On 7/9/2014 8:46 AM, trader_4 wrote:
Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

Not me. I think they produce a breeze in summer that is both cooling
and soothing. Even if you're outside, which 75F day is more pleasant? One
that is dead calm, or one with a light breeze?

runs to the right.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 06:03:36 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

In sci.electronics.design RobertMacy wrote:
It's HOT, so I thought run the ceiling fan so the cool air comes across
the stone flooring and moves by me to be sucked up into the ceiling fan -
so I feel cooler. Fan is set to move air UP

Earlier I thought run the fan directly onto me gently moving air straight
at me, which is DOWN. But when I did that, after 10-15min felt hotter in
the room.

Just saw one of those home shows, says in winter run the fan to move air
UP so the hot air moves along the ceiling and down your walls. And, in the
summer run your fan DOWN, with NO explanation, except claiming that lowers
your temperature 4-5 degrees [which is impossible in a CLOSED system] and
save up to 40% on air conditioning [what planet do THEY live on?]

So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP or DOWN
air in the summer?

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

Anyone who thinks they're pointless has never had one. They work very
well and they're cheap. I'd install a few more if it weren't such a
PITA.

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 06:03:36 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

In sci.electronics.design RobertMacy wrote:
It's HOT, so I thought run the ceiling fan so the cool air comes across
the stone flooring and moves by me to be sucked up into the ceiling fan -
so I feel cooler. Fan is set to move air UP

Earlier I thought run the fan directly onto me gently moving air straight
at me, which is DOWN. But when I did that, after 10-15min felt hotter in
the room.

Just saw one of those home shows, says in winter run the fan to move air
UP so the hot air moves along the ceiling and down your walls. And, in the
summer run your fan DOWN, with NO explanation, except claiming that lowers
your temperature 4-5 degrees [which is impossible in a CLOSED system] and
save up to 40% on air conditioning [what planet do THEY live on?]

So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP or DOWN
air in the summer?

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

We really appreciate ours.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 06:03:36 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

In sci.electronics.design RobertMacy wrote:
It's HOT, so I thought run the ceiling fan so the cool air comes across
the stone flooring and moves by me to be sucked up into the ceiling fan -
so I feel cooler. Fan is set to move air UP

Earlier I thought run the fan directly onto me gently moving air straight
at me, which is DOWN. But when I did that, after 10-15min felt hotter in
the room.

Just saw one of those home shows, says in winter run the fan to move air
UP so the hot air moves along the ceiling and down your walls. And, in the
summer run your fan DOWN, with NO explanation, except claiming that lowers
your temperature 4-5 degrees [which is impossible in a CLOSED system] and
save up to 40% on air conditioning [what planet do THEY live on?]

So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP or DOWN
air in the summer?

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?
Can't speak for anyone else, but I would definitely dissagree.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/9/2014 11:26 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 06:03:36 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

If you stand under a ceiling fan wearing a pickelhaube, I guess(tm) it
might remove the point, making it pointless:
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=pickelhaube




I spent a year in Germany while in the USCG. There was a bar that we
frequented where the (German) owners weren't really fans of the German
army. Every now and then one of them would come of the back room carrying a
fancy toilet, with some beautiful artwork painted on it. Inside the toilet
there was pickelhaube filled with...what else...pickles! They would walk
around giving out free pickles to the patrons.

Cydrome Leader wrote:
In sci.electronics.design RobertMacy wrote:
It's HOT, so I thought run the ceiling fan so the cool air comes across
the stone flooring and moves by me to be sucked up into the ceiling fan -
so I feel cooler. Fan is set to move air UP

Earlier I thought run the fan directly onto me gently moving air straight
at me, which is DOWN. But when I did that, after 10-15min felt hotter in
the room.

Just saw one of those home shows, says in winter run the fan to move air
UP so the hot air moves along the ceiling and down your walls. And, in the
summer run your fan DOWN, with NO explanation, except claiming that lowers
your temperature 4-5 degrees [which is impossible in a CLOSED system] and
save up to 40% on air conditioning [what planet do THEY live on?]

So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP or DOWN
air in the summer?

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

Definitely not me. Love 'em.

On 7/10/2014 12:08 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/9/2014 11:26 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014 06:03:36 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
wrote:

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

If you stand under a ceiling fan wearing a pickelhaube, I guess(tm) it
might remove the point, making it pointless:
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=pickelhaube




I spent a year in Germany while in the USCG. There was a bar that we
frequented where the (German) owners weren't really fans of the German
army. Every now and then one of them would come of the back room carrying a
fancy toilet, with some beautiful artwork painted on it. Inside the toilet
there was pickelhaube filled with...what else...pickles! They would walk
around giving out free pickles to the patrons.

Is a toilet in Germany something different from what it is here? I
can't picture carrying a toilet without some help and I don't think I
would be serving pickles from one... 8-@

--

Rick

On 7/10/2014 12:27 PM, rickman wrote:

Is a toilet in Germany something different from what it is here? I
can't picture carrying a toilet without some help and I don't think I
would be serving pickles from one... 8-@


If it is good enough for the dog to drink from, it is good enough for
yhou to eat pickles from. Pass on the chocolate candy bar though.

On 04/07/2014 15:31, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 04:06:11 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/4/2014 12:57 AM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 22:28:23 -0400, krw wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:00:16 -0700, "Pico Rico"
wrote:


"RobertMacy" wrote in message
newsp.xif3so2o2cx0wh@ajm...
On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 16:29:47 -0700, Pico Rico
wrote:


"RobertMacy" wrote in message
newsp.xif3f3zo2cx0wh@ajm...
...snip...
So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP
or DOWN air in the summer?

it depends if you have air conditioning.

again which way? for what reason? elaborate?

heat rises. If you have ac, you want to push the warm air down so it
can become ac'd. If you don't have ac, you might as well leave the warm
air up there were it will be less noticed.

