Will Limiting On-Off Cycles Save $$$

ChrisJ

Hatterasguy said:

ChrisJ said:

I disagree.
The walls behind my radiators are a whole lot cooler when it's 0F than when it's 50F. That ice cold wall is just sucking the IR right out of the radiators.

Even an insulated wall would change too, so I can't agree in any structure.

Also, the temperature obviously doesn't have to change a degree to change the output of a steam radiator. If it changes 1/100 of a degree the output changes.

The difference in the temperature of the wall is probably about 5°F or so, depending on the insulation. I agree that this difference will affect the capability of the rad to deliver heat.

I disagree that the 5°F can be considered "ice cold" and would be "just sucking the IR right out of the radiators".

The rads are at 215°F. A 5°F change in the environment isn't going to make a huge difference for them.

Wow, you've never been in a house like mine have you?
No sheathing, no insulation just clap board on the outside and lath and plaster on the inside. My kitchen floor over the crawl space was sweating a few times last year when it was below zero and windy out. I measured 38F with my IR thermometer.

That's a 174F difference between the radiator and floor.

Yes, they suck the heat out of the radiators.

Tolik

ChrisJ said:

KC_Jones said:

Does the Nest have an outdoor temperature sensor? Without that it can't do what you say reliably, it's just "guessing".

No outdoor sensor.
I *think* it may use local weather reports, but I'm not even sure of that. The fact it locked up for no reason in the first hour is the reason I ditched mine.

The Ecosteam doesn't do that and if I ever have a problem, or want a feature Mark see's what he can do. I'd also bet the PLC is a lot more reliable and durable than a Nest.

That is correct no outdoor sensor, it uses local zip code for weather.

I'm not saying its perfect but it is simple and fast to install. I'm by no means endorsing it I'm just stating that it has the "feature" that FXProglJr is looking for. It can be installed in minutes and can be purchased at Lowes or HD now, and the best part if it sucks you have 90 days to return it (which is essentially the entire heating season

ChrisJ

Tolik said:

ChrisJ said:

KC_Jones said:

Does the Nest have an outdoor temperature sensor? Without that it can't do what you say reliably, it's just "guessing".

No outdoor sensor.
I *think* it may use local weather reports, but I'm not even sure of that. The fact it locked up for no reason in the first hour is the reason I ditched mine.

The Ecosteam doesn't do that and if I ever have a problem, or want a feature Mark see's what he can do. I'd also bet the PLC is a lot more reliable and durable than a Nest.

That is correct no outdoor sensor, it uses local zip code for weather.

I'm not saying its perfect but it is simple and fast to install. I'm by no means endorsing it I'm just stating that it has the "feature" that FXProglJr is looking for. It can be installed in minutes and can be purchased at Lowes or HD now, and the best part if it sucks you have 90 days to return it (which is essentially the entire heating season

My biggest beef with recommending the Nest for use with steam is you basically need to disable all of the features that make it a Nest. You end up with a round pretty thermostat, nothing else.

Trying to do one setback is hard enough with 99% of steam systems out there, expecting it to do multiples per day and learn on it's own doing things on a whim is just going to cause discomfort and wasted fuel.

When I installed mine I went through all of the features, looked at the software etc. It was a nice package, but seemed completely bassackwards for steam or even hot water / radiant.

ChrisJ

Hatterasguy said:

ChrisJ said:

Wow, you've never been in a house like mine have you?
No sheathing, no insulation just clap board on the outside and lath and plaster on the inside. My kitchen floor over the crawl space was sweating a few times last year when it was below zero and windy out. I measured 38F with my IR thermometer.

That's a 174F difference between the radiator and floor.

Yes, they suck the heat out of the radiators.

Obviously, if you have a house that leaks like the proverbial sieve then your argument is valid.

Yes, I have been in houses like yours and it constantly reminds me of the ignorance of the HO regarding envelope upgrades.

No ignorance here.
No money or time either.

It's ok, let me take out a loan and have a modcon installed for the most efficiency like most people. It doesn't matter if all of the heat is leaving.

PMJ

Hatterasguy said:

PMJ said:

You can't have it both ways. You admit that the radiators are never full of steam. A radiator only a little filled is delivering steam at a slower rate to the room (as in btu per hour) than one that is more full plain and simple.

Fair enough.

Steam systems are unique as the rate of delivery climbs with TIME. Unlike a hot water baseboard system where the rate is constant with time.

Understand, however, that it does NOT climb with outdoor temperature. The steam system will deliver the same number of BTU's in 15 minutes when the ambient is 50°F as it will when the ambient is 0°F.

If we agree on this then we're good.

Can't agree - but we are getting closer. You seem to agree that the boiler must run longer (higher % of the total elapsed time) when it is 0 outside than 50 degrees(it must because the bill is higher). More btu's are lost per hour from the room in 0 outside conditions than 50. If the room temperature is to be maintained the radiator must supply more btu's per hour in the colder conditions. That is normally accomplished by running it more full at 0 outside than 50 outside - which is achieved by running the boiler a longer time just as you say. But the result of that extra run time is in fact a radiator that is just some more full(and radiating at higher btu's per hour) or should be if you don't want to have a big overshoot.

Now if you insist on running your system so that the radiator completely fills on each cycle, overheats the room and then sits off for long periods then I suppose you could argue that the radiator is always radiating at very close to a constant amount. But that is exactly the opposite of what the OP in this thread is trying to accomplish(more even heat) and also exactly the conditions that Ecosteam is trying to prevent. I am one of the tinkerers that likes to fiddle with my own control to even out my heat and a totally full radiator is something I am trying never to see happen. It never needs to be full except on design day outside temperature which never happens.

ChrisJ

A quick heatloss on a building will tell you approx how full the radiators need to be at any given ambient temperature.

Most of mine never need to be full, ever. Maybe with bedroom windows open, other than that, no. A few I vent fast and do fill sometimes, but I like those rooms (bathrooms etc) warmer.

Jamie Hall

Envelope upgrades? Hatteras, in some cases I agree with you on them -- but one mustn't be too absolute on that. In some instances, envelope upgrades to meet or even approach modern standards may not be feasible, or may be too expensive even if feasible to provide any return on investment. While this may not be true in modern buildings -- say from the early 1950s on, which were often very poorly built and aren't that hard to upgrade -- on historic structures it is very very often true. The place I care for being a case in point -- so perhaps I am sensitive to it!

ChrisJ

Jamie Hall said:

Envelope upgrades? Hatteras, in some cases I agree with you on them -- but one mustn't be too absolute on that. In some instances, envelope upgrades to meet or even approach modern standards may not be feasible, or may be too expensive even if feasible to provide any return on investment. While this may not be true in modern buildings -- say from the early 1950s on, which were often very poorly built and aren't that hard to upgrade -- on historic structures it is very very often true. The place I care for being a case in point -- so perhaps I am sensitive to it!

I'd need to rip my 1950s aluminum siding off, rip all of the 150 year old clapboard off, tear out the 150 year old windows and replace them, which, 26 quality windows don't come cheap. Then insulation, then sheathing, siding etc.

It's not cheap by any means. I'd end up with a more comfortable house and the windows would be really nice but there's no way I could afford it. Not even close.

I'd probably want Anderson 400 series WoodWright windows with the 2 over 2 pattern to match my originals and I don't know what I'd do for siding, I hate vinyl. Probably Hardieboard. You're talking $13K in windows alone for my house not counting labor or anything else.

sunlight33

How much insulation do you have in the attic? If you can stop most of the air leak with caulking/foam, you can get good results with less money spent.

ChrisJ

sunlight33 said:

How much insulation do you have in the attic? If you can stop most of the air leak with caulking/foam, you can get good results with less money spent.

Have to be careful with that, very careful.
For example, my attic isn't vented and we use it for storage. We have no moisture issues and I'm very hesitant to tamper with it unless we go all out and do it correctly with a ridge vent and gable vents. None of that will be happening unless I can properly, and adequate insulate the attic and seal off the tops of all walls (balloon framed, no fire stops). Right now that trapped air in the attic is most of what keeps the heat in the building.

For my type of building with nothing more than clapboard siding, every seam is a leak. You can see sunlight if you look in the walls. You'd have to caulk every joint, not happening. If you just try to insulate them from the inside you're almost guaranteed to have severe moisture issues.

The attic yes, we can insulate and 80% of it has some, but nothing impressive. We'll be adding some over my sons room soon, if I ever get time but caulking and sealing won't be happening. Whatever air it's getting is working fine so I'm leaving it alone.

ChrisJ

Hatterasguy said:

PMJ said:

Hatterasguy said:

PMJ said:

You can't have it both ways. You admit that the radiators are never full of steam. A radiator only a little filled is delivering steam at a slower rate to the room (as in btu per hour) than one that is more full plain and simple.

Fair enough.

Steam systems are unique as the rate of delivery climbs with TIME. Unlike a hot water baseboard system where the rate is constant with time.

Understand, however, that it does NOT climb with outdoor temperature. The steam system will deliver the same number of BTU's in 15 minutes when the ambient is 50°F as it will when the ambient is 0°F.

If we agree on this then we're good.

Can't agree - but we are getting closer. You seem to agree that the boiler must run longer (higher % of the total elapsed time) when it is 0 outside than 50 degrees(it must because the bill is higher). More btu's are lost per hour from the room in 0 outside conditions than 50. If the room temperature is to be maintained the radiator must supply more btu's per hour in the colder conditions. That is normally accomplished by running it more full at 0 outside than 50 outside - which is achieved by running the boiler a longer time just as you say. But the result of that extra run time is in fact a radiator that is just some more full(and radiating at higher btu's per hour) or should be if you don't want to have a big overshoot.

Now if you insist on running your system so that the radiator completely fills on each cycle, overheats the room and then sits off for long periods then I suppose you could argue that the radiator is always radiating at very close to a constant amount. But that is exactly the opposite of what the OP in this thread is trying to accomplish(more even heat) and also exactly the conditions that Ecosteam is trying to prevent. I am one of the tinkerers that likes to fiddle with my own control to even out my heat and a totally full radiator is something I am trying never to see happen. It never needs to be full except on design day outside temperature which never happens.

This is all agreed.

Note, again, however that the output of the rad is not directly dependent on the outdoor temperature. It is dependent on the TIME that the 'stat is closed. The time the 'stat is closed is directly dependent on outdoor temperature.

So, if you wish to conclude that the amount of heat delivery is indirectly related to the outdoor temperature (via the 'stat), then, of course, you'd be correct.

However, it is not a direct relationship. The 'stat is required for regulation of the output.

In my case, the output of the radiators is directly related to outdoor temperature. Because of the Ecosteam. And, the cold walls and floors.

Do you have any idea, how bad forced hot air would feel in my house? I can't even begin to imagine.

Jamie Hall

ChrisJ said:

Jamie Hall said:

Envelope upgrades? Hatteras, in some cases I agree with you on them -- but one mustn't be too absolute on that. In some instances, envelope upgrades to meet or even approach modern standards may not be feasible, or may be too expensive even if feasible to provide any return on investment. While this may not be true in modern buildings -- say from the early 1950s on, which were often very poorly built and aren't that hard to upgrade -- on historic structures it is very very often true. The place I care for being a case in point -- so perhaps I am sensitive to it!

I'd need to rip my 1950s aluminum siding off, rip all of the 150 year old clapboard off, tear out the 150 year old windows and replace them, which, 26 quality windows don't come cheap. Then insulation, then sheathing, siding etc.

It's not cheap by any means. I'd end up with a more comfortable house and the windows would be really nice but there's no way I could afford it. Not even close.

I'd probably want Anderson 400 series WoodWright windows with the 2 over 2 pattern to match my originals and I don't know what I'd do for siding, I hate vinyl. Probably Hardieboard. You're talking $13K in windows alone for my house not counting labor or anything else.

My point exactly, @ChrisJ . And if you are going for a real restoration, rather than an upgrade, the costs are even more astronomical! In response to @sunlight33 's comment -- as much foam as the roof will take! Where it was accessible without damaging the original plaster. Elsewhere... ah... well, most of the draughts are within reason.

SWEI

ChrisJ said:

adequately insulate the attic and seal off the tops of all walls (balloon framed, no fire stops). Right now that trapped air in the attic is most of what keeps the heat in the building.

For my type of building with nothing more than clapboard siding, every seam is a leak. You can see sunlight if you look in the walls. You'd have to caulk every joint, not happening. If you just try to insulate them from the inside you're almost guaranteed to have severe moisture issues.

Balloon framing and dense-packed cellulose make very good bedfellows IME. You really can seal in place without destroying the structure.

sunlight33

For windows, if you want to minimize air infiltration I recommend tilt and turn windows over double hung. Since you have 150 year old windows (did people make double pane back then?), even the cheapest double pane would help tremendously.

ChrisJ

sunlight33 said:

For windows, if you want to minimize air infiltration I recommend tilt and turn windows over double hung. Since you have 150 year old windows (did people make double pane back then?), even the cheapest double pane would help tremendously.

Yeah,
How long until those cheap windows become total garbage? That's why I won't spend money or time on them. The 150 year old ones at least function and look decent.

Also, like I said, I'd want the 2x2 look the originals have. That greatly effects the look of a building.

sunlight33

Well, in that case I have a better brand to recommend:
M-SORA windows
That's a good choice if you are buying windows not just for you but also for your grandchildren.

ChrisJ

SWEI said:

ChrisJ said:

adequately insulate the attic and seal off the tops of all walls (balloon framed, no fire stops). Right now that trapped air in the attic is most of what keeps the heat in the building.

For my type of building with nothing more than clapboard siding, every seam is a leak. You can see sunlight if you look in the walls. You'd have to caulk every joint, not happening. If you just try to insulate them from the inside you're almost guaranteed to have severe moisture issues.

Balloon framing and dense-packed cellulose make very good bedfellows IME. You really can seal in place without destroying the structure.

How does dense-packed cellulose work with clapboard? Isn't that the #1 thing you should never use in such a wall, or was that another blown product, I can't remember.

ChrisJ

sunlight33 said:

Well, in that case I have a better brand to recommend:
M-SORA windows
That's a good choice if you are buying windows not just for you but also for your grandchildren.

If they're available in 2 over 2 I'm interested.
If I ever have money for it anyway.

I do have storm windows, but they're not great.


2 over 2 example from Anderson

SWEI

As long as the clapboard is reasonably intact (most importantly that it sheds falling water and does not redirect it into the stud spaces) then dense-packed cellulose should be a good fit.

sunlight33

Have you also considered wrapping your house with 2'' polyiso foam boards?

ChrisJ

sunlight33 said:

Have you also considered wrapping your house with 2'' polyiso foam boards?

Curious,
What do you do for a living?

I'm starting to suspect this is your area of expertise.

SWEI

Beware of polyiso (or any other polyurethane-based foam products.) Their "closed cell" is actually about 95% closed and so absorbs water as it ages. An exterior sheeting of properly taped & sealed XPS will provide both a vapor barrier and a thermal-break free insulation layer. It will not absorb water -- even after decades of direct wetting.

sunlight33

ChrisJ said:

sunlight33 said:

Have you also considered wrapping your house with 2'' polyiso foam boards?

Curious,
What do you do for a living?

I'm starting to suspect this is your area of expertise.

Nah, I just did some research on insulation ever since I bought my house a couple of years ago. I learned some of the theory stuff so I know what my house is lacking in terms of insulation, but when it comes to taking my house apart, no I am not there yet.
But if I have the money, time and skill, the first time I would do is to add rigid foam boards beneath the siding, can't tolerate 4'' walls here in upstate New York!

Jamie Hall

A comment, if I may, on windows. It is very very likely that the 150 year old windows of which we are speaking either are, or can easily be made to be, tight (all mine have been, although it has taken me some years to do it, a few at a time). Once they are made tight, they can be fitted with either exterior or interior removable storm windows, with a result which is very close in R value to some of the best modern windows.

The advantages: for some projects, foremost is that that is a restoration, not a replacement. If the building has historic value, swapping in a modern window is a complete no-no unless the window cannot be restored, which is rare. Second, the addition of either inner or outer storm windows is fully reversible -- again, in a building with historic value, a very desirable thing. Third, you have preserved the old glass, which has considerable architectural value (but careful -- the stuff is fragile!). Fourth, it is likely to have been a good deal less expensive.

The disadvantages:

This is emphatically not true of windows in construction from somewhere between 1930 and 1950. There, replacement can make sense. For windows made in the last 20 years, if they are not tight they are almost unrepairable, and will have to be replaced.

sunlight33

SWEI said:

Beware of polyiso (or any other polyurethane-based foam products.) Their "closed cell" is actually about 95% closed and so absorbs water as it ages. An exterior sheeting of properly taped & sealed XPS will provide both a vapor barrier and a thermal-break free insulation layer. It will not absorb water -- even after decades of direct wetting.

Yea I am starting to recall that.
Another product I recommend for sheathing insulation is Roxul Comfortboard IS. In fact I just ordered some this week for a project on my house.
I am a big fan of Roxul, I like their stuff.

SWEI

Mineral wool is wonderful stuff. Pricey, but it really is the best product for certain applications.

ChrisJ

Jamie,

Most of my windows are made poorly / wrong so I'm not even going to bother.

The biggest issue, is most do not have what appears to be called a "parting stop". The top and bottom sashes rub against eachother. They are also not tapered or anything where they meet. Almost none have sashweights, only a few that were modified/moved in the late 1800s. The sashes don't even fit right, they're loose.

I have two 1 over 1 windows that were built new in the late 1800s , sash weights and all and they work unbelievable. Fit tight, work nice and smooth. Sashes are tapered where they meet so when they are closed it's fairly tight.

I had looked into spring bronze and all kinds of stuff to upgrade and restore the majority of them and fact is, they suck.

Fred

To Jamie's point on window restorations. There are a few companies out there that can/will take the original windows out, take the glass out and router the frames to accept a thermopane. It is less costly that quality replacement windows but not less than the cheap replacement windows. Of course the sashes have to be in good shape. We do allow replacement windows in our Historic Districts (most do) but they have to have a similar profile and certainly have to have the same lite configuration as the originals. Permanent Stiles/muttens on the exterior, spacers between the glass (for multi-lite windows) and stiles/muttens on the interior. The snap in stiles and the ones between the glass are not acceptable. That eliminates the majority of the cheaper replacements. We encourage rebuilding the original sashes and installing storms. The difference in R value between a dual pane window and one that has a properly installed storm is almost zero.

MarkS

I think Erin needs to add a "This Old House" section to the Wall.

ChrisJ

What's the R value difference between double pane and triple pane? I'm going to assume nothing if the overall gap is the same? Why not just do a double pane with a larger gap?

ChrisJ

SWEI said:

Mineral wool is wonderful stuff. Pricey, but it really is the best product for certain applications.

I had looked into buying aerogel to insulate my monitor top cabinet with. That ended with 5 years off my life just looking at the price.

I decided to keep the 3" of corrugated cardboard, which, apparently isn't much different than 3" of fiberglass batting.

sunlight33

ChrisJ said:

What's the R value difference between double pane and triple pane? I'm going to assume nothing if the overall gap is the same? Why not just do a double pane with a larger gap?

I had a friend who built a net-zero house and I think they use triple pane with R10. (windows were ordered from Europe) They also built walls with R value close to 50!
The difference between a double and a triple is pretty significant. But remember the heating cost associated with R value is nonlinear. In fact I think the payback period from R5 to R10 windows is something like 40 years.

Canucker

I'very always figured that if you don't have air blowing through your windows, they should be the last thing to replace on your reno to do list. The best windows are still pretty crappy walls

ChrisJ

Canucker said:

I'very always figured that if you don't have air blowing through your windows, they should be the last thing to replace on your reno to do list. The best windows are still pretty crappy walls

I suppose that depends.
My windows are quite drafty and there's 26 of them in a 1616sqft house and they're quite large.

KC_Jones

I have been slowly restoring mine as I do remodeling to the house. I have been adding a weatherstripping kit I found from a restoration company online. They work so well I have been removing the storms. I passionately HATE storm windows at a level I can't even express. The originals have come out so well I find I don't even need the storms. Even if I did I am not spending the money on new ones, the old ones I have are all worn out so they aren't doing much of anything anyway. In addition since I gut remodel everything I spray foam inside the weight pockets to eliminate the draft. It makes a huge difference. I have run the numbers on replacement windows, in my house the payback period isn't in my lifetime.

sunlight33

If the R value of walls is 10 times that of windows, then windows with area 1/10th of walls will have the same heat loss as the overall walls. So it depends.

Fred

Most triple panes are not actually triple panes of glass. The middle layer is usually a stretched film of some type. I don't recall the difference in R value between double pane and triple pane but the ROI is sigfinicantly longer. Most HO don't go triple pane. Anderson has a double pane window line now that the glass has an e coating on it that adds to the R value and they are touted as being self cleaning. The sun causes dirt to release from the glass. I have 35 windows in my house and they quoted me $30K for them. needless to say, I haven't gotten them. At my age I figure what's the point?

Canucker

I agree, the smaller you make the window, it will definitely lose less heat. From an ROI perspective, the amount I would have to spend to replace windows would almost cover the cost of gutting and reinsulating what I have.

Fred

KC_Jones said:

I have been slowly restoring mine as I do remodeling to the house. I have been adding a weatherstripping kit I found from a restoration company online. They work so well I have been removing the storms. I passionately HATE storm windows at a level I can't even express. The originals have come out so well I find I don't even need the storms. Even if I did I am not spending the money on new ones, the old ones I have are all worn out so they aren't doing much of anything anyway. In addition since I gut remodel everything I spray foam inside the weight pockets to eliminate the draft. It makes a huge difference. I have run the numbers on replacement windows, in my house the payback period isn't in my lifetime.

@KC_Jones , I agree. I don't like the looks of storm windows either and don't have them on my house. They do change the appearance of a home and hide a lot of the details on a window.

Jamie Hall

ChrisJ said:

Jamie,

Most of my windows are made poorly / wrong so I'm not even going to bother.

The biggest issue, is most do not have what appears to be called a "parting stop". The top and bottom sashes rub against eachother. They are also not tapered or anything where they meet. Almost none have sashweights, only a few that were modified/moved in the late 1800s. The sashes don't even fit right, they're loose.

I have two 1 over 1 windows that were built new in the late 1800s , sash weights and all and they work unbelievable. Fit tight, work nice and smooth. Sashes are tapered where they meet so when they are closed it's fairly tight.

I had looked into spring bronze and all kinds of stuff to upgrade and restore the majority of them and fact is, they suck.

Those difficult windows you describe are very early -- must be quite an interesting house! They are also, sadly, very difficult to get to be reasonably tight -- as you have found out. You might be able, though, to modify them (very carefully!) by adapting them to accept a parting stop -- a little work with a router on the frames will do that. You might also be able to get them to seal where they meet, again with a little woodworking. Not really (nor visually) modifying the frames. One does have to be absurdly careful with the old glass, of course. I have about a dozen of those -- they're 6 over 6 -- and I have done that to them. They're pretty good now.

The efficiency of a double or triple pane window depends very much on the distance between the panes. I was involved in some work on that, and the optimum seems to be around an inch to an inch and a half. Much less, and the radiant transfer gets to be significant. Much more, and one gets air circulating in between and the convection losses start to add up. Difficult.