Search the forum,

Discuss Buffer Tanks - 2 or 4 port connections in the Plumbing Jobs | The Job-board area at PlumbersForums.net

Status
Not open for further replies.

Worcester

Esteemed
Plumber
Messages
1,005
OK, A nice technical one for the Bank Holiday Weekend :)

Buffer tanks - 2 port connection or 4 ?

Which is best 2 or 4 port, in What situation and why?

What factors e.g. does it depend upon the heating load types (e.g. underfloor / simple zone controlled rads)

So under what circumstances would a 2 port connection be best and when would 4 port connections be best.

Heat Pumps or Biomass Boilers?

Adding to that in each scenario which is the best way to send the call for heat to the Heat Source (HP or Biomass Boiler?

Finally when to use a loss loss header in preference to a buffer tank?

Example 1 Biomass boiler, long time to come on, like to run for a long time, long time for boiler to cool down - i.e. a large hysteresis, as such boiler manages buffer tank based on top and bottom temperatures and hysteresis on both. Heat load considers buffer as an inexhaustible supply of heat. Call for heat from rads / underfloor merely turns on circulation pump, so 90% of installations recommended as 4 port, though I have seen a few controlled this way though plumbed as 2 port, so with a proper back end management system means when boiler fired up that heat goes to heating circuits first.

Example 2 Ground Source Heat pump (non inverter) supplying mix of underfloor heating and rads, as all heat demands could be shut off manufacturers recommendation has been install buffer with a 2 port connection so that when heat load is less than production HP will heat up buffer tank and also meets the minimum flow requirements so doesn't get High pressure faults. - Call for heat from heating system

Example 3 Air Source Heat Pump (Inverter controlled) supplying mix of undefloor heating, fan coil and radiant panels, where load could vary from 600W to 10KW,
a) Supplier 1 recommended low loss header with call for heat from heating system
b) Supplier 2 recommends 100 Litre 4 port buffer tank with call for heat from heating system.
c) Supplier 3 recommends 100 Litre 4 port buffer tank with call for heat to HP from buffer tank with single sensor and 6°C hysteresis.

So question is Why the different recommendations re heat pumps, whether its GS or AS or Biomass - What's good and bad about each option?

Discussed it with various manufacturers and they simply maintain their position with no explanation as to why. :(
 
No idea why manufacturers recommendations vary as they are all very similar products.

LLH option for air source would depend on total water content of system I would imagine to prevent short cycling.

Froling recommend 2 port connection for buffer tank so that heating doesn't have to wait for buffer to be charged, I've always piped them in a 4 port configuration as always controlled them as you mentioned, boiler to buffer temp, radiators controls circulation pump only.

I can't really see how it makes any odds unless you intend switching the heat source off before buffer is satisfied to help reduce heat loss through buffer? If you could control the flow to buffer depending on flow rate as opposed to temperature, it would make more sense.
 
Last edited:
LLH option for air source would depend on total water content of system I would imagine to prevent short cycling.

I don't see how it does that (prevent short cycling) I can see how it prevents the low flow and hence HP faults on the heat Pumps.

Froling recommend 2 port connection for buffer tank so that heating doesn't have to wait for buffer to be charged

That's the only reason I can see for that as well.

I suppose there is one other scenario which is where the boiler is undersized for short term peak demand, so the boiler and buffer tank are providing heat directly, that may work better in a 2 port configuration...

So which is better for overall efficiency and hence fuel economy?
 
It's to do with minimum water content I believe.

The hysteresis set by the controller will also probably effect the required minimum water volume in order for the heat pump to run for a set amount of time. If the hysteresis is small then a small volume of water would take very little time to return at the set temperature. Although the controllers generally have anti short cycling settings as well. This is my interpretation of it anyway.

As for the biomass buffers and under sizing, Your looking at a much larger volume of water required then though, an accumulator, unless your set point is considerably greater than your flow temperature.

I was talking to the warmflow rep the other day who says their pellet boiler doesn't need a buffer in most circumstances. I've always wondered why the buffer sizes are so large for biomass, other than to cover as you say, the slow start up times etc. Most gas boilers have a similar turn down ratio.

I think buffers are much more common on the continent and so a lot of the manufacturers don't feel they need to explain their uses to anyone. We are looking at the Heliotherm range of ground source heat pumps which have full step less modulation, yet they still require (according to the manufacturer) large buffer vessels for maximum efficiency.

As for efficiency, I'm always wondering myself. It's a double edged sword, larger buffers will prevent as many start ups and allow longer run times at a lower temperature rise, but larger buffer will suffer from greater standing losses at the same time. The later isn't really calculated for, which seems like a bit of an oversight to me?

I am glad your on actually, as I wanted to ask a question I'd like you to answer! I'll post a thread.
 
