It's regarded that most of the action of a typical straight-vane agitator occurs on the sides of the agitator where the vanes can push the water horizontally. After closer observation however, it appears that most of the action actually occurs off of the bottom of the agitator, where the vanes are vertical, and push the water up. Am I correct on this assumption?
The business end of the agitator
- Thread starter Cybrvanr
- Start date
Help Support :
Tub design and agitator make a big difference in how well clothes will circulate. As far as straight vanes go...isn't WP's super surgilator basically a staight vane?
From personal observation, i think a well designd straight vane is the best for heavier loads as far as circulation goes.
From personal observation, i think a well designd straight vane is the best for heavier loads as far as circulation goes.
I believe the bottom of an agitator is the "power-house".
The dual-action "corkscrew" models appear to be an attempt to increase rollover to get the clothing to the bottom of the basket/agitator to be near the main water action.
Sadly many mannys shortend the stroke and increased the speed to make the TOP portion of a dual-action agitator look like it is moving constantly. IMHO--I much prefer 210* and a slower speed. Interestingly the NorgeTag appears to have a nice old-fashioned slow-wide oscillaiton, as I saw on Ross' "real" machine in Tucson, AZ.
The dual-action "corkscrew" models appear to be an attempt to increase rollover to get the clothing to the bottom of the basket/agitator to be near the main water action.
Sadly many mannys shortend the stroke and increased the speed to make the TOP portion of a dual-action agitator look like it is moving constantly. IMHO--I much prefer 210* and a slower speed. Interestingly the NorgeTag appears to have a nice old-fashioned slow-wide oscillaiton, as I saw on Ross' "real" machine in Tucson, AZ.
Stevezasycho
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2005
- Messages
- 28
Straight Vane is for the birds..
I have an Inglis (Which here in the US is WPs Entry level washer.. Like.. SUB-Roper, lol)
It has a straight vane agitator, and it is purty ineffective, in my opinion.. It doesnt do too terribly much except splash a lot on small loads, and doesnt doo much for rolling things over on any load size..
Months back, I wanted to switch the DA from the Kenmore this thing replaced, but the Kenmore has a Super capacity, and my Inglis is XL.. I am still lookin for a DD DA that will fit in a 2.5 XL cap. washer, lol
I have an Inglis (Which here in the US is WPs Entry level washer.. Like.. SUB-Roper, lol)
It has a straight vane agitator, and it is purty ineffective, in my opinion.. It doesnt do too terribly much except splash a lot on small loads, and doesnt doo much for rolling things over on any load size..
Months back, I wanted to switch the DA from the Kenmore this thing replaced, but the Kenmore has a Super capacity, and my Inglis is XL.. I am still lookin for a DD DA that will fit in a 2.5 XL cap. washer, lol
Dual action agitators are available for the extra large tub. Part # is 285558. Rollover is much better. The bottom vanes of the agitator are higher up and not at the very bottom of the tub.Hope this helps!
Designgeek
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 865
The action of the bottom vanes on an agitator is similar to that of the impeller in a centrifugal pump, i.e. to fling water outward and away from the center. In a washer drum the outward movement of water at the bottom is deflected upward by the walls of the drum; this causes a toroidal water current, where the vertical center-post of the agitator pokes through the "hole" in the toroid. The toroidal current is what produces the turnover action of the load.
And since the water movement is most vigorous at the bottom, that's where the most vigorous washing action occurs. Fabric passing over the moving vanes gets a bit of a scrubbing action as well, though in excess this produces wear on the fabric. The vanes down the center-post are basically there to direct the inward flow of the toroidal current back downward, and also to provide some additional lateral water movement throughout the load.
Some manufacturers use spiral blades or separate accessories on the agitators, for example a corkscrew that has a ratchet mechanism so it only moves in the "downward" direction every half-cycle. These variations can help to increase load capacity and improve turnover. Some people swear by them, others think they're unnecessary.
Every manufacturer claims that its particular arrangement is the most effective, and in fact all of those claims are probably true for specific load sizes and compositions. You can get good results with any machine by learning, through experience, what are its optimal load characteristics.
And since the water movement is most vigorous at the bottom, that's where the most vigorous washing action occurs. Fabric passing over the moving vanes gets a bit of a scrubbing action as well, though in excess this produces wear on the fabric. The vanes down the center-post are basically there to direct the inward flow of the toroidal current back downward, and also to provide some additional lateral water movement throughout the load.
