mrcleanjeans
New member
Has anyone,somehow, ever thought of modifying one of those wimpy spinning combos to greatly ramp up the spin? Perhaps a smaller pulley? Of course how to modify the suspension system or lack thereof would also come into play.
The Tim Allen Home Improvement Combo
- Thread starter mrcleanjeans
- Start date
Help Support :
ingliscanada
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2009
- Messages
- 338
Or Westy Slanties?
How about ramping up the spin on the old Westinghouse Slant Fronts? Their spin was very wimpy, too.
How about ramping up the spin on the old Westinghouse Slant Fronts? Their spin was very wimpy, too.
mrcleanjeans
New member
So true. Love them though,they are a favorite of mine. Who knows, perhaps another one of those threads-"Why does everyone..."
Dave, I think the biggest obstacle is the suspension. You have the issue of stress on the tub bearing, then you have to hold the tub in balance---even though the contents of it might be off balance to a degree. The weight of the machine also plays into it (and the Bendi are MEGAliths!). Also not every household has a concrete floor. Wooden floor will "give" especially with this kind of weight.
IMO Bendix did the best job. I am sure their designers and test crew tried all different combinations of spin speeds with all different types of clothes on board to come up with the speed they chose----especially when it came to longevity of service.
IMO Bendix did the best job. I am sure their designers and test crew tried all different combinations of spin speeds with all different types of clothes on board to come up with the speed they chose----especially when it came to longevity of service.
First, as the friendly rebbe says, is the structure. The gauge of the steel in the drums, as constructed, can only take so much force. Most of the combo drums were heavier than dryer drums, but not built to cope with the spinning stress of a regular washer's extraction forces. We were told at a training meeting that the tubs in the DD WP machines would come apart at speeds above 850 rpm. Next, bearings would be a definite consideration as well as the strength of the tub shaft. Even if you could beef up all of those components, you would need to have a frame strong enough to withstand the dynamic forces resulting from higher speed spins while being bolted to the floor. Most of y'all are too young to remember this, but the two domestic front loaders, the Bendix and the Norge, that were bolt down machines were very poor at water extraction, on a par with the non-Bendix combos.
The other problem, and the user's manual for the 36" Duomatics warned about this, was the possibility of clothes sticking to the tub after the high speed spin. That is the reason for the initial low speed spin or the later variation with the interrupter switch to limit spin speed before the total stop, then the tumble, low speed spin and then the high speed spin in Bendix and Philco combos. The initial low speed spin spun some water out of the load. At the stop, the load fell away from the sides of the tub. Then the load was tumbled and redistributed and air was reintroduced to the relaxed fibers. When the load was spun again, the fabrics did not pack together as tightly, nor did they stick to the drum with as strong a bond as if they had been spun at high speed from a totally sodden state. Other combo makers used variations of this process. Philco Bendix mentioned that fabric softener could help avoid this but warned that certain items like diapers should be checked before the drying started to make sure that they released from the tub after the spin. For those of you who have watched the later models of the WP/Sears 29" combo in operation, this is part of the reason behind the periods of low speed spins and tumbling before the final 400 RPM spin period. It was also to try to remove as much water as possible to make the load easier to balance for the final spin. Before they came up with this spin sequence, the combos went right into the high speed spin after the final rinse. Then the cylinder slowed to a tumble and the diverter valve, that sent water into the balance ring during the spin, would open and shut to intermittently spray water through the wash stream nozzle to give what Kenmore called a peel off or peel away rinse to rewet the load sufficiently to cause it to fall away from the tub while tumbling before the second period of high speed spin. Again, this helped prevent the load from sticking to the tub when the drying started, although in a very bass ackwards way.
The other problem, and the user's manual for the 36" Duomatics warned about this, was the possibility of clothes sticking to the tub after the high speed spin. That is the reason for the initial low speed spin or the later variation with the interrupter switch to limit spin speed before the total stop, then the tumble, low speed spin and then the high speed spin in Bendix and Philco combos. The initial low speed spin spun some water out of the load. At the stop, the load fell away from the sides of the tub. Then the load was tumbled and redistributed and air was reintroduced to the relaxed fibers. When the load was spun again, the fabrics did not pack together as tightly, nor did they stick to the drum with as strong a bond as if they had been spun at high speed from a totally sodden state. Other combo makers used variations of this process. Philco Bendix mentioned that fabric softener could help avoid this but warned that certain items like diapers should be checked before the drying started to make sure that they released from the tub after the spin. For those of you who have watched the later models of the WP/Sears 29" combo in operation, this is part of the reason behind the periods of low speed spins and tumbling before the final 400 RPM spin period. It was also to try to remove as much water as possible to make the load easier to balance for the final spin. Before they came up with this spin sequence, the combos went right into the high speed spin after the final rinse. Then the cylinder slowed to a tumble and the diverter valve, that sent water into the balance ring during the spin, would open and shut to intermittently spray water through the wash stream nozzle to give what Kenmore called a peel off or peel away rinse to rewet the load sufficiently to cause it to fall away from the tub while tumbling before the second period of high speed spin. Again, this helped prevent the load from sticking to the tub when the drying started, although in a very bass ackwards way.
mrcleanjeans
New member
Youguysaresosmart.Interesting!
mrcleanjeans
New member
Spacebarstuck!sorry
mrcleanjeans
New member
BTW,howdoyouunstickthespacebar?Allthreeofmykeyboardsaredoingthis.
Yep Tom!
You are so correct!
I also think the spin sequence that you are talking about applies to the new front loaders that are on the market. Everyone is thinking that the spin and tumble equates issues with the balancing act. So untrue, and if you really watch your machine, the first ramp up will sometimes ramp up to 800 rpm's without an issue. This is the time that most consumers say; "why did you not just finish the spin". It doesn't though and then goes for a tumble. After the tumble then second ramp up, the tub seems unbalanced. Of course it does, because it is. The heaver fabrics that were in the middle are now on the outside of the tub at different weights. It ramps up once again to remove the most water out of the clothes as possible once again. In the process of spinning then tumble, the heaver fabrics (that have more water content) that were not on the outside of the drum during the first ramp up spin will now have a chance to tumble and make it to the outside of the drum to extract. Heavier fabric will always win in the tumble and usually make it to the outer part of the drum for the next spin ramp up. (I think this is why it is so important to wash "Like Fabrics" in a front loader or any make or vintage)
The first few times that I watched the LK, Bendix, etc. Combo's spins, I could tell that all of the "newer" front load manufactures of today had copied this tried and true process.
Great Thread!
Brent
You are so correct!
I also think the spin sequence that you are talking about applies to the new front loaders that are on the market. Everyone is thinking that the spin and tumble equates issues with the balancing act. So untrue, and if you really watch your machine, the first ramp up will sometimes ramp up to 800 rpm's without an issue. This is the time that most consumers say; "why did you not just finish the spin". It doesn't though and then goes for a tumble. After the tumble then second ramp up, the tub seems unbalanced. Of course it does, because it is. The heaver fabrics that were in the middle are now on the outside of the tub at different weights. It ramps up once again to remove the most water out of the clothes as possible once again. In the process of spinning then tumble, the heaver fabrics (that have more water content) that were not on the outside of the drum during the first ramp up spin will now have a chance to tumble and make it to the outside of the drum to extract. Heavier fabric will always win in the tumble and usually make it to the outer part of the drum for the next spin ramp up. (I think this is why it is so important to wash "Like Fabrics" in a front loader or any make or vintage)
The first few times that I watched the LK, Bendix, etc. Combo's spins, I could tell that all of the "newer" front load manufactures of today had copied this tried and true process.
Great Thread!
Brent
Graduated Spin
Is what Miele calls it and it takes place on my "vintage" unit before the final spin.
Basically as mentioned above, a period of show and low rpm spins followed by tumbling each way. Theory went, at least according to Miele that this helped remove a good part of water, thus preventing suds lock and or overwhelming the pump which in turn would trigger saftey systems that in turn would slow down spins. System also helped with creasing as items weren't plastered to the tub at the first spin.
Is what Miele calls it and it takes place on my "vintage" unit before the final spin.
Basically as mentioned above, a period of show and low rpm spins followed by tumbling each way. Theory went, at least according to Miele that this helped remove a good part of water, thus preventing suds lock and or overwhelming the pump which in turn would trigger saftey systems that in turn would slow down spins. System also helped with creasing as items weren't plastered to the tub at the first spin.
