All Activity

A small bump here.. I have cemfloor. I am about to paint mist coat and want to seal the floor. Will be a final finish of carpet / tiles / laminate depending on room. I am thinking a watered down ( 1/3 or 1/4 SBR ) and maybe a couple of coats to seal the floor?

I have passed this new info onto Norssken. Just awaiting a reply now..

If this is the case I think the industry needs to realise this and to stop promoting FR cavity barriers for openings in masonry built dwellings. I genuinely think that they should be installed but if this is the case I stand corrected although I would question why the diagrams indicates cavity barriers if they are not needed.

I appreciate very few will have read, let alone remembered, my original post in this thread (hence I've quoted it for context), but i thought some may be interested in an update, 8 years on. Just before we moved in in October 2017, my wife had a spirometry test on her lung function. It showed, despite having nebulised antibiotics for 18 months, that her lungs had worsened, with capacity having deteriorated to 50% (from 65% three years earlier). She stopped using the nebuliser around three weeks after moving in, and has only used it for a few days in toral in the 8 years since. In late December, as part of a pre-assessment for surgery for an unrelated condition, the anaesthetist requested a new spirometry test. Remarkably, it shows that her lungs have not measureably deteriorated since 2017. I can't say for certain that the house can be credited entirely for this result, but it has certainly played a massive part, and this is one bubble that refuses to burst.

I have. I think it’s confusing - why would the diagram show cavity barriers around a window in a masonry cavity wall if they are not needed?

Almost all currently available heat pumps do this out the box - you only need one mixer for the lowest flow temp zone. Shouldn't need a volumiser either, unless you over sized the heat pump. Basically work on the basis of 20L per kW minimum output, system volume, if you achieve this no volumiser is needed. Complexity - a temp probe down stream of mixer, connected to heat pump control/wiring centre. 3 wires to mixer from same control/wiring centre. Set controller to two zones, set the two WC curves, job done.

Have a read:

You’ve lost me. Are you saying that if you have a standard masonry cavity wall you do not need a cavity barrier around an opening?

@SteamyTea's helpful post, earlier in this thread is useful because it's brief and authoritative. By chance I also subscribe to The New Scientist, so I had a look at the link above and summarise it here (without using AI) - mainly because its so focused and easy to follow. Plan your sleep times Lighting is important : dimmer in the evenings, lighter early in the day Bedrooms cooler than living rooms (much discussion of that on BH) Avoid stress before bed (triggers are verboten) Bed is for sleeping, its not for checking BH posts Its OK to be a bit insomniac occasionally Thanks @SteamyTea

That’s correct, but how many of these can do this out of the box, and what cost and complexity will ensue? Mixers vs mixer? Eg qty 2 if UFH over 2 floors? This plus the fact that this will defo need a volumiser for when the house is at / near to target temps and the heat demand reduces.

How very odd. This sounds like a fundamental design issue as the two flows should not meet. Get a refund and maybe try another brand, like Vent Axia.

For clarification for my unit: Ext - External - Temperature of the fresh air coming into the system Exh - Exhaust - Temperature of the stale air once it has passed through the heat exchanger Int - Internal - Temperature of the stale air coming into the system before heat exchanger My unit doesn't have a supply temperature sensor, which is why i added some of my own, but they were only cheapy

Nice pipework. Sorry this is off-topic, but what's going on here?

You don't need separation. As @JohnMo says just a heatpump and controller that can deal with 2 zones using an electronic mixer.

