Bad Radiant

Paul Pollets

I keep seeing more of these systems using a tankless water heater to heat a home. The contractor didn't do any heat loss and installed non-barrier pex without plates. Plus a few radiators...just in case. The home will not reach setpoint. Propane is the fuel source.

Ironman

Just Lovely

Another cob-job!



I very strongly believe in limited government; but if the manufacturers don't soon step up to the plate and put a stop to selling equipment to unqualified people, you can rest assured that "big brother" will. And with his "help", will come more regulation and cost to do business which will be passed on to the consumer. And the regulation probably won't address the issue in any meaningful way and with it we'll loose a little more freedom.



But as long as the corporations, contractors and consumers are driven primarily by greed, the downward path will continue.

Paul Pollets

Calcs

The contractor could have had the wholesaler do the heat loss loads. Not using plates is usually a decision that the contractor makes thinking the owner won't like the additional cost...performance be damned.



It takes a long time for the "administrative authorities" to modify codes, regardless of the issues. I'll be long retired (and probably dead) before that happens.

Tim P._3

The rules are already there..

Most modern building codes require systems:



-to be designed in accordance with Manual J

-to be installed in accordance with manufacturer's instructions

-to be installed in a workmanlike manner



So there is every chance that the mechanism is already there to prevent this from happening.



Was a permit obtained?



Was it inspected?

Paul Pollets

Local codes

no inspection required, as the appliance is classified as a water heater. this project is on Camano Island, which requires a state boiler inspection for commercial work, not residential. It's very easy to squeeze between the cracks in this state. Yes, the code does require the residence to heat to 68 on design day. That requirement was certainly not met. The owner may go after the installer, and there may be some recourse since the system is less than a year old.

Ironman

I was thinking...

More along the lines of the manufacture requiring the contractor not only to be licensed but also trained and certified on the particular piece of equipment before he can buy it.



I've suggested this at higher levels to more than one manufacturer and the response has usually been about the same: "we can't deny selling them the product if they have a license."



That's hogwash! Let one of these "licensed" knuckleheads kill someone with one of their installs and see how quickly the manufacturer stops selling to them. And it's bound to happen sooner or later.



Buderus requires training and certification on their G125BE burner before anyone can purchase one for that very reason: they don't want an untrained contractor poisoning someone because he doesn't understand the product. If it can be required for one product, it can be required for all. Indeed, it should be required for any fuel burning appliance. Any of them can kill if improperly installed.



All of us in this industry, from manufacturers, to reps, to distributors, to contractors need to work together to stop this kind of thing from happening and see that only properly trained people are designing, installing and servicing fuel burning equipment. And that includes stopping the sale of equipment on the Internet as that seems to be the main source of the problem.



Paul,

I agree: we will both probably be dead and gone before anything is done, but I intend to keep voicing a warning to anyone who'll listen. It's our job to safeguard peoples lives, not put them in jeopardy because they want to save a buck and we want to make one.

furnacefigher15

Training

Buderus and others don't require training for safety. Safety may be a small bonus, but the reason is warranty claims.



A company like Buderus or Carrier is not so much concerned about the safety of the install. They want to limit their warranty claim expenses, and at the same time limit the damage to there reputation as manufactures. If a complicated product is installed willy nilly, the likely hood of changing parts that may have not even been bad in the first place goes through the roof.

Tim P._3

local codes..

Yeah, local codes make it difficult to figure out what is required in each state.



I see WA has adopted the 2009 IRC;  the 2009 IRC defines "water heater" and it ain't what you got there   If it doesn't meet the state-adopted definition of "water heater", the AHJ should have required a permit, I would think.



Unfortunately, things are rarely interpreted the same in different jurisdictions.

icesailor

Bad Radfiant, Wrong Application:

Where does it say in any form from the manufacturer, in the installation manual, that that is an appliance, designed for "Space Heating". It doesn't. It is designed and UL listed as a potable water heater, residential or possibly commercial. When the unit fails in a few years from over use, the manufacturer will claim the warranty was voided by the application.

I saw a similar application recently that I had to figure out what was wrong with it and it was separated with a flat plate HX to feed an air handler. It came with a plan that appeared to be from the manufacturer. When I called the manufacturer, I was told that the drawing didn't come from them and that it wasn't approved by them to be used in that application.

Just because you can do it, doesn't mean you can try to do it.

In this particular case, even with the tankless heater set to run at 140 degrees, you couldn't get more than 105 degree potable water to the hot water faucets. I installed a zone valve and corrected some things. It now works on the domestic side, has priority, and I still need to run the tankless at 140 degrees for the air handler.

Now they make combo units. I understand that they go through a lot of tin expansion tanks.

If it's such a good idea, why not use Mod-Con boilers as water heaters and heating the house also.