Nickfromwales

Street elbow aka "m&f bend". Buy the long ones for going into compression as the short ones can and often do cause issue when going into a compression fitting. Number one rule is to keep tapping it into the fitting as your tightening up the nut ( if a short one ) as the nut holds the bend away from being in fully. When the olive pinches you'll find it grabs onto the very end of the m&f stem. Strip it back down after tightening up to make sure the olive has got visible copper after it. Re-gunk, making sure zero gets inside the pipe, and re-assemble.

That still puts too much heat too close IMO. You're supposed to fit all the irons BEFORE mounting the valve as per my previous. .

Thought so. Only prob with 200L is.....for DHW uplift, and not much of it at a set temp of 40-42oC, you need to fill the entire vessel with a single coil so no other coils could be employed. After that it's all PHE and complexity, hence my starter buffer where uplift is key is a min of 250L, but 300L or > would be preferable.

Agreed, and purely for research / information. I would appreciate it as one I'm looking at wants to heat via MVHR and a duct pre-heater. I will pay you suitably for the market research of course. Out of curiosity how much is one pint up your neck of the woods ?

Oh, and that image in the last but one post shows a TS which I recon will be at least 450 / 500 L to get all those coils inside it and for them to be of any meaningful capacity.

Ive spoken to Telford to address this and I think there is some middle ground. Where we are all looking at the buffer tank as, for eg, a 200L buffer then the assumption is that there will be 200L of A/F ( antifreeze solution ) to factor in. Not always the case . If we are to accept that the buffer, in a particular instance, is primarily for cold mains uplift aka DHW preheat, then there will be a whopper of a coil inside the cylinder consuming a large amount of the total cylinder volume. In the case of my current enquiry, around or just over ( TBC ) 50% of the cylinder volume will be occupied by the coil. So, for a 250L buffer, <125L will be A/F. The benefit of having the ASHP to the cylinder ( aka tank ) is it can get all its heat into the cylinder as quickly as possible. Going through a coil isn't as efficient so as this is not just a buffer to prevent short cycling ( eg a much smaller cylinder ) I've looked at maximising heat transfer from ASHP to DHW pre-heat. To get that, somethings gotta give. My thoughts then turn to the UFH and how to glean heat without having to have A/F in that system too. "Stick another coil in the buffer" I hear you cry, but alas, no room exists inside the buffer now as to get any meaningful uplift from a 250L vessel stored at ~40oC you need a bloody huge coil. It just about leaves room for 1 immersion heater ( 3kW or 6kW ), so where does that leave us? Before anyone asks, a smaller cylinder or smaller coil is a waste of time as the uplift wouldn't make it worth the bother, so 250L is the starting point IF you want to lean heavily on the ASHP at high CoP for DHW production, and also remember that part of this remit is to avoid G3. From the ASHP I am looking into the pros and cons of fitting an oversized PHE inline with the flow. As its oversized ( to get a top through-flow rate on the primary side ) it should not impede upon the flow velocity of the ASHP pump and not impede upon water circulation to the buffer. So that gets us an A/F rich primary flow that goes from the ASHP to the PHE primary side ( PHE flow ), then it comes out of the PHE primary side ( return ) and then on to the body of the buffer to heat that. Im not bothered about recover / reheat times as this will purposely be set to come on and stay on during occupancy. The benefit of this setup will be no need for an additional pump / flow switch as the UFH manifold pump will simply draw heated water from the PHE as its required. The other option is Teeing the UFH PHE across the ASHP flow and return. @JSHarris any thoughts? Theory only at the moment.

Hi and welcome. Id be interested to hear, possibly from @PeterStarck, what the floor temp ( temp of actual floor covering that you walk on with bare feet ) sits at compared to the ambient temp as detected / denoted by the room thermostat . I cant help thinking that if members such as @jack report wishing they'd installed UFH in the upstairs bathrooms because the floors weren't exactly comfortable underfoot, then the ground floor of even a Ph build would be 'worse' than that. Can we filter out those with the "I'll wear slippers" PoV and get some real life feedback from any members WITHOUT ground floor heating please?

Did you have to fit larger bore ductwork or run the fan at a higher rate? Assume that is decided upon by the manufacturer / by design so possibly moot.

Any layout that allows you to isolate the buffer will, with the correct placement of valves etc, allow cooling. So yes. Your equipment as listed above is perfectly reasonable to have when you have a log gasification boiler, and the ST is designed to compliment the 2x TS's and offset the frequency of you operating the LGB. Why you have a LGB in the first place is the question? Did you push for wood burning in your spec? Also strange they didn't give you a bigger store ( more TS volume ) TBH.

Keep the pics coming .

Or that option ?

This one ? I'm going plumbing blind at the moment. ?

Yea. Practically fixed itself tbh.

Only BCO can tell you as he / she is signing it off. "Not lockable" refers to a thumb turn on the inside eg no looking for mislaid keys to get out in an emergency. But your house is tiny and cramped. How will you ever manage ?!?

Good point. A temporary certificate of habitation ? That may leave the drive until after the sale of the old house? Has this already been suggested ?

I go through loads of conditioner.

Depends if you want cooling. If you don't, you could go all Sunamp for space heating and DHW via E10 grid electricity and fortify with PV where budget allows.

hashtag : eating my own words

Just reading back through this top resource as the SA issue has caused a major re-think The solar coil would be too low IMO, particularly at the low temp the buffer will operate at, to be fully extracting the heat out at the rate it would be consumed, assuming max ( typical ) flow of 15-20 l/p/m. I'm getting on the phone this morning to Telford to have a yap with the cylinder gods there and I'l update here with any juicy bits of info I extract. Cant help thinking the arrangement in a standard UVC would be best suited, eg heat via the coil and extract DHW preheat by putting the cold in at the bottom and removing the heated ( 40oC ) water out of the absolute top of the cylinder.

Its OK Capt.F he's been through customs already ;). Just a bit of an overstep with the link so no lives lost.......yet. It goes all the way down my back too so theres a bit to do

Ok, if not tiles then what ? Time for a reality slap, cos pouring hundreds of litres of water, not even clean water, onta a flat concrete floor with no hygienic ( maintainable ) covering is a non-starter. Think again my good man . Impey do a great product for you here, and leaves very little to go wrong. Check this out :). With that you can connect and test the waste before the pour and then just leave that corner shy or get a mix that's workable and trowel it to the former as the lot goes down.

I was having my hair done. .

As it stands, with the PCM34 on ice due to technical problems, not that much TBH. See the last comment in my post here...... ....where ive had to revert back to a buffer tank instead of a pair of 6kW PCM34 Sunamp units. As it says, im just juggling the anti-freeze isolation issue ( minimising the volume of antifreeze rich water by not having the buffer full of that water ) a bit more before I cement a design to overcome this problem.

Nope, nothing.

That one is specific to a customer so just use that to get your head around it