diyrebel

When an arrogant presumptuous dick dumps hot-headed uncivil drivel into a relatively apolitical thread about plumbing technology and reduces the quality of the discussion to a Trump vs. $someone style shitshow of threadcrap, the tools given to the moderator are:

• remove the comment (chainsaw)
• ban the user from the community (sledge hammer)

Where are the refined sophisticated tools?

When it comes to nannying children, we don’t give teachers a baseball bat. It’s the wrong tool. We are forced into a dilemma: either let the garbage float, or censor. This encourages moderators to be tyrants and too many choose that route. Moderators often censor civil ideas purely because they want to control the narrative (not the quality).

I want to do quality control, not narrative control. I oppose the tyranny of censorship in all but the most vile cases of bullying or spam. The modlog does not give enough transparency. If I wholly remove that asshole’s comment, then I become an asshole too.

He is on-topic. Just poor quality drivel that contributes nothing of value. Normally voting should solve this. X number of down votes causes the comment to be folded out of view, but not censored. It would rightfully keep the comment accessible to people who want to pick through the garbage and expand the low quality posts.

Why voting fails:

• tiny community means there can never be enough down votes to fold a comment.
• votes have no meaning. Bob votes emotionally and down votes every idea he dislikes, while Alice down votes off-topic or uncivil comments, regardless of agreement.

Solutions:

I’m not trying to strongly prescribe a fix in particular, but have some ideas to brainstorm:

• Mods get the option to simply fold a shitty comment when the msg is still on-topic and slightly better quality than spam. This should come with a one-line field (perhaps mandatory) where the mod must rationalise the action (e.g. “folded for uncivil rant with no useful contribution to the technical information sought”).
• A warning counter. Mods can send a warning to a user in connection with a comment. This is already possible but requires moderators to have an unhuman memory. A warning should not just be like any DM.. it should be tracked and counted. Mods should see a counter next to participants indicating how many warnings they have received and a page to view them all, so as to aid in decisions on whether to ban a user from a community.
• Moderator votes should be heavier than user votes. Perhaps an ability to choose how many votes they want to cast on a particular comment to have an effect like folding. Of course this should be transparent so it’s clear that X number of votes were cast by a mod. Rationale:
  • mods have better awareness of the purpose and rules of the community
  • mods are stakeholders with more investment into the success of a community than users
• Moderators could control the weight of other user’s votes. When 6 people upvote an uncivil post and only 2 people down vote it, it renders voting as a tool impotent and in fact harm inducing. Lousy/malicious voters have no consequences for harmful voting and thus no incentive to use voting as an effective tool for good. A curator should be able to adjust voting weight accordingly. E.g. take an action on a particular poll that results in a weight adjustment (positive or negative) on the users who voted a particular direction. The effect would be to cause voters to prioritize civil quality above whether they simply like/dislike an idea, so that votes actually take on a universal meaning. Which of course then makes voting an effective tool for folding poor quality content (as it was originally intended).
• (edit) Ability for a moderator to remove a voting option. If a comment is uncivil, allowing upvotes is only detrimental. So a moderator should be able to narrow the ballot to either down vote or neutral. And perhaps the contrary as well (like some beehaw is instance-wide). And perhaps the option to neutralise voting on a specific comment.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/26703241

This diagram is from the service manual of a combi boiler. It’s a flow sensor which detects whether hot water is running, which is then used to trigger on-demand heat and switch a diverter to take radiators out of the loop.

In English, the diagram shows:

• X ⅔ red wire (+5V)
• X 2/2 black wire (ground)
• X 2/6 green wire (signal)

I need to know what those fractions mean. I took the voltage measurements in this video:

• https://iv.ggtyler.dev/watch?v=d8ucufoyUlQ

I cannot necessarily trust the model in that video to have the same specs as mine. My voltmeter detected 4.68 V on the red input wire showing that the sensor is well fed. The green “signal” wire is supposed to be 0 V at rest and 2 V with water running (or I think the reverse of that is used in some models). In my case the green wire is ~1.33 V at rest and ~0.66 V when water is running. I need to know if these readings are normal as I troubleshoot this problem.

update

@unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de and a couple others gave the answer I was after. Then @tofubl@discuss.tchncs.de helped solve the underlying problem. The theory that the sensor was fine but the board was not drove me to test the sensor in isolation. The sensor gave correct output in isolation. Then I connected it back to the motherboard to retest and reconfirm that it’s still broken. But it actually worked. The hot water suddenly and mysteriously works now. I guess the act of draining the water and unplugging the connector then reconnecting and repressurizing caused it to work. It may be temporary, since in the past it was hit or miss whether it would work.

This diagram is from the service manual of a combi boiler. It’s a flow sensor which detects whether hot water is running, which is then used to trigger on-demand heat and switch a diverter to take radiators out of the loop.

In English, the diagram shows:

• X ⅔ red wire (+5V)
• X 2/2 black wire (ground)
• X 2/6 green wire (signal)

I need to know what those fractions mean. I took the voltage measurements in this video:

• https://iv.ggtyler.dev/watch?v=d8ucufoyUlQ

I cannot necessarily trust the model in that video to have the same specs as mine. My voltmeter detected 4.68 V on the red input wire showing that the sensor is well fed. The green “signal” wire is supposed to be 0 V at rest and 2 V with water running (or I think the reverse of that is used in some models). In my case the green wire is ~1.33 V at rest and ~0.66 V when water is running. I need to know if these readings are normal as I troubleshoot this problem.

I have a plastic cistern which has started leaking, only when flushing. The cisterns in the region are installed to sit on a foam ring (~12mm thick), which serves as a gasket. The foam eventually fails. I’m baffled because failing foam looks no different than new foam. They charge €10 for these gaskets that probably shouldn’t cost more like 50¢.

I bought a new gasket and it fails as well.

One shop had some uncommon gummy play-dough-like stuff for this purpose. It comes out in a strand with about the same diameter as a sharpie marker. So I stuck that to the toilet around the cistern ingress hole. Then I put an old foam disc on top of that and pressed it down. Even that leaks. Maybe I was supposed to really pile up this gummy stuff and not use the foam ring at all.

DiY shop says “buy a new cistern for €40”. I hate that option because it rewards the same poor design and I’d be spending more than I should have to.

Fuck that.

Alternatively the standards have changed and the new design is to have a thick rubber flanged gasket. But the ceramic ingress hole in the new toilets is also 80mm (~7mm bigger than mine). So I need a whole new toilet to upgrade to the new standard. What a disaster.

Fuck that.

So I went to a rubber fabrication specialist to get the new rubber gasket design in the size of the older toilets. He does not have a 3d printer, so for the 3D thing I need will cost €1000 to build the casting mold.

Fuck that.

All pressure is on to throw away a whole functional toilet because of a failed gasket. I hope that’s the nuclear option. I’m seriously considering grinding the ingress hole of the ceramic toilet to have the ø 80mm needed to install the newer rubber gasket. Has anyone done that? I have a carbide hole saw for ø 83, which would deny me the tight fit that I need. So am I better off using a dremel with a stone bit? Seems like that will take forever and maybe be a bit error prone. Even if I make the perfect hole, the inside of the rubber flange is also bigger than the cistern output port. So then I might need to improvise something to make the cistern mate tightly with the flange.

(edit)
Another possible hack: thinking of those Victorian toilet designs where the cistern is mounted close to the ceiling with a pull chain. Those toilets still exist, I think deliberately as a retro interior design. I wonder if there is some kind of plumbing kit that would have better sealing properties, and perhaps the cistern could be just raised 10cm or so and bolted to the wall. Though if it goes wrong, the toilet could become the shower for some unfortunate user.

update: solved

I was seriously baffled. The gummy stuff seems great. I could see no way for water to pass above, through, or below the gummy stuff. The only remaining possibility was water was the flush was faster than the bowl and backing up and spilling over the foam ring. So I put a ring of paper on it and retested. Still leaked but the paper ring is dry! wtf.. no possibilities left. I spent a lot of energy on the gasket.

When I first spotted the leak, my very first suspicion was that the plastic cistern could have a fracture because I’ve had one fail in that way before. So I filled it with water and set it over a bucket. Saw no leak. Apparently I was too hasty with that test. I just tested again and there is a fracture that water is very slowly dripping through. It’s so slow I thought it could only be happening on flushes (which reinforced the false negative of my 1st test).

Anyway, the fix is just to squirt some super glue into the fracture it possible, perhaps do some plastic welding on top of that using a soldering iron and a zip tie, then maybe put a bit of flex seal tape or roofing tape on top of that.

Glad I did not take a grinder to the motherfucker. I appreciate everyone’s feedback!

update: hmm.. not so easy

I just glued and taped. Still leaks. There are 3 cracks. I think these cracks were introduced when I screwed down the cistern (plastic piece of garbage). One of the cracks spans a rail so cannot be fixed externally. The inside of the cistern has a layer of styrofoam (probably to reinforce it). So I’m ½ tempted to cut the styrofoam and squirt epoxy on the inside bottom.

Alternatively, the normal fix is to buy a new plastic cistern (price: €40). But people keep throwing away plastic cisterns simply because the internal rubber ring gets scaling buildup and they do not sell the ring. I happen to have 10 new rings. So I guess my best move is to wait until the next cistern gets thrown away.

