Foil behind radiators

Sep 21, 2025 Last reply: 9 months ago 50 Replies

lambda = 0.96 W/(mK) - thermal conductivity

(other details are shown if you hover over a material you've selected)

4.11 The U-value of an existing thermal element that is being renovated should both: a. be no worse than that of the element before it was renovated b. meet the limiting standards in Table 4.3. 4.12 Guidance on when an existing element should meet the standards in Table 4.3 is given in Section 11. Elements that should meet the standards include both of the following. a. Thermal elements being renovated in existing dwellings. Renovated elements should achieve the U-values in Table 4.3, column (b).

b. Elements being retained in existing dwellings, for example through a loft or garage conversion. Retained elements with a U-value that is higher than the threshold value in Table 4.3, column (a) should be upgraded to achieve the U-values in Table 4.3, column (b).

4.13 If achieving the U-value in Table 4.3, column (b) either: a. is not technically or functionally feasible or b. would not achieve a simple payback of 15 years or less then the element should be upgraded to the lowest U-value that both: a. is technically and functionally feasible and b. can achieve a simple payback not exceeding 15 years.

Generally, a thermal element once upgraded should not have a U-value greater than 0.7W/(m2·K). A lesser standard for the thermal element may be acceptable where work complies with Part C of the Building Regulations on protection from the harmful effects of interstitial and surface condensation.

Table 4.3 Limiting U-values for existing elements in existing dwellings Element U-value(1) W/(m2·K) (a) Threshold (b) Improved Roof(2)(3)(4) 0.35 0.16 Wall – cavity insulation(2)(5) 0.70 0.55 Wall – internal or external insulation(2)(6) 0.70 0.30 Floor(7)(8) 0.70 0.25 </quote>

formatting link
so for internally-insulated walls ideally you should meet U=0.30, but if that is not feasible or economic 4.13 says you should just do the best you can.

Basically all it means the builder has to explain reasons why they can't do it, rather than just skimp in order to do a slapdash job.

But it's only in practice enforced if there's a building regs inspection, which I doubt there will be for just an interior refit.

Theo

A couple of websites I looked at both state "Solid brick walls normally have a U-Value of 2.0 W/m^2. But is that for a single or double thickness brick wall? (eg

formatting link
) I don't know which is correct, but I find it hard to believe that with an outer temp of -5°C the brick inner temp would be only 4.7°C with a room temp of 20°C.

Next time it drops below zero outside I'll check the inside wall temp with an IR thermometer.

Lots of variables at play - most significantly the size of the rad and the flow temperature. Radiated energy increases sharply with temperature (due to the 4th power of the absolute temp in the sums). So each m^2 of rad surface could radiate >600w at 60 deg C (although not all that radiation will be directed at the wall)

And since the hot air from the rad heats the wall immediately behind and above it, then assuming a 9 inch un-insulated wall, insulating behind the rad and continuing up the wall, to the width of the rad, up to the ceiling would help.

Actually, back in 2013 when I bought some replacement DG upvc windows from the local builders merchants and fitted them myself, the regs only required replacement windows to be a minimum of C-rated.

I don't believe that any houses were built with bricks that were only 2 inches thick. Were these timber-framed houses with brick infilled panels (originally built with wattle and daub, or whatever it was called) ?.

Insulating these properties needs to be really, really carefully.

Warm air rising behind the radiator is often met with colder air falling from the window. One reason that it is recommended that radiators are placed under windows. Otherwise the falling cold air falls to the floor area and circulates around your feet making the room SEEM colder than it actually is

Ah. That is a reg I hadn't seen. And that is a huge breakthrough. My experience with living in seriously substandard accommodation is that almost anything can make a big difference to a single course of brick or a single layer of plasterboard between you and the -5°C outside...

It's the sort of situation where a builder can get himself in trouble if he fails to meet a regulation and BC eventually discovers it.

My bad. 100mm. Adjust calcs accordingly

My 1908 house is solid brick wall (no cavity) but is approx 9 inches (230mm) thick. Is includes the bit at the back which was once the outside loo.

Lucky you. The semis I lived in and friends lived in were 4" wide single brick. Cheap tat built to a cost.

Coal fires mandatory to avoid death.

Impossible to insulate more than a little bit.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required