user 3941
Well-known member
I believe they just changed how the motor is mounted...that's why it sounds a little different. Andrew will know...he's the Whirlpool guru haha.
New Maytags are shipping!!!
- Thread starter jkbff
- Start date
Help Support :
Henrik, did you NOT read what Combo52 wrote?
The design (direct drive vs belt drive) makes NO difference as to what it's capable of doing, "motions" etc, it's ONLY a matter of how the engineers PROGRAMMED the motor controller for each cycle.
Also, I think it's safe to say that John (Combo52) is more of an expert than you are, being he has been selling and repairing appliances A LOT longer than you have been alive.
Kevin
murando531
Well-known member
I always feel it would be easier to explain these things if I had a presentation board and a pointing stick, haha.
I do have to agree with Henrik and respectfully disagree with John. Yes, the two designs have full theoretical range of motion, but the behavior of the two drive systems are entirely different, which explains why there is such a contrast in the performance of the two.
And yes, vacerator, you are partly correct in that they added a "gearbox", but it is still the same BPM motor used in the Oasis/F&P design. The gearbox is simply there for torque conversion for the same reason it is used in the belt-drive VMW machines.
The VMW belt-drive has only three common agitation profiles: Normal - 360 degree oscillations, Short-strokes for distribution - ~90 degree oscillations, and Long stroke, usually ~2-3 rotations each direction, used primarily in the Bulky/Deep Fill cycle. The speed in which the motor spins to generate the agitation strokes doesn't change, only the duration in which it "pulses" each direction. On the other hand, the Oasis and VMAX designs with the BPM "pancake" motor have quite a few profiles. On a Normal cycle, it will frequently alter its behavior, for example, it can start out with aggressive oscillations at 450 degrees or so, then step down to medium 360 degree osc., then a slower version of 360 degree osc, then a quick short 90 degree, then back up to medium 360. Even if it were to stay at 360 degree agitation the entire time, it can change the behavior of those oscillations by rotating more aggressively or gently. In addition to more variety in its agitation behavior, it can also "sense" the load and adjust accordingly. For example, a light load of typical fabrics will result in gentler agitation, never really going into the aggressive ~360 and ~450 degree, but settling between the medium and gentle strokes. A heavy load with mixed fabrics and things like sweaters and jeans tends to alternate those more vigorous strokes in to help move the load properly, with short gentle strokes throughout to help distribute and keep balance.
Joeypete is right, the belt-drive VMW design is perfect for the traditional fill agitator machines, because the standard back and forth motion throughout the cycle is perfect for that type of washer, but for the HE washplate, it's not quite as effective, and results in lethargic rollover and tangling/balling the load to one side.
In all of this, drive systems aside, the biggest game changer is the addition of a recirculation pump in the flagship Oasis and VMAX machines. The VMW has no recirculation system at all, and in my opinion, a recirc pump makes or breaks an HE top-loader.
The best way to see the difference is just watching videos of the three. As far as parts diagrams, I'll do my best to find each of them and post when I have time.
In regards to the newest design, the VMAX, I finally found a technical education manual that explains exactly how they work and how they differ from its Oasis predecessor. I also have the diagram and a photo for the new machines in question for the thread's original subject.
http://https//s3.amazonaws.com/sm-backend-production-attachments/Job+Aid+-+W10758836+(L-87).pdf
I do have to agree with Henrik and respectfully disagree with John. Yes, the two designs have full theoretical range of motion, but the behavior of the two drive systems are entirely different, which explains why there is such a contrast in the performance of the two.
And yes, vacerator, you are partly correct in that they added a "gearbox", but it is still the same BPM motor used in the Oasis/F&P design. The gearbox is simply there for torque conversion for the same reason it is used in the belt-drive VMW machines.
The VMW belt-drive has only three common agitation profiles: Normal - 360 degree oscillations, Short-strokes for distribution - ~90 degree oscillations, and Long stroke, usually ~2-3 rotations each direction, used primarily in the Bulky/Deep Fill cycle. The speed in which the motor spins to generate the agitation strokes doesn't change, only the duration in which it "pulses" each direction. On the other hand, the Oasis and VMAX designs with the BPM "pancake" motor have quite a few profiles. On a Normal cycle, it will frequently alter its behavior, for example, it can start out with aggressive oscillations at 450 degrees or so, then step down to medium 360 degree osc., then a slower version of 360 degree osc, then a quick short 90 degree, then back up to medium 360. Even if it were to stay at 360 degree agitation the entire time, it can change the behavior of those oscillations by rotating more aggressively or gently. In addition to more variety in its agitation behavior, it can also "sense" the load and adjust accordingly. For example, a light load of typical fabrics will result in gentler agitation, never really going into the aggressive ~360 and ~450 degree, but settling between the medium and gentle strokes. A heavy load with mixed fabrics and things like sweaters and jeans tends to alternate those more vigorous strokes in to help move the load properly, with short gentle strokes throughout to help distribute and keep balance.
