4 ms·

The problem as usual is with the users not the system. If anyone in your building turns the valve on their radiator off (because their space is overheated) then

by romed 8y ago

The problem as usual is with the users not the system. If anyone in your building turns the valve on their radiator off (because their space is overheated) then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it. As for the air vents it seems that building supervisors just can’t resist painting them, which renders them inoperable. They should know better. So in summary steam is wonderful as long as humans don’t get involved.

nkurz 8y ago
If anyone in your building turns the valve on their radiator off (because their space is overheated) then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it. Theoretically, I don't think this is correct. And in practice, I'm sure it's not always true. That is, I've tuned up a steam system using Holoway's advice, and there was no problem with turning individual radiators on or off. In normal operation, the steam is condensing in the radiator, and then draining back to the boiler by gravity. Opening the valve after a period of nonoperation is not significantly different than the rush of condensation one gets at system start up when the radiator is cold. If the pipes are layed out correctly, when the valve is opened the water will drain back to the boiler with no outside action required. What is true is that the standard "one pipe" steam radiators work poorly when the user decides they want half the heat, and turns the steam valve halfway. In this case, the higher speed of the incoming steam through the smaller opening prevents the water from flowing out, and the radiator works poorly. The correct approach to variable heat on one-pipe steam systems is an adjustable exit air valve. Still, this should also "fix itself" quickly as soon as the shut-off valve is fully opened.
- Kadin 8y ago
  > The correct approach to variable heat is an adjustable exit air valve. I always wondered why the radiators in some buildings had two apparent temperature controls, one at the bottom of one side (generally a big gate valve) and another at the top of the other side (which I presume is the "exit air valve"). As a student, nobody ever told us how to actually regulate the heat, so there was a lot of randomly opening and closing valves until the thing either got hot or cooled down as needed. Or, more commonly, you just ran the thing full blast all the time and opened a window when it got too hot, titrating the cold air from outside against the overwhelming heat from the radiator. A couple of laminated instructions stapled to the wall near each radiator probably would have made the system perform much better.
anthonybsd 8y ago
> then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it That's not true. I've had issues with my house steam system in the past where I added too much water to the furnace and draining the furnace did the trick. Any excess water will simply turn to steam and cycle itself out of the system.
sigi45 8y ago
When the user doesn't understand the system, than it is the systems fault.
- romed 8y ago
  I can't believe you are being downvoted for this. It's absolutely correct and consistent with my point: a system that's abstractly superior but which cannot survive contact with humans is not a good one.
jayd16 8y ago
>The problem as usual is with the users not the system. Never the right attitude. If users have constant issues with a system, its a system flaw. You can't upgrade the users.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > You can't upgrade the users. You absolutely can. You just have to state and keep stating that the system is for adults who can be bothered to read half a page of instructions once in their life, instead of fostering a culture of ignorance. We have a similar problem with software UX, too.
  - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
    People are not going to read and remember detailed instructions for every one of the hundreds of devices in their daily lives. If that means they're stupid, then you have to design for stupids. It sucks, but that's how it goes. You're quite right that this is an ongoing problem in software UX. The problem is devs who insist that the user should accommodate the software rather than the other way around.
    - thrower123 8y ago
      It's pretty frigging amazing though with software that people will absolutely not spend a half hour reading documentation before they just start trying to poke and prod at things. In other industries, you have to go through mandatory trainings on a regular basis on your equipment.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      > People are not going to read and remember detailed instructions for every one of the hundreds of devices in their daily lives. I'm not saying hundreds. I'm saying couple dozen. Anything you interact with more often than twice in a lifetime. Nobody complains that they have to learn how to use a pen. Or a bike. Or a car. Or a gas stove. Or a microwave oven. People just suck it up, spend the necessary effort, and enjoy significantly improved capabilities. If you use something daily, you owe it to yourself to learn how to operate it. What we have with modern UX trends is a culture that despises learning. It's a marketing artifact - a software sells by first impression, not by value delivered, so the less learning user needs to get first results, the easier it is to sell a product or service. > You're quite right that this is an ongoing problem in software UX. The problem is devs who insist that the user should accommodate the software rather than the other way around. I meant precisely the opposite and you know it :). The rationale is this: the only way to have software that can be used by a newcomer to its full potential within first 5 seconds of exposure is to dumb the software down to near-uselessness. Which is the dominating trend nowadays. Lowering the beginning of the learning curve by flattening the entire curve creates a hard ceiling on utility of a piece of software (or hardware). If there's nothing to learn, the user is forever stuck at beginner productivity levels. Which means the software isn't really providing much value (it probably provides negative value if the user was forced to upgrade from older software which allowed for mastery).
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
> The problem as usual is with the users not the system. If anyone in your building turns the valve on their radiator off (because their space is overheated) then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it. If that's true, it would definitely be a problem with the system, not the user. A heating system that malfunctions semi-permanently if you turn off one radiator is not a good heating system, and it's not reasonable to demand that residents swelter in their rooms to accommodate the system's failings.

