Air in CH system and hot water returning to FE tank via the cold feed

[Tiggy1955]

I have a problem with air being sucked into my CH system creating airlocks in the radiators. The water is flowing back into the FE tank via the cold feed pipe. I can feel warm water coming through the feed pipe back into the tank as the tank water level slowly get higher. I can hear the overflow gurgling in the FE tank.

The system is 20 years old but the Worcester Bosch boiler is only 9 years old. All has worked perfectly well. I did have the classic blockage where the cold feed meets the hot return but the clogged pipes have been cut out and replaced.

I have fitted a new pump and it is set to the lowest speed. All of the radiators have been bled many times and balanced.

So the heating is working fine except that I have this problem of the air displacing the water back to the FE tank. The water it getting back into the tank a quite a rate - I would say about 2 litres per hour. This means that the rads need to be bled constantly.

Any ideas? Could it be an problem with the boiler itself?

 

[Ric2013]

First question: can you confirm that there is water in the F&E?

 

[Ric2013]

The water it getting back into the tank a quite a rate - I would say about 2 litres per hour. This means that the rads need to be bled constantly.

Can you re-word this please: not sure what you mean.

 

[Tiggy1955]

First question: can you confirm that there is water in the F&E?

Yes the tank is full. As the heating runs I can see the sediment being moved around the FE tank. I put my hand in the tank and you can feel warn water coming back in via the feed outlet.

 

[Tiggy1955]

Can you re-word this please: not sure what you mean.

The FE tank is fall as normal. However when the heating is running I can see the sediment at the bottom of the tank being moved around. I put my hand into the tank and can feel warm water coming back in via the cold outlet.

Because the tank is therefore getting fuller I scooped about 2 litres of it out. I turned the CH off. Bled all of the rads and did this again and about 30 mins later a further 2 litres had come back in. Is is not coming from the expansion pipe but I can hear that gurgling.

 

[Ric2013]

Hmm. So the water level continues to rise in the F&E even after the system is warmed up. And even if you continually bleed the radiators, the water rises in the F&E.

I assume you are taking water out of the F&E because there is no overflow?

 

[Tiggy1955]

Hmm. So the water level continues to rise in the F&E even after the system is warmed up. And even if you continually bleed the radiators, the water rises in the F&E.

I assume you are taking water out of the F&E because there is no overflow?

Yes the water is rising all the time. I have to bleed the rads every time the heating has been on. There is an overflow but I elected to scoop it our rather than let it get that full. In fact it was a pool of water outside that alerted me to the fact that water was returning to the FE tank.

 

[John.g]

I have a problem with air being sucked into my CH system creating airlocks in the radiators. The water is flowing back into the FE tank via the cold feed pipe. I can feel warm water coming through the feed pipe back into the tank as the tank water level slowly get higher. I can hear the overflow gurgling in the FE tank.

The system is 20 years old but the Worcester Bosch boiler is only 9 years old. All has worked perfectly well. I did have the classic blockage where the cold feed meets the hot return but the clogged pipes have been cut out and replaced.

I have fitted a new pump and it is set to the lowest speed. All of the radiators have been bled many times and balanced.

So the heating is working fine except that I have this problem of the air displacing the water back to the FE tank. The water it getting back into the tank a quite a rate - I would say about 2 litres per hour. This means that the rads need to be bled constantly.

Any ideas? Could it be an problem with the boiler itself?

Has this problem occured since the new pump fitting, if so you might post the make/model of the old pump and ditto for the new pump.

 

[Tiggy1955]

Has this problem occured since the new pump fitting, if so you might post the make/model of the old pump and ditto for the new pump.

No. It started before. I replaced the pump like for like (Grundfos UPS2). In actual fact I did't really need to replace the pump but did so at this time as a precaution because I know the last one that was fitted was a second hand one.

 

[John.g]

No. It started before. I replaced the pump like for like (Grundfos UPS2). In actual fact I did't really need to replace the pump but did so at this time as a precaution because I know the last one that was fitted was a second hand one.

The new pump will or should have PP (proportional pressure) control.
The present fixed speed setting 1 is equivalent to a 4M pump and for
most systems should not cause any pump over problems... however you could try setting it to one of the 3 PP settings which are all fairly close, I would suggest trying it on PP2 which will reduce the head considerably at the cost of reduced circulation through the system but might still be quite adequate for your purposes, if no pump over at this setting, I would suggest increasing it to PP3, if you still have pump over (at PP2) reduce it to PP1.

 

[Tiggy1955]

The new pump will or should have PP (proportional pressure) control.
The present fixed speed setting 1 is equivalent to a 4M pump and for
most systems should not cause any pump over problems... however you could try setting it to one of the 3 PP settings which are all fairly close, I would suggest trying it on PP2 which will reduce the head considerably at the cost of reduced circulation through the system but might still be quite adequate for your purposes, if no pump over at this setting, I would suggest increasing it to PP3, if you still have pump over (at PP2) reduce it to PP1.

The pump has 3 speed settings. Initially it was on 3 and I thought that was the problem so it is currently set to 1 and the problem still exists. I should mention we are in a bungalow so I think 1 is adequate anyway.

 

[Ric2013]

This doesn't sound like pump-over at all. And if the system is correctly designed, then the speed of the pump is immaterial.

I take it when you turn the boiler off and the system cools and you bleed the radiators, the F&E level is not dropping back down? You'd need to isolate the float valve aka ballcock to check as otherwise it will refill the F&E automatically.

I'm going to come up with the hypothesis that you have a hot water cylinder and that the coil in it is leaking. This would explain the water rising, though not sure where the air issue fits in. Do you have a cylinder or do you have a combi-boiler?

 

[John.g]

The pump has 3 speed settings. Initially it was on 3 and I thought that was the problem so it is currently set to 1 and the problem still exists. I should mention we are in a bungalow so I think 1 is adequate anyway.

Agreed, speed setting 1 should be fine in normal circumstances but by selecting PP control it will reduce the head from say 3M to ~ 1.5/1.7M and IF the F&E tank "movement" dies down or ceases then at least it will tell you something.

 

[Tiggy1955]

This doesn't sound like pump-over at all. And if the system is correctly designed, then the speed of the pump is immaterial.

I take it when you turn the boiler off and the system cools and you bleed the radiators, the F&E level is not dropping back down? You'd need to isolate the float valve aka ballcock to check as otherwise it will refill the F&E automatically.

I'm going to come up with the hypothesis that you have a hot water cylinder and that the coil in it is leaking. This would explain the water rising, though not sure where the air issue fits in. Do you have a cylinder or do you have a combi-boiler?

When I bleed the rads the FE level does drop and water enters via the ballcock. Yes we have a hot water cylinder.

 

[Ric2013]

So if your ballcock were not refilling the F&E, and no overflowing took place, you think the volume of water in the system would stay the same? There isn't any being added, by, say, a leak from the coil in your hot water cylinder?

 

[Tiggy1955]

Agreed, speed setting 1 should be fine in normal circumstances but by selecting PP control it will reduce the head from say 3M to ~ 1.5/1.7M and IF the F&E tank "movement" dies down or ceases then at least it will tell you something.

