Hansson said:
So a vertical tank takes less footprint. It don't have to be so big witch mean that you can have a smaller "inexpensive" boiler.
The boiler size does not change. We're storing the roughly the same effective amount of energy (btu's or kW's) - we're just getting a higher temperature swing and on a smaller volume, to accomplish the same storage capacity.
Jim in CT said:
This SS modular tank, would there be a liner? What are costs running, for just the tank (minus coils)? Dimensions?
No liner, which is how it can handle higher temperatures.
The tank is 62" tall, plus roughly 6" for the bulkhead in the center (roughly 18" square). The 1000-gallon tank should be 76" square. If you do the math, that's actually more than 1000 gallons, but I'm just labeling them in even numbers for convenience. Those numbers are for the tank itself, without insulation. Insulation will be 4" or more of polyisocyanurate. It's recommended to install a base of cinderblocks and plywood under the tank to keep it off the floor and improve insulation, but you could go with just the foam if headroom is an issue.
500-gallon would be the same height, but 76x40" footprint, and the 1500 gallon would be 76x114".
All these dimensions are rough, and subject to some change (the height is probably the closest to being "set").
Pricing is still in the works. This is very much in the "beta" stage, and until we work out the details with the fabricator, we won't know if it is an economically-feasible design or not. Obviously, if it cannot be competitive with the other technologies on the market, then there's no real point in making it into a commercial product. The number of options which will be available is also still in the works (eg, I'd like to have at least the three sizes, and the options of moving the tappings for the feed/return pipes, controls, and such to either the front or side, but we may have some other options).
Joe