| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My
apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 9, 10:59*am, Richard Fangnail
wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? *My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. *I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Older apts in Chicago often had it in ceilings too, it works, but floor is better, or radiators under windows, etc. Sounds like it may be an older building? |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , Richard Fangnail wrote:
What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. The main thing to consider is how the floor is heated, or whats under the floor. Having only ceiling heat with a cold floor is rediculous. The main thing about floor heating is walking on it, and heat rises. The ceiling would have to be pretty hot before enough radiant heat would be enough, and any air current would rapidly change the room temp, and the ceiling would be too hot to touch ! greg |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , Richard Fangnail wrote:
What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. So how many floors do you have. If the ceiling is heated, then the apt. below ceiling will be your floor. greg |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 9, 9:51*am, (GregS) wrote:
Having only ceiling heat with a cold floor is rediculous. The main thing about floor heating is walking on it, and heat rises. The ceiling would have to be pretty hot before enough radiant heat would be enough, and any air current would rapidly change the room temp, and the ceiling would be too hot to touch ! greg My impression is that all the apts have only the ceiling radiant heat and that's it. What is so ridiculous about having just ceiling heat? (I live on the top floor if that matters.) |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , Bert Hyman wrote:
In Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Unless there some mechanism for moving the air around in your rooms, you won't get as much benefit from heat in the ceiling as in the floor. In a multi-story building, you'll probably be heating your upstairs neighbor's place more than your own. My old office had a radiant panel in the ceiling and I found the heating effect on the top of my head to be downright creepy. The secret to apt, condo living, if you have individule heat sources and are paying for it, is to keep your apt. at a lower temp than our neighbor. They will heat you apt. for pennies on your bill. greg |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 9, 10:59*am, Richard Fangnail
wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? *My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. *I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. The bottom floor would be better with radiators, the others it would be floor heat for the guy above, for the top floor it would be a big energy waster if it was ceiling also, but It would not be necessary. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
Richard Fangnail wrote:
What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Well, in the floor you have a warm floor and the heat rises from there. In the ceiling you have a warm zone near the ceiling and unless you fan-force it no way for that heat to get near the floor, so you end up with a significant gradient from floor to ceiling level. Personally I'd rather have a warm floor than a warm ceiling given the choice. I spend more time in contact with the floor. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 9, 2:53*pm, Bert Hyman wrote:
Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? *My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. *I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Unless there some mechanism for moving the air around in your rooms, you won't get as much benefit from heat in the ceiling as in the floor. In a multi-story building, you'll probably be heating your upstairs neighbor's place more than your own. My old office had a radiant panel in the ceiling and I found the heating effect on the top of my head to be downright creepy. -- Bert Hyman * * *St. Paul, MN * FWIW: The only ceiling heat (electric not hot water piping) installation we have ever seen in this area was considered not very satisfactory. The house had sloping and fairly high ceilings. Not sure if system was undersized for this climate or what. One problem the owner mentioned was you could not do anything with the ceiling except repaint it's surface for fear of putting a screw or nail through the heating wiring. Gossip seems to say that in floor heating is more comfortable but have no facts to back that up. An acquaintance has in floor hot water heating and its effectiveness does seem to be somewhat limited due the birch wooden floor above it. It is also very slow (as one would expect) to react. Good luck with your pros and cons. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
Bert Hyman wrote:
In Richard Fangnail wrote: (snip) My old office had a radiant panel in the ceiling and I found the heating effect on the top of my head to be downright creepy. I only have personal experience with one house with radiant ceiling heat. (electric, not water.) Noticed that even if the room felt warm, if you put your arm or leg under a table, it felt cold. The heat had shadows. -- aem sends... |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:57:55 -0800 (PST), Richard Fangnail
