- Messages
- 26
Re-done previous post as I was unclear.
Scenario - multi-million pound council programme to redistribute heat from a hospital, via a set of "block" boilers, into homes with heat exchangers. My personal bill was 15k for the local work (x290 flats in block) and 4k (x a lot) for the longer distance hospital stuff. As a leaseholder, I pay. No breakdown. The standard of work generally was awful, and lots of remediation work was done. The latest thing I am fighting is the standard of lagging. For me, a system based on waste heat distribution is particularly sensitive to heat loss, so lagging seems important. We turn on the hot water tap and literally wait c. 2 minutes for hot water in some cases, as an example.
So the context is quite specific: the standard is: You, a reasonable and knowledgeable professional, have specified lagging work of a reasonable standard, knowing the use case is for a heat exchanger system.
Now, here is the lagging that was done:
Album — Postimage.org
None of the cuts have had adhesive applied. Significant gaps ont he side you can't see at the joints. As you can see, none of the clip areas, or valve areas, are covered. Good practice guidance is clear this is sub-standard:
http://www.armacell.com/C1256AF100412A28/F/NT016C8C66/$FILE/ArmaflexApplicationUK.pdf
Q&A!
Q. This isn't a place for contractor bashing, pay for a 3rd party opinion.
A: I have got a 3rd party opinion, and it is that the lagging isn't good enough. But that is just one opinion vs the council, I need more, and it isn't fair to get a ton of people turning up to give me an opinion. Also, I'm as much council-procurement bashing as contractor bashing.
Q: It depends how much you paid / what work was specified
A: There is no cost breakdown. The whole project cost a lot, so I think the standard should be high. The key thing for me is I understand a heat exchanger system is particularly sensitive to heat loss, and so a reasonable procurer should have specified a good standard of lagging. (For those interested, NO lagging was done originally...!)
Scenario - multi-million pound council programme to redistribute heat from a hospital, via a set of "block" boilers, into homes with heat exchangers. My personal bill was 15k for the local work (x290 flats in block) and 4k (x a lot) for the longer distance hospital stuff. As a leaseholder, I pay. No breakdown. The standard of work generally was awful, and lots of remediation work was done. The latest thing I am fighting is the standard of lagging. For me, a system based on waste heat distribution is particularly sensitive to heat loss, so lagging seems important. We turn on the hot water tap and literally wait c. 2 minutes for hot water in some cases, as an example.
So the context is quite specific: the standard is: You, a reasonable and knowledgeable professional, have specified lagging work of a reasonable standard, knowing the use case is for a heat exchanger system.
Now, here is the lagging that was done:
Album — Postimage.org
None of the cuts have had adhesive applied. Significant gaps ont he side you can't see at the joints. As you can see, none of the clip areas, or valve areas, are covered. Good practice guidance is clear this is sub-standard:
http://www.armacell.com/C1256AF100412A28/F/NT016C8C66/$FILE/ArmaflexApplicationUK.pdf
Q&A!
Q. This isn't a place for contractor bashing, pay for a 3rd party opinion.
A: I have got a 3rd party opinion, and it is that the lagging isn't good enough. But that is just one opinion vs the council, I need more, and it isn't fair to get a ton of people turning up to give me an opinion. Also, I'm as much council-procurement bashing as contractor bashing.
Q: It depends how much you paid / what work was specified
A: There is no cost breakdown. The whole project cost a lot, so I think the standard should be high. The key thing for me is I understand a heat exchanger system is particularly sensitive to heat loss, and so a reasonable procurer should have specified a good standard of lagging. (For those interested, NO lagging was done originally...!)
