ᐅ Which type of façade is better?

Roppo schrieb:
And the facing brick is exactly the same material as the cladding, just a thin slice of it. The external properties, including weather resistance, should be almost the same, right?

Regarding weather resistance, probably yes; however, the thickness of the layer might make a difference in terms of frost resistance, as well as the installation method. The cladding is traditionally laid with mortar, while with the facing brick, I’m not sure to what extent a special thin-bed adhesive technique might be used. I assume there is a significant difference here: the cladding is stacked “stone on stone,” layer on layer, whereas the facing bricks are more likely pre-glued and adhere directly to the facade. However, I haven’t heard of any significantly different susceptibility to damage. Where I live in RLP, strong winds rarely whip around the houses anyway.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Hello, I am new here, so please let me know if this question is not appropriate, but what are the other alternatives and why do you want to choose between these two options? Or is there no other possibility? Aren’t there also great new ecological options? Or is it too costly? Sorry for all the questions.

tommifc schrieb:
but what would the other alternatives be, and why do you want to choose between these two options? Or is there really no other possibility.

When someone doesn’t consider all alternatives from A to Z but only asks about A or B, it’s usually because a supplier basically says: "I can only offer (for example) Poroton, but you have the option to choose either fries or croquettes at the same price." So the prospective homeowner then asks in the forum: "Poroton with croquettes or Poroton with fries, is it basically the same thing, or what would you choose and why?"

The answer, "there is also sand-lime brick beyond the seven mountains with the seven dwarfs (just to name one example)" would be correct—but considering the limited options available to the questioner, it wouldn’t be very helpful.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Not encouraging for the person asking the question, but actually still reasonable. Because it’s not just the questioner who reads this thread.

In three years, someone will find this here through a Google search and read that only A and B exist. What a pity ... especially since A would only be a suboptimal solution that combines many disadvantages ...

Hello again,

First of all, I deliberately chose the Poroton clay brick because I don’t think very highly of aerated concrete. It was already quite difficult to find a supplier offering Poroton bricks, since aerated concrete is generally easier and cheaper to work with in almost every aspect. As a result, most suppliers also offer aerated concrete... Sand-lime bricks are even harder to get than hollow bricks, but I don’t necessarily find them as appealing as, for example, Poroton...

So, I decided to go with this type of brick.
And, as with almost all other options, the question now is: plaster? Brick slips? Facing brick? ... The latter two are my main contenders.

Best regards

tempic schrieb:
In three years, someone will find this through a Google search and read that there are only A and B.

No, they will read that only two options were asked about here – not that there are only two in the entire world. Google wouldn’t make anyone believe that.

Roppo schrieb:
First of all, I deliberately chose the Poroton clay brick because I

Exactly: "because I" – that’s why you are the client, so you are allowed to make an "objective" decision in a "subjective" way. For that reason, I limited myself to using that as a starting point for the answer, assuming that you have already heard about other building materials and have personally ruled some out.

Roppo schrieb:
And as with almost all other options, the question now arises: plaster? Brick slips? Facing bricks? ...

If you now expand your initial question to the triangle of facing bricks – brick slips – plaster, I’ll adjust the answer a bit:

a) Facing bricks regarding the building material (i.e., solid facing bricks vs. brick slips) are two things made from the same material. The difference is in the application: solid facing bricks as full brickwork are an independent masonry shell. Here thermally, not structurally, designed, but still classically laid: one course of bricks follows another, "brick on brick." Brick slips, on the other hand, are a surface material; therefore, it would be misleading to consider them, for example, from the perspective of total wall thickness budgeting like a thinner masonry shell (whose thickness gain might then be credited to an insulation layer). Practically speaking, they are small, rough wall tiles and are adhered, "brick on wall."

b) Regarding the surface, facing bricks thus do not distinguish between solid facing bricks and brick slips, but rather make more sense when comparing facing bricks and plaster. The facing bricks are then seen as wall cladding, for which brick slips exist. This naturally makes a significant difference in appearance, which is why – as in the example of aerated concrete vs. lightweight clay bricks – rarely are both variants equally liked by the same observer. Objectively, however, they can also be differentiated: both can get dirty and lose aesthetic appeal. Both plaster and facing bricks come in different textures and varying susceptibility to dirt. The more northern the climate, the better facing bricks tend to suit exposure to weather stress.

c) If facing bricks are considered as cladding, I would not weigh solid facing bricks against brick slips, but rather compare them to other masonry cladding materials that are also laid as masonry: e.g., bricks, sand-lime bricks, or facing bricks with different surface qualities and colors.

Do not forget that your original question was framed very differently, and I will leave aside the aspect of "total thickness":

2.) is a classic wall structure, conservative in terms of building physics; 1.) is a trendy wall structure, developed from the U-value calculator’s “test tube,” and from a building physics viewpoint questionable without an air gap in my opinion. That both “meet” KfW55 only means that both are already better than required for KfW70 but not good enough for KfW40 – it does not mean that they perform equally somewhere in between.

If you want to embrace the belief in the U-value as the new gospel, option 1.) would be your thicker friend; and for option 2.), it makes little to no difference whether you finish with plaster or brick slips.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/