Boiler Slowdown Pellematic Ökofen

[MOREA 49]

Did67 wrote:
The average time: the display will be the average since start-up. So at first, it won't move much. If you want to measure the impact of the change, you have to record the operating time and the number of starts recorded at the time of the change, then for example 5 days later, make the difference and divide ...
Thank you for the explanation. But I had calculated to see if "the case" of my boiler improved with an average of 12 min since the beginning, on the recent period it persists at 11min.
For the probe I will see with my installer what can be done.
And our polyflam fireplace remains the secret boot ... it works without electricity (which can be practical ...) and will provide an additional if necessary ...
Have a good week

[Did67]

I had calculated to see if "the case" of my boiler improved with an average of 12 min since the beginning, on the recent period it persists at 11min.

Your situation illustrates the fact that "heat control" (and "self-regulation" of the boiler) and "heating regulation" (good use of heat) are two separate things.

Obviously, you have greatly improved the relevant use of the calories produced: much better comfort for the same expense.

But at the level of the boiler, not much has happened. And this is normal.

Hence the fact that at the beginning, perhaps without your understanding it, I insisted on "classifying" the problems and not attacking from all sides at the same time ... [which is a bit the temptation on these threads where several discussions intersect ...]. First the heating curve, then the time programming and now only the boiler cycles ...

To reassure you: the efficiency between a "full boiler" and a "boiler at minimum power" only varies by 3 or 4%. The short cycles play above all on premature and unnecessary wear of certain parts (igniter, "anti-fire" valve = Belimo valve, etc ...), more on real savings (mainly linked to good regulation (therefore a good "use" of calories). lost a lot in the meantime! And as regards wear, know that everything is planned for a few tens of thousands of ignitions and stops ...

[zefred72]

To manet42
I come back to what you said

Conclusion:
- double your lowering instructions, you want to decrease by 2 °, go from 19 to 17, ask for a decrease of 4 ° or 15 °.
-Do not require too much drop to avoid a LONG rise in T °
- No short comfort period.
- if you have an int. forces compensation to 7/8 and increases anticipation (160-180) with radiators and high inertia.

Why not short comfort periods?

My "comfort" programming ranges are as follows
Mon - Tue 7h00-8h30 / 18h00-22h00
Wed 7h00-22h00
Thu - Fri 7h00-8h30 / 18h00-22h00
Sat - Sun 9:00 am-22:00pm

Would it be better to leave the beach in the morning from 7:00 am to 8:30 am?

[manet42]

Well seen, you look good! I made a mistake ... short periods reduced. Should we have written.
My comment was mainly on the level of savings over a short period.

[Did67]

But depending on the inertia, raising the temperature for a short period of comfort can represent a lot of calories too ...

So the question is asked.

[manet42]

Absolutely..With my "machine" I avoid short periods of reduced or comfort as much as possible.

By the time it works, it barely becomes noticeable (sensation)
Kind regards.

JC.

[MOREA 49]

Back with unchanged programming, and a comfort period of 16 p.m. / 22 p.m. (at 18 ° 5 reduced to 15 ° 5)
Monday and Tuesday morning (7h reduced T ° 18 ° 3) today 18 ° 5 all day reduced and even 19 ° 3 this afternoon with the sun.
The other weekend when we checked the T °, ​​all the radiators open; the T ° were more or less in line with the demands in comfort 18 ° 5 as in reduced 17 ° 5 for 15 ° 5 requested.

This is no longer the case at the start of the week. I find what I had noticed last winter: little difference between comfort and reduced. Yesterday and today we were at home: 18 ° 3 in the morning, it hasn't gone down all day, and even 19 ° 1 in the afternoon with the sun. (With low T °: - 2 ° in the morning and a maximum of around 3 °)
Could the fact of having closed certain radiators (unoccupied rooms) and lowered certain others with thermostats have a link?
For the reduction of power of the boiler, I will have to fight, my installer wants "before reducing modify some settings (I do not know which ones) and see what it gives". I don't have a date because he's overwhelmed.
I will learn your arguments before he comes ... and not let go ...

[zefred72]

You should perhaps not focus too much on the ambient temperature which does not decrease as desired in reduced mode: if you are a little warmer than expected, it is not bad in these periods of frost. (myself for 14 ° of reduced temperature, I can hardly go below 17 °).
The important thing is that the boiler takes your request into account and that the flow temperature drops as a result: isn't it?

[manet42]

According to the previous messages, the starting temperature is dropping, perhaps not quite enough, in this case lowering the demand a little further.
No internal probe. and a house sensitive to the contributions (velux, bay windows), an insert, human presence (1 person = 1 radiator 50W), a big inertia, normal that the atmosphere does not decrease, the boiler "does not know" that it is 19 °, it continues to send water to have 17 ° 5 .....

[zefred72]

According to the previous messages, the starting temperature is dropping, perhaps not quite enough, in this case lowering the demand a little further.
No internal probe. and a house sensitive to the contributions (velux, bay windows), an insert, human presence (1 person = 1 radiator 50W), a big inertia, normal that the atmosphere does not decrease, the boiler "does not know" that it is 19 °, it continues to send water to have 17 ° 5 .....

In fact the boiler continues to send water to have 15,5 ° (reduced temperature requested) but the atmosphere is at 17,5 ° (inputs, inertia ...)