|
|
Post by jfc on May 2, 2008 17:08:52 GMT
Been chatting with Mr S today about u values on dg units .
Glass Specification Cavity Width
12 mm 16 mm 20 mm
Optifloat/air/Optifloat 2.9 2.7 2.8
Optifloat/argon/Optifloat 2.7 2.6 2.6
Optifloat/air/Pilkington K Glass 1.9 1.7 1.8
Optifloat/argon/Pilkington K Glass 1.6 1.5 1.5
Overall width of Insulight Unit (mm) 20 24 28
They show what u values for larger units but does anyone know the u value of a 4 6 4k unit ?
|
|
Telos
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by Telos on May 3, 2008 8:42:48 GMT
I have a Pilkington Insulight folder that gives a U value of 2.0 for a 6mm Argon-fill gap in their Insulight Therm SN units. The 16mm Kglass, argon-fill values are lower than yours at 1.2 though, so we may be comparing apples and oranges here... Insulight Therm SN Air gap 6mm=2.0U 9mm=1.6U 12mm=1.3U 15mm=1.2U 20mm=1.2U I couldn't find the folder on the Pilkington website but I did come across this: www.pilkington.com/resources/defaulttable.pdfwhich gives poorer figures but you get the idea  |
|
|
|
Post by jfc on May 3, 2008 9:11:48 GMT
Well that table gives the same data that i have found , the lowest i can find a 6mm gap is 2.3 . I thought the aim was 1.8 but i am told it's 2.0 .
|
|
Telos
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by Telos on May 3, 2008 9:52:49 GMT
Yup, Part L specifies a minimum of U=2.0 for replacement windows. U=1.8 is for new builds/extensions.
|
|
|
|
Post by jfc on May 3, 2008 20:05:13 GMT
So from your calcs a 4 6argon 4k unit will meet with regs  Why is it never used then  |
|
|
|
Post by Scrit on May 3, 2008 20:07:26 GMT
Poor sound attenuation? The greater the void width the better the sound insulation, or so I've been told. Apparently better sound attenuation is achieved by using laminated glass, grteter void space and different thicknesses of glass 9or a combination)
Scrit
|
|
|
|
Post by jfc on May 3, 2008 20:15:06 GMT
People always went for 4 6 4 before the regs came in as they didnt want to see the DG . I cant find a 464 getting down to 2.0 but maybe Telos has an updated version and i am looking at old data online |
|
|
|
Post by jake on May 3, 2008 21:36:19 GMT
Apparently better sound attenuation is achieved by using laminated glass, grteter void space and different thicknesses of glass 9or a combination) Yup. The different thicknesses resonate differently, so they attenuate different frequencies, even better if laminated together. There are inevitably, proprietary Pilkington etc products. |
|
Telos
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by Telos on May 4, 2008 10:17:04 GMT
There are inevitably, proprietary Pilkington etc products. Yup again. Pilkington Insulight Phon with Optilam is specially made to reduce noise transfer. |
|
Telos
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by Telos on May 4, 2008 10:31:06 GMT
So from your calcs a 4 6argon 4k unit will meet with regs Why is it never used then Too bloody expensive, has to be made to order and 24mm standard crap is knocked out by the tonne is my guess. I'm just passing on what I've read. The Pilkington page for Optitherm has a crap load of info on it, have a looksee here: www.pilkington.com/applications/products2006/english/bybenefit/thermalinsulation/optitherm/default.htmIf you specify 5 or 6mm for the outerpane (especially with some of their more weird and wonderful Sun coatings) any value seems possible. Give 'em a ring and ask for some bumf or try out the Spectrum on-line calculator. I think you'll be surprised with what is possible. Non equal pane thicknesses also cuts down on the chance of spectral interference where the coatings become visible under some circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by jfc on May 6, 2008 16:17:47 GMT
I spoke to Pilkington glass today and they sent me this .  |
|
|
|
Post by thatsnotafestool on May 6, 2008 22:20:58 GMT
That's neat....is there a URL or was it an attachment?
|
|
Telos
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by Telos on May 7, 2008 7:59:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jfc on May 9, 2008 7:51:36 GMT
Sort of right . I was told it depends on the type of frame it is put into and if the local BCO would allow it Why will nobody ever commit to saying " yes thats in line with the regs "  |
|
Telos
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by Telos on May 9, 2008 11:38:54 GMT
Bloody typical  Why can't anything be simple any more? ..and why should the BCO be judge and jury anyway? If you have a bit of paper that comes with your IGU proving its U value, what does it matter to Mr. Jobsworth that it looks a bit thinner than normal?  |
|
|
|
Post by jake on Nov 4, 2008 11:23:16 GMT
I got a quote for some glass today - 4:6:4, with a top-end soft-coat low-E glass - U=2.0 with an argon fill, U=1.4 with a krypton fill.
The krypton fill adds about 50% to the cost, though - £130 on top of the £277 for 16 argon fill units (6 of them laminated outside/toughened inside)
|
|
spud
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by spud on Nov 4, 2008 12:47:29 GMT
What a swindle and load of nonsense all this is. I don't believe in this 'global warming' garbage, (Are you still allowed to call it that? As it seems to be obviously getting wetter and colder. So perhaps we should stick to the new phrase of 'climate change').
Luckily I don't have to destroy the front of my house with this muck, because my building is listed.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrgrimsdale on Nov 4, 2008 13:03:15 GMT
Now called "climate change" because nobody really knows what will happen in the long term, except that there will be change; hotter in some places , colder in others.