How do I change the PP setting? The pump only has the 3 setting selected via a button.

 

[Tiggy1955]

This doesn't sound like pump-over at all. And if the system is correctly designed, then the speed of the pump is immaterial.

I take it when you turn the boiler off and the system cools and you bleed the radiators, the F&E level is not dropping back down? You'd need to isolate the float valve aka ballcock to check as otherwise it will refill the F&E automatically.

I'm going to come up with the hypothesis that you have a hot water cylinder and that the coil in it is leaking. This would explain the water rising, though not sure where the air issue fits in. Do you have a cylinder or do you have a combi-boiler?

I thought I would post this photo of the piping as it might help to explain the problem in more detail? This piping is directly above the boiler.

 

[Tiggy1955]

So if your ballcock were not refilling the F&E, and no overflowing took place, you think the volume of water in the system would stay the same? There isn't any being added, by, say, a leak from the coil in your hot water cylinder?

How could I check that please?

 

[John.g]

How do I change the PP setting? The pump only has the 3 setting selected via a button.

It has 3 fixed speed settings and 3 PP settings, you press and hold the button for 5 secs to change from FP to PP (page 7 of attachment).
"When you press the button for five seconds, the pump
will change from fixed-speed operation to proportional pressure
control"

 

[Ric2013]

How could I check that please?

If you were to isolate the ballcock and let the system cool, bleed the air out and add back the water you have scooped out, then you should have the same level you started with.

Looking at your photo, I am wondering where your vent is? I am assuming there isn't one? If so, then the system isn't pumping over.

Assuming your pump is somewhere on the boiler flow then anything between the cold feed and the pump inlet is running at a vacuum when the pump is on and there could be a minor weep which is admitting air to the system. Could be a radiator valve, the pump inlet gate valve stem, the pump inlet washer, or one of the joints in or near the boiler.

Alternatively, if there was a blockage, then there must be some degree of scale or rust in the system. Could be the boiler is kettling and creating steam, but I wouldn't imagine that steam could continue to survive as such for very long in the sort of quantity you are experiencing.

You seem to enjoy problem solving, so hopefully this will give you some ideas, but I am beginning to think you may need a professional to attend and have a good look at the system and how it is all arranged.

 

[sammathias]

If the coil has failed in the cylinder the small feed and EXPANSION tank would constantly be overflowing due to the hot water cistern being higher/bigger. It's normal for the water to rise slighlts in the f+e. After all where else is the expanded water going to go????

 

[Tiggy1955]

If you were to isolate the ballcock and let the system cool, bleed the air out and add back the water you have scooped out, then you should have the same level you started with.

Looking at your photo, I am wondering where your vent is? I am assuming there isn't one? If so, then the system isn't pumping over.

Assuming your pump is somewhere on the boiler flow then anything between the cold feed and the pump inlet is running at a vacuum when the pump is on and there could be a minor weep which is admitting air to the system. Could be a radiator valve, the pump inlet gate valve stem, the pump inlet washer, or one of the joints in or near the boiler.

Alternatively, if there was a blockage, then there must be some degree of scale or rust in the system. Could be the boiler is kettling and creating steam, but I wouldn't imagine that steam could continue to survive as such for very long in the sort of quantity you are experiencing.

You seem to enjoy problem solving, so hopefully this will give you some ideas, but I am beginning to think you may need a professional to attend and have a good look at the system and how it is all arranged.

Hi Ric2013 - Thanks for all the info so far. To answer some of your points:

The vent (and by that I assume you mean the pipe that dangles over the FE tank?) is T’d into the boiler flow and is plastered into the wall about 20” to the right of the cold feed shown in the photo.


The pump is in the airing cupboard and I assume is attached to the boiler flow (pretty sure it is - the pipes come up through the floor boards). Above the pump is the 3 way motorised valve - which appears to be functioning correctly when you switch between CH and HW.


As for enjoying solving problems - yes I do - but this one is driving me nuts!!! 🙁

Thanks again.

 

[Ric2013]

Ah, so your arrangement is something like this then?

If so, the pump is pulling on the vent and could be pulling in air if it runs too fast. Unfortunately, in PP mode, the pump will start fast even when it then slows down. What you have there is probably a residual of an old legacy system much more than 20 years old that worked very well with the old boilers that had negligable resistance to flow, not so well with a modern boiler. Possibly has never been fully modernised. The pump may well have been on the return once upon a time.

You can try setting down the pump as other have suggested, but my feeling is that this kind of setup is prone to this sort of problem and you might want to look at getting the system reconfigured.

One important question: Did it used to work okay and when did this change?

View attachment 36394

 

[John.g]

Ah, so your arrangement is something like this then?View attachment 36395

If so, the pump is pulling on the vent and could be pulling in air if it runs too fast. Unfortunately, in PP mode, the pump will start fast even when it then slows down. What you have there is probably a residual of an old legacy system much more than 20 years old that worked very well with the old boilers that had negligable resistance to flow, not so well with a modern boiler. Possibly has never been fully modernised. The pump may well have been on the return once upon a time.

You can try setting down the pump as other have suggested, but my feeling is that this kind of setup is prone to this sort of problem and you might want to look at getting the system reconfigured.

One important question: Did it used to work okay and when did this change?

View attachment 36394

My own system has a combined vent and cold feed, ie the cold feed is teed directly into the vent where it passes by the Feed & Expansion tank, I know of a number of systems like Tiggy1995,s above that were modified to this combined system, this obviously isn't allowed in a solid fuel system. However he did say his system worked well as is and the boiler was renewed 9 years ago, I don't think he has had this problem for the past 9 years.

Re the pump speeding up on PP setting, it does, but only for a few seconds to find its steady state condition, its only the press of a button to try it out and it may alleviate if not cure the problem until a permanent solution is found.

 

[Tiggy1955]

Ah, so your arrangement is something like this then?View attachment 36395

If so, the pump is pulling on the vent and could be pulling in air if it runs too fast. Unfortunately, in PP mode, the pump will start fast even when it then slows down. What you have there is probably a residual of an old legacy system much more than 20 years old that worked very well with the old boilers that had negligable resistance to flow, not so well with a modern boiler. Possibly has never been fully modernised. The pump may well have been on the return once upon a time.

You can try setting down the pump as other have suggested, but my feeling is that this kind of setup is prone to this sort of problem and you might want to look at getting the system reconfigured.

One important question: Did it used to work okay and when did this change?

View attachment 36394

Yes that diagram is correct. The system has never been reconfigured. We have lived here since the house was built. The only thing that has changed is the boiler. The original was an Ideal now a Worcester Bosch (I think the builder might have used BG to install the heating system at the time - over 20 years actually).

You are also correct in that this problem has just started in the last few weeks. I have also just realised something else this evening. When the system is set to CH and HW the heating hardly gets hot. On CH only it heats up nicely. I'm at the end of what I think I can do so I'm going to get a heating engineer to have a look at it now. I'm even considering replacing the whole lot with a combo boiler. We live in a bungalow and there are only two of us so a combo should be OK. I'll get advice.

