|
Home > Archive > Home Repair forum > February 2006 > Smarter Programmable Thermostat?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Smarter Programmable Thermostat?
|
|
|
| Are there any thermostats (any type) that are smart enough not to
turn on the heat at 10:55 when they are programmed to set back at
11:00? It seems wasteful and hard on the equipment to do so.
Also for heat pump thermostats, are there any out there that will
not activate stage 2 (electric aux heat) during normal setback
recovery. If it is 45 degrees outside, I don't want the aux heat
immediately coming on every morning just because the thermostat
is set to warm the house to the morning temp setting.
| |
|
|
| trader4@optonline.net 2006-02-23, 4:21 am |
|
buffalobill wrote:
> http://www.honeywell-thermostat.com...-thermostat.htm
The honeywell touchscreen models are also fully programmable and I
believe will solve problem number 2. Not sure if any solve #1 though.
But, I don't think #1 is that big of deal. If the heat comes on 10
mins before the setback, all that means is the house will have a little
extra heat, so the heat won't need to come back on for a little longer
during the setback. In essence, it means the setback period could
have been 10 mins longer, but that diff is so small it's not going to
amount to anything really.
| |
| Bubba 2006-02-23, 10:21 am |
| On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:10:28 -0500, John <john@no.spam> wrote:
>Are there any thermostats (any type) that are smart enough not to
>turn on the heat at 10:55 when they are programmed to set back at
>11:00? It seems wasteful and hard on the equipment to do so.
>
>Also for heat pump thermostats, are there any out there that will
>not activate stage 2 (electric aux heat) during normal setback
>recovery. If it is 45 degrees outside, I don't want the aux heat
>immediately coming on every morning just because the thermostat
>is set to warm the house to the morning temp setting.
Plenty of them out there. Honeywell, White-Rogers, etc. You just have
to stop buying that cheapo stuff for $40. Get a real stat. Upwards of
$100 and a 5 yr warranty.
Bubba
| |
| dnoyeB 2006-02-23, 11:21 am |
| John wrote:
> Are there any thermostats (any type) that are smart enough not to
> turn on the heat at 10:55 when they are programmed to set back at
> 11:00? It seems wasteful and hard on the equipment to do so.
>
> Also for heat pump thermostats, are there any out there that will
> not activate stage 2 (electric aux heat) during normal setback
> recovery. If it is 45 degrees outside, I don't want the aux heat
> immediately coming on every morning just because the thermostat
> is set to warm the house to the morning temp setting.
>
White-Rodgers. It can turn on or off this feature. Also it can turn on
fan full time during certain periods. In summer I leave my fan on all
night, but not during day. raises humidity in house, but it costs less.
--
Thank you,
"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor
man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard." Ecclesiastes 9:16
| |
| edlisal@hotmail.com 2006-02-23, 11:21 am |
| John wrote:
>
> Also for heat pump thermostats, are there any out there that will
> not activate stage 2 (electric aux heat) during normal setback
> recovery. If it is 45 degrees outside, I don't want the aux heat
> immediately coming on every morning just because the thermostat
> is set to warm the house to the morning temp setting.
I have a Honeywell CT3611R that I use with my heat pump. It has "Smart
Response Technology" that turns the heat pump on early so that it
gradually reaches the target temperature by the time you program
without using the strip heater. It has been a huge savings for me.
You can see one at:
http://todaysconcept.com/honeywell-...?ROITrakid=1790
I'm sure you can search and find one cheaper also. I have to say that
I bought mine on E-bay for around $22. It was new in the package and
has worked great for 2 years now.
HTH,
Lisa
| |
| Goedjn 2006-02-23, 2:21 pm |
| On 22 Feb 2006 23:49:46 -0800, trader4@optonline.net wrote:
>
>buffalobill wrote:
>
>
>The honeywell touchscreen models are also fully programmable and I
>believe will solve problem number 2. Not sure if any solve #1 though.
>
>But, I don't think #1 is that big of deal. If the heat comes on 10
>mins before the setback, all that means is the house will have a little
>extra heat, so the heat won't need to come back on for a little longer
>during the setback. In essence, it means the setback period could
>have been 10 mins longer, but that diff is so small it's not going to
>amount to anything really.
And, in fact, having a thermostat that's smart enough not to come
on within 10 minutes of the set-back period is *EXACTLY* equivilent
to setting the set-back period 10 minutes earlier.
| |
| Tomes 2006-02-24, 12:21 am |
|
"John" <john@no.spam> wrote in message news:43FD43C4.C41018AB@no.spam...
> Are there any thermostats (any type) that are smart enough not to
> turn on the heat at 10:55 when they are programmed to set back at
> 11:00? It seems wasteful and hard on the equipment to do so.