The big difference between the 29" LK combos and the new FLs is the reason why the LK did not have to worry about the drain pump being overwhelmed by the amount of water being spun out of the load in the intital stages of spin. At the end of the 3rd rinse, the machine drains to what is called "balance level" which is where the water level in the outer tub is just below the bottom of the inner tub. You hear a strong surge of water draining and suddenly the snap of the valve closing, not the tapering off of the water being pumped out after the wash and first two rinses. This is also the water level used in the "Super Wash" part of the cycle. This approximately 3 gallons of water is kept in circulation by the pump, but instead of the water spraying through the opening for the wash stream, it sprays against the gate at the opening for the balance ring at the front of the tub. It also adds 30 lbs of ballast at the base of the machine giving added stability when it will be most needed. As water is spun out of the load, especially of heavy fabrics, the diverter valve between the drain and recirculate hoses will snap open and shut to keep the water level from rising and you will hear a shot of water go down the drain. Only in the heaviest of unbalanced loads will water be sprayed into the balance tanks to balance the tub during low speed spin periods and this is accompanied by long hisses from the air valve. When the machine goes into the high speed spin, the tub has to be balanced to achieve the full rip-roaring top speed of 400 rpm. When the heavier side of the tub passes near the 9 to 10 o'clock position, it causes the the balance system components to flex. That does two things: it opens the air valve to bleed air out of the inflatable clutch in the transmission to slow the speed and it opens a gate in the balance ring to allow water to spray into the tank or tanks opposite the heaviest side of the tub. This is the most dramatic part of the cycle for sight and sound. The tranny is trying to bring the tub up to speed so you hear the sounds of acceleration. As the balancing is taking place, you hear the hissing sounds of air being bled out of the system each time the heaviest side or heavier sides of the tub pass the sensing position and sometimes, if not much water is needed to balance the load, you will hear the drain valve snap open and shut to drain excess water. As the speed picks up, the hisses get shorter and closer together until the hissing stops and the tub spins along for 4 minutes. At the end of the spin the diverter valve snaps open to drain the water in the outer tub so there is an initial rush of water down the drain. As the tub slows, any water in the balance tanks falls out and is pumped away also. It is sort of like a horse at the end of a race; the flood gates open. The air I mentioned is compressed by a pump on the transmission. Before variable speed motors, WP engineered the air-driven clutch system as a means of controlling the rate of acceleration by varying the amount of force coming through the transmission from a constant speed motor with an almost infinitely variable medium, air pressure. It was pretty brilliant engineering using cruder technologies of the late 50s and early 60s. We have found that the most vulnerable part is the leather-like air bellows run by an eccentric in the transmission to give pumping action to compress the air. Unfortunately trouble with this set of bellows cannot be bypassed by using a guitar a la Franz Grueber.
Neither the Kenmore combo nor the Duomatics had to worry about their pumps being overwhelmed by the water spun out of the clothes, unlike some modern front loaders with less powerful pumps. These two machines, like the old Westinghouse washers, have pumps driven by the main (and only) drive motor so they are very powerful and they have a larger sump area to collect the water for the pump so there is less likelihood that the spinning tub will pull water up between the inner and outer tubs preventing it from being drained away. If many modern front loaders had more powerful pumps, sumps a bit deeper and better baffle arrangement in the sump over the pump inlet, the goofy, time-wasting multiple spin attempts could be reduced. As Brent said, the initial full throttle acceleration into spin by the Duet-type machines results in the surge of water spun out of the load triggering the flood sensor switch, but with my Duet, I did not hear water being pumped out of the machine until after the tub came to amost a complete stop. My Mieles, on the other hand, use more graduated spin acceleration to prevent that, although the methods differ greatly between the W1918 and the W1986. Still, you do not loose a well balanced load's first spin attempt because the machine cannot pump out the water.
Neither the Kenmore combo nor the Duomatics had to worry about their pumps being overwhelmed by the water spun out of the clothes, unlike some modern front loaders with less powerful pumps. These two machines, like the old Westinghouse washers, have pumps driven by the main (and only) drive motor so they are very powerful and they have a larger sump area to collect the water for the pump so there is less likelihood that the spinning tub will pull water up between the inner and outer tubs preventing it from being drained away. If many modern front loaders had more powerful pumps, sumps a bit deeper and better baffle arrangement in the sump over the pump inlet, the goofy, time-wasting multiple spin attempts could be reduced. As Brent said, the initial full throttle acceleration into spin by the Duet-type machines results in the surge of water spun out of the load triggering the flood sensor switch, but with my Duet, I did not hear water being pumped out of the machine until after the tub came to amost a complete stop. My Mieles, on the other hand, use more graduated spin acceleration to prevent that, although the methods differ greatly between the W1918 and the W1986. Still, you do not loose a well balanced load's first spin attempt because the machine cannot pump out the water.