Joeypete is right, the belt-drive VMW design is perfect for the traditional fill agitator machines, because the standard back and forth motion throughout the cycle is perfect for that type of washer, but for the HE washplate, it's not quite as effective, and results in lethargic rollover and tangling/balling the load to one side.
In all of this, drive systems aside, the biggest game changer is the addition of a recirculation pump in the flagship Oasis and VMAX machines. The VMW has no recirculation system at all, and in my opinion, a recirc pump makes or breaks an HE top-loader.
The best way to see the difference is just watching videos of the three. As far as parts diagrams, I'll do my best to find each of them and post when I have time.
In regards to the newest design, the VMAX, I finally found a technical education manual that explains exactly how they work and how they differ from its Oasis predecessor. I also have the diagram and a photo for the new machines in question for the thread's original subject.
http://https//s3.amazonaws.com/sm-backend-production-attachments/Job+Aid+-+W10758836+(L-87).pdf
murando531
Well-known member
And no RevvinKevin, I'm sorry, but by combo52's logic, that's the same as having a Dodge Charger SE sitting side by side with a Charger SRT HellCat, and saying that there's no difference in performance because "they both have engines and wheels". It makes no sense. Seeing the VMW operating next to the Oasis or VMAX clearly differentiates the two machines and how they work.
Here's an example. This is a video of the VMW belt drive Cabrio, same as the equivalent model Kenmore and Maytag Bravos X. Notice the pulsing to turn the tub rather than a smooth fluid rotation, and the same repetitive agitation throughout the entire cycle.
Also, photos of the drive system underneath.
Here's an example. This is a video of the VMW belt drive Cabrio, same as the equivalent model Kenmore and Maytag Bravos X. Notice the pulsing to turn the tub rather than a smooth fluid rotation, and the same repetitive agitation throughout the entire cycle.
Also, photos of the drive system underneath.
murando531
Well-known member
And here is a video of a flagship model Oasis machine with the recirculation pump and direct drive BPM motor. Skip to about 26:00 for the start of the agitation if so desired. Note how the agitation changes frequently throughout the wash portion.
Here's another with a full heavy load of towels. Agitation begins around 17:00. The agitation changes from aggressive to medium a few times, and there is no way to deny the drastic difference in rollover performance as opposed to the video with the VMW belt drive.
Photos of the drive system. Note that with the Oasis design, there is no square metal panel directly under the BPM motor as there is on the VMAX. The Oasis has no gearbox whatsoever, as the rotor is directly attached to the agitator, and the basket floats to disengage/rengage for agitate and spin. The pumps are also placed a bit differently, with the recirculator at the front of the machine on the VMAX, where on the Oasis they're both at the rear.
Here's another with a full heavy load of towels. Agitation begins around 17:00. The agitation changes from aggressive to medium a few times, and there is no way to deny the drastic difference in rollover performance as opposed to the video with the VMW belt drive.
Photos of the drive system. Note that with the Oasis design, there is no square metal panel directly under the BPM motor as there is on the VMAX. The Oasis has no gearbox whatsoever, as the rotor is directly attached to the agitator, and the basket floats to disengage/rengage for agitate and spin. The pumps are also placed a bit differently, with the recirculator at the front of the machine on the VMAX, where on the Oasis they're both at the rear.
user 3941
Well-known member
See I knew Andrew would have the answers hahaha.
I can tell you what, at 41 years old I'm probably considered young by many people here and old by others...but in my 41 years I've discovered that age does NOT always mean more knowledge. My nephew will be 24 this December and by age 8 he was dissecting all kinds of electronics and could tell you how they worked inside and out. We were all astonished (and worried that the FBI would be coming to the house hahaha). It was amazing how much knowledge filled that little head of his.
