Hello everyone,
in this forum, there are occasionally mentions of the possibility to cool using groundwater or geothermal probes.
Various brick manufacturers offer "climate" or "comfort slabs" that can also be used for cooling. One such option was offered to me with an additional cost of about 5,000 € (approximately 5,000 euros). The roof structure would also be constructed using bricks:
There will also be an aquarium with nearly 1,000 watts of lighting later on in the house. This can be used for heating quite well during the transitional seasons, but in summer, it will make the indoor temperature a bit warmer than usual.
Groundwater is available at a depth of about 1.20 m (4 feet) in sufficient quantity.
Does anyone have experience with cooling technology?
Would the added comfort justify an extra cost of around 20,000 € (approximately 20,000 euros) for you?
The additional investment will likely not pay off quickly compared to gas heating.
Best regards,
frank
in this forum, there are occasionally mentions of the possibility to cool using groundwater or geothermal probes.
Various brick manufacturers offer "climate" or "comfort slabs" that can also be used for cooling. One such option was offered to me with an additional cost of about 5,000 € (approximately 5,000 euros). The roof structure would also be constructed using bricks:
There will also be an aquarium with nearly 1,000 watts of lighting later on in the house. This can be used for heating quite well during the transitional seasons, but in summer, it will make the indoor temperature a bit warmer than usual.
Groundwater is available at a depth of about 1.20 m (4 feet) in sufficient quantity.
Does anyone have experience with cooling technology?
Would the added comfort justify an extra cost of around 20,000 € (approximately 20,000 euros) for you?
The additional investment will likely not pay off quickly compared to gas heating.
Best regards,
frank
Hello,
Comfort is subjective! Possibly you could save €15,000. Neither heating nor cooling systems actually pay for themselves! You can only make economic comparisons.
What does "extra cost compared to gas" mean? The question already contains contradictions and is not directly comparable.
Best regards
fmjuchi schrieb:These are simply massive roof or ceiling elements. Cooling can be achieved in many different ways: passive, active, or silent. Which method is necessary depends on a calculation of indoor temperatures and cooling loads during the summer heat period. With the "right" building design, it might not be needed!
...Various brick manufacturers offer "climate" or "comfort slabs" that can also provide cooling.
fmjuchi schrieb:Part of that is internal heat gain. Don’t forget heating!
...Later on, the house will also have an aquarium with almost 1,000 watts of lighting.
fmjuchi schrieb:A high groundwater level does not say anything about suitability for cooling!
...Groundwater is sufficiently available from 1.20m (4 feet) down.
fmjuchi schrieb:
...Would the comfort gain be worth the extra cost of about 20,000 €? The additional cost is unlikely to pay off quickly compared to gas.
Comfort is subjective! Possibly you could save €15,000. Neither heating nor cooling systems actually pay for themselves! You can only make economic comparisons.
What does "extra cost compared to gas" mean? The question already contains contradictions and is not directly comparable.
Best regards
Hello,
The ceiling panels include a pipe system that can be used for heating in winter and cooling in summer. Underfloor heating would then be unnecessary. Does anyone have experience with this system, and are there any disadvantages of ceiling heating compared to underfloor heating?
Initial assessments suggest that conditions are suitable for a heat pump using groundwater or a ground-source heat exchanger. Heat pump manufacturers advertise "natural cooling" or "free cooling," where the heating water is cooled without running the heat pump.
The additional costs for the heat pump, heat source installation, and ceiling system amount to approximately €15,000 (about $16,500) compared to a condensing gas heating system. Since there is no heat pump tariff for the property, annual savings with the heat pump are estimated to be only about €500 (around $550).
Best regards,
frank
The ceiling panels include a pipe system that can be used for heating in winter and cooling in summer. Underfloor heating would then be unnecessary. Does anyone have experience with this system, and are there any disadvantages of ceiling heating compared to underfloor heating?
Initial assessments suggest that conditions are suitable for a heat pump using groundwater or a ground-source heat exchanger. Heat pump manufacturers advertise "natural cooling" or "free cooling," where the heating water is cooled without running the heat pump.
The additional costs for the heat pump, heat source installation, and ceiling system amount to approximately €15,000 (about $16,500) compared to a condensing gas heating system. Since there is no heat pump tariff for the property, annual savings with the heat pump are estimated to be only about €500 (around $550).
