Was posted on BBC a few weeks back and in the comments sections this was posted.
Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
51–60 of 166 posts
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#52>"We found it worked as good as a concrete counterweight, stopping the spinning drum from heavily vibrating the machine," Sorry to be off topic, but shouldn't it be "worked as well "? Not a native speaker, but it sounds strange. Very interesting idea, though as many have pointed out, I'd be worried of leakage in the long run. A plastic container should be cheap to replace, however.
I think this is a UK article, but I think people in the USA often say 'good' when they mean 'well'. Maybe that's crossing the Atlantic now.
This is likely correct - it's a common mistake in English on both sides of the Atlantic, and you are right that it should be "well". My clients from the UK use it about as frequently as my US clients.
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#53For those on the lazy web like me; the answer is fill a hollow plastic counter weight with water when the machine is installed rather than lug great slabs of concrete round the world.
Concrete weighs 2.5 as much per given volume 150 vs 62 pounds per cubic foot. So, there are significant trade offs involved. Also, adding a sealed water container creates a few more ways for these things to break down which was a larger concern when washing machines lasted ~5x as long.
> when washing machines lasted ~5x as long
Planned obsolescence is so damned depressing. Imagine how much CO2 and energy could be saved if washing machines simply lasted as long as they did 25 years ago (concrete counterweight or not!). It's sad to see these examples of how consumerism and marketing have actually reversed the progress of humanity.
Is it not possible to legally mandate a minimum level of quality for motors, bearings, repairability etc? I guess this stuff is incredibly hard to do without creating weird unintended consequences.
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, concrete is solid and water is liquid. I know it sounds obvious, but have you ever seen in your life a plastic flask or tank or jerry can that after several years leaked? It is of course doable, but how durable will it be? Imagine the kind of vibrations and shocks a jerry can used as a counterbalancing device in a relatively hot environment needs to bear. A good, environment-friendly idea would be to make the c…
make it metal, fill with sand
...with an added cost of some 10-15 US$ for a steel tank that being just over something generating hot, humid air all the time will rust in no time or 40-60 US$ in the case of stainless steel.
Then everyone has 20 Kg of sand at home (if you have to transport the 20 Kg of sand all the theoretical transport savings are gone).
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only issue might be the container not being 100% full causing the water inside to slosh and increase the vibrations. (Probably not that hard to solve)
>(Probably not that hard to solve) Yeah, just throw a 2 channel PID controller and a bunch of servos. It most likely be rather cheap (sarcasm)
Most probably the new washing machine will have a microprocessor anyway being IoT ;), so it's just the cost of sensors and servos that adds to the BOM.
As a side note, and JFYI, a celebration of connected washers (by IBM):
https://www.ibm.com/blogs/internet-of-things/washing-iot-sol...
Particularly:
>New business transformation opportunities can be explored whereby the washing machine itself can be turned into a service where the thing is not purchased, but given to the user, with the user adopting a pay per wash experience.
The first example of WAASH (Washing As A Service, Hot) I ever saw.
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#56Somewhat tickled to say I thought of this about 10 years ago, told everyone who would listen, and many who wouldn't. As I was not remotely interested in developing it myself I was happy to tell anyone. Got an audience with a designer at Dyson, gave it to him straight in the clearest most open terms imaginable, to be met by nonplussed disinterest. Just kept it for cocktail parties since then.
I imagine the difficulty here is not in coming up with the idea of using a water tank, but rather in designing the shape and material of a container that is sufficiently strong to survive the forces acting upon it.
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's one of those ideas that seems so obvious and sensible in retrospect it makes you wonder how many other stupid designs are hidden in plain view, and why did this problem not get solved until 2017, when there are robots on Mars and probes orbiting Jupiter and Saturn ?
I got this idea long ago but I couldn't think of a way of using this idea. Then I thought it was obvious and that it was not implemented for some non obvious reason I didn't know.
A block of concrete is cheap and zero maintanance. And the machine typically is carried only twice in it's lifetime.
A water reservoir needs some way of filling, thus extra work for the buyer (typical ad: our washing machine doesn't need filling as those clunky reservoir ones!!!), maybe requires some maintenance. If you leave water in it for years it will rot, so probably you also need to put some disinfectants in.
So basically this idea is more environmentally sane, but more expensive. But there could be a market here, people care and are willing to spend more these days to save the env.
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#58god dammit, yet another stupid idea I thought nobody would ever like. ps: same goes for almost every dead weight transport. Road blocks, you name it. Someone computes the wasted energy ? pps: what about vertical axis spinning models ? I remember people saying they were inneficient. Anyone can explain ? ppps: I remember a guy in africa coupling a dead bike to a vertical spinning container. sigh
Water-filled road blocks are not new: https://www.trafficsafetystore.com/water-filled-barriers
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, concrete is solid and water is liquid. I know it sounds obvious, but have you ever seen in your life a plastic flask or tank or jerry can that after several years leaked? It is of course doable, but how durable will it be? Imagine the kind of vibrations and shocks a jerry can used as a counterbalancing device in a relatively hot environment needs to bear. A good, environment-friendly idea would be to make the c…
make it metal, fill with sand
[deleted]
Re: Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin
#60I find innovations like this wonderfully elegant when they're so obvious in hindsight. It boggles the mind nobody thought of this before. There must be other problems with radically better obvious-in-hindsight solutions out there too.
I think that many people thought of it. Water filled counterweights are used everywhere. That a washing machine uses water certainly helps making the connection.
But ideas are easy, implementation is hard. How to deal with the lower density of water, its tendency to slosh around, how is the tank filled, how is it emptied, how to prevent leaks, staleness, what if it is improperly filled, the costs and benefits.
These are all questions manufacturers have to answer. The University of Nottingham made a small step towards the solution by having a working prototype. But as hundreds of failed Kickstarter project show, there is a world between a prototype and mass production.