Are technical training courses the last word?

RoBoTeq

I am all for any and all technical training courses. I have been to many and given a few in my time. I finally got to sit in on a particular heat exchanger course I have been wanting to go to for some time now, but kept missing the opportunity.

The course was well worth the time, even though the venue was not very condusive for what is meant to be an interactive, but still classroom training seminar. There were no tables available, so taking notes and even eating lunch had to be jockied on our laps and the floor around our chairs.

During the course, I realized that like many technical courses, this one was selling itself over other training. OK, I can understand this to a degree. However; do training courses at times become more of the focus then resolving the issues that the training course is discussing?

In other words, how many training courses attempt to make every situation fit into their programmed training? At what point do we neglect the actual problem in order to make the problem fit the specific training course we are taking?

In this particular course, the course giver made it known that he does not condone the use of video snakes to show HOs cracks and other flaws in the inside of their heat exchanger. The reason given is that HOs tend to feel that there is a slight of hand by the technician showing them a picture of a cracked heat exchanger rather then their own actual heat exchanger. OK, I can see some skeptical HOs thinking that, but that should not be a reason for dismissing the use of video snakes for finding cracks in heat exchangers.

The heat exchanger class is just one scenario. I would like to discuss all technical classes and "their" methods versus other ways to skin the proverbial cat.

Yuri

I go for the Donuts.

RoBoTeq

So, is a training class that has assorted pastries and bagels along with donuts a better class? Does a class that offers only donuts not work with classes on the same subject that offer bagels or pastries?

Yuri

Now I'm gettin hungry. Went to a good Fujitsu class where they had steak sandwiches and all their inverter tech stuff. That was interesting.

RoBoTeq

OK, this brings up another point. No; not about steak sandwiches.

Now that inveter technology is part of our lives, will we soon be having inverter snobs the way we wound up with scroll snobs? Even though scroll compressors are not better, and at times not as good as recips or even rotary's in smaller applications, there are some who poo-poo recip and rotary technology.

So, just because Fujitsu says (and I don't really know that they do) that inverter technology is the only way to go now, does that make other compressor technologies wrong?

Yuri

The reason they use it is because to get a unit over 20 SEER a ECM DC voltage/ inverter type motor is going to have to be used. Motors with capacitors are power hogs (poor power factor PF) and due to electrical theory and AC vs DC motor theory cannot be made more efficient. Right now a 21 SEER AC is the size of a refrigerator with a scroll and I doubt if anyone will buy an even bigger sized unit in the future.

RoBoTeq

I understand why new technology is being used. I am interested in whether of not some new technology will ever be worth the cost difference for residential use.

Obviously, the closer to the Equator we are located, then more we will save in energy reduction for cooling systems. Likewise, the further from the Equator or high altitudes will benefit from energy reductions for heating systems. At what point does the return on investment become a moot point compared to the cost of installation, repair and maintenance?