 

[Ric2013]

I think getting someone in may be a good idea. No point fitting a new boiler as a soution until you can be sure what the problem is. Good luck, and please do let us know how you get on - makes it worth our while, you know.

 

[Tiggy1955]

OK guys here is an update on my situation...............

Action taken yesterday:

• I fully drained the system.
• I fitted a brand new diverter mid-position valve. I did this because a) it was old, b) the CH and HW were not working together c) the system was empty so do it now as a preventative measure.
• I have filled the system with Sentinel X400 and that is currently still in the system.

Outcome:

• The system is working very very well - getting a lot hotter that it used to.
• The CH and HW work together now.
• The whole system seems quieter and more efficient.

But:

• The rads still need bleeding within 30 minutes of the CH starting up. One in particular is gurgling and this is the one loosing most of it’s water back to the FE tank.
• The FE tank is still getting water pushed back into it via the flow outlet at the bottom of the tank. I know this because, apart from the rads getting cold at the top, if you watch it for 5 minutes you can actually see the levels rising and you can see murky water entering via the flow outlet. The tank water was perfectly clear yesterday, now it’s rusty red (well at least I guess the X400 is doing it’s job 🙂.
• When I bleed the rads the water level in the FE drops back to the correct level.

Planned next steps:

• Leave the X400 in for a couple more days and see if this makes any difference.
• Drain, flush and add some X100 inhibitor.
• Test for another couple of days.
• If I still have the back fill/bleeding problem call a good Heating Engineer for advice.
• Go off and resolve the Brexit Crisis because that looks a lot easier 😉

Thank you all for your help - I’ll keep you posted.

 

[John.g]

OK guys here is an update on my situation....

Action taken yesterday:

• I fully drained the system.
• I fitted a brand new diverter mid-position valve. I did this because a) it was old, b) the CH and HW were not working together c) the system was empty so do it now as a preventative measure.
• I have filled the system with Sentinel X400 and that is currently still in the system.

Outcome:

• The system is working very very well - getting a lot hotter that it used to.
• The CH and HW work together now.
• The whole system seems quieter and more efficient.

But:

• The rads still need bleeding within 30 minutes of the CH starting up. One in particular is gurgling and this is the one loosing most of it’s water back to the FE tank.
• The FE tank is still getting water pushed back into it via the flow outlet at the bottom of the tank. I know this because, apart from the rads getting cold at the top, if you watch it for 5 minutes you can actually see the levels rising and you can see murky water entering via the flow outlet. The tank water was perfectly clear yesterday, now it’s rusty red (well at least I guess the X400 is doing it’s job 🙂.
• When I bleed the rads the water level in the FE drops back to the correct level.

Planned next steps:

• Leave the X400 in for a couple more days and see if this makes any difference.
• Drain, flush and add some X100 inhibitor.
• Test for another couple of days.
• If I still have the back fill/bleeding problem call a good Heating Engineer for advice.
• Go off and resolve the Brexit Crisis because that looks a lot easier 😉

Thank you all for your help - I’ll keep you posted.

Thanks for the feed back, did you try the pump on PP control?.

 

[Tiggy1955]

Thanks for the feed back, did you try the pump on PP control?.

Going to do that today. Will let you know - thanks.

 

[Tiggy1955]

Thanks for the feed back, did you try the pump on PP control?.

John G you are a star!!! Set the pump to PP2 and all is sweet! I thank you sir.

Would you mind spending 2 mins explaining to me in laymans terms exactly what the Proportional Pressure setting does? It must be more that just a lower pressure setting - thanks.

 

[doitmyself]

Yes the tank is full. As the heating runs I can see the sediment being moved around the FE tank. I put my hand in the tank and you can feel warn water coming back in via the feed outlet.

I see that you have 'solved' the problem by setting the pump to PP2. However this may be a compromise.

When the water is heated it will expand so the water level in the FE tank will rise and feel warm (hot water rises).

The level should be adjusted, by bending the ballcock valve stem, so the tank is only half full when the water is hot.

If the level is too high water will escape via the overflow pipe. So when it cools down the level in the tank drops and has to be replenished via the ballcock valve. This introduces more air to the system meaning more bleeding.

 

[John.g]

John G you are a star!!! Set the pump to PP2 and all is sweet! I thank you sir.

Would you mind spending 2 mins explaining to me in laymans terms exactly what the Proportional Pressure setting does? It must be more that just a lower pressure setting - thanks.

Good to hear that the pump over has stopped, I assume that you checked it with CH only & HW only. One concern I have is that you may have a partial blockage of the boiler heat exchanger as you ran for years with no pump over on a fixed speed setting, if there is a blockage and it gets progressively worse the the pump on PP control will just keep modulating down and the boiler deltaT will keep increasing for any given firing rate, I think some boilers cut out if the deltaT exceeds 25C or 30C, on the other hand you may have no blockage and/or you may have cleared it out with the chemical addition. Pump PP control is not recommended for boilers with a ABV (auto bypass valve) which opens on circ pump over run (if installed) for a short time on boiler shutdown to remove the residual heat from the exchanger, this is no problem with a fixed speed pump as the pump head will rise to its max (4M in your case) when all the zone valves shut so th ABV can be set at say ~ 3M so that it will open only on boiler shutdown, On PP control, the pump will reduce its speed to maintain its minimum head of ~ 1.2M but if you set the ABV down to say 0.8M then when the boiler comes back on the pump will ramp up to maybe 2M or so and there will be excessive bypass at this pressure. Again your boiler may not be fitted with this or it may use the post air purge to cool down the exchanger.
Now for the good news....pump PP control.
PP control was introduced on A rated circ pumps to save energy and in some cases to reduce noisy TRV,s when throttling down.
I have one myself (Wilo) which consumes 21/23 watts with everything opened up and falls to 12/14 watts on CH only when some of the TRVs are throttled down.
They work like this, depending on the PP setting you select the pump then sets a minimum head at zero flow and a maximum head at its full flow. For example assume that PP3 setting is selected on the UPS2, at that setting (see page 11 of the manual), the pump will modulate between 0 flow at 1.2M & 2.15M3/h (36 LPM) at a 3M head.
Now assume that the pump is running on fixed speed1 and the system with everything opened up requires a 2.9M head at a f/rate of 0.9 M3/h (15 LPM).....you now change over to PP3 control, the pump will go minimum speed and then starts ramping up, for any given point on that "curve" the pump calculates the exact power needed and compares this with the actual absorbed pump power and because there is only one point on this (or any) curve where that calculated power and the absorbed power are exactly equal then the pump will stop ramping and remain at this setting until the system conditions change. I am able to calculate this in a spreadsheet (unfortunately that I am unable to post on here) so if we go back to our original requirement of a 2.9M head at 15 LPM and c/o to PP control then the pump head and f/rate will fall to 1.8M head & 11.6 LPM, as the system requirements fall then the pump will modulate still further. Again if you are back to fixed speed and you shut off "1/2" the rads you might need a 2M head for a f/rate of 7.5 LPM, change back to PP control and the head will fall to 1.52M & the f/rate to 6.7 LPM. If you "dead headed" the pump by say shutting the pump discharge isolating valve, the pump head will fall to 1.2 M at zero F/rate, if you fitted a controllable by pass around the pump and started opening it, the pump would ramp up to a 3 M head & a f/rate of 2.15 M3/h or 36 LPM.

