Vitodens and Ergomax? Pros and Cons?

heatboy

an Ergomax would be to make DHW. For that to happen you will need to maintain a constant high tank temperature to assure transfer since it's just a copper coil in a tank of hot water. Matching it to a Vitodens sounds foolish and a waste of the Vitodens.

But then again, that's just my eletist viewpoint.

hb

Bernie Riddle

All opinions welcomed!!!

Constantin

I'm a mere homeowner...

The heat transfer will be very efficient... Unless you buy a very small Ergomax and combine it with a very large Vitodens, it is unlikely you'll ever outstrip the HX capacity inside the Ergomax.

The huge HX should make for efficient HX even when the boiler water temperature isn't that high... which is a real plus with condensing boilers like the Vitodens.

However, I doubt that the performance of a Phase III from triangle-tube would lag far behind.

Joe Brix

Since the Vitoden modulates

I don't see the need for the buffering benefits of the Ergomax for the added cost. Still need a lot of BTU's to make a lot of Hot water if that's your plan. As said, can't go wrong with a good regular indirect.

hr

Look at the bigger picture to help decide

that being the heating system. High or low temperature? Multi zoned? Small zones below the boilers lowest input?

I still say a buffer will help even modulating boilers if they have the potential to be micro loaded. Even modulating boilers will cycle if the load is real small. That is until theymodulate down to a match sized flame

This becomes more of a problem when a large sized boiler is required to produce adequate DHW. Often times with todays well insulated, tight homes the boiler may be 3 times larger than the heat load to provide adequate DHW! With an indirect I feel you want a minimum of 80K input to do a good job of DHW production. In my area a 2000 square foot home will have a load of @ 34,000 BTU/hr with a 17 BTU/ square foot heat load. I've calced some as low as 12-15 BTU/ foot!

Hense the potential for buffer help

The tanks you mentioned would be two of my top choices. Watch the ErgoMax charts carefully, they require a lot of horsepower to drive the fast recovery. Whereas the Triangle tube will have a "dump load" storage ability.

Consider the heat load, but also the amount of DHW you require, and how fast you want it to happen.

hot rod

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

Bernie Riddle

The boiler will replace my old Janitrol circa 1935. I am heating a 2 story Victorian with CI radiators about the same age as the boiler. Just thought I would take care of DHW at the same time and get rid of my vent chimney altogether. I am currently heating water with NG standalone about 4 years old. I thought about keeping it for a while, but I figured I would change out everything while we're at it. The ergomax idea seems to make sense to me but I'm just wanting to get the opinions of the very good group of people on this site.

Ron Schroeder_3

Unless your peak instantanious DHW demand is higher than the HX rating of the Ergomax (or any other inside out indirect) I don't see any instance where a a conventional indirect would be better in performance. The Ergomax will work with lower boiler temperature, can be used as a buffer, has less chance of bacteria growth, can use a lower head circ, and should last longer. With all that said, I still can't believe they are so dang expensive. They should not cost any more (and probably less) to build.

Ron

Maine doug

Ergomax

I have an E44 Ergomax with two 80K boilers piped P/S. The Ergo is in series with the primary loop. We have radiant floor and panel rads.
Until it gets really cold, we run on one boiler. In winter we use two when the large tub is filled. The Ergo generates lots of hot water for home and studio and acts as a big reserve for the little boilers. Since we have a public water supply that draws from a lake, there is a lot of fine silt and stuff in the water. The inside out indirect does not store the silt.
One problem-- the Ergo quality control was not very good when they assembled my tank. The thermo well was not properly installed and had a small leak which you do not see since it is covered with insulation. My Ergo now has cancer. Ergomax was not very responsive. Never assume they install fittings correctly.

hr

Look closer at the Ergomax

and you will see it is not just a tank with a copper coil The 48 gallon weighs 235 lbs. About 150 pounds heavier than an average 40 gallon water heater. The reason being it is PACKED with copper coils. The E45 has 5- 150 foot coils of type L copper under the hood!

Check out a cut away at the next trade show you attend.

With that much copper you can run the boiler side much lower. Check out the Close Approch data in the Flat Plate sizing catalog. You will see it is possible to get within 2° between A and B side IF you have the surface area to drive the exchange. That's the principle behind these tanks, lots of surface area, and a very conductive coil material.

I was a skeptic also, until I installed an Ergomax 65 on a carwash recently.

Here is an example of a reverse indirect as a buffer on a high/ low temperature system.

http://www.pmmag.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/features/BNP__Features__Item/0,2379,78589,00.html

hot rod

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

Joe Brix

Thermo2000 out of Canada

makes the Turbomax, might be slightly cheaper. I tried to get a duraflow from Laars but no one carried it.
www.thermo2000.com

Ron Schroeder_3

Hi hot rod,

I thought the coils that Ergomax used was 50 feet (and at least 3 coils of course).

Ron