Same is true for a lot of things. Every time I've bought a car, I've had vastly more knowledge about the vehicles than the salesman did...yes even ones that had been selling a particular brand for decades. Sure they knew all the options, etc but I knew the history of the model...the engines/transmissions and so on. I'm finding this with appliances too. My coworker's husband was an appliance repairman for 20 years and I was helping them pick out new appliances. Just because you sell and repair things doesn't mean you know every detail about them...or how they are designed and why.
I'm not trying to be disrespectful...nor is anyone here. Combo52 is very knowledgeable about appliances but Andrew and Henrick both are thinking more along the lines of engineering aspects of these machines...more so than just on how they work or don't. More facts than just opinion.
I can tell you what, at 41 years old I'm probably considered young by many people here and old by others...but in my 41 years I've discovered that age does NOT always mean more knowledge. My nephew will be 24 this December and by age 8 he was dissecting all kinds of electronics and could tell you how they worked inside and out. We were all astonished (and worried that the FBI would be coming to the house hahaha). It was amazing how much knowledge filled that little head of his.
Same is true for a lot of things. Every time I've bought a car, I've had vastly more knowledge about the vehicles than the salesman did...yes even ones that had been selling a particular brand for decades. Sure they knew all the options, etc but I knew the history of the model...the engines/transmissions and so on. I'm finding this with appliances too. My coworker's husband was an appliance repairman for 20 years and I was helping them pick out new appliances. Just because you sell and repair things doesn't mean you know every detail about them...or how they are designed and why.
I'm not trying to be disrespectful...nor is anyone here. Combo52 is very knowledgeable about appliances but Andrew and Henrick both are thinking more along the lines of engineering aspects of these machines...more so than just on how they work or don't. More facts than just opinion.
Yes, the two designs have full theoretical range of motion
Thank you, that is EXACTLY my point!
I'm NOT talking about the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">performance</span> of the machines, or how they wash clothes here, (or a 300HP car versus a 700HP car). I am talking about how both the belt drive and direct drive designs are capable of doing the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">exact same things, functions, motions, etc.</span> Again, it's only a matter of how the motor controller is programmed!
If Whirlpool engineers programmed a <span style="font-size: 12pt;">direct drive machine to operate/function/perform like a belt drive machine, it would. And vise versa, if they programmed the belt drive design to have the same motions as a direct drive design, again it would.</span>
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">This is my point, not how the machines wash or how the clothes move or how one has recirculation and the other doesn't.</span>
Thank you, that is EXACTLY my point!
I'm NOT talking about the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">performance</span> of the machines, or how they wash clothes here, (or a 300HP car versus a 700HP car). I am talking about how both the belt drive and direct drive designs are capable of doing the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">exact same things, functions, motions, etc.</span> Again, it's only a matter of how the motor controller is programmed!
If Whirlpool engineers programmed a <span style="font-size: 12pt;">direct drive machine to operate/function/perform like a belt drive machine, it would. And vise versa, if they programmed the belt drive design to have the same motions as a direct drive design, again it would.</span>
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">This is my point, not how the machines wash or how the clothes move or how one has recirculation and the other doesn't.</span>
Direct vs Belt
This is not entirely true.
It fully depends on the actual designs and capabilities of the motors.
It's possible that the motor used in the belt driven VMW just simply CANNOT respond to the actions if it were simply plugged into a direct drive motor controller.
Plus you have a belt in between, so you'll have movement losses due to the damping of a belt. Torque loss, grip loss etc.
BPM motors are usually more responsive and able to be tighter controlled. That's why they can do such quick and powerful variables of motion, over the types of motors usually applied to a belt.
NOW, only if WP connected a pancake style BPM motor with a belt to a VMW tub could the VMW possibly have the same mannerisms as the direct drive machine. But you'll still have the lossy springiness of a belt in between. With the increased possibility of belt slip. The motors that drive belts are usually less torque, or dialed down to not tear up the belt.
With the direct drive motor, you can have 100% torque, right away, to control wash motion.
It's a huge difference.
In NO way does it matter that you can turn a shaft the same way with either a direct drive motor or a belt link.
It doesn't matter. That's not how WP designed the machines.
The theoretical does not matter.
That's what us engineers have to fight with everyday.
All you regular people out there. Y'all don't get it's NOT JUST THAT SIMPLE.
This is not entirely true.
It fully depends on the actual designs and capabilities of the motors.
