Joined on October 13, 2004
Last Post on August 30, 2014
@ December 22, 2004 12:53 PM in foam insulation questionWhen the roofing material prematurely fails, don't even think you will collect on any warranty with out proper ventilation fact. I don't care what reading material is out there disproving the need of roof ventilation,in the end when the shingles fail it is the manufacture that you will deal with and they do not disprove the need for proper ventilation. Remember hot flows to cold, so any delta t you create on the backside of the roof surface will enhance the dissipation of the heat build up, some is better then none at all. When I replaced my old roof you could tell exactly where the hot spots were. The original attic ventilation had no soffit vents and two gable vents, because original roofing was cedar it did not make to much difference.The reroof was fiberglass shingles and ventilation was not enhanced roof failed in 15 years. Since I have moved in and installed a new roof this summer and changed the ventilation. It makes a difference. In the case of spraying foam on the backside of the roof, fine but you should have a 2" gap between the foam and the plywood with continuous soffit and ridge vents.
@ December 22, 2004 10:29 AM in What's the right amount of Delta T?Mark in a radiant system there are several delta t's. In a mix down type application there is the following delta t's. Main return and the boiler supply. Main return and mixed down supply to the radiant loops. The loop supply and return. The fluid and pipe wall in the loop. The pipe wall and the medium the pipe is imbedded in. The medium and the room Temp. Which of the these delta T's do you find most important? I know it sounds a little crazy breaking down some of these "micro" delta t's. Just wondering if anyone considers these and which they pay the most attention to. Gordy
@ December 18, 2004 6:41 PM in Efficiency vs. EconomyHere, Here. A mans home is his castle. I will be darned if, I will roam in my castle in slippers and a sweater. Comfort is the rung above efficiency for me for now that is. Finding that fine line of both is the key.
@ December 18, 2004 1:14 AM in Efficiency vs. EconomyLarry that is exactly what I'm trying to decifer. I don't think there is anything real concrete to go by that I have seen. I know I will save money, the question is how long is the pay back going to take and is it worth replacing a boiler that has alot of life left in it but not as efficient 82% in my case. I guess the enviroment is an arguement and if the cost of fossil fuel spirals upward it will become more worth it. I think it will be hard if not impossible to have a formula that fits every case. I only say that because everyones envelope is a little different, and the types of radiation, fuel types. The only true way would be to install the new boiler and compare the efficency with your old one. I think if the manufactorers can come up with a concrete formula they will sell alot more boilers high efficiency ones that is.
@ December 17, 2004 8:11 PM in work bootsI used to be in that train of thought. I could buy 4 pair of cheap boots, for what I would spend on a pair of Red Wings. Just try a pair forget about the money you won't be sorry. You only get 1 pair of feet. No breakin period comfortable. I use to go through 3 or 4 pairs of cheap boots a year. I get a year and a half out of my RedWings. I also got a discount for being in the union, saved me 35 bucks. Darn near a cheap pair of boots. Gordy
@ December 16, 2004 10:20 PM in Gas BillSee thread "1 st gas bill with new Vitodens". Mike figured Btus per degree day except he did not break it down to btus per square ft. He would be at 4.92 per square ft I'm at 4.74 before knocking off what goes up the stack. My square footage includes all areas where there is radiant so I have a portion of my basement in my calcs. Gordy
@ December 16, 2004 10:02 PM in Gas BillIts an outdoor double mantel lamppost from the 50's Novel. Sheds good light on the parking lot though. Gordy
@ December 16, 2004 10:00 PM in Gas BillPretty simple actually Mark. Single T-stat for dwelling, One B&G HV circulator for whole system, simple boiler bypass with a taco paneltrol mixing valve, and one "GROSSLY" oversized WM CGM 7 boiler,but lets not open that can of worms. That would be a thread "always do a heatloss calc." Ceiling radiant and floor radiant emitters. System temps are 100* supply after mixing valve,upper 80's return in the shoulder season. when it gets down around design it will run 115* supply and upper 90's return. I came up with a 89000 btu heatloss with slant fin,I think its even less than that. I don't know where the guy got his numbers for a 172000 btu boiler from. Well I do but thats another discussion. Thanks Gordy
@ December 16, 2004 9:34 PM in Gas BillI'm just trying to get a handle on how my gas consumption fairs to a more modern radiant system, or not so much the radiant end but the boiler and controls. Trying to decide on upgrading to a condensing modulating boiler, but will it warrant removing a perfectly good operating boiler at present. So what I'm trying to come up with here is a comparitive number "Btus a square foot per degree day" that could be an apples to apples approach. It twas early this mornin in my thinking so bare with me. I could deffinitly be at the wrong pew. I know what I'm consuming with the water heater and the Gas Light which thats all I have besides the boiler on gas.So is there some other method to kinda give an up front idea of savings with older boiler versus condenser. I have seen alot of % thrown around after the install. Gordy
@ December 16, 2004 5:49 AM in Gas BillI recieved my gas bill for the 60 day period yesterday. 330.95 therms total and 1062 degree days for period. 330.95-133.2(therms for water heater and gas light)=197.2 therms dedicated to my boiler. 197.2 therms / 1062 degree days =.186 therms per degree day .186*100,000=18,600 Btus per degree day. 18,600 Btus per degree day/ 3925 sq.ft. conditioned space=4.74 Btus a sqft. per degree day. 4.74-18% for the Gross boiler input=3.89 Btus a sqft. per degree day. Would indicate actual heatloss of the dwelling. Does this seem like the right approach? If so is 3.89 Btus sqft.per degree day a fair number for gas consumption? Thanks for your help Gordy
@ December 16, 2004 5:20 AM in I'm stumpedKinda like walking into the containment vessel at a nuke plant, -35 to 74* aHHH the radiation is so soothing. ;0
@ December 15, 2004 1:17 PM in I'm stumpedAre the two rooms on two different loops? Could it be air in the loop that is 10* cooler? you can still have flow and have identical delta T. Are floor coverings identical between the two rooms?
