SteamyTea

I did a bit about calculating periphery heat losses on here a while back. It is not a a BSI standard, but was close enough. Basically you add the aperture/wall thickness to the total wall area, then calculate as normal.

No, but I could if I wanted to. I don't even know where I got the tape from, seems to be one that just appeared one day. I have a posh Stanley one, and a calibrated engineers rule. It was calibrated in 1979, should still be good.

Are you thinking about cold bridges and how to calculate the losses?

See this bit at the end of the tape measure, bend it. Should get a 5mm variation then.

That will be 1096 days then.

I hated trigonometry, and is one of those things that is set up oddly in a spreadsheet as they use radians by default.

Well done. That is the secret, people forget that when modelling physical things, real models really help.

Also look at the peaks because which possibly (I don't know the software) takes night time into account. It is also worth adding in the reflectivity of the glazing, the steeper the angle, the more gets bounced off. I am not sure of the G-Value covers that. Solar film is another option to get you though the regs, cheap and removable.

My feeling as well. Just what is leaking, an edge or a flat, badly laminated, surface.

Tomorrow is fine, probably going up country anyway.

They are 375mm deep and claim a U Vale of 0.14, down to 0.11.

Thought you wanted something contemporary, not a pastiche of a 1920 cast iron radiator. For similar money you can get an A2AHP. Even more 'Ultra Efficient' than a 'ceramic core'. My 1980s storage heaters have ceramic cores, called bricks.

Well the Geo in house display lasted a total of a day. Spent two hours in phone to EDF (glossed the back door and moved storage heater will on hold). The remotely 'reset' my smart meter, made no difference. They also thought I was on pay as you go tariff. Then got cut off. Recalled, made sure I was not on PAYG. Took a while for them to check as there 'system' was slow today. Changed back to quarterly billing and variable tariff. (expletive deleted)ing imbeciles. I suspect my new in house display won't work.

Did you take pictures while it was being done? It was raining 3 weeks ago, it's been wet for 5 weeks now.

Which west coast you on, I like looking at GRP roofs. Pictures will have to do.

It is alright, not as good as a rabbit, as Bear said to Rabbit.

Would not have passed current fire regulations.

Quite often there will be a serial number somewhere, they often have a date in them.

Then you need a fair amount of insulation. The reason is that the floor is going to be at about 30⁰C to achieve a room temperature of around 20⁰C. The greater the temperature difference, the more insulation you will need so that the ground below the house does not sap all the energy away, leaving little to heat the house. Generally considered that a minimum of 150mm is needed, though the more the merrier. Easy enough to do the calculations. https://www.kingspan.com/kz/en/knowledge-articles/how-to-calculate-a-u-value/

Is that the snowflake one with no killing in it?

Are you having UFH?

I was making the point that insulation does not give a financial return, so best not to think about it that way. Add as much as can be practically done, then up the spec to get a lower U-Value. The problem is that people value the wrong things most if the time. A thermally comfortable house is of greater benefit than a deeper bathtub.

And a lot sunnier I suspect. There has been a lot of research done in Denver. That is further south than Madrid. At the moment it is 15⁰C where I am, and looks like this. That is St. Michael's Mount in the fog.

I have no idea what that means. Greatest of All Time?

please explain how deciding on how I could have done this by not deciding on the level of insulation I have? Your heating times were similar to mine, that was more to do with the being in the SW. I would have to model your old house and increase the insulation levels, then see what the marginal cost would have been. No, I would have not been surprised I would have been. Domestic energy prices had risen by less than inflation for 2 decades, but oddly stayed at about 5% of median household earnings (more to do with falling real wages). They will gradually go back to that 5%, but the nominal price will have increased. This same argument about diminishing returns has been going on since the 1970s and can be proved to be true. You can by a large family tent, or 4, and stick a fan heater in them. Would cost about about £110 per tent, including the tent. The heat load will be about 1.5 kW, so £15/day for 8 months of the year (£3,500/year). But you save the price of building a house, say £300,000, so if you had 4 family tents with fan heaters, that is: Price of House - Price of tents and heaters = 300000 - (4 x 110) = 299,560 299,560 / 3500 = 85.6 years. So one can argue that insulation, of any sort, is totally pointless from a financial viewpoint (it is the argument that the building trade still uses). The alternative is to think about thermal loads and the associated CO2e emissions. Is it not better to reduce both as much as we can? I am not saying that we need to put a metre thickness on all walls (would make my house 2 metres wide inside), but reducing, at the time of building, from the 0.25 W.m-2.K-1 to 0.125 W.m-2.K-1 would only have reduced my floor area by 8%, and as it is only about 25 metres of wall to insulate, the marginal cost would have been pretty small. Same with floor insulation. The one thing that building regs has improved upon.