ᐅ Underfloor heating: wet or dry installation?

Created on: 17 Mar 2016 20:38
T
Tu Hus
Hello everyone,

like many of you, we are currently in the planning phase of our house building project.
After numerous discussions with different builders, we still don’t know which method is best for installing underfloor heating. Some prefer the wet installation method, while others swear by the dry installation method. For example, which option offers better thermal conductivity? What are your experiences? We want to install vinyl flooring and can’t understand why wet installation with bonding the vinyl surface should be disadvantageous...

Best regards, Tu Hus
B
Bieber0815
19 Mar 2016 22:02
Tu Hus schrieb:
I still wonder how the sales consultant can promote drywall construction as the only proper method for underfloor heating. Essentially implying that all other methods are inferior...

If he says that: Get out as fast as you can! Make sure not to sign anything beforehand!
EveundGerd19 Mar 2016 22:22
We installed the flooring using a "wet" method. Our floor covering in the living area/kitchen is vinyl.
In my opinion, when installing vinyl as a floating floor, it is important to use suitable impact sound insulation and a vapor barrier. If the vinyl is glued down, the adhesive should not be water-soluble, as residual moisture in the screed could cause problems.
tomtom7920 Mar 2016 07:47
In our basement, a dry screed with underfloor heating was installed. It was a rubble aggregate that surrounds the pipes. On the upper floor, we received prefabricated panels.

Whether this is better or worse, we have no idea, but we are not familiar with any drying phase or mold growth.
Kaspatoo23 Oct 2016 17:26
When I read this, I understand dry systems to mean that no screed is used at all.

However, from what I have gathered through research, the key feature of dry systems with underfloor heating is that the pipes themselves do not come into direct contact with the screed, which still needs to be installed. Additionally, heat-conductive plates around the pipes seem to be common in dry systems.

My father-in-law has exactly this kind of system installed. After everything was covered with plates, a flowing screed was still pumped into the living room through a hose.

Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to clearly identify the advantages and disadvantages of both systems, except for the following:
- Wet systems appear to be less expensive
- In dry systems, the trades for heating and screed are separated by the cover plates
- According to manufacturers, dry systems have a lower installation height
- According to manufacturers, dry systems are more durable
- According to manufacturers, heat in dry systems distributes faster, resulting in better response time of the heating
KlaRa24 Oct 2016 20:05
Hello "Tu Hus",
embedding the system into a so-called wet screed is the standard approach.
All other solutions are special constructions. This also applies to underfloor heating systems using warm water that operate with much thinner heating elements instead of the usual diameters.
Which system is used depends on whether the installation height for a wet screed is available or if the load-bearing capacity of the subfloor (e.g., in timber construction) would not support a wet screed (in that case, a dry construction method would be used).
Especially for prefabricated constructions (dry constructions), there are a variety of different systems, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
It is essential to understand the building situation to provide any meaningful advice here.
----------------------
Best regards, KlaRa
Kaspatoo24 Oct 2016 21:38
New construction, all options available