Why hot water and not steam?

Gordy

Yeah power steering, power brakes........seat belts

Paul48

"Of poor reliability, poor gas mileage, high smog in cities, terrible handling, no air conditioning (in most vehicles) and poor traction"

I always found them to be very reliable. You could fix most problems that did pop up, with simple tools. Try that with a modern car. No one cared about the gas mileage...gas was cheap, and those v8's sucked it up. Smog in the cities is a modern problem. It came about with many cars in every household. The handling was better than what had come before. No air conditioning...No Problem...Open the windows and drive faster. The traction had to be good enough to get off the line.
Comparing then and now is like comparing a steam system to a mod/con. That's not say, you can't appreciate both.

ChrisJ

> @Jamie Hall said:
> For the sake of laughs and distraction -- the first car I drove (learned to drive on) was a Ford Model A pickup truck... if you think the handling and brakes of cars in the '50s and 60s were bad...

I maintain a 1931 model A pickup for my boss which has bias ply tires. Also @Gordy many of my atvs had bias ply but my last one had radials. The radials were much better at grabbing


I assure you my idea would work.

ChrisJ

I've done more work to the model a than I care to think about. It's certainly no Duesy

hot_rod

Jamie Hall said:

@ChrisJ -- no. My first car was a Rambler. Which ate tires alive (can't have been my driving, can it?) and generators. The second one was a very nice '61 Buick Special station wagon -- with the aluminium V8.

Those Ramblers made for great roll over cars. I spent the summer of 72 driving for the American Thrill show, sponsored by American Motors. We would get old junkers from local dealers at every fair stop. Strip the glass out, put an aircraft seatbelt in them and off you go.

Single ramp, driver side high. Crank the wheel as you hit the top of the ramp, lay over on the seat in case the roof caved in, and the car would roll. Two guys completed to see how many times you could roll it. Those early roundy Ramblers would roll 3 times.

The Chrysler 300 not so good of a roll over car. The firemen in the background would have to get you rolled back over from the roof top:)

That is how the hot rod nickname was born.

http://jmderby.com/our-videos/

j a_2

Gordy said:

Then there is the J58 jet engine for the SR 71. Developed in 1958 initially, then a complete make over to suit the needs of Mach 3.2 in the blackbird. Think about the jump in technology in roughly a 15 year span going from piston prop to jets. That engine was over 80% efficienct at Mach 3. The inlet spikes, and how they operate were genius to get that engine to perform. A plane that holds records yet today. Kelly Johnson was an icon in aviation.

Loved the black bird, in Okinawa 1971,two of them took off every morning at 0915 if I remember correctly ...It was an awesome sight....I was a phantom guy, the F4 was as well as awesome,,two J79GE~15 at 18.5 k horsepower per engine...can't explain how it felt to arm them prior to take off...then watch them hit the afterburner on roll out...At that time the aim 7s and aim 9s were the best we had. The 20 mm cannon with HEI was capable of makeing someone's day real bad...

Gordy

> @j a said:
> Then there is the J58 jet engine for the SR 71. Developed in 1958 initially, then a complete make over to suit the needs of Mach 3.2 in the blackbird. Think about the jump in technology in roughly a 15 year span going from piston prop to jets. That engine was over 80% efficienct at Mach 3. The inlet spikes, and how they operate were genius to get that engine to perform. A plane that holds records yet today. Kelly Johnson was an icon in aviation.
>
> Loved the black bird, in Okinawa 1971,two of them took off every morning at 0915 if I remember correctly ...It was an awesome sight....I was a phantom guy, the F4 was as well as awesome,,two J79GE~15 at 18.5 k horsepower per engine...can't explain how it felt to arm them prior to take off...then watch them hit the afterburner on roll out...At that time the aim 7s and aim 9s were the best we had. The 20 mm cannon with HEI was capable of makeing someone's day real bad...

Habu Squadron? Damn @ja you were there!

j a_2

Yes I was, 36th tatical fighter sq. Was on crash recovery the night of July 20 1973 when the habu crashed and burned upon landing....You was there?

Gordy

No I was not. Just a pleasure to meet someone who was though.

j a_2

Nice...

Gordy

Unless one really reads in depth about the sophistication of that airplane from concept to production. Most don't truly get it. Everything had to be reinvented right down to the tires.

Darn satellites is the only reason it was retired.......

j a_2

Gordy I'll dig thru my old pictures, but there just pictures, being there seeing the Habu x 2 take off each morning at a very specific time and doing a vertical at the end of the runway was truly amazing...Not long after they took off the B 52s would follow...

Eric35

Just signed up because I like steam just because I like old technology and history, as well as I was a navy boiler tech. I'm an hvac tech now. I like the gentlemans idea of sealed hermetic copper system, as one of the issues of any water based system steam or hot water is the issues of water and steam chemistry corrosion, pitting, etc. sealed system could be clean and treated with no air infiltration, makeup water to scale, etc. As a new signup today I also of course say from what I skimmed and no prejudice towards personalities follow the money which is the idealists constant annoyance yet cannot be ignored in the real world. As far as the issue of OSA reset raised, may I humbly suggest the concept of variable area , which can be staged or modulated . That is the concept used with VAV air systems or multiple paralleled coils with solenoid valves used on VRF systems to balance varying percent of simultaneous heating and cooling zones. Good luck gentlemen and I assume some ladies perhaps?