>
In this case I would just set it for 10:55. The time set is when the
instruction changes.
Tomes
| |
|
| On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 03:52:23 GMT, "Tomes" <askme@here.net> wrote:
>
>"John" <john@no.spam> wrote in message news:43FD43C4.C41018AB@no.spam...
>
>In this case I would just set it for 10:55. The time set is when the
>instruction changes.
>Tomes
I think you missing the problem as that doesn't solve anything.
Regardless of what the time the change is set he is trying to find a stat
that is smart enough to avoid a 2 or 3 minute truncated "on" cycle at the
end of a program period by anticipating the pending change.
Using made up numbers, the stat would only come on if it could get a full
10 minute or longer "on" cycle, So while the program setting changes at
11:00, the latest the unit would come on would be 10: 50. If the unit was
already running at 10:50 it would continue to run as long a necesary up to
11:00. If the unit was off at 10:50 it would anticipate the 11:00 change
and would not start an "on" cycle..
| |
| Tomes 2006-02-24, 12:21 pm |
| "LDC" <ldcolton@san.spamblocker.com> wrote in message
news:ck7tv1l2c05qu87cv4p03qfal2hftn902s@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 03:52:23 GMT, "Tomes" <askme@here.net> wrote:
>
>
> I think you missing the problem as that doesn't solve anything.
> Regardless of what the time the change is set he is trying to find a stat
> that is smart enough to avoid a 2 or 3 minute truncated "on" cycle at the
> end of a program period by anticipating the pending change.
>
> Using made up numbers, the stat would only come on if it could get a full
> 10 minute or longer "on" cycle, So while the program setting changes at
> 11:00, the latest the unit would come on would be 10: 50. If the unit was
> already running at 10:50 it would continue to run as long a necesary up to
> 11:00. If the unit was off at 10:50 it would anticipate the 11:00 change
> and would not start an "on" cycle..
>
>
..... and this is exactly the same as setting it to 10:50. Really, it is.
The same things are happening at the same times.
Tomes
| |
|
| On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:46:34 GMT, "Tomes" <askme@here.net> wrote:
>
>.... and this is exactly the same as setting it to 10:50. Really, it is.
>The same things are happening at the same times.
>Tomes
Of course it is not the same as moving the shut off time up 10 minutes..
Because now you get the short cycle at 10:47. OP wants to avoid the
unnecessary short cycle, not move it earlier.
| |
| Mark Lloyd 2006-02-24, 3:21 pm |
| On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:46:34 GMT, "Tomes" <askme@here.net> wrote:
>"LDC" <ldcolton@san.spamblocker.com> wrote in message
>news:ck7tv1l2c05qu87cv4p03qfal2hftn902s@4ax.com...
>
>.... and this is exactly the same as setting it to 10:50. Really, it is.
>The same things are happening at the same times.
>Tomes
>
For some strange reason, a lot of people seem to think they've solved
a problem when they've just pushed it around a little.
That could go on forever, and you're no closer to a solution.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
| |
| Mark Lloyd 2006-02-24, 3:21 pm |
| On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:33:14 GMT, LDC <ldcolton@san.spamblocker.com>
wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:46:34 GMT, "Tomes" <askme@here.net> wrote:
>
>
>Of course it is not the same as moving the shut off time up 10 minutes..
>Because now you get the short cycle at 10:47. OP wants to avoid the
>unnecessary short cycle, not move it earlier.
My thermostat (a RCS remote-controllable unit) avoids short cycles,
but in a slightly different way. It just does not turn off the heat
until a minimum time has expired. This may cause it to run a little
past the setback time. It also assures the minimum off-time for an AC
compressor.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
| |
|
| Goedjn wrote:
> On 22 Feb 2006 23:49:46 -0800, trader4@optonline.net wrote:
>
>
> And, in fact, having a thermostat that's smart enough not to come
> on within 10 minutes of the set-back period is *EXACTLY* equivilent
> to setting the set-back period 10 minutes earlier.
No it's not, since you don't know when the last cycle will begin. In other
words, if you set the set-back time 10 minutes earlier, that wouldn't
prevent the thermostat from calling for heat one minute before that. What
I'm looking for is either the thermostat not calling for a new heat cycle if
it's within x minutes of the setback time, or keeping the equipment on for a
minimum cycle time, even if that means continuing to operate for a little
while after setback time.
| |
|
|
"Bubba <" wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:10:28 -0500, John <john@no.spam> wrote:
>
>
> Plenty of them out there. Honeywell, White-Rogers, etc. You just have
> to stop buying that cheapo stuff for $40. Get a real stat. Upwards of
> $100 and a 5 yr warranty.
