Vertical radiator hung horizontally

[Bruce]

I am looking to hang a vertical radiator horizontally as I have limited
space, the radiator style I would like to use is an oval tube style
designer radiator, so I would like some idea on the issues I may have if
any, these radiators do not have any convector fins so there is no issue
there, I can't see any problem apart from the possible mounting issues,
could anyone help, thanks

--

[Tim Watts]

Got a picture? It would help...

[Chris French]

In message <1abfd$560009a2$cf3aab60$11...@news.flashnewsgroups.com>,
Bruce <caedfaa9ed1216d60e...@example.com> writes

Yes, mounting could be an issue, the main thing is the water flow.
Ideally you want it plumbed like a towel rad, with the flow and return
at what will be the base - if it has standard 1/2" tappings for the
bleed valve then you should be ok I guess - but not all these designery
rads do I don't think. And of course you need to be able to have a bleed
valve at the top

. Otherwise you won't get the proper flow through the rad, and would end
up with possibly ugly pipe work

I assume you have assessed if it will look ok mounted 'wrong'
--
Chris French

[Fredxxx]

Given TIBO (top-in, bottom-out) fitting of pipes to a radiator is quite
common, I don't see the issue with flow through/across the rad.

[tabb...@gmail.com]

If flow goes in at the bottom & out at top, there's no problem there. And no need for bleeding with such an arrangement.


NT

[Andy Burns]

tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

> If flow goes in at the bottom & out at top, there's no problem there

Depends, if it's a 'designer' one turned horizontally, it might end up
with vertical tubes, so the water could just flow straight up the
nearest tube to the inlet and straight out, either never heating up
other tubes, or taking ages.

[tabb...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 22 September 2015 08:51:27 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:

traditional horizontal rads do much the same. Resistance to flow means at least some flow will occur in the other tubes.


NT

[Andy Burns]

tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> nt wrote:
>>
>>> If flow goes in at the bottom & out at top, there's no problem there
>>

>> it might end up with vertical tubes, so the water could just flow
>> straight up the nearest tube to the inlet and straight out
>

> traditional horizontal rads do much the same.

Except most are plumbed bottom in, bottom out, unless by 'traditional'
you mean the column variety, rather than pressed steel.

> Resistance to flow means at least some flow will occur in the other
> tubes.

Sure, but if it's being plumbed from scratch might as well make it top
in bottom out, depending on the design, it might be fully flexible on
which corners he can use anyway.

[tabb...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 22 September 2015 12:58:13 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> nt wrote:
> > Andy Burns wrote:
> >> nt wrote:
> >>
> >>> If flow goes in at the bottom & out at top, there's no problem there
> >>
> >> it might end up with vertical tubes, so the water could just flow
> >> straight up the nearest tube to the inlet and straight out
> >
> > traditional horizontal rads do much the same.
>
> Except most are plumbed bottom in, bottom out, unless by 'traditional'
> you mean the column variety, rather than pressed steel.

I meant with standard rads most of the water flow is a short circuit, with the water flow in the columns much slower. And that's not a problem.

> > Resistance to flow means at least some flow will occur in the other
> > tubes.
>
> Sure, but if it's being plumbed from scratch might as well make it top
> in bottom out, depending on the design, it might be fully flexible on
> which corners he can use anyway.

Better to have water in at bottom, out at top, that way its always self bleeding rather than the pump & plumbing hindering bleeding.


NT

[Tim Watts]

On 22/09/15 19:27, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Better to have water in at bottom, out at top, that way its always
> self bleeding rather than the pump & plumbing hindering bleeding.
>

Except it's at odds with convection.

[tabb...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 22 September 2015 21:50:16 UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:

> On 22/09/15 19:27, nt wrote:
> >
> > Better to have water in at bottom, out at top, that way its always
> > self bleeding rather than the pump & plumbing hindering bleeding.
> >
>
> Except it's at odds with convection.

no it aids convection. Not that it matters, with water running through it there will be movement all over.


NT

[Tim Watts]

Provided it does not convect up one or two pipes or channels, which was
the point I was making. It's always been a rule of thumb that you don't
do it that way.

[Fredxxx]

TIBO will result in a radiator at a more uniform temperature.

BITO will mean that most of the bottom of the radiator will stay cold,
as you say where convection aids circulation at the expense of filling
the whole of the radiator with hot water.

A plumber once got the TIBO the wrong way round. I can assure you that
1/2 of the radiator stayed cold, where there was a vertical column of
hot water above the input, and the top of the radiator also hot as the
hot travelled to the output in the shortest/most convenient path.

[tabb...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 07:36:17 UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:

I don't know what you mean at all


NT

[Tim Watts]

TIBO or BIBO

not

BITO

[Andy Burns]

tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

> Tim Watts wrote:
>
>> Provided it does not convect up one or two pipes or channels, which was
>> the point I was making. It's always been a rule of thumb that you don't
>> do it that way.
>
> I don't know what you mean at all

Do some image searches for "FLIR radiator"

[tabb...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 22:31:00 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:

Sounds like a fine idea. But all I see is rads with problems with all patterns of connection.


NT