Let's ask Bud what he meant with that statement.
First, some info about changes in washing machines
- Thread starter peterh770
- Start date
Help Support :
Well, yes, I should clarify.
A Top loading H/A washer doesn't have the boot that a traditional front loader has, so there's nothing to collect mold, mildew and other yucky things.
If they designed the rubber seal on the sliding door at the top of a Top loading H/A machine correctly, it shouldn't collect water.
It is my understanding that a Top loading H/A washer can have bearings on both sides of the tub instead of a front loader which can only have one at the rear of the tub. In theory, two bearings sharing the weight and G forces of the tub should provide better reliability.
Now, in saying this, I don't personally own one of these machines, so I don't know exactly what other peoples experiences are. So far, all I've heard are the problems Staber machines have, which isn't encouraging.
Apparently, Staber machines apparently suffer bearing failures just as often as normal front load machines, so maybe they only just have one tub bearing?
I apologize for the confusion.
So, Why are these style of machines not that popular anyway, when in theory it would be a perfection of tumble-style agitation technology?
A Top loading H/A washer doesn't have the boot that a traditional front loader has, so there's nothing to collect mold, mildew and other yucky things.
If they designed the rubber seal on the sliding door at the top of a Top loading H/A machine correctly, it shouldn't collect water.
It is my understanding that a Top loading H/A washer can have bearings on both sides of the tub instead of a front loader which can only have one at the rear of the tub. In theory, two bearings sharing the weight and G forces of the tub should provide better reliability.
Now, in saying this, I don't personally own one of these machines, so I don't know exactly what other peoples experiences are. So far, all I've heard are the problems Staber machines have, which isn't encouraging.
Apparently, Staber machines apparently suffer bearing failures just as often as normal front load machines, so maybe they only just have one tub bearing?
I apologize for the confusion.
So, Why are these style of machines not that popular anyway, when in theory it would be a perfection of tumble-style agitation technology?
arbilab
Well-known member
TL HA was/is a staple of very-large volume commercial laundries. However, I've seen firsthand 50# FL HA commercial machines and they go as high as 150#. Just for fun, call the Bellagio hotel in Las Vegas, ask for the laundry, and see what they use.
Look at the biggest Unimacs, they are all hugely expanded versions of a home FL. But then look at the biggest Wascomats. They are another beast yet. H axis, double bearing, trapdoor loading, but they load from the front nonetheless. No home machine works this way.
Hypothetically, the bearing loads are lower when the tub is supported at both ends. But don't you just know, that consumer manufacturers use that advantage to reduce the bearing integrity and cost rather than increase the reliability.
Look at the biggest Unimacs, they are all hugely expanded versions of a home FL. But then look at the biggest Wascomats. They are another beast yet. H axis, double bearing, trapdoor loading, but they load from the front nonetheless. No home machine works this way.
Hypothetically, the bearing loads are lower when the tub is supported at both ends. But don't you just know, that consumer manufacturers use that advantage to reduce the bearing integrity and cost rather than increase the reliability.
dj-gabriele
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,685
Here in Italy around 10-15% of all the sales orignates from top loading (horizontal axis ) machines.
We even have top loanding dryers and washer dryers.
In theory, as Arbilab said, the TLHA machines can be more reliable than front loading, because of the double bearing structure but in reality they are not as they are mechanically more complex!
Think of the double door and the opening on the side of the drum or the auto return mechanism to have the drum always ready in position (no new machine lacks this mechanism).
Staber machines looks interesting but they're hugely water wasteful (because of their werid washing drum) compared to their European counterpart and I too read that they're very failure prone.
Plus they have short wash cycles and a wimpy extraction speed. Too bad for a good concept gone bad.
Anyway I wouldn't ever get a machine where I can't see the clothes tumbling.
We even have top loanding dryers and washer dryers.
In theory, as Arbilab said, the TLHA machines can be more reliable than front loading, because of the double bearing structure but in reality they are not as they are mechanically more complex!