Edit: Should have asked, what PP setting are you using??, thanks.
Have just seen that you are on PP2, I will adjust the numbers above shortly to reflect this, I would suggest PP3 if still no pump over.
I have left the above PP3 and shown the PP2 settings below, very little difference, one of the draw backs of UPS2 PP control.

PP2 SETTING
assume that the pump is running on fixed speed1 and the system with everything opened up requires a 2.9M head at a f/rate of 0.9 M3/h (15 LPM).....you now change over to PP2 control, the pump will go minimum speed and then starts ramping up, for any given point on that "curve" the pump calculates the exact power needed and compares this with the actual absorbed pump power and because there is only one point on this (or any) curve where that calculated power and the absorbed power are exactly equal then the pump will stop ramping and remain at this setting until the system conditions change. I am able to calculate this in a spreadsheet (unfortunately that I am unable to post on here) so if we go back to our original requirement of a 2.9M head at 15 LPM and c/o to PP2 control then the pump head and f/rate will fall to 1.58M head & 11.1 LPM, as the system requirements fall then the pump will modulate still further. Again if you are back to fixed speed and you shut off "1/2" the rads you might need a 2M head for a f/rate of 7.5 LPM, change back to PP2 control and the head will fall to 1.35 M & the f/rate to 6.2 LPM. If you "dead headed" the pump by say shutting the pump discharge isolating valve, the pump head will fall to 1.1 M at zero F/rate, if you fitted a controllable by pass around the pump and started opening it, the pump would ramp up to a 2.7 M head & a f/rate of 2.34 M3/h or 39 LPM.

 

[doitmyself]

I am able to calculate this in a spreadsheet (unfortunately that I am unable to post on here)

You can post it if you zip it first. I would be interested in seeing the spreadsheet.

 

[Ric2013]

Just in case you didn't follow that, and I'm not sure I did, here is another very rough explanation of PP as explained to me by a Grundfos engineer.

Very basically, a pump could run faster and slower to maintain the same available head as rad valves are open and shut. When a valve is opened, more water can flow so the pump runs faster to maintain the same pressure. This would be a constant pressure setting.

Proportional pressure slightly over-compensates, so as the flow increases when you (or a TRV) open the flow to a rad, the pressure at the pump is not only maintained by increasing the pump rotation speed, but the pressure is actually raised a little. The reason for this is that the primary circuit (the pipe from the boiler to the motorised valve and the common return to the boiler) creates more drag when the water velocity is higher. So if the pump merely maintained a constant pressure at the pump, the pressure at each radiator would drop when all valves were open and each radiator would still receive a little less water than if only half were turned on. By over-compensating, the pump makes up for the increased drag on the primary circuit as velocity increases.

On the UPS2 (and I would imagine most pumps are similar), the PP1,2, and 3, differ in that the PP3 does the most overcompensation, and the PP1 does the least.

 

[John.g]

You can post it if you zip it first. I would be interested in seeing the spreadsheet.

There you go, works exactly as the spreadsheet shows.

 

[John.g]

Just in case you didn't follow that, and I'm not sure I did, here is another very rough explanation of PP as explained to me by a Grundfos engineer.

Very basically, a pump could run faster and slower to maintain the same available head as rad valves are open and shut. When a valve is opened, more water can flow so the pump runs faster to maintain the same pressure. This would be a constant pressure setting.

Proportional pressure slightly over-compensates, so as the flow increases when you (or a TRV) open the flow to a rad, the pressure at the pump is not only maintained by increasing the pump rotation speed, but the pressure is actually raised a little. The reason for this is that the primary circuit (the pipe from the boiler to the motorised valve and the common return to the boiler) creates more drag when the water velocity is higher. So if the pump merely maintained a constant pressure at the pump, the pressure at each radiator would drop when all valves were open and each radiator would still receive a little less water than if only half were turned on. By over-compensating, the pump makes up for the increased drag on the primary circuit as velocity increases.

On the UPS2 (and I would imagine most pumps are similar), the PP1,2, and 3, differ in that the PP3 does the most overcompensation, and the PP1 does the least.

Just in case you didn't follow that, and I'm not sure I did, here is another very rough explanation of PP as explained to me by a Grundfos engineer.

Very basically, a pump could run faster and slower to maintain the same available head as rad valves are open and shut. When a valve is opened, more water can flow so the pump runs faster to maintain the same pressure. This would be a constant pressure setting.

Proportional pressure slightly over-compensates, so as the flow increases when you (or a TRV) open the flow to a rad, the pressure at the pump is not only maintained by increasing the pump rotation speed, but the pressure is actually raised a little. The reason for this is that the primary circuit (the pipe from the boiler to the motorised valve and the common return to the boiler) creates more drag when the water velocity is higher. So if the pump merely maintained a constant pressure at the pump, the pressure at each radiator would drop when all valves were open and each radiator would still receive a little less water than if only half were turned on. By over-compensating, the pump makes up for the increased drag on the primary circuit as velocity increases.

On the UPS2 (and I would imagine most pumps are similar), the PP1,2, and 3, differ in that the PP3 does the most overcompensation, and the PP1 does the least.

I would like to ask that grundfos engineer why in a 6M pump that they only allow a max 3M PP head, even the "cheap" pumps allow a 5 M PP head. I think that even the UPS3 only has a max PP setting of 3.5M.
If you take the above example that I used and assume a perfectly normal CH system. Ideally to set up the PP control, one should open up all the zone valves including HW and open all or any TRVs fully to get the maximum flow, you can then calculate the head and flow rate, I did mine by measuring the boiler deltaT and because I knew its output I was able to calculate the flow rate, I then looked at the (fixed) speed pump curve and was able to read off the head.
So if the head & flow required are 2.9M @ 15 LPM, you should then be able to set the PP control high enough to give you this but because the UPS2 can only be set to a max of 3M the head and flow will fall to 1.8M & 11.6 LPM so you are getting 77% of the max flow. IF you could increase that PP setting to 4M (3.8M to be exact) then you would have the required head & flow of 2.9M & 15 LPM on change over to PP mode. I know this is exactly how it works because I can set my Wilo pump any where between 0.5 M & 5.5 M PP head in increments of 0.1 M so if I set it to the 3.8 M above I will get that 2.9M head & 15 LPM, it will never go any higher but will ramp down as I described on reducing heat demand.

 

[John.g]

You can post it if you zip it first. I would be interested in seeing the spreadsheet.

Here is very interesting article on Grundfos AuotAdapt.

