ᐅ New Single-Family House Construction (KFW70) / Aerated Concrete vs. Sand-Lime Brick / Which Material to Choose?
Created on: 31 Jan 2014 08:27
L
Lacos
Hi everyone,
We are planning to build with a general contractor and have collected some offers. Some use aerated concrete, others use calcium silicate bricks. Some combine the two, using aerated concrete for the exterior walls and calcium silicate bricks on the inside.
What would you recommend? Is this combination of aerated concrete on the outside and calcium silicate bricks on the inside common and preferable?
Should we be concerned about cracks due to the different expansion properties of the two materials, or is this not an issue with proper construction?
What would you currently choose to build with or have built—what is your preferred building material?
Thank you in advance,
Lacos
We are planning to build with a general contractor and have collected some offers. Some use aerated concrete, others use calcium silicate bricks. Some combine the two, using aerated concrete for the exterior walls and calcium silicate bricks on the inside.
What would you recommend? Is this combination of aerated concrete on the outside and calcium silicate bricks on the inside common and preferable?
Should we be concerned about cracks due to the different expansion properties of the two materials, or is this not an issue with proper construction?
What would you currently choose to build with or have built—what is your preferred building material?
Thank you in advance,
Lacos
Hello Building Expert,
I am not only active as an MEP (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing) planner and energy consultant but also as an expert assessor! What I frequently encounter in building services engineering is beyond description. The biggest potential for deficiencies is found in the technical building systems. Most general contractors/main contractors push easily persuaded clients almost anything. Off-the-shelf solutions are grabbed and patched together because previously a generous discount contract had been agreed with a manufacturer, completely regardless of whether this solution is actually suitable for the individual construction project.
The clients’ actual consumption later on is never part of any contract! A suspicious mind might think badly of this All this is regardless of any optimistic assumptions in energy saving regulation compliance or funding certificates.
I am certainly willing to learn and to correct myself! Please present an example of a building contract you arranged, where consumption is defined, so that the client later has a realistic legal chance to hold the responsible party accountable in case of excessive costs!
Best regards.
Bauexpert schrieb:At least it’s something solid. Of course, people can talk endlessly, but what is that actually worth? Nothing!
....You don’t exactly make exchanges with yourself easy if you always fall back on your own calculations....
Bauexpert schrieb:
.... - how am I supposed to follow you if I am not an engineer? Especially since you are not at all willing to publicly share your results, and above all free of charge, for the benefit of the users in this forum?..
Bauexpert schrieb:My posts are not intended to collect applause; on the contrary, I put my finger on the sore spot, which apparently does not suit some people at all!
You hide behind numbers and formulas? Or on the other hand, do you deny that it’s really not the end of the world to accept a different opinion as such? ....
I am not only active as an MEP (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing) planner and energy consultant but also as an expert assessor! What I frequently encounter in building services engineering is beyond description. The biggest potential for deficiencies is found in the technical building systems. Most general contractors/main contractors push easily persuaded clients almost anything. Off-the-shelf solutions are grabbed and patched together because previously a generous discount contract had been agreed with a manufacturer, completely regardless of whether this solution is actually suitable for the individual construction project.
The clients’ actual consumption later on is never part of any contract! A suspicious mind might think badly of this All this is regardless of any optimistic assumptions in energy saving regulation compliance or funding certificates.
I am certainly willing to learn and to correct myself! Please present an example of a building contract you arranged, where consumption is defined, so that the client later has a realistic legal chance to hold the responsible party accountable in case of excessive costs!
Bauexpert schrieb:I would not disagree with that. My aim is not primarily to be likable or to seek applause, but rather to clarify the necessities. Apparently, I am not completely wrong in that. Some have understood this, others not.
You might be many things; a pleasant character probably not.
Best regards.
klblb schrieb:
....- also quite knowledgeable, but I have NEVER read anything concrete from you.... Usually, the initial data basis simply does not exist. Moreover, as is well known, every construction project is specific, so how could concrete details lead to a general conclusion? At best, trends can be outlined, which I have done sufficiently multiple times! Anyone who wants to base a concrete investment decision on general, often anonymous chatter should of course do so. Their decision! [Quote="klblb, post: 58009"]...Why don’t you post 2-3 example calculations from energy performance certificates, which you say are often incorrect?...[ /QUOTE] Who would that help, since every case is individual and specific, and general transferability is simply not possible? In addition, there is a difference between energy reports and certificates. Compare the date of your certificate with the date of final construction completion (acceptance, notification to the local building authority)!
The fact is that many homeowners do not understand energy reports or certificates at all. They should not be blamed for this, but the creators should be, as sufficient explanation is usually lacking.
Homeowners actually believe that the stated final energy demand corresponds to the amount to be paid! A big misunderstanding!!!
[Quote="klblb, post: 58009"]...Why no homepage showing your references?...[ /QUOTE] Don’t worry, it has been in the drawer for a long time and might still come this year. Until now, there has been no need. However, I could save myself a lot of effort explaining things individually. You’re certainly right about that.
[Quote="klblb, post: 58009"]...It would be nice if the next 1400 posts were more productive....[ /QUOTE] In what way? Questioner X wants a reliable answer, even though no fundamental survey has been carried out? What would be the point of that? I’ll gladly leave anonymous chatting without any guarantee to others!
best regards
B
Bauexperte3 Feb 2014 10:40Hello €uro,
You’re deliberately misunderstanding me.
I understand what you mean—just remember, there are always two sides to every coin.
I’m not going to try to predict the future in consultations without having any knowledge of the client’s daily life or behavior. I inform clients about our procedures (listing them here would be too extensive and the admin would rightly consider this advertising), and cautiously estimate a realistic consumption range based on known parameters (if really comparable), always *noting* the need for the mandatory, paid calculations. Every client is free to contact our references and verify the truthfulness of our statements or not; we/I are not building services engineers. And please no more sly insinuations; neither my partner nor I are present at these meetings or visits, nor is there any cash involved. Since we have already discussed this topic, I hope I can assume you are willing to accept this without proof. We/I do not like to be blackmailed!
Regarding the calculations for dimensioning and future consumption, our customers naturally have access to the creator of those calculations and can intervene or complain at any time; “hold by the ears,” as you put it.
But that is not the primary issue at all. The post from user klblb clearly shows exactly what this is about. You repeatedly use the same terms in your brief replies. That is not very helpful to someone asking questions in a forum like this—unless your sole focus is on generating new contracts.
If you really want to change the status quo you described—incorrect system technology—you should explain it in a way that laypeople can understand. No more, no less; that’s why, for example, I am here and not always receiving applause.
Regards, Bauexperte
€uro schrieb:
My posts are not intended to receive applause; on the contrary, I’m pointing out uncomfortable truths, which apparently bothers some people!
You’re deliberately misunderstanding me.
€uro schrieb:
The actual later consumption of the homeowners is not specified in any contract! A suspicious person might think badly of that. This is completely independent of any optimistic calculations in the energy saving regulations or KfW certificates.
I understand what you mean—just remember, there are always two sides to every coin.
€uro schrieb:
I am quite capable of learning and willing to correct myself! Please give an example of a construction contract you have arranged that defines consumption, so that the homeowner later has a real legal chance to hold the responsible party accountable for excessive costs!
I’m not going to try to predict the future in consultations without having any knowledge of the client’s daily life or behavior. I inform clients about our procedures (listing them here would be too extensive and the admin would rightly consider this advertising), and cautiously estimate a realistic consumption range based on known parameters (if really comparable), always *noting* the need for the mandatory, paid calculations. Every client is free to contact our references and verify the truthfulness of our statements or not; we/I are not building services engineers. And please no more sly insinuations; neither my partner nor I are present at these meetings or visits, nor is there any cash involved. Since we have already discussed this topic, I hope I can assume you are willing to accept this without proof. We/I do not like to be blackmailed!
Regarding the calculations for dimensioning and future consumption, our customers naturally have access to the creator of those calculations and can intervene or complain at any time; “hold by the ears,” as you put it.
€uro schrieb:
My goal is not primarily to be agreeable or seek applause, but rather to raise awareness of the necessities.
But that is not the primary issue at all. The post from user klblb clearly shows exactly what this is about. You repeatedly use the same terms in your brief replies. That is not very helpful to someone asking questions in a forum like this—unless your sole focus is on generating new contracts.
If you really want to change the status quo you described—incorrect system technology—you should explain it in a way that laypeople can understand. No more, no less; that’s why, for example, I am here and not always receiving applause.
Regards, Bauexperte
Hello Building Expert.
Some general contractors/builders know this very well. The legally uncertain position of homeowners later on is often shamelessly exploited by general contractors/builders from the outset!
What prevents you from presenting an example of your construction service mediation where the contractor had a legitimate legal opportunity to claim excessive consumption costs? I’m curious!
Best regards.
Bauexperte schrieb:Certainly not, although I fully understand that as a mediator of construction services, you are bound by the parameters set by your system installers!
...You want to deliberately misunderstand me ...
Bauexperte schrieb:That’s certainly not necessary, but the individual and specific requirements of the clients should always be taken into account. It seems there is neither time nor sufficient expertise available on the system side for this.
I won’t go to the trouble of using a crystal ball in consultation talks,....
Bauexperte schrieb:How is a layperson supposed to professionally assess your procedures in the required depth?
. I inform the interested parties about our procedures ...
Bauexperte schrieb:That is extremely clear! You predictably completely avoided my question regarding contractually agreed consumption figures.
we/I am not a MEP planner. ...
Bauexperte schrieb:Example for sustainable review by all users?
Regarding calculations for sizing and later consumption, our – then – customers naturally have access to the creator and can intervene or complain at any time, "pulling their ears," as you say...
Bauexperte schrieb:Why not then? Ultimately, only the comparison between what was promised and what was actually delivered matters. Recognizing a mostly retrospective shortfall rarely helps homeowners, as they cannot legally enforce it with reasonable effort.
That’s not the primary issue at all....
Some general contractors/builders know this very well. The legally uncertain position of homeowners later on is often shamelessly exploited by general contractors/builders from the outset!
What prevents you from presenting an example of your construction service mediation where the contractor had a legitimate legal opportunity to claim excessive consumption costs? I’m curious!
Bauexperte schrieb:Need for supportive help because the wound the finger is pointing to hurts too much?
The post from user klblb illustrates ...
Bauexperte schrieb:Gladly:
If you really want to change something about the status quo you raised => wrong system technology, you should explain it in a way that a layperson can understand. ...
Best regards.
B
Bauexperte3 Feb 2014 11:58Hello €uro,
I see you’re in a playful mood.
Regards, Bauexperte
€uro schrieb:You would be surprised how many of our construction projects are supported by external, qualified experts with academic backgrounds.
How can a layperson evaluate your approach technically and in the necessary depth?
I see you’re in a playful mood.
Regards, Bauexperte
Bauexperte schrieb:
Hello €uro,...You would probably be surprised how many of our construction projects are supported by external, qualified experts with academic backgrounds ... So what? Guttenberg and associates even have doctorates, and organizations like ADAC, TÜV, etc. have several academics in their dependent teams! Now please finally provide the contract example from Schenk-Bauberatung, where homeowners could realistically expect legally binding corrections based on the accompanying academic expertise!
If the academic support is that reliable, it should be a straightforward matter to reflect this properly in the contract drafting.
I am very curious!
Best regards