Think of the double door and the opening on the side of the drum or the auto return mechanism to have the drum always ready in position (no new machine lacks this mechanism).
Staber machines looks interesting but they're hugely water wasteful (because of their werid washing drum) compared to their European counterpart and I too read that they're very failure prone.
Plus they have short wash cycles and a wimpy extraction speed. Too bad for a good concept gone bad.
Anyway I wouldn't ever get a machine where I can't see the clothes tumbling.
ronhic
Well-known member
Not popular...
From a European perspective, probably because they can't be built under a bench or integrated into a kitchen....
From an Australian perspective, there has only been one or two sold here...both were expensive and had a smaller capacity AND lower spin speed than was expected for the money.
I've used a Baukneckt in Germany some years ago that would have been at least 15 years old - lovely brown beast it was....relatively quiet, cleaned well and had provided my partners grandmother faultless service.
From a European perspective, probably because they can't be built under a bench or integrated into a kitchen....
From an Australian perspective, there has only been one or two sold here...both were expensive and had a smaller capacity AND lower spin speed than was expected for the money.
I've used a Baukneckt in Germany some years ago that would have been at least 15 years old - lovely brown beast it was....relatively quiet, cleaned well and had provided my partners grandmother faultless service.
launderess
Well-known member
Long Before H-Axis Washers That Were Front Loading
For both commercial and even domestic use had top loading H-Axis washers. Heck I've seen photo's and also are included in my vintage laundry manuals are models with tubs made from wood.
The advantage is was easy to see then in that such *pony* washers didn't require water tight seals the way modern front loaders do today.
As for modern "pocket" washers (large H-Axis washers are often divided into compartments beneath the bonnet),the advantages are easy to see.
First such machines are easier to load and unload than a similar sized front loader with a boot, especially as one goes up in capacity weight.
For commercial laundries in hospitals and or those that frequently do infected/hospital linen these units can be built into a wall where one has a clean and dirty side.
Despite their advantages top loading "H-Axis" washers have had limited market penetration in Europe and are virtually nil on this side of the pond except for Staber.
One big drawback is that once one goes over a certain capacity the drum must switch to a side to side design. This would be fine for a small washer but to handle large loads you're likely looking at a unit whose cabinet won't fit the standard 24" (or whatever it is) width of American top loading washing machines.
With toploading H-Axis washers of a small size such as those sold in Europe by Miele and others the drum is recessed and thus one has a flat surface. By nature *pony* washers have drums/tubs that are raised and covered over. This means giving up that flat surface. Now one could lower the tubs but that means for a washer of any decent capacity (to compete with the 18 or pounds an Amercian top loader holds), but then you are going to have a very deep tub with perhaps a small opening. Not something your average Mrs. American housewife may relish on laundry day trying to fetch out items from the bottom of the tub.
For both commercial and even domestic use had top loading H-Axis washers. Heck I've seen photo's and also are included in my vintage laundry manuals are models with tubs made from wood.
The advantage is was easy to see then in that such *pony* washers didn't require water tight seals the way modern front loaders do today.
As for modern "pocket" washers (large H-Axis washers are often divided into compartments beneath the bonnet),the advantages are easy to see.
First such machines are easier to load and unload than a similar sized front loader with a boot, especially as one goes up in capacity weight.
For commercial laundries in hospitals and or those that frequently do infected/hospital linen these units can be built into a wall where one has a clean and dirty side.
Despite their advantages top loading "H-Axis" washers have had limited market penetration in Europe and are virtually nil on this side of the pond except for Staber.
One big drawback is that once one goes over a certain capacity the drum must switch to a side to side design. This would be fine for a small washer but to handle large loads you're likely looking at a unit whose cabinet won't fit the standard 24" (or whatever it is) width of American top loading washing machines.
With toploading H-Axis washers of a small size such as those sold in Europe by Miele and others the drum is recessed and thus one has a flat surface. By nature *pony* washers have drums/tubs that are raised and covered over. This means giving up that flat surface. Now one could lower the tubs but that means for a washer of any decent capacity (to compete with the 18 or pounds an Amercian top loader holds), but then you are going to have a very deep tub with perhaps a small opening. Not something your average Mrs. American housewife may relish on laundry day trying to fetch out items from the bottom of the tub.
haxisfan
Well-known member
18 Pounds American Washer... that's about 8kg right?
Hi there... sorry for butting in... first congratulations to 'Launderess' for your profile picture showing my favourite actress of all times... Patricia Rout... I mean Mrs Bouquet!
You were mentioning 18 pounds TL H-Axis washers and... on condition that my conversion skills didn't betray me, it should be equivalent to approx 8 kilograms, which is the capacity of the 40cm TL featured in the link below from 'Hoover'. I don't have any experience with these machines but I find it hard to imagine such a huge drum in a confined space 40cm wide. It must have a larger diameter drum... meaning the user must be provided with very stretchy arms and a very solid backbone to unload this machine!
I agree with what 'arbilab' was saying about the reliability issue that might affect this kind of washers... the type of construction suggests they are sturdier and less susceptible to bearings failures compared to FLs but it's not necessarily the case. Have you seen the size of the bearings used on TLHAs and the flimsiness of their spider? If they had the same bearings assembly of a front loader on both sides of the tub, then yes... they would be indestructible!
Hi there... sorry for butting in... first congratulations to 'Launderess' for your profile picture showing my favourite actress of all times... Patricia Rout... I mean Mrs Bouquet!
You were mentioning 18 pounds TL H-Axis washers and... on condition that my conversion skills didn't betray me, it should be equivalent to approx 8 kilograms, which is the capacity of the 40cm TL featured in the link below from 'Hoover'. I don't have any experience with these machines but I find it hard to imagine such a huge drum in a confined space 40cm wide. It must have a larger diameter drum... meaning the user must be provided with very stretchy arms and a very solid backbone to unload this machine!
I agree with what 'arbilab' was saying about the reliability issue that might affect this kind of washers... the type of construction suggests they are sturdier and less susceptible to bearings failures compared to FLs but it's not necessarily the case. Have you seen the size of the bearings used on TLHAs and the flimsiness of their spider? If they had the same bearings assembly of a front loader on both sides of the tub, then yes... they would be indestructible!
Let me tune in here...
As a well known Topload H-axis lover I guess I can add my two cents here.
I guess you can say that each design is as good as it's execution (is that good english? lol). It's the way you build them, not the design itself that makes it good.
Topload H-axis machines have their own quirks and their own advantages.
Rubber gasket: They don't need a rubber gasket when there is an extra lid on the outer tub. My Philips has three lids, one in the inner drum, one in the outer drum and one on top of the machine. It doesn't need a gasket because the outer drum is closed by that second lid.
Two bearings: Not all toploaders have two bearings. Miele uses only one, just as in their frontloaders. The drum is only on one side mounted to the machine.
Miele did this because they claimed that it solved the problem of two bearings getting out of line. Apparently it was possible that the bearings got out of alignment in a severe off balance situation or so. Frontloaders would not have a problem with this.
Capacity: In a way topload h-axis machines use the cabinet space more efficiently. That's why for a long time the smaller h-axis machines had about the same capacity as the frontloaders. European frontloaders have a foot print of 60 x 60cm. Toploaders are usually 60 x 40 or 45cm. I'm waiting for a manufacturer to come with a toploader with a 60 x 60cm footprint, the capacity could be bigger than a same sized frontloader.
I told here before that Whirlpool still has an H-axis design on the shelf. Apparently they chose to make the V-axis HE toploaders over the H-axis design. It was explained to me that the H-axis with the two or three lids would be too complicted for the American consumers. I don't know if this would be true, we will never know I guess.
Yes, such a machine will be deep, but the big HE toploaders now on the market have deep tubs as well.
