I am currently doing some research. And yes, I know this topic has been discussed extensively. I also understand that workmanship, windows, roller shutter boxes, and so on play a role. And yes, if you really want effective sound insulation, other options should be preferred (such as calcium silicate blocks, etc.).
I am assuming a monolithic construction method.
What surprises me is a particular observation. When using search engines and reading through forums, the overall consensus is very clear.
Poroton has a higher raw density than aerated concrete, and therefore obviously provides better sound insulation. That sounds logical.
Now, I looked at the technical data sheets of two blocks with the same lambda value (0.08).
Both from well-known manufacturers. The Poroton block is filled with mineral wool.
And yet, both have comparable sound insulation values between 46 and 47 dB.
Now I’m confused. Can someone explain this to me?
I am assuming a monolithic construction method.
What surprises me is a particular observation. When using search engines and reading through forums, the overall consensus is very clear.
Poroton has a higher raw density than aerated concrete, and therefore obviously provides better sound insulation. That sounds logical.
Now, I looked at the technical data sheets of two blocks with the same lambda value (0.08).
Both from well-known manufacturers. The Poroton block is filled with mineral wool.
And yet, both have comparable sound insulation values between 46 and 47 dB.
Now I’m confused. Can someone explain this to me?
M
Mottenhausen21 Jun 2019 10:36Since sound insulation ultimately involves a highly subjective perception of different frequencies, it cannot be effectively represented by a single measurement or material property value.
If sound insulation is a major concern for you (railway line, highway, airport, etc.), it is worthwhile to invest time in detailed research, visiting model home parks to test and experience it firsthand, and so on. For a typical residential area, no one can convince me that you would hear anything through, for example, a 36cm (14 inch) Ytong wall.
If sound insulation is a major concern for you (railway line, highway, airport, etc.), it is worthwhile to invest time in detailed research, visiting model home parks to test and experience it firsthand, and so on. For a typical residential area, no one can convince me that you would hear anything through, for example, a 36cm (14 inch) Ytong wall.
The concept of "big issue" is relative. For our development area, a noise protection assessment was carried out. We will be provided with a noise barrier. The local council was quite annoyed.
In brief, because the noise level in the first floor is exceeded by a minimal amount at night due to a combination of various factors, including a street that has so far only been planned but not built, we now have to provide a calculated noise protection certificate.
We are located relatively favorably within the area, so I’m not too worried about being unable to sleep at night.
However, since I am still undecided between Poroton (clay blocks) and aerated concrete (aerated autoclaved concrete), this naturally would have been an argument for or against one or the other if there were significant differences. That was my initial impression after some quick research on the internet. So I was somewhat surprised.
I understand that these are only calculated values and that many factors come into play.
My gut feeling leans toward aerated concrete, but the noise protection issue has made me reconsider.
In brief, because the noise level in the first floor is exceeded by a minimal amount at night due to a combination of various factors, including a street that has so far only been planned but not built, we now have to provide a calculated noise protection certificate.
We are located relatively favorably within the area, so I’m not too worried about being unable to sleep at night.
However, since I am still undecided between Poroton (clay blocks) and aerated concrete (aerated autoclaved concrete), this naturally would have been an argument for or against one or the other if there were significant differences. That was my initial impression after some quick research on the internet. So I was somewhat surprised.
I understand that these are only calculated values and that many factors come into play.
My gut feeling leans toward aerated concrete, but the noise protection issue has made me reconsider.
M
Mottenhausen21 Jun 2019 13:12Okay, so the problem is real. In that case, neither the subjective experiences here in the forum nor the specifications in the glossy brochures will likely help you. Who is preparing the sound insulation certification? An architect? Perhaps they would be kind enough to prepare it for both building materials. Both options will meet the requirements, but this way you would have a solid, objective comparison and could then make a decision.
Real, in the sense that I need proof – yes.
The structural engineer/engineering firm will provide that. I will receive it in the next few days. And yes, they will issue an invoice for both types of bricks.
At first glance, he said he doesn’t see any major issues, but of course, he can only confirm after completing the calculations.
Since only the peak noise level at night is slightly exceeded, and that only when all factors overlap, I am not panicking about it.
The structural engineer/engineering firm will provide that. I will receive it in the next few days. And yes, they will issue an invoice for both types of bricks.
At first glance, he said he doesn’t see any major issues, but of course, he can only confirm after completing the calculations.
Since only the peak noise level at night is slightly exceeded, and that only when all factors overlap, I am not panicking about it.
Similar topics