@ December 14, 2004 6:55 PM in Popular Mechanics wet heat articleSounds like the editors surfed the net.
@ December 14, 2004 11:21 AM in Dan Peel has died (Dan H.)I'm So sorry for your loss! although I never personally knew Dan, I was always eager to read his posts on what ever subject it was pertaining to,he had a hand in helping me learn and probably never knew it. What a man, my eyes well as I read these posts. What an honor to be missed by so many. I can't imagine leaving this world in a better way then to be remembered by so many elite colleagues.His words will be missed and his presence. The Kaske family
@ December 6, 2004 9:55 PM in one or two valve radiator: danger of fire in OLD buildingProves Mikes point. The power of steam is truly amazing in the right conditions though. I got to witness first hand while working at an outage at a nuclear power station. Worked on the turbine deck building scaffold for the fitters. Saw 36"dia.X 4" thick wall stainless steel pipe elbows that looked like a tiger clawed a bar of soap, the pipe erosion was incredible. One pin hole and run your hand acrossed it at that kind of pressure it would cut your fingers off and cauterize the stubs in one pass.
@ December 6, 2004 6:43 PM in one or two valve radiator: danger of fire in OLD buildingThat was not even a best guess.Mikes totally right on this. Even if a radiator could get that hot the fire would have started at a closer proximity to the radiator (under it) and on the top side of the floor. Was there any wiring in that joist bay? That fire started in the underside of the floor,maybe a hole in the floor caused the fire to intensify in the burned through portion of the floor,unless the fire department opened the floor up. What is the pipe running closest to the hole? Conduit,Gas? I see the pipe fpr the radiator.
@ December 5, 2004 9:09 PM in Conductive Concrete???That was 3000 Kwh for the 3 day period. At my residential rate of .08 that pans out to 243.00 for the 3 day period. My house used 1733 Kwh in 30 days. A bad winter could get pricey compared to the old salt trick. lets just say that the county would have a hefty electric bill if "ALL" bridges were done this way let alone roadways. Buy stock in the power companies. Gordy
@ December 5, 2004 7:44 PM in Conductive Concrete???Thats what I mean buy other areas Dan.But in my eyes a swavy consumer would not limit the ability to heat the dwelling to the emitters being lashed to electricity as a sole means to power them. At least with hydronics you can choose your heat plant to use the cheapest form of fuel and if that changes in the future you can roll with the change as long as it is cost effective. Until electricity can be produced at a cheaper rate maybe never, maybe through the CO-Generation avenue with the use of the stirling engine it could be. I think electric resistance heat of any kind on a residential scale in a dwelling is not going to be cheap until then. We already have it but cost to operate is why its not as popular. Gordy
@ December 5, 2004 12:06 PM in Conductive Concrete???Being in the bridge construction industry for 21 years,I can say this is a high tech. Cost prohibitive system that is just being studied. Implementing it on a large scale will be tough. A 150' bridge is not squat at 3000 kwh per hour,power consumption. Salt,fuel and manpower is way cheaper over a time period they have to do the road anyway. Also to just do the bridge under the pretense we are preventing corrosion from salts is a myth,the salt will be carried from the roadway onto the bridge. This is not to say that the technology will not have some potential on a smaller scale in other areas, and applications. JMHO Gordy
@ December 1, 2004 12:13 PM in Combustion AirWondering what?