But you can cool to a higher temperature if you help the convection off
your skin. Add in evaporative cooling and a breeze is a big win, at
least in small rooms, like a home.

We have air conditioning which keeps the house at 78, and a way
undersized room dehumidifier which we set up in the master shower, turn
on the circulating fan in the furnace, and basically slowly and
inefficiently dry out the whole house.

It makes a huge huge difference how hot it feels -- and we're in Oregon,
where everyone is a humidity wimp.

Do you realize the dehumidifier is just an AC unit where the heat is
exhausted back into the room? You could do the same thing by running a
small space heater which would make the AC run more often which does a
much better job of taking the humidity out of the air. Actually, I've
never seen a house with AC that still had high humidity, but then I'm
not in the Pacific northwest.
If the AC is oversized it is not efficient at removing humidity
because it doesn't run long enough. ANd if it isn't warm enough to
require running the AC, you still have the humidity.

Don't you just turn it up until you get to a combination of
temperature/humidity that feels comfortable?


Running the heater and the A/C at the same time MIGHT help, by forcing
the AC to run more, but it most certainly is NOT efficient. At the
price of electricity in Ontario, particularly during peak periods, it
doesn't make any sense at all. We run the AC off-peak to drop the
temperature and keep the house closed up on-peak to keep the heat out.
As soon as it cools down outside the wife wants to open the windows -
even when the humidity is 81%+ outside and only 40% inside.

Slowly getting her trained, after 33 years.


--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:36:20 PM UTC-4, Brian Gregory wrote:
On 04/07/2014 15:31, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 04:06:11 -0400, rickman wrote:



On 7/4/2014 12:57 AM, Tim Wescott wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 22:28:23 -0400, krw wrote:



On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:00:16 -0700, "Pico Rico"

wrote:





"RobertMacy" wrote in message

newsp.xif3so2o2cx0wh@ajm...

On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 16:29:47 -0700, Pico Rico

wrote:





"RobertMacy" wrote in message

newsp.xif3f3zo2cx0wh@ajm...

...snip...

So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP

or DOWN air in the summer?



it depends if you have air conditioning.



again which way? for what reason? elaborate?



heat rises. If you have ac, you want to push the warm air down so it

can become ac'd. If you don't have ac, you might as well leave the warm

air up there were it will be less noticed.



But you can cool to a higher temperature if you help the convection off

your skin. Add in evaporative cooling and a breeze is a big win, at

least in small rooms, like a home.



We have air conditioning which keeps the house at 78, and a way

undersized room dehumidifier which we set up in the master shower, turn

on the circulating fan in the furnace, and basically slowly and

inefficiently dry out the whole house.



It makes a huge huge difference how hot it feels -- and we're in Oregon,

where everyone is a humidity wimp.



Do you realize the dehumidifier is just an AC unit where the heat is

exhausted back into the room? You could do the same thing by running a

small space heater which would make the AC run more often which does a

much better job of taking the humidity out of the air. Actually, I've

never seen a house with AC that still had high humidity, but then I'm

not in the Pacific northwest.

If the AC is oversized it is not efficient at removing humidity

because it doesn't run long enough. ANd if it isn't warm enough to

require running the AC, you still have the humidity.



Don't you just turn it up until you get to a combination of

temperature/humidity that feels comfortable?



Stop it right now. You're being entirely too practical....

LOL

That's what I've been doing for decades. And despite all the talk
about the need to remove humidity without lowering temperature, it's
always worked fine for me here in the NYC area. If it's 77 and the
AC hasn't been running, it can get humid. So, I just lower it to 75,
it runs and in 20 mins you can feel the difference and it's comfortable.

I'm sure having a two stage AC, humidity sensors etc could control
it better, but it's not a problem for me.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 22:36:20 +0100, Brian Gregory
wrote:

On 04/07/2014 15:31, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 04:06:11 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/4/2014 12:57 AM, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 22:28:23 -0400, krw wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:00:16 -0700, "Pico Rico"
wrote:


"RobertMacy" wrote in message
newsp.xif3so2o2cx0wh@ajm...
On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 16:29:47 -0700, Pico Rico
wrote:


"RobertMacy" wrote in message
newsp.xif3f3zo2cx0wh@ajm...
...snip...
So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP
or DOWN air in the summer?

it depends if you have air conditioning.

again which way? for what reason? elaborate?

heat rises. If you have ac, you want to push the warm air down so it
can become ac'd. If you don't have ac, you might as well leave the warm
air up there were it will be less noticed.

But you can cool to a higher temperature if you help the convection off
your skin. Add in evaporative cooling and a breeze is a big win, at
least in small rooms, like a home.

We have air conditioning which keeps the house at 78, and a way
undersized room dehumidifier which we set up in the master shower, turn
on the circulating fan in the furnace, and basically slowly and
inefficiently dry out the whole house.

It makes a huge huge difference how hot it feels -- and we're in Oregon,
where everyone is a humidity wimp.

Do you realize the dehumidifier is just an AC unit where the heat is
exhausted back into the room? You could do the same thing by running a
small space heater which would make the AC run more often which does a
much better job of taking the humidity out of the air. Actually, I've
never seen a house with AC that still had high humidity, but then I'm
not in the Pacific northwest.
If the AC is oversized it is not efficient at removing humidity
because it doesn't run long enough. ANd if it isn't warm enough to
require running the AC, you still have the humidity.

Don't you just turn it up until you get to a combination of
temperature/humidity that feels comfortable?


Which is better, hot and humid or cold and clammy??? If those are your
only options, you are never comfortable. You need to be able to dry
the air at both ends of the scale.

Running the heater and the A/C at the same time MIGHT help, by forcing
the AC to run more, but it most certainly is NOT efficient. At the
price of electricity in Ontario, particularly during peak periods, it
doesn't make any sense at all. We run the AC off-peak to drop the
temperature and keep the house closed up on-peak to keep the heat out.
As soon as it cools down outside the wife wants to open the windows -
even when the humidity is 81%+ outside and only 40% inside.

