|
Posted by The King on January 22, 2009, 8:23 pm
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:38:08 -0600, "geothermaljones"
>I'm assuming Bryant built it for worst case & offered up a $10-20.00 kit for
>LP-NG swap.
>Sure would lower production costs.
Yea there was a LP kit installed.
>Maybe they built it to operate in sub zero temp zones...
>Propane pressure drops as the temps drop below zero, & has none at all if
>it's below it's -44dF boiling point.
>Not common, but well above my states low temp record... (-60dF in Tower, MN
>1996)
I was reading not long ago about the temp in Tok AK of -78. They were
saying at those temps the brake fluid would freeze in cars and truck.
Can you imagine living in those temps? Brrrrrrr.
>Add to that the pressures of tanks near empty, tank heaters are common, &
>many are underground.
Some LP kits include a LP switch to be installed in the supply line to
shut off the furnace when the pressure gets low to prevent sooting.
>But, I could be wrong...
> geothermaljones
>> On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:35:38 -0600, "geothermaljones"
>>>3.2" seems low, but is not unusual.
>> This is propane, you know LP gas..
>>>Since lots of gas lines "out East" are ancient many run on very low
>>>pressure.
>>>Not long ago, (w/in 15 yrs) Boston & Chicago still had gas mains made of
>>>wood,
>>>14" WC gas pressure was all that could be delivered at the street.
>>>Bring that into a building, & run it through a meter, & 7" was the max
>>>they'd "guarantee delivered"
>>>7" WC pressure out from the meter, & a reasonable pipe TEL (total
>>>equivalent
>>>length), common practice meant most equipment was sized to operate on a
>>>standard loss of 50% from the meter...
>>>hence, 3.5"
>>>With high pressure gas out West (80 psi at the street) it does seem
>>>"small"
>>> goodluck
>>> geothermaljones
>>>> Ran across a 20 ton Byrant LP RTU today that is data tagged at 3.2" wc
>>>> on the manifold and verified by the manufacture as such. That's a
>>>> first for me. Every other piece of LP equipment I've ever seen runs
>>>> 10" wc on the manifold.
>>
|
>LP-NG swap.
>Sure would lower production costs.