ᐅ Planning a Single-Family Home

Hello Matthias,

Matthias182 schrieb:
There are two points that have discouraged me so far. Firstly, the noise. I usually read that it can be around 60 decibels. Secondly, it would all come down to that ugly box on the house.

"Heat pumps are systems that do not require approval under emissions protection laws but are subject to the requirements of §§ 22 to 24 of the Federal Immission Control Act (BImSchG). Therefore, these systems may only be installed and operated in such a way that

• harmful environmental impacts, including noise, are prevented as far as possible according to the state of the art, and
• any unavoidable harmful environmental impacts are minimized in line with current technology.

The immission-effective sound power levels for the majority of indoor air-source heat pumps are approximately 55 dB(A) to 60 dB(A), while for most outdoor units they are between 62 dB(A) and 67 dB(A). Individual devices that comply with the current best sound insulation technology have an immission-effective sound power level of only around 50 dB(A) (e.g., split units)."

Source: lfu.bayern

For example, we like to work with a Japanese supplier of air-to-water heat pumps, whose values – depending on the size of the system – range between 39 and 50 dB(A). In addition, their customer service is hard to beat, even compared to German providers. Usually, we try to locate the utility room near the garage so that the outdoor unit can be placed on top of the garage. This way, concerns about noise and the aesthetic impact can be addressed.

Matthias182 schrieb:
That’s certainly an argument. But does it already bring the necessary 7%?

This is just my personal opinion – so no guarantee – but I think it should be enough.

Matthias182 schrieb:
I’ve attached some pictures. Can you make use of them?

Not really, but thanks anyway.

Matthias182 schrieb:
I can basically understand the argument. However, the measures I described must already be considered "overkill" in terms of insulation, right? Can you really get even more out of that? I can hardly imagine it.

Scope of services: Energy Technology

....

The use of energy synergies, including alternative or renewable energies, within a building or a building complex is integrated into an overall system of technical equipment.

• Integrated planning using simulation techniques to optimize energy use.
• Comprehensive technical planning considering innovative, renewable, and alternative energy sources.
• Feasibility studies, energy consumption studies, and economic evaluations.
• Due diligence.
• Inventory and assessment of existing technical systems.
• Energy consulting, energy analyses, and energy optimization.
• Calculations for overall energy efficiency of buildings, including the preparation of energy/building certificates (energy performance certificates / building energy ratings).

For more information, you can visit the German Energy Agency at dena.de.

Best regards

Bauexperte schrieb:

Not really, but thanks anyway.

What would be necessary to at least roughly assess the whole thing (based on construction experience)?

If it then turns out that there is still some potential here, I will definitely address the MEP topic.

Bauexperte schrieb:

Scope of services: Energy Technology

....

The use of energy synergies, including alternative or renewable energy sources, within a building or building complex is integrated into an overall system of technical equipment.

• Integrated planning using simulation techniques to optimize energy consumption.
• Comprehensive technical planning considering innovative, renewable, and alternative energy sources.
• Feasibility studies, energy consumption analyses, and cost-effectiveness calculations.
• Due diligence.
• Inventory recording and assessment of technical systems.
• Energy consulting, energy analyses, and energy optimization.
• Calculations of overall building energy efficiency, including the preparation of energy/building certificates.

Source: Pi

More information is available from the German Energy Agency at dena.de.

To be honest, I did not understand this part of your answer.

Bauexperte schrieb:
Recently, the objection has been raised here that a homeowner cannot possibly know how often, for example, they will take a bath or how frequently they will use their fireplace. With all due respect, that is nonsense. An individual’s usage behavior does not change simply because their four walls change; if a homeowner always opened the left window sash in the bedroom in their apartment, they will do the same in their new single-family house. If they enjoyed a full bath twice a week, they will continue to do so in the future.

@ Bauexperte

This statement is complete nonsense. No one moves into an identical house, and with that, usage patterns will change to some extent—more for some, less for others. The reasons for this have already been discussed with €uro. That said, it is clear that average values or experience-based estimates can still be applied.

For those unfamiliar with the thread, here are some counterexamples:
If I previously didn’t have a bathtub or a fireplace and therefore couldn’t use them, that doesn’t mean I won’t use them in the future. And if you install a ventilation system, you will probably avoid keeping the bedroom window open all the time.

Also, you might have additional rooms that simply weren’t there before or not in that form.
It could be, for example, that family life shifts from the living room to a large kitchen with a TV—or vice versa—because you suddenly have an open-plan living and dining area. Maybe the small child now prefers to play in the living room because the bedroom is one floor above and therefore farther away.

Furthermore, there is the factor of changes over time that indirectly alter usage habits.
Example 1
Planning for a family means more space is needed, which might lead to building a house. But then the woman is at home more, whereas before she was out all day.
Example 2
The children have left home, the house is too big, joints ache, retirement is approaching. The solution: a small bungalow, and the large house gets sold. After years of working from early morning to late evening, now you’re at home all day.
Here too, usage behavior changes.