Slowly getting her trained, after 33 years.

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 7:17:00 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 22:36:20 +0100, Brian Gregory

wrote:



On 04/07/2014 15:31, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 04:06:11 -0400, rickman wrote:



On 7/4/2014 12:57 AM, Tim Wescott wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 22:28:23 -0400, krw wrote:



On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:00:16 -0700, "Pico Rico"

wrote:





"RobertMacy" wrote in message

newsp.xif3so2o2cx0wh@ajm...

On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 16:29:47 -0700, Pico Rico

wrote:





"RobertMacy" wrote in message

newsp.xif3f3zo2cx0wh@ajm...

...snip...

So my question is WHICH way is this !@#$#@ system designed for? UP

or DOWN air in the summer?



it depends if you have air conditioning.



again which way? for what reason? elaborate?



heat rises. If you have ac, you want to push the warm air down so it

can become ac'd. If you don't have ac, you might as well leave the warm

air up there were it will be less noticed.



But you can cool to a higher temperature if you help the convection off

your skin. Add in evaporative cooling and a breeze is a big win, at

least in small rooms, like a home.



We have air conditioning which keeps the house at 78, and a way

undersized room dehumidifier which we set up in the master shower, turn

on the circulating fan in the furnace, and basically slowly and

inefficiently dry out the whole house.



It makes a huge huge difference how hot it feels -- and we're in Oregon,

where everyone is a humidity wimp.



Do you realize the dehumidifier is just an AC unit where the heat is

exhausted back into the room? You could do the same thing by running a

small space heater which would make the AC run more often which does a

much better job of taking the humidity out of the air. Actually, I've

never seen a house with AC that still had high humidity, but then I'm

not in the Pacific northwest.

If the AC is oversized it is not efficient at removing humidity

because it doesn't run long enough. ANd if it isn't warm enough to

require running the AC, you still have the humidity.



Don't you just turn it up until you get to a combination of

temperature/humidity that feels comfortable?





Which is better, hot and humid or cold and clammy??? If those are your

only options, you are never comfortable. You need to be able to dry

the air at both ends of the scale.





Why are those two your only options? Like Brian, I have no problem
setting a comfortable temperature. If it's too humid, I've never
had conditions where lowering the thermostat 2 degrees didn't fix
it and result in a comfortable temperature. If it's 80+ and humid
outside, the AC runs enough so that humidity isn't a problem. If
it's cooler and the AC isn't running, lowering it a degree or two
to run the AC for a bit lowers both the humidity and the temp and
it's comfortable, because it's the combined effect that we feel.
You must live in some unusual conditions.

On 2014-07-09, RobertMacy wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 23:03:36 -0700, Cydrome Leader
wrote:

...snip...

Anybody else here think ceiling fans are just pointless all together?

I did!

I used to think they were just for making flies avoid the room, and kept
envisioning people in a smoke filled room sitting around a table covered
in green felt playing cards, etc.

But, after finally trying one, I see the advantage in 'low humidity'
conditions. Makes the air 'seem' cooler and doesn't stuff the pockets of
the ultities firms.

They don't make flies avoid the room, but they do stop flies.

--
umop apisdn


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Is this a joke article? He lists some useful info and then draws faulty
conclusions. I think the lead in line is a perfect example...

A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100°F when running

Wow! 100°F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light
bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off
more heat. I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit
overstated. More useful would have been a simple statement of the
wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.
They let in direct radiant heat from the outside. I can assure you than
nearly any window in your house lets in more heat in the summer than the
fan puts off. The temperature of the glass has no bearing on the heat
coming in through the window.

--

Rick

Right. Ceiling fans both turn and lean
to the right. Cause they are made by hard
working capitalists.

A ceiling fan that blows hard to the left
costs far too much, doesn't work, and leaves
you cold. And you keep paying more and more,
over and over.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 20:22:13 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who werent in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Well, better than answering those 2005 postings where the people are
waiting for info where to buy a repair part, eh?

AHA! Thanks for finding that bit of info. THAT explains why the office
fan runs for about 10-15 minutes before it seemed like the temp started to
rise! In otherwords, fan at first good, over time bad. I haven't gotten up
on ladder [10 ft ceilings] to check the motor housing to see just how hot
it does get. But then heat means power, so why not just run Heat Pump for
a bit? EVERYTHING eats power. These houses were built like energy is free.
Simple example is the 7 ceiling spot lights in the kitchen at 60W each,
that's a whopping 420W just to see! A microwave runs on that! well almost.

However, back to fan, with the UP direction not so noticeable. But that
direction was contrary to intuition AND to that TV show. so had to check.
Thanks for confirming there is little advantage to running fan without
anyone in room, unless the Air Handler is anemic, but that's another topic.

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 5:36:44 AM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Probably a bit late...



From the current issue of Home Power magazine:

"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"

http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan

The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything

else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.

Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren�t in

the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.



Is this a joke article? He lists some useful info and then draws faulty

conclusions. I think the lead in line is a perfect example...



A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100�F when running



Wow! 100�F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light

bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off

more heat. I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit

overstated. More useful would have been a simple statement of the

wattage of the fan.

Or better yet, actually measure it using a Kill-A-Watt or
similar. I agree, I don't believe a small motor like that is going
to generate much heat. From what I see, typical is 50 to 75W or
so. I just felt the motor on mine, running on medium speed,
and it doesn't feel warm at all.



The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.

They let in direct radiant heat from the outside. I can assure you than

nearly any window in your house lets in more heat in the summer than the

fan puts off. The temperature of the glass has no bearing on the heat

coming in through the window.


+1

The advice that the fan only helps if you're there to benefit from
the breeze I agree with.

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:36:44 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Is this a joke article?

It's quite real. It's one of those short info articles that magazines
like to use for filler. I suspect that it might have been shortened
through over editing.

