ᐅ Radiators or underfloor heating: Which option is recommended in these circumstances?
Created on: 8 Mar 2018 17:29
J
jundb
Hello,
we are about to purchase/build a solid masonry semi-detached house of 142 sqm (1526 sq ft), KfW55 standard, from a developer. Standard/included are radiators on the first floor + second floor + attic, optionally there is underfloor heating for €5700 (plus presumably property transfer tax) only(!) on the ground floor (is that so, no need to argue about that).
I am inexperienced with underfloor heating myself, I have nothing against it, but I have not dreamed of it for decades (unlike a fireplace…) and I am used to radiators and have always managed well with them so far. Please no fundamental discussions about underfloor heating or radiators, medically, swollen feet, dust, “thermal comfort,” it “shouldn’t” be more expensive, etc., I fear there would only be back and forth here. I want to know your opinion on whether underfloor heating under these(!) circumstances makes sense, that is a real approx. €6000 (about $6500) extra cost, only on the ground floor (so only for the living room, kitchen, hallway, guest toilet (and these 4 areas would be controlled separately)) and in addition (regardless of financial or energy benefits or not, it is an old dream) a fireplace in the living room.
What I have read so far, I think:
- In terms of energy consumption, there is not much difference, more efficient due to low temperature operation, fine, but radiators are not that bad in a well-insulated new KfW55 house either. Somewhere on a professional sanitary trade association page I read about 10% less energy with underfloor heating in a new build, but since it is only one of three floors, maybe 5%, that is max about €50 (about $55) per year.
- My wife prefers underfloor heating so far, but without rational reasons or much experience, simply out of curiosity for something new and supposedly better. She often feels cold like many women, even when the room is warm, and I could imagine that in such phases she would prefer a radiating radiator that warms noticeably rather than a rather constant and slow to heat up underfloor heating. On the other hand, the fireplace would help with that.
- Since we generally prefer it rather cool/use little heating, I even imagine in the summer half of the year it could be better without underfloor heating if we want to cool down faster during a sudden weather change or, conversely, heat the living room within 1-2 hours during a sudden temperature drop.
- Another possible point against underfloor heating: the build quality and coordination of many subcontractors with this developer is not always great. Radiators, as far as I know (or am I mistaken?), are not as sensitive; not much can go wrong there, but a poorly installed underfloor heating system would, I believe, be unpleasant.
- The only real bigger argument for underfloor heating on the ground floor for me personally is the space gain from removing the radiators. We need to take a closer look at where they would be and how much they would be in the way; we do not yet have detailed plans. In the guest toilet and hallway, I don’t really care (since they would be used little anyway), leaving the one in the kitchen (I’ve also often heard that people simply left it out in open kitchen concepts like ours are planned). Then only the one in the living room remains.
Without the extra cost, I would take underfloor heating, but as it is and only to save 1-2 radiators on the ground floor, it does not seem worthwhile for us (under the described circumstances!).
Now it's your turn...
Thanks & regards
Jo
we are about to purchase/build a solid masonry semi-detached house of 142 sqm (1526 sq ft), KfW55 standard, from a developer. Standard/included are radiators on the first floor + second floor + attic, optionally there is underfloor heating for €5700 (plus presumably property transfer tax) only(!) on the ground floor (is that so, no need to argue about that).
I am inexperienced with underfloor heating myself, I have nothing against it, but I have not dreamed of it for decades (unlike a fireplace…) and I am used to radiators and have always managed well with them so far. Please no fundamental discussions about underfloor heating or radiators, medically, swollen feet, dust, “thermal comfort,” it “shouldn’t” be more expensive, etc., I fear there would only be back and forth here. I want to know your opinion on whether underfloor heating under these(!) circumstances makes sense, that is a real approx. €6000 (about $6500) extra cost, only on the ground floor (so only for the living room, kitchen, hallway, guest toilet (and these 4 areas would be controlled separately)) and in addition (regardless of financial or energy benefits or not, it is an old dream) a fireplace in the living room.