Leonard

All things being equal, think one issue is furnace is slightly more efficient at getting BTUs from hot burner exhaust into water the less you have to heat the water ( to ~ 180 VS 212). However I suspect that's ~ negligible.

Biggest issue is likely cost of installing large iron threaded pipes for steam , VS small easy copper. Back then electricity was cheap.

And while I wasn't around back then I'm guessing hydronic furnace manufacturers ran a heavy ad campaigns to promote their new product , maybe even promotional discounts to get their product selling.

I remember in the late 60's electric companies where offering house builders a $400 rebate (kickback) for every new house they built with only electric heating.

ChrisJ

> @Leonard said:
> All things being equal, think one issue is furnace is slightly more efficient at getting BTUs from hot burner exhaust into water the less you have to heat the water ( to ~ 180 VS 212). However I suspect that's ~ negligible.
>
> Biggest issue is likely cost of installing large iron threaded pipes for steam , VS small easy copper. Back then electricity was cheap.
>
> And while I wasn't around back then I'm guessing hydronic furnace manufacturers ran a heavy ad campaigns to promote their new product , maybe even promotional discounts to get their product selling.
>
> I remember in the late 60's electric companies where offering house builders a $400 rebate (kickback) for every new house they built with only electric heating.

If you're answering my original post, then when steam was popular many places didn't have electric and those that did it was incredibly expensive. This is why early hot water systems are mostly gravity.

mikeg2015

Steam had already been in decline since the 1920's. After WWII there was a high demand for lots of cheap homes. Only custom high end homes had even hot water. I think lack of tradesmen that knew steam outside of NYC or Chicago was the main reason.

I think poorly maintained systems gave it a bad reputation as well. It's not as forgiving and in the end much more expensive.

Look at most of the hack work on just forced air out there. Modern high efficiency furnaces practically install themselves. All you need is a couple tools and to read the damn manual. But apparently that's too hard.

Gordy

Early hot water systems were gravity because the circulator had not yet been invented. It wasn’t because of the lack of the power grid to homes in those times.


When the circulator was invented it allowed piping in hot water heating systems to be smaller diameter saving dollars, and piping systems to defy gravity which made things easier from design to installation practices. No longer did gravity have to be the driver of the hot water system. However gravity still played a role in other hot water heating problem issues, and still does.

ChrisJ

Gordy said:

Early hot water systems were gravity because the circulator had not yet been invented. It wasn’t because of the lack of the power grid to homes in those times.


When the circulator was invented it allowed piping in hot water heating systems to be smaller diameter saving dollars, and piping systems to defy gravity which made things easier from design to installation practices. No longer did gravity have to be the driver of the hot water system. However gravity still played a role in other hot water heating problem issues, and still does.

How do you know this to be correct considering most homes did not have electric back then?

We certainly had pumps........ I believe the centrifugal pump was invented some time in the 1400s and I'm sure someone decided to put an electric motor on one by the 1800s.

Dave0176

After WWII the post war building boon kicked in especially in New Jersey in the suburbs. It’s kindve divided between North Jersey and central Jersey. In North Jersey the 1950s and 1960s homes were built primarily with hot water, the earlier built homes seemed to use convectors or slendeized cast iron radiators, the later built homes all have fin tube.

Now in Central Jersey I’ve noticed a lot the 1950s and 1960s built homes are primarily oil fired warm air. And they ducted those systems with a lot of aluminum and some of the smallest size duct work I’ve seen. The majority have added AC later on in the 80s and 90s. When I’m called to replace a system I try to convince the HO that the whole duct system needs replacing, your just never going to get any efficiency or even temperatures. It was done like this because it was quick and cheap, 1000s of homes where being built at the same time.

ChrisJ

Dave0176 said:

After WWII the post war building boon kicked in especially in New Jersey in the suburbs. It’s kindve divided between North Jersey and central Jersey. In North Jersey the 1950s and 1960s homes were built primarily with hot water, the earlier built homes seemed to use convectors or slendeized cast iron radiators, the later built homes all have fin tube.

Now in Central Jersey I’ve noticed a lot the 1950s and 1960s built homes are primarily oil fired warm air. And they ducted those systems with a lot of aluminum and some of the smallest size duct work I’ve seen. The majority have added AC later on in the 80s and 90s. When I’m called to replace a system I try to convince the HO that the whole duct system needs replacing, your just never going to get any efficiency or even temperatures. It was done like this because it was quick and cheap, 1000s of homes where being built at the same time.

It must be awesome working on the slab ranches with the ductwork in the slab.

SeanBeans

@ChrisJ those are rough. We’ve abandoned the ductwork in slabs and rerouted ductwork in the homeowners attic a few times before. those attics are usually loads of fun...

Gordy

Gordy

By 1925 half of U.S. homes had electricity. It accelerated exponentially from there.

Gordy

@ChrisJ I guess we need to define a time line. The circulator was probably not really invented earlier because of the lack of electricity in urban areas why would you when gravity was doing the job just fine for the most part. Im sure large cities were certainly on grid before 1929. I’m pretty sure it took a while to accept the circulator into hydronic by the dead men since they were making systems work with out them long before. Like propress

ChrisJ

> @Gordy said:
> By 1925 half of U.S. homes had electricity. It accelerated exponentially from there.

Ok, so half of them did not. I was thinking earlier than 1925, but even so half is many without.

And those that did, electric was incredibly expressive.