He lists some useful info and then draws faulty
conclusions.

I have to confess that I didn't read it thoroughly and criticially.
You're right. The article has problems.

I think the lead in line is a perfect example...

A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100°F when running

Wow! 100°F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light
bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off
more heat.

Nope, they're about the same. A running ceiling fan will burn about
75 watts going full blast. A light bulb might burn about 75 watts.
Both convert most of the 75 watts into heat. It's the power
consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature. If
I place a sealing fan motor, and a light bulb, in two seperate
marginally insulated cardboard boxes, and let them run for a while,
the final temperature will be the same.

I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit
overstated.

Yeah, probably true.

More useful would have been a simple statement of the
wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.

Yeah, also true. However, please remember the audience. It's mostly
home owners that are interested in alternative energy for their homes,
not engineers and energy professionals. For such an audience,
generalizations are useful.

They let in direct radiant heat from the outside. I can assure you than
nearly any window in your house lets in more heat in the summer than the
fan puts off. The temperature of the glass has no bearing on the heat
coming in through the window.

True, if you assume uncoated glass. With a Low-E coating, much of the
IR is reflected. I can grind the numbers for how much later if you
want.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 1:42:35 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:36:44 -0400, rickman wrote:



On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Probably a bit late...



From the current issue of Home Power magazine:

"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"

http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan

The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything

else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.

Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren�t in

the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.



Is this a joke article?



It's quite real. It's one of those short info articles that magazines

like to use for filler. I suspect that it might have been shortened

through over editing.



He lists some useful info and then draws faulty

conclusions.



I have to confess that I didn't read it thoroughly and criticially.

You're right. The article has problems.



I think the lead in line is a perfect example...



A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100�F when running



Wow! 100�F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light

bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off

more heat.



Nope, they're about the same. A running ceiling fan will burn about

75 watts going full blast. A light bulb might burn about 75 watts.

Both convert most of the 75 watts into heat.

I don't think that's true in the case of the fan. A lot, hoefully most
of the energy is going into moving the air, not generating heat. It's like
saying 1 hp = 745 watts, so a 1 hp water pump is generating 745 watts in
heat. In fact, most of that energy is going to moving the water.
If it wasn't you'd have a resistance heater, not a pump.


It's the power

consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature. If

I place a sealing fan motor, and a light bulb, in two seperate

marginally insulated cardboard boxes, and let them run for a while,

the final temperature will be the same.


Per the above, I don't think so.




I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit

overstated.



Yeah, probably true.



More useful would have been a simple statement of the

wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.



Yeah, also true.

Not really, because again most of the energy from the motor is
not resulting in heat. I made that mistake myself, suggesting that
you could measure the wattage using a Kill-a-Watt. You can measure it,
but you can't then say because it's pulling 50W that it's generating
50W of heat in the room.

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
Not really, because again most of the energy from the motor is
not resulting in heat. I made that mistake myself, suggesting that
you could measure the wattage using a Kill-a-Watt. You can measure it,
but you can't then say because it's pulling 50W that it's generating
50W of heat in the room.

I understand your thinking, but all the power a fan is using in a closed up
room is going to generating heat.

Part of the power to turn the motor is being used in the wiring, part is
lost in the bearings of the motor, and whatever is left over is moving the
air. When the air is moving, that movement is being converted back to heat.

If it was being used to blow air out of the room, then much of the enegry
used to move the air would be dissapated as heat outside the room.

Just plucking out numbers from the air, say the fan draws 100 watts from the
AC line. All 100 watts will be heating the room unless you blow air out of
the room. The fan may only use 25 watts to heat up the motor due to
electrical and mechanical losses. The other 75 watts will be converted to
heat when the air molicules rub against each other and slow down. Just like
rubbing your hands together.

Same as a light bulb. So much goes to generating the light, and whatever
the light hits heats up. So unless there is a window that lets a few photons
out, all the power of a light bulb of any kind will go to heating up the
room. Some types of bulbs are just more efficiant in making light than
others so you can get an equivilent ammount of light with less wattage and
het.

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 2:13:39 PM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message

...

Not really, because again most of the energy from the motor is

not resulting in heat. I made that mistake myself, suggesting that

you could measure the wattage using a Kill-a-Watt. You can measure it,

but you can't then say because it's pulling 50W that it's generating

50W of heat in the room.



I understand your thinking, but all the power a fan is using in a closed up

room is going to generating heat.



Part of the power to turn the motor is being used in the wiring, part is

lost in the bearings of the motor, and whatever is left over is moving the

air. When the air is moving, that movement is being converted back to heat.



If it was being used to blow air out of the room, then much of the enegry

used to move the air would be dissapated as heat outside the room.



OK, I agree with your analysis. As long as the air stays within
the room, then the increased energy of the air that the motor transfers to
it has to go somewhere and I agree it would result as heat in the room.
From what I can see, these fans are typically ~75W. From a heat standpoint,
just pushing the hot air from the ceiling down is going to have a bigger
effect than the 75W ever will. For example, when I turn one of my fans
on I can feel the hotter air moving down suddenly. Once it evens out,
the breeze makes the room feel more comfortable. But from an energy
standpoint, I would bet that the fan constantly moving hot air from higher
levels instead of just leaving it be, raises the temp of the lower levels
of the room a couple orders of magnitude more than the 75W of the fan
generated heat. You also have to wonder on it's effect of using more
AC. Two scenarios. One is leave the air stratified, so the hottest air
is up high where no one is. Or use the fan to bring the hot air down,
where the AC has to deal with it. I guess if you leave the AC slightly
higher because you now have a breeze, it could make up for it. Otherwise,
with the hot air being pushed down, I'd expect the AC is going to have to
run more.








Just plucking out numbers from the air, say the fan draws 100 watts from the

AC line. All 100 watts will be heating the room unless you blow air out of

the room. The fan may only use 25 watts to heat up the motor due to

electrical and mechanical losses. The other 75 watts will be converted to

heat when the air molicules rub against each other and slow down. Just like

rubbing your hands together.



