zoothorn

I have listened, to everything, please don't assume that I haven't/ that I don't. It is only bc I do not understand, even with replies, that the info is not sinking in. Tbh it still doesn't. If I had one of you here, saying the same things but i could see/ read expressions... I likely would have grasped the basics of this long ago. It seems, poosibly, that I still simply do not understand what on earth this exercise is for/ what is the goal/ why mine as they are cannot be deemed balanced. I had thought 1 st they are highly likely balanced as is ( the rads) bc they all seem the same temp, the same time coming on, the same simultaneous aspect to coming on (none obviously lagging behind in heat appearing). It seemed logical, from all these similarities, to conclude they must be in balance, regardless of their size I cannot alter, and that their temp must be the only thing that can change/ therefore be the " currency" of the balance exercise. Then it was hollered at me NO!! Etc etc reply after reply. So, if not... then the only logical thing, to me then, must be that the word balance must be relative to something other than the rads' temp being in balance & the only possible thing then: the room temps. As this is the ultimate facet of the rads function, to alter the rooms' temp by their input, I was resolute in thinking the term was 'wrong' & balance radiators as an exercise - had- to be referring to ultimately balancing room temps. Yesterday, mulling over your spanner in the works explanation of "trv's" being the way room temps can easily be regulated, altho i do not have trv's (more yet mild confusion, as why would you mention them then?) plus you saying that actually 'balancing rads' WAS correct as an expression after all- I tried to reevaluate the whole shebang. I read, I listened. I was so brain fugged by now I put huge dollop of ginger paste in my cauliflower cheese sauce not garlic paste & I concluded that after all, now right back to sq 1.. I haven't the foggiest idea of what is to balance, what the goal is, why my rads cannot be deemed in balance just as they are if they're all coming on the same... right back to sq 1. I do not know my ass from my elbow, or maybe I do, I haven't a clue of anything. My cheesy dinner was an abomination. Like my understanding of all this. If you said that my cheesy dinner was, in fact actually perfectly ok... I wouldn't be surprised at all tbh.

Joe, This implies to me you do at least understand why and how I have misinterpreted this term, even if you are not prepared to say (I think also true of most too preferring to club together, instead of seeing my pov only bc it's unpopular to do so). Anyway.. Thanks for this further explanation of the basics. Ok its clearer you explaining this shifting, but also adds more confusion. You are here explaining how radiator temps can actually be balanced after all by shifting etc. Fine. But, if it will not/ cannot/ ever be of any use in my house (due to the huge 6* coldest to the warmest room temps) then I can conceive only of the following of being of use: not a similarity whatsoever in radiator temps (this will be useless, is what I have now) but only, only, only a very large inbalance in rad temps could possibly ever result in evenness in room temps. Also my end of the line rad, is not the coldest as you suggest is normal, but the warmest, so pushing more heat to this rad would do the opposite of what's needed (yet another opposite/ the confusion never ceases for me). Perhaps because my house is so unusually cold -plus - a new extention added vastly different to most of old cold house, that, contrary to all normal houses where a semblance of parity in room rad temps is the norm & just 'a bit of shifting heat from rad to rad is all that's needed' to achieve optimum balance.. here perhaps normally-similar radiator temps, or without question same rad temps, are totally useless to be of any possible consideration. Thanks zoot.

I have yet to find out how to jump into step 1 > I'm about to. If it needs plummewry tools.. then I need to buy 1st. But before I've asked a Q about my 6*C difference.. the implications of this.. & whether the whole exercise isn't made kaput if A) I have this huge room temp discrepency, & if B) I already -afaik- have a very high 55* flow temp setting, & only 2 of 8 rooms achieving decent warmth. I just want to know the exercise isn't pointless.. unless I ramp my source up to no.11, blow it up.. along with mrs. miggins at no.73. thx

Understand step1 is to get a parity in rad temps/ get them all established as fully open (And here Id imagine, is temporarlily, briefly & the only-flamin-do-diddly-time the radiators will be balanced one to the next!!). I understand now that the -last step, the whole point- is to get a balance in room temps, not a balance in radiators whatsoever. Thanks MJN. [[And special thanks to Gav_P: who hugely kindly sent me 4x pipe temp thermometres. Anyone who wants to borrow: I can send on]]

Also fixing my hinges to my door: I see various positions of the 'barrel' (I dont know what its called, but the centre section with the moving parts in) either on the edge of the door, or just off it, or a bit further out. Where should I position this bit? Huge delay on this job- no fixings with hinges, so alot of trial & error getting screws/ not sure if right even now.

