Anyone buy/use the (Passive House) PHPP Software/ any 'math' on Thermal Bridging

ircoha

Am looking at PH design in detail for the first time and wondering has anybody used the PHPP software mentioned in the SEI blurb on PH design and which is retailing in US at USD 190 at present?

Also wondering how Thermal bridging is calculated given that the unit of measurement is W/(mK) ie watts per linear meter per degree K.
The new Part L Regs refer to DEAP

What is treated floor area please?
Thanks in advance

[Move if not in right section]

shakeydude

Hi,

I havent used it, but if you fork out the €190 let me know how you get on;). I was speaking to a rep from Gerald Lange architecture at the Energy Show and he is very familiar with it. He gave me the impression that it was straight forward, very similar to the Deap software.

The SEI have a very good document on Passive Homes where they give a very brief overview of the software. In this they say that they calculate the thermal bridge of the timber stud by "calculating the proportion of the insulated wall occupied by timber(in this case 10%)."This is a quote so I dont understand fully.

http://www.sei.ie/index.asp?locID=264&docID=-1

ircoha

shakeydude wrote: »

Hi,

I havent used it, but if you fork out the €190 let me know how you get on;). I was speaking to a rep from Gerald Lange architecture at the Energy Show and he is very familiar with it. He gave me the impression that it was straight forward, very similar to the Deap software.

The SEI have a very good document on Passive Homes where they give a very brief overview of the software. In this they say that they calculate the thermal bridge of the timber stud by "calculating the proportion of the insulated wall occupied by timber(in this case 10%)."This is a quote so I dont understand fully.

http://www.sei.ie/index.asp?locID=264&docID=-1

Will put u down for half the cost of the PHPP?:pac:

Have since discovered that it is available from SEI for 130 euro including shipping and packaging.

It would be interesting if anyone knows how similiar it is to the BER package.

The 10% figure is I suspect 44mm studs at 400mm centres means that c 10% of the wall area acts as a thermal bridge, the net insulated area between studs being [400-44 ] or 356 and 44 is 12.36% of 356.

holdfast

will pm you manual when i find it on my hard drive. how is the prject going

CJhaughey

ircoha wrote: »

What is treated floor area please?

Treated floor area is defined as Living or usable area within thermal envelope.

sas

It's an excel spreadsheet. I don't see how you can easily calculate the cold bridging detail using it. You enter u-values for your various elements. The problem is that the u-value you'd have for your floor for example (based on the way Ireland and the Uk calculate it) will be alot better than the PHI would measure it. On paper it's very easy to get to a 0.1 floor u-value using our method. For a passive house you have to use something like www.isoquick.de to get to that 0.1. You see where I'm going with this...

Its easy to solve pretty much any bridge apart from the one between the floor and wall insulation anyway. The SEI document referenced above says you can use quinnlite (aac) blocks to break this bridge. There's a big problem with this though. I recently stuck a 300mm * 150mm * 150mm chunk of a quinnlite b7 into water for 2 hours. It took on a just over a litre of water in that time. This means its insulating ability has to be seriously compromised due to all the air cavities being filled with water.

This is disappointing given that quinnlite has a IAB cert for use below the dpc.

I was originally going to build with poroton T8 and have a full layer of Quinnlite in place (bones of 3k all in) specifically for this reason. I'll likely be ripping this out now because it serves no purpose. Plus the change away from poroton to something else (likely TF or ICF) means a change to the rising wall build up anyway. This is a nuisance but I have to think long term.

sinnerboy

sas wrote: »

Its easy to solve pretty much any bridge apart from the one between the floor and wall insulation anyway. QUOTE]

SAS have you looked at Foamglass Perinsul blocks for this

http://www.foamglas.co.uk/perinsul.htm

shakeydude

sinnerboy wrote: »

sas wrote: »

Its easy to solve pretty much any bridge apart from the one between the floor and wall insulation anyway. QUOTE]

SAS have you looked at Foamglass Perinsul blocks for this

http://www.foamglas.co.uk/perinsul.htm

That is a pretty nifty product. Basically an insulated block with load carrying properties? The next question is how expensive and available is it?

sas

shakeydude wrote: »

sinnerboy wrote: »

That is a pretty nifty product. Basically an insulated block with load carrying properties? The next question is how expensive and available is it?

www.atil.ie supply it here.

