Talk:Domestic Hot Water Systems
Here is some content to play with for real in the new DIYki (tm) :-)
It's an article I've been sketching out when I've had some Round Tuits to spare and therefore probably a good example of where collaborative wiki-type effort could work i.e. the article might get
- finished (if wiki articles can every be considered finished)
It particularly needs some good diagrams and an expanded discussion of unvented DHW systems (especially their control and safety systems).
I have some text on thermal stores and heat banks to go in (when the next Round Tuit comes along)
John Stumbles 22:51, 15 December 2006 (GMT)
Ed: I changed back the section on stratification to read "70C at the top and 10C at the bottom" rather than "10C less ..." as you'd amended it. "10C at the bottom" is what I meant to say. If you disagree with the actual figures I've chosen for the example by all means put in some better ones. I plucked the figures out of the air for the sake of illustation but it would be better if they were realistic. I'll go and measure when I'm next out with my IR thermometer and some Round Tuits!
split up article?
This article seems to me to discuss too many concepts which have no direct relation to each other:
- direct & indirect
- primary & secondary
I'm thinking of splitting these into mini articles of their own and just linking to them from wherever in other articles it seems appropriate e.g. to 'recovery' from places in the articles on unvented and on thermal stores.
Anyone have any feedback on this?
--John Stumbles 15:59, 20 January 2007 (GMT)
Lot of good stuff there, but as you say its a lot to digest in one go. Generally I'm in favour of splitting subject up into several articles because it makes each one easy to take in, and the material all relevant to the question the reader has. A single thorough but huge article can be a bit intimidating to take it all in, and the reader may not really know which bits are relevant to their query and which arent.
A way to gruoup them ogteher could be to make them all part of the same subcategory, such as DHW design, which DHW system, or something like that. NT 18:28, 20 January 2007 (GMT)
'Pumps usually required for showers and some types of taps.'
Surely they're only required for power showers and occasionally conventional showers NT 22:58, 7 January 2014 (GMT)
"Power showers" normally include a pump anyway. Some "mains pressure" taps are unusable on gravity systems due to a combination of low flow, and in some cases an inability to not let by unless there is adequate pressure. So pumps become essential there.
--John Rumm 01:29, 8 January 2014 (GMT)
Yup, which all means most such houses have no pump NT 20:51, 8 January 2014 (GMT)
Can you put any figures to that claim? I don't know what the numbers are... but I don't have any problem with the general statement that pumps are "usually required" with a gravity system for (decent) showers - especially in the context of an article that will be of primary interest to people making an active choice of the type of DHW system to install. The comment on taps is becoming more relevant as it becomes ever more difficult to find decent quality low pressure brassware at a sensible price.
Obviously oots of places were built with gravity fed systems that originally only had a bath (showering becoming more common in recent times). So showers were added later, and then they realised they were a bit disappointing. So either fitted a pump or swapped to a combi or put up with it.
--John Rumm 00:06, 10 January 2014 (GMT)