ᐅ Insulating a New Build with 36.5 cm Aerated Concrete Blocks?
Created on: 17 Jan 2014 14:00
B
bygoran
Hello
our new build starts on Monday.
I am considering insulating the 36.5cm (14.4 inches) aerated concrete wall right away while the scaffolding is still in place.
We are building without KfW funding but want to insulate as well as possible.
According to a U-value calculator, I need 200mm (8 inches) of insulation to avoid moisture problems. Is that correct?
Can someone provide more detailed information? Or calculate exactly how thick the insulation needs to be to avoid any issues.
A controlled mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery is also planned.
The last ceiling below the cold roof is made of 24cm (9.5 inches) concrete, and I plan to add 240mm (9.4 inches) mineral wool insulation with a thermal conductivity of 0.035 W/(m·K). Is that sufficient?
I would appreciate any information.
our new build starts on Monday.
I am considering insulating the 36.5cm (14.4 inches) aerated concrete wall right away while the scaffolding is still in place.
We are building without KfW funding but want to insulate as well as possible.
According to a U-value calculator, I need 200mm (8 inches) of insulation to avoid moisture problems. Is that correct?
Can someone provide more detailed information? Or calculate exactly how thick the insulation needs to be to avoid any issues.
A controlled mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery is also planned.
The last ceiling below the cold roof is made of 24cm (9.5 inches) concrete, and I plan to add 240mm (9.4 inches) mineral wool insulation with a thermal conductivity of 0.035 W/(m·K). Is that sufficient?
I would appreciate any information.
Grym schrieb:
According to prevailing opinion, the solution without additional insulation is significantly more cost-effective in the long run, even if heating costs are somewhat higher. The maintenance and renovation efforts are considerably lower over the lifespan of the house.You always just write something random, don’t you? Almost every post from you is some kind of black-and-white opinion. It’s no coincidence that you had a pure troll status in the green forum.
There are studies on EPS insulation... probably the most well-known one is from the Fraunhofer Institute... The result: after decades, the insulation is still in the same condition as at the beginning... Why wouldn’t it be? It’s plastic. It does not rot. Of course, proper installation is a prerequisite (as with everything).
And the U-value comments... windows have a much bigger impact than wall areas... Oh man. Troll.
Tego12 schrieb:
You just keep writing whatever, don’t you? Almost every post from you is some kind of black-and-white opinion. It’s no coincidence that you had a pure troll status in the green forum.
There are studies about EPS insulation... the most well-known probably by the Fraunhofer Institute... Result: The insulation remains in the same condition after decades as it was at the beginning... Why wouldn’t it? It’s plastic. It does not rot. Of course, proper installation (as with everything) is a prerequisite.
And the U-value comments... windows have a far greater impact than wall areas... Oh man. Troll. Everyone knows that plastic does not rot, but it’s also clear that façades with insulation tend to be more prone to algae growth, and if a cheap and too thin layer of render is applied, it’s no surprise to see stains after 2 years.
Correct. For me, this falls under improper installation.
Don’t get me wrong, everything has its pros and cons, but I’m allergic to this black-and-white thinking. For example, a 36cm (14 inch) aerated concrete wall is “Stone Age” in terms of insulation and also offers poor soundproofing. If monolithic construction is important to someone, that’s fine; if other aspects matter more, they can build differently. We will be using brick veneer anyway, so neither applies to us.
Don’t get me wrong, everything has its pros and cons, but I’m allergic to this black-and-white thinking. For example, a 36cm (14 inch) aerated concrete wall is “Stone Age” in terms of insulation and also offers poor soundproofing. If monolithic construction is important to someone, that’s fine; if other aspects matter more, they can build differently. We will be using brick veneer anyway, so neither applies to us.
No plan. In my area, all kinds of systems are being installed. Even after years, the ETICS walls do not have any problems with algae. So I’m not familiar with this issue.
The Fraunhofer study even concluded that, due to the decoupling between the masonry and the insulation, there is less damage to the facade compared to traditional masonry with plaster... However, I’m not sure what exactly “damage” refers to in this context.
The Fraunhofer study even concluded that, due to the decoupling between the masonry and the insulation, there is less damage to the facade compared to traditional masonry with plaster... However, I’m not sure what exactly “damage” refers to in this context.
And why is that considered outdated when it meets KfW 70 standards, even KfW 55, while being impact-resistant, affordable, and mold-resistant? Apart from sound insulation, I see no disadvantages. And in many new residential areas, it is simply not noisy, so sound insulation is not always necessary.
Similar topics