Poor pressure on a megaflo??

[doitall]

I think the mod is saying there is a rule against abuse, but not against insults, so the "yes" and "no" refers to the existence of a rule, not referring to the insults or abuse.

Glad thats sorted then

only ask tounge in cheek

 

[Agile]

I would have thought that an insult is an abuse !

 

[croydoncorgi]

What is going on here is a hatchet job on a good product

Please note that I NEVER commented on the product itself.
I have only two criticisms:

- an accumulator can only do what its name implies: accumulate pressure that is provided to it, by the mains supply or by a pump. Given the size and cost of the thing and the cost of a booster pump and break-tank, if this is also required, then you have a very big cost, maybe for a small benefit. The same result might also be achieved by alternative, possibly less expensive, means.

- my second point is not about the product at all, only the way it is being sold as an attempted monopoly. As far as I can see there is no novelty and therefore there should be no patent protection. If other manufacturers of unvented HW systems (who are most affected by this monopoly) are prepared to live with it, more fool them! The purpose of patents is to protect, for a limited time, the R&D costs of a new concept or product. This example is neither novel nor required much R&D, if any.

 

[Softus]

Softus, it's funny, but it has just occured to me that you are an idiot.

Quite so - I'm an idiot and just here for your amusement. I have no right to poke fun at simond, but you can slate me in whatever way you like.

There is no shame in not understanding how something works

Quite so; to wit you'll find posts in which I state exactly that, and the remainder in which it's demonstrably the opposite.

Go away, read up on it and then you can contribute to what I think has been a very interesting debate, but please don't just sit there poking at Simon when you don't have anything relevant to say.[/i]

Request acknowledged and hereby ignored. If you don't agree with what I write, then feel free to contradict it or just ignore it. It's your choice.

 

[Water Systems]

We knew we were deailng with a salesman, now we know we're dealing with a poor one.

Without an accumulator, . . . , as you reach the max flow rate the working pressure falls off significantly.

This is a double concealed lie.
It pretends
1) that the working pressure doesn't fall off as you reach maximum flow, if you have an accumulator. Of course it does, any supply will do that. Some do it less than an accumulator system.
2) it forgets that the pressure and therefore flow from an accumulator system drops off as you use it.

Because the accumulator has such a large volume, showers etc, even three running simultaneously, will still be invigourating to say the least.

The "large volume" of the accumulator is one of its main drawbacks - it's a pretty inefficient way of storing water, as only about half the volume is usable. Assuming you need to store any water at all, that is.
The "invigourating" (sic) qualities of the showers are not due to their being sourced by an accumulator per se. Any low resistance supply will be exactly the same. But any other method of delivering the same pressure and flow doesn't collapse it as you use it like an accumulator does.

Even at 1.5bar, the working pressure is impressive

Only if you want to call 1.5 bar impressive. Many if not most "designer" showers are designed for around 3 bar and look very sad at 1.5.

So it doesn't boost pressure per se, just makes better use of what you have.

Yes it does that. But only "better" in one respect, flow, not pressure (as required by those showers). And at huge cost. There are other, arguably better, and certainly more popular methods of achieving the same, and improvements over that.
Try increasing the size of the mains supply. Whatever flow you want, and not a lot of storage space required.

Now we get the real nonsense. Presumably there's a QVC style set of varnished nails to go with it.

The comparison between pumps and accumulators is a good one, and one we regularly discuss with customers. Accumulators negate negative and positive pressure pumps, are completely silent in operation, store potable water, continue to work in a power cut, and do not wake everyone else up in the house. My company does not specify shower pumps .

Accumulators do not, slightly, in any sense, "negate" pumps.
Pump noise is not even noticed in many installations. I was at a FLAT two days ago which had a 3 bar ESP pump. The occupants didn't even KNOW they had a pump. There would have been nowhere to put an accumulator. In houses big enough to accommodate huge accumulators there's usually somewhere to put a pump(s) so that noise simply isn't an issue. The bath taps make more noticeable noise.

Any plumber who thinks pumps need "wake everyone else up in the house" is an ignorant one. Or a dishonest one.
Any plumbing company which doesn't offer pumps is a remarkably incomplete plumbing company. "Because of the potential call backs" - try learning how to install pumps properly. You must be very afraid of seeing your customers ? Why would that be I wonder.

Accumulators have been around a long time and can be suitable in some situations, but they're a one trick pony.

Anyone who promotes them as the best solution, and excludes the other options, is deluding his customers and probably himself. We can't put it down to ignorance, which leaves dishonesty, incompetence, or both.

Just the sort of tiresome hobby-horse jockey nobody wants.

Accumulators have their place of course. In one situation a high pressure system was needed and the mains was poor, and a loft was being converted. The easy solution was a couple of coffin tanks in the attached garage attic space and a 3 bar pump off that doing all hot and cold supplies. Two were fitted, one for backup. A pump header pipe for both pumps, and supplies off that, with the thermal store having its own dedicated supply. A Gledhill thermal store was to be used in the existing airing cupboard, but moved to the garage attic and a DHW secondary circulation loop installed. The down stairs toilet was fed directly off the tank to keep it quiet – it was easy to do. No pump noise as the pumps were in the garage – and any leaks are in the garage not a mess of the ceilings. The mains drinking water at the kitchen tap was not brilliant but OK. Sorted.

Cheap enough too, and no annual unvented cylinder service charge either. The Achilles heel is the pumps, as they will eventually fail to a great expense of replacement. But if an accumulator fails?



RE: pumps. I have found no power shower pump quiet in a flat. What was it and how was it fitted?

 

[Water Systems]

What is going on here is a hatchet job on a good product

Please note that I NEVER commented on the product itself.
I have only two criticisms:

- an accumulator can only do what its name implies: accumulate pressure that is provided to it, by the mains supply or by a pump. Given the size and cost of the thing and the cost of a booster pump and break-tank, if this is also required, then you have a very big cost, maybe for a small benefit. The same result might also be achieved by alternative, possibly less expensive, means.

- my second point is not about the product at all, only the way it is being sold as an attempted monopoly. As far as I can see there is no novelty and therefore there should be no patent protection. If other manufacturers of unvented HW systems (who are most affected by this monopoly) are prepared to live with it, more fool them! The purpose of patents is to protect, for a limited time, the R&D costs of a new concept or product. This example is neither novel nor required much R&D, if any.

I can't see this Dual Stream patent holding. Accumulators are not new. How RCMs accumulator fits into all this I don't know.

http://www.rcmgroup.co.uk/stainless_steel/mains_booster/index.htm

An accumulator can work with an unvented cylinder, combi or thermal store/heat bank. Any mains pressure system. The secret to mains presure systems is having a dedicated supply to the thermal store, cylinder or combi and balancing the oulets. Having a dedicated supplies for the showers is a great boost too.

RCM say their accumulators may have a pump to increase pressure too.

 

[Water Systems]

Simon,

It really has been educational, thanks for the advice etc...
I'd never considered the possibility of such a device before, and the figures you posted speak volumes.

I think the difficulty with this type of product is that (without wishing to sound rude) there are plenty of people who will just slate it because they don't understand it.

I like to think that for me that isn't the case.

I have 4bar at home and a flow rate of 30l/min from the bath taps combined (hot and cold) and the space (and luckily) money for a large vessel - I'd love to see a larger flow rate (for showers mainly) and increasing the main size isn't really an option, pumps and tanks aren't either.

I still maintain that they aren't for everyone, but in a situation where you have a good static pressure but poor flow they offer a good solution to pumps and tanks without the associated noise and electricity usage.

Cheers
-Dan

Good post. The drawback is the cost and replacement cost when they fail. What is the lifetime of one of these???

Good point about ignorance of something new. Fear is another point.

 

[Water Systems]

This implies pumps and tanks are the problem. Accumulators have one significant problem, the inefficient use of space.

Not true. A tank and a pump set would tak up more space than a simple neat cylinder.

 

[Water Systems]

I take it those of you who are mouthing off about challenging the patent are not the same ones who doubted it worked in earlier posts on this thread?

Where is the Dual Stream accumulators different to others?

 

[croydoncorgi]

Watersystems:

I can't see this Dual Stream patent holding. Accumulators are not new. How RCMs accumulator fits into all this I don't know

Indeed they're not new! That's my point. Nevertheless it does appear that GAH has licensed a (recent) patent that covers enough of the bases to be a problem for other manufacturers. Maybe RCM has acquired a licence too?

Where is the Dual Stream accumulators different to others?

Don't think there is any material difference.

(The RCM accumulator looks absolutely identical to the GAH one!)

 

[doitall]

Hey up CC its spreading to screwfix.

http://www.screwfix.com/talk/thread.jspa?threadID=39829&start=15&tstart=0

 

[chrishutt]

16 pages, 235 posts and 4331 viewings so far. This has got to be a record for DIYnot plumbing forum, hasn't it?

 

[doitall]

Better than watching football, and much more exciting

 

[chrishutt]

Watching a bunch of over-paid, under-skilled has-beens kicking a ball around, trying to score points off each other? I see what you mean.

 

[croydoncorgi]

Gotta go - my paint's dry!

BTW - the thread in Screwfix talks about a patent relating to the diaphragm in the accumulator and stratification.

As far as I can see, the patent number actually quoted by GAH says absolutely nothing about the diaphragm or stratification.