a post on this site, not too long ago, where a poster was concerned that a hot water radiant pipe below a wood floor would get too hot and it was a potential fire hazard? There were some interesting comments made in reply about the temperature it would need to get to before it would start a fire. I’m looking for that thread because I would like to use some of the info in a report I am writing. Thanks.
Hi John, I remember that thread but as I recall the only real concern is drying out the wood too much if the circulating water is too high.
Retrofitted radiant heat pipes use some type of radiating device to spread the heat out below the wood and have a temperature regulator to limit the water temp in the pipe.
Check the uponor(wirsbo) site for details
Perfect Michael. Thank you.
Hydronic heat radiators causing a fire hazard?
Yea, you got to be kidding me!!!
The damn boiler will take out the entire block before it causes a fire!
Where do you guys come up with this crap?!
But David, the water was really, really hot so its possible, dontcha think, huh, huh.
Actually, it was only one person on that other thread that felt it was a fire hazard…the majority of the posts were rebutting him.
Well that one was a CMI.
The kindling temp of wood is 451F, of course different woods have different kindling temperatures. Water tanks are usually in the 120-180 range. IMO I dont think the floor would catch fire
Everyone but the CMI would agree with you.
Go read the thread.
Totally agree dude…
Let me tell you guys why I asked the question about this thread in the first place. I got a call to do a an inspection on a wood burning fireplace. The home is an older late 1800’s brownstone rowhome. The clients neighbor, attached on one side where the fireplace is located, complained and was concerned that the fireplace was a fire hazard to her home because her wall was getting hot. She also complained about peeling paint on her side. The fireplace was a full brick fireplace, with a double layer of firebricks lining the inside (2nd layer was put on to appease the neighbor), new clay liner, and appeared to be installed professionally. I wanted to mention in my report about what temperature a combustible material (i.e. wood framing) would need to reach before it would start a fire, although I could not confirm if there were combustible materials in contact with the fireplace. How hot can the wall get at the adjacent house through a double layer of fire bricks plus the full brick chimney itself? Unfortunately, I could not get into the neighbors house and am only reporting on the condition of the fireplace itself. How would you tell her there is nothing to worry about?
I would not have even gotten involved in that situation. Unless trained in a specific area I always refer this kind of matter to an expert. You could easily find yourself wrapped around the axle in a lawsuit down the road. I get weird calls all the time from people wanting me to inspect things well outside anything an inspector should be involved in.
“I need someone to come look at a broken beam under my house!”
“What do you want me to tell you?”
“What to do about it or how to fix it.”
“You already know it is broken. Call a contractor.”
This goes so far beyond the scope of a home inspection that it is scary.
Unless you have special training in in fire safety and chimneys, stay away and refer it to at least a some one that can preform a level II inspection.
Yep, Fire Marshall or someone who can definitively settle the matter “officially”. I would tactfully tell my customer that I had done all I could do and give them their money back. No charge because I could not help you, have a nice day and run like the wind for the exit.
Michael and Doug, your comments are well received and acknowledged. I completely understand where you are coming from and do agree with it, with a small caveat. I will make it perfectly clear in my report on the components I did and did not inspect. I will also be sure to be clear that the inspection is performed within the SOP of the HI industry, is a visual inspection only, is not a level II or III inspection, does not include dismantling of any component, etc. In short, CYA every way possible. My agreement does say all of these things in it. So long as my client understands this and agreed to it, I see nothing wrong with doing it.
So CMIs are always correct ?
Remember…CMI is a “marketing gimmick”. Take it from there!
From an INACHI member on another thread yesterday…
“We as inspectors and builders dispense advice all the time…heck, one can cruise through any of the forums and find bad advice being given from inspectors to inspectors…quite frankly its gets pretty pathetic to read at times…especially when it is coming from those who portray themselves as CMI’s or some other advertising gimmick initials.”
Please pay close attention to Brian’s post’s .
It looks to me like he does not like many thing NACHI has.
He comes into our NACHI home and tries to destroy NACHI members ,NACHI methods,NACHI ideas,NACHI education ,
There’s no other association that I have seen that does any good at what NACHI excels at.
Long Time Member Gerry B Died ,
Instantly The NACHI members had donated enough money to fly Gerrys MOM and Dad over from the UK to the USA .
To Quote Brian’s words He is (" pretty pathetic to read at times. ")
The way he comes here so often it is obvious he is jealous of our family .
He just wanders from Forum to Forum to mainly complain .
I hope our Great NACHI members will understand he has difficulty seeing what we have and how NACHI continues to grow .
Yes I now that Roy ! But I was just kidding !!! Have a great Christmas & Happy New Year ! Al .;):D:D