As to the exercise itself, finally on track.. I don't see how in my case here, with such a large discrepency in room temps (6*C coldest room to warmest, with all the rads 'open' afaict.. if by feeling they are all similarly hot that's a reasonable assumption to make) how I can balance the room temps without excessively 'upping' the source of the heat. I mean I can understand the exercise completey, if a "normal house" let's say discrepency of maybe 2*C is found coldest to hottest rooms: then the source need be upped within a normal scope. Mine? its already running flat-out afaik @ 55* flow temp, far higher than its default setting. My point is: I can easily do the exercise, balance my room temps (with help how- I'm quite sure) by adjusting lockshield valves one rad to the next etc, finally ramping my source up to run at 9,0000 rpm (as it were) to achieve 21*C in all my rooms: but surely this is completely unwise & the thing will blow up. As Ive said: my house is -not- normal. It is stupidly fkn cold (& with a modern extention on complicating things --temps-- to balance). Thanks zH

It wasn't neccessary to 'do a quick search to find out the meaning'!!!! Jesushchrist. No again "Balance radiators" is -not- open to interpretation if normal use of the two words are used. In plumming context, for some reason, logic is thrown out & the word balance is not referring to radiators at all, but to the room temps instead! therefore: it is an illogical term. Once it was established that this was so, that balance must have nothing to do with radiators [the exercise is: create an imbalance in rads, to achieve a balance in room temps: so the term is plain & simple 100% stupidity].. but room temperatures instead.. once this emerged as reason for my (totally reasonable) total confusion... I don't need to then go & find out what "to balance radiators" means!! I've found out- the hard way!! The odd thing to me is why couldn't someone have just said " 'balance rads'.. dont take it literally, think of it as 'balancing room temps' & you'll understand principle of the idea". (Why didn't someone say? very likely simply bc the term is known to them, so they were confused & irritated why I kept saying my rads afaict were balanced if all the same temp = culminating in alot of unwarranted antipathy, mini pack mentality, & aggression at me). Such misinterpretation is to be expected on a forum using communication via a box of text; it is it's achilles heel. That is all on the matter.

Kapisch up to nuclear reactor.. and from there to the end, no kapisch & my head exploded (especially what "it" might be: cant cope with cryptic schmyptics on top of nuclear numnums). So Ill likely only be able to extract half at best of what you speak of! Will try afresh tmrw no.3 tho.

Yup balance anything under the sun.. there's still intrinsically a parity of one side to the other gav. Apart from 'balancing radiators' when the opposite is true! you create an -imbalance- in the rads one to the next... in order to achieve a balance of temperature one room to the next. Total nonsensical illogical numnuts as ever Ive heard in my whole life. Nope I agree english is sometimes illogical, but it is perfectly logical though to assume 'balance whatever' means just this a balance, an equity, a parity!

Ok really appreciated this explanation MJN. It'll take me 10x reads of it to understand tho, a heck of alot there to absorb & for me to make sense of, and I will ask q's if i still dont get a part of it.. but I'll go through this info tmrw. cheers zoot

No, sorry, you dont understand Declan. I was under the sole impression, because 'balance something' means a parity of something in english.... that my rads were balanced because they were all a similar temp. Logical. Logical. Logical. They were not balanced, only because these two words, in plummerry world & here only, for some inexplicable reason................... do not in fact mean parity. Balance = parity. Usually! enough.