As a moderator, you should accept other opinions, especially when they are well-reasoned, rather than dismissing them as nonsense.
I appreciate your expertise, but the occasionally offensive tone you use should be avoided as a moderator. Be glad this forum does not escalate like some others.

Musketier

Hello,

Musketier schrieb:

This statement is complete nonsense.

Is it really?

Musketier schrieb:

No one will move into an identical house, so some people’s usage behavior will change only slightly, while others will change more.

I never wrote about identical rooms, but about “automatic behaviors.” A left-handed person will always approach the left side of the windows, a right-handed person the right side. If a homeowner moves from an apartment to a detached house, they will automatically use their “preferred” hand — for example, a right-hander will use the right door of their living space as an exit, and so on.

If the homeowner always left the bedroom window open, they won’t stop doing so in summer; rather, they will have the existing ventilation system adjusted accordingly or at least have the controls explained in detail. There are numerous posts confirming this behavior, so I don’t need to write only from my professional perspective.

This user behavior is also considered during every work plan discussion — at least here with us and not only for the building services engineering (MEP) planning for the house. From this “known” user behavior, both the architect and especially the building services engineer can develop models that they can simulate on their screen and discuss with the homeowner.

Musketier schrieb:

For those who don’t know the thread, here are some counter-examples: If I never had a bathtub or a fireplace before and could not use them, that does not mean I will not use them in the future.

Anyone who invests in an expensive fireplace will generally use it. The building services engineer will ask questions about the current living and working situation related to this “new” usage behavior and consider the information in their calculations.

Musketier schrieb:

Also, you might have additional rooms that were not there before or not in the same form. For example, family life may shift from the living room to the large kitchen with TV or vice versa, because suddenly there is a living room with a dining area. Maybe the small child now prefers playing in the living room because the nursery is suddenly one floor above and therefore far away...

And what does that have to do with building services engineering planning? If one room is used more heavily than another and can therefore do without heating? These factors would only be relevant if a passive house (PH) is being planned. But even here in practice, it has proven sensible to build with “braces,” because in a passive house the body heat is also included in the calculations. It is not uncommon for passive house owners to be surprised when their home is cold after returning from work or especially holiday.

Musketier schrieb:

As a moderator, you should accept other opinions that are well-founded and not dismiss them as nonsense. I appreciate your expertise but not the sometimes insulting tone...

If I intended to provoke — or “insult” as you put it — I certainly would have omitted the “with all due respect.”

Nevertheless, the house building forum is no wish concert, and unfortunately many homeowners believe what they have “learned” on the internet or have been told by their salespeople. You, for example, focus on user behavior because it confirms your opinion; meanwhile, you overlook that there are constants which a building services engineer must include in their calculations. You have not understood why I wrote what is now in the thread. In one point, you are correct: “Sender => Receiver” — I should have said “the primary user behavior of the individual” does not change, or also “future energy savings through ‘conscious’ user behavior.”

The energy agency states: “Energy saving is not necessarily associated with major investments. Examples from various municipalities show this. Simple organizational measures or changes in user behavior can achieve significant effects: User behavior has a considerable influence on a building’s energy consumption. Up to 15% of energy costs can be saved by behavior changes. The basis for this is informing and motivating all involved. Building users and management must work together on rational energy use.”

For precisely this reason, I brought up personal user behavior. A good building services engineer — and there are more good ones than you might believe — addresses this topic. However, first, they need to know the existing user behavior of their client and, based on experience, will know which things definitely will not change in the future.

Best regards

Hello everyone,

There has been some progress on the project recently.

The wall construction now looks as follows:

1 cm (0.4 inches) render
17.5 cm (7 inches) aerated concrete PPW4
14 cm (5.5 inches) insulation WLG 035
4 cm (1.6 inches) air gap
11.5 cm (4.5 inches) facing brick

For the roof, there is 240 mm (9.4 inches) insulation MF035 and 120 mm (4.7 inches) underside insulation PS035.

Additionally, a solar rooftop system including a hot water storage tank has now been planned.

According to the assessment of our building engineer, this should achieve the KfW 70 standard even without a heat pump.

That would be more than acceptable for me, as I am not at all convinced by air source heat pumps.

Best regards,
Matthias

Hello everyone,

We have made significant progress by now. The excavation work was carried out last week, and the concrete slab has already been poured. Unfortunately, there was a mistake. The connection for the kitchen is located in one of the internal partition walls, but it should have been in the front external wall. We had communicated the desired position, but it was overlooked.

The builder’s suggestion is now to chisel open a section of the slab and install the missing pipe. The architect who is working with us also proposed the idea of running the pipe through the screed. However, she pointed out that neither solution is ideal.

My question is, are there any better alternatives? If not, which option would you choose?

Best regards,
Matthias