>
For question #2 (the heat pump question) the thermostat in place IS a
Honeywell, specifically model # 8611. Another unit in the same house has
a similar thermostat except that it is branded as Lennox. In either case
when the morning/evening recovery time begins, the Stage 2 (Aux electric
heat) comes on too, which sharply increases operating costs
unnecessarily. Perhaps Honeywell should be added to the cheapo stuff
list? I believe the 8611 cost well over 100, they were installed by the
contractor when the HP units (the whole business) were replaced.
| |
|
| dnoyeB wrote:
> John wrote:
>
> White-Rodgers. It can turn on or off this feature. Also it can turn on
> fan full time during certain periods. In summer I leave my fan on all
> night, but not during day. raises humidity in house, but it costs less.
Sounds good! What model # do you have? I like the programmable fan feature.
| |
|
| edlisal@hotmail.com wrote:
> John wrote:
>
>
> I have a Honeywell CT3611R that I use with my heat pump. It has "Smart
> Response Technology" that turns the heat pump on early so that it
> gradually reaches the target temperature by the time you program
> without using the strip heater. It has been a huge savings for me.
> You can see one at:
>
> http://todaysconcept.com/honeywell-...?ROITrakid=1790
>
> I'm sure you can search and find one cheaper also. I have to say that
> I bought mine on E-bay for around $22. It was new in the package and
> has worked great for 2 years now.
I'll look into that model. I once used the single stage CT3600 (same series I think) for
a gas boiler operation. One thing I liked about it was that it kept a daily and a
resetable log of the time the system operates. The Honeywell 8611 has the "smart response
technology" too, but it doesn't seem smart in my case.
| |
|
|
Tomes wrote:
> "John" <john@no.spam> wrote in message news:43FD43C4.C41018AB@no.spam...
>
> In this case I would just set it for 10:55. The time set is when the
> instruction changes.
That's great, but that's not what I'm looking for, since a call for heat at
10:54 is the exact same scenario in your case. The exact time of the
setback isn't important, prevening an unnecessary short cycle by turning on
just before setback time is.
| |
|
| Tomes wrote:
> "LDC" <ldcolton@san.spamblocker.com> wrote in message
> news:ck7tv1l2c05qu87cv4p03qfal2hftn902s@4ax.com...
>
> .... and this is exactly the same as setting it to 10:50. Really, it is.
> The same things are happening at the same times.
No it's not, because the thermostat calling for heat at 10:49 with a setback
time of 10:50 is the same issue. The time of day isn't important, preventing
the unnecessary short cycle is.
| |
|
| buffalobill wrote:
> John wrote:
>
rmostat is set to warm the house to the morning temp setting.[color=darkred]
> http://www.honeywell-thermostat.com...-thermostat.htm
Fascinating, because that's exactly the model that prompted my
question! The house has one Honeywell 8611g and one Lennox branded
Honeywell thermostat that looks to be the exact same thing. (I'm not
sure if the Lennox branded one has any additional features, doesn't
appear to and the instructions are very basic). In both cases a normal
setback recovery causes the AUX heat to come on, which consumes a lot of
energy unnecessarily (and also ramps up the fan to the noisy high
setting).
| |
|
| "John" <john@no.spam> wrote in message news:43FFCEA3.C8DE2357@no.spam...
> Tomes wrote:
>
> That's great, but that's not what I'm looking for, since a call for heat
> at
> 10:54 is the exact same scenario in your case. The exact time of the
> setback isn't important, prevening an unnecessary short cycle by turning
> on
> just before setback time is.
Oh - OK. I see now, it is the short cycle thing. My bad for not picking up
on that. Now that I see the issue. I think this is a really good idea for
the reasons that everyone is discussing here.
Sorry about that folks.
Tomes
| |
| export@twowinstone.com 2006-02-26, 12:28 pm |
| CHINA TWOWIN STONE COMPANY EXPORT Granite Counter Tops,Kitchen
Granite,Bathroom Counter Top,Granite Kitchen Island,Bar Counter
Top,Bathroom Counter Tops,Vanity Counter Top,Granite Tiles & Marble
Tiles,Granite Tiles,Marble Tiles,Granite Slab & Marble Slab,Granite
Slab,Marble Slab,Tub Surround ,Bath Tub Surround,Stone Wall Panel,Stone
Wall Tiles,Window Sills,Window Stool,Stepping Stone,China Stepping
Stone,Paving Stone http://www.china-stone-export.com
| |
|
| On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:10:28 -0500, someone wrote:
>Are there any thermostats (any type) that are smart enough not to
>turn on the heat at 10:55 when they are programmed to set back at
>11:00? It seems wasteful and hard on the equipment to do so.
>
So make your setback 10:55. No wait then it might come on at 10:50.
So make your setback 10:50. No wait.....
Reply to NG only - this e.mail address goes to a kill file.
| |
| Keith Williams 2006-02-27, 3:21 pm |
| In article <44033871.10476768@news.verizon.net>,
vze8f3tq@verizon.net says...
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:10:28 -0500, someone wrote:
>
> So make your setback 10:55. No wait then it might come on at 10:50.
> So make your setback 10:50. No wait.....
So if it wants to come on at 10:50, let it but don't shut it down
until 11:00. If it wants heat at 10:55, don't bother.
Or if the thermostat demands heat at 10:59:59, turn the heat on,
but run it for X minutes even if the setback occurs.
If the point is to prevent short-cycles, either of the above would
do it. If the point is to save energy, set it back at noon. ;-)
--
Keith
| |
| Goedjn 2006-02-27, 5:21 pm |
| On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:21:15 -0500, Keith XXXXXXXX <krw@att.bizzzz>
wrote:
>In article <44033871.10476768@news.verizon.net>,
>vze8f3tq@verizon.net says...
>
>So if it wants to come on at 10:50, let it but don't shut it down
>until 11:00. If it wants heat at 10:55, don't bother.
>
>Or if the thermostat demands heat at 10:59:59, turn the heat on,
>but run it for X minutes even if the setback occurs.
>
>If the point is to prevent short-cycles, either of the above would
>do it. If the point is to save energy, set it back at noon. ;-)
Even if the furnace is running almost continuously, this in
only going to save you 1 extra start/stop cycle a day,
during the heating season. What's the point of even
worrying about it?
| |
| Mark Lloyd 2006-02-27, 8:21 pm |
| On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:11:12 -0500, Goedjn <prose@mail.uri.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:21:15 -0500, Keith XXXXXXXX <krw@att.bizzzz>
>wrote:
>
>
>Even if the furnace is running almost continuously, this in
>only going to save you 1 extra start/stop cycle a day,
>during the heating season. What's the point of even
>worrying about it?
>
>
>
>
>
>
I know about the problem with short OFF periods (with a compressor).
What's the problem with short ON periods?
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
| |
| trader4@optonline.net 2006-02-28, 9:21 am |
|
Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:11:12 -0500, Goedjn <prose@mail.uri.edu> wrote:
>
>
> I know about the problem with short OFF periods (with a compressor).
> What's the problem with short ON periods?
Well, too short of an off period for a compressor is obviously worse.
But, I think what he's worrying about is that short cycles for just
about any heating system are less efficient than longer ones. In his
case, the heat pumps will draw more current during start up and
probably doesn't reach peak efficiency for a couple of minutes.
Even a simple system like gas fired forced air has short cycle issues.
Every time it cycles, some energy is wasted at the end, where the
blower shuts down, but some heat still remains to be lost up the flue.
It doesn't likely really amounts to all that much if it happens on
average less than once a day, but it's still there.
> --
> Mark Lloyd
> http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
>
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
| |
| Keith Williams 2006-02-28, 10:21 am |
| In article <5nm602h5a0a3mu2m3694uh7361g3mei433@4ax.com>,
prose@mail.uri.edu says...
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:21:15 -0500, Keith XXXXXXXX <krw@att.bizzzz>
> wrote:
>
>
> Even if the furnace is running almost continuously, this in
> only going to save you 1 extra start/stop cycle a day,
> during the heating season. What's the point of even
> worrying about it?
A short cycle may be very hard on equipment (compressors?). It may
be better allowing a "full" cycle before setting back the
thermostat.
--
Keith
| |
| Keith Williams 2006-02-28, 1:38 pm |
| In article <1141131929.808705.229520@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,
trader4@optonline.net says...
>
> Mark Lloyd wrote:
>
>
> Well, too short of an off period for a compressor is obviously worse.
> But, I think what he's worrying about is that short cycles for just
> about any heating system are less efficient than longer ones. In his
> case, the heat pumps will draw more current during start up and
> probably doesn't reach peak efficiency for a couple of minutes.
>
> Even a simple system like gas fired forced air has short cycle issues.
> Every time it cycles, some energy is wasted at the end, where the
> blower shuts down, but some heat still remains to be lost up the flue.
> It doesn't likely really amounts to all that much if it happens on
> average less than once a day, but it's still there.
>
There may be an issue on the other end too (perhaps more so). If
the thermostat is just about to be set higher and the heat is
already on, keep it in longer to avoid a short "off" cycle and
increase efficiency.
--
Keith
|
|
|
|
|