|
'40 CF
Mar 9, 2014 23:50:00 GMT
Post by birkie on Mar 9, 2014 23:50:00 GMT
I guess I just joined the $75 flat top club! It's a JB6-40-B. According to the manual, it has a CF-2H machine. It also made me notice that the scanned scotch yoke manual is missing page 38, which would list the specs for that unit. I don't have any pictures, but it is the "art deco" looking cabinet shown here: It's missing the "cold storage" chiller dish, so there is a gaping hole in the upper rack where it should be. The freezer door has some cracks in the metal near the hinges, but otherwise it's in great condition. It seemed to be happy briefly running in the cool (30-40F) garage. I'll post some pics once we pick it up.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 10, 2014 0:19:14 GMT
Post by coldspaces on Mar 10, 2014 0:19:14 GMT
Sounds like a nice pre war refrigerating machine. Will be watching for those pics.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 10, 2014 1:05:52 GMT
Post by cablehack on Mar 10, 2014 1:05:52 GMT
Excellent that another CF will join the group! I can't wait to see all the pics of it. You can really see the excellence in GE's Scotch Yoke design because nothing ever goes wrong with them. Evaporator design was also at its peak. I presume you're also aware that these Flatops and their CK brothers have the lowest power consumption compared to any other same size fridge.
Re the manual; I'll check that tonight - I know there was at least one blank page in the original, but will see if I've missed page 38.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 10, 2014 12:09:16 GMT
Post by birkie on Mar 10, 2014 12:09:16 GMT
You can really see the excellence in GE's Scotch Yoke design because nothing ever goes wrong with them. Evaporator design was also at its peak. I presume you're also aware that these Flatops and their CK brothers have the lowest power consumption compared to any other same size fridge. Yes, exactly. After reading the William Holladay article and the patents, I'm impressed with the CK-style evaporator. Interestingly, there are slight differences between the evaporator on this CF vs my CK-2-B16. See where the channels along the interior wall of the evaporator expand slightly towards the interior where before they meet the header (making a sort of wedge shape?)? The CF is like that. The older CK evaporator has flat walls - the diameter of the tubes does not expand at all before they meet the header. That change change may have been to further reduce turbulence in the header, but that's only a wild guess. Great, thanks. It looks like page 39 is included twice: once as page 38, and again as page 39.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 10, 2014 23:46:36 GMT
Post by cablehack on Mar 10, 2014 23:46:36 GMT
You were quite right; a bit of an error on my part. I've corrected the zip file, so you should find page 38 in it now.
I've noticed the wedge shape under the header tank of later machines - it could be as you say. I'd read that the restrictions placed at the bottom were meant to function as nozzles to speed up evaporation. If you go through all the evaporator patents it might explain the difference - there's several of the CK/CF style. It's probably worth looking up all the patents listed on your cooling unit anyway.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 11, 2014 16:12:14 GMT
Post by birkie on Mar 11, 2014 16:12:14 GMT
You were quite right; a bit of an error on my part. I've corrected the zip file, so you should find page 38 in it now. I've noticed the wedge shape under the header tank of later machines - it could be as you say. I'd read that the restrictions placed at the bottom were meant to function as nozzles to speed up evaporation. If you go through all the evaporator patents it might explain the difference - there's several of the CK/CF style. It's probably worth looking up all the patents listed on your cooling unit anyway. Great, got it Thanks!. Once I haul the unit back to my place, I'll take a look at the patents and see if there is anything interesting (and/or different from coldspace's '38)
|
|
|
Post by birkie on Mar 17, 2014 3:38:03 GMT
Hi all, Here are some picks of our new flat top: Compared to our CK-2-B16: The art deco handle Interior with shelves. There is no chiller tray, and I'm pretty sure it came with at least another shelf. There are pegs for a tiny shelf to the right of the evaporator as well. Under the evaporator. You can clearly see that the freezer door doesn't close. The metal has some cracks by the hinges, it was probably forced at some point. Someone must have aggressively gone after the evaporator with an ice pick. Given the dents just below the center of the picture, it must have been accompanied by a hammer!
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 17, 2014 3:59:16 GMT
Post by coldspaces on Mar 17, 2014 3:59:16 GMT
That looks real nice. I am convinced that the stainless steel evaps are one of the reasons so many GE survived. They could take a lot of abuse. I see one problem though,you better get it some legs,its gonna be a dust catcher compared to the Monitor Top lol.