 

[Tiggy1955]

I would like to ask that grundfos engineer why in a 6M pump that they only allow a max 3M PP head, even the "cheap" pumps allow a 5 M PP head. I think that even the UPS3 only has a max PP setting of 3.5M.
If you take the above example that I used and assume a perfectly normal CH system. Ideally to set up the PP control, one should open up all the zone valves including HW and open all or any TRVs fully to get the maximum flow, you can then calculate the head and flow rate, I did mine by measuring the boiler deltaT and because I knew its output I was able to calculate the flow rate, I then looked at the (fixed) speed pump curve and was able to read off the head.
So if the head & flow required are 2.9M @ 15 LPM, you should then be able to set the PP control high enough to give you this but because the UPS2 can only be set to a max of 3M the head and flow will fall to 1.8M & 11.6 LPM so you are getting 77% of the max flow. IF you could increase that PP setting to 4M (3.8M to be exact) then you would have the required head & flow of 2.9M & 15 LPM on change over to PP mode. I know this is exactly how it works because I can set my Wilo pump any where between 0.5 M & 5.5 M PP head in increments of 0.1 M so if I set it to the 3.8 M above I will get that 2.9M head & 15 LPM, it will never go any higher but will ramp down as I described on reducing heat demand.

So in really simple non-technical terms:

A pump set to a Fixed Speed will apply a constant speed/pressure regardless of what’s ahead of it in the system. The result being that it could be too much pressure (particularly when a change takes place such as some rads being closed off) and it is also inefficient.

A pump set with Proportional Pressure will apply a variable speed/pressure depending on what is ahead of it (when a rad is closed/opened the pump compensates accordingly). The result being a more appropriate pressure is applied and it is more efficient.

Is that about right?

 

[Tiggy1955]

I have one final question on this topic:

I replaced the old Grundfoss UPS pump (because it was old) with the Grundnfos UPS2. I got the UPS2 because that seemed to be the direct replacement for the UPS.

Until John G mentioned PP I had never heard of it. What’s more, I did not even know that the UPS2 had PP.


My question is: If I had not replaced the pump I would have been left with a pump that only had Fixed Speeds. In which case, how could I have resolved the pump over problem if the slowest speed of the pump was still too much?

 

[John.g]

I have one final question on this topic:

I replaced the old Grundfoss UPS pump (because it was old) with the Grundnfos UPS2. I got the UPS2 because that seemed to be the direct replacement for the UPS.

Until John G mentioned PP I had never heard of it. What’s more, I did not even know that the UPS2 had PP.


My question is: If I had not replaced the pump I would have been left with a pump that only had Fixed Speeds. In which case, how could I have resolved the pump over problem if the slowest speed of the pump was still too much?

With your system like Ric2013 has shown above, cold feed before the boiler and vent after it I am a bit surprised that you wern't get some pump over "all the tine" depending on the number of rads in service. The cure: ideally I would ensure that the boiler heat exchanger has no (or partial) blockage but of course you need a RGI to do this. If you are happy not to inspect it then if you want to retain the gravity system you could shift the cold feed from before the boiler to after it adjacent to the vent but not more than 150mm away from it OR fit a fully pressurized system with a expansion vessel.

If the PP control is "curing" the problem then why worry too much?.

Are all your rads etc heating up to your satisfaction?.

I don't know if you have a boiler flow temperature indication but (if so) sometime you might watch it when the boiler shuts down and see what the temperature rise is over the next few minutes.
All this has been and is very very interesting, thanks for the feed back.

 

[Chuck]

So in really simple non-technical terms:

In an ideal world, the pressure drop across a given radiator would always be the same. The flow through this radiator is then limited by the lockshield valve and controlled by the local TRV.

A so-called 'constant pressure' pump, which adjusts its displacement rate to achieve a fixed pressure difference across its ports, will give a constant pressure drop across the radiators provided there is no pressure drop along the connecting pipework.

In practice, there will will be a flow-dependent pressure drop due to the connecting pipework. The 'proportional pressure' behaviour of a smart pump is an attempt to cancel this out.

Constant pressure operation is definitely, in my opinion, an improvement over a traditional constant speed pump, although it makes setting up the external by-pass correctly a rather delicate operation. Whether the additional complication introduced by PP is actually worthwhile in practice I'm not so sure about; the theory is based on an assumption about the pipework that is at best a rough approximation.

 

[Tiggy1955]

With your system like Ric2013 has shown above, cold feed before the boiler and vent after it I am a bit surprised that you wern't get some pump over "all the tine" depending on the number of rads in service. The cure: ideally I would ensure that the boiler heat exchanger has no (or partial) blockage but of course you need a RGI to do this. If you are happy not to inspect it then if you want to retain the gravity system you could shift the cold feed from before the boiler to after it adjacent to the vent but not more than 150mm away from it OR fit a fully pressurized system with a expansion vessel.

If the PP control is "curing" the problem then why worry too much?.

Are all your rads etc heating up to your satisfaction?.

I don't know if you have a boiler flow temperature indication but (if so) sometime you might watch it when the boiler shuts down and see what the temperature rise is over the next few minutes.
All this has been and is very very interesting, thanks for the feed back.

I'm draining the system down right now to remove the X400 and flushing through. I will refill and add the X100. All rads working really well (better that they have for a long time) and HW piping hot so I'm going to stick with the PP control.

 

[John.g]

So in really simple non-technical terms:

A pump set to a Fixed Speed will apply a constant speed/pressure regardless of what’s ahead of it in the system. The result being that it could be too much pressure (particularly when a change takes place such as some rads being closed off) and it is also inefficient.

A pump set with Proportional Pressure will apply a variable speed/pressure depending on what is ahead of it (when a rad is closed/opened the pump compensates accordingly). The result being a more appropriate pressure is applied and it is more efficient.

Is that about right?

More or less, a fixed speed pump head falls as the flow rate increases and increases with flow rate decrease (Trv's or zone valves closing) where as PP control works in the opposite sense, as the flow rate increases the pump head increases (pump ramps up the speed) and visa versa. Most of these pumps also have CP (constant pressure) control where the head is kept constant whatever the flow rate is.

 

[John.g]

In an ideal world, the pressure drop across a given radiator would always be the same. The flow through this radiator is then limited by the lockshield valve and controlled by the local TRV.

A so-called 'constant pressure' pump, which adjusts its displacement rate to achieve a fixed pressure difference across its ports, will give a constant pressure drop across the radiators provided there is no pressure drop along the connecting pipework.

In practice, there will will be a flow-dependent pressure drop due to the connecting pipework. The 'proportional pressure' behaviour of a smart pump is an attempt to cancel this out.

Constant pressure operation is definitely, in my opinion, an improvement over a traditional constant speed pump, although it makes setting up the external by-pass correctly a rather delicate operation. Whether the additional complication introduced by PP is actually worthwhile in practice I'm not so sure about; the theory is based on an assumption about the pipework that is at best a rough approximation.

I picked up this description of PP control somewhere along the line and it bears out what you are saying.
I would have to say that PP control works very well for me.

PP Control
"It starts with the assumption that about half of your pressure loss in the system will be in the distribution pipe while the other half is lost in the radiators. Consequently, the pump is controlled such that it will respond to a decrease in flow with a reduction of its head and that at zero flow, when all valves are closed, it will provide half the head pressure it has at maximum flow."

 

[doitmyself]

There you go, works exactly as the spreadsheet shows.

Unfortunately the spreadsheet is difficult to understand as you don't explain where the data comes from or what each column contains.

For example:
How did you obtain the Know Head and Known Flow?
Where does the UPS2 data at the top come from? It doesn't agree with the Grundfos published data.
What does "rem 7.9 lpm" mean (apart from the obvious litres per min)?
What does series 1 and series 2 refer to?
etc etc.

 

[doitmyself]

Here is very interesting article on Grundfos AuotAdapt.

The file will not open.

 

[John.g]

I have one final question on this topic:

I replaced the old Grundfoss UPS pump (because it was old) with the Grundnfos UPS2. I got the UPS2 because that seemed to be the direct replacement for the UPS.

Until John G mentioned PP I had never heard of it. What’s more, I did not even know that the UPS2 had PP.


My question is: If I had not replaced the pump I would have been left with a pump that only had Fixed Speeds. In which case, how could I have resolved the pump over problem if the slowest speed of the pump was still too much?

The file will not open.

Try this link so.
The Grundfos AUTOADAPT algorithm

 

[John.g]

Unfortunately the spreadsheet is difficult to understand as you don't explain where the data comes from or what each column contains.

For example:
How did you obtain the Know Head and Known Flow?
Where does the UPS2 data at the top come from? It doesn't agree with the Grundfos published data.
What does "rem 7.9 lpm" mean (apart from the obvious litres per min)?
What does series 1 and series 2 refer to?
etc etc.

I would have to spend a very long time explaining the whole spreadsheet data etc but if you click in any of the cells (assuming you are familiar with s.heets) you can see every calculation carried out, however I will try and answer some/most of your queries.
The known head and known flow are from my own system, I derived it years ago by measuring the oil fired boiler deltaT, then knowing the boiler output I was able to calculate the flow rate, I then went to my pump (a salmson at that time) and just read off the fixed speed pump head at that flow. Every installation is different of course but even if you have no idea what it is, if you select PP3 on the UPS2 you may find that it will be perfectly adequate, I use a different pump (Wilo) which gives far more options and I run it at a PP head of 4M to give me what I want.

"UPS data on the top??" it comes from the PP curves in page 11 of the attached UPS2 file and I would venture that it is reasonably accurate given that I am reading it off a plain sheet.

"rem 7.9 LPM" was just some reminder to myself when building the spreadsheet.

series1 & series2 are just excel assigned labels for the two trend lines, just place the cursor above the labels and the data columns will be highlighted, the x axis (horizontal) is the pump head in meters and the Y axis (vertical) is the pump flow in LPM.
The point where the two trend lines intersect is (or should be) the actual head and flow rate achieved with a UPS2 pump on PP setting 3 based on my known values.

Should also have said that if you place the cursor in either of the trend lines and click on it that it will highlight the data for that particular trend line, if you place it in the trend line without clicking it will give you the two values at that particular point.

 

[doitmyself]

I would like to ask that grundfos engineer why in a 6M pump that they only allow a max 3M PP head

The simple answer is efficiency. The pump efficiency peaks around the middle of the curve.

 

[doitmyself]

The known head and known flow are from my own system, I derived it years ago by measuring the oil fired boiler deltaT, then knowing the boiler output I was able to calculate the flow rate, I then went to my pump (a salmson at that time) and just read off the fixed speed pump head at that flow.

That just gives you the working point when that particular pump is used. That may not be the same as the required working point.

Here's a example, using my system which has a UPS2:

The required flow rate and head are 8 litres/min at 2.2m. The actual working point, shown by the yellow dot, is 9.99 lpm at 3.43m which is where the pump curve and system curve (red line) meet. See graph below.

If a PP setting is used, it needs to provide the required flow/head not those obtained by the fixed speed setting.

The attached UPS2 file is corrupted

 

[John.g]

The simple answer is efficiency. The pump efficiency peaks around the middle of the curve.

Yes, I saw Grundfos mentioning that but if that max setting of 3.0M isnt sufficiently high enough for your needs then you simply have to go over to fixed speed which is a pity really as you have lost all the benefits of PP control including much lower power demand).

 

[John.g]

That just gives you the working point when that particular pump is used. That may not be the same as the required working point.

Here's a example, using my system which has a UPS2:

The required flow rate and head are 8 litres/min at 2.2m. The actual working point, shown by the yellow dot, is 9.99 lpm at 3.43m which is where the pump curve and system curve (red line) meet. See graph below.

If a PP setting is used, it needs to provide the required flow/head not those obtained by the fixed speed setting.

The attached UPS2 file is corrupted,

View attachment 36462

Yes, exactly, if you need 8 LPM @ 2.2M head then the UPS2 will NOT do the job in PP mode at its max setting of 3M, it will only give 6.8 LPM @ 1.53M, just put 2.2 in cell L10 and 8 in cell M10 of my spreadsheet and just read the result off the graph. You would need a PP capability of around 3.3/3.4 to give you those required numbers.
I really couldn't recommend anyone to buy the UPS2 for this very reason. I will shortly post a modified spreadsheet using a Wilo pump on PP control to give your 8LPM @ 2.2M.

 

[John.g]

Unfortunately the spreadsheet is difficult to understand as you don't explain where the data comes from or what each column contains.

For example:
How did you obtain the Know Head and Known Flow?
Where does the UPS2 data at the top come from? It doesn't agree with the Grundfos published data.
What does "rem 7.9 lpm" mean (apart from the obvious litres per min)?
What does series 1 and series 2 refer to?
etc etc.

Here is a more detailed description of my spreadsheet which you may find interesting.

Most pump manufacturers PP control operate between a max and a min head where the minimum is the max/2 (see my post #234 above), for example in a pump that might have a PP set at 3M, the minimum is then 3/2 or 1.5M. Grundfos are a little different in that with the PP set at 3M then the minimum is ~ 1.2M (hard to read, page 11 of UPS file), but it doesn’t matter as the calculations method is the same for all the manufacturers and is very simple.

In the above case (UPS2.) 1.2M=0M3/h and 3M=2.15M3/h, I prefer to use LPM so 1.2M to 3M = 0 to 36 LPM. The calculation that the pump microprocessor carries out is completely proportional. So mathematically the calculated head = 1.2+(3-1.2)*LPM. For example if the LPM are 18 then the calculated head = 1.2+((3-1.2)*(18/36))= 2.1M, another example at 36 LPM the head is 1.2+((3-1.2)*(18/36))=3.0M (which we know is correct as 3M=36 LPM but just checking!) Spreadsheet: In column I (under LPM) I have started at 0 LPM and incrementally increased it in 0.1 LPM steps down through the column, (these values I copied across to column K to make it easier to build the trend.The caculation above is then done in the adjacent column J under H and gives the equivalent PP calculated head . Now the known (in this case, my own) LPM is 15 at a head of 2.9 M but as the pump starts ramping up at 1.2M (it possibly starts at 0) and because Flow is proportional to the sq.root of head then the ACTUAL flowrate at 1.2M is 15*sqroot(1.2/2.9), 9.65 LPM as shown in column L, so as the pump is ramping up this real flow rate will keep increasing and the calculated PP head will also keep increasing and when the real flow rate “catches up” with the calculated PP flow rate then the pump will stop ramping as the calculated power and the absorbed power will be equal, in this case at ~ 11.8 LPM @ 1.8M head. (the pump only looks at the power, it doesn,t measure head or flow) . Also see cells K134 & L134.

 

[John.g]

Yes, exactly, if you need 8 LPM @ 2.2M head then the UPS2 will NOT do the job in PP mode at its max setting of 3M, it will only give 6.8 LPM @ 1.53M, just put 2.2 in cell L10 and 8 in cell M10 of my spreadsheet and just read the result off the graph. You would need a PP capability of around 3.3/3.4 to give you those required numbers.
I really couldn't recommend anyone to buy the UPS2 for this very reason. I will shortly post a modified spreadsheet using a Wilo pump on PP control to give your 8LPM @ 2.2M.

Here you go, using a PP head of 3.3M will give you very close to your required 8 LPM @ 2M, it gives ~ 7.9 LPM @ 2.12M.

 

[John.g]

Correction: 2M should have read 2.2M.
Here you go, using a PP head of 3.3M will give you very close to your required 8 LPM @ 2.2M, it gives ~ 7.9 LPM @ 2.12M.

 

[doitmyself]

I really couldn't recommend anyone to buy the UPS2 for this very reason.

I have also come to the conclusion that the UPS2 PP option is a non-starter.

It is interesting that the Grundfos pump-sizing facility on their web-site never suggested the UPS2 if you specify PP operation; but it's recommended if you use fixed speed. I do wonder why they provided PP settings. The new UPS3 is much better.

 

[John.g]

I have also come to the conclusion that the UPS2 PP option is a non-starter.

It is interesting that the Grundfos pump-sizing facility on their web-site never suggested the UPS2 if you specify PP operation; but it's recommended if you use fixed speed. I do wonder why they provided PP settings. The new UPS3 is much better.

 

[John.g]

Yes, its strange alright because their old pumps were excellent long living products and some cheaper makes offer 5 or 6 PP settings, OK most of the lower ones wouldn't be used very often but the higher setting is often 4.5M or even 5M which will meet most normal sized dwelling needs.
As you say the UPS3 is better and even though it has only two PP settings, the higher one is 3.6M.
I have attached a different method of "sizing them up" which is easier to use I think than the previous Spreadsheet, I have done a few calcs using the UPS3 which are included.

 

[Ric2013]

I have also come to the conclusion that the UPS2 PP option is a non-starter.

It is interesting that the Grundfos pump-sizing facility on their web-site never suggested the UPS2 if you specify PP operation; but it's recommended if you use fixed speed. I do wonder why they provided PP settings. The new UPS3 is much better.

I have a UPS2 in my own house. I got it for free because the screws were missing on the terminal box. Actually, the head it provides is more than sufficient and one of the advantages of the UPS2 for me was that the fixed speed UPS on setting 1 was far far too high, but then I have quite an old boiler with negligable head loss across the heat exchanger.

That said, I do suspect that a high head would never be required for a properly designed system: if the velocity of the water in pipes be kept reasonably low, why would you need a 6m head? That said, easier to ensure in a new system than when modifying an existing system.

 

[John.g]

I have a UPS2 in my own house. I got it for free because the screws were missing on the terminal box. Actually, the head it provides is more than sufficient and one of the advantages of the UPS2 for me was that the fixed speed UPS on setting 1 was far far too high, but then I have quite an old boiler with negligable head loss across the heat exchanger.

That said, I do suspect that a high head would never be required for a properly designed system: if the velocity of the water in pipes be kept reasonably low, why would you need a 6m head? That said, easier to ensure in a new system than when modifying an existing system.

I suppose we should bear in mind that the UPS2 hasn't true fixed speed curves. Even speed 1 will give a constant head of 4M from 0 to ~ 6 LPM before the head starts falling, (any real fixed speed pump head starts dropping immediately on flow demand) which with modern zoning/TRV's etc will cater for over 6 kw of heat demand at a deltaT of 15C. and with the retro fitting of condensing oil/gas boilers the trend is to get a greater deltaT of 20C to enhance the condensing effect thus leading to even lower circulation rates. So in a house with even just basic insulation could very easily be running the UPS2 pump at the ridiculously high head of 4M on "fixed speed" for significant periods of time.
I havn't any pump curves for the older UPS pumps but I would think that they would have been operating at least 1/1.5M lower head?
Having said that the 3M PP head is a bit mean to say the least and certainly will fall short in a lot of instances as on PP control the head falls with reduced flow demand so to cater for both full heating flow rates and reduced demand it would have been nice if 3.5M to 4M was available, as was pointed out above, The UPS 3 has now got a 3.6M PP head. (AND has two CP (constant pressure) settings as well!)
This one may have been replaced in a lot of cases by the UPS 2.
https://product-selection.grundfos....tid=GMA&productnumber=97549426&qcid=501056454

 

[Ric2013]

At 6l/m the old UPS 15/50 had around a 3m head and the UPS 15/60 around 3.6m head.

The very old Selectric UPS 15/50 and Super-Selectric 15/60 has 7 and 9 foot head, at 6l/min respectively, so a little less. (I say 'has' in the present tense because I know at least one that is still running.)

All the above are on speed 1.

I suppose it would be useful to plot a little chart showing various types of pump curve all on the same axes, so comparisons could be made.

Why am I still up?

 

[John.g]

At 6l/m the old UPS 15/50 had around a 3m head and the UPS 15/60 around 3.6m head.

The very old Selectric UPS 15/50 and Super-Selectric 15/60 has 7 and 9 foot head, at 6l/min respectively, so a little less. (I say 'has' in the present tense because I know at least one that is still running.)

All the above are on speed 1.

I suppose it would be useful to plot a little chart showing various types of pump curve all on the same axes, so comparisons could be made.

Why am I still up?

Will put together one (chart) later today, I will include my own old Salmson NYL 33 which I installed in Sept 2000 set to speed 2 and was still running perfectly and quietly when I replaced it last November with a Wilo Yonos Pico 1-6 last November.

 

[tonyt]

A bit off thread but I love this forum! It's so good to see people discussing issues using reasoned and evidenced facts supported by experience rather then slagging each other off.

 

[Ric2013]

A bit off thread but I love this forum! It's so good to see people discussing issues using reasoned and evidenced facts supported by experience rather then slagging each other off.

That's because I'm a left-leaning liberal **** as they say on Youtube when I'm trying to make a reasoned point.

 

[John.g]

Will put together one (chart) later today, I will include my own old Salmson NYL 33 which I installed in Sept 2000 set to speed 2 and was still running perfectly and quietly when I replaced it last November with a Wilo Yonos Pico 1-6 last November.

Here it is, I wouldn't care to be running a few of these on even fixed speed 1, especially the UPS 3 .

 

[Ric2013]

Here it is, I wouldn't care to be running a few of these on even fixed speed 1, especially the UPS 3 .

Doesn't work on Libreoffice. Thanks though.

 

[John.g]

Doesn't work on Libreoffice. Thanks though.

Here's a snapshot of it & also a Zipped word copy.

 

[Ric2013]

I take it that's the old UPS and not the very old one, but it looks wrong. The UPS 15-50 starts at a 0 flow at 3.5m exactly, so how are you getting 3.76? Have you yet another IOM, as that differs from my data?

 

[John.g]

I take it that's the old UPS and not the very old one, but it looks wrong. The UPS 15-50 starts at a 0 flow at 3.5m exactly, so how are you getting 3.76? Have you yet another IOM, as that differs from my data?

You posted

I take it that's the old UPS and not the very old one, but it looks wrong. The UPS 15-50 starts at a 0 flow at 3.5m exactly, so how are you getting 3.76? Have you yet another IOM, as that differs from my data?

I got it from one of your files above... "Selectric UPS Old Style" page 1 shows speed 1 curve starting at 3.75/3.76M ?.

 

[John.g]

At 6l/m the old UPS 15/50 had around a 3m head and the UPS 15/60 around 3.6m head.

The very old Selectric UPS 15/50 and Super-Selectric 15/60 has 7 and 9 foot head, at 6l/min respectively, so a little less. (I say 'has' in the present tense because I know at least one that is still running.)

All the above are on speed 1.

I suppose it would be useful to plot a little chart showing various types of pump curve all on the same axes, so comparisons could be made.

Why am I still up?

Can you post any links (charts etc) to a UPS 25-50 Selectric, power outputs 40W, 65W & 95W. (installed in a new build house in 2005/2006), still running.
Thanks.

 

[Ric2013]

You posted


I got it from one of your files above... "Selectric UPS Old Style" page 1 shows speed 1 curve starting at 3.75/3.76M ?.

Can you look at the chart on my file again and tell me what you see? I make it between 3.5 and 3.6 and would like to know if this is human or electronic error.
This is how it appears on my screen:

 

[doitmyself]

Can you look at the chart on my file again and tell me what you see? I make it between 3.5 and 3.6 and would like to know if this is human or electronic error.
This is how it appears on my screen:View attachment 36507

I have to agree with john.g. The speed 1 line crosses the y-axis at 3.75.

 

[John.g]

Can you look at the chart on my file again and tell me what you see? I make it between 3.5 and 3.6 and would like to know if this is human or electronic error.
This is how it appears on my screen:View attachment 36507

(Internet down for past few hours so couldn't relpy)

A bit confused as to why you ask human /electronic error as this I presume is a grundfos data sheet that you posted?, I just copied the data from it into my own spreadsheet, if you can post the proper chart I can incorporate that data in the spreadsheet and re post.

 

[Ric2013]

It's okay John. I'm not very good at reading data from a screen for some reason and I was reading the digits 3.5 against the 3.75 line.

So ignore my comments above.

 

[John.g]

It's okay John. I'm not very good at reading data from a screen for some reason and I was reading the digits 3.5 against the 3.75 line.

So ignore my comments above.

No problem, if you do come across any info on that 25-50 selectric with those power settings I would appreciate it. (#70)

 

[Ric2013]

Have you tried asking Grundfos? I think that's where I got the file for the VERY old Selectric pumps from. Rang them and asked for the curves IIRC.

 

[doitmyself]

Can you post any links (charts etc) to a UPS 25-50 Selectric, power outputs 40W, 65W & 95W. (installed in a new build house in 2005/2006), still running.
Thanks.

The curves are exactly the same as for the UPS 15-50 Selectric of the same vintage. The innards are the same, it's just the connections which are different.

 

[John.g]

The curves are exactly the same as for the UPS 15-50 Selectric of the same vintage. The innards are the same, it's just the connections which are different.

ref post#61
File "selectric UPS pumps old" shows the UPS 15-50 with power inputs of 35/45/50 watts. In "selectric very old" it shows the UPS 15-50 with power inputs of 40/65/100 watts with different speeds/curves, my query pump, a UPS 25-50 has power inputs of 40/65/95 so I will assume that the pump curves are similar to the latter one, above, its a 2005/2006 install. I wonder what was the time span period for the UPS 15-50 35/45/50 watts.

 

[doitmyself]

Here is the info you are looking for. The PC 9706 on pump data plate (see pic of the pump) shows that it was in production in 1997.

 

[John.g]

Here is the info you are looking for. The PC 9706 on pump data plate (see pic of the pump) shows that it was in production in 1997.

Thanks for that data.

 

[John.g]

Here is the info you are looking for. The PC 9706 on pump data plate (see pic of the pump) shows that it was in production in 1997.

Just received a photo of the pump, it seems a difficult one to track down, I presume the PC 0414 means it was manufactured in 2004.
Thanks again

 

[doitmyself]

I presume the PC 0414 means it was manufactured in 2004.

Week 14 of 2004 to be precise.

It's instructive to see how the performance of the 'same' pump has changed over time. (You should have three versions now.)

 

[Ajlsat]

sure i am in wrong place, can someone direct me. where to ask question ref heat pump instalation.thanks

QUOTE="John.g, post: 1022186, member: 99812"]I suppose we should bear in mind that the UPS2 hasn't true fixed speed curves. Even speed 1 will give a constant head of 4M from 0 to ~ 6 LPM before the head starts falling, (any real fixed speed pump head starts dropping immediately on flow demand) which with modern zoning/TRV's etc will cater for over 6 kw of heat demand at a deltaT of 15C. and with the retro fitting of condensing oil/gas boilers the trend is to get a greater deltaT of 20C to enhance the condensing effect thus leading to even lower circulation rates. So in a house with even just basic insulation could very easily be running the UPS2 pump at the ridiculously high head of 4M on "fixed speed" for significant periods of time.
I havn't any pump curves for the older UPS pumps but I would think that they would have been operating at least 1/1.5M lower head?
Having said that the 3M PP head is a bit mean to say the least and certainly will fall short in a lot of instances as on PP control the head falls with reduced flow demand so to cater for both full heating flow rates and reduced demand it would have been nice if 3.5M to 4M was available, as was pointed out above, The UPS 3 has now got a 3.6M PP head. (AND has two CP (constant pressure) settings as well!)
This one may have been replaced in a lot of cases by the UPS 2.
https://product-selection.grundfos....tid=GMA&productnumber=97549426&qcid=501056454[/QUOTE]

 

[SJB060685]

So if your ballcock were not refilling the F&E, and no overflowing took place, you think the volume of water in the system would stay the same? There isn't any being added, by, say, a leak from the coil in your hot water cylinder?

Took the words out of my mouth lol

 

[John.g]

Took the words out of my mouth lol

The air in the rads is/was displacing the water??

 

[SJB060685]

The air in the rads is/was displacing the water??

Well any air in the system will displace water. I thought my post was agreeing with someone suggest a split in cylinder coil?

 

[John.g]

Well any air in the system will displace water. I thought my post was agreeing with someone suggest a split in cylinder coil?

I thought the OP ruled that out by changing the pump settings to PP control which reduced the pump head and stopped the water returning to the feed & expansion tank and drawing air in through the vent. If the coil is split he would be getting a continuous overflow from the F & E Tank.

 

[SJB060685]

I thought the OP ruled that out by changing the pump settings to PP control which reduced the pump head and stopped the water returning to the feed & expansion tank and drawing air in through the vent. If the coil is split he would be getting a continuous overflow from the F & E Tank.

Yeah but I thought I said that before I’d read every comment lol. I know you suggesting or whoever it was to make this adjustment solved it.