by romed 8y ago

nkurz 8y ago

If anyone in your building turns the valve on their radiator off (because their space is overheated) then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it. Theoretically, I don't think this is correct. And in practice, I'm sure it's not always true. That is, I've tuned up a steam system using Holoway's advice, and there was no problem with turning individual radiators on or off. In normal operation, the steam is condensing in the radiator, and then draining back to the boiler by gravity. Opening the valve after a period of nonoperation is not significantly different than the rush of condensation one gets at system start up when the radiator is cold. If the pipes are layed out correctly, when the valve is opened the water will drain back to the boiler with no outside action required. What is true is that the standard "one pipe" steam radiators work poorly when the user decides they want half the heat, and turns the steam valve halfway. In this case, the higher speed of the incoming steam through the smaller opening prevents the water from flowing out, and the radiator works poorly. The correct approach to variable heat on one-pipe steam systems is an adjustable exit air valve. Still, this should also "fix itself" quickly as soon as the shut-off valve is fully opened.

Kadin 8y ago
> The correct approach to variable heat is an adjustable exit air valve. I always wondered why the radiators in some buildings had two apparent temperature controls, one at the bottom of one side (generally a big gate valve) and another at the top of the other side (which I presume is the "exit air valve"). As a student, nobody ever told us how to actually regulate the heat, so there was a lot of randomly opening and closing valves until the thing either got hot or cooled down as needed. Or, more commonly, you just ran the thing full blast all the time and opened a window when it got too hot, titrating the cold air from outside against the overwhelming heat from the radiator. A couple of laminated instructions stapled to the wall near each radiator probably would have made the system perform much better.

anthonybsd 8y ago

> then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it That's not true. I've had issues with my house steam system in the past where I added too much water to the furnace and draining the furnace did the trick. Any excess water will simply turn to steam and cycle itself out of the system.

sigi45 8y ago

When the user doesn't understand the system, than it is the systems fault.

romed 8y ago
I can't believe you are being downvoted for this. It's absolutely correct and consistent with my point: a system that's abstractly superior but which cannot survive contact with humans is not a good one.

jayd16 8y ago

>The problem as usual is with the users not the system. Never the right attitude. If users have constant issues with a system, its a system flaw. You can't upgrade the users.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
> You can't upgrade the users. You absolutely can. You just have to state and keep stating that the system is for adults who can be bothered to read half a page of instructions once in their life, instead of fostering a culture of ignorance. We have a similar problem with software UX, too.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  People are not going to read and remember detailed instructions for every one of the hundreds of devices in their daily lives. If that means they're stupid, then you have to design for stupids. It sucks, but that's how it goes. You're quite right that this is an ongoing problem in software UX. The problem is devs who insist that the user should accommodate the software rather than the other way around.
  - thrower123 8y ago
    It's pretty frigging amazing though with software that people will absolutely not spend a half hour reading documentation before they just start trying to poke and prod at things. In other industries, you have to go through mandatory trainings on a regular basis on your equipment.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    > People are not going to read and remember detailed instructions for every one of the hundreds of devices in their daily lives. I'm not saying hundreds. I'm saying couple dozen. Anything you interact with more often than twice in a lifetime. Nobody complains that they have to learn how to use a pen. Or a bike. Or a car. Or a gas stove. Or a microwave oven. People just suck it up, spend the necessary effort, and enjoy significantly improved capabilities. If you use something daily, you owe it to yourself to learn how to operate it. What we have with modern UX trends is a culture that despises learning. It's a marketing artifact - a software sells by first impression, not by value delivered, so the less learning user needs to get first results, the easier it is to sell a product or service. > You're quite right that this is an ongoing problem in software UX. The problem is devs who insist that the user should accommodate the software rather than the other way around. I meant precisely the opposite and you know it :). The rationale is this: the only way to have software that can be used by a newcomer to its full potential within first 5 seconds of exposure is to dumb the software down to near-uselessness. Which is the dominating trend nowadays. Lowering the beginning of the learning curve by flattening the entire curve creates a hard ceiling on utility of a piece of software (or hardware). If there's nothing to learn, the user is forever stuck at beginner productivity levels. Which means the software isn't really providing much value (it probably provides negative value if the user was forced to upgrade from older software which allowed for mastery).

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

> The problem as usual is with the users not the system. If anyone in your building turns the valve on their radiator off (because their space is overheated) then the water will condense and when they open it again the entire system will hammer, forever, until the building engineer drains it. If that's true, it would definitely be a problem with the system, not the user. A heating system that malfunctions semi-permanently if you turn off one radiator is not a good heating system, and it's not reasonable to demand that residents swelter in their rooms to accommodate the system's failings.