No work gav. Every £10 means alot now tbh. Im not obdurately just refusing to buy the gizmos. No, I just want to understand their purpose 1st (other than "a thermometre dummy"). I am only just starting to try understanding this system balancing, now i know my rads are not balanced after all -as i thought that they were up until only hrs ago- which Im sure I'll be quite capable of doing fine, but once the basics are understood 1st is the right idea. Its just Im not getting the gist, the principle of this gizmo's function, thats all. I'll get it but like building anything, it takes me 10x the time it does you. thx zh

I dont know best. The opposite. I dont understand something. so I am asking MJN. But surely if you restrict a rad, within the balancing the system idea, for a room that's hotter for eg (presuming this might be part of the balance exercise, as illogical as that intrinsically is because you are creating a flippin imbalance if altering/ restricting any rad's temp relative to another... but i go along with it) ...the flow and return temps dont change. I mean how can they change, unless cold water is introduced? I cant think of any other way a flow temp can change, apart from if I change the whole shebangs overall 'flow temp' on the controller.

Argh!! Im not 'refusing to accept it' (im just refusing -to use- it only bc its caused me grief because its inherrantly illogical!). I fully accept what it means within the context of plummerry, now I know its meaning/ it's not to be taken literally! strewth alive. Please. ----------- But if I have a thermometre, which i easily take room to room wait only 15 mins to read well, that tells me your 17 or 19 figure.. so Im not getting why the extra exercise with the gizmo on the pipe (& also if i know with some accuracy id assume, my 55* flow temp is also in the pipes). Surely i buy the gizmo, put on a pipe, & it says uniformly maybe 55*. So I bought the gizmo for..... ?

joe.. you dissapoint me. I threw that out but wasn't expecting you to fall for it ?

Ok understood. But look 1st, why can't i assume that if the system is set to 55*, then surely the rads are near as dammit (Im not fussy about needing super Onoff accuracy, am I?) all 55* too? Even if they're a degree or two off, I still don't get why i need to know a more accurate flow figure anywhere in the system, if the ultimate results are simply if the room feels warm, or not, and you could 'balance the SYSTEM' by saying yes this rooms warm, no that rooms not as warm. (IE Im obviously missing something.. I just need a bit more explanation of the purpose of these gizmos.)

YESSSSSSS!!!!! Thank god at least ProDave understands me. Balance the system, or better (& ffs why isn't it instead??!!) BALANCE THE ROOM TEMPS: you know this means one thing only: similarity between the rooms, similarity between sugar bags, anything....... apart from...... it seems..... fkn radiators already!! Totally. Unambiguously. Clear.

Right. Im back on track. Rant over. If i go by the flow temp I set my HW to dpm... 55*. If you're asking to put an Onoff gizmo on a pipe for a more accurate figure.. I don't have one sorry.

YES IT DOES. Ffs Onoff! Its basic english two words together. Balance = Parity!!!!! Jesush man. its only bc - you know- it as a plumbers term... that you intrinsically understand it's not to be taken literally!! Otherwise in normal context its two english words together without chance of being misinterpreted/ of being ambiguous, in any possible way, what so fkn ever!!! Balance sugar bags. Theres only one notion: they're the fkn same! Nothing possibly ambiguous about it! Swap sugar for anthing else and its still parity...... apart from one thing in the whole fkn universe apparantly: radiators!!!!!

Yes.. but the point was, because 'balance radiators' is an unambiguous term if used correctly (as i think you can appreciate is surely a logical conclusion from these two words)... the point was, i was resolute in thinking nothing other than one rad is in balance with another, the same, the same temp. So i had understood these two words together perfectly so i was thinking, as is logical to, for a whole page of replies telling me otherwise, hence the enormous & frustrating confusion. There was never any reason for any possible misinterpretation of the term. Its only because it was made by an idiot this confusion happened. But i was never in the know that i didnt understand the term!!!! Only once it was explained (not outright, i had to glean this info from jfb's reply) that in effect 'balance radiators'............. is not to be taken literally.................. could i then understand it meant in fact 'balance room temps' ( & not a balance of rads at all !!!). The stupid fkn term was probably coined back in ancient rome or something, by Archimedes, or Diabetes or some such ancient idiot i shouldn't wonder.

