Post and beam

Should heat pumps without WC be deleted from the shopping list? The riello 8kw that i have been investigating does not apparently have it. The Midea that it is a clone of, as i have been told, does and looks to have a much better Scop. This really is getting totally confusing.

I cannot see a specific % anywhere on the graphs i have been looking at on this site. Is it an interpretation of a Scop of 2.67? Edit due to blindness: Scratch that. i am an idiot

From day one they have been saying that MVHR is mandatory for the figures they quote and are expecting.

Well this is extracted from the document i posted. On page 1 Measured/design AP50 = .3 page 5 Measured/design AP50 = 5 page 9 Measured/design AP50 = .3 page 12 Measured/design AP50 = 5 page 15 Measured/design AP50 = .3 page 19 Measured/design AP50 = .3 page 24 Measured/design AP50 = .3 page 28 Measured/design AP50 = .3 I dont yet have any idea what variables change that require the repeat of the tables 8 times. Yes i have asked them to explain it. The house is not a Passivehaus design. They have always said they expect to beat the 1.5 - 3. But the get out is, final result is down to costomer and chosen main contractor. TF company do the frame and weathertight but do not consider themselves as main contractor.

Point 5 metres

Oh and the cost is not surprising either. All of these surveys types appear to be able to write into their terms that they can decide when and if they need to do more, visit you again. You have no say in this but its at your cost. Licence to print money. I hope you dont have to have an Archeaology survey but if you do pray they dont find anything interesting. If they decide a full team is required, with welfare facilities etc. you are liable.

This is virtually identical to the pain i had with these surveys last year and earlier this year. documented on here. The argument you proposed above wont wash. Then there is an acrcheaology survey. Good luck To help the non existent snakes and newts i am required to dig them a home once building starts. .5 metre deep, > 1 metre wide and filled with stones, sticks and anything else that creates a space. Then covered over. I am not kidding. I am also supposed to cover all foundation trenches every night in case creatures fall in. Oh yes and provide them a way out should they do so. This is east herts by the way.

Thanks Hugh That section 8 is repeated, on page 3 it shows 26.5 W/m2 (99) Then... page 7 = 33 page 11 = 34.5 page 15 = 36.9 Etc I am missing, and or, misunderstanding something in this.

Done. I took my address out of it. You know, in case i dont apply for planning for my ASHP install. And thank you Full SAP Calculation Printout Combined_2023-08(1).pdf

Well that is sort of the whole thrust of my question. Should i just ignore the grant and get it done outside of MCS at the best standard and price i can arrange.

I just read the England relevant version on the .gov site. It does not say you cannot install in a conservation area, its just more restrictive. But even that is not that restrictive. Needs to be MCS or equivalent, ? and not for cooling or closer to the road than the house. Otherwise go for it

No, simply to illustrate that a small box annotated as ASHP is drawn on the south side of the ground floor part of the submitted drawings. No other significance.

Yes, that is what i thought it meant. Its a figure that comes from the TF and was a surprise to me to be honest. Initially their target design value was 1.5-3

How so?

I have today received a 32 page SAP calc report from my TF builders. Having scanned through it once i am overwhelmed by the amount of detail. It appears to repeat the same blocks of tabulated data. Is there a document that explains what to look for. On a summary sheet that has some but not all of the same figures i see a Design airtightness figure of .3m2/hm2 @ 50Pa And a primary energy target of 37.82 Kwh/m2. Which does not sound very good. Also see a primary heating efficiency of 219%. Does this translate to a scop of 2.2 or am i hopelessly off the mark? Thanks in advance as always keith

Thanks for the replies guys. My concern is that once i engage them there is no going back. Therefore, if they say that i dont have permission i am then committed to putting in a planning application. This removes my other option of quietly getting a non MCS install doesn't it? Planning will insist on an MCS certificate.

It turns out my planned house is just within a conservation area. An ASHP was drawn on the planning application on the south side of the house but somehow i dont think i can justify saying this is tacit approval of same. So i have the obvious 2 options. Request planning and go for an expensive MCS install. or Buy the parts and try to engage someone that will connect it all up for me. I am not a plumber and just about bright enough to understand that my limitations mean i should leave this to someone else. Discuss Oh and thanks as always

Sorry dude, i did not mean you specifically when i said 'you' . I just meant why throw out all of the old radiators in any given scenario where fitting larger radiators to suit a HP is deemed necessary. Apologies for the confusion.

Why would you need to replace all of your radiators in the circumstance where they were regarded as too small for your new heat pump. Surely some of the larger ones would work perfectly well in rooms that previously had small radaitors.

Its this that i am hoping the collective wisdom can steer me away from. Thanks for your recommends.

I am getting close to having to engage someone to install my UFH. There is a lot of discussion here about particular brands of manifolds/pumps flow valves etc. I (will) have 114 metres of ground floor in 2 zones only and am looking at 100-150mm spacing of pipes with a flow temp as low as makes good sense. What brand parts would i ideally specify and why please ?

Are these heliotherm units available in the u.k. They look interesting and not heard of them before. Edit: Found them

Achieving as good a Scop figure as possible is obviously a good goal. But.... I am moving from a small 3 bed semi built in 1986 of approximately 93 sq/m. And building a highly insulated 200 sq/m house. I doubt that even if i dont get the kind of Scop that i aim for that the new house will cost as much as the old one to keep warm. Lots of discussion focuses on x design factor being a little off will mean your new house will cost more to heat. True when comparing variations of the new build but probably not true when comparing, in my case, where i am moving from. Have i missed the point?

Thanks dude

Apologies, are we talking about the Riello or the Samsung now?