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.

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?

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

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

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.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

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.)

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

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.

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)

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.

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...

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.

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.

"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.

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 .

In Van Chocstraw
wrote:

Heat does not radiate down.

Sure it does.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

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'!

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.

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.

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

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.

"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...

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.

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.

"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

"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?

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.

"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.

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

"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.

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.

"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.

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

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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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?