Some manufacturers use spiral blades or separate accessories on the agitators, for example a corkscrew that has a ratchet mechanism so it only moves in the "downward" direction every half-cycle. These variations can help to increase load capacity and improve turnover. Some people swear by them, others think they're unnecessary.
Every manufacturer claims that its particular arrangement is the most effective, and in fact all of those claims are probably true for specific load sizes and compositions. You can get good results with any machine by learning, through experience, what are its optimal load characteristics.
I agree with designgeek!
Most agitators with blades going from the top of the agitator to the skirt provides the best washing action because the clothes are gently being scrubbed at the top until it gets to the bottom where the actual washing occurs.
Since I seen what a Kenmore three vane agitator can do, it cleans well because its about three inches high at the end off the skirt. But the Whirlpool has more power because it has waves in the blade leading from the top to the bottom causing massive water currents that has different points of suction during agitation!
When Whirlpool introduced the Double Duty Surgilator, I was very disappointed in the design because the wings was mounted in the wrong spot, the wings should have been mounted dead center on the blade than in between the blade. The rollover rate would have increased 10% more since the water being deflected off the blade before it had a chance to bounce off the basket!
If you have a belt drive washer, place your hand in the washer during the wash cycle and feel the water current, though you feel the water current strength between the blade, but the power of the currents is where the agitation begins and end at each stroke. This is why I was disappointed in the Double Duty Surgilator's design!
The Maytag agitator is unique, the flex fins does three thing that a standard agitator could not do. The blades flexes so the clothes are washed without being over scrubbed, the lint filter in the agitator provides more water through the clothes action and drag on the agitator is reduced because the blade is not mounted on the skirt causing extra wear on the transmission and motor. (This the reason Kenmore copied the fins on the DAA)
I can go on and on but my time is up!
So who's next to stand on the soap box?
Most agitators with blades going from the top of the agitator to the skirt provides the best washing action because the clothes are gently being scrubbed at the top until it gets to the bottom where the actual washing occurs.
Since I seen what a Kenmore three vane agitator can do, it cleans well because its about three inches high at the end off the skirt. But the Whirlpool has more power because it has waves in the blade leading from the top to the bottom causing massive water currents that has different points of suction during agitation!
When Whirlpool introduced the Double Duty Surgilator, I was very disappointed in the design because the wings was mounted in the wrong spot, the wings should have been mounted dead center on the blade than in between the blade. The rollover rate would have increased 10% more since the water being deflected off the blade before it had a chance to bounce off the basket!
If you have a belt drive washer, place your hand in the washer during the wash cycle and feel the water current, though you feel the water current strength between the blade, but the power of the currents is where the agitation begins and end at each stroke. This is why I was disappointed in the Double Duty Surgilator's design!
The Maytag agitator is unique, the flex fins does three thing that a standard agitator could not do. The blades flexes so the clothes are washed without being over scrubbed, the lint filter in the agitator provides more water through the clothes action and drag on the agitator is reduced because the blade is not mounted on the skirt causing extra wear on the transmission and motor. (This the reason Kenmore copied the fins on the DAA)
I can go on and on but my time is up!
So who's next to stand on the soap box?
kenmore1978
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,119
OK
So woul these theories apply to the skirtless KM RotoFlex agitator of the 60's?
So woul these theories apply to the skirtless KM RotoFlex agitator of the 60's?
Designgeek
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 865
Thanks, Cleanteam!
I'm also thinking that there is an interaction between the variables of a) washtub diameter, b) blade depth at the outer edge of the agitator skirt, and c) speed of movement of the agitator as it rotates. Above a certain point, increased blade depth and speed would cause "cavitation," the introduction of air into the water flow; this could help or hinder washing action, I don't know for sure. Also the deeper the fins, all other variables equal, the more energy needed to turn the agitator, *but* beyond a certain point the added energy input doesn't translate to increased cleaning performance.
And then (one more variable?!), there's a point at which the speed of the agitator produces a water flow that's "resonant" with the size of the washtub, i.e. maximizes the toroidal current (and an increase in power input beyond that won't make much difference). All other factors equal, stiff garments might not wash as well in a water current that's "too fast," because they move more slowly and wouldn't have time to follow the flow (this may be why I've tended to prefer using the "gentle" cycle even on conventional TLs).
