Water heaters....tank or on-demand?

Users who are viewing this thread

Chris8796

New Member
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Illinois
Those drain heat recovery units seem like a good idea, but why are they so expensive? Maybe, I'm missing something, but they just look like coiled up copper tubing.

They are more expensive than I think the should be, I think it is just patent issues that prevent them from being cheaper. I paid $430 for mine and DIY it. I would estimate the payback to be 4-5 yrs in my case and get the benefit of greater capacity in the mean time. We have take showers back to back to back in the morning so its a good setup for us and we can easily see the benefit. I considered trying to make my own, but once you start pricing 3-4" copper and soft 3/4" its still pretty expensive at retail prices. The tubing is flatten out somewhat to get better contact so it would be hard to make an identical one.

A few reports I've seen say a DHRU increases the efficiency factor of a water heater about 0.22. That is about the average difference between tank (0.62) and demand units (0.80-0.85)(non-condensing). So for the price difference, DHRU seem to be a safe bet to bridge the difference. They don't have any maintenance issues either.

They are just an interesting way of adding capacity and saving some energy that most people don't consider.
 

Dana

In the trades
Messages
7,889
Reaction score
509
Points
113
Location
01609
And from what I understand, as long as the system is allowed to flow through and not sit and stagnate, it would be fine to use on the same heater as the drinking water.

In MA there is a specific requirement on non-isolated combi systms to run the circulation pumps X-minutes out of every Y-hours to mitigate stagnation issues. (I don't recall the ratio)

For space efficient (and reasonably efficient) combi systems, this guy's reverse-indirect HW heater as buffer approach is about right, and has a high-capacity heat-exchanger:

http://www.heatpro.us/designtree/documents/tanklesssys.htm

The other advantage with the above system is that the tankless only heats (and the tank only stores) "dead" boiler water, cutting down on scaling & corrosion issues in both. It's not as efficient as a mod-con + indirect, but it's not bad- better in small heat-load scenarios than McMansions. If the domesting HW flow is detected with a flow switch to inhibit heating system calls the HW delivery has significant buffer to work down before the tankless needs to fire at full modulation- the best of both the tank/tankless worlds from a HW heating point of view.

Used as a boiler, an on-demand will run a few percent more efficient than the EF numbers imply since it'll have guaranteed longer duty cycles. eliminating efficiency-robbing short cycles like half-gallon handwashing draws. It generally takes a couple of minutes for even low-mass burners like a tankless to hit their efficiency strides. Draws of less than a gallon or so results in rather poor relative performance (under 60% efficiency), draws of a half gallon or can even be less than 50% efficient.

I tend to believe people who actually measure stuff: These folks did a comparison using a un-buffered Rinnai tankless (82EF) to heat HW & run an air-handler and it tested out in the mid-80s for combustion efficiency vs. high-70s for a pretty-good forced-draft tank heater in a similar system & load. It's shoulder & summer efficiency numbers were favorable by comparison as well.

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2007/cmhc-schl/nh18-22/NH18-22-106-108E.pdf

If going combi-system, almost any tankless (buffered or otherwise) will likely outperform any conventional tank heater with some margin. But buffering the tankless with a reverse-indirect will squeeze a bit more performance out while removing all the tankless quirks in the process, and avoids any stagnation issues. Heatpro's combi probably beats the eKoComfort design's efficiency, during the heating season, and possibly even during the summer.
 
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

This is awkward, but...

It looks like you're using an ad blocker. We get it, but (1) terrylove.com can't live without ads, and (2) ad blockers can cause issues with videos and comments. If you'd like to support the site, please allow ads.

If any particular ad is your REASON for blocking ads, please let us know. We might be able to do something about it. Thanks.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks