ᐅ KfW 40 or better in solid construction without additional insulation possible?
Created on: 18 Nov 2019 08:44
S
Specki
Hello,
I was initially set on a timber frame construction for my future house. However, I am now reconsidering solid construction because it does have its advantages. Ideally, I would prefer this without additional external insulation, as that would be redundant and insulation typically does not last as long as the masonry itself. Poroton seems the most appealing option to me at first glance.
But is that even feasible? Are there bricks (or other solid building blocks) that on their own meet the KfW 40 standard, or possibly perform even better?
Does anyone have experience with this? Has anyone actually built something like this?
I’m open to discussion if you believe additional insulation makes sense. However, no “Styrofoam” will be used on the exterior walls; if anything, it will be an alternative material.
The comments I would rather avoid are those suggesting a lower energy standard would be sufficient. I will not build anything below KfW 40.
Thanks in advance for your input.
Best regards,
Specki
I was initially set on a timber frame construction for my future house. However, I am now reconsidering solid construction because it does have its advantages. Ideally, I would prefer this without additional external insulation, as that would be redundant and insulation typically does not last as long as the masonry itself. Poroton seems the most appealing option to me at first glance.
But is that even feasible? Are there bricks (or other solid building blocks) that on their own meet the KfW 40 standard, or possibly perform even better?
Does anyone have experience with this? Has anyone actually built something like this?
I’m open to discussion if you believe additional insulation makes sense. However, no “Styrofoam” will be used on the exterior walls; if anything, it will be an alternative material.
The comments I would rather avoid are those suggesting a lower energy standard would be sufficient. I will not build anything below KfW 40.
Thanks in advance for your input.
Best regards,
Specki
In 2016, we couldn’t find anyone who built solid walls without insulation according to the passive house standard. Theoretically, it’s possible, but in practice, companies were not willing to do it. We started searching regionally and quite quickly settled on solid timber with insulation. That ended the search.
I can recommend a company for solid timber with insulation, but unfortunately not for building stone on stone.
I can recommend a company for solid timber with insulation, but unfortunately not for building stone on stone.
I actually don’t want solid wood. It will either be a timber frame or a solid build with stone.
If insulation still needs to be added, it simply becomes more complicated because the only interesting option for insulation would be a ventilated rainscreen facade. This means I would need an outer facade layer, which will probably be more complex. I could imagine a wooden facade. But a solid construction with a wooden facade also feels kind of odd ^^
If insulation still needs to be added, it simply becomes more complicated because the only interesting option for insulation would be a ventilated rainscreen facade. This means I would need an outer facade layer, which will probably be more complex. I could imagine a wooden facade. But a solid construction with a wooden facade also feels kind of odd ^^
There is nothing strange about that. Whether it’s plaster, wood, or brick slips, that is mainly a matter of appearance.
You are currently choosing very expensive options. I claim that a monolithic KfW 40 building will be several (!) tens of thousands of euros more expensive to construct than using a timber frame or external thermal insulation composite system (ETICS / WDVS). Additionally, there is the loss of usable floor area due to the thick masonry.
Cladding an entire house with wood also costs a significantly five-figure amount, plus ongoing maintenance.
You are currently choosing very expensive options. I claim that a monolithic KfW 40 building will be several (!) tens of thousands of euros more expensive to construct than using a timber frame or external thermal insulation composite system (ETICS / WDVS). Additionally, there is the loss of usable floor area due to the thick masonry.
Cladding an entire house with wood also costs a significantly five-figure amount, plus ongoing maintenance.
Phew, okay. I actually didn’t want to pick out the most expensive option...
What do you mean by that? That purely monolithic construction at KfW40 standard (or better) is the most expensive, or monolithic plus insulated exterior cladding?
Maintenance for wood façades isn’t significant. And it’s a trade I’d almost feel confident doing myself. With a bit of guidance, I should be able to handle it completely on my own.
Hmm, maybe back to timber frame construction then. Apparently, it already has advantages with the extreme insulation levels.
The downside is the low thermal mass, which leads to poorer phase shift (especially relevant in summer when it comes to overheating) and the durability of the material itself. (And a few other disadvantages compared to solid construction)....
Timber frame was actually already decided on. But over the weekend, I spoke to someone who said that solid construction doesn’t really cost more anymore and does have some advantages.
It’s still an exciting decision. Luckily, building the house is planned for 2 to 3 years from now ^^
Best regards,
Specki
What do you mean by that? That purely monolithic construction at KfW40 standard (or better) is the most expensive, or monolithic plus insulated exterior cladding?
Maintenance for wood façades isn’t significant. And it’s a trade I’d almost feel confident doing myself. With a bit of guidance, I should be able to handle it completely on my own.
Hmm, maybe back to timber frame construction then. Apparently, it already has advantages with the extreme insulation levels.
The downside is the low thermal mass, which leads to poorer phase shift (especially relevant in summer when it comes to overheating) and the durability of the material itself. (And a few other disadvantages compared to solid construction)....
Timber frame was actually already decided on. But over the weekend, I spoke to someone who said that solid construction doesn’t really cost more anymore and does have some advantages.
It’s still an exciting decision. Luckily, building the house is planned for 2 to 3 years from now ^^
Best regards,
Specki
Similar topics