Posted by Rob Dekker on October 27, 2005, 10:51 pm
> Depends on your climate. Here in Canada I would have to A/C more heat and
> moisture out of this concrete mass to make my home comfortable. This means
> turning the A/C on in late May and not turning it off until Late October or the
> humidity will settle in and take days of continuous running to recover the
> comfort again.
I am not sure if I understand you.
For temperature control, why you need to turn your AC on all summer long.
With massive amounts of thermal mass, your house would ideally stay at the
24 hour 'average' temperature of your climate. I do not know where you live
in Canada, but Toronto does not get above 20deg C in summer, which should be
quite comfortable in a concrete home without (much) AC usage.
http://www.worldclimate.com/cgi-bin/data.pl?ref=N43W079+1102+7162404G1
For moisture creep or moisture control, there are different ways of dealing with
that than using AC, depending on how bad the moisture gets.
But why do you think that thermal mass increases your moisture problem ?
> We get some nice weather too where we like to open windows and you wouldnt be
> able to for fear of a hot day again. Quicker response is in order which means
> low thermal mass.
Why not the 'old' way :
Close the windows once outside is warmer than you want inside,
and open them when outside temp is more desirable (like at night) ?
That is a quick response :)
> For dry climates/desert climates where hot during day and cold
> at night thermal mass is desired to average out the temps.
Totally.
I do not understand why they are building wood-frame homes in the desert.
Maybe just in-experience with any other building methods ?
>>
>> I have always been surpised with the differences in building materials used
> around the world,
>> mostly between the US and Northern Europe. Hardly any wood is used in Northern
> Europe.
>>
>> I live in California now, in a wooden house with little insulation, but I grew
> up in Holland,
>> in the cold/windy lowlands. No AC required there for sure, but exceptional
> insulation is
>> necessary to keep the wind/rain/cold out and still have moderate heating cost.
>> Lumber is expensive in this small, densely populated country, but plenty of
> rivers and thus
>> brick and concrete are the materials of choice.
>>
>> During the post-war reconstruction, explosive growth in Northern Europe
> required
>> low-cost homes that can still withstand the nasty elements. So here is how
> they built houses there:
>>
>> Put up two-story high concrete walls for the sides of the house, with a
> triangle-shaped top
>> where a slanted roof will fit later. Put an entire block of houses up
> 'sliced-bread' style,
>> so you use the same concrete form to build identical walls, often 4, 8, 12 or
> more in
>> a block. The forms already have extensions for where electrical wires and
> outlets need to
>> indent into the concrete, so you do not need a chainsaw to put the electrical
> wires in later.
>> So most houses share a concrete wall with both neighbors.
>>
>> Front and back of the house : pop-in two massive tripple-pane windows, or
> pre-fab
>> window/door panels. The big windows brings is a lot of light, which you need
> to stay sane
>> (it's pretty depressive in winter). The double or tripple-pane windows are
> great temp insulators.
>>
>> To finish the thing off, apply 5 inch or more of (stone wool) insulation on
> the (concrete) sides,
>> and erect an outer wall with mostly brick (or other durable, estetically sound
> material).
>> The front and back are mostly windows, but the 'wall' parts of it (around the
> door etc)
>> are typically finished with brick also.
>>
>> Put a (wooden) slanted roof on top, cover with clay-tiles (red or black; you
> must have
>> seen pictures), 10 inch of stone-wood on the inside of the roof, and the house
> is closed.
>>
>> All in all, this method is extremely energy-efficient, although it was first
> first designed
>> to be a cheap, mass-production process. Not much labor is involved in
> building, except for laying
>> the brick of the outer wall. Often they compromise on the amount of brick by
> making the
>> windows larger, to reduce labor cost (and increase natural light in the
> houses).
>>
>> Sheer mass of the double-stone, concrete/brick walls the double/tripple pane
> windows
>> and the 5 inch stone wool insulation keep temperature very stable.
>> The heater is off during the night, but inside it drops only 10F (70->60)
> overnight,
>> even though outside the wind is hauling at near freezing temps.
>>
>> What a difference with my 'standard', poorly insulated, California home, which
> costs
>> three times as much to build as compared to a similar size home in Holland,
> and has
>> less than half the insulation value.
>>
>> So, I'd say : Concrete is the way to go.
>>
>> > The claim is R36 and with concrete poured into it's form R50. Lots of
> thermal
>> > mass but when does concrete have an R1.5 per inch? The forms at close range
> do
>> > nt apear to have 7 inches of foam either. 4 maybe?????
>> >
>> > Very quiet from external noise if that is wanted.
>> >
>> > There is a lot of rebar to support the complete structure, including the
> second
>> > floor (if two story) and the forms for the second story before the concrete
> is
>> > filled in. I don't know how it supported all that beofe the pour.
>> >
>> > The wiring is done with a chainsaw, with a depth stop, to make a slot into
> the
>> > wall, the wiring pressed into it and caulking covering it. The electrical
> boxes
>> > are special units, extra flat???? and the drywall is then glued on. No
> vapour
>> > barrier required. Not sure how the plumbing goes in or how they get away
> with
>> > wiring that close to the surface let alone the plumbing problems.
>> >
>> > They are claiming no A/C will be required...ROFLMFAO
>> >
>> > Looks very interesting but a pain to build with all the special items and
>> > related costs. Person in my future neighbourhood has spent all year with
> lots of
>> > family help building his home while the one beside me started later and has
>> > passed him, working completely alone on a lstandard umber home with bigger
>> > dimensions. To be fair, the lumber home guy is a renovator by trade and the
>> > styrofoam guy is just a financial guy.
>> >
>> > When doing a heat loss study, one soons finds out the walls are not the
> major
>> > heat loss areas.
>> >
>> > The ceilings and floors aren't going to be changed by the walls. It may be
> just
>> > cheaper to insulate further with lumber construction and foam clad.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Does anyone have anything good or bad in building a home out of ICF
>> >> technology in order to save energy. It seems that this technology brings
>> >> lots of benefits towards energy savings. This with the addition of solar
>> >> technology would be a great combination.
>> >>
>> >> Any positive or negative comments would be appreciated.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >>
>> >> Ray
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
Posted by Iain McClatchie on October 27, 2005, 11:30 pm
Rob> I do not understand why they are building wood-frame homes in the
desert.
Rob> Maybe just in-experience with any other building methods ?
Concrete, even reinforced concrete, is not a great building material
where you expect earthquakes. It's much simpler to make a lightweight
wood house safe, because the strength to weight is better, and because
it can flex a bit.
Posted by Rob Dekker on October 28, 2005, 8:08 pm
> Rob> I do not understand why they are building wood-frame homes in the
> desert.
> Rob> Maybe just in-experience with any other building methods ?
> Concrete, even reinforced concrete, is not a great building material
> where you expect earthquakes. It's much simpler to make a lightweight
> wood house safe, because the strength to weight is better, and because
> it can flex a bit.
Hi Iain,
There are not that many earthquakes in the deserts (of Nevada, Arizona, New
Mexico),
so there must still be another reason to build with wood there.
About concrete in Earthquake sensitive areas, yes, I hear that (strength/weight
problem) a lot.
I am not convinced it is really true yet, because a well-constructed concrete
structure is
is really exceptionally strong. After all, they build all high-risers with
concrete (not wood),
and there are plenty of these here in San Francisco.
It might be that the US obsession with wooden homes is just a historically grown
habit.
Wood used to be readily available pretty much everywhere, so the lumber industry
and construction would gain a lot of experience with wood. Once an entire
industry
is finetuning any process for decades or even longer, it almost automatically
becomes cheap.
That is (I think) why Northern Europe builds with concrete/brick, and the US
builds
with wood.
Energy (oil/gas) was also dirt-cheap, so energy-efficiency (or thermal-mass temp
equalization)
in homes was never an issue.Until now...
Posted by nospam.clare.nce on October 29, 2005, 2:17 am
wrote:
>> Rob> I do not understand why they are building wood-frame homes in the
>> desert.
>> Rob> Maybe just in-experience with any other building methods ?
>>
>> Concrete, even reinforced concrete, is not a great building material
>> where you expect earthquakes. It's much simpler to make a lightweight
>> wood house safe, because the strength to weight is better, and because
>> it can flex a bit.
>>
>Hi Iain,
>There are not that many earthquakes in the deserts (of Nevada, Arizona, New
Mexico),
>so there must still be another reason to build with wood there.
>About concrete in Earthquake sensitive areas, yes, I hear that (strength/weight
problem) a lot.
>I am not convinced it is really true yet, because a well-constructed concrete
structure is
>is really exceptionally strong. After all, they build all high-risers with
concrete (not wood),
>and there are plenty of these here in San Francisco.
>It might be that the US obsession with wooden homes is just a historically
grown habit.
>Wood used to be readily available pretty much everywhere, so the lumber industry
>and construction would gain a lot of experience with wood. Once an entire
industry
>is finetuning any process for decades or even longer, it almost automatically
becomes cheap.
>That is (I think) why Northern Europe builds with concrete/brick, and the US
builds
>with wood.
>Energy (oil/gas) was also dirt-cheap, so energy-efficiency (or thermal-mass
temp equalization)
>in homes was never an issue.Until now...
As long as the US can steal the softwod from Canada and thumb their
noses at international law, the USA will continue to build with wood.
Posted by Ecnerwal on October 29, 2005, 10:19 am
nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca wrote:
> As long as the US can steal the softwod from Canada and thumb their
> noses at international law, the USA will continue to build with wood.
Judging by the grade stamps on some of the softwood in my building
project in Vermont (quite close to Canada), we are now importing from
Austria and Germany. Kinda silly IMHO, but nobody asks me. Fortunately,
with SIPs I'm not using much of it.
--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by
XML site map
> moisture out of this concrete mass to make my home comfortable. This means
> turning the A/C on in late May and not turning it off until Late October or the
> humidity will settle in and take days of continuous running to recover the
> comfort again.