CO and Oil

Firedragon_4

you read the following:
"Emmissions Characteristics of Modern Oil Heating Equipment, Krajewski, Celebi, Coughlan, Butcher and McDonald.

This Project Report was published July 1990 by the Building Equipment Division, Office of Building Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy, Brookhaven National Laboratory.

The water is getting muddied again with reports mostly dealing with gas (natural, L.P., etc.), let's stick to what started this discussion, the testing of oilfired appliances.

I sure don't know it all when it comes to combustion, but I know about my own trade.

John Ruhnke

From the DOE?

Oh great another wonderfull report from the DOE. Hey maybe if I read it I will gain insight as to how they got so screwed up in the first place. The DOE is costing us bilions of dollars in fuel bills because of their failer to produce a decent standard for heating systems. I would never trust their advice on something as important as life or death as found in CO poisoning.

Read Consumer Product Safety Commission report called non-fire CO deaths and injuries assoc with the use of consumer products.

10,000 get taken to the hospital annually and 500 or so die annually. This is from the deaths that they know of. CO death is only detectable under a special test. Often in the case of death they won't do the test unless they suspect CO poisoning. I would say that it is safe to assume that another 500 die from CO poisoning without anyone knowing the true cause of death. YES PEOPLE DIE FROM OIL FIRED EQUIPMENT EVERY YEAR IT IS IN THE REPORT.

The occurance of death in oil fired equipment is way less then gas, yes, but oil fired equipment can still put you in the hospital and even kill you.

JR

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Firedragon_4

I've never said it wouldn't, FACT!

John Ruhnke

I'm not upset with you.................

I'm not upset with you. I am mad at the DOE. Jim Davis, Buderus and Veissmann have been complaining about the unfairness of AFUE for many years. I realized that AFUE was a problem and came up with what I thought was a great solution. I applied for a provisional patent application on it. I also submitted a Grant Application to the DOE. My friend,Bob and I were up very late many nights writing this application. The project got rejected. The DOE sent me a letter of rejection failing my project in every single catagory. It was horrible! It never made it past the first round. They thought that energy auditors were already doing the same thing. So I called all of the names that they gave me and I found they were wrong. They got nothing like my HEF project. When I explained the differences, they told me that IT DOESN'T MATTER IF I SAVE ENERGY. That is not as important to them as fitting projects to there political agendas that they get handed to them by politicians who are trying to pay back political contributers.

Oh I AM VERY MAD AT THIS WHOLE SYSTEM. They will never fund me. I am not a PHD, I am just a Heating Contractor.

JR

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Rookie_3

dispute!!!!

I didn't see Firedragon or anyone else disbute that improper CO was not a danger. The disagreement was that electronic CO testing was the only option and that the Fyrite was primative and not acceptable. Show the statistics
of the 10,000 people treated yearly for CO posioning that CAME FROM a -.02"W.C. OF draft, -.04"W.C. breech draft,
10%-12% CO2, & 0 smoke.

Firedragon_4

I know the feeling John and I'm sorry for your loss,

further I can understand it having applied to my industry for funds for INDEPENDENT education and having been rejected 3 times. The establishment always wins, kinda like gambling!

Also, don't give up on the DOE, some groups like BNL are true research programs and do accomplish much, but beaurocracy is .............

If you contact me off-line I will try to direct you to some entrepreneurs or groups that may want to hear what you have to say and besides the private sector pays better.

A suggestion if I may to protect you. Make a copy of your data and mail it to yourself or your partner by registered mail. Don't open it, put it in a safe place like a safe deposit box. If something happens down the road it's an insurance policy, FACT!

Firedragon_4

Thank you!

John Ruhnke

There is a better way.......................

There is a better way. The combustion analyzer is much more accurate. The accuracy will allow field techs to improve efficiency and save a few lives. Combustion analyzers are like watching a video in real time on the internet. The old liquid bottles are like taking a picture and waiting for it to develop before seeing the result. COMUSTION ANALYZERS SAVE LIVES.

What if many years ago, I invented a seat belt for a car, would you argue that no seat belts are just fine because for many years people did'n't wear them? No seat belts was tried and true for decades, why change? Would you argue that seat belts don't save lives?

JR

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Chuck Shaw_2

digital combustion analyzers are a tool

and like every tool, they are only as good as the person using them. If the person with that tool does not know what he is looking at, or what he is going to do with the numbers he gets, he may as well not test at all. The same goes for any type of test equipment.

Understanding the results as important as how you get them.

JMO

Chuck

Rookie_3

seat belts!!!!

No John, I wouldn't argue that seatbelts don't save lives.
Your missing your own point!!!! Would you say that a
5 point seatbelt is the only one that will save a life and the standard shoulder harness is outdated and useless
even though those are the seatbelts most are using and
they work!!!!
Now are you going to give me traffic injuries statistics based on seat belts vs. no seatbelts or statics on one type of safety belt vs. the other. ELECTRONIC vs. LIQUID not
electronic vs. nothing.

Firedragon_4

Just for the record and to prove

that nothing is perfect, a seatbelt didn't save Dale Earnhardt, but I started wearing one after that fateful situation FACT!

I agree with Chuck and that has been my point all along. EDUCATION is the most important issue being discussed here. Re-read the postings and look at the assumptions, inuendo and all out falsehoods that have been posted. I stop at and won't get into the distortion of facts, that's a book full.

Bottom line, is a good education in the fundamentals of combustion is essential if you service fuel burning equipment. The adjustments should only be made using instruments. If your company policy is to test for CO, great, if not, know how to work around it.

Mark Hunt posted pictures of a failed boiler chamber area. He found it using a CO tester, well done!

The shame of it is that it should and could have been found using both a breeching and overfire CO2 test. I am a great believer and have been forever in that test especially on BRAND NEW equipment. Why? Because we're all only human. How many combustion teachers teach it and how many of us do it?

Most pump(oil) instructors teach the use of gauges, some of us even prefer they be liquid filled, how many of us do it?

Electronic ignitors have become the norm on both gas and oil, how many of us know what the resistance is across the coil(?) of all of them out there? How about just the one's you work on?

Need I go on???

Take any and every course on combustion you can as Timmie said, obtain every piece of OEM literature and book on the subject that you can.

Education will protect your job and public safety, enhance the image of the heating field and after all a circulator or a low-water cutoff may be fun to learn more about, but setting fires is what the job is really all about and they do kill!

J.C.A._3

BRAVO CHUCK !

I couldn't have put it better myself.

LEARN, LEARN ,LEARN!!! Don't be a monkey doing what your told, find and figure out WHY. If you don't, your following blindly into what someone else wants you to believe.

I've read all the posts on this subject....So far, and can only applaud the response you gave. BTW, Firedragon,I trained under you and learned the REASONS for the numbers I read. Timmie, I've also learned from you, and was proud to tell you that all the procedures I were doing, were RIGHT. Being able to understand, and adjust an appliance becomes a "natural" thing,when you know WHY fire works!

(Please note....I stayed out of the "mudslinging and name calling". I believe a bit of truth is LEARNED from all the posts, but have to say, the best was Timmies "calm down and can't WE ALL, just get along" post.. I'm smarter than that, and everyone here should be also. Bashing each other is not the HIGH ROAD. There are customers and homeowners that come here for opinions and answers, not OPINIONS only)

After a day of repairing numerous holes, in a radiant floor thanks to a carpet installer....I'm tired and want you all to be on your best behavior for the rest of the weekend! Chris

todd s

Electronic testers

There's a built in electronic analyzer on every burner. It only requires an ohmeter and a jumper. This is electronic testing/analyzing - no? I bet there is a direct correlation to what an ohmeter sees and what the digital flue analyzer sees. I learned about this from Firedragon in a seminar.

Ken D.

Testing

I have been using a Bacharach 25 electronic tester for several years now. I still have my red and blue bottles along with my glass tube CO tester. The electronic saves so much time and effort. Turn it on and read direct in real time. The old bottles you had to aspirate 18 times, turn over the bottle twice, read, adjust and do it all over again. The modern way is electronic. This is progress. It is most certainly an improvement than the old ways. Hell, remember the days before cordless tools? Remember carburetors before fuel injection? Remember eyeballing before instruments? Remember stoking a coal furnace by hand? Progress. I keep the old kit for back up, but the 25 is my primary. Agreed, they are not cheap, but neither are lawsuits, not to mention the time saved on the job. It is the 21st Century!