Kenmore, for those of us with less working expertise in vintage machines, could you post a link or say where we can find pics of that RotoFlex? I'm always interested in data that contradict my hypotheses, that's where new knowledge comes from.
I'm also thinking that there is an interaction between the variables of a) washtub diameter, b) blade depth at the outer edge of the agitator skirt, and c) speed of movement of the agitator as it rotates. Above a certain point, increased blade depth and speed would cause "cavitation," the introduction of air into the water flow; this could help or hinder washing action, I don't know for sure. Also the deeper the fins, all other variables equal, the more energy needed to turn the agitator, *but* beyond a certain point the added energy input doesn't translate to increased cleaning performance.
And then (one more variable?!), there's a point at which the speed of the agitator produces a water flow that's "resonant" with the size of the washtub, i.e. maximizes the toroidal current (and an increase in power input beyond that won't make much difference). All other factors equal, stiff garments might not wash as well in a water current that's "too fast," because they move more slowly and wouldn't have time to follow the flow (this may be why I've tended to prefer using the "gentle" cycle even on conventional TLs).
Kenmore, for those of us with less working expertise in vintage machines, could you post a link or say where we can find pics of that RotoFlex? I'm always interested in data that contradict my hypotheses, that's where new knowledge comes from.
I thought someone here posted a turquoise-colored LK pair that had the skirtless/vanes-only RotoFlex. Don't have time to search for it as I'm at work. Hope this helps you at least a bit, designgeek.
Juane,
I believe that it does.
I think that it would have a little more power than the Maytag's powerfin since two more blades are added to the equation,
but too much can be a bad thing! If the load is large it can bottleneck and it would not circulate well especially when the water level is set on extra high doing jeans or towels. Most people will try to do more in one load than to break the load in two and do them separately.
I believe that it does.
I think that it would have a little more power than the Maytag's powerfin since two more blades are added to the equation,
but too much can be a bad thing! If the load is large it can bottleneck and it would not circulate well especially when the water level is set on extra high doing jeans or towels. Most people will try to do more in one load than to break the load in two and do them separately.
westytoploader
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 4,485
The agitator's upward currents are a result of the horizontal currents, IMHO...you can feel the strong horizontal currents on the '82 with the Roto-Swirl, especially on 68 OPM! The "vertical" action (such as turnover) takes place with the curved ramps which help pull the clothes downward, but the base vanes are straight. On the GE, which, unlike the Roto-Swirl, has curved base vanes, it is stronger and faster due to the aggressive 100 OPM high speed. With the rapidly moving (330 on the Unimatic--Rollermatic; 360 on the 1-18) pulsator of the Frigidaire, you can feel the strongest horizontal currents.
I believe that there are two things needed for good turnover. You need a method of pulling the clothes down to the base (where the REAL action happens) of the agitator, and a way of bringing them back up again. The horizontal currents made by the agitator could be deflected upward off the sides of the tub, which results in the clothes coming back up to the top, especially on a Frigidaire, IMHO. That's why when a Frigidaire starts agitating, you can see the currents forming near the sides of the tub before the load is pulled down and starts rolling. With an indexing tub, the reason there isn't usually much turnover is because the push and pull currents aren't strong enough. The tub is constantly moving so theoretically there's nothing to "bounce off of"...add a weak agitator to the mix and there's no upward or downward movement. With the Westinghouse spiral ramp agitator, the currents it produces are strong enough to pull the clothes down and bring them back up, even with the indexing tub. Someone will definitely correct me on this, but I also believe that on the solid-tub Norges, there's not much turnover on a full load (however, on a light load, I learned that they will turn over quite well) because the stroke is too long and slow to produce strong currents to get a full load moving...instead it cleans by the dragging action; not one article will remain untouched. I know the design of the agitator (WIDE base) also has something to do with this. Same with the solid-tub SQs...they will roll the clothes when lightly loaded, but not on a "capacity" load. But the agitator moves fast, has large vanes, and the base isn't too terribly wide. So how could this be explained?
Very interesting topic...would like to hear more!
--Austin
I believe that there are two things needed for good turnover. You need a method of pulling the clothes down to the base (where the REAL action happens) of the agitator, and a way of bringing them back up again. The horizontal currents made by the agitator could be deflected upward off the sides of the tub, which results in the clothes coming back up to the top, especially on a Frigidaire, IMHO. That's why when a Frigidaire starts agitating, you can see the currents forming near the sides of the tub before the load is pulled down and starts rolling. With an indexing tub, the reason there isn't usually much turnover is because the push and pull currents aren't strong enough. The tub is constantly moving so theoretically there's nothing to "bounce off of"...add a weak agitator to the mix and there's no upward or downward movement. With the Westinghouse spiral ramp agitator, the currents it produces are strong enough to pull the clothes down and bring them back up, even with the indexing tub. Someone will definitely correct me on this, but I also believe that on the solid-tub Norges, there's not much turnover on a full load (however, on a light load, I learned that they will turn over quite well) because the stroke is too long and slow to produce strong currents to get a full load moving...instead it cleans by the dragging action; not one article will remain untouched. I know the design of the agitator (WIDE base) also has something to do with this. Same with the solid-tub SQs...they will roll the clothes when lightly loaded, but not on a "capacity" load. But the agitator moves fast, has large vanes, and the base isn't too terribly wide. So how could this be explained?
Very interesting topic...would like to hear more!
--Austin
F&P agitation is interesting in that there is indexing in both directions by way of the strokes being progressively longer one direction than the other, which occasionally changes. The effect is very subtle when watching, more clear when running a video on fast-forward.
kenmore1978
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,119
KM Roto Flex
I went through the entire members photo collection, and believe it or not, there's not one shot of a Roto Flex agitator
I went through the entire members photo collection, and believe it or not, there's not one shot of a Roto Flex agitator
huhh??? Dadoes
"F&P agitation is interesting in that there is indexing in both directions by way of the strokes being progressively longer one direction than the other, which occasionally changes."
How can it index in both directions while one stroke is longer than the other?
Does this mean that the agitator slowly rotates so every "right" stroke is longer than every "left" stroke and the whole thing cranks around in a complete circle after several agitations?
Or does the tub index around the agitator?
-confused in boston...............
"F&P agitation is interesting in that there is indexing in both directions by way of the strokes being progressively longer one direction than the other, which occasionally changes."
How can it index in both directions while one stroke is longer than the other?
Does this mean that the agitator slowly rotates so every "right" stroke is longer than every "left" stroke and the whole thing cranks around in a complete circle after several agitations?
Or does the tub index around the agitator?
-confused in boston...............
Jon, the stroke moves progressively around in one direction for a while, then switches and moves progressively around the other direction. The effect is very subtle. I believe it's an effect of both the stroke itself being slightly longer one direction than the other, and also due to intertia of the moving load at the end of the stroke.
I've haven't tried this on my IWL12, but I know on my GWL08, when the agitator is oscillating one can grab it at the end of a stroke and push it further along. The SmartDrive motor senses the motion and doesn't trigger a reverse stroke until movement has stopped at the end of the stroke. Thus, agitation action responds and changes to a small degree according to the motion of the load.
I recall a couple years ago washing a single small item, I believe it was cotton throw, in my GWL08. A couple times when the lower fins got a good 'grip' on the item, interia kept it moving further at the end of the stroke, and it was rather odd and interesting to see.
The wash basket is completely free-spinning during agitation, as it floats up off the drive cog when the tub fills with water.
I've haven't tried this on my IWL12, but I know on my GWL08, when the agitator is oscillating one can grab it at the end of a stroke and push it further along. The SmartDrive motor senses the motion and doesn't trigger a reverse stroke until movement has stopped at the end of the stroke. Thus, agitation action responds and changes to a small degree according to the motion of the load.
I recall a couple years ago washing a single small item, I believe it was cotton throw, in my GWL08. A couple times when the lower fins got a good 'grip' on the item, interia kept it moving further at the end of the stroke, and it was rather odd and interesting to see.
The wash basket is completely free-spinning during agitation, as it floats up off the drive cog when the tub fills with water.
Here's the RotoFlex in action..........
RotoFlex at low speed.
You may need to log into yahoo if you cannot view.
RotoFlex at low speed.
You may need to log into yahoo if you cannot view.
F&P
Going from high to low agitation.
Going from high to low agitation.
Larry, the links don't work for me, and I am logged in to Yahoo. I think if you copied the URLs while *you* were logged in, it includes a cookie reference for your log-in, which won't work for anybody else. Either that, or the Yahoo folder isn't shared for public viewing.
