Boiler Timing Effects: Closed Chamber, Optimal Supply Temperature & Increased Gas Consumption

Hello

I keep thinking about the timing of the boiler (closed chamber).
We say this is an adverse reaction. So that the boiler does not clock, we increase the supply temperature. But then the losses will be greater, because more heat is lost up the chimney, right?

It is known that during clocking the boiler starts with maximum power. However, if it is limited, there will be no increased gas consumption, right?

What do my dear colleagues think of this line of reasoning?

Of course, some elements of the boiler may undergo accelerated wear during clocking. Which?

Changing the supply temperature alone will not eliminate the clocking. You need to increase the power take-off from the boiler. In a simple installation without thermostatic heads, this will happen - higher temperature of the medium and radiators means work with more power. In a modern installation with heads and mixers, apart from the deterioration of efficiency, you will not gain anything. If the boiler is oversized, in a brick building one should try to limit the number of starts by extending the delay time after the burner is extinguished.

You see, I noticed this regularity - the lower the power supply temperature, the more it clocks. Of course, my boiler is too strong. And the overrun is set to max. i.e. 3 minutes. It would be nice if it could be increased even more

I see that you belong to the club of owners of the wrong boiler. who think that by adjusting the automation they will improve the situation.
She won't. The choice of boiler power has been screwed up or has been screwed up by insulating the house and there is not much you can do about it. "Free" anyway. Poking around in the boiler's automation can make things worse, he wrote William Bonaventure . You need to know what you want to achieve and know the boiler control algorithms well. The rest, as a rule, is very imperfect and simplified.
The best would be a buffer and additional automation to it to make the so-called. dynamic discharge (loud name. ). However, it costs a lot and requires space. It will be cheaper to buy a new "smaller" boiler.
Timing issues have been discussed many times on the forum. read. acc. For me (and not only) the clocking losses result from frequently occurring transients of the boiler operation. Speaking in peasant terms, before the kitten will take over and speed up, it must be turned off so as not to overheat the rooms. Frequent lighting of the burner and warming up the chimney system and the heat exchanger. In addition, runs to cool down the exchanger. All this leads to a situation that most of the time the boiler operates beyond the optimal parameters and its efficiency decreases and the wear of the boiler elements increases.
Reducing the maximum power does not give much, if not "backwards", in terms of reducing gas consumption. Most often it is a hoax of the installer who chose a boiler with too much power, because he had one at hand or he would earn more on it.
Ending my complaining, I will ask:
How do you control the boiler? Do you have a room regulator? What about thermostatic radiator valves? Please describe your installation in more detail. Maybe you can get something cheap?

jack63 I will describe my setup in detail when I get home from work.
The boiler is under the care of the invaluable irus.m.
But in my free time, I'm trying to figure out if there are possibilities to get something more out of the boiler.
I guess that the boiler's automation works in such a way that it decides whether the burner is to operate or to rest on the basis of the return water temperature measurement.
Only probably, depending on the temperature setting on the boiler, the safe supply/return differences change.
Because how else to explain that at a higher supply temperature, the boiler heats for about 1/2 hour on one firing, and 10 minutes at a lower one. and starts clocking? After all, since there is no set temperature on the controller, the heat is received from the radiators, right?

Added after 2 [minutes]:

Oh, I have the driver in the coolest room. The head is removed there. There are heads in the other rooms.

Added after 4 [hours] 31 [minutes]:

Okay, I'm back from work.

The hut is 60 sq m.
The boiler is Immergas Zeus MINI.

One room is approx. 13 sq m. Second 25
In the smaller one there is a 160x60 radiator and a recently added 60x60 radiator.
In the larger 100x60 and 120x60.
In the kitchen 100x60.
A ladder in the bathroom.

After adding a 60x60 radiator, I realized that the installation guys had reduced the diameter from 18 to 15 for unknown reasons. I already changed it because I didn't like it.

What other info is needed?

In a word - drama. For the installation with 5kW of heat reception, the installer used a boiler with a minimum power of 10kW.... The only sensible solution is to add a heat buffer (container) to the installation.

You know, the investment was made at the expense of the state treasury and probably without supervision.
And this buffer is probably the cost of a new boiler, right?

