California radiant heating code needs to be fixed

Kalifornia needs to be fixed...

Gordy said:

You may not like how the code is implemented. However I can assure you slab insulation is beneficial in reducing energy consumption no matter what soil type you have. Even if it's not a radiant heated slab. Where the diminishing returns as to how much is a case by case basis.

I am not a big fan of regulation but I will tell you that I wish that under slab insulation was a requirement when my house was built. I have an under insulated slab in my basement. The space has the lowest heat loss in the house and calls for heat at least 3 times as often as the rest of the zones.

Honestly I think it's a sad state of affairs when regulations make things mandatory. When I built my own home in 2009, my small town had no building code other than at least one 3' wide exterior door, and at least 1 Window that met egress standards in each bedroom.

If national building codes had been in effect then, I'd have had to have a 6' (local frost line) frost wall instead of a monolithic thickened edge slab. All insulation that I did was way above what code would have dictated though.

The point is that where I am located and the ground work that I did with many cubic yards of gravel frost walls were not necessary, but building codes would have mandated them due to the building's use being for habitation.

I think it's a homeowner's or architect's responsibility to insulate to what they deem a good investment. I personally believe that insulation is the best investment one can make in a building. R35 walls and R60 ceiling with as close to airtight construction as reasonable, but that shouldn't be mandated IMHO.

I agree with some minimum standards, especially with energy and insulation details, and safety.

The ones that get hurt most from lack of adequate slab insulation details are usually the ones that can afford it them least.

There have been numerous radiant slab systems abandoned and replaced with FA or mini splits systems due to excessive fuel costs associated with non, or poorly insulated slabs. And the homeowner now lives uncomfortably on a FA heated slab on grade structure.

It is the one insulation detail that is not easily remedied after the pour

Some rural areas around me have zero codes for building. I see parts of those homes blowing in the wind when tornado conditions start up around here. People die every year here in Missouri from houses blowing away, is that fair to the family and others in harms way? I have had large pieces of metal roofing drop into my yard from tornado, or high wind damaged properties 80 miles away. Along with their paycheck stubs, in one case.

The gift that keeps on giving.

Even with minimum standards the insulating gets done 1/2 arse.

Ok, let me clarify my statement. I am certainly not against safety codes....I am an electrician after all. It's the UBC-uniform building code, the last thing I have to think about is hurricanes, so I shouldn't have to build to the same standard as someone in a hurricane zone. Same with earthquake-resistance etc.

As with all trades there are good tradesmen and "good enough...code min" tradesmen. I see way too much poor quality installation of equipment and insulation muddled up by installers and other trades alike.

I'm of the camp that it is a good owner or architect's job to build things to their standard, which should be their choice.

I have R20 perimeter slab insulation and R10 below. @Gordy my wife and I lived in a small (converted 2 car garage freestanding) apartment which had no slab insulation other than the carpet....Electric baseboard heat. That is one of the reasons why I went in the direction I did when I built my own home. That apartment was terrible! Suspended ceiling with fiberglass directly on top of it too, cost us quite a bit of money to heat considering the 480 square feet.

@Solid_Fuel_Man all I know is you get so use to the radiant silence when it's not there it hits like a ton of bricks. My floors were 74-75. Now IF they are even 68 it's terrible on tile.

Not to mention blower noise, dry air, fluctuating humidity, cold drafts on a cycle start until the ducts warm up. Ahh the noise.

Solid_Fuel_Man said:

Ok, let me clarify my statement. I am certainly not against safety codes....I am an electrician after all. It's the UBC-uniform building code, the last thing I have to think about is hurricanes, so I shouldn't have to build to the same standard as someone in a hurricane zone. Same with earthquake-resistance etc.



As with all trades there are good tradesmen and "good enough...code min" tradesmen. I see way too much poor quality installation of equipment and insulation muddled up by installers and other trades alike.



I'm of the camp that it is a good owner or architect's job to build things to their standard, which should be their choice.



I have R20 perimeter slab insulation and R10 below. @Gordy my wife and I lived in a small (converted 2 car garage freestanding) apartment which had no slab insulation other than the carpet....Electric baseboard heat. That is one of the reasons why I went in the direction I did when I built my own home. That apartment was terrible! Suspended ceiling with fiberglass directly on top of it too, cost us quite a bit of money to heat considering the 480 square feet.

Building codes are safety codes, essentially.

I doubt in your area that you are required to build to seismic codes, like CA or maybe not roof loading codes as in the western mountain areas. So I think they try to adjust the codes to local conditions. Local AHJ have the ability to modify the codes or add addendum to best serve their area.

I imagine most licensed builders and architects refer to the various codes often in design and build, they do intend to protect the general public. I question that the general public has the knowledge to build and size structural dwellings without some code guidance.

I know IAMPO just spent a lot of time and money developing solar and hydronic codes to try and get a handle on bad and or dangerous installations. it protects the public and our industry. Mark Eatherton worked a lot on that project and several wallies here helped develop the curriculum and test questions.

CA Energy Codes came out in I think it was '79 or '80. I was in the contracting business in CA then. Those "Title 24" codes have...matured over the years, and yes there are some of the...What?...Really? Things, but overall I give it good marks. It is consumer protection in that you know you are getting a pretty consistent product when you buy a house. I got a call a few weeks back to look a house over that was having fuel consumption issues. Really a beautiful single story radiant slab with much of the slab edge exposed. 1800 sq ft. $900/ mo in gas bills when using the radiant. No slab insulation anywhere. The lady who bought the house wishes it was there and it is a shame she can't use the radiant. Insulate it.

Insulation used to be optional. An associate of mine who works for a local AHJ consulted with me before he made a recommendation to the IRC, IMC as it pertains to insulation minimums.

I recommended minimum R 5 for slabs and slab edges, R 7 (was still available back then) for framed floors over conditioned spaces, and R-19 for suspended floors above unconditioned spaces, with the caveat that as you move further north, R values may need to be increased. He (the inspector) was tired of having to field calls from dis-satisfied consumers who had cold basements and were pouring money down the drain due to the lack of insulation.

At the time, I was approaching the problem more from the perspective of slab performance, than energy conservation. Energy was relatively cheap back then.

Remember also that the code is the MINIMUM standard. If you have somewhere that you think you can enhance the overall performance of a building through the application of insulation, air sealing or technology, go for it. They can't tell you that you are building to excess.

As it pertains to crappy insulation installations, take responsibility for providing and placing the insulation, and CHARGE for it accordingly. Making a profit is not against the law, and the best way to maintain good control over its placement, is to provide it and place it yourself. If you think that is below you, then align yourself with a good insulation contractor, and make money on his work. Remember, the performance of YOUR system is depending on good insulation.

In general, having had many years of experience developing codes, there has to be a "Life, Health or Safety" issue in order to be considered for code applicability.

The waste of energy is considered detrimental to life due to the potential of global warming (not my intent, please do not flame me). As noted, IMHO it's about "system" performance more than it is energy conservation. Conservation is still a wise decision.

As it pertains to solar thermal, or solar in general, just because it is allegedly "FREE", doesn't mean it should be wasted. I think the opposite is true. Solar thermal BTU's are SO precious, that extra care should be taken to conserve them as well as we possibly can, and as such, should NOT be wasted in any form.

One of the reasons that I look forward to disconnecting myself from my current employer (IAPMO) is because as an employee, my hands are literally tied when it comes to making code recommendations. As an employee of IAPMO, working on an ANSI document, I am not allowed to have any "influence" on decisions made by the technical committees charged with developing code recommendations. I have holes in my tongue and lips gotten from biting them during public code hearings.

At one point, I had to publicly apologize to the people on a committee for belittling them in public. If I had been on the outside, I wouldn't have held back, and I wouldn't have had to apologized for their silly actions.

The IAPMO codes are developed by it's stake holders, Contractors are stake holders. Manufacturers are stakeholders. Heck, even the consumer is a stakeholder and If you don't like the direction that the code is going, you are allowed to make public comment, and there is a process in place to make certain your voice is heard. Your recommendations may or may not make it into the final version, but you ARE allowed to have a say in the development of these codes. Unfortunately, IAPMO is only one code development authority, and although their codes are the most widely used in the WORLD, they are a minority in the US.

BTW, there are big differences in code development authorities. Some are consensus developed, and some are not. All IAPMO codes are consensus developed. The intent of the RPA in being involved in developing the codes pertaining to hydronics, was to level the playing field for the consumer. The bottom line intent was to provide minimum guidance to ensure that these wonderful systems perform as well as they possibly can.

None of the systems I and my former company installed were ever done to the code "minimum". The installed cost of our systems were typically 2 times more than our closest competitors. I had lunch with my former business partner, and he said that his company is struggling, but its a good struggle to have. His problem is finding enough time to get all the projects done that they have contracts for. It's almost as stressful as not having enough work to keep people busy, but it is a good problem to have...

You have one chance (with insulation below slabs and on slab edges) to do it right.

INSULATE!

PS, I will have to get the URL from my work PC, but we do have a link to the current version of the USEHC that is a read only version that you can read online. Codes are a living document, and this is the 2015 version. There are many changes in the USEHC and UMC that will be reflected in the 2018 version. It is too late to get public comments in, but if you are seriously interested in becoming involved with the IAPMO code development process, by all means contact the code development division of IAPMO.

ME

Establishing minimum requirements even when it is not a safety issue is really a good thing for quality minded contractors.

I hear guys complain that the did not get a job because it was given a less expensive company that does shoddy work.

Code minimums level this playing field, everyone has to build to same standard.

As for the OP insistence that factors like soil type or energy source should be considered in determining under slab insulation requirements, I have heard this nonsense for years and it is absolutely not true. The simple fact is that when you don't insulate, you are dumping energy into the ground all the time (unless of course your soil temp is higher the design air temp).

I used to work for a guy that insisted that you don't need insulation because "heat still rises right?" He is retired in Mexico, every time I see one of his jobs and hear the owners complaint, I have to resist the impulse to call him up.

As for the argument that we have some inalienable right to screw up our own house and the government has no right to intervene, I absolutely agree. Why should an adult motorcyclist be required to where a helmet?
However all houses are sold to some unsuspecting sole at some point. As long as all the concealed construction defects associated with a property are documented and recorded with the deed for future owners to evaluate, people should be able to do what ever they please with properties that only they occupy.

Ground is the only economical way to store months and years of solar energy.

Sal Santamaura said:

jumper said:

...Slab insulation can actually be a negative in California if you're using solar energy...

Why? Please explain.

Canada has long painful experiences with government ordered or encouraged insulation. UFFI is an example out of Catch-22.

jumper said:

Ground is the only economical way to store months and years of solar energy...

In such an approach, wouldn't it be necessary to insulate some volume of soil beneath the slab so that solar energy is contained? If not, why wouldn't the energy dissipate into surrounding soil and be lost?

What temperature do you think built-over ground in California is? You think it's cold? Perhaps in California desert cool floor makes home more comfortable in summer? Where's the balance? Send this thread to California Energy Commission and they'll commission a study for next iteration of KaliforniaKode.

Gordy said:

It doesn't add up. If I want to store, and reuse energy. I need to contain it. Replenish, use, replenish. Or replenish as used, or use as produced. Insulation helps with that.

Sometimes energy efficiency does add up and sometimes not. Insulation is perfect example. Some insulation in the correct place can pay for itself. Additional insulation usually doesn't. Law of diminishing returns. Dry ground is considered an insulator by the way.

It's a tough argument to make Jumper. If the grounds any temperature below the slab temperature, some of the heat energy will go to the ground, and keep going down.

It looks like soil temperatures in the winter months drop into the 50's in some areas of California. So with an 82° slab temperature you have close to a 30°∆T encouraging the heat transfer to the ground.

Water, if you have the space for those large unpressurized tanks is a much better way to store energy. 4-6" of insulation around a tank will keep it pretty well.

This is an older study, for just one area of CA I'll bet other current data exists.

I think Robert Bean has some FEA and infrared of energy transfer to the earth at healthyheating.com


http://www.water.ca.gov/pubs/use/land_and_water_use/agroclimatic_monitoring_in_the_san_joaquin_valley_1958-1991/section_7.pdf

Sal Santamaura said:

within a few degress...

Can't edit stupid mistakes after posting. "degrees," not "degress."

Never mind. Fixed now.

Sal Santamaura said:

Sal Santamaura said:

within a few degress...

Can't edit stupid mistakes after posting. "degrees," not "degress."

Sal,
If you click the setting icon in the top left corner of the post, you can edit. You have to be signed in to do this.

jumper said:

...Have you guys included the insulation contributions from water barrier and gravel?...

Water barrier? Gravel? Around here, they flatten the clay soil, lay out cables/posts (for subsequent tensioning) and ABS drain lines, then pour. Concrete is in direct contact with highly expansive clay. Good that those cables/posts are included. Not good that the civil engineering wizards pay no attention to soon-to-rack wood-framed walls sitting on able-to-simulate-ocean-waves-without-cracking slabs.