Why didn't anyone think of this before?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 30
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 30

Guest
Washing machines have a 25Kg block in the bottom to stabilise the machine. Some bright spark at Nottingham Trent University has come up with the idea to have a water drum that is in place of the block, the water drum fills up with water and acts as the weight once the machine is installed.

This makes it great for reducing carbon and costs in transportation as the machine is 23Kg lighter.

And, so much lighter on your back should you have to move it.

Genius! :)

More info here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40821915
 
halvor

halvor

a most elusive fish
If it weren't for the fact that noone having thought of this earlier being so utterly stupid, then yes, it would be genius. And think of us having dragged these monsters up and down stairs when moving or getting new ones.
 
UKRob

UKRob

Forum GOD!
Not quite as straightforward as the article makes out. Firstly, there are two blocks - one bottom and one top that make up the total weight. I can foresee difficulties in filling and emptying a bottom reservoir whereas the top one should be straight forward. The machine shown has a top reservoir only.
 
LeeBot

LeeBot

Forum GOD!
UKRob said:
Not quite as straightforward as the article makes out. Firstly, there are two blocks - one bottom and one top that make up the total weight. I can foresee difficulties in filling and emptying a bottom reservoir whereas the top one should be straight forward. The machine shown has a top reservoir only.
Click to expand...
Even just replacing the just top one and leaving a concrete base in the bottom would make a significant difference. Can't help but feel there's an issue somewhere though as the concept of using water to weigh things down only once they're in situ is not new.

Might be a bit alarming for someone who forgets or doesn't know to fill it up though. Bouncing washing machine!
 
Last edited:
slapo

slapo

It's... alive!
It's a likeable idea, but I can see three issues now:
1. As LeeBot mentioned, if it's anywhere but at the top, design may need to work around filling it.
2. Size difference. As the article mentions, the blocks would need to be bigger. If that means larger machines, manufacturer's hesitation would be understandable.
3. Filling the blocks. They'd need to make sure the blocks are quite full, with no air in there, to prevent sloshing in the blocks.

I think #3 could be avoided by slightly overfilling. Clumsy, inelegant, would work, though, but only if the the water blocks would be out at the time of filling.
#2 - maybe same size blocks plus water 'rods' could help (or pipes as mentioned by Nick_S), but that's another design change, plus if pipes were to be used, they would probably have to be sturdier than ordinary pipes.
#1 - they'd either have to make the bottom blocks removable or have something lead water in there. Pipes would solve it, but that's more wasted space.

I think an easy solution would be to have the washing machine fill all the tanks by itself during first start and then close the tanks off, but perhaps that's too complicated, thus prone to failure. Maybe not, though.
 
Last edited:
Mikey J

Mikey J

Forum HOG!
In regards to the filling and sloshing issues why not just have two internal tanks (one top, one bottom) filled directly from the household inlet internally via pipe work.

Get it into position, plumb it in, power it up and it fills itself automatically. When you come to move press the "move" button (for arguments sake) and it drains both tanks.
 
E

Eeyore

Forum GOD!
Sounds like an elegant solution! You only need to take a leak-proof design into account, including expansion through freezing.
 
Mikey J

Mikey J

Forum HOG!
Eeyore said:
Sounds like an elegant solution! You only need to take a leak-proof design into account, including expansion through freezing.
Click to expand...
And through heating... Perhaps a bellows kind of waist on the tank could deal with that? The space is the major issue. It needs to be suspended to counteract the spinning of the drum and water is 2.4x less dense than concrete...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top