FOSGEN1 wrote:

the buffer is probably the cost of a new boiler

Depends on what boiler you are talking about? An insulated buffer tank with a minimum of 1 m3 of water probably costs a bit more than many boilers. But where are you going to put it??? Not to mention automation.

jack63 I was just referring to the words William Bonaventure

William Bonawentura wrote:

In a word - drama. For the installation with 5kW of heat reception, the installer used a boiler with a minimum power of 10kW.

There are so many dramas. Some of it is due to the idiotic (for whom???) subsidies set by the bureaucrats. In Krakow, when a coal furnace is liquidated, they pay extra to the kW of the boiler's power. In this way, people have 35kW boilers in apartments where 10kW is enough. Plus, it's dual-purpose! Even for CWU it is too much. Great thing: You turn on the water to rinse your hands and such a colossus moves. He won't even have time to light the burner well and ... it goes out because you turned off the tap.
I wonder how this situation affects the durability of the boiler?
This is how thoughtless actions of officials lead to a waste of energy and taxpayers' money. And so much is said about the greenhouse effect and saving energy.
PHOSGEN1 Think about mounting the buffer.

But you say it's a very expensive party. And the boiler is old and probably in a few springs it will be changed to a more adequate one. And then I'm left with a buffer?

And apart from the buffer proposal, no ideas?

Added after 7 [minutes]:

Btw., I've read here and there about these buffers and it seems like a rather pointless solution. But maybe I misread.

FOSGEN1 wrote:

The boiler is under the care of the invaluable irus.m.

I wonder why he doesn't talk? I'm also curious if he mentioned to you about oversizing the boiler? Or did you make this 'discovery' yourself.

FOSGEN1 wrote:

I've read about these buffers here and there and it seems like a rather pointless solution.

I'm curious as to what it is. this nonsense to you?
For me, the buffer is the most sensible, which does not mean that, like everything, it does not have flaws.
I will list the two most painful:
1. The cost of the tank itself and the automation for it.
2. The place it occupies. In small houses/apartments there is simply no place to put it.
The rest are just benefits.

jack63 , irus.m has already spoken out over the phone. After the conversation, I decided to post a thread on the forum, because... the more heads, the easier it is to come up with a good idea.

jack63 wrote:

I'm also curious if he mentioned to you about oversizing the boiler? Or did you make this 'discovery' yourself.

I figured it out first, and then Irek devoted time to it, which the magicians, whose advertisements I found on the boiler, did not want to spend (it was installed and started when someone else lived here).

jack63 wrote:

I'm curious as to what it is. this nonsense to you?

jack63 wrote:

For me, the buffer is the most sensible, which does not mean that, like everything, it does not have flaws.
I will list the two most painful:
1. The cost of the tank itself and the automation for it.
2. The place it occupies. In small houses/apartments there is simply no place to put it.

You answered yourself.

FOSGEN1 wrote:

And the boiler is old and probably in a few springs it will be changed to a more adequate one. And then I'm left with a buffer?

As I mentioned, the boiler is old and, if only because of its limited lifespan, it makes no sense to pack money.
I still can't quite figure out the timing issue. I wrote about it in post #1.
I think I read on the forum some time ago that some people plug some nozzles in the burner. I'm not entirely convinced, although Irek and I considered such an option.

This year, however, I added an extra heater in the room, which has a poor display. By the way, I replaced a section of the pipe, which, for some reason, the fitters instead of 18mm replaced with 15. And in my opinion, 18 should go to the first radiator in the order. So I replaced it, in my opinion there was some improvement in the efficiency of the radiator. But it's my nature to search and ponder, so I'm still trying to figure out what else can be done to make it cheaper. This is probably understandable, because there are many threads of people looking for savings.

jack63 wrote:

How do you control the boiler? Do you have a room regulator? What about thermostatic radiator valves? Please describe your installation in more detail. Maybe you can get something cheap?

You talked about magic at low cost, and you propose a buffer, which you yourself write that cheap has no right to be. Maybe you have some other options?

Walker29 but it's also a bit of a cost...

What would be of interest to you?
acc. clutch does nothing for me. Well, unless it will be 0.5 m3.

jack63 wrote:

What would be of interest to you?