Here's the Whirlpool design again.
As a well known Topload H-axis lover I guess I can add my two cents here.
I guess you can say that each design is as good as it's execution (is that good english? lol). It's the way you build them, not the design itself that makes it good.
Topload H-axis machines have their own quirks and their own advantages.
Rubber gasket: They don't need a rubber gasket when there is an extra lid on the outer tub. My Philips has three lids, one in the inner drum, one in the outer drum and one on top of the machine. It doesn't need a gasket because the outer drum is closed by that second lid.
Two bearings: Not all toploaders have two bearings. Miele uses only one, just as in their frontloaders. The drum is only on one side mounted to the machine.
Miele did this because they claimed that it solved the problem of two bearings getting out of line. Apparently it was possible that the bearings got out of alignment in a severe off balance situation or so. Frontloaders would not have a problem with this.
Capacity: In a way topload h-axis machines use the cabinet space more efficiently. That's why for a long time the smaller h-axis machines had about the same capacity as the frontloaders. European frontloaders have a foot print of 60 x 60cm. Toploaders are usually 60 x 40 or 45cm. I'm waiting for a manufacturer to come with a toploader with a 60 x 60cm footprint, the capacity could be bigger than a same sized frontloader.
I told here before that Whirlpool still has an H-axis design on the shelf. Apparently they chose to make the V-axis HE toploaders over the H-axis design. It was explained to me that the H-axis with the two or three lids would be too complicted for the American consumers. I don't know if this would be true, we will never know I guess.
Yes, such a machine will be deep, but the big HE toploaders now on the market have deep tubs as well.
Here's the Whirlpool design again.
launderess
Well-known member
Interesting Machine
You can read more about the Hoover here:
Yes, 8kg runs about 18lbs (or 17.6 closer to be exact)so compared to a standard European "top loader" this washer holds more.
However as stated above and as with all H=Axis washer to increase capacity there are several options; increase diameter and or depth of the tub.
Considering the small and rather narrow opening of most top loading H-Axis washers like the Hoover it may not be up every woman's street to go digging down into the bowels of the washer to fetch laundry.
You can read more about the Hoover here:
Yes, 8kg runs about 18lbs (or 17.6 closer to be exact)so compared to a standard European "top loader" this washer holds more.
However as stated above and as with all H=Axis washer to increase capacity there are several options; increase diameter and or depth of the tub.
Considering the small and rather narrow opening of most top loading H-Axis washers like the Hoover it may not be up every woman's street to go digging down into the bowels of the washer to fetch laundry.
launderess
Well-known member
Should Like To Make Something Clear
Federal goverment in the United States did *not* regulate and or otherwise control phosphates or laundry/dishwasher appliance design directly.
Rather they used the Clean Water Act to get states to reduce pollution entering waterways. States could have chosen to build and or improve waste treatment plants to deal with phosphates but that cost is quite dear. Given how cash strapped most states are at the moment it would have been a tough sell especially with residents voting *no* to anything or anyone that increases their taxes. So the easier route was to simply ban the stuff.
Since most detergent manufacturers by and large have stopped regional production and now use central plants for a good area of the country making phosphate versus non-phosphate to suit various markets was by and large a no go. Such things are expensive and with the detergent market mature and declining there isn't much incentive.
As for water use of washing machines and dishwashers again the federal government hasnt' laid down any laws. Whirlpool or anyone else is perfectly free to design and produce *water hog* washing machines or dishwashers. However then they will loose out on all that Energy Star money not to mention potential sales. The government and consumer groups have done quite a good job in getting people to look for and purchase ES rated appliances. Thus one wonders how well a unit without such a label would do in the market place. Again with the domestic appliance market being a mature one for quite some time, there just isn't that much interest in spending huge amounts on R&D that may not be recouped.
Federal goverment in the United States did *not* regulate and or otherwise control phosphates or laundry/dishwasher appliance design directly.