Belief doesn't come into it! You just have to look at the facts i.e. many millions of top scientific man-hours devoted to observation and research, over many years.
Mind you they regularly get it wrong. It's become a regular event - another announcement that new research suggests that things are happening faster than previously estimated.
DG calcs. The only calc which really counts is the cost benefit. It is often surprisingly low or even negative. DG is not a high priority if energy saving is the issue.
cheers
Jacob
|
|
spud
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by spud on Nov 4, 2008 13:13:46 GMT
The earth's climate has always naturally changed, it is nothing new. It's just now there are people ready to exploit it, to generate revenue and control resources. Ironically most of these hypocrites are the same ones who spray depleted uranium around the globe, which will poison the climate for millions of years. There are also manyy scientists (non-conformist ones) who think the whole episode is a farce- many of whom are being bullied, and removed from their positions for speaking up.  This is like the witch hunt's in the dark ages! |
|
|
|
Post by mrgrimsdale on Nov 4, 2008 14:25:20 GMT
The earth's climate has always naturally changed, it is nothing new. Yes - and it's changing naturally again. The dominant natural force is ourselves. We are natural too! The difference is that unlike forces from solar radiation, volcanoes etc, we have a theoretical ability to change our behaviour.Never really understood this bit of nonsense I can't see who profits - except loft insulators and thick underwear salesmen.Not true. The best known "scientific" sceptics are either loonies, or not really as "scientific' as they say they are. And they are a very small group. They seem more numerous than they really are because the same ones are regularly wheeled out for quotations and commentsComplete and utter nonsense. Anybody can buy the book you refer to*. It's not banned, burned or anything. If anything the well known "sceptics" are profiting by writing stupid books and articles and appearing on the media. Nobody is shutting them up, more's the pity! cheers Jacob PS * here it is on Amazon. £14.99 new or 18 copies SH from £8.99. Some witch hunt! |
|
spud
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by spud on Nov 4, 2008 16:03:20 GMT
It's not my behaviour! I haven't promoted the idea of consumerism, and mass produced crap, engineered to fail. I was much more content with things made to last. Why produce all this Taiwanese muck, if you know it is going to create masses of waste? Easy, so they can charge you to take it away again..ub-duh! If you are so sincere, why spray DU everywhere, dump all your waste in the sea, destroy the rail industry, promote the usage of cars, so you can feed off the artifical petrol prices, and tax? Haven't you noticed, that everytime they spew more of this nonsense, and bring in more legislation, old joe public has to dig deeper into his pocket again? You are probably eagerly awaiting you 'carbon footprint tax' so you can fill the coffers of the government, who have bankrupted the country, and sold off it's gold reserves. You obviously do not ever work with insulation. You should buy some one day, and take a good, long, hard look at the manufactures labels, see who makes the insulation and plastics. It's not that hard! Huge multi national companies. Especially the oil companies, who bank- roll your lovely, sincere government. They don't take back-handers from those nice folks at Monsato you mean? Or grovel to 'top scientist' Al Gore, recently caught lying about this little gem:  Only because they are banished from the media. And the media promote their agenda, to give the impression the 'global warming' gangsters are a vast majority. No, that is exactly what the media does with the promoters of this scam...Constant repetition, to create people devoid of the capability of critical thinking. Yes the age old 'loonies' smear (anyone who isn't on the T.V) A childish method, of not countering their arguments in debate. That is an unbelievably obtuse attitude. you are obviously not at all interested in other points of view and opinions. You seem to believe everything you see on the T.V as Gospel. I bet you sit in front of that for hours, getting constant nourishment. You are probably still breathing a huge sigh of relief that the vast arsenal of WMD's Saddam had, has been neutralized. A contrast to the 'official truth' which is promoted with an almost feverish frenzy. Yes they are, they are being bullied and persecuted, for thought crimes. Well, you could always jail them, if they hurt your religion. You could have them for blasphemy! Do you wear a hard-hat and day-glow jacket when you mow your lawn by any chance? You are a scary person, completely institutionalized-so much unswerving faith in all he is led to believe. I bet you can hardly contain your glee, at the thought of the EU-SSR giving you an I.D card and pinning a CCTV camera on your bed. |
|
|
|
Post by jake on Nov 4, 2008 16:12:41 GMT
Oh christ, here's another one. Do you think you could start a thread in The Pub for your archaic paranoid conspiracy flat earth nonsense?
This is a perfectly sensible thread about U values. The Bilderberg have nothing to do with this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by jfc on Nov 4, 2008 16:15:44 GMT
Well said Jake ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by jake on Nov 4, 2008 16:17:45 GMT
DG calcs. The only calc which really counts is the cost benefit. It is often surprisingly low or even negative. DG is not a high priority if energy saving is the issue. I think that is right if the issue is whether to rip out old windows to install new DG units, but if you are installing new windows anyway, the incremental cost of putting in a sealed unit rather than single pane (very unscientifically) just has to be a much better return than you are suggesting. Show us your sources, and maybe we can deal with it? Last time, you evaded this one. |
|
spud
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by spud on Nov 4, 2008 16:26:59 GMT
It was the other way around old chap! Galileo at the time said the world was round, whilst the 'official truth' pronounced it was flat. For that he was vilified and persecuted...It was many years before what he suggested was accepted as true!
Stop twisting things into doublespeak.
|
|
Why is it never used then 
Why can't anything be simple any more? ..and why should the BCO be judge and jury anyway? If you have a bit of paper that comes with your IGU proving its U value, what does it matter to Mr. Jobsworth that it looks a bit thinner than normal? 