It's possible that the motor used in the belt driven VMW just simply CANNOT respond to the actions if it were simply plugged into a direct drive motor controller.
Plus you have a belt in between, so you'll have movement losses due to the damping of a belt. Torque loss, grip loss etc.
BPM motors are usually more responsive and able to be tighter controlled. That's why they can do such quick and powerful variables of motion, over the types of motors usually applied to a belt.
NOW, only if WP connected a pancake style BPM motor with a belt to a VMW tub could the VMW possibly have the same mannerisms as the direct drive machine. But you'll still have the lossy springiness of a belt in between. With the increased possibility of belt slip. The motors that drive belts are usually less torque, or dialed down to not tear up the belt.
With the direct drive motor, you can have 100% torque, right away, to control wash motion.
It's a huge difference.
In NO way does it matter that you can turn a shaft the same way with either a direct drive motor or a belt link.
It doesn't matter. That's not how WP designed the machines.
The theoretical does not matter.
That's what us engineers have to fight with everyday.
All you regular people out there. Y'all don't get it's NOT JUST THAT SIMPLE.
murando531
Well-known member
Exactly what johnb300m said.
To say that the two designs are exactly the same just "because they can turn back and forth" is foolish. The two motors are entirely different devices with entirely different capabilities. The single-phase motor in the VMW operates at set speeds. The BPM rotor/stator motor has infinitely variable speeds and torque. To say that they'd work exactly the same way just because of a programming change makes no logical sense.
And if the two COULD work the same exact way just from changing programming, why would they have two entirely different designs in the first place? They could just use the cheaper-to-manufacture VMW design for everything and save the cost of the higher end BPM system.
To say that the two designs are exactly the same just "because they can turn back and forth" is foolish. The two motors are entirely different devices with entirely different capabilities. The single-phase motor in the VMW operates at set speeds. The BPM rotor/stator motor has infinitely variable speeds and torque. To say that they'd work exactly the same way just because of a programming change makes no logical sense.
And if the two COULD work the same exact way just from changing programming, why would they have two entirely different designs in the first place? They could just use the cheaper-to-manufacture VMW design for everything and save the cost of the higher end BPM system.
Dual Action???
Ok I was looking at this again. I know many of us were wondering.
Is this pole agitator a true 'dual action' or a fake?
I'm still not sure but it looks like they might be two pieces.
See the pic.
Any ideas?
Ok I was looking at this again. I know many of us were wondering.
Is this pole agitator a true 'dual action' or a fake?
I'm still not sure but it looks like they might be two pieces.
See the pic.
Any ideas?
Single piece
vacerator
Well-known member
Excellent Andrew!
That's what I've been wondering all along. They've changed the hub design and eliminated the basket drive inner and outer flotation hub, and replaced it with a clutch. No gears (splutch) either??????, but they sure sound like they have gears.
That's what I've been wondering all along. They've changed the hub design and eliminated the basket drive inner and outer flotation hub, and replaced it with a clutch. No gears (splutch) either??????, but they sure sound like they have gears.
mrb627
Well-known member
Wash action.
Maybe the impeller spins in a longer arc in the clockwise direction?
Like 720* CW then 360* cow?
Malcolm
Maybe the impeller spins in a longer arc in the clockwise direction?
Like 720* CW then 360* cow?
Malcolm
RevinKevin
Yeah, then your point is totaly and utterly useless for this discussion.
Then, each and every V-achis TL washer except for some more exotic desingns (Frigidaire -matic series, Calypso, Neptune TL) can theoreticly do the same if they'd be designed to. But they aren't.
Sure, if I'd design a microwave to dry my socks, it sure could. If I'd design a VMW to be a Oasis or vise versa, it sure would be.
But it isn't.
Everything is possible; most of it hasn't been done yet and thus is not matter of discussion until its tried to be done.
Yeah, then your point is totaly and utterly useless for this discussion.
Then, each and every V-achis TL washer except for some more exotic desingns (Frigidaire -matic series, Calypso, Neptune TL) can theoreticly do the same if they'd be designed to. But they aren't.
Sure, if I'd design a microwave to dry my socks, it sure could. If I'd design a VMW to be a Oasis or vise versa, it sure would be.
But it isn't.
Everything is possible; most of it hasn't been done yet and thus is not matter of discussion until its tried to be done.
vacerator
Well-known member
Yeah!
Zee Snap!
Zee Snap!
