Ultra fin job

alang

I did all the AV install work on a large house which was all Ultra Fin. About 4500 Sq Ft. They installed after the subfloors were down and used the snake hangars which screw to the underside of the subfloor and suspend the tube about 2-3 inches below the subfloor. Later, they came back with fiberglass below.

I was in the house in march doing the final peices of my install and was loving walking around in my socks. The house also has 3 zones of hydroair, but they weren;t hooked up, and its was very comfortable even with the wind and snow blowing around outside.

I have some pics of the Boiler install, and the tube install, that I can post later.

Big Will

This is my first time

using the ultra fin. It went really well. Six zones 3700 sq feet total of 80 hours labor. We used 250' loops and ran the fins at 18" on center hopefully this will allow me to run low temps. The carpenters were right behind us with the subfloor. If this works well I will be using it a lot for new construction.

JohnNY

Hey,

Do those plates get stapled to the subfloor?

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Darin Cook_5

Will

What did you use for design software? I am curious how many btu's per square feet this can do or is supposed to do. I would sure hate to find out the hard way that the system won't heat the floor in the dead of winter. Cold customers can be "agitated".





Darin

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Tony_42

What was the system design temperature?

I thought using ultra-fin required much higher temperatures to achieve the comfort zone. How many btu per sq/ft can you get using ultra-fin? Thanks! ***see page three of brochure***

tim smith

I question the tubing location w/ fins in the joist bay

I hope you suspended the tubes up from the insulation before sub floor went down, the pics show it laying right on foil barrier I think. I was pretty sure but rechecked on Ultra fin website, the plates and tube need to have 2" air space below and above them to allow for air flow to pick up heat off plates. I don't install this type of system but I have seen it before and just want to forwarn you, this could really impact your heat output of this type of system. Just fyi, Tim

tim smith

John, they are just a joist bay heating device. Kinda like

a fin tube section suspended in the joist and heating that air space. I saw these about 2 yrs ago here, a bit unusual but some say they work ??

Paul Rohrs_4

Red Flags

Will, read carefully what contractors are "posting" to you. This should be throwing up some red flags.

Start with the heatloss for the structure. Is 18"OC sufficient,then move to the required water temp and attachment method for your ultra-fins. All of these items I find suspect to a correctly designed system.

If you need help outside of "The Wall". Have the manufacturer double check your install method before the process moves forward to much farther.


Regards,

PR

Tombig_4

Will, those plates will seriously underperform if they are touching the insulation below. Other than that they should work fine but will require higher temps than conductive plates

Unknown

Not to hyjack

this thread away from its intention, but is foil-backed fiberglass insulation intended to be installed this way?
If it ever got wet, how would it dry?
Seems like a mold breeding-ground to me.

Dave

Derrick Ellefson

I thought ultra fin was supposed to run the other way? Whats going to happen when that pex heats up. Wont it sag and lay on the insulation even more?

Big Will

The pics dont show it very well

but the install uses what they call a side key hanger that suspends the tube. it is definetly not in contact with the insulation. Acording to the manufacturer this installation alows me to run 100-140 deg water and get any where from 10-20 btu per square foot. This puts me right at design btu for 32deg. Keep in mind this is just north of Napa California and never very cold. Freexzing is very rare for more than a few hours. Also we have a compleate forced air system in the house as well that will act as second stage heat and for A/C.

Unknown

I will continue to request that people stop spreading that flawed study in support of raupanel every time I see it reproduced on line. Rehau screwed up when they put it in their sales lit. It's a junk study, we've discussed it before, the student who did the study acknowledges its flaws, please stop posting it.

Tony_42

Dear NRT Rob

This is in all the REHAU literature, because you say it's flawed does not make it so. Do you wonder why manufacturers no longer post here? It's because every time they do, people like you bash them and the anonymous followers jump on. This has changed the dynamics of the Wall. It's just not worth it is it? They are all gone.

Please show me YOUR documentation that shows this is flawed based on 110'F water temperature. Why don't you sue them for false advertising? Show us your proof and I will destroy this document.

I am waiting, because I like many others are tired of manufacturers being slammed by bottom feeders. The clock is ticking...

Tony_42

Aren't you the guy nrt-rob

Who sells direct to the homeowner and cuts out any shot at material mark-up? You have no in the field credibility in the real world. You are one of the major company slammers here. shame on you, shame on you!

Unknown

Rick,

We have had very complete discussions on this topic, here is one: http://forums.invision.net/Index.cfm?CFApp=2&Message_ID=389102

I am not going to rehash it again. the bottom line is this was a student project, not a professional study, and it is wrong, obviously wrong to anyone with a basic level of knowledge of heat transfer.

Raupanel is a very strong product. This study is garbage, and sadly makes rehau look bad for using it. I am done discussing it for the dozenth time with this post, until the next time I see it is posted again. Get as mad as you like, or please feel free to continue to call me names in the meantime, but I will not be quiet just because someone thought the cool graphs should be put into some sales lit. Nor do I care enough to sue rehau for false advertising, though if another manufacturer with a vested interest in the outcome wishes to take that up, I would not fault them for it. Personally, it doesn't matter to me or my business one whit either way, I just don't like misinformation.

Unknown

Troll on, "Bill". If you're competant, you have little to fear from me.

hot_rod

mid to upper 20's

BTU/ square foot that is a believeable, defendable output for a radiant panel.

If you believe in the science that states any radiant panel emits 2 but per every degree difference between the panel surface temperature and the room temperature. Robert Bean has some excellent reading on that formula, by the way, at his site.

So to hit that 30 btu you would need a fairly warm floor surface, or a cold space.

Certainly commercial shops can see 30 plus output as they run a cooler space temperature. But in a comfortable, residential setting of say 70F, you would see some fairly warm, maybe uncomfortable to the bare foot, temperatures over that plate and tub assembly.

So yes it is possible to reach 30 btu/ ft outputs but may or may not provide ideal comfort.

hr

Tony_42

This student you refer to is

Amit Khanna who holds a Master of Science degree from Virginia Tech, what's your credentials besides a good heat loss program? I reviewed where "we had a complete discussion" It was YOU bashing the results not we. I figured it out, you are mad at REHAU because they won't sell to you direct, you would have to go through distribution like everyone else. Stop bashing the manufacturers, without them you have nothing...

Bob Bona_4

look

at all those Hyvents standing proud like soldiers.

Once they start leaking, by the time you get to the 12th, you'll need to start all over!

By then, the installer coulda had paid for a Spirovent

Looks like a pumpaholic at work...

Thanks for the fun pics!!

Unknown

I have not spoken to amit myself, but as others have pointed out, Amit himself acknowledged that the study was not flawless and was, really, a learning experience.

But by all means, please keep speculating.

Tony_42

Show us the facts

Please provide where he said it was flawed and show what the discrepancies are, if not you are speculating. Not trying to do battle here, just very tired of the manufacturer bashing and it's mostly just opinion. They have all been chased away and it's not fair. Please stop the speculation and show us the facts and I will destroy the document...

Unknown

I will say one more time, I'm not rehashing it all again. read the conversation I linked, which has some very clear arguments outlined in it. Both reality, and theory show that the study is not accurate and should not be used as any kind of case study.

I will, as I always do when this comes up, state ONE MORE TIME that I think raupanel is a very strong product; I'm not bashing raupanel, or saying any other product has better output than raupanel (though several should be close, it is indubitably the top). Unlike many others, it probably UNDERSTATES its output in its output charts. it is a good product. I don't think I can be any clearer about that, so cool it with the MFG bashing claims. Rehau generally makes very good stuff. They made a bad choice on this sales lit though which I object to, and when I see it, I say so, that's all it ever has been or will be.

and it will happen the next time I see this study posted as well, probably repeated verbatim.

Marc_17

I think there is a spirovent that you can't see in the pic. BTW, the pump for the domestic is missing, it mounted on the end of the manifold, to make an even bakers dozen 007's

Here are a few more pics of the Ultra Fin.

Tony_42

Hollow argument Rob

I'm done with this, you have proved only one thing and inaccuracies in their report is not it. See you next time this comes up. Good luck...

EJ hoffman

for your climate it will work well

Will, for your climate it will work well, though I would be leary of the 1oo deg tem claim, lowest I have been able to go is 120. You will have problems with infiltration on the rim joist it should have been foamed and sealed and blocked with insulation. When the system is up and running shoot the edges of the rim joist with your infared and you will see that uninsulated 2" air pocket is costing you in lost btu's. Good looking job. Funny how you can tell alot of the east coast guys from the west coast guys, Moderate temps to them are 32 and those of us on the west coast don't work if it is below 32 cuz it is just too cold and tommorrow will be 50.

Jamie_5

output study

The thread NRT.Rob cited does in fact have some good discussion of the study. In that thread someone named BC pointed out that the results of the surface temperature readings---which are the measurements most directly correlated with panel output---were inconsistent with the output graphs, which were based on the difference in supply and return water temperatures, i.e. the heat lost by the water to the test mechanism. The study itself identified some possible explanations of that discrepancy, as did poster BC. It's a fine experiment qua experiment, but if I were trying to find the highest output product based on that study, I would look at the surface temperature graphs and thermal imaging reported in the study. Those results are consistent with conventional wisdom about the expected behaviors of the various systems.

Bashing NRT.Rob for working with people who do some part of radiant system design and/or installation seems to me misdirected, irrelevant to his claim about the merits of the study, and uncivil.

Tony_42

Jamie

That was someone else. I was looking for his data that backs up his claim because every time this report comes up he jumps to his pulpit. It becomes "the sky is falling" after a while. Ultra-Fin is a high temp application and RAUPANEL is a low temp application. Can we agree on that? What are you saving if you have to run at high temps on a radiant job? Might as well have baseboard I have yet to see how inaccurate this study is done by a dude with better credentials and education than all of us. That's all...

Unknown

If you don't understand how temperatures are related to output, I could understand your difficulty in understanding BC's, or my argument. You don't need a degree to understand that though, so maybe you could, you know, just read up on it or something.

My INITIAL objections are simply that the study contradicts both all common sense, and the installed performance i have anecdotally observed in my own systems, which use several of the installation methods tested, many times over. That should be 'credential' enough for me to voice an informed opinion, but if you want to blow smoke about degrees and education and such, well, that's called an "argument by authority" and it's a logical fallacy. So is, for that matter, "ad hominem" attacks, where you attack the person but you don't attack the arguments. How about you try to address the substance of the objections? Or I suppose you can just take the next step and flat out call me a liar, since you're "not here to do battle" or anything.

BC further provided very clear information on the issue about how the study failed to provide a graph that reflects reality. That supported and explained the discrepancies I have already observed.. more rigorously than I felt the need to do, since the discrepancies are OBVIOUS to anyone who understands basic heat transfer.

if the fact that MY name is not BC means you have to dismiss the argument, then you are not really interested in the truth. I knew the truth already, and BC simply corroborated it. Now you're just playing games. The fact that a master student with little actual experience with these products made some mistakes in a graph is not some "message from on high" when the graph contradicts its own source data.

Raupanel is low temp. Ultra Fin is high temp. And your study provides misleading and outright wrong comparisons of most other installation methods on it. So please stop using it.

congrats, you got me to rehash it, one more time! I suppose you can take a small victory in wasting a few more minutes of my life on this piece of unfortunate sales literature. If only I were strong enough to resist people who attack the messenger and resort to logical fallacies to prop up bad marketing.

If you have any integrity left, please stop discussing this now. You're either a shrill apologist for rehau (or, as I believe, an employee) or you just don't understand radiant.

Tony_42

Got ya

See you next time

scott markle_2

The vapor barrier should face the conditioned space, which it is. Still I'v pulled enough discussing glass from crawl spaces to keep me from using glass.

There is lot's of conjecture that fiber glass is a serious health hazard especially as the fibers break into smaller particles over time.

Jamie_5

Rick

You have my apologies for lumping your reply together with the other poster's. You are correct that your messages did not mention NRT.Rob's market segment.

On the data question, though, it seems to me that the data to back up NRT.Rob's claims are right there in the disputed study, namely the surface temperature readings the experimenter published in the study. Those readings are contained in the series of graphs that are accompanied by the thermal imaging photos. That was my point in noting the inconsistency between those readings and the output graphs that come a few pages later.

I assume that the problems with the output graphs in the study/experiment are independent of the quality of Raupanel, which seems to be widely accepted as a fine product. By noting the apparent problems with the study, I am not attempting to make any claims about the virtues of running lower fluid temperatures in a radiant system or of Raupanel in helping to achieve those lower temperatures.

Big Will

I am using

Staple up with zurn plates for the second floor so I will be running the boiler at 140 for design day anyway. It will be in condensing temps most of the time due to the reset curve. I am just real happy with the install. I have been looking for a good technique for this new construction situation. Its hard to sell the customer on a lightweight pour over because of the cost. I see your point about the edge insulation though.

klaus

lightweight overpour too $$$$$?

I know different regions mean different prices for products, but we hire guys who drive 500 miles round trip doing our gypcrete overpours all the time, and its a lot cheaper than the labor intentive staple up. You mentioned it took 50 hours to install this. To staple down tube on top, maybe 9" centers, hooked up to a manifold, would be about a third that many man hours! Plus the extra material, for staple-up?. Can't believe an overpour would be more.
Your wide spacing and minimal difusers would not produce whats needed up here, regardless. Would require addition heat source/baseboards/etc. and throw the cost even higher.
On a remodel we may sometimes do a staple up, but its always cost more per sq.ft. than staple down, even after adding the overpour cost.

Tony_42

Jamie and everybody else

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours...

Big Will

In the SF bay area

Nothing is remotely cheap. A 3700 sq foot over pour is about around five digits. That's a lot of labor.

troll_2

Some of us

Have been cut out by Rob.

It's unfortunate but true.

EJ hoffman

labor

Will, did you see ways to make your labor time go down Once you completed the lay out. We took 8hrs just to get 800 sq ft done, but then we figured out a few things like first we ran all the tube, then we assembled one side of the fin on a bench and clipped the fins over the pipe so we only had one side to rivet/screw together. I think we are doing 2200 sq ft in 8 hrs 3 men now with ultra fin.

Big Will

I would think the second time will go faster.