Nickfromwales

Anywhere other than YOUR bottom for sure. Another quality thread taken under….

If waters getting to the other side of untreated wood, then don’t you need to solve the issue further upstream? Just saying…..

So……they’re not actually auto-balancing then as they each require full mechanical (human) commissioning? I’m failing to see the benefit, sorry, and think it is much easier (for a newbie in particular) to get to the best result with balancing via the existing lock shield valve. The latter is also the obvious choice in an existing install where you have the TRV’s (regular, serviceable ones) and do not want to make any changes. @Dee, best to save your pennies and do this in one hit in the summer, as suggested above. Then you can take your time.

Yes, Hepworth, lol. Those BES manifolds are good value for money, and from the pics they may be cone faced 1/2” males so may take a standard nut and olive and allow a direct connection with copper. Failing that and them being true 1/2” male threads, then the Hep2o fittings could be used to convert “iron to copper” LINK and you’re off to the races. Add the costs of the extra time / fittings, though, and you’re not much better off tbh. MLCP tends to be less forgiving IMO, for long runs and 1st fixing, so I prefer the user-friendly flexibility of standard Hep2o pipe. Everything will be interchangeable, but if you use a particular pipe you should use their fittings; eg I won’t use John Guest fittings on a Hep2o pipe installation (largely through fear of failure / warranty issues, as I install these things for 3rd party clientele vs myself so any doubt / risk must be managed or eliminated).

All “mechanical” systems require the same, just a big difference between caretaking a single point of service vs multiples of. I wouldn’t want such a statement to frighten anyone away from MVHR, as it is the best solution, in a suitably airtight house, hands down. Filter cleaning / replacement in a quality MVHR unit is a 10-15 min job at worst; sub 5 minute job if they’re simply being replaced. Brink filters can be changed in sub 60 seconds, just swing open the front access door and slide them in/out. Through-wall single point MVHR units are reported to be more grief than they contribute, but PIV and dMEV are things I have the least interest / experience with, due to near constant cold air influx in winter with zero heat recovery (AFAIK).

Merry Xmas lol. 🎅

Respectfully, you need to do a test and get the results. If it’s worse than you think then maybe a 450 won’t do it, if it’s much better (sub 1.0 ACH) then the 450 may suffice.

Or maybe just some Talon trunking? Link

Nah....Durisol did nothing there to protect the glass in the windows

Another bump of this thread for the most recent new members

Fill your boots matey Plenty on here who have renovated / are renovating. Find a subject, search up a relevant thread, and then post there if possible please! Don’t worry about blowing the dust off an old thread btw! Otherwise just start a new thread and folk will chip in .

You can build cheaper with masonry I expect, vs a high-performance TF, but then spend more over time heating it. If you have the budget to go for a well insulated foundation and frame package (a-la MBC TimberFrame Passivhaus spec offering (they do many different specs btw, worth going to visit the factory)) and then spend less over the lifetime of occupancy. You often have to make sacrifices but these will be yours to make; eg pretty things or insulation and airtightness.

Both are relevant points. Effectiveness is the most relevant, as with enough downward/other losses and a max surface temp of 27°C, you can soon find yourself pumping a huge amount of energy into the subfloor vs room which means it’s fair to say that it is ineffective in the grand scheme as it’s so perverse to have chosen/be running it. Efficient is where bags of insulation and airtightness makes these things perform excellently. Biggest killer will be the natural infiltration of the dwelling, as each of the above will both be useless maths if the heated air leaves via the clouds. Aim to get airtight with MVHR (go with an option that has heat recovery, it’s really a no brainier if viable) and then you’ll only need a thimble of heat anyways. Shift the problem instead of making the solution fit? Spend money on ‘energy saving’ not ‘energy spending’ via compensating for poor fabric performance.

FYI @Dee, the diverters are short / medium lengths of pipe or other to make the flow enter the rad vs just skip in and out like the SAS Same thing you’d get with the old twin-entry valves.

Thread tidied. @Dee If you’ve got column rads then these are flow hungry, but will also bypass the flow potential of your pump (path of least resistance yaadaa-yaadaa), so basically try and draw a map of the rads and pipework in distance from pump > rad. Work these as an epicentre and adjust the LS valves according to % distance; eg 10 rads in a row in a straight line would have first LS set at 10% flow, 5th rad 50% flow 10th rad fully open. Are all the rads fed from 15mm pipe work? 10mm to column rads is ‘no bueno’. Do you know how much 22/28mm (if any 28mm at all?) primary pipe work there is? And do you know if no more than 4 rads are fed off a run of 15mm pipework? How old are the TRVs? These things don’t last forever.