Combustion testing a Munchkin

rudy_2

Have gotten several calls in the past few weeks about what to expect when combustion testing a Munchkin.

Talked to a guy tonight (as well as some others) who was told the CO reading should be around 5ppm in low fire, 105 or 110ppm in high fire. Is that the diluted CO reading or the CO air free reading?

Also wondering what the O2 and stack temp ranges should be at both firing rates.

Any thoughts??

Thanks, rudy

jwade55_3

Give

the guys at HTP a call. 1-800-323-9651 ext. 925

J

rudy_2

Thanks

Thanks for the number J, I'll give them a call this am.

[Deleted User]

co

come on please post what the co is to be as well as other appliances.

rudy_2

OK, Mike, here's a start!!

You and J set a fire under my butt to get started on a project that has been on the 'back burner' since I started combustion testing.

While the residential oil and commercial gas/oil fired industries have included this info in the I&O manuals for years, the residential gas folks have not (although I'm seeing it more frequently now that combustion testing is more common).

Guess the main reason I haven't gotten on this sooner is that it is a HUGE project....

I truely believe making this info easily available will help insure safe, efficient and relaible heating system operation by verifying that the equipment is burning as designed and engineered.

If any furnace/boiler manufacturer can email the particular 'suggested' combustion test results for individual makes and models of their equipment, I'd be more than happy to add the info to the list.

Or, if any of you folks have a contact at a manufacturer you think may be able to provide this info, or have the spec's on hand, please get in touch with me, I'd sure appreciate it.

I've started with the Munchkin from info I got from HTP earlier this week (Thanks, Chuck).

Here's the link to the start of the page.

http://www.bacharach-training.com/Combustion Readings.htm

For now I'm leaving this as a 'hidden link' so If you think this info is helpful, add the url to your 'favorites' list.

jim sokolovic

Can you provide...

a sample of what parameters will be published, and how they are presented? Would you like ranges of values, or nominal readings with tolerances? I assume you would like to have all the information shown in a comparable format, from manufacturer to manufacturer.

rudy_2

Good Question

The format I used on the 'draft' website page above will probably have to be tweeked as I get info.

Starting out, however you would like to have the info presented. Guess the goal here is if a tech is servicing/installing a piece of equipment, they can easily have a source to find specific ranges that are considered acceptable for a particular piece of equipment.

I'm open to any suggestions!!

Unknown

Rudy, I hope you have

better luck than I have had in the past. It seems that manufacturers that I have asked for this information were very hesitant to release the info as it pertains to residentail gas equipment. I was usually given the generic 8 to 9.5% CO2 and 4 to 6% O2. I have had some manuals that did give some info but very limited. The answer I have been given as to why they do not print specific test results is that every situation in the field is different. Duh I think we know that, just gives us some parameters to work within based on lab tests that they have conducted. Good luck, I am going to go through some of my manuals from different manufacturers and what I can find I will pass on to you.

rudy_2

I know, Tim

But I've had fairly good luck getting the info. One gas furnace manufacturer (Carrier) has started putting the info on a start up sheet in the back of the I&O manual.

One funny story though, contacted one last year, told the fellow I was requestion O2, CO and stack temp readings for their equipment. He connected me with another guy - shortly after starting to talk with him I realized he had no idea what I was talking about.

Turns out I had said the 'magic' word, "CO", I had been referred to their legal dept!!

Unknown

People get nervous

now days when you ask for combustion information. I was at a LP training session this week and ask how many in the room do combustion testing. Out of 30 marketers only two do testing. One guy came up to me afterwards and said his lawyer told him not to get involved with that kind of stuff do to legal ramifications. We have a long way to go with all of this.

I look forward to being able to exchange this info with you and get the message out to everyone.

jim sokolovic

I think the main problem with this effort...

would be that the CO values that one manufacturer says are considered "normal" would conflict with the CO values that another manufacturer says indicates a problem with the appliance.

I reviewed the section where you show the correct way to take the readings on various residential appliances. Nicely done, but I still don't agree with referring to the entire venting system, both upstream and downstream of the draft controlling device, as "the stack".

rudy_2

What ever is considered 'Normal'

What ever is considered normal by the maufacturer needs to be information available to the tech. For example, if I tested a piece of equipment that was running at 110ppm CO air free, I would want to double check a few things. I am usually shooting for a max of 100.

However, if the manufacturer stated that is the way it is supposed to run, I wouldn't have any concerns with that level - that's the way it was designed and engineered.

Actually, I was a little suprised that HTP stated something other than other manufacturers who usually refer to the AGA standard of 400ppm CO air free.


Out of curiosity what terms do you all use to differentiate between up and down stream from the draft hood?

Thanks for your input, Jim. I really appreciate your thoughts and ideas. Hopefully I'm not biting off more than I can chew!!

jim sokolovic

Glad you asked...

I love to drive Timmie and Jim Davis crazy!

The portion of the vent upstream of the draft relief is the flue, and the portion downstream of the draft relief is the stack. The full definitions are in the ASHREA 103 Boiler Testing Standard. I strongly believe in differentiating between these two areas with these terms, so that no misunderstanding can occur when explaining the procedure or presenting the readings to someone.

I would assume that HTP is giving a more precise range of CO to look for because they are using CO level as the means to set the equipment, rather than just a level to confirm after setting the equipment via (normally) a pressure reading.

We were told by AGA to remove any references to CO2 or CO for adjusting the boiler from one of our Instruction Manuals about 10 years ago, when we tried that. They said no one in North America carries combustion analyzers, therefore it was not an approvable adjustment means - FACT!

I guess the times are changing - good news for those who sell combustion analyzers.

Earthfire_2

level of excellence

so much for maintaining a minimum level of competence. Looks like the nuckledragers and numbskulls dictate proper procedure at AGA. Excellence should be encouraged not obstructed. At least here, we have a chance to learn how to be better at what we choose to do.

rudy_2

Really!!

Good comments Jim and Earthfire. By the way, I enjoy getting Tim and Jim going as well!!

Thanks for the clairification on the 'stack' terminology.

Good story about AGA having you take the combustion readings out of your manual.

Yep, times are changing but I'd argue that while it is a good thing for combustion instrument manufacturers, it's even a better thing for contractors.

Before, all a contractor had were 'opinions' which only results in a customer getting other 'opinions'. Now a contractor can provide 'facts' which result in more work!!

Unknown

AGA forgot to ask

my company a gas company by the way. We always tested up until I left in 1994 (can't speak for what they do now).

I have been testing since 1966 I guess they did not get the message. As far as I know all the gas utitlites in the northeast have been testing at least that long. We could not do conversion burners without testing.

It is very interesting how people think. I was just turned down to do some training because I am not a member of AGA. They hired a marketing rep to the training instead because he is an AGA member. Do not forget AGA is God and all must bow down.

jim sokolovic

I think the Project Engineer at AGA...

that put thumbs down of our effort was under the impression that most contractors did not own a combustion analyzer. We never discussed utilities. I really couldn't argue his point too much. They can be quite subjective there, if a subject is not defined in a book for them. I had alot of difficulty with many issues the first time I was involved with product certification with them. It's a real ball being stuck between two rocks - a boss and them.

munchkin-man

CO testing

Years ago we did not have direct vented equipment so the co levels were much higher than with a direct vented appliance of today. It was stated that back when no one had the equipment to test with well it still exist today and is a major problem for us not having th reading and contractors shooting from the hip. The days or eye balling the flame sre over on this type of equipment. Each manufacture will spec out there own levels based on design and must conform to limitations of a standard. We proudly list our specifications in our installation manual and give a range to work in. When targeting a certain level of co the co2 will fall into a range respectfuly. We test and set up to rate and co to find the mid range and still comply to the standars we are goverened under.