Talk:Radiant heating and cooling

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Physics: Fluid Dynamics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Images

Hi Werieth, I saw that you deleted all the picture I added. To be sure that there is no misunderstanding, here a few comments:

I do not plan to use these images for commercial purpose
The images only explain radiant system principle and slab construction. There are no logo or brand on these images
The images are not only my property but they also belong to my research group (the Center for the Built Environment at UC Berkeley)

The only reason I was adding a copyright is because we would like to by cited in case of reuse of these images. I decided to add the images back. Let me know if there is anything wrong with that.

I am re-removing the files, blanket copyright on those images is not acceptable. A file can be released under a free license and still be required to credit the creator. These files are fairly easy to replace with free files and are thus unacceptable, please do not re-add. Werieth (talk) 11:08, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just modified the copyright. Let me know if the images are fine now. I wish to add them soon again. Thanks, Caroline karmann, 24 November 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 02:21, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too technical and verbose makes this article of little value to the majority of people

Most people looking to WP who look up Radiant Heating will be completely flummoxed by this article. It has little value, as written, in the real world of heating someone's home of building.Bugatti35racer (talk) 00:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think the article deserves a major overhaul to make it clear and approachable. I think it is okay to include many of the technical details, but we should reorganize the article so that it is not so overwhelming. Radiant heating and cooling is a fairly broad technology category, with some grey areas at the edges (eg: should "radiators" or "chilled beams" be included in the broadest interpretation of the technology category?). I think it would be most helpful for the introduction to explain that this is a broad technology category, then ease into more gritty details. Following introductory material, we should have some subsections that deal with fundamental concepts that apply to all types of radiant systems, then move on to subsections that address specifics that only apply to certain sub-categories. At the moment, the article is largely organized around "heating" and "cooling", which I think is confusing because almost all radiant cooling systems are also used for heating. I think it would be better to organize sub-categories around tangible technology categories like: a) metal ceiling panels, b) embedded surface systems, c) high temperature infrared heaters, etc. Jmwoolley (talk) 04:14, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion

Formal request has been received to merge the Radiant heating and Radiant cooling articles into the Radiant heating and cooling system article on 7 April 2019 (UTC). by Trialpears; Reason: see below Discuss it here. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 00:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: The merge tags for this merger were placed in august 2017, however the proposal process was not completed. I am now completing the process and putting it up on the proposed mergers page. This is not a relisting as it has never been on the page before. I believe that Radiant heating and Radiant cooling should be merged into Radiant heating and cooling system due to the heavily overlapping subject matters. The underlying principles are the same for both heating and cooling and in many cases the same system can be used to both heating and cooling by changing the temperature of the hydronic. Trialpears (talk) 20:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For Heating,

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 04:16, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For Cooling,

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 04:45, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quality

I am disappointed that the quality of this article is so bad. The lead CLAIMS that:"By definition, in radiant heating and cooling systems, thermal radiation covers more than 50% of heat exchange within the space." But this is clearly wrong, and wrong in a number of ways. First, thermal radiation does NOT "cover" heat exchange. Second, space is NOT something that is (usefully (here)) heated or cooled. Air may be, objects in a (confined) space may be, but not the space itself. Third, I suppose what is meant is that when a subsystem (an object, volume (containing various objects and gasses), etc.) exchanges (heat) energy with the rest of the (thermodynamic) system, then if the NET heat exchange via radiation is more than 50% of the net energy, then it any such process can be said to be "radiant heating and cooling". Fourth, it is incorrect to claim that the heat exchange is "within" the space. Fifth, there may be other heating and cooling processes going on, and there may be conversion of heat to other forms of energy (i.e. electricity, potential energy of various mechanical, physical, or chemical types ). It isn't the TOTAL heat exchange that is of interest, but the net - the control of the temperature(s) of the various sub-components of a system. Sixth, by "whose" definition?! 50% is (obviously) arbitrary and I doubt everyone working on designing/engineering systems which include radiant heating and cooling no mater where in the world they are and no matter what the system is they are designing would agree with this "definition". (but surprise me by citing the global authority). Farther down into the article it is claimed that heat transfer by radiation is proportional to the fourth power of absolute temperature. So, two objects at 0.1 K will transfer (between one another) little heat but those same two at 10,000K will transfer (10,000/0.1)^4 = 1E20 times as much heat? I don't think so. I think that two objects (or subsystems or subcomponents) transfer heat proportional to the fourth power of their DIFFERENCE in temperature, but I may be mistaken. This entire (very flawed) article seems to be based on the assumption that radiant heating and cooling is a topic for architecture and building design, that neither nuclear reactors nor spaceships need worry about (control of) heating and cooling. The fact that there are exactly zero physical equations in an article about a very technically well understood engineering topic should be a red alert that someone has failed to provide an adequate discussion here.40.142.185.108 (talk) 12:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article needs substantial improvements. Jmwoolley (talk) 03:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User 40.142.185.108 points out that the topic of this article is focused on "radiant heating and cooling" as an HVAC technology within the broader field of architecture. We could consider adding "(architecture)" to the title of the article to be clear about its scope. This is common for other pages such as Ventilation (architecture), where it is helpful to disambiguate from other broader or more fundamental interpretations of the same term. There is not currently any other page about the fundamental physics "radiant heating and cooling", from which we should be careful to disambiguate, but it could still be helpful to add "(architecture)" to the title.Jmwoolley (talk) 03:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Discussion

I propose that the page Underfloor heating be merged into Radiant heating and cooling. Many, if not most of the concepts addressed within Underfloor heating are better addressed within the broader concept of Radiant heating and cooling, and I do not think they should be addressed in both places. Jmwoolley (talk) 03:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've place mergeto and mergefrom tags on each page Jmwoolley (talk) 04:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This may be true, however both articles appear to be well developed making a merge hard to achieve and in addition there has been no progress with this discussion in nearly a year. As such I am removing the banner. It may be simpler to remove replicated content from sections of each articles, and refer the reader to more detailed information in the other article. Happy to engage in further discussion on the subject if people wish to. PeterEastern (talk) 10:26, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of radiant buildings

I have been adding to the list of buildings with radiant cooling. I think it is very useful and helpful to have such a list on Wikipedia. Most building owners, architects, and engineers are not familiar with radiant systems, so it can be useful to see examples of many buildings in many climate zones that have used these technologies successfully. However, the list can grow quite long, so I suggest that we create a separate page titled "List of Buildings with Radiant Heating and Cooling", not unlike the List of songs written by Bob Dylan. Jmwoolley (talk) 16:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]