Posted by:
frazenhiemer
at Thu Mar 24 20:03:44 2005 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by frazenhiemer ]
I doubt I would have the dimmer set low enough to have a hysteresis issue. I think any way you slice the element wear argument, the comparitive life expectancy is in theory measurable, but in reality negligable.
an on/off stat like the Ranco would provide less steady temp control than my set up and could fail on. It has been known to happen. Someone I know lost $27,000.oo worth of Ball Pythons when a proportional failed on.
one down side to my setup would be that if the room temperature was lowered substantially (Say my furnace quits working in the middle of the winter when I'm on vacation.) an automatic temp control device rather than a manual one would sure be nice. Another would be that a dimmer switch is more vunerable to accidental adjustment. Another would be that when a dimmer fails, it usually fails on. Down side to a proportional stat would be the cost. My setup would run me around $60.oo a Helix stat would run around $130.oo does anyone know if Helix guarantees that if their stat fails it will fail off? If not add another $50.oo for a Ranco stat for high limit cutout. The cost curve really adds up when you are talking say 20 or 30 rack control setups.
[ Hide Replies ]
|
RE: Your theory on heat element wear is incorrect, here's why - frazenhiemer, Thu Mar 24 20:03:44 2005