooklyn than in Queens I guess so they don't service me.



I could probably find other oil burner guys with other oil companies, but I don't buy oil from their company. My local plumbers stay away from oil burners, probably b/c they don't carry that License.



I hate being at the mercy of others, especially when the others are all knuckleheads. Sometimes I wish I was a little old lady that really has no clue about the things around her. I bet life is a much happier place when you don't know how screwed up the people that you rely on actually are .... oh I guess they made a saying for that IGNORANCE IS BLISS.



Lesson learned .. don't expect that an annual burner tune-up guy will have burner tune-up equipment.

Steamhead

I put the call out

on Oil Tech Talk. Hopefully we can find someone near you. 

jpf321

Thanks!

Thanks .. you have my direct and personal email I believe...

Steamhead

They can

contact you directly thru this board's "Contact User" function if they need to. It will show up as "Someone from the Wall has sent you a message".

jpf321

in theory

in theory, they are sending a new tech today with the proper gizmo(s). will follow-up later.



RESCHEDULED for Friday before 10AM.

jpf321

rescheduled again...

for Wednesday 9/8 before noon....argh! apparently everyone wants a very long holiday weekend. 

c.t.kay

Test Kit

I do have 2 or 3 test kits if you are interested.

jpf321

well .. better I guess

so the guy came today .. he had a fancy Bacharat gizmo .. but it didn't work. It was finally able to read stack temp using one of MY thermocouple probes.



We tried 1.25A x 80 @140psi .. the stack temp was about 380dF .. the

question that I still have, do you subtract the room temp from the sensor temp achieve NET temp and is it that NET temp that

needs to be above 350?



we switched out to a 1.50A x 80 @ 140psi. He had a smoke pump device thing with some filter paper .. it doesn't seem like there's any smoke. Stack temp is at about 425dF .. no idea about CO2 or O2 or Draft.



 I guess it will have to work for now.



those folks that have access to fantastic techs, please consider yourselves lucky!

Unknown

Gee,,

you sure are having a rough time finding someone with working/available equipment!

I have one here I would let you borrow if cross-border shipping wasn`t such a hassle. ;-)



BTW- Yes, you do subtract the room temp from the gross stack temp to come-up with your net.

Charlie from wmass

It would cost a whole day

but I would be happy to come down. Digital analyzer with fresh batteries in hand.

jpf321

thanks but...

 i'll save the offer for something bigger :-)



his batteries were fine, i guess his machine was the problem. stack always read 15.6 CO2 and ambient air always 0.0 CO2 .. his probe gave a stack temp of -167dF ... very strange.



really what's stranger still is that his said he had to dig it out of his house and he never goes to residential calls with the analyzer ... i'm not even going to waste my time calling the Oil Service manager back, I guess this is what I get for getting the cheapest oil I can find.

Steamhead

Sensors were bad

you need someone who knows how to maintain his equipment, and knows that ALL burners must be tested with the analyzer. This is pathetic.



No response to my OTT posting either, guess all the real oilmen have left the Queens area.



And the oilheat industry wonders why it continues to lose market share.........

jpf321

finally

i was able to borrow, and still have if further testing is required, a TPI 712 flue gas analyzer ...



remember, I am burning with a 1.50A x 80deg @ 140psi nozzle ... the flame seems to be hitting the chamber wall quite a bit more .. see new photos below.



it looks like we have done OK, my NET temp is just barely 350 after about 10mins runtime ..  but I want to see if there is any feedback from the wall regarding the data.



see analyzer report below:

Steamhead

Flame is still unstable

I wonder whether the "Z" dimension of the head is set correctly. If it is, maybe a semi (Delavan W) might work better.



I've seen worse numbers but those could be better. If there's a way to test right over the fire you could compare the excess-air reading to that in the stack. If the excess air is less over the fire, there is an air leak somewhere in the boiler.

jpf321

tomorrow...

Wow, I thought the numbers looked good .. glad I shared them.



Tomorrow I will try sticking the probe directly in the inspection port on the boiler door. I'm not sure if that will be suitable for your test .. but it's what I can think of .. maybe I will fill most of the hole with Aluminum Foil and push the probe through. The probe is about 12" so I'm not sure that will get me right over the fire .. but I'll see what I can do .. perhaps they make a longer probe accessory?



It's possible that there is a leak perhaps around the door seal, or infiltration around the inspection port or perhaps around the edge of the flue box (where the tube access is) .. I don't think I have any other leaks, the burner is well cemented and sealed ... I can fill water all the way up into the supply and test for spilling water I suppose .. I certainly don't have any leaking tubes. My boiler is overfilled right now for summer tankless use.



I will also check the Z dimension based on the SR manual .. and I will obtain a 1.50W x 80 nozzle tomorrow ..



Thanks

jpf321

over flame test...

Well I stuck the probe in my inspection port ... here are the numbers:



CO (ppm): 16

O2%: 6.6

CO2%: 10.6

Ratio (CO/CO2): 0.0001

CO Air Free (ppm): 23

Excess Air: 46

Gross Efficiency: 64.9

Temp 1: 1122dF

Temp 2: 81dF



I did not plug the inspection port hole with Aluminum Foil there was a slight opening without plugging the excess hole. I let it run until the temp seemed to stabilize, but it probably didn't run longer than 2-4 mins. (What is the upper temp these things will handle?) If these numbers are completely wacky (which it looks to me to be the case), I will retest with a longer run and a plugged hole.

Steamhead

You definitely have an air leak somewhere

possibly around one of the doors. That explains the higher CO2 and lower excess air readings over the fire.



With proper setup, that  burner would run real nice in that boiler.

jpf321

well thanks for your patience...

while I do try to get it set-up better. it certainly helps to not be at the mercy of service calls and bad equipment.



i will check for leaks .. is there a tried and true method for finding these types of leaks?

Steamhead

There are several ways to do it

but as things now stand, you need some more expertise. Maybe take Charlie up on his kind offer? 

jpf321

i think I found...

some problem areas where there is blackening on the exterior ...



can i use my Hercules High-Heat Furnace Cement liberally to seal any gaps that I see both inside and out?



a problem spot seems to also be around the top of the door .. the old fabric/rope seal around the door seems to be worn pretty well and not maintaining a tight seal anymore .. can that be repaired? can I just cement the door shut or is there some other type of method such as silicon or something? can I use standard Home Depot silicon caulk to form a new bead?



any idea how big a leak am I looking for? should I still overfill with water and check for spillage or would a leak into the water area show different symptoms?



the chamber could use some cement patching too .. but I shouldn't mess with the bricks or the burn-floor right? even though the burn-floor is a bit cracked and flaked?



would you like detailed pictures before I go at it with my cement?