
Concrete-free washing machines are lighter to transport, just as good in a spin - the-dude
http://newatlas.com/plastic-counterweight-washing-machine-concrete/50769/
======
jmkd
Somewhat 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.

~~~
amelius
I've been telling this for years every time I helped people move. The thought
of patenting it crossed my mind, but I always assumed this would be "too
simple" an invention, that companies probably already had figured out, but
couldn't use because of some patent troll or something like that. Also, as a
student, I didn't have the money for a patent application.

~~~
dingaling
> Also, as a student, I didn't have the money for a patent application.

That's the big probem for individuals.

Patenting as an individual is expensive and as a friend learned the big
companies can just sit-tight until the renewal fees become too much to bear.

He had designed a self-assembly glassfibre astronomical observatory on the
Buckmeister principle, with a wide-opening orifice using petal segments, and
toured the major manufacturers in the field. None wanted to license the
patent.

Shortly after he let the patent lapse due to cost, several of the
manufacturers brought out their variants. That's just the way the game is
played.

~~~
marcosdumay
That's the main failure on that argument that patents protect small inventors.

It's a wonder that the companies on your case decided to ignore the patent,
instead of implementing it expecting your friend to not have enough money to
sue.

------
blkhawk
Newer washing machines have less concrete in them that before - My guess would
be that in the past the water tank would have been to large to actually fit
the machine.

I also wonder how the plastic will stand up to the vibrations. You might get
leaks because the plastic will flex and eventually rupture from stress.

The reason why newer machines have less counterweight is that the motors are
electronically regulated these days. That means you can partly dampen
vibrations with the motor instead of with weights.

~~~
yoz-y
3.5 kg of plastic is quite a lot though, I suppose it is because the tank is
very thick.

------
italicbold
"The plastic counterweight (right) could save around 45,000 tonnes of CO2 each
year in the UK..."

How about we just make machines that last instead of having to be replaced all
the time.

~~~
rsynnott
Because no-one wants to pay for that. Washing machines which last exist, but
they're expensive. They use sturdier, more easily replaceable parts, higher
quality motors and control systems, etc. And sometimes _iron_ counterweights
(even more CO2 there).

You can get a washing machine that might last perhaps 5-10 years for about
200-300 euro... or a Miele one that'll probably last over 20 years for 1000
euro. It's a hard sell for most people.

~~~
switch007
My problem is that I'm willing to spend the money but I'm worried about
getting burnt. It can be difficult to ascertain what product is worth spending
money on and how much extra to spend exactly.

There is zero guarantee of spending more to get higher quality and longer
life. It takes a lot of research.

You need to be really, really determined to follow the "Buy It For Life" way.

~~~
KGIII
A bit less than ten years ago, I had my home built and purchased nothing but
high-end industrial appliances. I admit, this was costly and I made similar
viewpoint purchases for the rest of the house.

So far, I've not had to have anything repaired - at all. I haven't even had to
change an appliance lightbulb. I just keep the consumables replaced on
schedule.

Initially, it was quite expensive. I do think it may be cheaper on the long
run.

~~~
jjeaff
Do cheap appliances really have longevity problems though?

My place is going on 22 years old with the same gas oven/stove top, built in
microwave, and standing washer dryer combo. No repairs needed that I know of
and even if they did, they are all standard, whirlpool type appliance with an
abundance of cheap parts online. Even the fridge was going strong until we had
an internal water leak a few years ago which was easily fixed for $100. We did
recently get rid of it for a more efficient model though.

Now that I think about it, the dishwasher was replaced a few years ago. Mostly
because we didn't think the old one was cleaning well enough. But the new one
was barely $200 all in.

Commerical, high end versions of these appliances would need to last more than
my remaining lifespan to pay for themselves.

I don't think much financial argument can be made for spending large amounts
of money on regular kitchen appliances for their longevity.

~~~
EADGBE
It's always a gamble, but I feel like your appliances probably fall in the
threshold of manufacturers giving a damn about longevity.

Our 32-year-old home, with original washer/dryer, dishwasher, fridge, and oven
were only recently renovated mostly because of aesthetics - not operation. Of
those appliances, the dishwasher was the only real dud the last year.

------
chr4004
Having a "dead weight" has it's advantages - passive, no bacteria, mold, flex,
resistant to shock etc. Pretty sure billion dollar companies like Siemens have
thought this through and came to the conclusion that concrete is best. The
negative externality of a disappointed customer seems to be larger (medium
term) than the damage being done by producing the concrete.

~~~
joezydeco
Manufacturers really don't care too much about shipping costs (and the
secondary CO2 burden) once the machine leaves their loading dock. Their
concern is to make the machine as cheaply as possible for the features
involved and maximize the margin.

~~~
dx034
Costs are probably not that high anyway. For most logistic companies, volume
determines capacity for trucks, not weight. Transporting a washing machine
amongst other deliveries will not cost much more than other deliveries of that
size (except for the additional fuel which is probably low). Carrying it in
place can be done within minutes, not much longer than other deliveries.

That's probably also the reason why machines are cheap to buy online. If
shipping was a constraint, buying at big stores would be cheaper.

Therefore, concrete can save some CO2 but probably not much cost. The cost of
replacing faulty water tanks could be higher than the saved cost.

------
taoufix
I never knew washing machines had concrete in them :(

~~~
tim333
Yeah, check out Secret Life Of Machines 104 The Washing Machine
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baFaEvBywGc&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baFaEvBywGc&feature=youtu.be&t=7m30s)

they show what happens if you take the block out. Also how comercial machines
do without it by balancing the load.

~~~
stevekemp
Damn that takes me back! I used to love watch Secret Life of Machines, back in
the 80s.

------
code4tee
This is one of those things where I'd have to think the washing machine
companies have certainly thought of this and there's a reason they don't do it
that's being left out of the article. It does seem like a good idea, but
curious why it's not done already.

------
Bjartr
My top loader has damping springs at the bottom and a plastic "balance
ring"[1] around the top of the basket that's filled with fluid to reduce
vibrations. Certainly no concrete anywhere in it, that I could see when I took
the cover/case off anyway.

Though I've been having problems with it shaking too much during the spin
cycle, so I wish it did have concrete.

[1] [http://www.appliancepartspros.com/whirlpool-balance-ring-
asm...](http://www.appliancepartspros.com/whirlpool-balance-ring-asm-
wp3956205-ap6008969.html)

~~~
ars
Only front loaders have it. Top loaders don't spin fast enough to need it.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I was of the understanding top loaders don't require it because the axis of
spin is oriented such that, so long as the load is sufficiently balanced, it
doesn't matter how fast it spins.

Front loaders have a harder time balancing the load due to the orientation of
the drum, so require greater inertial mass to stabilise them.

~~~
ars
No, I don't believe that's true. An imbalanced top loader will "walk" across
the room if it's not heavy enough to stay put.

No, it's simply that top loaders just don't spin very fast.

> Front loaders have a harder time balancing the load due to the orientation
> of the drum

The opposite - it's easier for a front loader to balance the load, not harder
(that's why they are able to spin faster).

A top loader has no ability to move the clothing into balance. But a front
loader can - it spins slowly so that the clothing moves around, and then when
it detects balance, it speeds up and locks the clothing into position.

A front loader is a better washing machine in every single way, except for
one: it needs to be water tight, which means air tight, so it can grow mildew
if the door is not left open when it's not in use.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
Ah, yep, all going points, I think you're right. I sit corrected.

Yeah, got to leave that door open when not in use. Definitely something I
always do.

------
s-berwick
Was posted on BBC a few weeks back and in the comments sections this was
posted.

[https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0326502A1/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0326502A1/en)

~~~
lathiat
He has another one where it seems it pumps water through a second reservoir.
Looks like that expired recently so possibly why we are seeing this? (Far from
a patent expert)

[https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0707670B1/en?q=D06F37%2f...](https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0707670B1/en?q=D06F37%2f265&assignee=Georges+Martinez)

------
diroussel
I wonder when active damping systems will come to washing machines. You'll
need sensors to measure vibrations, a control unit and some small but fast
actuator coupled to a small counter weight.

The technology shouldn't be much different to the noise cancelling earphones
I'm wearing right now. But with a larger actuator.

~~~
ynniv
My current LG washer spins the drum at startup to detect balance and load, so
it probably accomplishes some active balancing by modulating the drive motor
during the spin cycle. This one still has a regular concrete balance though.

~~~
taneq
Same, but I figured it was doing something more like:

    
    
        int speed = 0, retries = 0;
        for (int time = 0; time < SPIN_LENGTH; time++) {
          speed += speed < MAX_SPEED ? 1 : 0;
          if (read_shake_sensor() > TOO_MUCH_SHAKING) {
            time = speed = 0;
            if (++retries > MAX_RETRIES)
              break;
          }
          set_spin_speed(speed);
          sleep(1);
        }

~~~
ynniv
While it's possible that it is this simple, spinning the drum back and forth
to detect load shows a significantly more advanced understanding of control
theory.

~~~
joezydeco
I have an LG and noticed that it takes a _very_ measured approach to spin
cycles, as if it's taking a bunch of measurements at certain speeds before
going into the high speed final spin.

It can also reverse the drum to try and loosen loads that have fixed together
in one lump. That has to be a huge advantage of the direct drive system and
most likely something that concrete-filled belt-driven UK banger can't do.

------
creeble
Is this a British thing?

I'm pretty sure my 22-year-old Kenmore washer doesn't have any concrete in it.
I have it apart three or four times in 22 years for different maintenance
(never costing more than $50 in parts) and it's not particularly heavy.

~~~
ars
No, not a British thing. But only front loaders need it, since old top loaders
don't spin very fast.

------
jakobegger
Water has a density of 1000kg/m3 whereas concrete has a density of 2300kg/m3.
Your washing machine will end up a bit bigger if you want the same
counterweight.

Some washers even have cast iron counterweights (7000kg/m3).

~~~
trias
what about sand? comes close to concrete but is easily (re)fillable.

~~~
s0rce
and never gets moldy

------
the-dude
This seems to be such an incredible innovation, the questions arise : is it
really feasible and why has it not happened before?

~~~
vbuwivbiu
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 ?

~~~
DiThi
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.

~~~
21
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.

~~~
DiThi
> thus extra work for the buyer

The soap water inlet can be a flexible tube that one can put inside the
reservoir, then push a button and the exact amount of water is added (or some
more and have it overflow to the drum).

> maybe requires some maintenance

Not if done correctly. And if it wasn't done correctly it seems easy to fix.

> so probably you also need to put some disinfectants in

They can just come with a bleach tablet inside.

------
agumonkey
god 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_

~~~
Gracana
Horizontal axis is better because it tumbles the clothes through a small
puddle of water at the bottom. Vertical axis requires lots of energy to
agitate, and a lot of water.

~~~
athenot
My vertical axis washer uses probably as much as a horizontal one. The trick
is in an improved impeller to properly agitate a full load in what's merely a
puddle of water. Also the cycle starts with a pump spraying (recycled) water
back into the basket so that all the clothes reach the same wetness therefore
can have the same density and get impelled uniformly.

~~~
dpark
I always felt like vertical washers had to be harder on clothes. Horizontal
washers are just flopping clothes around so the worst wear is probably on
buttons. Vertical washers are scraping and stretching the fabric itself when
they agitate. Especially if there's not much water to lubricate, seems like it
would be tough on the fabric.

------
ouid
"Concrete is bad for the environment due to the amount of CO2 released in its
production"

While this might be true for very large scale pours, is it really true of
washing machines? burning 1 kg of gasoline produces about 3 kg CO2. Producing
1 kg of cement produces < 1kg of CO2.

~~~
louithethrid
Only slightly related- but is there research into genetic modified wood
growth? As in - directly from a cell culture in a tank?

------
londons_explore
I'm going to guess this will go nowhere.

There is the human time to take the cover off and fill two massive water
tanks, the cost of having plugs and caps for said tanks, the risk that they
leak, the risk that they don't get filled and the machine vibrates to pieces,
the fatigue risk (try designing a thin plastic tank to take >200 lbs of
vibrational force), the risk of a new and unproven design, etc.

All of that only saves a few cents of extra gas for shipping the machines.
Probably not worth it.

Probably the plastic tank cost is more expensive to manufacture than blocks of
concrete anyway. Concrete is damn cheap.

------
avar
Why not force companies to standardize the size and shape of the concrete
counterweight, and mandate that it must be easily removable and you can't sell
them bundled with the machines themselves?

Then you could simply remove it for transport, and it many cases reuse the one
from your old machine, or buy a really cheap second-hand counterweight from
your local hardware store.

------
Salamat
So it is an old idea in a new usage.Water filled road barriers have been there
for ages."The Jersey barrier, also called New Jersey wall, was developed in
the 1950s (introduced in current form in 1959), at the Stevens Institute of
Technology,[1] New Jersey, United States, under the direction of the New
Jersey State Highway Department to divide multiple lanes on a highway".
Wikifelia.

~~~
KGIII
Interestingly, they first used movable concrete barriers in the late 1940s, in
California. The plastic ones came out in the late 60s. Some of them contain
sand or concrete.

Err...

I modeled traffic. I spent as much time as I could being on-site for data
collection. I've also spent way too much mental energy on learning about
roads. This is because I am still largely a child, even though I'm old.

------
resedit
>"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.

~~~
chrisseaton
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.

~~~
csydas
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.

------
lumberjack
I thought you were always supposed to take out the concrete block before
moving the thing. It's usually very easy to do.

------
egeozcan
Can't we just fix the damn things to the walls or floor? Maybe sell a
separate, universal "base"?

~~~
lfowles
I'd rather my _entire_ house not rumble when my washing machine has a heavy
load :)

------
ratherbefuddled
I 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.

~~~
avip
What makes you think nobody thought of this before?

~~~
ratherbefuddled
To my knowledge nobody did it, and I can't see a reason why having had the
idea it wouldn't be used.

~~~
rasz
There are patents for this from 1989.

------
nextweek2
Bad idea, you are shifting a problem at the transportation side to a repair
nightmare.

How is having a bucket of water on top of electronics being violently shaken
on a daily basis a good design?

------
rplst8
How about we just reuse the concrete blocks? They don't wear out do they?

~~~
KGIII
That seems rather inefficient and as though you'd want a standard across many
models. I suspect it's worse than just crushing it up for reuse.

------
andy_ppp
For 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.

~~~
Retric
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.

~~~
jrs235
What if they used sand instead of water?

~~~
jerf
Well, I don't know about your house, but in my house I don't have hoses with
free-flowing sand guaranteed to be right next to my washing machine when I
install it. A washing machine that required you to buy sand too would have a
hard time in the market; it may be irrational in some sense, but that would be
perceived as a huge installation burden by the market and it would not do
well.

~~~
jrs235
Excellent points.

