Flame retention head conversion of Wayne E series burner

MikeAmann

We are thinking the same Ed. That's why when I fully open the air bands I feel air blowing back out. The fan wants to deliver the air, but can't do it because something is restricting it.
Just like the SR, my Wayne motor is 1725 rpm. I have no info on the diameter of the SR squirrel cage fan, but my Wayne is 5 to 6 inches in diameter.

I was just reviewing the Beckett SR manual and noticed that only one size static plate is used for nearly all of the combos. 2-3/4" plate or nothing. The newer AF and AFG combos have more static plate choices.

I have a spare Beckett static plate that I can easily make a smaller size - I'm thinking 2-5/8" as a starting point.

MikeAmann

I found the SR fan dimension in the parts list, #9, 6-1/4"
I will measure my Wayne fan tonight.

EBEBRATT-Ed

i don't know if the 6 1/4" is width or diameter.

As far as fans go, a wider fan will give you more air but no increase in static pressure.

A larger diameter will give you more static pressure and more air flow

MikeAmann

6-1/4" diameter by the width of the transformer (about 4").

MikeAmann

Showing the 2-3/4" static plate installed. Tonight I will be going smaller to try to pass more air to get the smoke reading down.

MikeAmann

I just found something very interesting while trying to find pics showing the difference between the F0 (.40 - .75 GPH) and the F3 head. Supply House says:

F3 Replacement Burner Head for AF, AFG, SR Series
Firing rate (AF, AFG): 0.75-1.25
Firing rate (SR): 0.65-1.10

I am running with a .60 GPH nozzle at 120 psi = .66 GPH.

This is the first time I have ever seen this. I was going to comment that maybe I will have to go to the F3 head because it has additional slots compared to the F0 head. I don't think that making the static disk smaller is going to change anything - it's the head itself that can't pass enough air.



I changed my mind. No modifying static disks tonight. The easy thing to do is to swap in the .50 GPH nozzle which should put me in the range of the F0 head and see if the smoke reading is reduced.

EBEBRATT-Ed

@MikeAmann

Yes with the SR burner .40-.75 with the F0, .65=1.10 with the F3 both use the 2 3/4 static plate.

I think you will find the F0 too restrictive even if you lower the firing rate.

Things don't always work the the mfg says. I think you will find the F0 head will make adjusting the burner more difficult especially if you can't get enough air through it


You might try different nozzles as well.

What you do is a nozzle application test. You get it running with say a 70 deg hollow take Co2 and smoke then without adjusting the burner you try a 70 deg solid. If it's better with the hollow then you try an 80 deg then a 60 deg. I find Delevan nozzles seem to be better for me.

Any time you work on a conversion that is the best procedure although most won't even try it.

I have put in new jobs with a factory packaged boiler and burner that didn't work well with the factory set up, called the factory in and they tried different nozzles and it worked.

oil has a lot of variables, the oil, the oil temperature and viscosity, combustion air temp, draft etc etc.

HVACNUT

Have you tried checking draft with all the baffles removed? Maybe amp out the burner motor. It'll  be a high draw if moving too much air. 
I would probably go with the F3 head regardless. 
The old really tight Peerless JOT- 3 and 4, we used to fire a Beckett AFG with the F6 head, .75 80 A, 100 psi and the low fire baffle. But they run at 3450 rpm. 
A Riello F3 would do wonders. 

MikeAmann

My Wayne fan is the same size as the SR >>> 6-1/4" diameter.

You guys are going to love this. Last night I swapped in the smaller .50 GPH nozzle and I left all the other settings as they were. The smoke was better at 1-1/2 (previous was 2). So since I couldn't pass any more air, then all I could do was to cut back on the fuel to see if that was a step in the right direction. It was. BTW, at 120 psi, going from .66 to .55 is 16.666 % less fuel.

I could see that the 2-3/4" static plate was capable of passing plenty of air, therefore the restriction had to be the F0 head itself. I printed a picture of the F3 head to get an idea of the size of the slots that the F0 head does not have. And I got to work drilling some holes - (28) 7/64" evenly spaced holes in the same place that the F3 head has slots. I will add the pictures late tonight. I swapped back to the .60 nozzle because the .50 was just too small of a flame to fill the combustion chamber. THE HOLES CHANGED EVERYTHING.

I started with the air bands halfway (1.782") open and got ZERO smoke. There was now much less air coming OUT from around the air bands area. I kept closing the air bands in steps and testing smoke.


The barometric draft regulator was now dancing at about 1/2" open. This has never happened in the 20 years I have owned this house. And the heat reclaimer was running more often and for longer cycles. It has it's own thermostat. The actual stack temperature was 400 F just before the HI Limit was reached.

I did a combustion analysis, and then added air to drop the CO2 by 1/2 percent. I only had to move the air bands ONLY .050" (the thickness of a dime) to do so. Here are the results.


I will be ordering an F3 head.

Ed, thanks for the how-to on determining the correct nozzle. Burnham uses 80 degree A hollow nozzles and I like Delavan also.

EBEBRATT-Ed

@MikeAmann

At this point with a new combustion chamber and you might as well say a new burner what Burnham wan't means nothing. Your on your own with a conversion. Your now the lab guy at the factory.

I would try some different spray angles probably just 70 or 80 degrees and different spray patterns hollow and solid total of 3 more nozzles and see what is best.

Your numbers look good Co2 I would expect a little higher. With a trace of smoke I would expect 11-12

MikeAmann

Ed, I am used to being the lab engineer with nearly everything I do. Planned obsolescence drives me crazy.
I can automatically see the planned failure points designed into things. I have modified new items before I've used them for the first time.

My boiler is still an old-school Burnham configuration. When I replaced the combustion chamber, there was only one size available, and it is probably larger than the one it replaced. Previous boiler service people have used narrower angle nozzles to keep the flame off of the failing walls of the old chamber. But you're right about this boiler - it's now "custom".

I will probably go back to a .65 GPH nozzle (.71 firing rate at 120 psi) to fill the combustion chamber more completely. But I have no desire to put "the fires of hell" into a 57 year old boiler, although it would probably take it now.

Delavan has hollow, solid, and semi-solid nozzles in both 70 and 80 degree flavors. I will get an assortment.

I went a little too big with the holes. I knew I should have stopped at 3/32". That's why the Co2 is lower than it should be - a little too much air. But this proved the point. I will do it all again once I get the F3 head and nozzles.

BrassFinger

I'm not a burner tech but I have fooled around with HVAC most of my life. They way I understand it, as long as you have negative over-fire draft, you are not restricted through the boiler flues. The static pressure of the burner blower is far more than anything created by natural draft. That is to say, the burner has enough pressure so that if you were severely restricted in the flues, the burner would be forcing the exhaust out the inspection port and you'd have positive pressure in the firebox. Yes, the extra backpressure on the burner would likely cause smoke due to reduced airflow at that point, but if you are reading -.02 over-fire draft you should be good to go. You should also have a minimum of -.04 to -.06 at the chimney breach so the draft regulator can stabilize it correctly at the boiler flue connection.

Commercial practice calls for drafts an order of magnitude higher, several inches in some cases at the flue outlet! A triple pass firetube boiler has a lot of resistance, but by the time you get to the over-fire draft it's not so much different.

Think of it as trying to drink a shake with a regular straw vs. a straw the size of a garden hose. Ultimately you can drink each shake at the same speed but you'll have to suck a lot harder on the straw to get it done. The shake is your firebox, the straw is your boiler and your mouth is the chimney draft.

Chris

MikeAmann

BrassFinger - that is a good explanation and the way I understand this also. But, like Ed said, I have changed everything, so this unit is custom now and there will be a lot of back-and-forth testing to dial it in correctly. I'm nearly there. And I did manage to pick up an F3 head this afternoon which I will try tonight.

MikeAmann

Question: so I added the Beckett F84 oil valve delay kit (2182602U). I want to have a spare coil on hand in case mine should fail. I called Beckett today and they have no clue what I am talking about. I'm pretty sure that Suntec actually makes the parts and Beckett puts their name on them. The coil that is available, p/n 3713824U is NOT the same coil that is on this solenoid. This part number is the replacement for the CleanCut pump. Does anyone have the correct number for this coil? It is 120 volt. Thanks.

What's printed on the coil:
Delta F84 NC
9W 100% ED

I found this: http://delta-elektrogas.com/content/families/shut-off-valves/

MikeAmann

I installed the F3 head. And I used the .65 80A nozzle (.71 at 120#).