No Buttercup please, you don't get the very gist of what I'm saying. Bc the term "Balance radiators" is a total misnomer (IE it WRONGLY implies a balance of rads) & temperature the only thing that's to balance.. I was in no understanding other than the exercise of this term, the idea, was to achieve a parity of temperatures one rad to the next. So, because parity of rad temps is what I find, I'd no reason to say anything other than that my radiators -are- balanced. I stuck to that by just applying logic to the term "balance radiators". I couldn't understand why people kept saying "NO!" (now... yes... I can understand). If the term had actually been "Balance room temps (by un-balancing radiators)" I'd have understood. And not stubbornly repeated b.. b.. but my radiators are balanced!! until Peter's wig flew off. and me scratching my head in huge frustration. Round & round until pocaster pops up from under his bridge with his 'funnies'. Then I let off steam like Peter & his wig. It is therefore -only- due to 1 STUPID ASS term (know what it means to all on here, all but me) "balance radiators" which should in fact 100% more accurately be "un-balance radiators" that started much confusion. "Balance room temps" the exercise should be called............ not FFS whoever coined it "balance radiators"!!

I agree entirely, I always am grateful for the help. But its innevitable things 1. get lost in translation using a box of text to and fro, 2. occasional posts are missed/ im not prompted by like yours just now, id say 5% are. 3. If im trying to understand X for the 1st time, & its commonknowledge to most, frustration at me not getting it happens, & 4. if in actuality its balancing the room temps that is the aim, by in fact un-balancing the rads (from a state now currently balanced: balance ONLY EVER meaning equalibrium, A DEFINITION) in order to achieve this term "balance radiators" is then an utterly preposterously stupid term, and I should be cut some slack at being confused by it, not ridiculed & sniped at like many posts. Yes there's mostly patience, but alot of unwarranted impatience suddenly errupts too. Joe90, Jfb, Peter Stark should be commended for never getting angry, a calm manner I think realise Im new to most stuff, & are patient. Thanks . Zoot

RIGHT!! I think!! At last!! (but without answering my Q yes or no.. but it seems NO is the answer). Thanks jfb. Apologies if someone tried to explain this before, PeterW maybe (10 days ago-?) but I honestly totally missed it, because this is the 1st time this has been explained that I've seen. So this explanation -does concur- with wondering if my interpretation of "balance" was wrong, & not in sync with joe's/ Peter's interpretation then (I did ask if this seemed possibly why I couldn't understand, as it seemed the only plausible reason.. but no-one replied). So my interpretation, that all my rads being equal temp so "balanced" is wrong then. So why didn't anyone tell me so? I mean I kept repeating it only because I had no reason to think otherwise as its a very very reasonable assumption to make. bizarre. SO if I was to balance the system, approximately lets just say for now, due to being very cold 13.3* achieved in my kitchen, with its rad on many hours & a high flow temp @ 55* currently...... then in theory I have to whack the flow temp up to 60+*, to get the cold kitchen to say 18.5* min. Then turn down workshop rad to min, presumably the new top room above down to say medium. In order to balance the --room temps--. So, balancing the rads is a total misnomer!!.. it is in effect not balancing the rads at all!! but balancing the room temps!! JesusHffsake no fkn wonder Ive been so confused!! dont get much empathy on here eh?! cjrist I need a break. thanks jfb

Please someone tell me yes or no. Does balancing radiators mean getting all to the same temp, or not. Thanks.

Understood. But shouldn't I expect though that the double rad (1800 x 70) in a room 3800x 3600 x 2300mm H, with a flow temp of 55*, and on for 8 hours (desired temp 19*) should be more than adequate if the room below (2000mm H) has a double rad in only 2/5ths of the size, & heats the room very well? Both rads are equal temp. It remains very strange that it doesn't seem to be adequate. And if it can get the room to 19.5*, once/ therefore it is capable, does that not proove that it is in fact adequate? Generally the rads are alot larger. But Ive compensated with the cooler water the ashp usually puts into rads, by increacing the flow temp to 55*. I think 55* is more normal for a electric or gas boiler, more standard CH system isn't it? (if so the very large rad should unquestionably be above adequate in the top room: even stranger then).