water feeder

ottawan

I'm so pleased to find this site again. My old link stopped working and I've just discovered it via Google again. Of course I have a question.



I went down to check my furnace before firing up and discovered that the water had risen well over the top of the glass. I did Dan's troubleshooting procedure in "Lost Art" (p. 210) and discovered that the water feeder was leaking and I can't stop the leak by jiggling the valve stem. Is it part #341600 (Mcdonnell 47-2) that my heating guy has to replace ("valve, cartridge and stainer") or do I have to replace the whole unit that sits beside the big float unit?



Further to this, while reading about the low water cutoff Dan says there are two types- Mcdonnell 47-2 and also No. 67. I discover I have both! Is this normal?(see photo)



Thanks for your help

Timco

LWCO

Yes, having both is fine. Code here says you need two lwco devises. One is feeding your water and protecting, and the other is just protecting. You can just replace the feeder.

Dave in QCA

Assembly kit includes housing

341600 SA47-101-102 Valve, cartridge & strainer assembly kit includes the cast iron housing.  This is the entire assembly that is attached to the side of the large float chamber.  This should be all that you need and should get your boiler back in tip top condition.

As Timco said, 2 lwco devices with one of them being the feeder & lwco and one as a lwco only, is the normal setup.  Notice that your type 67 is also installed at a lower level.  It is the backup to the main device.

ottawan

Thank You

I feel much more confident now about what I need. Thanks.

BobC

Auto water feeders

I can understand why having two automatic feeders would be a good idea but it also doubles the failure rate.



I've lived with steam heating systems for over 60 years and never had automatic feeders on the boiler. This means you have to look at the boiler a couple of times a week and if you go away for any extended period, you have to have somebody keep an eye on the boiler.



The good news is that it forces you to look at the boiler a few times a week so any problems are usually caught early. Also replacing a manual valve costs less than $10 while the auto-feeders cost $150, assuming you do the work yourself in both cases.



i think I'll stick with the manual valve and I'll be sure to test the LWCO monthly to be sure it works.

Jamie Hall

Two LWCO's

Timco was referring to two LWCOs, not two automatic feeders, as being required by code, and he's right -- at least where I am.  Furthermore, the lower one of the two must be a manual reset around here; that is, if it trips, it stays tripped until someone resets it by hand.  Who, hopefully, is not a doofus and checks around to figure out why it tripped...



The upper one, around here at least, is commonly tied into an automatic feeder as well as an LWCO, with the LWCO having a bit of a delay (so does the feeder, but less of a one, usually).

BobC

re: two LWCO

jamie,



I fat fingered that one pretty bad. i was trying to make the point that the boiler might be better off if homeowners had to visit it a few times a week and not ignore the beast in the basement.



Again I can see why redundant LWCO's are a good idea but as others have pointed out they should be teamed up with a meter so one can see how much water is being fed. Even the meter won't be much good if nobody goes near the boiler on a regular basis and keeps a log to track water usage.