What can I expect

tommyoil

I take out the plug out of the second supply tapping on a Weil McClain EG 45 and utilize both three inch tappings? Will there be a negative difference performance wise. If its advantageous in some way O.K. but I want to make sure it wouldnt be a problem. Is the single three inch (actually its a 2-1/2" minimum on that model) a MINIMUM requirement only? Is there any disadvantage to using both tappings? I'm thinking it could only help. Is that the case??? Will it slow the velosity of the steam exiting the boiler?

Unknown

Yes to all

Using the other tapping should reduce the exit velocity , as well as keep the water line in the boiler more stable while it's steaming up . Usually the spec in the instructions is minimum size .

Why are you going back to tap into the extra port ? Has the system been acting up ? We went to a problem Peerless install a few years ago - banging pipes , spewing vents . We tapped into the 2nd port and increased the boiler header size to 3 inch and the problems went away .

tommyoil

Taking out a snowman

Actually the crew I use is doing the snow removal and boiler demo on the 11th. Right now system is all quiet(with existing boiler). HOWEVER there are definate areas of concern and I want to try to slow things down as much as possible. There are some LONG runouts to some addition work ect. Some stuff I have resigned myself ( and the customer) to doing. Access (finished ceilings) and money are the restrictions on the other stuff. But I'm hoping with the advantage of slower steam on my side it will overcome some other concerns and keep things as quiet as they are now. My plan is two utilize both tappings using full three inch supplies into a three inch dropped header manifolded into three two inch supplies. Any concerns??? or is it all good? I wish I knew how to post pictures. I can post them to email but cant get them to post to here. Any ideas? I have minimal computer skills and have taken enough abuse at the hands of my 14 year old with regard to same. Hes forever helping me out but the price tag is getting higher as he gets older. Damn toys get bigger and more expensive.

Unknown

The layout sound great

Get the right size boiler and with the increased header size , you'll do fine . You can take it one step further and keep everything 3 inch on the boiler header and reduce to 2 inch with reducer couplings going up . But with money restrictions , I would keep the 3 by 2 tees . I like to drop the equalizer full sized about a foot or more then reduce to the return size . I'd like to see some of the pics you got . If you need some coaching , I'm on AOL also , just IM me .

tommyoil

Have full intentions

of staying with the 3" across the manifold and using full 3" tees, using as long a 3" nipple as possible before using 3" x2" reducing couplings as close to the ceiling as possible. Do you think if I go direct to my equalizer with a 3" x 2" 90 at the end of the manifold would be a detriment? I could use a full 3" ell and a 3" nipple and another reducing coupling to reduce to my equalizer size. My eqaulizer and hartford will be all full 2". Just trying to make sure I dont create any problems using the two tapping approach.

lchmb

pics

Tommy on the bottom is the attachment key. click on that and it should open a window

lchmb

pics

Tommy if you need help with pic's email them to me. I can post them for you. If you want to try yourself, click attachments and when the window open's click "browse". Depending on your operating system you will find them

lchmb

pics

Tommy if you need help with pic's email them to me. I can post them for you. If you want to try yourself, click "attachments" and when the window open's click "browse". Depending on your operating system you will find them under "my pictures" or "documents". Good luck..:)

Robert O'Connor_7

tommyoil..

I applaud your efforts for going the extra mile. I do however feel using the extra tapping is overkill for such a tiny boiler. WM EG series work well in small installs and in my opinion doesn't require the extra tapping on the EG-45. But it wouldn't hurt either, just seems like alot of work..Robert O'Connor/NJ

tommyoil

Overkill indeed

Thanks Robert. Jobs in Rutherford. I have never done this with the EG either. That is why I inquired. As I said, its the system which really needs addressing but ,again, limited funds and access are the problem. As it stands I have to repipe 15 and 20 foot runouts of leaking 1" copper with black pipe (1-1/2") in a crawlspace (an addition). There are areas of counterflow,ect. The thing is, nothing makes a peep right now and I'm really trying to keep it that way, hense, the overkill. I'm sure the steam will be moving just a little faster than the old snowman could move it.

Bruce Labitt

Adjusting Oil flow rates on new Furnace

Just recently found this site. Lot of good stuff here. I'm not sure this post will end up in the right spot, so I offer my apologies in advance.

A month ago, I had to replace a Weil McLean(sp) boiler. Burned out the boiler due to a failed LWCO. Replaced it with a Burnham V85. My serviceman [oil company] is having trouble getting the system dialed in. The old boiler used a 1.05gph nozzle. With this size nozzle the rate of steam generation seemed to be close to optimal. Wasn't wet, had no banging pipes, radiators filled reasonably well, and had mostly even heating around the house. The new boiler, inconjunction with a Riello burner appears to generate a lot more steam and a lot more quickly. As you might imagine, lots of water hammer, especially at start up. However, the hammering seems to continue for most of the cycle. [It is lower intensity, or rather fewer clangs per minute.]

Unfortunately for me, and the oil company, we've had a lot of callbacks. The service man lead me to believe this was part of the process of getting steam to be dialled in. I've been patient for the most part, but we haven't properly set everything up yet. [Or it may have been, but I failed to recognize this.]

If the nozzle is made rather small, 0.60gph/100psi [equivalent to approximately 0.71 gph at the 140psi that the Riello puts out] there does not seem to be enough steam generated to keep up with the heat load that this snowy January has demanded. A 0.65 gph [0.78 equivalent] likewise did not seem to be enough. But a 0.75gph [0.90gph equiv.] nozzle is making the house hammer like the forge of Hades.

Obvious question is, do you think I should revert to the 0.65 nozzle? I would think so, even if just to eliminate the knock while trying to find the real cause of the problem.

Is the new furnace actually more efficient than the old? I'm not sure. It looks like it is generating lots of wet steam, but perhaps that is a guess on my part.

I presume the knocking is indicative of wet steam / improper pitch somewhere / improper insulation ? I will check on the Hartford loop plumbing for pipe size and position. I can check for the easy one - pitch. Just have to grub about in the crawl space. Anything obvious I could check? Oh yes, the pressuretrol is down near the minimum.

Thanks for any help you can provide.