Hello everyone,
So far, I have only been reading along in the forum and found a lot of interesting information.
Now I am planning to build a single-family house.
I am surprised that there is so little information about concrete in private construction, even though in real life I have already seen several architect-designed houses made of exposed concrete. I don’t want or am allowed to build something that extreme, but I am interested in whether the cost-effective construction method of a basement can also be used above ground for living spaces. Manufacturers of prefabricated basements advertise how versatile their products are. But is it really possible to build something other than a basement this way?
Does anyone have experience with KFW-55 compliant concrete walls for the ground floor of a single-family house (essentially an above-ground living basement)? Does this work in practice?
Thanks in advance for all your answers!
p.s.
Please, let’s not discuss breathable versus non-breathable walls in this thread. Thank you.
Also, I am aware that installing electrical wiring inside concrete walls is quite complicated. However, this can largely be avoided through design by placing installations, light switches, etc., in drywall interior walls. Theoretically.
So far, I have only been reading along in the forum and found a lot of interesting information.
Now I am planning to build a single-family house.
I am surprised that there is so little information about concrete in private construction, even though in real life I have already seen several architect-designed houses made of exposed concrete. I don’t want or am allowed to build something that extreme, but I am interested in whether the cost-effective construction method of a basement can also be used above ground for living spaces. Manufacturers of prefabricated basements advertise how versatile their products are. But is it really possible to build something other than a basement this way?
Does anyone have experience with KFW-55 compliant concrete walls for the ground floor of a single-family house (essentially an above-ground living basement)? Does this work in practice?
Thanks in advance for all your answers!
p.s.
Please, let’s not discuss breathable versus non-breathable walls in this thread. Thank you.
Also, I am aware that installing electrical wiring inside concrete walls is quite complicated. However, this can largely be avoided through design by placing installations, light switches, etc., in drywall interior walls. Theoretically.
He wants to save money, bet? Some kind of slab building with a pitched roof.Of course, I always like to save money. The origin of the idea, however, is my amateur assumption that concrete is more stable than brick or sand-lime brick (meaning I can have thinner walls with concrete) and that this would be an alternative to timber frame construction plus external ETICS (external thermal insulation composite system).
"Slab building with a pitched roof" is quite accurate. The basement manufacturers advertise concrete slabs as a sandwich with insulation in between.
bindig schrieb:
The origin of the idea is my layman assumption that concrete is more stable than brick or calcium silicate blocks (meaning I can have thinner walls with concrete) and that this would be an alternative to a timber frame with external insulation. I see. So your question basically is: "If my assumption is wrong, can I still arrive at the right result?", and the simple answer is: "No."
Whether it’s 16 cm (6.3 inches) solid structural timber (plus drywall, chipboard, etc., on both sides) or 17.5 cm (6.9 inches) brick: either way, they’ll attach 16 cm (6.3 inches) of low-grade insulation panels to that.
bindig schrieb:
The basement manufacturers advertise concrete panels as a sandwich with insulation in between. Unless used as permanent formwork, you won’t get those elements transported affordably. They are mostly used in multi-story residential construction where time equals money.
Also, the idea that insulation sandwiched between layers could reduce the overall thickness is quite naive: instead of 33.5 cm (13.2 inches), your wall would realistically be around 44 cm (17.3 inches) thick in total.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
I still don’t quite understand.
You want to build with concrete, but it shouldn’t be visible.
Adding an extra full story was not your intention.
Saving money was not your intention either (especially since it was already suspected that it might even be more expensive).
Do you believe that concrete is more stable than a brick or block house?
What exactly are you afraid of? Tsunami? Landslide? Nuclear bomb?
Or is it about having thinner walls? What advantage does a wall have if it is 30cm (12 inches) thinner?
On the other hand, since concrete has fairly poor insulation properties, you need more insulation for it. A masonry wall made with hollow bricks requires less thick insulation.
If you really want ETICS (external thermal insulation composite system), that also works with masonry walls.
Personally, I don’t consider ETICS an advantage either (in my opinion, it is flammable, hazardous waste, and not very durable).
Why are you already ruling out masonry houses or trying to avoid masonry? I still consider that the best option.
