Hi all,
I could use a little help with selecting a thermostat for a gas fired steam heat system. This is a house I own which my mother lives in. Unfortunately I live about an hour and a half away and finding a heating specialist or good plumber is difficult when I can’t be on site to ask the proper questions. The piece of junk thermostat which was installed (by a knucklehead) last winter may be good for forced hot air but that’s about it.
It’s a big old house located in the northeast, just outside of NYC. It was built in 1910. It has a gas fired steam boiler which was replaced about 8 years ago. The boiler works fine. We used to have an old mechanical style clock thermostat on the system and it did a pretty good job maintaining the heat in the house.
I’m looking for a thermostat, heat only programmable or non-programmable. I’ve looked at the following: Honeywell TH5110, 6110 and 8110. Before I go off and buy the wrong device I thought I would ask for some advice.
Thanks for your help
Replies
Thermostats
are very simple devices. Why did you change the one that worked? What makes the current one a "piece of junk"?
Any of the HW's you list will work fine, if not set up to run a gas furnce. Almost all (if not all) thermostats made in my lifetime can be setup to operate either a gas forced air system of a hydronic system.
Go here http://customer.honeywell.com/Business/Cultures/en-US/Default.htm and search for literature for the stats and check out the installation manuals to see the features and limitations.
My steam system in the duplex I just bought, has two stats, one for each floor. One is the HW "gold bug" (T87) works great. Simple, inexpensive and perfect for a steam system.
The other is some JCI thing, I've never seen (and I thought I had seen most everything). Simple, mechanical and effective.
The VisionPro and FocusPro stats you list are all good, but have setup setting that have to be tailored to the system.
Personally, in an old house with a single zone steam system (manual valves on the rads, right?) a non-programable, mechanical thermostat is perfect.
Thermostat
As far as programmable thermostats go, I used to swear by Honeywell Chronotherms. They were the most intuitive (at least for me). My neighbor had a 'brand x' and I had to scrutinize the instructions every time she needed it adjusted. I used to curse it!
Do you need a programmable stat if your mother is in the house normally? Programmable stats don't save energy over e.g. manual ones turned up/down as you need them ... in fact they use more energy. Primary benefit of a programmable stat is convenience and remembering to do something that you might otherwise forget.
A manual stat works fine for people generally engaged w/ their living space (i.e. often there and willing to get out of bed and turn it up).
I'm sure these days there are other prog. stats that MAY be intuitive .... just not sure which one. White Rogers should make one, but I've little experience w/ them.
Thermostats
programmable or not consume very little energy. Just enough to power that little display....
OTOH, if you are claiming that systems operating with a programmable setback thermostat consume more energy to heat a space than those with manual setpoint thermostats, I'll have to disagree. While they will not save as much energy as claimed, they certainly cannot create or destroy energy and will not cause the load on a heating system to somehow increase as compared to a manual thermostat controlled system.
I would be interested in hearing the reasoning behind such a conclusion, if you'll share.
Since programmable stats are all about convenience ... they kick on BEFORE you get out of bed and BEFORE you get home from work. Manual stats (operated efficiently like when I was a kid) are turned up to setpoint WHEN you get up and WHEN you get home, not before. There in lies the savings of manual stats. I'm not criticizing prog stats, though, just stating the facts ... very good on convenience and forgetfullness, but not as good as [a properly run] manual in efficiency ... as a general rule.
I understand your point
that a meticulously operated manual thermostat (1 in a 1000, BTW) can make a system use less energy than a poorly programmed programmable.
IF I bought that everyone actually adjusted their manual thermostats to correspond with occupancy and activity, I would agree with you, but I do not. "Set it and forget it" is the common mode of operation. The "facts" you reference are a relatively narrow opinion or personal experience, not actually factual in many instances. I would also have to believe, that all of the automatron geniouses that do precisely set their thermostats up and down religiously, are somehow incapable of programming the thermostat to correspond to their actual activity and occupancy. pretty far fetched, my friend.
The whole premise behind programmable stats is that nobody but the RainMan would actually turn themselves into a human program to manually setback the temperature in the house on any regular basis. Convenience is not the primary use. Set the temperature to follow normal use and occupancy, thereby avoiding unnecessay "overheating" when everyone is snug in their beds or out and about.
For the average person, programmable thermosts do save energy. Whether that savings is significant depends on the habits of the homeowner(s).
Gee, and I would have thought you'd consider programmable thermostats to be a government conspiracy.
But my point was simply that IF you did monitor your thermostat manually and consistently, it is more efficient. When I was a kid, there really was no such thing as a programmable thermostat, and yes, we as a family and throughout our town would religiously turn our thermostats on/off as needed. My opinion isn't particulary narrow ... nor is my mind.
The fact is, programmable stats are convenience devices (respectfully so) for those who don't want to be bothered making manual adjustments and/or who like the notion of the house being warm when they get up in the morning or when they get home from work (not after). And those devices continue to work ... and use energy, even though you've decided to change your schedule and e.g. go out to dinner after work rather than return home.
I'm not belittling the value of the convenience nor advocating one over the other. I was simply commenting that programmable stats don't inherently save energy over a properly operated manual stat. Many people assume you need a programmable stat that somehow saves even more energy than simply turning the thermostat up/down as needed. There are many misconceptions about energy technologies that people still don't understand in a way to make effective decisions.
FYI ... back in 'the old days' ... many people were a "Rain Man".
The programmable is useful for systems (such as some hydronic systems) that have a long lag. The temp can be turned down at night and still be pleasant when people get up, and it can be turned way down when gone and still be pleasant when people return.
But I'd guess that most programmables are "flashing 12:00" conceptually if not literally -- most people don't use them. Partly it's because even the best are hard to program, but mostly it's because few families have such regular schedules that they can program in the occupancy times.
It would probably make more sense to use motion detectors or some such.
I've heard some claims that the programmables are more efficient because they maintain temperature more accurately, and therefore reduce the tendency to turn the thermostat up when one "feels a chill". (Not sure I believe this, though.) At the very least they reduce the tendency to have "binary" operation (such as my mother did), where the thermostat is either "off' or "on", and never allowed to reach set temp.
You know the
thermostat operating habits of all "throughout our town "?
Interesting. I remain skeptical, however, if you insist on having detailed knowledge of the temperature setting habits of a large number of people outside of your home, I have no knowledge to the contrary. I have no detailed knowlege of the habits of all of the people throught my town, but I do have a few decades of experience in the HVAC field, and it differs from yours.
This is all beside the point. Originally, I thought you were making the case that operting a system with a "setback", either by electronic or human prgramming, was inherently more energy consumptive than operating a system without. Less energy is consumed in a setback regime. We both agree on that.
Yeah, interesting what people used to small talk about around town when it was cold outside. Similar to Hank Hill ... yyyyuppp ... sip.
Seems if you are in the HVAC industry, you'd know the tendencies of your clientelle that you interact with ... or do you simply go in their houses and do it your way w/out any consideration for 'their tendencies'?
I'm certain your few decades of HVAC experience is different from my few decades HVAC experience. uh ... so?
And you apparently didn't read my original post well about the case I was making. Glad you got caught up!
There is a significant
difference in your "HVAC experience" and mine.
I know the operational habits of my customers, buidling owners and clients for whom I've created solutions to their problems and needs. I know because I asked them.
Hmmm ... You say that "I have
Hmmm ... You say that "I have no detailed knowlege of the habits of all of the people throught my town", but you do know about the detailed habits of your clients. While it is understood that you or I do not know the detailed habits of literally ALL the people in our respective communities, we do know a fair amount about a presumable relavant cross section of people ... our clients and our aquaintenances ... which is all I really could be construed to imply. So either you know or you don't know. Or maybe you do or don't depending on the slant you wish to place on your point of view.
This must be a language issue
because I stated that I know my clients and customers habits because I asked them and they told me. Not a presumption. Not a speculation. Not a misunderstanding. Not an inference from a small sample to a large population. It is a statement of fact. A report of actual events that took place. Questions were asked and answered. I did make the bold presumption that my customers and clients did not lie to me in their responses.
This is significantly different than the statement: "we as a family and throughout our town would religiously turn our thermostats on/off as needed". Your statment is based on a presumtive relative cross section of people and observations of your families activities. It is based on a very small sample of information, inference and speculation.
As I also clearly stated, our experience in the industry is significanlty different, and this example illustrates that very well.
Point of view are slanted?!? I can't believe that. You came from a town full of "rainmen"? I can believe that. Must be something in the water. Hinkley, California, right? (caution: the previous statements are not to be taken seriously!)
My experience is contradictory to your inference. You claim most people manually adjust their thermostat to a regular setback schedule (and therefore save energy compared to a programmable version). I claim that most people do not, but rather adjust their manual thermostats as the feel uncomfortable, leaving a great deal more potential energy savings to be had should one choose to upgrade.
If you were to scrutinize the information one had from interviews vs from inference, which would hold more credence?
Thanks for the entertainment.
Have a Happy and Safe New Year!
We're digressing a bit here with the mud slinging. I respect your point of view and don't really disagree w/ it as I mentioned. In my experience, just because you ask a question, doesn't mean you get an honest answer. Couching questions in the right manner to get an honest answer is part of what I have to do to sleuth out true problems. But I'll assume you got relevant information. Doesn't really matter.
My sample of information is probably no bigger, smaller, or less relevant than yours ... unless you did a structured sampling, which I presume you did not. All of this doesn't really matter ... my comment was a casual comment about some of my [old] observations.
I did NOT claim that most people do adjust their manual stats religiously ... I claim, that as I grew up ... before programmable stats were even available, that it was not unusual for people to regularly adjust their stats in a manner that effectively provided minimal energy use. If that stat was replaced by a programmable stat to ensure comfort conditions prior to rising in the morning and going to sleep at night, it would result in higher energy use. There are plenty of people that adhere to such a rain man lifestyle ... which is why I made the comment in the first place ... I may have detected that maybe the reference person may already have a propensity to do so.
And again ... a programmable stat does not accomodate the change of plans/schedule when you are away from home.
Whether I'm tuned into a cross section or whether that cross section of population is necessarily even relevant still doesn't matter.
My original statement holds true ... a programmable stat is primarily a convenience ... one which I feel is normally a very worthwhile convenience. A manual stat adjusted regularly (as in when I rise and when I return/go to bed) will provide more efficiency. Neither statement has anything to do really with what a cross section of the population did or did not do or may or may not do today. And neither statement makes me push one approach over the other.
Programmable stats that aren't particularly intuitive for the users, are often worthless I've found and are actually worse than having a manual stat. And there are plenty of these around. I don't know what it is ... they make them complex and confusing because they think complex is viewed as 'better' or some such BS. That certainly doesn't promote efficiency. But it doesn't reduce my feelings about the value of programmable stats which, contrary to what you might think, is actually for programmable stats ... because I place a high value on convenience and consistency ... and yes people can forget.
Enough
of this sidebar. We have beat this horse to death severla times over. I really don't care.
Have a Happy New Year.
+1 for Honeywell
But, be sure you have a model suitable for STEAM heat. Most are good for forced air or hot water, which is not the same as STEAM. If it doesn't say steam on the package, read the instructions. If no setup for steam, keep looking.
This is due to the number of heating cycles per hour. One good idea, find someone who services steam boilers and ask them for a suggestion. Or, try the HVAC site "The Wall" for advice.
Good luck.