You know, since I don't know, I'm asking. Some of you probably know more.

[quote="jack63"]

FOSGEN1 wrote:

The boiler is under the care of the invaluable irus.m.

I wonder why he doesn't talk? I'm also curious if he mentioned to you about oversizing the boiler? ""jack63

I am in constant contact with Darek, I told him everything when it comes to technical issues (oversizing and d..a), he paid not bad for the opinion of a specialist (meaning mine).
I am silent because we discussed technical problems, he knows my opinion.
But I listen to the Forum with great attention, I'm learning all my life.
I'm sure I'll draw good conclusions from this polemic.
I appreciate Darek for his inquisitiveness and willingness to learn.
greetings Irek

I would consider using a more powerful circulation pump.
In my opinion, these strange reasons for switching on at a lower temperature are poor circulation caused by an inefficient pump, or thermostats on the radiators (which are then closed).

wik12 wrote:

I would consider using a more powerful circulation pump.

It makes no sense. The apartment has 60 square meters, only 5 radiators + a ladder in the bathroom. On one floor.

Walker29 wrote:

The only expense outside the clutch (more or less 2x max power of your boiler) you need to add a pump between the boiler and the clutch.

Clutches are not cheap. The first time I saw the price it knocked me off my feet. A few hundred for a small tank with a sieve plate inside...
And the pump would have to be added between the coupling and the rest of the system. Probably a mistake, because the boiler has its own pump.
As a rule, quite efficient. In my installation, without thermostatic valves, it was too efficient. I changed gear from third (recommended) to second, turning off the BYPASS, which was unnecessary in this situation.

irus.m wrote:

But I listen to the Forum with great attention, I'm learning all my life.

Too bad you're just listening. Your valuable comments could also be useful to other users of oversized boilers.

irus.m wrote:

I am silent because we discussed technical problems, he knows my opinion.

Therefore, I do not understand what the author of the topic is still looking for???
After all, he has an opinion and probably conclusions of a very good specialist, for which he paid. Did he want to check/confirm this opinion?

jack63 wrote:

Therefore, I do not understand what the author of the topic is still looking for???
After all, he has an opinion and probably conclusions of a very good specialist, for which he paid. Did he want to check/confirm this opinion?

What I don't understand is why are you stressing? It looks like you're jealous or something...
As for my financial accounts with irus.m , then I will not comment, although your comment is at least inappropriate.
But let me remind you of your words:

jack63 wrote:

Ending my complaining, I will ask:
How do you control the boiler? Do you have a room regulator? What about thermostatic radiator valves? Please describe your installation in more detail. Maybe you can get something cheap?

And I can't wait for anything specific from you.

I will give you a hint, because you may not know - the more sources of knowledge, the greater the chance of making the right decision.

FOSGEN1 wrote:

What I don't understand is why are you stressing? It looks like you're jealous or something...
As for my financial settlements with irus.m, I will not comment, although your comment is at least inappropriate.

Let me tell you how we got into politics. I am not jealous, but full of compassion. If I were in this situation, I don't know what I would do? I'm not in your shoes and I won't be. I understand some of the dismay, but why are you making me the scapegoat.
You wrote about financial settlements yourself! You didn't have to do it, and now it looks like you have a subconscious grudge against me irus.m . Neither he nor I are to blame for this bizarre situation, but why do I get it???

FOSGEN1 wrote:

And I can't wait for anything specific from you.

After a few posts and the information contained in them, my proposal lost its raison d'?tre. What else can you do in this situation??? Physics will not be jumped by any "tricks" from automation, which also has little influence. Boiler automation is "unchangeable". The buffer, i.e. the only correct solution, is too expensive. It's really hard to come up with something. Can someone smarter help me???

jack63 wrote:

After all, he has an opinion and probably conclusions of a very good specialist, for which he paid.

you wrote it in post #22

FOSGEN1 wrote:

Regarding my financial settlement with irus.m

I replied in post #23.

So with all due respect to your forum achievements and knowledge, please don't try to create a new reality.

But back to the topic, this

wik12 wrote:

In my opinion, these strange reasons for switching on at a lower temperature are poor circulation caused by an inefficient pump, or thermostats on the radiators (which are then closed).