Again though, it needs to be used below the dpc (in all practicality) to achieve the required effect. How does it fair when buried in wet ground etc. Plus the load bearing capacity is low (same as quinnlite b3 if I remember correctly) and the supervising engineer is "conservative" when it comes to the structural parts.

I just don't know...

sinnerboy

it is a bitumuous product - I should imagine ( have not used it ) that it can cope with wet conditions

you are quite right about getting "the ok" from your certifying engineer

sas

Actually, I did a little more digging on Perinsul SL this afternoon. It apparently is totally impermeable to water i.e. it can be sitting in water for months and it's insulation value is not affected.

Its thermal conductivity is 0.055 (i.e. twice as good as the B3 quinnlite).

Its a 3kn block.

The 215 * 100 *450 mm (i.e. to tie in with a 4 inch solid on the flat) block costs 19.30 + VAT. It ain't cheap but if it does what it's supposed to then it's likely worth it in the long run.

I think it's really suited to someone who will be externally insulating their house. This is the situation I'd consider using it in.

sinnerboy

Wow - aint cheap is right

Good digging SAS

sas

sas wrote: »

The SEI document referenced above says you can use quinnlite (aac) blocks to break this bridge. There's a big problem with this though. I recently stuck a 300mm * 150mm * 150mm chunk of a quinnlite b7 into water for 2 hours. It took on a just over a litre of water in that time. This means its insulating ability has to be seriously compromised due to all the air cavities being filled with water.

This is disappointing given that quinnlite has a IAB cert for use below the dpc.

Just to add a clarification as I've done a little more informal testing on my quinnlite block. The above test (possibly unfairly) involved submerging the block completely in water. This is not necessarily reflective of site conditions i.e. we don't build houses in swimming pools. This time I sat the same block in about an inch of water. It's been over 48 hours and the capillary action has caused the water to rise approx 1/4 way up the block (luckily they are a completely different shade when wet).

I feel the blocks are still oversold for their insulating abilities (below dpc) but they are certainly nowhere near as bad as I initially thought.

sas

Was at a passive house talk last week and one point I found very interesting\disappointing came out of it.

One of the speakers has a passive house in Galway with an annual energy usage of just 6kw per metre squared. It apparently is the 3rd best rated passive house on the planet. It's also a B1 in DEAP software. Brilliant!

The reason apparently is that while the PHPP focuses on minimizing the energy usage, the DEAP system focuses on getting your energy from renewable resources. So you can build a medium insulated house and score highly with devices that have a short (in terms of the life of the building) life.

So 5 years down the line that expensive wind turbine gets damage in a storm and is going to be expensive to fix. It gets left broken and the house owner just increases their draw from the grid.

sydthebeat

.... absolutely correct.....

but its like comparing apples with oranges....

the purpose of the BER is to create a standardised method to compare all new builds..... its not really a measure of your proposed energy usage. I always explain this to people that whilst their BER may show a 'primary energy usage'.... it is actually only an assumed standarised usage and not an actual usage.

basically PhPP measured 'actual' whilst DEAP measures 'assumed'.....

thats why phpp is so much more detailed..... and my god is it detailed!!! :eek:

badolepuddytat

I've used the PPHP software and it is very similar to the DEAP spreadsheet with the exception of complexity.

Deap assumes if you have 130 sq meters of a house you'll hav 3.8 people who will have 1.2 tv's kettles, X l of DHW etc etc. all you put in is floor area.

PPHP asks you for every minute detail so that you calculate the exact internal gains and the exact energy usage. no assumptions.