Maybe you could clarify what specific advantages you see in the concrete option and why timber framing or masonry walls wouldn’t provide those benefits.
You want to build with concrete, but it shouldn’t be visible.
Adding an extra full story was not your intention.
Saving money was not your intention either (especially since it was already suspected that it might even be more expensive).
Do you believe that concrete is more stable than a brick or block house?
What exactly are you afraid of? Tsunami? Landslide? Nuclear bomb?
Or is it about having thinner walls? What advantage does a wall have if it is 30cm (12 inches) thinner?
On the other hand, since concrete has fairly poor insulation properties, you need more insulation for it. A masonry wall made with hollow bricks requires less thick insulation.
If you really want ETICS (external thermal insulation composite system), that also works with masonry walls.
Personally, I don’t consider ETICS an advantage either (in my opinion, it is flammable, hazardous waste, and not very durable).
Why are you already ruling out masonry houses or trying to avoid masonry? I still consider that the best option.
Maybe you could clarify what specific advantages you see in the concrete option and why timber framing or masonry walls wouldn’t provide those benefits.
I do not want to rule out masonry walls. On the contrary, I would prefer masonry without external insulation.
However, the wall becomes quite thick if it needs to provide good insulation. Also, the new self-insulating materials seem quite fragile to me, if I may say so in a non-technical way. They need to be installed carefully by professionals (glued!) if the insulation performance is to be effective.
My partner would prefer to avoid external ETICS (external thermal insulation composite systems) / external insulation systems.
That is why it seemed like a good idea to me that the basement providers say they place the insulation as an intermediate layer between two concrete slabs. This is stable and not excessively thick.
However, the wall becomes quite thick if it needs to provide good insulation. Also, the new self-insulating materials seem quite fragile to me, if I may say so in a non-technical way. They need to be installed carefully by professionals (glued!) if the insulation performance is to be effective.
My partner would prefer to avoid external ETICS (external thermal insulation composite systems) / external insulation systems.
That is why it seemed like a good idea to me that the basement providers say they place the insulation as an intermediate layer between two concrete slabs. This is stable and not excessively thick.
T
Traumfaenger4 Jul 2017 22:5511ant schrieb:
Whether it’s 16 cm (6.3 inches) structural timber (plus drywall, chipboard, etc. on both sides) or 17.5 cm (6.9 inches) cavity wall: either way, they’ll just stick 16 cm (6.3 inches) of special waste boards onto it. I don’t understand this answer. There is a wide range within timber frame and solid timber construction. The modern approach is the "healthy living" method—without external thermal insulation composite systems (ETICS), without vapor barriers, and so on, but diffusion-open, etc. Should the statement above be assumed to apply universally to all buildings made from wood materials???
Traumfaenger schrieb:
I don't understand the answer. The issue was a fundamental misconception by the original poster, which is also clearly shown in
bindig schrieb:
My partner would prefer to avoid an exterior thermal insulation composite system (ETICS).
Therefore, it seemed like a good idea to me when the basement contractors say they place the insulation as an intermediate layer between two concrete slabs. Stable. And not so thick. Hence, I wanted to clarify that when building with ETICS, whether the structure behind it is masonry or timber frame only makes a difference “after the decimal point” in the total wall thickness.
And I actually hoped it would be clear—or become clear—that for the insulating effect (or overall wall thickness) it does not matter if the insulation is placed on the outside or in between layers.
But as we can see, the original poster still does not seem to understand this:
bindig schrieb:
On the contrary, I would prefer masonry without exterior insulation.
But that makes the wall very thick if it needs to be well insulated. I will summarize once again:
1) In the concept of a “building material shell plus insulation layer,” there is no significant fundamental difference whether the building material shell is made of masonry or timber frame. Most suppliers offer total wall thicknesses ranging between about 29.5 to 33.5 cm (12 to 13 inches).
2) For monolithic aerated concrete, 36.5 cm (14.5 inches) suffice.
3) Whether the insulation is positioned on the outside or within the structure does not affect the total wall thickness. Concrete walls with insulation typically reach about 44 cm (17 inches) overall (according to the Energy Saving Ordinance). At this thickness, timber frame construction already achieves approximately KfW 40 standard.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics