Is concrete core activation for the floor slab in a bungalow meaningful?

Hello,

I am currently planning a bungalow without a basement (168 sqm) with a heat pump. The exterior facade is almost completely glazed, resulting in a high U-value for the entire building. The heat load calculation shows that a concrete core activation in the ceiling does not provide enough output to heat the rooms to over 20 degrees in winter; it will probably be a bit cooler in front of the windows. So far, I had planned underfloor heating as an additional heat source. There is also input about this here in the forum. Alternatively, I am considering an additional concrete core activation in the floor slab.

Question: Does anyone have experience with the use of concrete core activation in the floor slab instead of underfloor heating? Advantages/disadvantages? What should one pay attention to?

Thanks for your input

I am currently planning a bungalow without a basement (168 sqm) with a heat pump. The exterior facade is almost completely glazed, resulting in a high U-value for the entire building. The heat load calculation shows that concrete core activation in the ceiling does not deliver sufficient performance,

With more insight into your design, an attempt could probably be made to help you more effectively.

With more insight into your draft, an attempt could probably be made to help you more effectively.

Gladly, what information do you need? I am interested in the advantages and disadvantages of a concrete core activation in the floor slab compared to underfloor heating. Does it make sense to install concrete core activation in the floor slab (heating only) and in the ceiling (heating and cooling)?

Gladly, what information do you need?

Everything else, almost everything is missing. We know almost nothing about your house. With that, no ways can be shown on how to address the actual "problem" (room not really heatable) other than with

I'm interested in the pros and cons of a concrete core activation in the floor slab compared to underfloor heating. Does it make sense to install a concrete core activation in the floor slab (heating only) and in the ceiling (heating and cooling)?

Simply adding more loss heat with double the effective surface of an inefficient method does not sound like a smart approach. The audience joker will not help if the applause dominates.
With sparse information, the advice-givers' mind cinema-lab remains cold in the kitchen.

Unfortunately, many brilliant self-planners fear good advice to revise their concept, and would rather hope for supporters of their ideas. But you will not hear "Just go full throttle on the wrong track, then it will work out great!"

I know it like this: insulation is placed on the foundation slab and the screed on top of that. If you then "activate" the foundation slab, you are only heating the ground because the insulation lies on the foundation slab. Where do you see the advantage? Underfloor heating, however, makes sense. With that, you heat the screed.

Question: Does anyone have experience with the use of thermal activated concrete slabs in the floor slab instead of underfloor heating? Advantages/disadvantages? What should be considered?

No, not personally. It is also commonly marketed as a "Swedish slab" and is a standard variant. You can read up on it online. A disadvantage, for example, is an even slower control response than with normal underfloor heating. However, you need a construction company that can do it. Because without screed, you need a completely flat concrete slab (all other pipes are also embedded in it (electrical, water)). An advantage, for example, is the avoidance of thermal bridges to the rising masonry or the possibility to drill into the floor without any problems (within certain limits), without damaging the activation (which lies quite deep). Additionally, you do without the screed.