Closely spaced tees

CBRob

I'm familiar with the traditional set up.

Is there a variety of styles that still decouple pumps with the tees in different positions?

Any places I can look for examples of tee alternatives,?
See drawing in lower post

STEVEusaPA

Why the very abstract questions?
Probably better you post what you are trying to do, what you are contemplating, and why traditional methods won’t work for you (or a drawing).

CBRob

Just working through options. I can route the traditional way, but wonder if these are as effective.
Here is the traditional
And my proposed versions.

mattmia2

If i'm thinking of it right, as long as they are close so the resistance of the pipe between the tee's is small they will serve their function

hot_rod

Really no set in stone requirements and some variance from Primary Secondary Etiquettecy (sp) will work to a point.

As @mattmia2 indicated it is about maintaining the lowest resistance between the tees. And that is dependant on flow rate to some degree. I have seen in excess of 12" between the tees and it still works fine. Also a bit depends on the flow resistance of the secondaries. Low flow resistance would be more potential for ghost flow.

Drawing #1 was commonly used on the Watts HydroControl pre-manufactured panels

#2 would be a stretch

#3 seems like a common P/S?

This issue of Idronics shows some common P/S piping flubs

https://www.caleffi.com/sites/default/files/coll_attach_file/idronics_19_na.pdf

Time to move past P/S piping and embrace hydraulic separators

mattmia2

but the hydraulic separator costs like half the price of the boiler...

CBRob

I'm replacing a boiler here in this application.

I think the main role of the primary secondary separation here is going to be maintaining the minimum flow through the boiler.
I only have one circ pump serving all of these zones. The zones are in high mass infloor and staple up in floor heat.
No regard for the GPM rate when it's one zone or 10 zones open. No differencial bypass either.

The original set up is more of the #2 drawing.

Bob, in the #3 drawing...
Does it matter if it's the primary tee'd into the secondary or the other way around?

hot_rod

mattmia2 said:

but the hydraulic separator costs like half the price of the boiler...

Where are you buying separators? Need to looks as a separator as a 4 function device, and the labor cost of buying and building all that separately.

hot_rod

CBRob said:

I'm replacing a boiler here in this application.



I think the main role of the primary secondary separation here is going to be maintaining the minimum flow through the boiler.

I only have one circ pump serving all of these zones. The zones are in high mass infloor and staple up in floor heat.

No regard for the GPM rate when it's one zone or 10 zones open. No differencial bypass either.



The original set up is more of the #2 drawing.



Bob, in the #3 drawing...

Does it matter if it's the primary tee'd into the secondary or the other way around?

I would highly recommend either a pressure bypass valve, or better yet a delta P circulator. The rule of thumb is 4 or more zone valves and you should have pressure activated bypass valves.

What is the total required GPM of that job? Must be some small micro loads with that many ZVs?

The debate is ongoing as to which loop is considered primary and which secondary. Some suggest the loop the boiler is in should be the primary. Function-wise the key is proper use and sizing of the closely spaced tees.

mattmia2

Actually, I made my near boiler piping bigger than it needed to be in my rush to replace a leaking water heater so it probably all wouldn't have been as bad in 1" vs 1.25"

CBRob

Bob, the house is about 3000 sf, so about 300 SF per zone.

The house heated pretty well with the existing setup....
At least no complaints from the owners
The boiler will be a direct replacement for a same size model.
Just a little different on the piping.

I'll look into the delta p pumps
I've read a little about them.
Thanks

CBRob

The alpha 1 pump is not too expensive.
I'll try and talk the owner into the upgrade.
Looks like it would be ideal for use in this one pump 10 zones application.

SuperTech

> @CBRob said:
>
> The alpha 1 pump is not too expensive.
> I'll try and talk the owner into the upgrade.
> Looks like it would be ideal for use in this one pump 10 zones application.

> @CBRob said:
>
> The alpha 1 pump is not too expensive.
> I'll try and talk the owner into the upgrade.
> Looks like it would be ideal for use in this one pump 10 zones application.

I have the Alpha 2, it's a fine circulator for zone valve applications. I've also seen the Taco VR1816 in action, it does the job just as well.

STEVEusaPA

Shouldn’t you pump into the boiler and into the top of the indirect?

CBRob

> @STEVEusaPA said:
> Shouldn’t you pump into the boiler and into the top of the indirect?

The suggested install is to pump out of the boiler, but I think either is fine.
Is it better to pump away from the vent at the top of the boiler?
The indirect is designed to get the supply at the bottom, labeled as such.

hot_rod

CBRob said:

> @STEVEusaPA said:

> Shouldn’t you pump into the boiler and into the top of the indirect?



The suggested install is to pump out of the boiler, but I think either is fine.

Is it better to pump away from the vent at the top of the boiler?

The indirect is designed to get the supply at the bottom, labeled as such.

If it is a high pressure, high flow resistance type of boiler I would suggest and so would most manufacturers that you pump into the boiler.

Cast iron or fire tube, it is not as critical, although no harm would come from pumping in. Assuming the circulator is sized and piped correctly.

Cast iron package boilers came out of the crate with circulators mounted on the return for many years, maybe some still do