OK,
Here's the main link to my album:
Here's the main link to my album:
The business end of the agitator
- Thread starter Cybrvanr
- Start date
Help Support :
Thanks
Glenn for correcting me!!!
Glenn for correcting me!!!
Thanks Glenn
I see how it works like alot of other Oz washers I saw over there. My cousin had one , I was so suprised to see it in action. I had never thought you could clean clothes with a sweeping agigitator motion before. But why not??!!
Her's would swirl around and create big eddy currents, it was a very quite operation as I remember no sloshing sounds like a reversing agigtator.
I am falling for the top load dryer! Everytime I go to Gray's I keep lingering longer and longer over it.
I see how it works like alot of other Oz washers I saw over there. My cousin had one , I was so suprised to see it in action. I had never thought you could clean clothes with a sweeping agigitator motion before. But why not??!!
Her's would swirl around and create big eddy currents, it was a very quite operation as I remember no sloshing sounds like a reversing agigtator.
I am falling for the top load dryer! Everytime I go to Gray's I keep lingering longer and longer over it.
kenmore1978
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,119
RotoFlex
I only see two pictures in Cleanteamofny's album, and neither is the inside of a washer.
I only see two pictures in Cleanteamofny's album, and neither is the inside of a washer.
Agitators
It has been my exprience that those washers with fins that extend up along the agitator post get clothes cleaner as 1 they help to pull the clothes down to the bottom. 2. It also helps to breaks up any soap that hasn't disolved out. 3. To name a few machines that have fins or vanes on up the agitator posts, Fedders/Norge, G.E./Speed Queen/Kelvinator and Gibson/a few models of DD Whirlpool&Kenmore but just on the lower end machines/Maytag just started putting fins on the agitator post during the 90's.
It has been my exprience that those washers with fins that extend up along the agitator post get clothes cleaner as 1 they help to pull the clothes down to the bottom. 2. It also helps to breaks up any soap that hasn't disolved out. 3. To name a few machines that have fins or vanes on up the agitator posts, Fedders/Norge, G.E./Speed Queen/Kelvinator and Gibson/a few models of DD Whirlpool&Kenmore but just on the lower end machines/Maytag just started putting fins on the agitator post during the 90's.
I have been looking for a "Roto-Flex" to put im my '65 LK "on steroids". Jason changed the pulley's and the agitation and spin speeds are VERY fast for a Kenmore! Envision a large "Vita-Mix"!
I'm so sick of Yahoo Phunking with my folders!
I have no choice but to us MSN to view.......
Please give me time to redirect links.
Yahoo can kiss my widebody ---!
I have no choice but to us MSN to view.......
Please give me time to redirect links.
Yahoo can kiss my widebody ---!
Let's try it again......
There should be 4 items in the folder.
Two pics of my DD washer and dryer and two Mpegs
Please let me know if its working this time!
Larry
There should be 4 items in the folder.
Two pics of my DD washer and dryer and two Mpegs
Please let me know if its working this time!
Larry
I see only two pictures. One of your topload set and one of your frontload set. When I click on the File Folders link I see that there are four items in it, but when I click on it again I can only see those two pictures again.
Thanks Louis!
Yahoo is not allowing Mpegs for some reason!?!?
Yahoo is not allowing Mpegs for some reason!?!?
Kenmorepeter5
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2005
- Messages
- 117
MOVIE??
I'm deaf. It's post #91819....I didn't find this movie, I don't know which is. Any help about find this movie?
~ Peter
I'm deaf. It's post #91819....I didn't find this movie, I don't know which is. Any help about find this movie?
~ Peter
Peter, there's no movie on the link. Louis is just making a suggestion of using that site tempdir.com an on-line storage location for sharing video clips, since Yahoo apparently doesn't allow it.
Kenmorepeter5
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2005
- Messages
- 117
Which is storage
Which is the storage number?
~ Peter
Which is the storage number?
~ Peter
Peter, no storage number because there is no movie.
Designgeek
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 865
Re. indexing:
At risk of being unpopular, I'm going to say it shouldn't make a difference in the water currents.
Reason is this: Water is dense, has a lot of inertia. The smooth sides of a tub, when rotating during indexing, can't get "traction" on the water to make the mass of water move with them. To check this out, get a bucket full of water and rotate it back and forth by holding it off the ground and turning the handle clockwise and then counterclockwise. Drop a single square of clean toilet tissue in there so you can see what's happening. Nothing will happen; the water won't move much, the bucket will just "slide" past the water in each direction.
Now you put an agitator at the bottom and it's going to be moving faster than the water can move with it. So it acts like the impeller of a centrifugal pump and throws the water outward at the base of the agitator. The water current hits the side of the tub and turns upward, in a toroidal shape. The vector of the inertial mass of the water is perpendicular to the agitator. There's a lot of mass moving fairly quickly there. That mass is not going to be affected much if at all, by whether the wall of the washtub is or isn't moving.
Now let's take another extreme case, and assume we have a vertical-axis washtub with an agitator in the center, and the washtub itself has vertical blades in it like the tub of a front-loader. Now we'll have that hypothetical washtub index back and forth, and to be even more extreme, we'll have it move *in unison with the agitator.* In that case what we're going to get is centrifugal force (angular momentum), where the mass of water is really being pushed around and tries to climb the wall of the washtub. But the speed of the agitator is calculated such that there is not enough centrifugal force to cause the water to slosh out over the top of the washtub.
If you were to look at a cross-section, what you'd see is that the top surface of the mass of water is roughly concave, slightly depressed at the center and slightly higher at the edges. And if you were to throw in the hypothetical piece of clean toilet paper, or a handkerchief or washcloth, you'd see it circulating in a toroidal pattern: the water that has reached as far up as it's going to get along the walls of the tub has to go somewhere, so it rolls back down toward the center of the tub and then follows the column of the agitator downward to start over again.
I somewhat doubt that this hypothetical configuration would wash very well because the load would not be moving in a circle (the circle surrounding the axis of the agitator). It would only move in a rolling-over motion, no circular motion for mixing, so the large and small articles would tend to segregate in the load. You'd get a lot of turbulence at the periphery and that would produce excessive wear on some of the clothes.
It would be tempting to suggest that this configuration would wash fine if you used a shorter washing period, since after all, Hoovermatic used a maximum 4-minute cycle. However, the lack of mixing would produce the result that some articles would come clean and get a bit of excess wear in the process, and some articles would not get enough movement to get as clean.
Anyone wants to try this badly enough, there is probably a way to build a working model to test these ideas.
At risk of being unpopular, I'm going to say it shouldn't make a difference in the water currents.
Reason is this: Water is dense, has a lot of inertia. The smooth sides of a tub, when rotating during indexing, can't get "traction" on the water to make the mass of water move with them. To check this out, get a bucket full of water and rotate it back and forth by holding it off the ground and turning the handle clockwise and then counterclockwise. Drop a single square of clean toilet tissue in there so you can see what's happening. Nothing will happen; the water won't move much, the bucket will just "slide" past the water in each direction.
Now you put an agitator at the bottom and it's going to be moving faster than the water can move with it. So it acts like the impeller of a centrifugal pump and throws the water outward at the base of the agitator. The water current hits the side of the tub and turns upward, in a toroidal shape. The vector of the inertial mass of the water is perpendicular to the agitator. There's a lot of mass moving fairly quickly there. That mass is not going to be affected much if at all, by whether the wall of the washtub is or isn't moving.
Now let's take another extreme case, and assume we have a vertical-axis washtub with an agitator in the center, and the washtub itself has vertical blades in it like the tub of a front-loader. Now we'll have that hypothetical washtub index back and forth, and to be even more extreme, we'll have it move *in unison with the agitator.* In that case what we're going to get is centrifugal force (angular momentum), where the mass of water is really being pushed around and tries to climb the wall of the washtub. But the speed of the agitator is calculated such that there is not enough centrifugal force to cause the water to slosh out over the top of the washtub.
If you were to look at a cross-section, what you'd see is that the top surface of the mass of water is roughly concave, slightly depressed at the center and slightly higher at the edges. And if you were to throw in the hypothetical piece of clean toilet paper, or a handkerchief or washcloth, you'd see it circulating in a toroidal pattern: the water that has reached as far up as it's going to get along the walls of the tub has to go somewhere, so it rolls back down toward the center of the tub and then follows the column of the agitator downward to start over again.
I somewhat doubt that this hypothetical configuration would wash very well because the load would not be moving in a circle (the circle surrounding the axis of the agitator). It would only move in a rolling-over motion, no circular motion for mixing, so the large and small articles would tend to segregate in the load. You'd get a lot of turbulence at the periphery and that would produce excessive wear on some of the clothes.
It would be tempting to suggest that this configuration would wash fine if you used a shorter washing period, since after all, Hoovermatic used a maximum 4-minute cycle. However, the lack of mixing would produce the result that some articles would come clean and get a bit of excess wear in the process, and some articles would not get enough movement to get as clean.
Anyone wants to try this badly enough, there is probably a way to build a working model to test these ideas.
bostonwash
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2005
- Messages
- 223
nice washers Cleanteam/Larry
excellent kenmores in that apartment. look right at home in NY!
excellent kenmores in that apartment. look right at home in NY!
I love the dryer but the washer is another story. The features are great but I wished the washer was more flexible with speeds and water temp!
kenmore1978
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,119
flexibility
As much as Ilove Lady K machines, the flexibility was a problem. The engineers basically decided thaty THEY knew what was the best combination of speeds/times/water temps and there was no way to override them, i.e., one couldn't have the long 14 minute wash with cold water. To be fair, KM wasn't the only company guilty of this, the Maytag al push button models even fixed the water levels for certain cycles. And it's rare indeed to find even a regular machine that let's you do slow agitation with fast spin.
As much as Ilove Lady K machines, the flexibility was a problem. The engineers basically decided thaty THEY knew what was the best combination of speeds/times/water temps and there was no way to override them, i.e., one couldn't have the long 14 minute wash with cold water. To be fair, KM wasn't the only company guilty of this, the Maytag al push button models even fixed the water levels for certain cycles. And it's rare indeed to find even a regular machine that let's you do slow agitation with fast spin.
But some LKs had the Cold Wash option, yes? Didn't all the electronic machines allow that? For the pushbutton/rotary dial models, there's always dial-pushing / Selective Dialing.
Electro-mechanical pushbutton Maytags *were* restrictive. Some of them had the hidden 'advance' button, but it was't intended for consumer use, and one would have to figure out how to read the timer clicks.
Electro-mechanical pushbutton Maytags *were* restrictive. Some of them had the hidden 'advance' button, but it was't intended for consumer use, and one would have to figure out how to read the timer clicks.
