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
I just calculated the cooling capacity, since this was not checked for this system. However, it can be derived from the heating output.
With an actual heating output of 35 W/m² (3.3 W/ft²), the expected cooling capacity (ΔT 8°C (14°F)) is realistically hardly more than 20 W/m² (1.9 W/ft²) to 25 W/m² (2.3 W/ft²).
Nevertheless,
With proper design and planning, an excellent indoor climate is achieved during both heating and cooling operation. Additionally, in daily heating use, humidity and dust levels in the air are significantly more favorable.
P_B
With an actual heating output of 35 W/m² (3.3 W/ft²), the expected cooling capacity (ΔT 8°C (14°F)) is realistically hardly more than 20 W/m² (1.9 W/ft²) to 25 W/m² (2.3 W/ft²).
Nevertheless,
With proper design and planning, an excellent indoor climate is achieved during both heating and cooling operation. Additionally, in daily heating use, humidity and dust levels in the air are significantly more favorable.
P_B
Hello,
The vast majority of single-family homes are built without sufficient heating system planning!
Manufacturers always specify the heat flux density delivered to the room! The actual heat loss is the responsibility of the planner!
Well, is that really sensible with an air heat pump?!
That really is ideal!!!
EN 12831 has been revised several times and the national annex updated as well. Experienced planners are familiar with the pitfalls.
Best regards
Why is paul_bau banned?
paul_bau schrieb:
... Actually, it has long been required that no house can be built without these certifications.
The vast majority of single-family homes are built without sufficient heating system planning!
paul_bau schrieb:
..
The mentioned system achieved a maximum heating capacity of 49 W/m² (4.6 W/sq ft) during testing with pipe spacing of 18.5/9.5/9.5 cm (7.3/3.7/3.7 inches). The conventionally offered system has a tested capacity of 45 W/m² (4.2 W/sq ft) (pipe spacing 250 mm (10 inches)).
The response time ranges from 120 minutes to 650 minutes (on/off depending on the chosen system), which is slower than a modern underfloor heating system.
Manufacturers always specify the heat flux density delivered to the room! The actual heat loss is the responsibility of the planner!
paul_bau schrieb:
..In my KfW 40 house, the supply/return temperature when only the cores are activated with a 250 mm (10 inches) pipe grid 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 tiled stove and an additional heat source in the bathroom at the same time, this is sufficient.
Well, is that really sensible with an air heat pump?!
paul_bau schrieb:
..When both pipe systems operate simultaneously (= buffer and ceiling heating), the supply/return temperatures at minus 16°C (3°F) outside can be reduced to 27°C to 24°C (81°F to 75°F). Ideal for our air heat pump.
That really is ideal!!!
paul_bau schrieb:
..
A tip from my own painful experience:
1.) Determine the heating load (DIN EN 12831, even though there is criticism of this method)
EN 12831 has been revised several times and the national annex updated as well. Experienced planners are familiar with the pitfalls.
Best regards
Why is paul_bau banned?
Hello €uro
I’ve already asked about that. I really didn’t want to advertise myself. (Rule 3) Maybe the addition “_bau” is a problem. Now without the addition | second attempt.
€uro schrieb:
Hello,
The vast majority of single-family homes are built without sufficient planning of the heating system!
UNFORTUNATELY, UNFORTUNATELY. When someone buys a car, even if it’s an old clunker for €500, they ask about details like fuel consumption, insurance, vehicle inspection, etc. But with heating systems, which can easily cost between 20,000 and 50,000 €uros, the homeowner and contractor only ask for a heating unit. Hard to understand.
Manufacturers always specify the heat flux density delivered to the room!
The actual heat loss is up to the planner!
At least it should be. But when they do plan it, it’s unfortunately not always done correctly.
A gatekeeper who means harm.
Simply omitting the ceiling plaster is quite serious, since systems in real applications are always installed with plaster. Especially with ceiling heating systems, which tend to be more powerful and faster reacting than underfloor heating to achieve optimal results, this can quickly become a problem for planners unfamiliar with this type of ceiling heating.
In addition, with drywall systems, "active area," "installed area," and "coverage ratio" are often mixed up and used inconsistently as needed.
Well, is that reasonable for an air-source heat pump?!
Probably not. But that’s just my personal opinion. By the way, there are cases where the ceiling is only used to support other systems. Unfortunately, we don’t know the overall system here.
This is actually ideal!!!
I’m currently calculating a residential complex of several thousand square meters with the same supply temperatures.
It’s always exciting because experience shows that ceiling heating tends to undershoot the calculated values by as much as 3-10 K. This is simply due to the lower room temperature (with equal comfort), the exterior surfaces being warmer and therefore drier and better insulated, and the resulting lower transmission and ventilation losses.
Standard 12831 has been revised multiple times and the national annex updated as well. Experienced planners know the pitfalls.
So we keep practicing and always have something new to read.
Best regards,
Why is paul_bau banned?
I’ve already asked about that. I really didn’t want to advertise myself. (Rule 3) Maybe the addition “_bau” is a problem. Now without the addition | second attempt.