Last edited:
the only reason i can see for using a 2 port tank would be with a biomass and using it as an accumulator not a buffer. We would always suggest a buffer with any biomass boiler to reduce cycling. went to look at an install done pre 2008 which had a 90kw eta hack boiler, no buffer and he was told by the installer that due to the size of the house and 2x 250ltr unvented cylinders, there is enough system for the heat to dissipate, only problem is the boiler is connected directly by either the cylinder stats or a room stat. i was there for an hour and the boiler fired at least 6 times.

a lot of the biomass manufacturers recommend using the tank as an accumulator so the heat is drawn from there while the boiler is firing round its shunt circuit, once its upto temp and the mixer is open then the boiler takes over the heating and the tank remains uncharged until the heating demand is gone.

We would only really fit a lowloss header if the system had various different heating systems ie. ufh, rads, air blowers etc, or the temperature and flowrates needed to be different for the different circuits. Fitted quite a few LLH as we do alot of commercial buildings.
 
So in the mixed emitter environment would you fit a llh in conjunction with a buffer tank? - Assuming the buffer is 'remote' from the heating distribution location so you aren't able take advantage of the multiple connection points on the buffer ?
 
Absolutely, we had an installation in a garden centre where plant room was well away from the ditribution system. Ran pumped pipework from buffer round to lowloss which then fed a hot water circuit, underfloor heating circuit, and 2 overhead fan heater circuits. All the circuits needed different flow rates so the lowloss was perfect, combined with commissioning valves and variable speed pumps.
 
20141128_155813.jpg this is our low loss header
 
Gerberit Mapress or Yorkshire Pegler Xpress? :)

We tend to use Xpress as our local BSS keep 10x as much of that as the Mapress ... 1000's of connections made and No leaks (apart from the joint we forgot to press :) ) - we like that :)
 
We use xpress as much as we can. We have had a couple of leaks but I'm sure there would be allot more if we had soldered them all
 
Very poor practise, you need to leave the soldering to the men

Why it's handy to have esp when there's water in the pipe or when you can't turn the water off and have to put a valve in
 
Had a interesting discussions today with the UK Froling distributor (Not the BG subsidiary) wrt buffer and low loss headers.

One of the biggest issues on biomass boiler efficiency is to get the return temperature to the buffer / boiler as low as possible. - the boiler will always raise it if need with the return riser, it can;t lower it.

They are strongly recommending full weather comp with mixing valves on the heating circuits (not HDW). That will dramatically lower the boiler / buffer tank return temperatures for 95% of the year, so will help the boiler to modulate properly and therefore better fuel efficiency.

One component that would destroy that reduced return flow temperature is of course a low loss header... so they strongly recommend to design them out whenever possible. - Seems to make sense to me.

Part of the goal therefore of getting as low a return temperatrure as possible therefore points to using a two port buffer connection for the heating circuits (take DHW of the top of the buffer tank) Interesting to note that the 'official' Froling buffer tanks only have one column of four connection points. (plus top)

Thoughts?
 
Interesting and yet a completely different answer to the one I received when I asked the same question a week or so back. I actually meant to post on here but didn't get around to it.

Who did you speak to out of interest?

I also raised the question when I did the commissioning and controller course but this wasn't mentioned at all.

Surely if the buffer is charged though the return will always be fairly high? What sort of temperature where they suggesting was optimal, 60?
 
Was it zero carbon future?. So are they suggesting we design to use the tanks as accumulators rather than buffers? Surely if you have the return from the system designed to say 50oC And the boiler needed the mixer to be at 60 , then I would imagine the boiler would cycle more keeping the shunt circuit heated!!! And therefore using more fuel. We were told by ETA that the ideal buffer setting would be top target of 80 and bottom off at 70.
 
@nostrum, i was discussing it with Finian
@missplumb, yep, we are getting the different stories from eta and froling :)

What froling (zcf) are saying is that the eta (innasol) way will cause more full power cycling and claim that their method will enable the boiler to modulate properly.

The buffer will still be charged as appropriately as DHW still requires full temp flow, and is the only consumer (optionally) directly connected to the buffer.

if the boiler is "stealing" flow to top up the return flow temperature, then the balance of the flow (production) required by the consumers (heating system) will come from the buffer, so the flow in that length of pipework will reverse (depleting the buffer), as it's only got a single column of connections that has to happen.

I can see the logic of both arguments, perhaps they are both correct for their particular boilers? Maybe, to an extent, it may therefore depend upon the boiler control software / systems?
 
I'm confused if I'm honest. Surely the load will be the same in either situation, therefore unless the load exceeds the output the boiler will function the same.