Rather they used the Clean Water Act to get states to reduce pollution entering waterways. States could have chosen to build and or improve waste treatment plants to deal with phosphates but that cost is quite dear. Given how cash strapped most states are at the moment it would have been a tough sell especially with residents voting *no* to anything or anyone that increases their taxes. So the easier route was to simply ban the stuff.
Since most detergent manufacturers by and large have stopped regional production and now use central plants for a good area of the country making phosphate versus non-phosphate to suit various markets was by and large a no go. Such things are expensive and with the detergent market mature and declining there isn't much incentive.
As for water use of washing machines and dishwashers again the federal government hasnt' laid down any laws. Whirlpool or anyone else is perfectly free to design and produce *water hog* washing machines or dishwashers. However then they will loose out on all that Energy Star money not to mention potential sales. The government and consumer groups have done quite a good job in getting people to look for and purchase ES rated appliances. Thus one wonders how well a unit without such a label would do in the market place. Again with the domestic appliance market being a mature one for quite some time, there just isn't that much interest in spending huge amounts on R&D that may not be recouped.
Post# 560544, Reply# 27 12/1/2011 at 03:46 by ronhic
Chris, many Korean-made front-loaders like my Samsung are slightly DEEPER than most US machines, with very few exceptions. Same goes for the height, my Samsung is about 2+inches higher than our old Kenmore TL.(look at my photo) The Electrolux FL I had for a month last year before I sent it back, was a bit higher than most every North American-made machines. As far as width, most every front-loader sold here today is about 27" wide, the "standard" wahser/dryer width. Whirlpool-made brands still have many machines of the old-fashioned 29" conventional-type dryers, with drying systems to match!
Chris, many Korean-made front-loaders like my Samsung are slightly DEEPER than most US machines, with very few exceptions. Same goes for the height, my Samsung is about 2+inches higher than our old Kenmore TL.(look at my photo) The Electrolux FL I had for a month last year before I sent it back, was a bit higher than most every North American-made machines. As far as width, most every front-loader sold here today is about 27" wide, the "standard" wahser/dryer width. Whirlpool-made brands still have many machines of the old-fashioned 29" conventional-type dryers, with drying systems to match!
"Asko is made by Electrolux"
No, it isn't and never has been. Asko is owned by Gorenje, see link.
http://www.gorenjegroup.com/en/awards/red_dot_design_award/red_dot_design_award_2011/asko
No, it isn't and never has been. Asko is owned by Gorenje, see link.
http://www.gorenjegroup.com/en/awards/red_dot_design_award/red_dot_design_award_2011/asko
"The government and consumer groups have done quite a good job in getting people to look for and purchase ES rated appliances."
I'm not so sure they are going to have as easy a time getting people to buy that second ES POS dishwasher. While some are very good, especially if they have an onboard water softener or the house has one or the water is naturally soft, others are bad news and the removal of STPP from DW detergents has made things much worse.
I'm not so sure they are going to have as easy a time getting people to buy that second ES POS dishwasher. While some are very good, especially if they have an onboard water softener or the house has one or the water is naturally soft, others are bad news and the removal of STPP from DW detergents has made things much worse.
ronhic
Well-known member
slightly DEEPER than most US machines, with very few excepti
Hunter, I only commented on WIDTH because I know that US machines are generally wider than the 60cm/24" of European ones.
In Oz, over 95% of all Front Load machines sold are 60cm/24" and most are also 85cm tall, though there are always exceptions and these tend to be machines that have originally been designed for markets that have a different standard, such as the US.
Hunter, I only commented on WIDTH because I know that US machines are generally wider than the 60cm/24" of European ones.
In Oz, over 95% of all Front Load machines sold are 60cm/24" and most are also 85cm tall, though there are always exceptions and these tend to be machines that have originally been designed for markets that have a different standard, such as the US.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Whirlpool's new dishwasher motors
- Latest: gelaundry4ever
-
-
