*
Anyone out there with 5 years of experiance installing or living with it? I’d like you opinion about it.TIA
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
Inspired by Larry Haun, this passionate framer is teaching a new generation of builders.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
It's very nice.
near the stream,
aj
*2 years living. Can't beat the comfort. Email in 3 years if you need the full 5.Cheers,Jim
*Over five years on both fronts...It can be a more expensive install...it is usually more economical to operate than forced air or baseboards...it creates a much more comfortable living environment than either of the former.I'm pro-RFH.If you have specific questions, fire away.Warm-footedly, Mongo
*3 years of warm feet, installed my own.Pros over other systems: very even distribution of heat - no hot and cold spots; larger thermal mass carries you through a power failure in greater comfort; saves a bit of money in operation because your air temps can be a bit lower than with a forced air system; in a tight house, you can use a hot water heater which is cheaper and easier to service than a furnace.Cons: Can cost more if you pour gypcrete for the upstairs floor (but there are other options). The large mass can be less responsive if your outside temps and sun can change quickly - this can dictate smarter controls. Works best with concrete, tile or "linoleum" floors. Doable with carpet and wood floors but have an expert doublecheck the heat output and responsive of the system.Ask for locally for people who are happy with their RFH and talk to their installers. -David
*3rd winter in use, also did it myself. No regrets! Ditto on comments above re: comfort, etc.
*Warm tiolets
*12 Years and very glad we chose this heat. Have masonry heater for spring/fall. Run a hose up under any tub in deck. Warm toes/warm fanny.
*I plan on doing it myself in new house to be constructed.....looking for packages and not available here in Northern Ontario. With exchange costs to get from USA but at least it's available.Anyone use RadiantDirect or Radiantec for their packages ?Interested in comments.
*I'm in southern Ontario, and this is what I did.I tried to buy the stuff locally without a lot of success. Mostly got the answer that it "Had to be supplied by a qualified installer, etc., etc.". So I contacted Radiantec and found it was cheap for the US but expensive after the Chretien peso exchange rate. So I got a list of suppliers and started calling distributors one at a time. Got a 'hit' on the fifth or so call and bought all my stuff there. I believe the dealer could get into trouble from the various manufacturers and especially his heating contractor customers if they found out he sold them the stuff, so I promissed to keep his name a secret, but he's located in a university city west of Toronto.I am sure that the one who would sell to you would happily ship it wherever you want.I did the entire system myself, including the boiler install. I believe the biggest saving is laying the PEX, which cost an inflated $1 CDN a foot, but they charge more than double that to install it, which is a joke because its so easy, especially on a slab. I suspect that PEX is available at a much lower cost, and I would consider even using non-oxygen barrier PEX (the plumbing stuff) which is cheap as dirt and available all over the place. You will need a bit more than 1 linear foot/square foot of house, unless you house is really poorly insulated.Do a lot of research before buying anything, and don't buy a package because you are likely to over pay for certain fittings, etc., which cost 10x what they should because they are for RFH. There is a great book on RFH, I have it but can't remember the title. Its mentioned a lot on this site.
