Consensus of Underfloor heating?

ichidan

So what's the general consensus of underfloor heating?

Pros:

- No radiators taking up physical space.
- Rooms are evenly heated up
- Flooring is warm
- Economic savings due to being more efficient (*)

Cons:

- Takes longer to heat up (although would likely be on a low/medium temperature continuously, or scheduled to come on at pre-planned times.)
- More expensive than traditional radiators (*)

* As you can see I'm at conflict with the economic cost of underfloor heating. I've read as many articles and comments saying that it is more expensive, and less expensive. So which is it?

I also plan on having Amtico, Karndean or similar flooring in my new build house, which can handle a maximum temperature of 26 or 27 degrees before suffering damage. I was recommended to go with click flooring (e.g. Amtico Click) as i) You don't need sub-floor preparation, and ii) You can more easily remove the flooring (without ripping up the concrete below surface), and so I could retro-fit with underfloor heating.

Is it that water-based (pipe) underfloor heating solutions are more efficient than radiators, while electric-based underfloor heating solutions are less efficient? Perhaps this is the confusion.

J_B

You don't say whether you mean water or electric?

Suppose your starred question is all down to the old egg, 'shall I leave my heating on all the time?', the answer to which is oft proven to be *no* - so no, they can't be more efficient

So, the pros
No radiators makes the room tidier??
Evenly heated - so what??
The flooring is warm - my wife loves this, some of our friends find it uncomfortable
Economics - see above

Cons:-
Yes they take ages to heat up, so as a consequence, you tend to leave it on all the time ... back to the 'economics' conundrum

Decisions eh!!

Smiley_Dan

Assuming a wet system...

Cons
- Less maintainable, when you have a leak it's a pain in the !!!!.
- Because of the lower grade heat you need to make sure the heat loss from your rooms is not high

I think the economics work out best for houses with higher occupancy during the day. The lower grade heat requirement means you have more options in terms of what runs the heating.

Cardew

No mention here of a heat pump(ASHP?GSHP)??


With a heat pump UFH is certainly more efficient as the lower the water temperature the higher the efficiency of the heat pump - water at 30C to 35C is ideal.


With any sort of UFH how can you contemplate flooring that gets damaged at temperatures of 26C to 27C? I must be missing something!

Smiley_Dan

That's what I tried to cover in my last paragraph, admittedly overly generalised.

lovesgshp

Wet underfloor can use higher temps. Here we sometimes have return temps of nearly 40C on very cold days. The floors are tiled though!!
It is basically a 24/7 system, but if weather compensated, it will increase heat on a gradual scale.
Most problems with UFH are caused by people wanting high room temps. UFH is ideal @ circa 19-20 room temperatures, as it is a far more even heat than a radiator.
I agree with Cardew as to why you should investigate why a system should possibly cause damage to the flooring if the temp gets to 25/27C, but if it is laminate, then quite possible.

Ectophile

If your flooring will be damaged by temperatures above 27C, then you'd better not lie down on it for too long - human body temperature is around 37C.

Cardew

Ectophile wrote: »

If your flooring will be damaged by temperatures above 27C, then you'd better not lie down on it for too long - human body temperature is around 37C.

Higher still when excited;) What if you spilt a cup of tea?

gamston

neighbour has under floor wet heating, he had his house re-built, and put in super insulation, said he only use's 1000 lts of oil a year in a big 3 bedroomed house,
if you are putting it in, get the floors super insulated,

ichidan

J_B wrote: »

You don't say whether you mean water or electric?

I didn't mention the type of Radiator either. I want to know if UFH (whether Wet, Electric, Radioisotype or dragon powered) is economically better than a radiator (regardless of what make). I figured my last paragraph would've covered this difference:

ichidan wrote:

Is it that water-based (pipe) underfloor heating solutions are more efficient than radiators, while electric-based underfloor heating solutions are less efficient? Perhaps this is the confusion.

J_B wrote: »

Suppose your starred question is all down to the old egg, 'shall I leave my heating on all the time?', the answer to which is oft proven to be *no* - so no, they can't be more efficient

Running a boiler for 24 hours at 27 degrees to run underfloor heating isn't the same as running a boiler for 12 hours at 60-70 degrees to run a radiator. It's not just a simple time equation, temperature and thus fuel/electricity consumption rate has to be factored in. UFH runs at roughly +14 degrees warmer than the cold tap (13 degrees), while a boiler runs at +50 degrees warmer than the cold tap, that's a huge difference.

J_B wrote: »

So, the pros
No radiators makes the room tidier?? Radiators take up space, they are physical objects that reside on the edges of rooms. So yes, without them you have more space. It's tidier if you don't hang things on the radiator, but messier if it means your throwing things on the floor instead of on radiators to dry.
Evenly heated - so what?? I heard this was a good thing, and means that you won't have to plan your room based on colder than usual and hotter than usual areas. I think this still remains a 'pro'.
The flooring is warm - my wife loves this, some of our friends find it uncomfortable Interesting, never heard of a warm floor being uncomfortable. Does the floor burn peoples feet? I'm going to assume this is more of a 'pro' than a 'con'.
Economics - see above

Cons:-
Yes they take ages to heat up, so as a consequence, you tend to leave it on all the time ... back to the 'economics' conundrum

Decisions eh!!

So these websites are lying then, or at least being very careful with what they are saying:

http://www.homebuilding.co.uk/advice/key-choices/heating/underfloor-heating-or-radiators

Underfloor heating operates at lower temperatures than radiators, making it more efficient, but it needs to be left on all day.

http://www.connectingindustry.com/energymanagement/underfloor-heating-vs-radiators-everything-you-need-to-know.aspx

Whilst underfloor heating is a larger initial outlay, it does repay in the long run with high energy savings. Particularly when paired with a renewable energy source, underfloor heating can prove to be extremely cost effective.

http://www.which.co.uk/energy/creating-an-energy-saving-home/guides/underfloor-heating-systems/underfloor-heating-pros-and-cons/

Pros:
Underfloor heating can be a more efficient way of heating a room…

Cons:
Can be expensive - take a look at our page on cost and installation for more.

You see why there is confusion?

Cardew wrote:

With any sort of UFH how can you contemplate flooring that gets damaged at temperatures of 26C to 27C? I must be missing something!

http://www.amtico.com/technical-info

They can be installed over concrete, timber floorboards, stone and many other types of sub-floor. You can also install Amtico floors over under-floor heating systems where the floor temperature is kept under a comfortable 27 degrees.

Yes, I'm not making this up. I'm just reciting what I've seen by professional Underfloor heating & Flooring companies. I have no experience with underfloor heating, so I'm trying to find the answers.

So this brings to another issue. The super indestructible Amtico/Karndean LVT flooring has a weakness, it will be destroyed if you lay on it, spill something warm, or even drop cigarette ashes on it. I think I may have to reconsider the flooring for my new property. Perhaps ceramic tiles are better…

Cardew wrote:

Higher still when excited

Indeed, although I plan to get 'super-king sized beds' & Steam-Showers & possibly a Hot-tub to contain any of the excitement from spilling over to the flooring

J_B

<<The flooring is warm - my wife loves this, some of our friends find it uncomfortable Interesting, never heard of a warm floor being uncomfortable. Does the floor burn peoples feet? I'm going to assume this is more of a 'pro' than a 'con'.>>

It doesn't burn at all, just gives them hot feet which they find uncomfortable