WOW! The boiler runs so smooth, so even, the flame is rock solid and fills the chamber more completely, as I thought.

10 minutes in, I started adjusting the air bands to looking for a trace of smoke. Air bands open .500" - ZERO, .400" - ZERO, .350" - maybe the slightest bit?

I think I am going to have to block some of the air band slots because the adjustment is so touchy. I can do that with a piece of black strapping, if I can find a wide enough piece. But for now, foil tape will do the job. I removed the inner air band and taped over 3 sets of slots, leaving me with just one pair to work with. Retry smoke, air band open 1.300" - ZERO, .850" - #1 smoke. I opened the band .350" more to 1.200" and left it there. I won't have the instruments again until next week.

I now have really good idea as to what my stack temperature is by the way the heat reclaimer operates.
My guess is 380 F with the boiler fully hot and about to hit the HI Limit.

The sound, the feel, the smoothness of the boiler now is almost unbelievable. It's so quiet that the heat reclaimer makes more noise than the burner. And that's only a small fan running.
I am so close now that I can feel it.

MikeAmann

I made my new inner air band last night from a piece of galvanized flue pipe. No slots leaving just one of the four pairs of slots in the outer band for adjusting the air. Then I fired the burner to make sure everything was still as it was before. This time the light wasn't on and I saw an orange glow coming from the one open slot. I looked in and was amazed at what I saw. From the backside of the air tube, I could see the static plate and the flame, AND THE FLAME DOES INDEED SPIN in a counter-clockwise direction! I knew, in theory, that the radial vanes designed into the flame-retention head were an attempt to spin the air to mix the air and fuel for a better mixture and more efficient flame. But I never would have believed that it actually works that well. I wish I had the equipment to get a video clip of what I saw.

EBEBRATT-Ed

Yes the flame spins. Some say the retention ring spins the air one way and the nozzle spins the oil the opposite way so they mix better. I never checked

MikeAmann

Another analysis will be next - tonight or tomorrow night.

MikeAmann

I have the combustion analysis results.

I checked the draft while the boiler was warming up. I have -.03 (2 3 4 on meter) over the fire and -.03 (2 3 4) at the breach. The air band was set at 1.00" open as a starting point looking for a TRACE of smoke. I got a 4. I opened the air band .200" more to 1.200" and got a TRACE. Then I inserted the probe of the analyzer into the breach and got the first column of numbers. The second column is with air added to bring the Co2 down .5% (air band now at 1.558" open). The third column is with the boiler fully hot and about to reach the HI Limit.


If I now understand this correctly (you pros are great teachers!), I interpret these numbers to mean that since the Co2% is still a little low, and the O2% a little high, and the Xair at 47, then there is still air available in the combustion chamber that is not being used. The combination of the F3 head (.65 - 1.10) with 2-3/4" static plate and 1725 rpm blower is still passing a little too much air. Therefore I should probably go up one more nozzle size to a .70 GPH (.77 firing rate at 120#). FW Webb actually has bins marked .70. They are out of stock right now. I was right about my stack temperature. I guessed 380 F and it was 390 just before the HI Limit was reached.

Unless there is something really wrong with the way this burner is running now, I feel confident to leave everything set where it is and go through the winter. I now have a boiler that will no longer soot up over the course of one heating season and use less fuel to get a hotter, more efficient flame. I call that a WIN!

EBEBRATT-Ed

everything looks ok except your Co is a little high. We like to keep that below 50ppm

I would try a few different nozzles. The air pattern of the burner can vary depending on draft, combustion chamber and all sorts of things. I would try hollow and solid at different spray angles.

Webb being out of anything doesn't surprise me at all. They claim they have everything and they can get anything but never in stock even common items

Steamhead

Good job, @MikeAmann !

That slightly elevated CO reading might be from some residue that the brush and vacuum didn't get, and now it's burning off. Check it again in a month or so.

Yes, there is some more excess air than we like, but for an older boiler like that, it should be fine. Given the rest of your results, I'd leave things pretty much as is. Especially, don't reduce the firing rate, or the stack temp could drop into the condensing range. That's not good for the boiler or the chimney.