Same as a light bulb. So much goes to generating the light, and whatever

the light hits heats up. So unless there is a window that lets a few photons

out, all the power of a light bulb of any kind will go to heating up the

room. Some types of bulbs are just more efficiant in making light than

others so you can get an equivilent ammount of light with less wattage and

het.

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
I understand your thinking, but all the power a fan is using in a closed
up

room is going to generating heat.



Part of the power to turn the motor is being used in the wiring, part
is

lost in the bearings of the motor, and whatever is left over is moving
the

air. When the air is moving, that movement is being converted back to
heat.



If it was being used to blow air out of the room, then much of the enegry

used to move the air would be dissapated as heat outside the room.



OK, I agree with your analysis. As long as the air stays within
the room, then the increased energy of the air that the motor transfers to
it has to go somewhere and I agree it would result as heat in the room.
From what I can see, these fans are typically ~75W. From a heat
standpoint,
just pushing the hot air from the ceiling down is going to have a bigger
effect than the 75W ever will. For example, when I turn one of my fans
on I can feel the hotter air moving down suddenly. Once it evens out,
the breeze makes the room feel more comfortable. But from an energy
standpoint, I would bet that the fan constantly moving hot air from higher
levels instead of just leaving it be, raises the temp of the lower levels
of the room a couple orders of magnitude more than the 75W of the fan
generated heat. You also have to wonder on it's effect of using more
AC. Two scenarios. One is leave the air stratified, so the hottest air
is up high where no one is. Or use the fan to bring the hot air down,
where the AC has to deal with it. I guess if you leave the AC slightly
higher because you now have a breeze, it could make up for it. Otherwise,
with the hot air being pushed down, I'd expect the AC is going to have to
run more.


I guess that it could also be the humidity of the air and how the fan blows
the sweat off of your skin that makes you feel cool. With no air movement
and high humidity the room has to be cooler to feel comfortable. Most of
the time it is not the actual temperature, but a combination of many things
that makes you feel cool or hot.

Often if the air conditioner is sized correctly, it will run and keep the
humidity low and then with a small ammount of air blowing across you, you
will feel cool at a higher temperature.

At one time I worked at a hopspital and some people in a room were
complaining about it being hot. Two older ladies were visiting a man that
was out of it. They were hot and I dropped down the lid of the air handler
in the room , took out a wrench and screwdriver and made some noise. They
said it felt cooler already. Told them if they got too cool to turn up the
thermostat.

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 07:01:16 -0700, RobertMacy
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 20:22:13 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who werent in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Well, better than answering those 2005 postings where the people are
waiting for info where to buy a repair part, eh?

AHA! Thanks for finding that bit of info. THAT explains why the office
fan runs for about 10-15 minutes before it seemed like the temp started to
rise! In otherwords, fan at first good, over time bad. I haven't gotten up
on ladder [10 ft ceilings] to check the motor housing to see just how hot
it does get. But then heat means power, so why not just run Heat Pump for
a bit? EVERYTHING eats power. These houses were built like energy is free.
Simple example is the 7 ceiling spot lights in the kitchen at 60W each,
that's a whopping 420W just to see! A microwave runs on that! well almost.

However, back to fan, with the UP direction not so noticeable. But that
direction was contrary to intuition AND to that TV show. so had to check.
Thanks for confirming there is little advantage to running fan without
anyone in room, unless the Air Handler is anemic, but that's another topic.

When it's warm in the summer, I keep all ceiling fans on, with doors
open. They are very low wattage.
Keeps air moving throughout the house and eliminates "hot spots."
Without the fans, AC would have to be set 3-5 degrees lower.
Always blowing down. You don't want a "boundary layer" on your skin.
I never, ever run the fans in the winter. YMMV.

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:42:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:36:44 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Is this a joke article?

It's quite real. It's one of those short info articles that magazines
like to use for filler. I suspect that it might have been shortened
through over editing.

He lists some useful info and then draws faulty
conclusions.

I have to confess that I didn't read it thoroughly and criticially.
You're right. The article has problems.

I think the lead in line is a perfect example...

A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100°F when running

Wow! 100°F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light
bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off
more heat.

Nope, they're about the same. A running ceiling fan will burn about
75 watts going full blast. A light bulb might burn about 75 watts.
Both convert most of the 75 watts into heat. It's the power
consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature. If
I place a sealing fan motor, and a light bulb, in two seperate
marginally insulated cardboard boxes, and let them run for a while,
the final temperature will be the same.

The 2 70 inch 5 blade fans I installed at the office are 35 watts wide
open, and they are only running half speed. They are high efficiency
DC motors - likely drawing about 20 watts each the way they are
running right now.

I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit
overstated.

Yeah, probably true.

More useful would have been a simple statement of the
wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.

Yeah, also true. However, please remember the audience. It's mostly
home owners that are interested in alternative energy for their homes,
not engineers and energy professionals. For such an audience,
generalizations are useful.

They let in direct radiant heat from the outside. I can assure you than
nearly any window in your house lets in more heat in the summer than the
fan puts off. The temperature of the glass has no bearing on the heat
coming in through the window.

True, if you assume uncoated glass. With a Low-E coating, much of the
IR is reflected. I can grind the numbers for how much later if you
want.

It depends on the season.

In the northern hemisphere, you prolly want to run your ceiling fan clockwise in January. In July, you'll prolly want to run it counterclockwise.

In the southern hemisphere, it's the opposite. In January, you'll likely run it counterclockwise and in July run it clockwise.

On 7/24/2014 1:42 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:36:44 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Is this a joke article?

It's quite real. It's one of those short info articles that magazines
like to use for filler. I suspect that it might have been shortened
through over editing.

He lists some useful info and then draws faulty
conclusions.

