The electro-mechanical switch that controls our heating has become unreliable so it's time to fit a replacement. Which of the electronic alternatives would be a good choice? Would like the usual features - separate timings for each day of the week, ability to separately control h/w & heating, override, etc. TIA.
I'd get a basic one that allows off, once, twice and continuous. And replace (or fit) a programmable room thermostat. That allows the temperature to be set for different values throughout the days over a 7 day period.
If you don't already have a room stat somewhere and decide to fit one you'll have to remove or disable any TRVs in that room.
The two units should cost under 100 quid.
I found that if you get the programmable stat, then there is no real need for a timer type programmer as well. I fitted one of these, which I have been pleased with:
Presumably you'd still need to be able to switch hot water and heating on or off? So I think you'd end up with a basic programmer to do this anyway
- unless you made something up.
Even with a programmable thermostat I still switch off overnight. And set it to twice on working days as I'm single. Then flip it to 'once' when I'm in all day.
Good point... I was forgetting about the HW side of things. (in my case I changed from that type of programmer on my stored water system, to having just the programmable stat, but on a combi system)
I did wonder whether I would miss having that type of control, but I found that with a temperature profile set that drops the demanded temperature to 16 degrees overnight, the vast majority of nights the boiler does not fire at all during this time. During the warmer months the house tends to stay naturally warm enough to keep the stat satisfied without calling for heat. So "off" states are achieved simply by setting the program to a low enough demand.
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:14:04 +0000, John Rumm squeezed out the following:
We've adopted the opposite approach. Our boiler has a decent programmable timer, which is what we normally use. If it's freezing we flick the boiler to "always on" and let the programmable thermostat do its stuff.
While I would like to move towards a more sophisticated system, we have an old - and very crude - heating system, piped through ½in steel tube. This means that even TRVs aren't an easily available option, let alone any form of zone control. The previous owner was in the habit of turning the heating on and off at the non-functioning Sangamo time clock but we introduced the now-dying time switch (which had been in my possession as a retired spare). I just need to keep the present system functioning uintil we can afford to replace it with a more effective alternative.
If it uses 1/2" pipe, it means it must be pumped, so is amenable to control by a programmable thermostat regardless of zoning or TRVs, etc. Indeed might well give even greater savings...
Replacing the mechanical timeswitch and adding a programmable thermostat won't be wasted if and when you have a new system fitted - they can be used with the new.
Errr, I think that is the same, rather than the opposite! ;-)
i.e. I leave the boiler permanently on (it has no programmer of its own, other than the on/off switch), and set the programmable stat to control everything.
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 21:38:40 +0000, John Rumm squeezed out the following:
... whereas most of the time we're relying on the boiler timer to switch it on and off, and only rarely (in freezing conditions) leave the boiler permanently on. That's the opposite to you - same as Dave.
Fairy snuff... same as me but only when freezing, otherwise same as Dave.
Any particular reason you switch methods like that?
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 03:15:29 +0000, John Rumm squeezed out the following:
Not really, now I come to think of it! If I had to choose one method I'd go for the programmable thermostat, but doing it our way I can have the standby temperature not too far below the comfort setting without feeling I'm wasting money when it's not freezing. Well it makes sense to me, anyway!
I figured that if I set (for example) the night time temp at the "a tad below comfort level", then it would only actually cost anything when the temp in the house fell below such level. The rest of the time the boiler remains to all intents and purposes "off". On the occasions where it has to do something, it ought to coincide with when I would like it to do something ;-)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.