Carbon buildup on electrodes and flame retention head

SuperTech

I just got home from a service call that has me second guessing everything I did and reminding myself that I am not really as much of a Super Tech as I would like to be.  

Back in October I was sent to a new customer with a 20 year old Peerless WBV-04-150. The boiler sections, combustion chamber, flue pipe and chimney base were completely packed with soot. I noticed as soon as I arrived that the chimney was in in poor condition and the masonry at the peak was falling apart. I checked as much as I could without firing the boiler and made recommendations for a deep cleaning, replacement chamber liner and electronic igniter. I told her I couldn't do anything until the chimney was repaired and referred her to a good chimney company.  She was so grateful to hear this because four other techs were there recently and all four didn't even give her options for repairs, they just recommended replacement.  

I was happy to find when I returned for repairs that a new stainless steel liner was installed, masonry repaired and they installed all new flue pipe and barometric damper.  I spent 6 hours cleaning the boiler and performing repairs. I ended up replacing the electrodes and installing a Carlin ProX primary control. The burner was a mess, I completely disassembled it and cleaned the air band, air shutter and air guide as well as the blower wheel. I found the last guy installed a 1.00 80B nozzle and the pump pressure was 130 PSI, factory specifications are 1.25 GPH at 140 PSI. I figured it was downfired, no big deal. Oil pump cutoff was good. Set combustion for true zero smoke, 18 PPM CO, -.021" draft over fire, -.043" in the stack. Cad cell reading 330 ohms. Everything looking good.  

I went back today because the primary control locked out due to an ignition error. I found the flame retention head had a good amount of carbon on it and so did the electrodes.  The air band, shutter and guide were all oily. I double checked my electrodes and Z dimension settings and both were correct. I checked the oil pump again and the pressure didn't drop more than 20 PSI when I closed the valve on the pump testing manifold. This surprised me because I figured I had an oil pump problem. Still concerned that the oil was from the nozzle dripping after it shuts off I checked if the boiler was level, it wasn't. The front of the boiler is lower than the back. But when I put a few drops of oil in the burner tube it still drained towards the flame retention head.  Despite this I still put a bead of RTV along the bottom of the burner tube where it joins the burner chassis.

I ended up installing a new clean cut pump and set the pressure to 140 PSI because I figured the oil had to come from a leaking oil pump seal, even though it passed the cutoff test. I'm not sure if this was the right diagnosis.  I'm hoping maybe a real Super Tech like @STEVEusaPA or @EBEBRATT-Ed might be able to tell me what I might have missed here. 

STEVEusaPA

Thanks for the nice words...but I'm just a regular tech...lol Sounds like you did everything I would do. Let's do a little brain storming 'outside the box'. After everything you did, sounds like I'm leaning toward ignition/combustion air issue. Did the ProMaxx offer any hints?

-What was CO2 and excess air numbers?
-I would put my analyzer in there and watch CO on start up and shut down, see how high it goes..
-How's combustion air? Is there enough and is it clean?
-Any new/large high efficiency clothes dryers in or near the boiler?
-Whole house fan?
-How about fuel quality?
-How about increasing pre & post purge? Maybe drop a K-type thermocouple in the air tube and see what happens to the temperature after shut down.

-Is the target wall on the chamber still flat against the back?

It's also possible you did everything right, and the nozzle is giving you trouble not spraying correctly.

I had a WBV-03 (I think) called for a .90x80B Hago, and just wouldn't dial in with the commonly used .85x80B Delavan. So I ordered/installed the Hago and have been fine ever since.

I've also been going back to the iron core transformers. Told a story before about an electronic ignitor and multiple calls. Despite the ignitor 'passing' per manufacturer instructions, I had a feeling it might be bad, but couldn't bring myself to change it without proof. Well if failed a spark test, finally, right in front of me, so I replaced it. Took it back and put it on my shop heater and its been running fine, probably 8 years now.

If you want, hit me up on my email, and I'll give you my number if you want to give me a call.

STEVEusaPA

I forgot to mention, first time I touch a burner I resurface the nozzle line with the tool in my profile pic, in case someone before me over tightened and misaligned the nozzle face. I also have a pressure gauge I put in place to deadhead the nozzle line, outside the burner. Turn on the burner, get the pressure up and shut down-checks pump cut off and will show any leaks in the nozzle assembly.
Also double check strainer gasket and fittings on pump, especially the plug in the return line.
I find squeezing some oil dry in my hands to get a powder dusting on it the touching all the place to check for a leak helps to easier identify wet (oil) spots…
That’s all I got…unless you’re looking for me to do a road trip…lol

rick in Alaska

It sounds like you are getting a burn behind the end cone, or I should say, lack of burn. It makes me wonder if maybe there is some air in the line, or if you might have just got a bad nozzle and is spraying slightly sideways.
Rick

EBEBRATT-Ed

@SuperTech

Everyone on this forum has been on jobs like that, though not all will admit to having issues. I have had my share.

@STEVEusaPA & @rick in Alaska are probably far better resources that this old retired guy and posted good suggestions above so I won't repeat any of those. I often go against the grain of what others think but I will put my $.02 in.

My guess would be the earlier chimney issues and plugged boiler caused the previous tech to downfire to the 1.00 nozzle.

Now that the liner is installed and the boiler was cleaned up you got good #s out of it. It should have been fine. I am guessing the carbon on the head caused the lockout on the last visit.

1. I wonder when the tech installed the smaller nozzle if he changed the burner head??
2. You may have already fixed the issue with the CC pump
3. Could the head be damaged/warped from running with the back pressure from the previous bad chimney/plugged boiler?
4. Outside of that maybe shimming the burner flange with washers if you think the "back pitch" is an issue
5. And I would double check the burner head and static plate size if you go back


Lastly (and this usually causes contention). I am not afraid to throw the "book" away and try something different with regard to nozzles and down firing if your having problems, which some consider an evil practice.

Every once in a while you find a job for whatever reason the "factory" set up doesn't work. I also can't see firing the boiler a 1/4 of a gallon harder just because the name plate says so when the smaller nozzle can do the job, but that's just me.

I just have seen too many jobs where the factory was wrong or I shouldn't say wrong but their set up didn't work. Such is the challenge of burning oil

You may go back in a few weeks or a month and find everything is fine. Hopefully you do

SuperTech

The boiler is installed in a basement by itself. The basement is only half the size of the house, most of the piping is in crawl space. The house is easily 100 years old and it appears that there would be enough infiltration to supply enough combustion air. No whole house fans or anything else to mess with things. The oil tank is underground (ugh) two pipe setup. I noticed a few compression fittings on the return line, the supply line is all flare connections. The two pipe setup should eliminate any air issues, right?

I tried bleeding some oil into an empty bottle to see if any water separated and it didn't. Fuel quality appears ok, no soot in the chamber or sections since the cleaning. I had combustion at 5.4% O2 in October and 5.8% O2 today. I didn't see any unusually high CO upon ignition today, but that was after cleaning the retention head and electrodes. I should have checked CO on burner shutdown too, I'll admit that I usually do that but I understand how that can show an after drip problem. Target wall is still in place correctly. 

Steve what is that tool in your profile picture? With the amount of oil burners I work on I should probably have one  so I check for those issues as well. 

I'm concerned that I may have changed the oil pump when it wasn't the problem. If the oil came from a leaking seal than wouldn't that have shown when I closed the pump testing manifold? 

EBEBRATT-Ed

@SuperTech

Did it have a clean cut pump originally or did you just put a clean cut on it now?

Robert O'Brien

Single pipe or two pipe? If two, what's vacuum?

STEVEusaPA

The tool in my profile pic is a nozzle resurfacing tool, originally sold by George Lanthier @ Firedragon. He stopped selling them when the original maker/patent holder stopped making them. That person won't allow anyone else to make them anymore. I heard a rumor there might be another small production run, and if so, I may have ordered 2 I'll keep you posted.
Reminder, 2 pipe doesn't eliminate air from getting into the fuel system, just helps eliminate it while running. However, unless your primary will recycle (scavanger), you'll could just end up with a lockout.
You mentioned it's 2 pipe and underground (2 strikes in my book...easy, @EBEBRATT-Ed...easy...lol). Sometimes a restriction or some crap could be partially plugging the oil line, causing high vacuum.
I'd probably switch it to a Tiger Loop to eliminate that possible issue.

Steamhead

SuperTech said:

............ I found the last guy installed a 1.00 80B nozzle and the pump pressure was 130 PSI, factory specifications are 1.25 GPH at 140 PSI. .........

I'm sure you already checked this, but here it is anyway from the Beckett OEM Spec Guide:

WBV-04-150: AFG, F6 head, 2-3/4" static plate, Delavan 1.25x80°A nozzle, pump pressure 140 PSI.

That's right- it takes a HOLLOW nozzle.

How many times have we worked on a burner that was supposed to have a hollow nozzle but some flamehead had installed a solid one?

rick in Alaska

Well, I have been on jobs where i had to throw the "book" away, and try different nozzles, and sometimes the solid nozzle did work better than the specified one. I would also say, most of the units I worked on, the nozzle is smaller than specified as the boiler was too big, and I could get away with a reduction. And on the same subject of manufacturers specs, I rarely found that the air mix setting they wanted was even close to reality. I had a lot of cases where the factory air setting was something like a 7 setting, and I wound up closer to a 2. That is a huge difference to me.
One thing that does have to happen though is if the nozzle is dropped too far down, then you might need to change the static plate, and possibly add a low fire baffle. I'm not sure, but I think you might need to go to an F0 head for a 1.0 nozzle.
Sorry; drifted way off topic. A two pipe system could still have a bit of an air leak, but because it is two pipe, it might be masking it. Does it light off clean when it sits for a while?
Rick

Larry Weingarten

Hi @STEVEusaPA , About the patent. Do you know if it's still in force? I understand that usually a patent is good for 14 years with the possibility of a seven year extension. Of course, somebody would have to take on the task of making the tool...

Yours, Larry

STEVEusaPA

Larry Weingarten said:

Hi @STEVEusaPA , About the patent. Do you know if it's still in force? I understand that usually a patent is good for 14 years with the possibility of a seven year extension. Of course, somebody would have to take on the task of making the tool...

Yours, Larry

Wouldn't know. George would have the most knowledge. Maybe he went that route.
I asked my cousin who's an electrical engineer and makes/designs/and get patents for things on a regular basis (mostly MRI & imaging machines). He said with 2 modifications I wanted to do it wouldn't be too hard to get a patent. He didn't say it would be cheap. Plus it would probably be pretty expensive to bang them out at a reasonable price in the USA. And if it's sniffed out overseas, they'll be dumping them here before you or I could get production started.

Jon_blaney

I am now pro but is the head insertion correct?

MikeAmann

For the non-pros following along (like me):


Whether this burner is firing with a 1.0 GPH nozzle, or even 1.25, F3 F4 and F6 heads can be used along with the same 2-3/4" static plate. Why would one choose one particular head over another?

STEVEusaPA

MikeAmann said:

…Whether this burner is firing with a 1.0 GPH nozzle, or even 1.25, F3 F4 and F6 heads can be used along with the same 2-3/4" static plate. Why would one choose one particular head over another?

Ideally you want to be in the middle of the head range for the nozzle in use. People can have problems when they fire at the bottom of, or below (or above) the recommended firing rate for a particular end cone.
Which is why it’s best to initially start with the OEM spec guide and take advantage of all the testing performed by the manufacturer.

Also note from your chart all the different air tube combinations and usable length.

EBEBRATT-Ed

I agree with @STEVEusaPA " Which is why it’s best to initially start with the OEM spec guide and take advantage of all the testing performed by the manufacturer.

And the question is DID they do the testing? A lot of MFGs don't that why (and I agree with @rick in Alaska ) you sometimes have to throw the book away.

I have seen plenty of guy bury themselves in the book and get blinders on because they refuse to try anything not in the book.

I was a burner rep for 13 years. I know for a fact some do not test the way they should. It's a huge task.

Take a simple residential boiler from say 3-6 sections. Now test it with Carlin, Beckett Riello Wayne etc

4 burners x 4 sections is 16 combinations to test x that by how many oil boilers that 1 mfg makes

Who is convinced they do all that??

Not me. Not ever

I have seen the thing that they do

Hopefully @SuperTech does not have one of those. I think not because the boiler is 20 years old

MikeAmann

Thanks guys. I am also one that has never accepted what "the book" says and blindly take what is said as FACT. Sorry, but I have to prove things to myself. It's just the way I am wired.

BDR529

Carbon build-up, oily airgates. Ok a bad seal, more towards a Bio fuel issue.

Robert O'Brien

STEVEusaPA said:

The tool in my profile pic is a nozzle resurfacing tool, originally sold by George Lanthier @ Firedragon. He stopped selling them when the original maker/patent holder stopped making them. That person won't allow anyone else to make them anymore. I heard a rumor there might be another small production run, and if so, I may have ordered 2 I'll keep you posted.
Reminder, 2 pipe doesn't eliminate air from getting into the fuel system, just helps eliminate it while running. However, unless your primary will recycle (scavanger), you'll could just end up with a lockout.
You mentioned it's 2 pipe and underground (2 strikes in my book...easy, @EBEBRATT-Ed...easy...lol). Sometimes a restriction or some crap could be partially plugging the oil line, causing high vacuum.
I'd probably switch it to a Tiger Loop to eliminate that possible issue.

Put it on single pipe or use a deaerator. What a lot of people see as an air leak is in fact, air being pulled from the fuel, these bubbles play havoc with cutoff. Happens at much lower levels than you would think, 6" or even less

SuperTech

A couple of things I have been wondering about is the nozzle being used and the flame retention head. I'm usually in the habit of checking the nozzle I find in the burner against what the sticker on the burner states the unit came from the factory with. The burner on this boiler had no readable information on it, I didn't question anything until I went back on Friday and saw the pump pressure was only 130 PSI. I'm wondering if the flame retention head is even the correct one. Who knows,  maybe someone changed a bunch of things over the course of 20 years.

So one mistake I made was not verifying the correct flame retention head was still there, the other is using a solid pattern nozzle instead of hollow. But if either was the cause of my issues I would think my combustion test would show it? 

Steamhead

Maybe, maybe not. I'd go back when you get a chance to at least see how it's doing.

SootBoy

did you or have you one of those Carlin REd nozzle head gauges? make sure the edge of nozzle and electrodes are in there? the FDR Carlins were trouble

SootBoy

BDR529 said:

Carbon build-up, oily airgates. Ok a bad seal, more towards a Bio fuel issue.

Does this so called "Bio-Fuel" have Ethanol in it? or what is the aditive?

Jamie Hall

SootBoy said:

BDR529 said:

Carbon build-up, oily airgates. Ok a bad seal, more towards a Bio fuel issue.

Does this so called "Bio-Fuel" have Ethanol in it? or what is the aditive?

No. Usually manufactured from soy beans. Ethanol is only in gasoline.