Well I said I'd provide updates, but there's nothing much to update other than to say I'm really disappointed with the customer service I've had from Brink. In early December they sent an installer who swapped out the whole unit with a new one which, to our amazement, behaves in exactly the same way. I know you'll think I'm mad, but there is definitely strong odour transfer between the extract and supply ports. We tested this new unit, again just via the ports on the top (to exclude any internal ducting issues) and the problem is the same. I wonder now if Brink have a design flaw or manufacturing issues with the Flair 200/225. The technician from Brink who came checked out our ducting and external connections, and said it all looked very neat and well-installed. I also got him to smell-test the old unit, which he did reluctantly (not sure why, it only takes a minute), and he acknowledged the problem. I didn't do another one on the new unit before he left, as it never entered my mind that the replacement unit would have the same issue. I clearly trusted them too much! So I emailed the supplier and Brink, explaining that this new unit had the same problem, and they wrote back telling me they were going to thoroughly inspect the returned unit, and would get back to me hopefully by the end of December. Well it's now February, and I still haven't heard anything at all. They even seem to ignore the supplier when he emails them (at least, they don't include me if they do reply!). So I've had to send a legal email to the supplier, cancelling the purchase contract due to defective goods. I didn't want to do this, I'd much rather they fixed the issue but they just don't seem interested. I'm not sure how they'll respond to this, I hope they just take it away and refund the money, I have no trust in Brink any more.

You call a broken toilet a minor disaster after building a complete house from scratch within contingency and ahead of schedule. That says a lot about what a great build this has been! Good luck for the next three weeks.

This does not apply if the wall consists of two leaves of brick or concrete, each at least 75mm thick. See "Diagram 5.3 Cavity walls excluded from provisions for cavity barriers" ADB V1 2019.

Or let the ASHP controller do the work, two zones, so two WC curves, controller can use an electronic mixer, such a an ESBE, the ASHP controls flow temp to coolest flow temp, no buffer needed, no temperature distortion, no additional pumps. Just run as fully open system with two flow temps, one unmixed and one mixed.

You’ll be sending 2 different temps into 2 different manifolds? What is the methodology for FF UFH?

Your issue will be the rate of discharge when it’s regenerating. How long is the run of 28mm pipe, and where does it terminate? I’ll assume the worst and advise you make a ‘table’ for the softener as you’ll need to have some gravity fall for this to work reliably (or at all….). This is how I plumbed the last one in, where the pipe had to run some distance horizontally, caveat being that the traps were then much higher off the floor. The white square is the ‘softener stool’ that the client made for it to sit on. Left the underside open so bags of salt cubes could be stored under it to use up the space. The two waterless traps have 21.5mm reducers in the top, and the 2 hoses off the unit just poke into those by about 70-80mm or so. FWIW, there are few instances where you can install the softener directly on to the floor.

Everything I have seen states that there is rarely a need for hydraulic separation. These comments confuse me! I will check regarding the TMV.

If you have both GF and FF UFH, then I assume you’ve allowed for a TMV on each manifold, and a buffer for hydraulic separation? You’ll need the flow temp from the ASHP to be at or slightly above the one that needs the highest output, hence you’ll need to be able to manage the temps per floor for the differing emitters and coverings.

Should we add that this typically pertains to 2 or 3 storey dwellings, and is relaxed for single storey?

I am taking full ownership of the design of my heating system as there are too many parties involved with not enough skin in the game. I came to this in ignorance: Never built a house from scratch, never installed a heating system from scratch, never owned an ASHP before. Therefore I made the mistake of not understanding how important the calculations are for a well designed ASHP heating system are. The ignorance led to a lack of attention paid at the beginning but I am trying to catch up and at the very least get to a position on paper where I can see a calculated flow temp for my ASHP/house that will produce the heat output the maths says I need. This will be my starting point and from there I will be able to set the system up for best efficiency/comfort. On my side I have as much solar as I can fit on the roof and a decent amount of battery. I have good insulation, MVHR and I am trying my best to get the most efficient building I can afford. The heat loss calculations I have seem correct. I already have the GF UFH down and it is should output more than enough heat but until I see the actual figure I won't be satisfied, hence me banging on about it on here!

AD B gives definitions of 'cavity barrier' and 'fire stopping' but not 'cavity closer'! Diag 5.3, Note 1, in the current AD B is quite specific about there being no particular fire performance requirement for the materials used to close the cavity. This note was included only in recent versions of AD B (post 2019?) and is not in the technical guidance for Wales, Scotland & Ireland. I have own my thoughts on why this was changed!! There is also no restriction on the fire performance of materials used in the cavity - mineral wool will be non-combustible, polystyrene and PUR/PIR will be classed as combustible.