What I have read so far, I think:
- In terms of energy consumption, there is not much difference, more efficient due to low temperature operation, fine, but radiators are not that bad in a well-insulated new KfW55 house either. Somewhere on a professional sanitary trade association page I read about 10% less energy with underfloor heating in a new build, but since it is only one of three floors, maybe 5%, that is max about €50 (about $55) per year.
- My wife prefers underfloor heating so far, but without rational reasons or much experience, simply out of curiosity for something new and supposedly better. She often feels cold like many women, even when the room is warm, and I could imagine that in such phases she would prefer a radiating radiator that warms noticeably rather than a rather constant and slow to heat up underfloor heating. On the other hand, the fireplace would help with that.
- Since we generally prefer it rather cool/use little heating, I even imagine in the summer half of the year it could be better without underfloor heating if we want to cool down faster during a sudden weather change or, conversely, heat the living room within 1-2 hours during a sudden temperature drop.
- Another possible point against underfloor heating: the build quality and coordination of many subcontractors with this developer is not always great. Radiators, as far as I know (or am I mistaken?), are not as sensitive; not much can go wrong there, but a poorly installed underfloor heating system would, I believe, be unpleasant.
- The only real bigger argument for underfloor heating on the ground floor for me personally is the space gain from removing the radiators. We need to take a closer look at where they would be and how much they would be in the way; we do not yet have detailed plans. In the guest toilet and hallway, I don’t really care (since they would be used little anyway), leaving the one in the kitchen (I’ve also often heard that people simply left it out in open kitchen concepts like ours are planned). Then only the one in the living room remains.
Without the extra cost, I would take underfloor heating, but as it is and only to save 1-2 radiators on the ground floor, it does not seem worthwhile for us (under the described circumstances!).
Now it's your turn...
Thanks & regards
Jo
When I built my house two years ago, I originally didn’t want underfloor heating, just radiators. I hadn’t had underfloor heating for the past 30 years and never missed it.
However, I gave it more thought, considering factors like modern standards, potential resale value, and especially the extra space gained. I really like a clean, almost bare look, and radiators would just get in the way.
At first, I planned to have underfloor heating only on the ground floor, which would have cost around 6,000 euros. Then I decided to include the upper floor as well. The additional cost came to just under 9,000 euros, but that didn’t bother me. In the basement and attic, I have radiators that I haven’t even turned on once in the past two years.
Now I’m completely happy with my underfloor heating. I especially enjoy the warm tiles in the bathroom, and I’m glad there are no radiators cluttering the walls.
However, I gave it more thought, considering factors like modern standards, potential resale value, and especially the extra space gained. I really like a clean, almost bare look, and radiators would just get in the way.
At first, I planned to have underfloor heating only on the ground floor, which would have cost around 6,000 euros. Then I decided to include the upper floor as well. The additional cost came to just under 9,000 euros, but that didn’t bother me. In the basement and attic, I have radiators that I haven’t even turned on once in the past two years.
Now I’m completely happy with my underfloor heating. I especially enjoy the warm tiles in the bathroom, and I’m glad there are no radiators cluttering the walls.
I’ll speak as someone with a mixed installation. Our house, however, isn’t a KFW building but dates back to 1990. I often wonder how such a mess could have been made. I installed a new heating system last year and I’m still trying to find the ideal settings because you need to properly coordinate the flow temperature, heating ramp, mixing valve control, and underfloor heating. Of course, mixing valves and condensing boilers handle a lot of this automatically nowadays, but that is exactly the problem. I have thermostats on the radiators, so they operate quite dynamically. When I adjust the room-by-room control for the underfloor heating, the system takes a few days to stabilize in the new state. For this reason, I removed the thermostatic valves from all underfloor heating circuits and now only regulate 3 of the 9 circuits. This works quite well for me, and the different control loops don’t interfere with each other. Still, it kept me busy from November to February.
Obviously, we need significantly more energy and therefore higher flow temperatures than in a new build, plus we have a rather open construction style. Nevertheless, operating the underfloor heating in our case involves a considerable amount of extra effort, just for warm feet. To make things worse, on the ground floor we also had a few radiators installed alongside the underfloor heating. We quickly removed those, except in the bathroom.
Of course, the underfloor heating has a lower flow temperature than the radiators, but that doesn’t help during heat generation, since the radiators require at least 60°C (140°F). The mixing valve then reduces this temperature for the underfloor heating. That’s why the system is more expensive because a second pump, a mixing valve, and corresponding controls have to be installed.
If you had the option to go fully with underfloor heating (I don’t know why it should be technically impossible), I would consider it because it is effective, simple, and unobtrusive. However, if the choice is only between radiators or a mixed system, then definitely avoid the mixed system. It only creates more effort without additional benefit.
The feeling of having underfloor heating upstairs is, in my opinion, not really true. Sure, the floor upstairs isn’t as cold as on the ground floor because the room below is heated. But there is still easily a 10-15°C (18-27°F) temperature difference, depending on the floor covering. Underfloor heating makes the most sense in the bathroom, the bedroom, and possibly the living room. The first two rooms are upstairs for you, so underfloor heating doesn’t make sense, especially since you can quickly turn down radiators when using the fireplace, while you can’t easily reduce the underfloor heating at the same time. It doesn’t save any costs, but at least you’re not heating the house twice.
Obviously, we need significantly more energy and therefore higher flow temperatures than in a new build, plus we have a rather open construction style. Nevertheless, operating the underfloor heating in our case involves a considerable amount of extra effort, just for warm feet. To make things worse, on the ground floor we also had a few radiators installed alongside the underfloor heating. We quickly removed those, except in the bathroom.
Of course, the underfloor heating has a lower flow temperature than the radiators, but that doesn’t help during heat generation, since the radiators require at least 60°C (140°F). The mixing valve then reduces this temperature for the underfloor heating. That’s why the system is more expensive because a second pump, a mixing valve, and corresponding controls have to be installed.
If you had the option to go fully with underfloor heating (I don’t know why it should be technically impossible), I would consider it because it is effective, simple, and unobtrusive. However, if the choice is only between radiators or a mixed system, then definitely avoid the mixed system. It only creates more effort without additional benefit.
The feeling of having underfloor heating upstairs is, in my opinion, not really true. Sure, the floor upstairs isn’t as cold as on the ground floor because the room below is heated. But there is still easily a 10-15°C (18-27°F) temperature difference, depending on the floor covering. Underfloor heating makes the most sense in the bathroom, the bedroom, and possibly the living room. The first two rooms are upstairs for you, so underfloor heating doesn’t make sense, especially since you can quickly turn down radiators when using the fireplace, while you can’t easily reduce the underfloor heating at the same time. It doesn’t save any costs, but at least you’re not heating the house twice.
H
Hafenlui759 Mar 2018 09:18We have both.
KfW 55 would not have been cost-effective for us, but with our equipment, we just missed meeting the standard.
Our experience: All radiators are cold all year round (except the towel warmers in the bathroom).
Underfloor heating is only used in the bathrooms and kitchen (because of the cold feet on the tiles).
Conclusion: Radiators are unnecessary for us and basically just take up wall space.
PS The central mechanical ventilation with heat exchanger manages heat distribution quite satisfactorily.
And for emergencies, we still have a small fireplace. However, it must not be burned too strongly, or we have to open the windows ;-)
Regards, Hafenlui
KfW 55 would not have been cost-effective for us, but with our equipment, we just missed meeting the standard.
Our experience: All radiators are cold all year round (except the towel warmers in the bathroom).
Underfloor heating is only used in the bathrooms and kitchen (because of the cold feet on the tiles).
Conclusion: Radiators are unnecessary for us and basically just take up wall space.
PS The central mechanical ventilation with heat exchanger manages heat distribution quite satisfactorily.
And for emergencies, we still have a small fireplace. However, it must not be burned too strongly, or we have to open the windows ;-)
Regards, Hafenlui
Of course, that would be possible if the provider offered it. But obviously, they do not. Low prices are either achieved by compromising on quality or through very strict organization of processes and standardization. This inevitably means limited (read: essentially nonexistent) options. I know which I would prefer.
Similar topics