*Ray... You can use either... Radiantec is helpful on the phone if yaa get flustered. I used them the first time. Now I just by pex for the best price I can find and build my own manifolds. Your heat source is important. A non cast iron boiler makes the oxygen barriar issue a non issue. Like a Teledyne Laars. Cold shocking is another issue... as is water temp... Do you need 120-150... or more... do you need 180 for baseboard loops. if using water heater.. watch out for dead water...and low water temps... diseases can grow in to water.When you are ready... you can do it. Start picking out components... and radiant floor materials. either staple up... or above... or in slabs... figure your finisf floor coverings... carpets... hardwood... tile... Stained concrete is the least expensive with the most heat. Tile is great. Carpets are the worst. Hardwood floors are fine but tricky... nails thru tubes... and wood that shrinks to show cracks that are unsightly if moisture not monitored during install. One idea is to rack the floors with flooring and not nail it for a month of heating. Then pick it up... clean floor... re lay and nail. mark your loops well!Lots of info on this site via search. David is big into it and figuring heat losses and figuring for overheat situations that sunny southern exposures cause.One problem people have... If the floor is uncomfortably hot.... they are keeping the temp too high at the tstat!!!!! The solution is to set it lower until comfortable. Some people bend the pointer in the tstats so 72 degrees reading is really 68 degrees. Sometimes the mind needs to see what it is used to seeing for the last 60 years to think it is warm.Blah blah blah... near the stream,aj
*Some really interesting posts here. I have heard that carpet over RFH isn't the best scenario. Does anyone here have it and are you happy with it ? If you had it to do over again, would you put baseboard radiation in carpeted areas ? Is baseboard the solution for carpeted areas ? Second floor bedrooms lend themselves to carpet and this has always been a concern of mine.
*It's all in the design.Carpet over RFH can work, but since carpet w padding has a higher R-value than tile, you could say in a very basic apples-to-apples comparison (carpet vs tile over the same subfloor/underlayment) that it's not the best choice.In my own house, I have probably 95% hardwood and 5% tile/stone. The tile/stone is in the foyer, laundry, and kids' bath.I do have a couple of oriental-type area rugs over the hardwood in some rooms, and I never changed the setup from before the rugs to after laying down the rugs. It still works fine.If you install Warmboard or a Warmboard-style subfloor (surface tubing between ripped ply sleepers over subfloor), the pad and carpet go directly on top of the warmboard...there's no subfloor or underlayment to hold up heat transfer.If you want carpet, it can easily be accomodated for in the design process. By doing so you don't have to think of it as a compromised indstallation. As a rule-of-thumb I use 3 times the R-value under the tubing as the R-value of the floor assembly above the tubing. That helps ensure that the heat goes up, into the floor and into the room it's supposed to heat...not down through the ceiling below, possibly overheating the room below.I'd take RFH over baseboards any day, with most any floor covering.
*aj, I believe Teledyne Laars (or Laars as they are now called) is a copper fin tube boiler with CAST IRON headers. Good post though.
*You are right....but they say don't worry about O2. I have a unit at a clients now for 9 no-problemo years.There are steel welded boilers made now...that take cold shocking....And even aluminum set ups.near the shockingly cold stream,aj
*Mongo, Assuming the use of Warmboard, what do you use for the insulating value or R value of carpet and pad ? This seems like such a great product but it seems to get only occasional use or mention. Do you know why this is ? How does it compare in price compared to other systems such as staple up from bottom or gypcrete ?
*I'm dealing with Radiant Floor Company (radiantcompany.com) - apparently an offshoot of Radiantec, so also in Vermont and also very DYI oriented. You learn a lot just talking to them on the phone.All the DYI places seem big on using non-O2 barrier tubing, in part because they tend to push "open" systems where one water heater serves both the DHW and heating needs and the water coming out your shower may have flowed through the floor earlier. With the open system all pumps are stainless steel to keep the potable-ness.I'm looking at a closed system with a heat exchanger as I want to be able to use anti-freeze (given my, um, delayed construction schedule)and as I'm unclear if Massachusetts has approved PEX tubing for potable use.
*I just saw on the "GreenBuilding" list a message stating that> in the most recent edition of Environmental Building News there is an excellent lead article about radiant floor heating (RFH); the gist of the article is a discussion on the pros and cons of this type of heating system [...]> In general, Alex Wilson suggests that tight, well insulated (super insulated) residences should not need this type of system for a variety of reasons, the high cost being a major factor.The poster didn't buy this argument, and neither do I. To me, the marriage of RFH & well-insulated homes makes great sense. With a low-temperature, low-volume system it then becomes possible to look at using solar or other alternate heat sources.If anyone has this article, it would be interesting to hear other interpretations.