I just visited some web galleries of bathroom remodelers in the US, and it looks uncommon to have external shower fixtures. They tend to bury as much of the fixture as possible in the wall. From the photos, I don’t get the impression they are using thermostatic mixing valves. But it’s hard to tell. Can anyone confirm or deny?

I think I might favor external fixtures because they tend to be much cheaper and also more easily servicable.

Wondering if anyone has done this.

I have converted my showers to the external style of thermostatic shower valve. Made a huge upgrade to showering UX. Why not do the same for bathroom faucets?

It seems the same benefit could be had with the bathroom faucet, but no bathroom faucets in local shops have this capability (I didn’t check online nor would I shop online). So to wash my hands (or whatever), I start with full blast hot water to get the hot water hurried along the pipes. Then of course it can get screaming hot soon enough and I have to adjust the valve in the middle of what I’m doing.

So the hack I have in mind is to install a mixer valve that is intended for showers. It can be installed under the sink with the output of that going to the hot input of the faucet. Then when I put the faucet on full hot, it opens the hot input 100% just until the preset temp is reached, at which point adjustments are made automatically and instantly. This would give warm water as quickly as possible. If I really need screaming hot water for some reason, the mixer under the sink can be put on full (although I think I have to accept that those probably still have an upper limit).

As house problems can manifest in many ways, I recall reading some basic advice “if water is ending up in the wrong place, it’s in the plumber’s domain”.

Exceptionally, if water appears on the ceiling of the top floor, I would skip the plumber and call a roofer. But what about showers?

This is a bit of a mystery:

A shower is leak is manifesting two rooms away from the shower. It’s clear that the shower is the source of the leak because water only leaks when the shower is running. The plumber claims to have fixed the drain pipework. But it still leaks, just at a very slight trickle or drip. So apparently the pipework was leaky and the fact that it’s significantly less water leaking means there is still another problem. Plumber made a 2nd visit and claims the new pipework is solid up to and including the drain, and makes a vague statement: “replace the shower pan”. When someone stands on the showerpan while showering, water leaks at a higher rate. The shower pan flexes when standing on it, which suggests that maybe the bedding is rotted wood due to the leak. We put wood planks on the shower pan to prevent the showerpan from flexing while showering. That reduces the leak. But the leak is still there. I wonder if water is hitting the outside of the drain pipe and clinging to the drain pipe due to water tension, and running along the outside of the pipe until the pipe takes a turn 2 rooms over. I can only guess.

The shower pan itself has no holes. We will redo the silicon caulking around it in case the leak is around the sides.

Anyway, I don’t want to get too far off into woods with speculation. I’m mainly just trying to work out: is the plumber competent? Are plumbers expected to accurately diagnose this sort of thing? Or are plumbers only responsible for pipework and water penetrating walls and showerpans is beyond their expertise?

It’s hard to find good plumbers and I wonder whether I should call this plumber back in the future.

There are a lot of mixed messages about plumbing with dissimilar metals. Mainstream local plumbing shops sell brass manifolds. They say I can connect the brass manifold to steel pipe. Copper is very dissimilar to steel, and fittings for copper are brass. So if it’s okay to connect brass to copper and brass to steel, why couldn’t a copper pipe be connected to a (steel) hot water tank simply using a brass fitting? It’s supposed to be a dielectric fitting that insulates using rubber so the metals don’t touch.

OTOH, there is a gas-fired tankless boiler with internal copper pipe and a professional directly attached those copper pipes to galvanized steel pipes. Youtubers say copper should never join steel and they show examples of corrosion.

The question at the moment is whether this is a good idea:

galvanized steel pipe → brass manifold → galvanized steel pipe

I can get brass that is nickel plated externally, or it can be simple brass. The nickel-plated manifolds have integrated PEX valves. If one valve goes bad, then the whole manifold needs to be replaced as a single piece.

Shouldn’t the manifold also be made of galvanized steel? I wonder if it’s worth it to go on a hunt for something that’s uncommon.

#askFedi

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/12359577

There are a few youtube videos where someone suggests using sulfuric acid to clean a secondary plate-style heat exchanger (for example). Yet I’ve heard sulfuric acid is extremely corrosive to metal, so something seems off about that advice. I certainly would not want an internal leak to cause radiator fluid to enter the tap water. I saw a drop of sulfuric acid land on a galvanized steel pipe once and within minutes it was rusted on the spot.

This guy also says sulfuric acid is an option but also says there is a safer alternative acid -- yet he did not mention what it is! Does anyone know?

This guy says he uses an ultrasonic bath but he does not say what chemicals he uses. Would distilled white vinegar be good for this?

Note these questions are very loosely related to this thread which describes a problem I am having, but really it’s a separate discussion. Secondary exchangers need periodic maintenance regardless of whether this is my current problem. I saved my previously clogged heat exchanger from a few years ago so I could work on cleaning it. I have a quite small ultrasonic I could try, but I cannot submerge the whole exchanger. I would have to stand it on end and only clean a few centimeters deep.

