Post a reply to the thread: Trane heat exchangers
You may choose an icon for your message from this list
Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Will turn www.example.com into [URL]http://www.example.com[/URL].
This was a big reason I stopped selling Trane. Customers always ask me what is the best furnace to which I can answer with all sincerity that its all about the heat exchanger design. I now only sell brands with tubular heat exchangers, no more clamshell for me ever again. These companies need to sack up and move to a tube design. They aren't perfect, we've all seen cracked tube HX's but they are like a needle in a haystack compared to the daily cracked clamshells. Trane is going to learn the hard way like Carrier.
Any crack and I condemn it. I won't make it unusable unless its really bad. A crack can lead to poor combustion which will lead to worse combustion. I'd rather err on the side of caution. I can see not doing anything and have it turn bad in a year or two and then come back on the last person who had their hands in it.
Originally Posted by pairajacks Total pressure is static plus velocity pressure. As the blower air sees restrictions, the velocity pressure gets backed up and INCREASES static pressure. The bulk pressure in the blower - house area is higher than the combustion chamber. The only way to get reverse air flow through a crack is to have local eddies where the venturi effect dominates, sucking CO into the house air. (Can this happen? Or is it designed to be fail-safe?). The sited reference did talk (slightly) about this. My point is, if something is this unsafe, and potentially dangerous to just about everyone, wouldn't gas furnace heat exchangers be designed to be fail-safe? Does anyone KNOW that they are not designed to be fail-safe? Just about every other product under the sun IS fail-safe. Why isn't the un-attended roaring gas-fire in everyone's garage that we call a furnace fail-safe? Given how likely furnaces are to have a crack (I read some posts where 3 year old Trane furnaces were being replaced for cracks), the market should be moving in the direction of making furnaces fail-safe, not relying on service guys to make judgements about hard to inspect areas. manuf manual says annual maintenance required, and as part of that hx inspection. GAMA standard is industry guidline for hx inspection, and is repeated as addendum in international code book. that seems to be the method for keeping and eye on hxs. blocked flue switches are not hx hole detectors. I've seen furnaces that were positive static pressure in the cabinent, but soot all around the crack/hole in hx and in house. I'vbe tried contacting manufs/reps about the hx issue, how much too much crack, and they're rather evasive about giving straight answers. Have a Payne document about the steel secondary hxs that resulted in a class action lawsuit, and there was some spin on that.
I had one last week, hairline crack, no rollouts. I told the lady, it's under warranty so I ordered a primary and secondary, left it running.
Originally Posted by pairajacks Total pressure is static plus velocity pressure. As the blower air sees restrictions, the velocity pressure gets backed up and INCREASES static pressure. The bulk pressure in the blower - house area is higher than the combustion chamber. The only way to get reverse air flow through a crack is to have local eddies where the venturi effect dominates, sucking CO into the house air. (Can this happen? Or is it designed to be fail-safe?). The sited reference did talk (slightly) about this. My point is, if something is this unsafe, and potentially dangerous to just about everyone, wouldn't gas furnace heat exchangers be designed to be fail-safe? Does anyone KNOW that they are not designed to be fail-safe? Just about every other product under the sun IS fail-safe. Why isn't the un-attended roaring gas-fire in everyone's garage that we call a furnace fail-safe? Given how likely furnaces are to have a crack (I read some posts where 3 year old Trane furnaces were being replaced for cracks), the market should be moving in the direction of making furnaces fail-safe, not relying on service guys to make judgements about hard to inspect areas. When a crack gets to the point of leaking, it is hazardous to have air blowing into the HX. This affects the flame and can cause dangerous rollout and elevated CO levels. Wouldn't it be better to catch the crack before it gets to that point, even if it is not an immediate hazard? In most cases, just a visible crack in a HX is not sufficient reason to red tag and disable a furnace. To shut down and red tag requires there to be a problem that poses an immediate danger to the occupants of the building. A barely visible crack does not qualify but needs to be brought to the owner's attention and repair recommendations made.
Total pressure is static plus velocity pressure. As the blower air sees restrictions, the velocity pressure gets backed up and INCREASES static pressure. The bulk pressure in the blower - house area is higher than the combustion chamber. The only way to get reverse air flow through a crack is to have local eddies where the venturi effect dominates, sucking CO into the house air. (Can this happen? Or is it designed to be fail-safe?). The sited reference did talk (slightly) about this. My point is, if something is this unsafe, and potentially dangerous to just about everyone, wouldn't gas furnace heat exchangers be designed to be fail-safe? Does anyone KNOW that they are not designed to be fail-safe? Just about every other product under the sun IS fail-safe. Why isn't the un-attended roaring gas-fire in everyone's garage that we call a furnace fail-safe? Given how likely furnaces are to have a crack (I read some posts where 3 year old Trane furnaces were being replaced for cracks), the market should be moving in the direction of making furnaces fail-safe, not relying on service guys to make judgements about hard to inspect areas.
Isn't there a "buy my book here" button on this site? sounds like one I saw yrs ago. Everyone is ripping you off, buy my book and I'll tell you what you want to hear, don't fix it. He states static pressure as proof that furnaces can't leak @ hx, but total pressure is full picture. Also, not seeing employees of manufacturers telling the public about furnace hxs is not proof that cracked hxs are safe.
I don't assume it is a dangerous thing,, I assume it could lead to a dangerous thing. If it is cracked it is condemned. If I make light of it and someone dies,,, it would be on me as I am the professional.
Everyone seems to be assuming that having a hairline crack in the heat exchanger is an extremely dangerous thing. Can combustion chamber air really get through a hairline crack when the combustion chamber is at a negative pressure relative to the house air? Reference - http://carbonmonoxidemyths.com/m/Myth-1.html. If this is such a dangerous thing, why aren't heat exchangers designed to be inspectable? Why are cracks so hard to find? Doesn't that suggest that cracks are likely to exist in many units out there that are thought to be good? Wouldn't this be a liability for furnace makers? (they've designed heat exchangers that can't be 100% reliably inspected for cracks that could lead to CO poisoning). The HVAC service guys (probably most reading this) are obviously worried about their part in this liability. What do the furnace design engineers have to say about this?
Originally Posted by luv2cruiserccl Sounds good. I been wondering if a inspection camera thru the limit switch would work at all in helping to find these issues as well Sent from my BlackBerry using Tapatalk please excuse typographical errors It should but it wod depend on the camera. My dewalt wouldn't fit.
I've found that Tranes are pretty consistent on O2 content. run 10% in flue. if its higher than that, likely a leak in hx. also, CO will be up sometimes as well.
Originally Posted by Hvac216 If I need to take the actual faceplate off then no. I'll pull it and look at it when I pull it off my van in the am. Sounds good. I been wondering if a inspection camera thru the limit switch would work at all in helping to find these issues as well Sent from my BlackBerry using Tapatalk please excuse typographical errors
Originally Posted by luv2cruiserccl Did u happen to check the plastic cover plate that have a dozen or so screws in in that covers the actual secondary hx when I find tail piece issue I usually see that but not always Sent from my BlackBerry using Tapatalk please excuse typographical errors If I need to take the actual faceplate off then no. I'll pull it and look at it when I pull it off my van in the am.
Originally Posted by Hvac216 Yes it is. That was the worst of it, but it was cracked a few places. They were all where the secondary screws to the faceplate. Did u happen to check the plastic cover plate that have a dozen or so screws in in that covers the actual secondary hx when I find tail piece issue I usually see that but not always Sent from my BlackBerry using Tapatalk please excuse typographical errors
Yes it is. That was the worst of it, but it was cracked a few places. They were all where the secondary screws to the faceplate.
Originally Posted by Hvac216 Attachment 357201 Found this one today. 9 yrs old. I assume that is the tail piece from secondary to comb blower motor? Sent from my BlackBerry using Tapatalk please excuse typographical errors
Attachment 357201 Found this one today. 9 yrs old.
Originally Posted by Gus-Herb94 Good lord, glad I found this thread! This answers my question about how Trane HX's are holding up... Now i'll be keeping an eye out. Are these failing HX's you guys are finding not getting enough airflow or something? (in other words any of them fail with proper airflow/ductwork etc) There is no reason outside of design or quality of materials.
Good lord, glad I found this thread! This answers my question about how Trane HX's are holding up... Now i'll be keeping an eye out. Are these failing HX's you guys are finding not getting enough airflow or something? (in other words any of them fail with proper airflow/ductwork etc)
Originally Posted by 2141 It doesn't matter the model. I have seen them on every model both 80 and 90 %. Here is a picture I took using my see snake and phone. It right underneath the burner entry Attachment 335651 Has anyone found any of these lately?
Forum Rules
