Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Wireless heating Controller ??

Options

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    you'd fit the relay box where the old timer is and mount the WPS on the wall

    1 channel as far as i can tell

    are you replacing a 1 channel analogue timer ie: apt or similar?

    if the heating system is all zoned together- i suppose it's debatable whether a stat is any benefit


  • Options
    #3
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    M cebee wrote: »
    are you replacing a 1 channel analogue timer ie: apt or similar?

    Yes, should be easy changeover.
    M cebee wrote: »
    if the heating system is all zoned together- i suppose it's debatable whether a stat is any benefit

    Why would you think that ??


  • Options
    #4
    Carlow52
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,389 ✭✭✭Carlow52


    bbam wrote: »
    Why would you think that ??


    because once the stat reaches temp the whole system shuts down via the stat or if it never reaches temp it will never shut down via the stat


  • Options
    #5
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    Carlow52 wrote: »
    because once the stat reaches temp the whole system shuts down via the stat or if it never reaches temp it will never shut down via the stat
    I would have thought it was still of benifet with no zones...

    Anyway..

    Our house has two zones..
    Downstairs stat cuts the heating from lower level.
    Upstairs stat only does a 50% cut as it needs to be at least 50% open to allow heat disapation from large multifuel stove at all times, thus avoiding explosion.

    The house is only 18 months old and with super insulation we're finding that the oil is still over-running with our current standard timer...

    I thought we had explained to sparks how we wanted heating stats to work but aparrently not well enough... In addition to each stat cutting the zones via motorised valves I wanted a situation where the boiler was locked out if both were satisfied thus preventing boiler over-run..

    I think this stat/timer will acheive this for me..
    If anyone knows of a similar RF stat/timer which would take two remote stats please let me know..


  • Options
    #6
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    you're stove should have expansion-you can't depend on a stat/mv to prevent explosions

    most of the modern boilers will have 'over-run' built-in

    on a basic boiler you need a 2-way pipe stat and permanent feed
    for the over-run
    you might also need an auto-bypass if MVs are closed

    with the 'honeywell' you need a 'WPS and a receiver' for each channel-the receivers would be switching the MVs
    i think you can fit another receiver to control the boiler via demand signals from multiple WPS's if the motorized valves haven't been wired correctly(via contact on valve)

    http://www.plumbnation.co.uk/site/honeywell-hc60ng-receiver/Honeywell%20HC60NG%20Specification%20Sheet.pdf


    it's not rocket science anyhow


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    M cebee wrote: »
    you're stove should have expansion-you can't depend on a stat/mv to prevent explosions

    not relying on stat/mv to prevent problems, what I meant was that the upper circuit is always at least 50% open to the stove thus allowing heat dissapation at all times, hence no problems
    M cebee wrote: »
    most of the modern boilers will have 'over-run' built-in

    What do you mean by over-run built in, I was referring to the fact that the boiler runs even though both stats have reached temperature, thus wasting oil. This is due to the upper loop being at least 50% open at all times creating a heat demand.
    M cebee wrote: »
    with the 'honeywell' you need a 'WPS and a receiver' for each channel-the receivers would be switching the MVs
    i think you can fit another receiver to control the boiler via demand signals from multiple WPS's if the motorized valves haven't been wired correctly(via contact on valve)

    I'm going to have the receiver switching the burner rather than the MV's
    When I mentioned two remote units I wondered if a wireless system where one receiver could receive signals from two remotes..

    thanks for help


  • Options
    #8
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    ....over-run 'aka' pump over-run



    ....your receiver (HC60NG)will receive demand signals from two WPS's-to regulate the boiler,but the mvs also need switching

    i'm not clear how you plan to configure the system-anyway nevermind:)


  • Options
    #9
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    M cebee wrote: »
    ....over-run 'aka' pump over-run

    No probelm, I meant the burner ran for unnecassary time wasting oil
    M cebee wrote: »
    ....your receiver (HC60NG)will receive demand signals from two WPS's-to regulate the boiler,but the mvs also need switching

    The MV's are currently switched with existing wall stats, I didn't plan to change or replace these..

    My plan was to have the system run as is but the control of the boiler would be via the new controller rather than the existing clock

    Cheers..


  • Options
    #10
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    omg! stop please:pac:

    you need to co-ordinate 'demand signals' to boiler and 'mv' operation

    that'll eliminate the prob you're having with the boiler


  • Options
    #11
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    I'm not sure what the problem would be...
    It's essentially a change of timer with the added function of thermostatic switching rather than just timed.

    Currently the stats control the MV's independent of the timer being on or off, this wouldn't change.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    the mv's and boiler should be co-ordinated

    you don't need programmable stat in addition to the stats located in the zones


  • Options
    #13
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    M cebee wrote: »
    the mv's and boiler should be co-ordinated

    you don't need programmable stat in addition to the stats located in the zones

    I agree they should be... but they're not, they exist as separate circuits :(.
    The house is only 18 months old and a considerable rework would be required to do that, I'm looking for a "next best" non invasive solution..


  • Options
    #14
    M cebee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭M cebee


    bbam wrote: »
    I agree they should be... but they're not, they exist as separate circuits :(.
    The house is only 18 months old and a considerable rework would be required to do that, I'm looking for a "next best" non invasive solution..

    never used them but i think you can do it with the honeywell gear- 2 wps and 3 receivers(2 for mvs 1 for boiler) afaik

    without any rework

    your system will be even more unwieldy if you add the WPS along with the existing stats


  • Options
    #15
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    Thanks for the help...
    I'll go ahead with the first and replace the timer, if I need further to replace the stats I'll probably be back....


    The system isn't unwieldy, we've reduced our oil consumption from 3.5 tanks to 1.5 with our new house, and with the boiler running excessively, I think better control will further reduce consumption to 1 tank a year


Advertisement