*I think one of the major drawbacks of Warmboard is its price. It does seem to be a good product, and it does fulfill the duty of several parts of a floor system. Still, it's expensive.A staple-up with or without plates would be much less expensive than Warmboard. Gypcrete has been varying in price...but even still, it can still be less expensive than Warmboard, though it depends on if you have to 'top' the gypcrete with another layer of ply.You'd really have to ask around in your local area for specific pricing.Warmboard is gaining in popularity. I think its market share will increase. The continuous Al does a nice job of reducing delta-T across the floor.Drawbacks to warmboard? You put the tubing where the grooves are, they dictate the spacing. No allowances for tighter loops near exterior glass walls, or wider spacing between loops in interior rooms. It can limit design layout in certain situations. There are some other design considerations in kitchens, for example...in general, you don't want to run tubing under an island or under cabinets. Getting the warmboard loops to align can sometimes result in funky layouts. Not a major inconvenience, but for the price and potential waste of material, it kind of is. You can get a lot of joint between the sheets that need blocking underneath for support. Sometimes this blocking can interfere with mechanicals/HVAC, etc. Blocking can be a special pain if you're using TJIs.You're limited to one size of tubing. That can be a factor if you want larger tubing due to the design requiring longer loop runs. It can be worked around, but again, it's a limitation.Potential damage to warmboard and tubing during construction. Warmboard is your subfloor...so it goes down and gets beat upon by the trades like any other subfloor. Not a big deal. As long as nothing gets damaged.I do think it's a good product. I'd like to see it used more...but I don't for varying reasons. I don't know of anyone who loves the product, but I know of a few who hate it. In a wide open room without peculiar BTU requirements, it's fairly easy to install and put to use.Here are some R-values for flooring materials...I'm at home now so I'm pulling these out of my noggin. Still, they shouldn't be off by more than a few hundredths:1/2" ply, 0.623/4" ply, 0.933/8" strip flooring, 0.503/4" strip flooring, 0.67linoleum, 0.101/8" cork, 0.30 (not sure on that one)ceramic, 0.20vinyl, 0.201/4" waffle rubber pad, 0.753/8" urethane pad, 1.601/2" acrylic carpet, 1.701/2" wool carpet, 2.207/8 nylon carpet, 1.80
*Tim:The R-values of carpeting can be found at the Carpet & Rug Institute's website at: http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=13&sub=19As Mongo, myself, and many others have posted, the r-value of carpeting can be overcome be insulation under the Warmboard @ 2 or 3 times the R-value of the carpet and pad combined. R-19 is code for crawl areas, which means most carpets will be under half of that anyway. Batt insulation will be more than enough to direct the heat into the targeted room--even with carpet and pad.I can address the other questions via e-mail, but it would be inappropriate for me to use this forum to "pitch" Warmboard against other products.Barry E. [email protected]
*Mongo:I hesitate to go into this because I want to respect the need to keep this a non-sales forum, but I couldn't pass without answering at least to some of the inaccuracies that would remain in place if I didn't respond. Your comments about Warmboard's cost against gypsum cement may not be taking everything into consideration that makes up the complete system cost and how Warmboard effects it. It is not simply the material cost differences you must consider. Labor costs differ SIGNIFICANTLY in Warmboard's favor, and I get those numbers from framers and general contractors who tell me so.Some material costs are actually lower due to a variable that you mentioned: Tube spacing. Narrower tube spacing would require more lineal feet and more manifolds and flow controls. The absence of weight removes the need for bigger joists. The absence of 1 1/2" of concrete removes the need for double-plates. The absence of water (one gallon per square foot for gyp) removes the need for a moisture barrier--not to mention removing the introduction of all that moisture to a frame made of wood. When the 'crete dries, that water goes somewhere.... The absence of 'crete removes the need for additional plywood layers for nailing of wood flooring.Warmboard's modular groove design does not provide any limitations to tube paths that effect the ability to heat the home adequately and evenly, nor does it limit the ability to zone extensively. I had one project that had 14 different joist directional changes and 8 separate zones. The waste left over from the expected cuts was minimal because we incorporated the use of most of the waste into our design drawings.With Warmboard's aluminum surface, moving the tubes closer together would not produce more heat than just increasing the water temp a hair. The striping is already down to 3 degrees maximum (only during heat-up), so there is very little difference in moving the tubes closer. More heat at the window wall can still be accomplished with warmer water, shorter loops, flow rate change, or supply water going toward the outside first (in any combination)--just like you would do in a staple down system. Moving the tubes closer gains nothing. In fact, Wirsbo's software calls for either 8" spacing or 20 degree hotter water in 'crete to equal Warmboard's BTU/ft2 output at 12" spacing. With 12" spacing in 'crete you will get 7-9 degree striping, so of course it makes sense to move the tubes closer together.Not heating under cabinets or islands can either be designed out by our designers, insulated out with small pieces of rigid foam under the cabinet floor (much cheaper than taking the time to cut-up the subfloor), or waiting for the laws of thermodynamics to take the heat where the delta-t is greater (not under the cabinets).Regarding your comment about it getting beat-up--all subfloors have to endure the trades. Warmboard wears no worse. The main difference between Warmboard and a regular subfloor is that the tubing not be attacked by power tools in the hands of careless workers. For high traffic areas, we always recommend that common sense be observed and that someone lay down a couple pieces of sheathing to catch chop-saw off-cuts and the like. Seeing the tubing actually PREVENTs a lot of damage.I'll bet you probably figured that you would draw me out, eh?I write this with all due respect for your experience and your knowledge. Just trying to keep the record straight.Barry E. [email protected]
*I did not put too much info in my first post so will elaborate on it now.I have printed hundreds of pages re RFH from the net and have read and studied it carefully. My house will set on a bed of sand that is approx 50' deep so will put down vapour barrier, 2" blue sm, 6x6 wire mesh, tie the tubing to the mesh and pour the 4" concrete floor. I will put the 2" blue sm around the perimeter of the slab to save heat loss to the walls and also put 1" blue sm on the inside lip of the footing to save heat loss to the footing. I will put 2" blue sm on the outside of the footing and up the outside wall 2'. The main floor will have TJI's rated for 60 lbs/sq ft, osb floor, vapour barrier, 2x4 sleepers with sand filled around the tubing, hardwood floor fastened to the sleepers. Of course will have to have double bottom plates.Using sand as thermal mass as we have lots and it's free and nice clear sand. I plan to use oil fired hot water tank to heat water. Closed system with heat exchanger. Oil because do not have gas and propane is high priced here(have it now with propane furnace).I have been getting same response "need to have us install the system..can not buy direct" from local installers; that's why I want to buy from distributor or package supplier as I have enough knowledge to do myself. Have built three houses already myself(do framing, electrical, plumbing, finishing). Have already done all electrical including meter base, main panel, sub-panels etc in my barn which will then feed the house. Inspected by local inspector...all o.k. Learned everything from the electrical distributor and thought could do same with the radiant.Perhaps you could email me the name of the distributor you used....otherwise I will do the same as you did and start dialling.Thanks for all of your comments.
*Barry, I even had a "Barry can provide more info on that..." sentence in my post, but ended up deleting it.I understand that costing can vary, which is why I wrote "...depends..." in my post regarding cost. A staple-up is cetainly more economical. Gypcrete? "It depends...".Some workers are sloppier than others. One builder had two runs of tubing damaged during construction due to it being exposed, he'll not use the product again. Were the trades at fault? The product? Of course it was the fault of the trades...however, the builder still had to eat the cost. Some subs just don't care, and he paid for their neglect. I know of others that use warmboard without prejudice. I recommended it for a house now being framed up north. No problems for me in the past, I don't anticipate any in the future.Like all products, there are pro's and con's associated with it. The pro's and con's I posted are real world feedback from the trenches. Those having problems with Warmboard may be having problems due to how they utilize it. Those having problems with Warmboard may be having problems due to limitations of the product.Don't get me wrong, as in my previous post, I like your product. I think you'll see more and more people abandoning gypcrete for warmboard for many of the reasons you mentioned.Regards, Mongo
*See Radiantec at rediantec.com. They are very helpful.
*Ray:Seems like I read something somewhere about building on the sand...?Anyway, to give you another possible source for your direct radiant supplies, you might check Shelter Products NW (www.spnwsupply.com). I haven't any personal dealings with them, but I checked out their website and spoke with them on the phone. They have up-front prices and packages that they will ship direct.I have also heard a bunch in the field and online about RadiantTech.Nothing bad.
*Mongo:As Dan H. says on his website: "Thanks for all you do." I appreciate the generous amount of time you spend answering people's questions on this forum and others. And believe it or not, I really apprectiate your honest feedback about the products you use, including your comments about Warmboard. You would be surprised if you knew just how far comments like yours go in the periodic re-engineering of a vendor's product. I wish we could get more folks to talk to us in such specific detail. Addressing various challenges is where innovation comes from. Knowledge of those challenges is the starting point.Warmest regards,Barry
*I originally was sold on the idea of radiant heat. The idea of heating a mass on the floor which basiclly allows the warmest spot to be at your feet. However after working with it in houses over the last 15 years or so, I wonder if it is the best solution.JLC December 2001 had an article about a Canadian study that disputes the claim of lower t-stat settings. I have noticed that myself on several houses I have worked in. Most houses I have been in with rfh have had the t-stats set at 70 or so.Also the efficiency issue is a bit confusing. The idea is you save heat cost by warming a thermal mass that can thus radiate the heat back into the room when the boiler is off. However, I think you will find that actual energy consumption is comparable for heat out-put on competing systems. The gist of the BUILDING ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS article is that insulation is the real key to energy efficiency and a warm house. Most construction does little in insulating floor space, as well as lacking in dealing with heat loss in general. My own experience with "super-insulated homes" leads me to favour this idea as being more realistic.Don't get me wrong. Warm floors are great, but I think one needs to look more closely at the efficiency issues. And so much of that has to do with overall design.just some thoughtswalk gooddavid
*Personally, I think there is a lot of BS on the efficiency front, whatever type of heating is being discussed. I believe the most important efficiecy measure is the conversion of fuel into heat that doesn't go up the chimeny. After all, the heat that doesn't go up the chimeny and doesn't heat the water in my boiler ends up heating the basement, so its not really wasted, just misallocated.I find my radiant system is comfortable and quiet, which are two major issues for me. The advantage of a thermal mass is that my house temperature drops less than 0.5 degree per hour, which is much better than I have seen with forced air.Plus, whether or not I save fuel, I set my thermostat at 68, which about 4 degress lower than when I had forced air. The major negative that I see is that I don't yet have a control system which allows a meaningful 'setback' at night, in particular allowing unused parts of the house to drop to 65 or so. But I'm working on it ...
*In my own house, the downstairs thermostat is set at 66 degrees, the upstairs at 65. I actually find it a tad too warm, but it's perfect for my wife.I've overseen three retrofits that I have basic follow-up data on. One replacing forced air with radiant, two replacing hydronic baseboard heat with radiant.All retrofits were staple-up. No modifications were done to two of the building envelopes in terms of improving insulation. One (1.5 story) had the roof blown out and shed dormers added, increasing the living space of the second floor, and the insulation in that house was improved.Granted, there are difficulties in comparing degree-day differences from one heating season to the next.1) a simple single-story ranch house, formerly baseboard heat, about 900 sq ft. with 4 years of 'lookback,' the homeowner reported a decrease in fuel oil of 'about 20%.' 2) another single-story that had forced air. 2 year homeowner feedback shows a savings of 'about 25%.'3) coastal 1.5 story beach house, formerly baseboard heat, this one had the roof blown out, added large shed dormers, and roof insulation improved in the ceiling and second story walls. 2 years of data, even with increasing the square footage it has used about 33% less fuel. All were, and still are oil heat, which is common in the northeast.The data is not perfect, the winters were not consistant, the before and after comparisons of fuel usage are based upon homeowner feedback.I think it shows some efficiencies, but it's tough to quantify the exact amount. Regardless, all homeowners rave about the increased wintertime comfort.
*I read the article mentioned in the JLC Mag. I also read the study they refered to. Interestingly enough, the data they used simply determined that people in RFH homes did NOT turn their thermostats down lower than people who lived in forced-air homes. It did nothing to refute or substantiate the claims of the greater efficiency of RFH over forced-air. All it did was refute the claims of some that people can be as comfortable at 68 w/RFH as they would be at 72 w/FA.I thought the study was short-sighted. While they had these people participating, they could have gotten more empirical data regarding heating costs per therm, insulation values of their homes, sq. ft. of glazing, etc., and crunched the numbers back home to determine what energy effect the RFH might have had. Rookie use of statistics to make a non-point.Admittedly, there really needs to be a side-by-side comparison (hey, Jim, are you lurking?) of two identical homes in identical climates with identical energy sources for a period of at least one complete year.I heard rumors about the U of Delaware teaming up with the D.O.E. in Washington DC to do a study on RFH effeciencies this year. Anyone else know anything? How 'bout it, easterners? Got your ear to the tracks?Barry
*Barry, Those are excellent observations and reinforce the asking of the question, " how does rfh compare in efficiency, cost etc?" Yes there was little data in the report. But I did like the real world aspect of the study. It suggests that what I have seen in regards to t-stat settings is realistic. Your comments on studys and comparisons, is an excellent point. Let's compare like buildings. It reminds me of the HUD studys on using ICF for construction. They built two identical houses, one 2x4 with fiberglass batts, the other 10" ICF wall construction. The stick-built they rated at R-11, the ICF was R-25 ( I think ). Their test data showed a 20% savings in energy consumption with the ICFs. Which I would expect with double the insulation. There was no building cost comparisons of the two structures. There was no energy use comparisons with the manufacturing process. And though I understand the reason of the 2x4 wall as standard construction, how do the numbers compare with a 2x6 wall or even a 2x8 double stack wall. The last would be more comparable in terms of thickness and potential R-value.Manufacturers and their proponents continue to push their products and ideas with simulations and models. There has been little long term evaluation especially with similar components. And yet we are continually prodded to buy these new products and sell them to the public.walk gooddavid
*In the examples I gave, I have no idea what their t-stats are set at.Again, it's hard to quantify, but my perception is that the oil burners run less in rfh houses than they do in forced air.Still, it's all apples-to-oranges.I'm suprised that somewhat comparable data couldn't be found in a tract-like subdivision where most envelopes and floorplans are essentially the same...though it may be hard to find a RFH house in a spec-housing, forced-air neighborhood.Ahem...(as I clear my throat)6 Feb, 2002In the name of scientific research, I hearby nominate Barry to donate 200 sheets of Warmboard to me. I will use this product to carry out further research into the comparison of RFH vs forced air.Signed, in the Name of Science, MongoEnjineer by Edjucashun, Aviater by vokashun, and Banger-of-Nails cause I have to.
*FOFLOL holding my gut as the spasms of laughter course through my body....Tell you what--you add some wooded lakefront acreage to the cause, and we'll build houses side by side. I'll even take the F/A house (long enough for the 1 year test). We'll put Warmboard in both and I'll leave mine idle until the test is over. Then I'll use the ducting for the air conditioning and fire up the Warmboard for the second winter. I might even have you over for a beer and to fish off my dock.Barry