Well Ron you are a smidge slower than your psuedonym suggests. You have
never had redundant systems share common duct work else you would have
a clue as to what I was saying.

I hired a guy from ARC Industries once, his nickname was Ronnie the
Rocket. If I told him precisely what to do, he would do a good job.

So far, heat pumps can be successfully set back with rediculous
situations. Go back and read carefully, sound out the big words.

You also have never had redundant systems share common ductwork nefore.
Search 'back draft dampers' and think about forward curved direct
drive fans spinning backwards.

Like I said Nick will spew forth some misapplied numbers and the odd
time he is on the money. Unfortunately , you do not have a clue.


Rod Speed wrote:
Abby Normal wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Abby Normal wrote
Rod Speed wrote

The problem is shortly after the temperature dropped
to the setback temperature, the heat pump would end
up running steady just to get back up to temperature.

Wrong with the situation being discussed, with
more than one system so it doesnt take a long
time to get it up to the normal temp again.

That is sure economically viable.

The economic viability wasnt being discussed.

No that's the problem.

Nope.

You want to argue the fact that you can install three
heat pumps to prove that you can set one back fine,

Lying, again. I JUST rubbed your nose in the FACT
that your pig ignorant claim that setback isnt viable
with heatpumps is just plain wrong.

I am just pointing out to you that it is a dumb idea.

No it isnt, most obviously if the extra heat pump is surplus.
That can indeed make set back viable and save real money.

To get a heat pump to work with setback, you are oversizing the
system. Either a single oversized unit, or multiple units. It takes
a rediculous situation to make setback work on a heat pump.

Nothing rediculous about using a surplus system to make
setback work in a situation where it isnt economic to
increase the insulation substantially and its quite lossy.

It can be a viable approach, particularly if the normal
temps are only set say in the late afternoon prior to
when the house will be occupied for long when not in bed.

I believe i mentioned I mentioned if you were trying
to set it back during the day while occupants are at
work, then have it recvover while the sun is still shining.

No you didnt.

Typically in the temperate states where air source heat pumps are
used, they are sized with the cooling load in mind and use the
heat strips. One sized for the full heat load will be grossly
oversized for cooling resulting in summer time humidity control
problems.

And what was being discussed was having more than one
system and doing that so it doesnt take a long time to get back
to the normal temp and doesnt use the heat strips to do that.

Yes multiple systems, now as high as three, just
to prove a point that you can setback a heat pump.

Its just one way to have a viable setback with a heat pump.

Yes I agree, if some one wants to have a viable scheme for
setback then spend the money on three heating systems.

That aint the only way to have a viable setback with a heat pump.

Dumb idea but you have proved a point.

The other obvious approach is to have the setback temp right
thru till say 3pm because the occupants arent likely to need the
normal temp in the hour or so when everyone is running around
having showers etc before heading out of the house in the morning.
Then even just a properly sized single system should be able to
come back off setback quickly enough to not use the strips
with a properly designed controller.

Occupants gone during the day, recover before the sun sets.

What I just said.

Even if it starts coming off setback at say 1pm because it
takes 4 hours to get back to normal temp with those outside
temps, its still going go save power over no setback.

Without the multiple heat pump scheme, you will save energy just
the slow recovery will be cool inside. Not maintaining a comfort point.

All you have to do is come off the setback well before it need to be
back to comfort point. That may well be very viable if you only want
the comfort point in the evening after the occupants have returned.

So keep the home cooler save energy at the cost of comfort.

No cost in comfort if you come off the setback with plenty of
time for the slower recovery to the time you need the comfort.

Set it to 65 all the time if you want.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to use a setback, and come
off that well before the house needs to be back to the comfort
temp, when the heat pump is working more efficiently with that
return to comfort temp happening after midday etc.

And it may well be possible to design the entire system
so the outside part of the system uses passive solar too
if its only going to come off setback after midday.

The only way set back works with a
heat pump is if it is grossly oversized.

Wrong again.

No not wrong

Yep, completely wrong.

Sure, buy 3 heatpumps to prove set back.

Its just ONE way to make setback viable with a heat pump.

Well so far you have come up with tree heat pumps to prove a point.

Lying, again. It was just ONE approach to get setback viable with a heat pump.

Going to extremes, rediculous.

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

Spend extra money on the ductwork involved
for three systems, including back draft dampers,

You dont need all that stuff for the system thats just ensuring
that you can come off setback without needing to use the strips.

lol what a crock

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag...

You cannot bull **** me and say you have ever had a redundant system
share common ductwork. You obviously never have. At least not with
direct drive equipment typical of a residential application these
days. Maybe you got lucky on some belt driven stuff. Rookie.

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag...

just unsucessful in educating you.

You cant even keep track of what was actually being discussed.

Well I believe you were speaking first of
two systems, then realized you needed three,

Wrong. I JUST said that three can be useful in SOME situations.

You dont even need two if you come off setback after midday,
just an adequately sized system that doesnt need to use the
strips on most days in winter. And if passive solar is used to
help with coming back off setback after midday, thats going
to make setback viable even with a heat pump. And wont
necessarily cost much at all hardware wise.

so as not to be short cylcing in the heating mode,
and in the summer having too much sensible cooling
that the stat would be satisfied in 5 minutes run time.

Thats an entirely separate issue to what was
being discussed, the silly pig ignorant claim that
setback can never be viable with heat pumps.

Well so far. without wasting power on heat strips I have seen
it proposed that a system with triple the heat capacity be
installed or you install three heat pumps to prove a point.

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag...

Don't bring a knife to a gun fight next time. At least Nick can
misapply numbers he crunches you seem to have nothing.

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag...

All that accomplishes is set back without auxiliary heat.
It would short cycle inefficiently except for when it was
trying to recover from a set back.

Not if you one of the systems sized so that doesnt happen.

Three systems sure, that is practical,

Doesnt have to be 3, or even 2.

So you are saying size one for the cooling load, one for the
heating load and one for speedy recovery from set back then?

Three heat pumps now.

Yep, I mentioned 3 for a reason.

Plus all the ductwork and backdraft dampers.

You dont have to duplicate/triplicate all of those.

No you could have three systems share a common
supply and return, just get it to work there einstein.

Perfectly possible if you dont have them all running at once, gomer.

Like I said you obviously have never designed a working
system with multiple equipment sharing common ductwork.

I never said that they had to all be running at
once, you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

If you had a succesful project of this nature then I suspect
that some contractor saved your ass. You probaly threw
up a lot of rhetoric, tried pointing fingers at everyone else
but in the end the owner paid extra for your lack of experience.

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag...

Let's try to keep this practical and not go to
hypothetical extremes to prove this is possible.

Wasnt doing anything like that.

No not at all just install three heat pumps. Or two heat
pumps and a central AC. Hey maybe you could get a two
stage one and a central AC. SUre is a lot of tap dancing
to prove that you could viably set back a heat pump.

Just one way to do setback with a heat pump.

Noah er I mean Nick is a bad influence on you.

Nothing to do with Nick at all.

In an environment with an ambient dewpoint above 60F there will
be problems with a grossly oversized system in cooling mode.

Again, not if you have more than one system.

Well like I said if you want to install
three heat pumps, knock yourself out.

Two and three was what was being discussed.

Your claim that setback has no value is just plain wrong with THAT
situation.

Setback has a value, just not with heat pumps.

Wrong when stated as absolutely as that. Most obviously
if the setback lasts until after midday and passive solar
is used instead of the strips for coming off setback.

A fossil fuel system sized right on the money for
the heat load in a high thermal mass home may
not be the best system to be setting back either.

Having fun thrashing that straw man are you ?

I did not realize you were Socrates the Scarecrow.
Next time I will simply light a match.

Couldnt bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag...