Welcome! Here are the website rules, as well as some tips for using this forum.
Need to contact us? Visit https://heatinghelp.com/contact-us/.
Click here to Find a Contractor in your area.

operating cost comparison

Greg_40
Greg_40 Member Posts: 43
Thanks, Paul. I went to Uponor site, but didn't find any archived information on the exact subject. I submitted a request for any assistance, but no replies at this time. If anyone has any case study information, please lay it on me. If there are no facts to back up what I say, it's just wasted breath.

As for distance clearances, some radiant tube heaters require 54" or more clearance to combustible surfaces. No mention of possible degradation, but fire safety instead.

Comments

  • Greg_40
    Greg_40 Member Posts: 43
    Fire Station

    I have been asked to consult a small community that is building a new fire station for the heating portion in the truck/apparatus bays. I am suggesting radiant floor heating & condensing boilers to supply the heat. Using Writesoft, I can estimate operating costs with various slab inslation scenarios.

    They are considering overhead radiant tube heaters as a cost cutting measure. The chief wants floor radiant heat, but as a governmental agency, tax $$ is being watched closely and if I cannot prove the floor radiant is less costly to operate or better, they will proceed with overhead radiant tube heaters. I don't believe I have any means to accurately discuss overhead radiant tube heating system vs. hydronic floor radiant.

    My concerns with tube heating: 1- possible degradation of the hoses stored in hose beds atop the trucks.
    2- degradation of vinyl covers for the hoses on those trucks so equipped.
    3- the above head radiant will not reach the floor adequately as the plans show installing it perpendicular to the trucks, rather than between them.
    4- snow melt capabilities from underneath the trucks will be non existent with overhead radiant tube heaters.
    5- the overhead heaters will not heat the floor or walk areas that are shadowed by apparatus equipment & trucks.
    6- any other rational arguments against overhead radiant heating you guys can help me with?
    7- operating cost comparisons- I assume a radiant heat loss will be the same regardless of the system??
    8- any advice or recommendations you guys may have to support either side of the discussion.

    Any help is greatly appreciated, but I need facts, not opinions. So far I have found nothing directly concerning radiant overhead heaters damaging hoses or other items stored atop the trucks. Thank you!
  • tim smith
    tim smith Member Posts: 2,841
    Radiant tube or floor

    Radiant tube heaters have a minimum distance from people etc to maintain comfortable temps, this also can be figured for surface temps at a certain distance which will tell you if degradation of material may occur. My guess is that due to height of firetrucks and the clearance they will provide to ceiling, these tubes will be too close to material on top of trucks. I too would be concerned. Also tube radiants are spot heating and you wont get full coverage on truck bays. If it is a new firehouse, I would definately go with radiant as you can also heat the other rooms with radiators where the firemen hangout/sleep with the same heat source. Tim
  • Paul Pollets
    Paul Pollets Member Posts: 3,666
    Case studies

    I believe that Uponor has a case study of a RFH firehouse. You'd want to check it out. It may be in their web archives, or call the sales manager. I would not do the Infra-red tubes. If you're using one of the major brands of tubing, their sales team should easily put together a sales "pitch" with engineering support.

    To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"
  • tim smith
    tim smith Member Posts: 2,841
    Morning Paul

  • Robert O'Brien
    Robert O'Brien Member Posts: 3,568
    I

    know you're not on Long Island!

    "but as a governmental agency, tax $$ is being watched closely"

    To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"
    To learn more about this professional, click here to visit their ad in Find A Contractor.
  • Rich Kontny_3
    Rich Kontny_3 Member Posts: 561
    Roberts Gordon

    Manufactures CORAYVAC and we have put this in fire houses, aircraft hangers and large loading docks.

    Advantages are the threat of freezeup with in-floor systems and the frequency of doors left open. The freezeup concerns can be overcome by anti-freeze but this compromises efficiency.

    Roberts-Gordon has an excellant site and a contact page where you can have your concerns addressed.

    As a wet-head this hurts, however in this application I would definitely go with the overhead infra-red!

    They have application examples of fire stations on their website!

    Rich K.

    Make Peace our Passion while Supporting our Troops!
This discussion has been closed.