I guess I was told wrong about the dual action agitator.
user 3941
Well-known member
Video
There's a video on the product descriptions. This looks like a great washer (the one with the agitator). Looks like they are really targeting both Speed Queen with the 5 year warranty model only sold by appliance stores...and the regular warranty one is towards GE and their new machines, with boasting the ability to add as much water as you want...and largest capacity.
http://www.maytag.com/laundry-1/laundry-appliances-2/washers-3/-[MVWB765FW]-5870096/MVWB765FW/
There's a video on the product descriptions. This looks like a great washer (the one with the agitator). Looks like they are really targeting both Speed Queen with the 5 year warranty model only sold by appliance stores...and the regular warranty one is towards GE and their new machines, with boasting the ability to add as much water as you want...and largest capacity.
http://www.maytag.com/laundry-1/laundry-appliances-2/washers-3/-[MVWB765FW]-5870096/MVWB765FW/
murando531
Well-known member
They need to place an asterisk foot note about that capacity, if they haven't already. 4.7 may be technically the largest capacity top load washer with an "agitator", but it's most certainly not the largest capacity in general.
Correction*** I completely missed where they did indeed back their claim as "largest capacity agitator washer". Even if it is just a washplate machine with a pole, but that's none of my business. Carry on!
Correction*** I completely missed where they did indeed back their claim as "largest capacity agitator washer". Even if it is just a washplate machine with a pole, but that's none of my business. Carry on!
Wow
no thanks, not for me.
no thanks, not for me.
Seriously?? That's way, wayy, wayyyyyyy too much water for that little load.
But interesting to see the Deep Water Wash option fills it FULL.
What a joke. A huge waste of water for that small load with it filling up all the way toward middle of the wash cycle. And then poor rinsing. I'd set it for fabric softener rinse all the time. Plus not use normal. I'll stick with my superior performing front loader tyvm.
Is that one direct drive? The ones we just put on the floor are direct drive with the glass lid.. as soon as I get it hooked up, I'll post a video.
I will stay with my old Hotpoint with its rampted agitator.The washer shown has lame agitation!If its going to fill that full-give the machine a REAL agitator-not one of those impeller things with the dual action spiral on it.And the spiral parts turns both ways-reducing its effectiveness.At least the machine is quieter than some.
brucelucenta
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 1,924
This is an excellent example of why new front load machines are so superior to top loaders. I was already convinced of this, but this makes me even more sure.
I don't understand why are manufacturers so reluctant to put a normal style type of agitator in any machines. It makes no sense to me.
Jon
Jon
mrb627
Well-known member
I said it years ago...
We will slowly be turned away from top loaders to front loaders.
It's a government conspiracy.
Malcolm
We will slowly be turned away from top loaders to front loaders.
It's a government conspiracy.
Malcolm
user 3941
Well-known member
OMG you guys are killing me. LOL. The new BOL Amana and Roper machines use the old WP surgilator. As does 2 of the WP branded machines that offer the Deep Fill option.
It is now safe to buy a cheap washer again. Using the "extra rinse" option on all these machines gives you a full deep rinse where you can use fabric softener. The machines that don't have a dispenser can use a Downy Ball or you can buy the dispenser as an accessory if you choose.
Things are getting better at least.
It is now safe to buy a cheap washer again. Using the "extra rinse" option on all these machines gives you a full deep rinse where you can use fabric softener. The machines that don't have a dispenser can use a Downy Ball or you can buy the dispenser as an accessory if you choose.
Things are getting better at least.
Could someone tell me why.............
why does this machine agitate while filling up then stop agitating? That has to be rough on clothing? FIFTEEN MINUTES TO FILL for a DEEP FILL?
Blink and you'll miss the one spray for a "rinse" without softener?
Although I am amazed at how HIGH the deep fill is. I suppose if you had a huge load or a comforter it may come in handy. The machine seems more quiet when agitating with a deep fill.
Mike
why does this machine agitate while filling up then stop agitating? That has to be rough on clothing? FIFTEEN MINUTES TO FILL for a DEEP FILL?
Blink and you'll miss the one spray for a "rinse" without softener?
Although I am amazed at how HIGH the deep fill is. I suppose if you had a huge load or a comforter it may come in handy. The machine seems more quiet when agitating with a deep fill.
Mike
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
CU's Very First Dishwasher Issue - 1952- Latest: Unimatic1140
-
-