The real worth of an RHP?

[kitedemon]

Kite, I am not arguing the fact that my cage IS hotter at the top then the bottom. My RHP is mounted to the top of the cage , so obviously the closer you get to the heat source the hotter it gets. You have brought up (again) my issues I have with MY RHP. That fact the surface temps are correct the hide TOP is warmer than this. You REPEATEDLY tell me it is the fact my test enclosure is 14 inches tall. I have always said that they heat from the top down and tall things are warmer than the lower things. You have always argued this simple fact this is part of why I say they are more complicated the place you want a given temp (substrate) is the coolest thing vertically. That is a fact that you have stated and that IS a true statement. Here is how I am calling my cage a satisfactory success IMO. First off I am using 3/4" plywood that is lined with a fiberglass impregnated panel which gives me excellent insulating factors to retain built up heat. ( This is probably the biggest factor in my equation ) I do not have extra air holes drilled in the cages. I am simply using the spaces that are between the sliding glass doors and I have a spacer that keeps the glass doors open an 1/8" at each end, so there is not an overwhelming amount of air movement going on inside to mix all the air together. Warm air rises it has to move.The panels are mounted to the far left of each cage so that they only are heating the objects under one side of the cage. The other side of the cage is naturally going to be room temp because it is un heated directly. You stated your AIR temps were 8ºF different on the hot side and cool side That is the heat gradient that I refer to when I say one side is showing 86 deg. the other is 78 deg. I think one of the things that you do not approve of is that I dangle my thermostat probe rather than fix it directly to the face of the panel ( if you attach the probe directly to the face of the panel and set it for 90 deg, Mine has always dangled I tried under the substrate as some do I found if you blocked it the temps shot up so I rejected this method, dangling is the best way I found. My FAILSAFE probe is on the panel face which you have been told more than once. then it is never going to provide enough energy to do anything, so instead I have my probe positioned 3" from the floor at about the height of the snakes back because that is the spot that I want to be at 86 deg.) the face of the panel does get hot ( 172 deg to be exact ) but because it is attached to the ceiling the snake can never lay directly on them. the most that can happen is it comes into brief contact with the panel. and although 172 deg sounds hot a person can hold their hand directly on the face of the panel at that temp for at least 10 seconds before they have to pull away. Regular heat bulbs reach temps of over 600 deg at the surface face. So there you have it . I have never argued any of this. I can read the brochure, I have said as always if the snake can access higher temps on a surface they could lay on that exceed 95º they can have digestion issues like the top of a hide with over head heating. Yes the top of the hide is hotter than the floor of the cage but in nature that would be true of the sun as well. ??? really a difference in temp in four inches? that is unrelated to absorption? Overhead heat recreates nature better than under tank heat. I have never seen a termite mound that was heated by a UTH. In the wild the sun heats the outside of the mound from over head causing the inside of the mound to heat up and create a warm environment for the snake to live. You may call what I am doing wrong and point out all kinds of scientific flaws on why my temp gradients are not laboratory perfect but the fact remains that my animals are thriving in this environment. They are on regular feed, they thermo regulate themselves from one side of the cage to the other, their sheds are good and they get regular checkups from the vet with blood workup to ensure that they are healthy. So where is the problem?? That is simple, you have told me many times the top of my hide being warmer than the bottom is because my enclosure is too short. You have twice suggested that a RHP alone can heat the ambient air more than 15ºF in a regular enclosure. Again you are claiming a gradient in ambient air temps. WARM air rises inside or out side the enclosure it rises law of physics. It has got to mix. The point I made the first time is this it is unlikely that the AIR temps have a gradient as great as 8ºF there MUST be an error. The LIKELY error is placing the probe under the panel and measuring the 'air' temp. It is not the air being measured but the surface of the probe. This is why the claim of massive air temp changes happen the air is not being measured. RHP make small changes to ambient air temps not large ones. You recommend RHP in every case. You always tell me that my enclosure is too low, you then suggest someone use a RHP in a lower enclosure. You can't have it both ways. Things can't heat 15-20ºF air temps (ambient) and then change to only heat 8º or less It does or doesn't they do not vary like with the hot spot the same temp.

I have said over and over they are about the same, one no better or worse than the other. RHP cost more to operate and buy than UTH do. (average RHP is 60$ to average UTH 20$ and UTH almost always are lower wattages so they use less power and heat more energy efficiently (they do not need to be over 100ºF usually.) You compare RHP to Kanes cost wise, it is like saying trucks are cheaper than cars because bugotti veyron costs $1000000.

They effect air temps a little more than a UTH but if you are in a cool room (below normal, >68º) you will still need a secondary heat source, they have more ins and outs that can make them more complex to set up (look at probe placement, there is at least 4 major methods UTH one, maybe two. (More options = more complicated) You have consistently fought this you refuse to accept they might cost more than (original debate was flex watt) UTH in general (even kanes are cheaper as most I see have built in thermostats) They have more complications and they are not efficient heaters. (172 deg to be exact to get 86º, 50% heat loss. UTH usually lose less than 15%) More efficient = less energy. RHPs are less efficient, cost more and are more complicated. This makes the easy cheaper solution a UTH. The differences are slight. You have always argued they are cheaper, the most efficient heat (then talked about heat lamps which no one brought up but you) and vastly different. Yet never have been able to back up the differences or the cost. I have never said they would not work just they are not well suited to terrestrial enclosures (Height less than 16 inches) You constantly argue and yet yours are what 2 feet tall? Hardly the same. You argue they are simple then spout you need to have it sized correctly by one person who will ask every question possible, all a UTH needs is a measuring tape.

Hosted on Fotki