There are a few youtube videos where someone suggests using sulfuric acid to clean a secondary plate-style heat exchanger (for example). Yet I’ve heard sulfuric acid is extremely corrosive to metal, so something seems off about that advice. I certainly would not want an internal leak to cause radiator fluid to enter the tap water. I saw a drop of sulfuric acid land on a galvanized steel pipe once and within minutes it was rusted on the spot.

This guy also says sulfuric acid is an option but also says there is a safer alternative acid -- yet he did not mention what it is! Does anyone know?

This guy says he uses an ultrasonic bath but he does not say what chemicals he uses. Would distilled white vinegar be good for this?

Note these questions are very loosely related to this thread which describes a problem I am having, but really it’s a separate discussion. Secondary exchangers need periodic maintenance regardless of whether this is my current problem. I saved my previously clogged heat exchanger from a few years ago so I could work on cleaning it. I have a quite small ultrasonic I could try, but I cannot submerge the whole exchanger. I would have to stand it on end and only clean a few centimeters deep.

My #Vaillant combi-boiler was working fine for both central heating and tap water, then suddenly there is no hot tap water. These are the clues that seem to imply the secondary heat exchanger would NOT be the problem:

• radiators heat up fine, which I think must prove the radiator side of the secondary heat exchanger is clear (OR does the secondary heat exchanger get bypassed when central heat runs)?
• the “hot” (cold) tap water flows with good pressure, which seems to suggest the tap water side of the secondary heat exchanger is probably clear as well.
• new secondary heat exchanger was installed in February 2019, which would be unlikely to clog this early.
• when I last showered the hot water was good and continuous. In 2019 when an exchanger clogged shower water would alternate between hot and cold. But in the case at hand I had solid hot tap water one day and not the next.

When I turn on a hot water tap, the boiler LCD should normally show an icon of a faucet to indicate that it has switched to tap water. That is not happening. Even if I turn off the central heating by turning the dial to the lowest setting, the boiler never switches to tap.

The guy in this video says it’s normally the central heating side of the secondary heat exchanger that clogs. Does anyone concur with that? Seems unlikely because the radiator circuit runs the same water through which has inhibitor. The tap water side would have new quite hard water constantly passing through the tap side of it.

There are no fault codes displayed when I press the “i” button for information. What a likely issue?

I guess this question might be important:

• Does the secondary heat exchanger get bypassed when central heat runs?

After some thought, I suspect bypassing the heat exchanger would be important, otherwise it would heat the tap water sitting still in the exchanger and cause unwanted pressure, correct? If that’s the case, it makes me think the radiator side of the exchanger could be clogged. But then I guess that does not explain the tap water icon not appearing on the lcd. When I turn on the tap, I hear no solenoid switching sound like I used to.

UPDATE

This morning the hot tap kind of works with the thermostat off and after letting water run quite a long time. The tap water icon appears somewhat chaotically, flashes every couple seconds (not sure if that’s normal). For the first couple minutes the status rotates between these undocumented status codes: 11, 14, 17. What do those mean?

The burner ignites for a second then quits (status 14). Like a car starting to rev but giving up.

Over the summer I drained the whole radiator system, flushed about ½ the radiators, and refilled with water and added the inhibitor. Just yesterday I added water to increase the radiator pressure. There is no filter on the radiator circuit. I wonder if my maintenance would have caused sludge to end up in the heat exchanger.

Then I turned on the heating and the tap water was shut out again. The status sequenced like this:

1. (status 4) heating mode: burner on
2. (status 5 undocumented)
3. (status 7) heating mode: pump overrun
4. (status 8) Anti cycling mode (after heating operation) ← what is that?

I’m seeing a contradiction on chain cleaning articles. One dodgy site says:

It is essential to avoid some common mistakes when cleaning a bike chain. Firstly, be cautious not to oversaturate the chain with degreaser as this can lead to damage or corrosion.

Then another site says to remove the chain and submerge it in degreaser.

The first site seems dodgy, like one of these machine-generated sites that scraps together fragments of other works and plagurizes it in a clumsy way. But is the advice good? If the chain is 100% degreased, when you oil it wouldn’t the oil eventually spread everywhere it’s needed?

The 2nd article says remove the chain. Yet I’ve heard advice to not re-use quick-links. So WTF are they implying we need to buy a new quick-link every time we clean it? If yes, then removing the chain defeats the cost effective motivation for cleaning it in the 1st place.

Maybe this is crazy talk, but one idea I have is to leave the chain on the bike and submerge just the deraileur into an ultrasonic bath and very slowly move the chain through it. Not sure if my deraileur has ball bearings.. if it does, then indeed the ultrasonic would be a bad idea.