ᐅ Solid wood house / partial self-construction, wall structure / differences

Did I say that cross-laminated timber is not glued with PUR????????????????????

Cross-laminated timber is usually bonded with PUR adhesive. Some manufacturers also use melamine-based adhesives.

I’m just trying to make clear to you that I consider the debate about harmful PUR glues to be nonsense. Of course, it would be better not to use any chemicals at all, but I don’t see any reason to favor the significantly more expensive glue-free products for that reason alone. Besides, there are other issues to consider.

Think about it: in the text I copied for you, it is accepted that no emissions are measurable. But because PUR is considered inherently bad by these people, something must be present. They are even willing to question today’s highly sensitive testing methods. To me, that strongly sounds like lobbying on behalf of the glue-free products.

So, if you insist on following this debate and exclude more affordable alternatives because of it, then you have to see how far your budget will take you. But please also exclude log construction methods, because you will get similarly glued products there—unless you are building a log cabin.

Of course, there are ways to build much cheaper with basic turnkey wet-construction builders if you want to go that route! But please don’t confuse them with prefab houses. Prefab homes are generally built using wood frame construction systems with factory-made elements. The cheap turnkey wet-construction builders usually do the masonry work on site.

Regards,
friedrich27

I am skeptical since I read the technical data sheet about this. According to it, besides allergies, it is classified once as a carcinogenic hazard category 2 and once even category 3. I do not want that. Apparently, this applies only to people who have to work with it, but if I do not want it for myself, I also do not want to impose it on others. If necessary, I will build with stone after all. But I am not giving up yet. Also, there are log houses connected only with harmless white glues. I have no issue with that. You just have to look back into the past. Asbestos was once considered harmless and was used extensively. Now we know it was highly dangerous and is classified as hazardous waste. It is difficult for a layperson without expertise to judge who is right and who is not. Everything always revolves around money.

Ingredient information according to CLP (EC) No 1272/2008:
Hazardous ingredients
CAS No.
EC No.
REACH Reg. No.
Content
Classification
4,4'-Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate
101-68-8
202-966-0
01-2119457014-47
< 30%
Carcinogenicity
2
H351
Acute toxicity
4; inhalation
H332
Specific target organ toxicity - repeated exposure
2
H373
Eye irritation
2
H319
Specific target organ toxicity - single exposure
3
H335
Skin irritation
2
H315
Respiratory sensitization
1
H334
Skin sensitization
1
H317

Ingredient information according to DPD (EC) No 1999/45:
Hazardous ingredients
CAS No.
EC No.
REACH Reg. No.
Content
Classification
4,4'-Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate
101-68-8
202-966-0
01-2119457014-47
< 30%
Xi - Irritant; R36/37/38
R42/43
Carcinogenic category 3; R40
Xn - Harmful; R20, R48/20

I am skeptical since I read the technical data sheet about it. According to that, aside from allergies, it is classified once as a carcinogenic risk category 2 and another time as category 3. I don’t want that. Apparently, this only applies to people who have to work with it, but what I don’t want for myself, I also don’t want to impose on others.

There is nothing more to say on this; today’s modern PU wood adhesives are completely safe for the user. I respect that you want to protect the people who work with it, but I don’t know any profession that is not exposed to a certain hazard potential. You wouldn’t refuse medical care just because nurses may potentially suffer from back problems. The important thing is to recognize the hazard and minimize it.

If necessary, build with stone instead.
You should inform yourself there as well. For example, building materials like clay and earth have excellent ecological and building-physical properties. However, depending on their origin, they (and their products such as bricks and roof tiles) can have considerable radioactivity.
In some cases, you might even have to forgo building altogether.

There are also log houses that are bonded only with harmless white glues.
How do you come to the conclusion that white glue (PVAC) is completely harmless? The common white glue is a low-formaldehyde dispersion adhesive based on PVAc (polyvinyl acetate) as a binder, delivered ready to use as a water dispersion and available as cold glue, fast binder, veneer glue, hardener glue, lacquer glue, and hot glue. It is classified in performance classes D2–D4.

To manufacture structural building products, an adhesive approval is required. Log house beams definitely fall into this category. Suitable adhesives are: UF (urea-formaldehyde); MUF (melamine-urea-formaldehyde); PRF (phenol-resorcinol-formaldehyde); PUR (polyurethane) adhesives.
Unsuitable is: white glue.

However, I would be very grateful if you could tell me the log house manufacturer or the product you mean. I really don’t want to remain ignorant; I learn something new every day and want to keep learning. Maybe I have a knowledge gap here. You can also send your message by private message.

Did I read correctly that you are from the Nuremberg area? So, a kind greeting from the Lower Franconian Prussians to the Middle Franconians from Potsdam.
Friedrich

If you follow this thread, you can really only come to one conclusion: to shoot yourself immediately. With so much toxicity surrounding us.

Irony off!

I believe things can be exaggerated. The house is built with excellent ecological standards, yet there are two cars in the garage, emitting plenty of toxins and plastics. Work is done in a non-eco-friendly office building (after all, it’s only 50 hours a week). The food also contains many substances that are not necessarily harmless. And in the end, we breathe air that isn’t exactly clean either. The list could go on indefinitely.

I’ll stick with my conventionally built house, which is probably more affordable, and still live to 94 years old.

You hit the nail on the head. That’s why I included the text about the radioactivity of clay and similar materials. Even in untreated wood, you can detect formaldehyde and/or VOCs. Nevertheless, clay and wood remain among the safest building materials overall. My only issue with clay and similar materials is when they are fired, as this process consumes a tremendous amount of embodied energy.

nordanney schrieb:

I think it can be overdone. The house is built to be super eco-friendly, yet there are two cars in the garage, which emit all kinds of toxins and plastics. Work is done in a non-eco-friendly office building (and that’s 50 hours a week). Food also contains many substances that aren’t exactly harmless. Lastly, we breathe air that isn’t really clean either. The list can go on endlessly.

I’ll stick with my conventionally built house, which is probably cheaper, and I’ll still live to be 94 years old.

It’s nice if you get to live to 94. I agree with everything, even though we aren’t the type to drive a lot or keep two cars in the garage. I also cook everything from fresh ingredients and use spices that I grind myself because I want to know what’s inside. Of course, this doesn’t apply when eating out, which I also do from time to time. But that doesn’t mean I have to suffer from headaches or breathing problems at home because everything is still off-gassing.