I wonder if there are the same differences in relation to the return temperature for individual temperatures set on the boiler. That is, if the supply temperature is 50, the boiler will clock at, say, 50-x, and at a supply temperature of 70 it will be 70 - x, or x+some degrees.
Because it still annoys me that my boiler clocks the more the lower the temperature set on the boiler. It cannot be about closed thermoregulators, because the rooms constantly need heat. So what's going on?

FOSGEN1 wrote:

Because it still annoys me that my boiler clocks the more the lower the temperature set on the boiler.

That should have explained it to you irus.m . I do not know the control algorithms for this boiler, but whatever they are, the lower the set temperature, the faster (in a shorter time) the set temperature will be reached (or actually exceeded) and the boiler turns off so as not to overheat the circuit.
controls can be handled differently. My boiler, especially at the low temperature setting, "overheated" by 2-3 oC, but it worked constantly. It was an unusual situation, because that winter we did not live in the house yet and I tried not to overcool the house with minimal gas consumption. I set about 25oC of the power supply (zero other automatics), and the boiler kept about 28oC. The power consumption was low, because at this temperature the heaters have low power. However, the boiler tried to "not go out" and just succeeded. However, mine has a modulation of 1.9kW and a maximum power of 12kW. So it is "oversized" by only 1/3 and the modulation is below 1/6 of the max power.

FOSGEN1 wrote:

It cannot be about closed thermoregulators, because the rooms constantly need heat. So what's going on?

Something's wrong. You wrote in another topic that the boiler heats all radiators except one. You dealt with that last one. Also with this heat consumption is not as you write. Probably the heads, however, close (do not close) the valves because the rooms are not overheated.
acc. I have nothing to look for in the boiler itself. irus.m he took care of it 100%. What remains is the rest of the installation, basically its minimum (currently) power consumption.
Oh well. You can always heat and open the windows, as it used to be done in blocks of flats. The boiler 100% will not clock. What is this method???
As it turns out, the excess causes headaches, and gas costs money.
Anyway, did you check how many of these tacts per hour in given conditions of internal / external temperature?

jack63 wrote:

You can always heat and open the windows, as it used to be done in blocks of flats

Oh, I think home accounting would kill me like a dog :-)

jack63 wrote:

Something's wrong. You wrote in another topic that the boiler heats all radiators except one. You dealt with that last one.

Yes, I had a problem with it. Once a 120cm radiator was installed, I changed it to 160cm. I converted the power supply to cross, but it was still linden. Then I found out that the magicians had reduced the pipe from 18/15 on the power supply to this radiator. I changed, flushed the radiator and it's much better.
And the head on it is dismantled.
When writing about thermoregulators, I believed and still believe that if the temperature does not reach the set temperature, there is no option for them to close.

FOSGEN1 wrote:

When writing about thermoregulators, I believed and still believe that if the temperature does not reach the set temperature, there is no option for them to close.

T finally do you have heated rooms or not??? Now I've lost it.
Have you made a list of radiator power in given conditions of supply temperature and room temperature? You just gave the dimensions. It's hard for someone else to do the math for you. Even more so without having a full set of information.
Is there 100% power reception from the radiators?
Returning to the dependence of the timing on the power supply temperature. The higher the value, the less often the boiler will be turned off until the room is heated up and the radiator valves are closed, because the power will be better received due to the greater achievable power of the radiators. In principle, a well-chosen boiler should not turn off then, and the clocking (if it can be called that then) should have a period of several dozen minutes, depending on the thermal inertia of the rooms.
Also my only advice is to increase the central heating supply temperature. High supply temperature for the turbo boiler should not affect its efficiency too much. acc. For me, greater gas losses are caused by frequent ignition of the burner and heating the exchanger and chimney.
Do you have a double-walled chimney?

The furnace turns off because it has the set temperature on the outlet.
So that it doesn't tick often, there are only two solutions:
- faster flow of the liquid (it will pass the test until there is a small difference between I/O, then not anymore).
- increasing the temperature hysteresis.
Working time and quantity, always depends on tamp. in/out, hysteresis of temperature on/off, and speed of liquid circulation.
The heat clutch will do little, for good work you will need another pump for the clutch.