EBEBRATT-Ed

And an older boiler could be leaking air into the firebox diluting the Co2.

Take a Co2 over the fire and compare it to the Co2 in the breeching

MikeAmann

Trust me, there is no air leaking into the combustion chamber that can't otherwise be controlled or sealed. I fitted that new combustion chamber in the warped firebox as tight as it could possibly get. I sanded and checked, sanded and checked, lather, rinse, repeat for about a week until I was satisfied with the fit. And remember, the walls and floor are lined with cement board. I have a ceramic chamber, within a cement board box, within a sheet metal box. The only air that bypasses the burner is the hair gap at the viewport. I can make a gasket for that, if necessary.

Also, I am borrowing the combustion analyzer from work, so I don't want to risk going to the well too many times and get cut off. When I am able to get a .70 nozzle from FW Webb, I will test again. Yes Ed, I will try solid and semi-solid also. But I am thinking that I want to keep the 80 degree angle because I don't want to focus this new torch right at the back wall of the combustion chamber.

A huge thanks to the members that could look past the ridiculousness of putting so much work and time into this antique boiler, and stuck with helping me get through this. I can't thank you enough.

EBEBRATT-Ed

@MikeAmann

Just one more comment on nozzles that many don't understand.

My first year in the business I was sent out to clean and service an old Smith #24 boiler that had a 1 year old Carlin burner in it. The owner had complained of a smell.

When I cleaned it I noticed a lot of carbon....big black clinkers on the combustion chamber floor.

Caused by the fire impinging on the chamber floor



I checked the height of the burner tube above the floor..ok
I checked that it had the right nozzle....ok
I checked the oil pressure...ok

Checked everything else on the burner all was ok. Replaced nozzle with a new nozzle same mfg, gal and spray angle and pattern, figured the old nozzle was dirty

Set it up with instruments #s were good

1 month later she is smelling things again.

so we tried some things that didn't work and then decided to have Carlin come take a look at it.

Now, we were running an 70 deg nozzle. The burner was supposed to run a 70 deg nozzle

Carlin looking at the flame with a flame mirror wanted to try an 80 degree nozzle, I said "no, that's going to make the flame wider and impinge on the floor more than a 70"

He said your right, but lets try it.

It worked, and the combustion test was even better

I asked him why

He shrugged his shoulders and said " this burner in this boiler an 80 degree nozzle fits the air pattern of the burner better"

MikeAmann

Point taken. Good story. And GREAT memory.

HVACNUT

If your testing over fire, don't insert the probe directly. EK offers this.

MikeAmann

So that would be a hose that attaches to the end of the probe, and then a metal line that can take the heat, I assume. I made my own out of a piece of 18" long 3/8" metal fuel line with a barb fitting adapter on the other end for checking the over fire draft. It comes out glowing red.
I would never stick the probe directly in the fire.

EBEBRATT-Ed

Just saying that if the Co2 over the fire and the Co2 in the breeching don't match it means neg draft is pulling air into the firebox from the base, around the doors etc

I am not saying it's happening but when you get lower than expected Co2 that's the test.

It would also prove why your draft over the fire and in the breech is the same

MikeAmann

Oh, okay, I get it.
Is it possible that my baffles could still be a little restrictive?
In other words, reducing the draft in the breach?
Granted I was not dialed in at the time (still using the F0 head), but when I removed the one baffle ..... I have -.02 over the fire, and I now have -.03 to -.04 at the breach with one baffle removed.
I think that as I increase the firing rate, the baffles will become more of a restriction >>> more flame trying to exhaust out of the same size opening.

MikeAmann

I do believe that I have found my air infiltration. I spent the entire night playing with the controls on the boiler trying to determine why I was getting a 3 minute run cycle 4 to 5 times per hour. Forget commenting on that part - that's in another post.
What I did notice is that there is only 1 place where air can get into the combustion chamber >>> the flange gasket. To get the perfect insertion depth, I stacked two of the white universal flange gaskets - my flange is 3 bolt. It should be this MATERIAL: 1/8” thick high temperature Manniglas 1200F rated paper. If you hold it up to your lips, you can blow right through it.
Can I / should I find a way to correct this? Is there a gasket that will not pass the air? Maybe graphite, or a high-temperature o-ring of some sort? I have 500 degree F silicone, but I don't want to "glue" things together that would result in damage if taken apart later, mainly the ceramic chamber 4" opening for the air tube. My IR temp gun says 120 F at that spot.

EBEBRATT-Ed

kaowool rope or sheet but I wouldn't think you would get much air leakage their

MikeAmann

Me neither Ed, but you know that I am going to find out.

I finally got a chance to add these pics.


My boiler side chimney cleanout. We will see what it looks like after the heating season.


Here is the spinning flame as seen through the air band slots.

MikeAmann

I stopped at FW Webb today and was able to buy the .70 GPH nozzles, both 80 degree. I grabbed a hollow and a solid. There is no semi-solid in .70.

HVACNUT

It's not the flange gasket, otherwise the flange gasket makers would've been out of business 40 years ago. You can use high temp silicone around the circumference of the air tube at the face of the flange. This gets done on positive pressure boilers. 

Steamhead

MikeAmann said:

I stopped at FW Webb today and was able to buy the .70 GPH nozzles, both 80 degree. I grabbed a hollow and a solid. There is no semi-solid in .70.

If you're using Delavan nozzles, the semi-solid equivalent is the W.

MikeAmann

Yes Delavan, but .70 GPH does not exist in a W. I bought A & B.

MikeAmann

HVACNUT said:

It's not the flange gasket, otherwise the flange gasket makers would've been out of business 40 years ago. You can use high temp silicone around the circumference of the air tube at the face of the flange. This gets done on positive pressure boilers. 

A follow up to this:
To rule out the possibility of any air leakage into the combustion chamber through all the extra flange slots and my double flange gasket, I made a large washer from an aluminum oven liner the same size as the flange gasket and used 500 degree silicone to glue it to the flange. Will it make a difference? We will see when I run the combustion tests again.....

MikeAmann

The FINAL ? combustion analysis (I hope).

This time it is with the new controls - Hydrostat 3250-Plus with ODR and Carlin Pro-X primary: https://forum.heatinghelp.com/discussion/185686/help-me-to-select-a-new-er-boiler-control-aquastat-for-my-old-boiler#latest

The nozzle this time is a Delavan .70x80B Solid at 120 psi = .77 GPH firing rate.
IMO, the solid nozzle fills the "bucket" portion of the combustion chamber more completely and evenly, and to my non-professional eye, it simply looks right (very stable) - better than the hollow where the ends of the flame were climbing up into the funnel section of the combustion chamber.

I measured the draft first. Same as previous -.020 over the fire and -.025 in the breach. I cannot get this any better. Remember, this boiler was designed with large passages needed to move a lot of air. I now require only about 25% of the air that the conventional burner needed - probably even less than that.

Next I found the TRACE of smoke setting - air band open to 1.750". The first column below is those results. The second column is with 1/2% less CO2 at the same flue temperature. The last column is just a little hotter.


The previous round of tests was with a smaller (.65) hollow nozzle giving a .71 GPH firing rate.
The numbers are essentially unchanged. From previous:


O2 % same
CO2 % same
Efc same
X air % same
TF f very close, a little hotter due to the increased firing rate?
CO ppm slightly higher, again, due to the increased firing rate?

I am happy with these numbers. I think I have taken this as far as I am able to.
Okay, let's hear from the professionals.........

EBEBRATT-Ed

looks good except the co is a little high. looks like it was better with the hollow nozzle.

I am surprise the co went up as the boiler heated up. Usually want the co below 50

MikeAmann

I can go back to the .65 GPH nozzle, but the way the flame fills the bucket is much better with the solid than the hollow. I tried the .70 because there was extra air and O2 in the chamber, so I figured a little more fuel would use some of it up and reduce those numbers. Is this line of thinking correct? It really doesn't matter, because the numbers hardly changed. I have great numbers at the trace of smoke point.
It's when I add the extra air to lower the CO2 by 1/2% that they go a little out of whack.

The CO going up as the boiler heats up has been consistent. What does this mean?

I can pick up a nozzle tomorrow. Should I stay with 80 degree or try different angles? 80 degree seems right. I can't spend all of my time testing nozzles, especially if they are hardly changing the numbers. But I definitely am going to try a .65x80B solid. I would like the burner to run a little longer when it does fire.