wrote: On Jan 9, 9:51*am, (GregS) wrote: Having only ceiling heat with a cold floor is rediculous. The main thing about floor heating is walking on it, and heat rises. The ceiling would have to be pretty hot before enough radiant heat would be enough, and any air current would rapidly change the room temp, and the ceiling would be too hot to touch ! greg My impression is that all the apts have only the ceiling radiant heat and that's it. I had that 30 years ago. It was terrible. What is so ridiculous about having just ceiling heat? Heat rises. Feet get cold. It's better to heat the floor so feet stay warm and the heat better mixes with the room air. Heating the ceiling also makes a larger temperature differential between the heater and the air above causing more heat loss. (I live on the top floor if that matters.) It matters a *lot*. You have cold air above your ceiling. The hot ceiling increases the delta-T, more heat loss, more money. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 9, 1:12*pm, (GregS) wrote:
In article , Bert Hyman wrote: In Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? *My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. *I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Unless there some mechanism for moving the air around in your rooms, you won't get as much benefit from heat in the ceiling as in the floor. In a multi-story building, you'll probably be heating your upstairs neighbor's place more than your own. My old office had a radiant panel in the ceiling and I found the heating effect on the top of my head to be downright creepy. The secret to apt, condo living, if you have individule heat sources and are paying for it, is to keep your apt. at a lower temp than our neighbor. They will heat you apt. for pennies on your bill. greg- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - no kidding,. get an apartment on the first floor above the boiler room and you're golden. warm in the winter, and cooler than upper floors in the summer. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"Van Chocstraw" wrote in message ... Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Heat does not radiate down. That is a ridiculous notion. Only a retard would put it in the ceiling. -- //--------------------\\ Van Chocstraw \\--------------------// Exactly. If heat radiated down, we'd be able to get some heat from the sun. It is 10 degrees outside so we know that doesn't work. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
Van Chocstraw wrote:
Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Heat does not radiate down. That is a ridiculous notion. Only a retard would put it in the ceiling. You're kidding, right? -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
|
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 10, 10:56*am, Van Chocstraw
wrote: Heat does not radiate down. That is a ridiculous notion. Only a retard would put it in the ceiling. Gee whiz. We were wondering how the heat from a radiant heat lamp mounted, say, above a bathtub could warn the person standing below it, guess we were wrong? And those radiant ceiling heaters seen in some retail stores don't work, eh? Even though one can 'feel' the heat from them beaming down. Also does the radiant heat form the sun; travels up, down, sideways horizontally vertically, at an angle .................. oh forget it Van! You must just be 'having us on' i.e. joking! :-) And the old chestnut; 'How does radiation (in form of heat/light) travel through a virtual vacuum from sun to earth? BTW an acquaintance left his 500 watt halogen lamp pointing downwards where it happened to heat up, rather severely, the black rubber surface of a spare tyre! So radiant heat does travel 'down'! |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , Van Chocstraw wrote:
Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Heat does not radiate down. That is a ridiculous notion. Only a retard would put it in the ceiling. If heat does not radiate down, perhaps you'd care to explain how the broiler element in an electric oven can cook meat. You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 10, 11:05*am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , Van Chocstraw wrote: Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? *My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. *I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Heat does not radiate down. That is a ridiculous notion. Only a retard would put it in the ceiling. If heat does not radiate down, perhaps you'd care to explain how the broiler element in an electric oven can cook meat. You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. The theory of radiant heat is to not to waste energy heating the air but use radiated heat directly where it's needed. But of course the hot surface does heat the air near it, and convection does spread that heat. I haven't been able to find any good description of how much heat gets to your body from the radiation vs from the air. But overhead heat is very commonly used in large spaces like maintenance facilities, garages, etc., where heating all the air would be cost prohibitive. Cold panels in the ceiling for air conditioning are new to me, but are beginning to be used. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In
TimR wrote: Cold panels in the ceiling for air conditioning are new to me, but are beginning to be used. I've never heard of them; what's the mechanism for cooling them? Offhand, I'd think they'd only be safe to use in places with very low humidity, otherwise the condensation would be annoying. -- Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , Bert Hyman wrote:
In TimR wrote: Cold panels in the ceiling for air conditioning are new to me, but are beginning to be used. I've never heard of them; what's the mechanism for cooling them? Pumped circulation of cold water. The human body radiates heat to its surroundings; when those surroundings include a large mass that's significantly cooler than human skin temperature, you feel cool. Offhand, I'd think they'd only be safe to use in places with very low humidity, otherwise the condensation would be annoying. The panel temperature doesn't have to be at or below the dew point to be effective at making the room feel cooler -- it just has to be low enough to absorb a significant amount of the heat radiated from your body. Radiant cooling is markedly less effective in areas of high humidity for two reasons: first, the higher dew point means a higher minimum panel temperature, and second, because they are operated above the dew point, they don't dehumidify as forced-air air conditioners do. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"Doug Miller" wrote:
You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. Not quite... NATURAL convection will tend to transport heat upward..FORCED convection, as in a forced air furnace, can transport heat in any direction it is directed by fans, ducts, etc. Wind tends to transport heat sideways in the local case... |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 10, 1:27*pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , Bert Hyman wrote: TimR wrote: Cold panels in the ceiling for air conditioning are new to me, but are beginning to be used. I've never heard of them; what's the mechanism for cooling them? Pumped circulation of cold water. The human body radiates heat to its surroundings; when those surroundings include a large mass that's significantly cooler than human skin temperature, you feel cool. Offhand, I'd think they'd only be safe to use in places with very low humidity, otherwise the condensation would be annoying. The panel temperature doesn't have to be at or below the dew point to be effective at making the room feel cooler -- it just has to be low enough to absorb a significant amount of the heat radiated from your body. Radiant cooling is markedly less effective in areas of high humidity for two reasons: first, the higher dew point means a higher minimum panel temperature, and second, because they are operated above the dew point, they don't dehumidify as forced-air air conditioners do. As we've tried to become more sophisticated at cooling living spaces like dormitories and military barracks, we've tried to separate the cooling function, the dehumidification function, and the fresh air ventilation function. Fancoil units used to be cooled with chilled water and have a vent for fresh air. This resulted in an inability to control humidity and mold growth, and mold growth is a pretty hot topic now. So we went to fancoil units with no vents, and supplied ducted dehumidified air to the space. That let us pressurize the building and control humidity, and let the comfort cooling be adjusted with the fancoil in each room. The cold plate is an improvement on that idea. Rather than cool all the room air, we want to use radiant cooling to cool just the human in the room. This does require we supply pressurized dehumidified outside air via a separate duct system. You're right, if we don't control humidity it will rain in the room. I've worked on building renovations with the separate fancoil and dehumidified air systems, but have yet to personally see a cold plate system. I suspect my employer will do one soon, hope so. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , "JR Weiss" wrote:
"Doug Miller" wrote: You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. Not quite... NATURAL convection will tend to transport heat upward.. Merely "tend to" ??? Seems you misspelled "always". :-) FORCED convection, No such thing. If it's fan-forced, it's not convection. as in a forced air furnace, can transport heat in any direction it is directed by fans, ducts, etc. Wind tends to transport heat sideways in the local case... Wind isn't convection either. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"Doug Miller" wrote in message ... In article , "JR Weiss" wrote: "Doug Miller" wrote: You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. Not quite... NATURAL convection will tend to transport heat upward.. Merely "tend to" ??? Seems you misspelled "always". :-) FORCED convection, No such thing. If it's fan-forced, it's not convection. as in a forced air furnace, can transport heat in any direction it is directed by fans, ducts, etc. Wind tends to transport heat sideways in the local case... Wind isn't convection either. So a convection oven does not use convection? Of course it does. Convection is transport of heat by motion of a fluid. There can be mechanical convection, or there can be convection driven by gravity acting on density differences in the fluid. -- Jeremy S. Nichols, PE Minneapolis, MN |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"Doug Miller" wrote...
You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. Not quite... NATURAL convection will tend to transport heat upward.. Merely "tend to" ??? Seems you misspelled "always". :-) FORCED convection, No such thing. If it's fan-forced, it's not convection. as in a forced air furnace, can transport heat in any direction it is directed by fans, ducts, etc. Wind tends to transport heat sideways in the local case... Wind isn't convection either. OK... Where have you found a general definition of convection that excludes forced convection or explicitly limits it to natural vertical movement? |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , "JR Weiss" wrote:
"Doug Miller" wrote... You're apparently thinking of convection, which does indeed transport heat only upward. Not quite... NATURAL convection will tend to transport heat upward.. Merely "tend to" ??? Seems you misspelled "always". :-) FORCED convection, No such thing. If it's fan-forced, it's not convection. as in a forced air furnace, can transport heat in any direction it is directed by fans, ducts, etc. Wind tends to transport heat sideways in the local case... Wind isn't convection either. OK... Where have you found a general definition of convection that excludes forced convection or explicitly limits it to natural vertical movement? Consult a dictionary; I think you'll find that convection is by definition the vertical transport of heated fluids under the influence of gravity. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"Doug Miller" wrote:
FORCED convection, No such thing. If it's fan-forced, it's not convection. Wind isn't convection either. OK... Where have you found a general definition of convection that excludes forced convection or explicitly limits it to natural vertical movement? Consult a dictionary; I think you'll find that convection is by definition the vertical transport of heated fluids under the influence of gravity. I already consulted several dictionaries. While that is ONE definition of convection, it is NOT the ONLY definition, especially in context: 1.. The act or process of conveying; transmission. 2.. Physics. 1.. Heat transfer in a gas or liquid by the circulation of currents from one region to another. 2.. Fluid motion caused by an external force such as gravity. 3.. Meteorology. The transfer of heat or other atmospheric properties by massive motion within the atmosphere, especially by such motion directed upward. 1. The act or process of conveying or transmitting. 2. (Physics) A process of transfer or transmission, as of heat or electricity, by means of currents in liquids or gases, resulting from changes of temperature and other causes. 1.. a transmitting or conveying 2.. a.. the mass movement of parts of a fluid within the fluid because of differences in the density of different parts b.. the transfer of heat by its absorption by a fluid at one point followed by motion of the fluid and rejection of the heat at another point transmission of energy or mass by a medium involving movement of the medium itself. The circulatory movement that occurs in a fluid at a nonuniform temperature owing to the variation of its density and the action of gravity. 1. The act or process of conveying or transmitting. 2. Physics A process of transfer or transmission, as of heat or electricity, by means of currents in liquids or gases, resulting from changes of temperature and other causes. 1 : the circulatory motion that occurs in a fluid at a nonuniform temperature owing to the variation of its density and the action of gravity 2 : the transfer of heat by convection in a fluid Current in a fluid caused by uneven distribution of heat. For example, air on a part of the Earth's surface warmed by strong sunlight will be heated by contact with the ground and will expand and flow upward, creating a region of low pressure below it; cooler surrounding air will then flow in to this low pressure region. The air thus circulates by convection, creating winds. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , Van Chocstraw wrote:
Richard Fangnail wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. Heat does not radiate down. That is a ridiculous notion. Only a retard would put it in the ceiling. Direction has no effect on radiation. It goes all directions. greg |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"Shawn Hirn" wrote in message Heat rises, so placing the radiant heating elements in the ceiling makes no sense. What that does is heat the space above the ceiling. Maybe not. If you put a barrier over the top of the heat, it won't go up. Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. I'd still rather have it in the floor, but ceilings can work. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"Shawn Hirn" wrote in message Heat rises, so placing the radiant heating elements in the ceiling makes no sense. What that does is heat the space above the ceiling. Maybe not. If you put a barrier over the top of the heat, it won't go up. Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. I'd still rather have it in the floor, but ceilings can work. Remember in a apartment, there is a floor then a ceiling, then a floor, then a ceiling,,,, There is no real insulation between apartments. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"GregS" wrote in message ... In article , "Ed Pawlowski" wrote: "Shawn Hirn" wrote in message Heat rises, so placing the radiant heating elements in the ceiling makes no sense. What that does is heat the space above the ceiling. Maybe not. If you put a barrier over the top of the heat, it won't go up. Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. I'd still rather have it in the floor, but ceilings can work. Remember in a apartment, there is a floor then a ceiling, then a floor, then a ceiling,,,, There is no real insulation between apartments. Do you know that for sure? It may have been in the original installation. Unless we can see it, we don't know what is there do we? Could be a reflective barrier. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"GregS" wrote in message ... In article , "Ed Pawlowski" wrote: "Shawn Hirn" wrote in message Heat rises, so placing the radiant heating elements in the ceiling makes no sense. What that does is heat the space above the ceiling. Maybe not. If you put a barrier over the top of the heat, it won't go up. Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. I'd still rather have it in the floor, but ceilings can work. Remember in a apartment, there is a floor then a ceiling, then a floor, then a ceiling,,,, There is no real insulation between apartments. Do you know that for sure? It may have been in the original installation. Unless we can see it, we don't know what is there do we? Could be a reflective barrier. I don't think the OP elaborated. Even if there is a reflective barrier, heat will still flow up. I said earlier, if the celing is expected to heat a room, its going to be too hot to touch. greg |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. Is there an up and down in space? The sun is round and radiates in all different directions because of its shape. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:02:27 -0500, "badgolferman"
wrote: Ed Pawlowski wrote: Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. Is there an up and down in space? The sun is round and radiates in all different directions because of its shape. It seems to me that what is often called radiant heat isn't radiation at all. The heating elements do radiate to the nearby building materials (the floor) and then the heat is conducted through the floor to your feet and shoes as well as nearby air. The heat is then spread around the room via convection. In other words, using the sun's radiation as an example isn't very helpful to someone wanting to install radiant heat in their apartment. The floor is much better than the ceiling because heating your feet makes you feel warm at a lower air temp. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
"GregS" wrote in message I said earlier, if the celing is expected to heat a room, its going to be too hot to touch. greg Not true If you add radiant ceiling panels they operate at about 150 degrees. BUT, if you use an imbedded system, the same amount of heat energy is spread over a much larger area and operating temperatures are MUCH lower. It is typical to run at less than 100° and use 25W panels. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 15, 11:02*am, "badgolferman"
wrote: Ed Pawlowski wrote: Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. Is there an up and down in space? *The sun is round and radiates in all different directions because of its shape. given the sun's gravity, it's radiating up. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 15, 11:26*am, wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:02:27 -0500, "badgolferman" wrote: Ed Pawlowski wrote: Heat can radiate down, just as the sun does. Is there an up and down in space? *The sun is round and radiates in all different directions because of its shape. It seems to me that what is often called radiant heat isn't radiation at all. *The heating elements do radiate to the nearby building materials (the floor) and then the heat is conducted through the floor to your feet and shoes as well as nearby air. *The heat is then spread around the room via convection. *In other words, using the sun's radiation as an example isn't very helpful to someone wanting to install radiant heat in their apartment. * The floor is much better than the ceiling because heating your feet makes you feel warm at a lower air temp. yeah, for either the floor or the ceiling to do much radiating, it would have to be red hot. it's convecting. friend of mine had a house built with "radiant heating" in the ceiling decades ago, state of the art whenever it was built. they hated it. didn't heat well, and it made the ceiling plasterboard or whatever it was crack a lot. they said there was just that one brief period when people were installing it, they stopped pretty quick when it turned out to be a dud. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
On Jan 9, 11:59*am, Richard Fangnail
wrote: What are the pros and cons of having radiant heat in your ceiling? *My apt. building has it in the ceiling and I'm not sure how well it works. *I was looking through webpages and the radiant heat systems were all in the floors. well, the pros are probably not installing it any more, which means the guys selling it are cons. |
Radiant heat in the ceiling vs the floor
In article , z wrote:
yeah, for either the floor or the ceiling to do much radiating, it would have to be red hot. it's convecting. False. For an object to radiate heat, it needs only to be warmer than its surroundings. friend of mine had a house built with "radiant heating" in the ceiling decades ago, state of the art whenever it was built. they hated it. didn't heat well, and it made the ceiling plasterboard or whatever it was crack a lot. they said there was just that one brief period when people were installing it, they stopped pretty quick when it turned out to be a dud. One incompetent installation invalidates the entire principle, huh? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:09 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter