Central heating - constant or timed?

[Barge Maria]

I wonder if anyone has any statistics or thoughts for whether it is better (i.e. more efficient) to run the central heating constantly but at a low level, to maintain a sort of "bubble" of heat in the boat (ours is a 30m Dutch Barge) compared to having the heating turn on in the morning for brekkie, then off until, say, teatime for the evening.

 

I am currently running low-level all day, largely driven by swmbo's feet which are permafrost even in the Summer!

Edited November 6, 2014 by Barge Maria

[Naughty Cal]

Not sure which method is best but we run our boat heating like our home heating. On a timer and thermostat.

[Barge Maria]

Yes that's what we used to do but it occurred to me that having a "cold section" in the middle of the day, when we are on board pretty well all the time as we work from home, might be less efficient as you then have to ratchet up the heat again when the timer comes on again at, say 5pm after having been off for, say, 7 or 8 hours. I just wondered if there were any comparative cost figures anywhere.

[Eeyore]

I wonder if anyone has any statistics or thoughts for whether it is better (i.e. more efficient) to run the central heating constantly but at a low level, to maintain a sort of "bubble" of heat in the boat (ours is a 30m Dutch Barge) compared to having the heating turn on in the morning for brekkie, then off until, say, teatime for the evening.

 

I am currently running low-level all day, largely driven by swmbo's feet which are permafrost even in the Summer!

I once compared the running costs with a friend who owned a similar house. They used the timer and thermostat, and I left the system on permanently controlled by the thermostat. The houses and usage patterns were similar, as were the bills. I still turn the thermostat down to about 14c when we go out, and up as needed when we are in. Having the heating on permanently allows you to feel warm as soon as you come in, without being too aware of how long it takes to get back to full temperature.

Not very scientific, but it's really about comfort - and that's very subjective.

Hope this helps.

Steve (Eeyore)

[John V]

I must admit it is something I have wondered about (20 metre Humber barge) although the timer is me throwing logs into the Rayburn range.

 

The thermal inertia of the system is high and it takes a heck of a long time to heat up (or cool down) and there does seem to be a point when you need to keep feeding the stove a little during the day just so that you can get the temperature up quicker in the evening.

 

eta ...a good stoke up at night before bed has a warmish stove and embers at get up time!

Edited November 6, 2014 by John V

[Leo No2]

I once compared the running costs with a friend who owned a similar house. They used the timer and thermostat, and I left the system on permanently controlled by the thermostat. The houses and usage patterns were similar, as were the bills. I still turn the thermostat down to about 14c when we go out, and up as needed when we are in. Having the heating on permanently allows you to feel warm as soon as you come in, without being too aware of how long it takes to get back to full temperature.

Not very scientific, but it's really about comfort - and that's very subjective.

Hope this helps.

Steve (Eeyore)

 

I run my house via thermostat and it works for me even I when went out to work! Experience from having spent a fortnight working in India and coming home on a bitterly cold November day (after the boiler had switched itself off for some reason whilst I was away) convinced me that bringing a building up to temperature was the more expensive side of the equation by far.

[Barge Maria]

Thanks to all of you for replying. I'm going to stay on constant ..... well, the heating is, but turn the 'stat down when we go out to the local bar...er I mean supermarket. Lot of supermarkets in Bruges!!

 

Cheers n beers to all. I'm sure there will be other opinions and MtB might have figures.

 

Tim

[Naughty Cal]

I once compared the running costs with a friend who owned a similar house. They used the timer and thermostat, and I left the system on permanently controlled by the thermostat. The houses and usage patterns were similar, as were the bills. I still turn the thermostat down to about 14c when we go out, and up as needed when we are in. Having the heating on permanently allows you to feel warm as soon as you come in, without being too aware of how long it takes to get back to full temperature.

Not very scientific, but it's really about comfort - and that's very subjective.

Hope this helps.

Steve (Eeyore)

So does having it on a timer!

[londonron]

constant works for houses as you get a lot of heat retention in the bricks. I had a broken boiler and once repaired thought it broke again as was still freezing. THen touched the rads and they were boiling. The system was at full temp but the house wasnt. Took a few days to recover.

 

So i would say constant will work well on a well insulated boat but if your boat isnt then you will have a warm boat when you turn up and a heart attack when the bill does.

[Dyertribe]

We have underfloor heating (house) and the people who service it tell us to leave the heating on 24/7 summer and winter with all the room thermostats set at 16 degrees. Then we program the rooms we use regularly to higher temps when we need it, kitchen in the morning, living room in the evening etc. it has improved our gas bills. Whether you can extrapolate that to boat life I dont know

[NMEA]

Depends on the type of boiler too, if you have one of the larger evaporator type heaters it's going to do it no good at all to run it continually, if however you have a pressure jet boiler then ignore this post.

[George94]

Heat loss is proportional to the temperature differential, so you will lose more heat if you keep your barge at a constant high temperature, than if you let it fluctuate between low and high. That's simple physics.

 

But if you have a lot of boat to heat, and a relatively small heater, it may take so long to get the temperature back up that it's hardly worth the bother.

[Dinz]

 

Over 2010 winter cold snap left on all the time

[Thermo Top C] and it ticked over once up to temp.

2011 winter Ran on timer.

Diesel usage about £35-£40 a month more for 2010, when on all the time.

However less coal used.

Considering how cold it was didn't seem much to worry about.

However did seem to need more of a de-coke spring 2011.

Probably down to extra hours run.

I believe that you are meant to turn off regular so as to force a full blow restart that burns off some excess coke.

NMEA can probably advise on this.

[NMEA]

However did seem to need more of a de-coke spring 2011.

Probably down to extra hours run.

I believe that you are meant to turn off regular so as to force a full blow restart that burns off some excess coke.

NMEA can probably advise on this.

What I can confirm is that a T90 like all evaporator heaters should not be relied on for continual use especially at low burn, except if one is aware of and prepared for the cost of decokes and new burners on a regular basis then fine and they will serve you well, yer pays yer money, yer takes yer choice. Running at full chat does not burn carbon, that requires temperatures far in excess of what any boiler can produce. what a high burn rate does do is produce less carbon deposits than low burn. The most important thing is to ensure minimum deposits by setting the burn rate correctly, a simple decoke of the matting actually stuffs the burn rate especially if done mechanically and aggressively, particularly if done by "the man who knows about this" in the boatyard or down the canal path. If somebody does not give you a CO / CO2 certificate after service or decoke then my advice is don't use them again as they clearly have neither the knowledge, customer service ethic or equipment to call themselves marine heating technicians.