Thanks for the pics
|
|
|
Post by ChrisJ on Mar 17, 2014 4:36:38 GMT
That looks real nice. I am convinced that the stainless steel evaps are one of the reasons so many GE survived. They could take a lot of abuse. I see one problem though,you better get it some legs,its gonna be a dust catcher compared to the Monitor Top lol. Thanks for the pics You know it's sad. I've been trying to figure out how to clean the condenser on our 2011 Kitchenaid refrigerator because it has this stupid setup where you can only get to the first and last row of fins. Everything in between, the entire depth of the fridge is packed with dust and I can't get to it. Then I looked over at the monitor top and realized how easy it is to clean that condenser and it just gave me a headache. So far my only idea is to empty the thing and have help and lean it back to try and clean under it. I'm a firm believer that all refrigerators should have smooth condensers on top and legs on the bottom.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 17, 2014 4:37:50 GMT
Post by cablehack on Mar 17, 2014 4:37:50 GMT
Very attractive indeed! Can you show some pics of the compressor? The cycling times and power consumption will be very interesting once it's stabilised at normal temperature.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 17, 2014 4:45:31 GMT
Post by coldspaces on Mar 17, 2014 4:45:31 GMT
That looks real nice. I am convinced that the stainless steel evaps are one of the reasons so many GE survived. They could take a lot of abuse. I see one problem though,you better get it some legs,its gonna be a dust catcher compared to the Monitor Top lol. Thanks for the pics You know it's sad. I've been trying to figure out how to clean the condenser on our 2011 Kitchenaid refrigerator because it has this stupid setup where you can only get to the first and last row of fins. Everything in between, the entire depth of the fridge is packed with dust and I can't get to it. Then I looked over at the monitor top and realized how easy it is to clean that condenser and it just gave me a headache. So far my only idea is to empty the thing and have help and lean it back to try and clean under it. I'm a firm believer that all refrigerators should have smooth condensers on top and legs on the bottom. Best way on these newer ones is the air compressor. They sure don't want you to get even a bush in there. Mine is near the back door and the last time I cleaned it it was a day the wind was blowing against the front of the house real strong. Opened the front and back doors and went to town. Did I mention I did it when the wife was gone? I have also used my old furnace blower to blow the dust out the back door when I do it.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 18, 2014 4:14:13 GMT
Post by birkie on Mar 18, 2014 4:14:13 GMT
Very attractive indeed! Can you show some pics of the compressor? The cycling times and power consumption will be very interesting once it's stabilised at normal temperature. Sure. I'm not sure I ran it long enough to truly stabilize (~2hrs), but it it runs 12 minutes off, 2:45 on. 70F room. This is with the original seals, which are hard and cracked, but not missing. Power consumption starts at 160W and drops to 145 at the end of the cycle. Power factor is about .6. Cabinet temperature was 37F, dial in middle position. I ran my CK-2-B16 for comparison - put blue tape around the door perimeter to compensate for the fact that it had *no* remaining door seal. Its ran slightly less than 2 minutes on, 15:10 off, but drew 175-165W. Cabinet temperature was 41F, dial in middle position. Here's a chart comparing runtime and power draw for the 1940 CF-2 vs 1935 CK-2. Higher draw, shorter run is the CK. Lower draw, longer run is the CF: Here's the compressor: Label (looking up patents)
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 18, 2014 4:53:07 GMT
Post by cablehack on Mar 18, 2014 4:53:07 GMT
That's really interesting. It looks in great condition underneath. I like your chart too. You'd really need to run them for a full day or two, with the cabinet temps the same, to get an accurate comparison, but those are very good cycling times for only 2hrs running. I notice the CF has less charge of S02, presumably because of the 6 cu. ft. cabinet, and this would be why it draws less current. What plans have you got for restoration?
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 19, 2014 2:47:39 GMT
Post by sheeplady on Mar 19, 2014 2:47:39 GMT
What plans have you got for restoration? Right now the plans are to replace the gaskets and possibly the cords. Other than that, it will be a deep cleaning for both. We plan on leaving the original finishes intact. I feel the original finish tells a story about how it was used. One will be our primary fridge and the second will be an overflow fridge (good for storing fruit after a harvest, for parties, etc.) But we haven't quite decided which fridge will be the primary. I am leaning towards the monitor top as our primary fridge, mostly because it has the nice foot pedal feature (I can see that coming in quite handy), the fact it is on feet (and will be easy to clean), and the fact that both my husband and I have always wanted a monitor top. We would like to find the chiller trays for both of these and the shelves we are missing from the flat top. I believe I have a an old ice cube tray packed away someplace (need to find it), but more of those would be nice. I know that GE also had refrigerator dishes labeled with "GE." Since we use "old fashioned" refrigerator dishes regularly, I would love a set of those too. Also, I have told my husband that we need to have a globe top and a DR to add to the collection.
|
|
|
'40 CF
Mar 20, 2014 12:39:19 GMT
Post by birkie on Mar 20, 2014 12:39:19 GMT
That's really interesting. It looks in great condition underneath. I like your chart too. You'd really need to run them for a full day or two, with the cabinet temps the same, to get an accurate comparison, but those are very good cycling times for only 2hrs running. Yeah, totally unscientific. The monitor top may have had an advantage due to the blue tape temporary seal, I'm not sure. I also don't know the condition of the insulation on either one. Interestingly, some quick back of the envelope math points to a yearly consusmption of ~180 kWh for the monitor top vs ~240 kWh for the flat top if this was representative of the steady state (which it isn't in real life). It would be fascinating to do a better comparison under more equal conditions. Hm, I thought the difference mostly would have been due to the 1940 redesign of the float chamber (making it spherical, with much less volume surrounding the float). The machines are rated for the same BTU output - how would the total amount of refrigerant affect power draw (i.e. what principles are at play)? I'm more familiar with general thermodynamics and chemical properties theory than refrigeration per se, so this would help me understand. I think my wife said it best - just addressing the seals/gaskets & wiring for now. I'm going to look under the textolite strips to see if the insulation looks compromised. If so, then we'd need to address that too.
|
|