I have to confess that I didn't read it thoroughly and criticially.
You're right. The article has problems.

I think the lead in line is a perfect example...

A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100°F when running

Wow! 100°F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light
bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off
more heat.

Nope, they're about the same. A running ceiling fan will burn about
75 watts going full blast. A light bulb might burn about 75 watts.
Both convert most of the 75 watts into heat. It's the power
consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature. If
I place a sealing fan motor, and a light bulb, in two seperate
marginally insulated cardboard boxes, and let them run for a while,
the final temperature will be the same.

I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit
overstated.

Yeah, probably true.

More useful would have been a simple statement of the
wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.

Yeah, also true. However, please remember the audience. It's mostly
home owners that are interested in alternative energy for their homes,
not engineers and energy professionals. For such an audience,
generalizations are useful.

That makes no sense. The window doesn't heat the room because the glass
is at 100°F, it heats the room because it allows radiant heat in.
Comparing the temperature is totally invalid and not useful in any way.


They let in direct radiant heat from the outside. I can assure you than
nearly any window in your house lets in more heat in the summer than the
fan puts off. The temperature of the glass has no bearing on the heat
coming in through the window.

True, if you assume uncoated glass. With a Low-E coating, much of the
IR is reflected. I can grind the numbers for how much later if you
want.

I would love to see some numbers.

--

Rick

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 22:44:47 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/24/2014 1:42 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:36:44 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Is this a joke article?

It's quite real. It's one of those short info articles that magazines
like to use for filler. I suspect that it might have been shortened
through over editing.

He lists some useful info and then draws faulty
conclusions.

I have to confess that I didn't read it thoroughly and criticially.
You're right. The article has problems.

I think the lead in line is a perfect example...

A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100°F when running

Wow! 100°F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light
bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off
more heat.

Nope, they're about the same. A running ceiling fan will burn about
75 watts going full blast. A light bulb might burn about 75 watts.
Both convert most of the 75 watts into heat. It's the power
consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature. If
I place a sealing fan motor, and a light bulb, in two seperate
marginally insulated cardboard boxes, and let them run for a while,
the final temperature will be the same.

I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit
overstated.

Yeah, probably true.

More useful would have been a simple statement of the
wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.

Yeah, also true. However, please remember the audience. It's mostly
home owners that are interested in alternative energy for their homes,
not engineers and energy professionals. For such an audience,
generalizations are useful.

That makes no sense. The window doesn't heat the room because the glass
is at 100°F, it heats the room because it allows radiant heat in.
Comparing the temperature is totally invalid and not useful in any way.


They let in direct radiant heat from the outside. I can assure you than
nearly any window in your house lets in more heat in the summer than the
fan puts off. The temperature of the glass has no bearing on the heat
coming in through the window.

True, if you assume uncoated glass. With a Low-E coating, much of the
IR is reflected. I can grind the numbers for how much later if you
want.

I would love to see some numbers.
I don't have the numbers, but a10 sq ft Low E2 window in direct sun
will sure add more than35 watts of heat to a room!!!

I just did some quick checking

With 900-1050 watts per square meter peak solar intensity and an SHGC
ranging from 0.42 to 0.67, a aquare meter window in direct sun can
provide 450 -703 watts of heat to a room. That's assuming Low E argon
filled double glazed window

On 7/24/2014 11:10 PM, wrote:
I don't have the numbers, but a10 sq ft Low E2 window in direct sun
will sure add more than35 watts of heat to a room!!!

I just did some quick checking

With 900-1050 watts per square meter peak solar intensity and an SHGC
ranging from 0.42 to 0.67, a aquare meter window in direct sun can
provide 450 -703 watts of heat to a room. That's assuming Low E argon
filled double glazed window

I've got a couple of southern facing skylights that I want to add some
sort of protection to. I'm not sure what it will be or how I will do
it, especially since they are 11 feet off the floor. I guess blinds
would be the minimal effort approach, especially if I let someone else
do it, lol. I'm thinking a piece of styrofoam covered with fabric to
make it look nice and seal around the edges. Once side would have a
reflective layer, possibly the reflective bubble wrap stuff. That would
reflect the heat back out and likely work as well when it is cold out,
not emitting as much heat.

With the reflective layer on one side it needs to fold away from you,
into the window well which is not deep enough for it. Folding into the
room means you see the reflector. Also, folding into the well means it
won't seal snug around the edges. Not sure what to do about that.

Trying to make it slide away from the window sounds hard to do. I am
thinking of a hinge with a draw cord. To slide sideways I could use
arms at each corner and swing it away to another spot on the ceiling or
even just let it hang to the side, it won't be in anyone's way up there,
lol. .

--

Rick

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 22:44:47 -0400, rickman wrote:

... It's the power
consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature.
(...)

That makes no sense. The window doesn't heat the room because the glass
is at 100°F, it heats the room because it allows radiant heat in.
Comparing the temperature is totally invalid and not useful in any way.

Agreed. I suspect you may have misread what I scribbled. See my
quote above.

True, if you assume uncoated glass. With a Low-E coating, much of the
IR is reflected. I can grind the numbers for how much later if you
want.

I would love to see some numbers.

Sure, but give me a few daze. I'm giving a Linux on Chromebook talk
tomorrow and am totally unprepared (as unusual). I'm also trying to
take next week off so that I can claim that I've actually had a
vacation this year.

I found this old meter in my mess:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/IES%20Solar%20Heat%20Meter.jpg
It has a solar cell on the back, with a 1/2" diameter aperture mask.
It's a "Solar Heat" guess meter, measuring BTU/hr-sqft (F), which can
be converted to something more sane like (5.68) watts/meter^2 (C).
There's no far-IR bandpass filter, so I don't think this is going to
be very useful. It's probably made for solar water heaters. Rather
than play with the calcs, I'll take some measurements today. Bug me
if I forget.

Also, this paper might be of some interest:
"Study of titanium nitride for low-e coating application."
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/Low-E-titanium-nitide-glass.pdf
I use it as a cheat sheet for how low-E glass works.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 22:44:47 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/24/2014 1:42 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:36:44 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/23/2014 11:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Probably a bit late...

From the current issue of Home Power magazine:
"Making the Most of Your Ceiling Fan"
http://www.homepower.com/articles/home-efficiency/electricity/making-most-your-ceiling-fan
The temperature of the motor was far higher than anything
else in the room, including windows exposed to direct sunlight.
Not only was the fan not cooling the people who weren’t in
the room, but it was also working as a little space heater.

Is this a joke article?

It's quite real. It's one of those short info articles that magazines
like to use for filler. I suspect that it might have been shortened
through over editing.

He lists some useful info and then draws faulty
conclusions.

I have to confess that I didn't read it thoroughly and criticially.
You're right. The article has problems.

I think the lead in line is a perfect example...

A ceiling fan can heat up to about 100°F when running

Wow! 100°F!!! That is pretty much nothing. The incandescent light
bulb in the same fixture is thousands of degrees and likely puts off
more heat.

Nope, they're about the same. A running ceiling fan will burn about
75 watts going full blast. A light bulb might burn about 75 watts.
Both convert most of the 75 watts into heat. It's the power
consumption in watts that's important, not the surface temperature. If
I place a sealing fan motor, and a light bulb, in two seperate
marginally insulated cardboard boxes, and let them run for a while,
the final temperature will be the same.

I think the case for the fan heating the room is a bit
overstated.

Yeah, probably true.

More useful would have been a simple statement of the
wattage of the fan. The comparison to the windows is totally absurd.

Yeah, also true. However, please remember the audience. It's mostly
home owners that are interested in alternative energy for their homes,
not engineers and energy professionals. For such an audience,
generalizations are useful.

That makes no sense. The window doesn't heat the room because the glass
is at 100°F, it heats the room because it allows radiant heat in.

It does both. Touch the glass: if it's hot, it's heating the air inside the
room.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:34:43 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/24/2014 11:10 PM, wrote:
I don't have the numbers, but a10 sq ft Low E2 window in direct sun
will sure add more than35 watts of heat to a room!!!

I just did some quick checking

With 900-1050 watts per square meter peak solar intensity and an SHGC
ranging from 0.42 to 0.67, a aquare meter window in direct sun can
provide 450 -703 watts of heat to a room. That's assuming Low E argon
filled double glazed window

I've got a couple of southern facing skylights that I want to add some
sort of protection to. I'm not sure what it will be or how I will do
it, especially since they are 11 feet off the floor. I guess blinds
would be the minimal effort approach, especially if I let someone else
do it, lol. I'm thinking a piece of styrofoam covered with fabric to
make it look nice and seal around the edges. Once side would have a
reflective layer, possibly the reflective bubble wrap stuff. That would
reflect the heat back out and likely work as well when it is cold out,
not emitting as much heat.

With the reflective layer on one side it needs to fold away from you,
into the window well which is not deep enough for it. Folding into the
room means you see the reflector. Also, folding into the well means it
won't seal snug around the edges. Not sure what to do about that.

Trying to make it slide away from the window sounds hard to do. I am
thinking of a hinge with a draw cord. To slide sideways I could use
arms at each corner and swing it away to another spot on the ceiling or
even just let it hang to the side, it won't be in anyone's way up there,
lol. .
Blocking off the skylight could damage the skylight by overheating
it. Just replace whatever you have with a velux and the insulation
situation is solved. Put an external shutter on to control heat if you
are getting too much heat gain. A shade that blocks direct sun in the
heat of a summer day, but allows lowere evening or winter sun to
provide heat (and light)

On 7/25/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:34:43 -0400, rickman wrote:

I've got a couple of southern facing skylights that I want to add some
sort of protection to. I'm not sure what it will be or how I will do
it, especially since they are 11 feet off the floor. I guess blinds
would be the minimal effort approach, especially if I let someone else
do it, lol. I'm thinking a piece of styrofoam covered with fabric to
make it look nice and seal around the edges. Once side would have a
reflective layer, possibly the reflective bubble wrap stuff. That would
reflect the heat back out and likely work as well when it is cold out,
not emitting as much heat.

With the reflective layer on one side it needs to fold away from you,
into the window well which is not deep enough for it. Folding into the
room means you see the reflector. Also, folding into the well means it
won't seal snug around the edges. Not sure what to do about that.

Trying to make it slide away from the window sounds hard to do. I am
thinking of a hinge with a draw cord. To slide sideways I could use
arms at each corner and swing it away to another spot on the ceiling or
even just let it hang to the side, it won't be in anyone's way up there,
lol. .
Blocking off the skylight could damage the skylight by overheating
it. Just replace whatever you have with a velux and the insulation
situation is solved. Put an external shutter on to control heat if you
are getting too much heat gain. A shade that blocks direct sun in the
heat of a summer day, but allows lowere evening or winter sun to
provide heat (and light)

What is a velux?

An external shutter sounds like a bad idea, subject to all sorts of
weather and debris. This is not a vertical surface, it is close to a
45° pitch. A shutter wouldn't even work well as it would end up laying
on the skylight.

--

Rick

On Friday, July 25, 2014 12:57:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:34:43 -0400, rickman wrote:



On 7/24/2014 11:10 PM, wrote:

I don't have the numbers, but a10 sq ft Low E2 window in direct sun

will sure add more than35 watts of heat to a room!!!



I just did some quick checking



With 900-1050 watts per square meter peak solar intensity and an SHGC

ranging from 0.42 to 0.67, a aquare meter window in direct sun can

provide 450 -703 watts of heat to a room. That's assuming Low E argon

filled double glazed window



I've got a couple of southern facing skylights that I want to add some

sort of protection to. I'm not sure what it will be or how I will do

it, especially since they are 11 feet off the floor. I guess blinds

would be the minimal effort approach, especially if I let someone else

do it, lol. I'm thinking a piece of styrofoam covered with fabric to

make it look nice and seal around the edges. Once side would have a

reflective layer, possibly the reflective bubble wrap stuff. That would

reflect the heat back out and likely work as well when it is cold out,

not emitting as much heat.



With the reflective layer on one side it needs to fold away from you,

into the window well which is not deep enough for it. Folding into the

room means you see the reflector. Also, folding into the well means it

won't seal snug around the edges. Not sure what to do about that.



Trying to make it slide away from the window sounds hard to do. I am

thinking of a hinge with a draw cord. To slide sideways I could use

arms at each corner and swing it away to another spot on the ceiling or

even just let it hang to the side, it won't be in anyone's way up there,

lol. .

Blocking off the skylight could damage the skylight by overheating

it.

It's no different than putting a shade or blinds on any other window.


Just replace whatever you have with a velux and the insulation

situation is solved.

Except of course for the huge cost of the new skylights and installation
and the fact that heat will still come in. I have Velux and heat comes
in.



Put an external shutter on to control heat if you

are getting too much heat gain. A shade that blocks direct sun in the

heat of a summer day, but allows lowere evening or winter sun to

provide heat (and light)

Yes, that should be real practical on the roof. I've seen a lot of
skylights, never one with a shade on the roof.

Or he can just put up a shade inside. Velux even makes the controls
to electrically operate them, so I guess they don't think it's such a
bad idea.

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:26:29 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/25/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:34:43 -0400, rickman wrote:

I've got a couple of southern facing skylights that I want to add some
sort of protection to. I'm not sure what it will be or how I will do
it, especially since they are 11 feet off the floor. I guess blinds
would be the minimal effort approach, especially if I let someone else
do it, lol. I'm thinking a piece of styrofoam covered with fabric to
make it look nice and seal around the edges. Once side would have a
reflective layer, possibly the reflective bubble wrap stuff. That would
reflect the heat back out and likely work as well when it is cold out,
not emitting as much heat.

With the reflective layer on one side it needs to fold away from you,
into the window well which is not deep enough for it. Folding into the
room means you see the reflector. Also, folding into the well means it
won't seal snug around the edges. Not sure what to do about that.

Trying to make it slide away from the window sounds hard to do. I am
thinking of a hinge with a draw cord. To slide sideways I could use
arms at each corner and swing it away to another spot on the ceiling or
even just let it hang to the side, it won't be in anyone's way up there,
lol. .
Blocking off the skylight could damage the skylight by overheating
it. Just replace whatever you have with a velux and the insulation
situation is solved. Put an external shutter on to control heat if you
are getting too much heat gain. A shade that blocks direct sun in the
heat of a summer day, but allows lowere evening or winter sun to
provide heat (and light)

What is a velux?

Just the best skylight made, bar none.

An external shutter sounds like a bad idea, subject to all sorts of
weather and debris. This is not a vertical surface, it is close to a
45° pitch. A shutter wouldn't even work well as it would end up laying
on the skylight.

On 7/25/2014 9:11 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:26:29 -0400, rickman wrote:

What is a velux?

Just the best skylight made, bar none.

I just had new skylights put in when the roof was redone. They are
supposed to be good units but I'm not sure since the builder was the guy
up the road and when I asked for the paperwork couldn't come up with it.
lol I'm not likely to put in new ones. Even a Velux is not nearly as
good as what can be done with real insulation. After all, it *is* a
window.

--

Rick

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:30:49 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/25/2014 9:11 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:26:29 -0400, rickman wrote:

What is a velux?

Just the best skylight made, bar none.

I just had new skylights put in when the roof was redone. They are
supposed to be good units but I'm not sure since the builder was the guy
up the road and when I asked for the paperwork couldn't come up with it.
lol I'm not likely to put in new ones. Even a Velux is not nearly as
good as what can be done with real insulation. After all, it *is* a
window.

As Clare pointed out, you risk losing the window if you insulate it
from below.

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:42:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:30:49 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/25/2014 9:11 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:26:29 -0400, rickman wrote:

What is a velux?

Just the best skylight made, bar none.

I just had new skylights put in when the roof was redone. They are
supposed to be good units but I'm not sure since the builder was the guy
up the road and when I asked for the paperwork couldn't come up with it.
lol I'm not likely to put in new ones. Even a Velux is not nearly as
good as what can be done with real insulation. After all, it *is* a
window.

As Clare pointed out, you risk losing the window if you insulate it
from below.
Even installing sun film on windows is dangerous. The whole front of
our office building is basically glass. Faces east. We had sun film
installed and within less than 2 weeks we had 6 broken windows.
Replaced the sealed units and film, no more failures (3 years ago)
These windows are about 4X10 feet or more.

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 23:12:31 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:42:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:30:49 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 7/25/2014 9:11 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:26:29 -0400, rickman wrote:

What is a velux?

Just the best skylight made, bar none.

I just had new skylights put in when the roof was redone. They are
supposed to be good units but I'm not sure since the builder was the guy
up the road and when I asked for the paperwork couldn't come up with it.
lol I'm not likely to put in new ones. Even a Velux is not nearly as
good as what can be done with real insulation. After all, it *is* a
window.

As Clare pointed out, you risk losing the window if you insulate it
from below.
Even installing sun film on windows is dangerous. The whole front of
our office building is basically glass. Faces east. We had sun film
installed and within less than 2 weeks we had 6 broken windows.
Replaced the sealed units and film, no more failures (3 years ago)
These windows are about 4X10 feet or more.

That's not unusual. Double-pane glass is at particular risk (which I
would presume would be used for even a half-decent sky light). The
seals are easily broken due to the uneven expansion of the panes.

I don't know why anyone would block off a skylight, anyway. If you
went to the bother (and risk) of installing them, use 'em. I may
install a sun shade (blinds) but that's about it.