Best regards,
frank
fmjuchi schrieb:
...the ceiling elements include a piping system that can be used for heating in winter and cooling in summer. Yes, I noticed that upon closer inspection afterwards as well. I have not done any planning with this system yet.
Personally, I find the variability too limited—that is, optimizing the heating surfaces for a heat pump as the heat source becomes significantly more difficult.
fmjuchi schrieb:
.. and does ceiling heating have disadvantages compared to underfloor heating? For cooling, the ceiling is more favorable; for heating, underfloor heating is better. fmjuchi schrieb:
..After initial checks, conditions for a heat pump with groundwater or geothermal probe seem to be present. Heat pump manufacturers advertise "natural cooling" or "free cooling." This means cooling the heating water without running the heat pump. It only becomes clear now that a heat pump is intended. Cooling without operating the heat pump is possible with brine/ground and water systems (passive cooling). fmjuchi schrieb:
...The additional costs for the heat pump, development of the heat source, and ceiling amount to approximately 15,000 € compared to condensing gas technology. It is only now clear that condensing gas technology is meant here, because there are also gas-powered heat pumps. With condensing gas boilers, of course, cooling is not possible. I would recommend having it checked in advance to what extent cooling is actually necessary.Best regards
fmjuchi schrieb:
Would the increased comfort be worth the additional cost of around 20,000 €?
Regards, frankIn my opinion… no.
Furthermore, the question arises as to what you mean by "cooling" or what "expectations" you have for it.
Logically, this can only be achieved with a few degrees difference from the regular room temperature. If the cooling is too intense, there is a risk of condensation forming on the water pipes... which could cause much greater damage than the comfort you hope to gain.
Hello Michi,
in these ceiling elements, the pipe system is embedded behind a brick layer within the concrete core.
Whether the system is suitable for the specific building project can be determined based on the test values and the required heating load per room (DIN EN 12831; despite all criticism) as well as the design (VDI 6030). By the way, VDI 6030 represents the state of the art and thus the required standard, making the determination of heating capacities per square meter of room according to DIN EN 12831 mandatory. In fact, it has long been the case that no house should be built without these proofs.
The mentioned system achieved a maximum heating output of 49 W/m² (Watt per square meter) in testing with a pipe spacing of 18.5/9.5/9.5 cm (7.3/3.7/3.7 inches). The conventionally offered system’s tested output is 45 W/m² with a pipe spacing of 250 mm (10 inches). The reaction time ranges from 120 minutes up to 650 minutes (switch-on/off depending on the chosen system), which is rather slower than a modern underfloor heating system.
WARNING: THIS IS NOT THE ACTUAL HEATING OUTPUT!
Experience from my own house:
Because the system was tested without plaster. However, this is completely unrealistic in practice. I don’t know any house with a “bare brick ceiling.” Based on comparable measurements from other systems, the plaster reduces the output by another 25-30%. Accordingly, the reaction time also gets somewhat worse. Therefore, when designing the system, it is advisable to plan some “reserve” since the real HEATING OUTPUT hardly exceeds 30-35 W/m².
In my KfW 40 house, the supply/return temperature when only the cores are activated at a 250 mm (10 inches) spacing is about 45°C to 42°C (113°F to 108°F) at an outdoor temperature of minus 16°C (3°F). When running a wood stove simultaneously along with an additional heat source in the bathroom, this is sufficient.
Regarding the 18.5/9.5/9.5 cm (7.3/3.7/3.7 inches) pipe spacing system, I can’t really comment, as we ultimately decided on a different manufacturer back then. However, the difference between the 250 mm (10 inches) and the “18.5/9.5/9.5 cm” spacing systems with only 4 W/m² is rather insignificant.
The system we chose heats via two circuits: the cores and a second system directly near the surface. When operating both pipe systems simultaneously (i.e., buffer and heating integrated in the ceiling), the supply/return temperatures at minus 16°C (3°F) outside can be lowered to 27°C to 24°C (81°F to 75°F). This is ideal for our air-source heat pump.
A tip from my own painful experience:
Only if I have precisely defined the needed capacity in advance can I demand it. Or put differently: if I buy “a piece” of a car, I cannot complain if it only has 30 HP, especially if this is also stated in the documents.
So:
1.) Determine the heating load (DIN EN 12831, even if the method is criticized)
2.) Request a system design according to VDI 6030 from the manufacturer, paying attention to the supply/return temperatures. These should also more or less correspond to the energy performance certificate, although they are not identical due to different data bases and calculation methods.
3.) Have the manufacturer guarantee a norm-compliant heating solution for the building according to energy-saving regulations, DIN standards, and VDI guidelines.
I hope this does not confuse you more than it helps.
Best regards
P_B
P.S.: The 15,000 euros seem quite high to me but probably depend on the heat pump. Our builder originally wanted that as well. In the end, it was just under 8,000 euros.
in these ceiling elements, the pipe system is embedded behind a brick layer within the concrete core.
Whether the system is suitable for the specific building project can be determined based on the test values and the required heating load per room (DIN EN 12831; despite all criticism) as well as the design (VDI 6030). By the way, VDI 6030 represents the state of the art and thus the required standard, making the determination of heating capacities per square meter of room according to DIN EN 12831 mandatory. In fact, it has long been the case that no house should be built without these proofs.
The mentioned system achieved a maximum heating output of 49 W/m² (Watt per square meter) in testing with a pipe spacing of 18.5/9.5/9.5 cm (7.3/3.7/3.7 inches). The conventionally offered system’s tested output is 45 W/m² with a pipe spacing of 250 mm (10 inches). The reaction time ranges from 120 minutes up to 650 minutes (switch-on/off depending on the chosen system), which is rather slower than a modern underfloor heating system.
WARNING: THIS IS NOT THE ACTUAL HEATING OUTPUT!
Experience from my own house:
Because the system was tested without plaster. However, this is completely unrealistic in practice. I don’t know any house with a “bare brick ceiling.” Based on comparable measurements from other systems, the plaster reduces the output by another 25-30%. Accordingly, the reaction time also gets somewhat worse. Therefore, when designing the system, it is advisable to plan some “reserve” since the real HEATING OUTPUT hardly exceeds 30-35 W/m².
In my KfW 40 house, the supply/return temperature when only the cores are activated at a 250 mm (10 inches) spacing is about 45°C to 42°C (113°F to 108°F) at an outdoor temperature of minus 16°C (3°F). When running a wood stove simultaneously along with an additional heat source in the bathroom, this is sufficient.
Regarding the 18.5/9.5/9.5 cm (7.3/3.7/3.7 inches) pipe spacing system, I can’t really comment, as we ultimately decided on a different manufacturer back then. However, the difference between the 250 mm (10 inches) and the “18.5/9.5/9.5 cm” spacing systems with only 4 W/m² is rather insignificant.
The system we chose heats via two circuits: the cores and a second system directly near the surface. When operating both pipe systems simultaneously (i.e., buffer and heating integrated in the ceiling), the supply/return temperatures at minus 16°C (3°F) outside can be lowered to 27°C to 24°C (81°F to 75°F). This is ideal for our air-source heat pump.
A tip from my own painful experience:
Only if I have precisely defined the needed capacity in advance can I demand it. Or put differently: if I buy “a piece” of a car, I cannot complain if it only has 30 HP, especially if this is also stated in the documents.
So:
1.) Determine the heating load (DIN EN 12831, even if the method is criticized)
2.) Request a system design according to VDI 6030 from the manufacturer, paying attention to the supply/return temperatures. These should also more or less correspond to the energy performance certificate, although they are not identical due to different data bases and calculation methods.
3.) Have the manufacturer guarantee a norm-compliant heating solution for the building according to energy-saving regulations, DIN standards, and VDI guidelines.
I hope this does not confuse you more than it helps.
Best regards
P_B
P.S.: The 15,000 euros seem quite high to me but probably depend on the heat pump. Our builder originally wanted that as well. In the end, it was just under 8,000 euros.
fmjuchi schrieb:
Hello,
the ceiling elements contain a pipe system that can be used for heating in winter and cooling in summer. The underfloor heating would then be omitted. Does anyone know the system and are there disadvantages of ceiling heating compared to underfloor heating?
Initial checks suggest that heat pumps with groundwater or geothermal probes could be suitable. Heat pump manufacturers advertise “natural cooling” or “free cooling.” This means the heating water is cooled without operating the heat pump.
The additional costs for the heat pump, heat source development, and ceiling amount to about 15,000 € compared to condensing gas heating. Since there is no heat pump tariff for the property, savings with the heat pump will likely be only about 500 € per year.
Best regards, Frank
Similar topics