The BER is flawed, but it has to be simple. if i was desiginging my house's energy performance, i would be on the pphp, not DEAP. however i would spend the few mins to put it through deap to make sure i wasn't doing anything stupid.

morning delight

ircoha wrote: »

Am looking at PH design in detail for the first time and wondering has anybody used the PHPP software mentioned in the SEI blurb on PH design and which is retailing in US at USD 190 at present?

Also wondering how Thermal bridging is calculated given that the unit of measurement is W/(mK) ie watts per linear meter per degree K.
The new Part L Regs refer to DEAP

What is treated floor area please?
Thanks in advance

[Move if not in right section]

Hi folks

I want to resurrect this thread as I'm wondering is anyone using this software?
I've PP at this stage and we are building a spec for going out to tender. I'd love to achieve Passiv Haus standard but will not be re-designing! However using the PHPP could now be very useful.

So is anyone using it and how are finding it?

beyondpassive

A few Irish guys went to the certified passive house designer course in Glasgow, where they learned to analyse a design using nothing more than a pen and calculator. The software for use as a design tool or to aid in determining where to spend the few bob, in terms of the most effective energy saving interventions is a Godsend, however the process of taking a Passive house completed building to certification is still a little onerous. That said after being in a passive house this week the coldest in 10 years or so years, I can't help but be impressed by the comfort level. The front and back doors were left open for twenty minutes yet the house maintained a stable temperature once they were closed thanks I suppose to the thermal storage of the cellulose. The house was designed as a conventional naughty's style thing in a field. Its a pity that there couldn't be a dispensation given by LA's for permissable designs to be adapted to low energy builds within the planning process. Many of the trophy house designs dont reflect the current era of austerity and take no heed of the effects of climate change, peak oil and community/ social fabric issues we are now facing.

Morning Delight, you can make changes to your approved planning as ammendments to approved planning permission or as changes that will not affect your architects opinion of substantial compliance. Small changes in fenestration can have a positive effect in achieving comfort without undue reliance on a large heating system.

morning delight

after being in a passive house this week

Is this open to the public to visit? I've visited Lars house in Galway and was impressed with the internal environment. Doors weren't open for 20 mins though!

Morning Delight, you can make changes to your approved planning as ammendments to approved planning permission or as changes that will not affect your architects opinion of substantial compliance.

Thanks for the advice. We are looking at making some changes, but more for design/ asthetics and to reduce the glazing bill!

Still looking at going down the passive route and luckily we (myself and architect) were conscious of window placement at the original design stage. 33% of glazing faces south and only 9% faces north.

Interestingly I got a quote for passive certified windows and low U-value doors (U-value of 1) to see if going passive was economically feasible as I believe this would be the biggest financial element to going passive. The quote for 33 windows & doors covering 75m2 came in just shy of 40k ex Vat. I believe this to be good! Talking to a friend who got quotes last year and 3 years ago prices seem to have tumbled!

Just a few small issues like airtightness and thermal bridging to sort out now!!:D

sinnerboy

morning delight wrote: »

Just a few small issues like airtightness and thermal bridging to sort out now!!:D

Sure aren't you in the right place for that

beyondpassive

Glad to hear you are considering aiming for passive. Cold bridging and airtightness are no small matter, in fact they are the biggest issue. I figure you get that and are just pulling my leg, ahhh ha, i see what youre at eh. eh!

Just PM me if you want to visit a Passive house. The ones I recommend are in Wicklow, Galway and Sligo. Let me know where suits. I generally find once you've experienced heat recovery ventilation, its easy to be convinced make steps towards Passive.

morning delight

beyondpassive wrote: »

Glad to hear you are considering aiming for passive. Cold bridging and airtightness are no small matter, in fact they are the biggest issue. I figure you get that and are just pulling my leg, ahhh ha, i see what youre at eh. eh!

Spot on, a bit of sarcasm there for sure! Thanks for offer and will PM you...