In both circumstances the boiler is triggered by the buffer sensor dropping below the set point (ignoring any hysteresis)

In both scenarios the buffer will 'give up' heat until the boiler fires, the only difference being which pipe it uses to export heat from the buffer, 4 port will have a dedicated export flow, 2 port will use the boiler flow in reverse?

Once the boiler fires the boiler pump will pull water from the bottom of the buffer and mix with the flow to desired temperature. The output energy will then be distributed through the heating load and into the buffer simultaneously until the buffer reaches set point again?

Where's the difference?! :skep: or what am I missing?
 
Just to add, I can see the benefit when using weather compensation and I guess in that scenario piping in the Froling configuration would reduce the return temperature to the boiler more directly.

image.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm gonna have to get my books out as that drawing doesn't show any mixing valve or shunt circuit, it's just using the boiler to service the heating and charge a heat store just for the hot water, in which case what the point of the buffer?
 
I'm confused too!

The mixing valves are shown of the heating circuits - they're controlled by the weather comp program in the boiler.

From recollection the P4's are odd beasts as well - the flow comes from the bottom of the boiler (see the example diagram) and the return enters the top of the boiler and is fed through an internal coil in the water jacket that then terminates in the water jacket, so the return gets warmed up before entering the jacket it doesn't have a return riser.

Assuming this is using the froling controller, then from recollection, the boiler is also triggered by a call for heat from the heating system, i.e. the heating system and buffer tank are managed separately yet together.
 
Last edited:
As far as I am aware the 3200 controller doesn't have weather comp built in as standard although they will almost definitely have a module you can add to activate it. I've not seen any option for weather comp curves whilst setting up.

The smaller P1 and P4s use a modulating pump controlled by the controller to control the pump speed to maintain the return temperature to the required temp. This may be what is on the drawing.

On the last quote we got a couple of weeks ago they added an export pack which was not on the quote before. I queried what it was (listed as CB mixer) thinking they'd specced two variants for the shunt pump as I couldn't understand how they could spec a pump without asking for hydraulic spec of system.

If they had said it was weather compensated mixing it would have made sense but they didn't, they simply said it was an export pump and mixing valve set. I've a feeling this has all only recently come about.
 
,
As far as I am aware the 3200 controller doesn't have weather comp built in as standard although they will almost definitely have a module you can add to activate it. I've not seen any option for weather comp curves whilst setting up.

The smaller P1 and P4s use a modulating pump controlled by the controller to control the pump speed to maintain the return temperature to the required temp. This may be what is on the drawing.

On the last quote we got a couple of weeks ago they added an export pack which was not on the quote before. I queried what it was (listed as CB mixer) thinking they'd specced two variants for the shunt pump as I couldn't understand how they could spec a pump without asking for hydraulic spec of system.

If they had said it was weather compensated mixing it would have made sense but they didn't, they simply said it was an export pump and mixing valve set. I've a feeling this has all only recently come about.

I've just looked through the controller manual. It would seem as if when you plug a froling room sensor in the weather comp option becomes available
 
That's a very small accumulator in test center...... I did my get as
 
Looking at the schematic a few times today I can see where this may differ to a 4 port buffer.

In this configuration the return temperature will fluctuate in line with the heating load. In a 4 port buffer configuration the temperature difference between flow and return will be relatively constant throughout the heating cycle until the buffer set point is reached, regardless of heating load.

In this configuration, the boiler cannot heat the buffer as the flow is reversed. The boiler will receive a return directly from the heating load which I presume will be a much lower water volume and from mixed circuits.

I don't quite understand how the flow from boiler and flow from buffer is balanced to feed the heating circuit ? Any ideas?

Only once the heating circuit is satisfied will the boiler reheat the buffer which would probably mean the boiler ramps up assuming the boiler modulates depending on return temperature rise. EG: a slower rise will cause the boiler to increase output to achieve set point.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
The flow from the boiler and buffer would be created by the export pump, but that is what I don't quite get as the boiler pump would only run when the buffer needs heat. I've been to several systems piped like this and because the heat loads have not been calculated, the size of the boiler has been well undersized. This means the boiler is constantly running and buffers sit there cold.
 
Yes and what is stopping cold water being pulled through the boiler in reverse until the buffer temp drops (which will then trigger boiler to fire)

Thinking about it the system is self balancing, any short fall from the boiler will be made up through the buffer.

The buffer will provide instant heat when heating is called on without the boiler firing until the buffer temp drops, the only pump running would be the mixer pump.

At the end of the heating demand the mixer pump will stop and the buffer will be loaded as normal using the boiler pump.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Reply to Buffer Tanks - 2 or 4 port connections in the Plumbing Jobs | The Job-board area at PlumbersForums.net

Creating content since 2001. Untold Media.

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock