New Insulation Regs Dec 1st 2011

bartooseboy

Hi Guys,

Just looking for your input into the new insulation regs and the options available to meet each one in a standard masonry house:

Floor Insulation 0.21 (80mm Polyiso or...........)

Wall Insulation 0.21 (80mm Polyiso or 150mm pumped cavity or........)

Cold Roof Attic Space .16 (400mm mineral wool or......

Warm roof rafter space (rigid insulation between joists) 0.16 (assuming 100mm polyiso between & a 50mm insulated plasterboard)


If you can come up with alternative methods / products to achieve the above i'd be interested to hear about them.

Cheers

BryanF

bartooseboy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

Just looking for your input into the new insulation regs and the options available to meet each one in a standard masonry house:

Floor Insulation 0.21 (80mm Polyiso or...........)

Wall Insulation 0.21 (80mm Polyiso or 150mm pumped cavity or........)

Cold Roof Attic Space .16 (400mm mineral wool or......

Warm roof rafter space (rigid insulation between joists) 0.16 (assuming 100mm polyiso between & a 50mm insulated plasterboard)


If you can come up with alternative methods / products to achieve the above i'd be interested to hear about them.

Cheers

it doesn't work like this any more, you need to get you arch/ BER assessor to do a holistic assessment on your build. even the DOE in their typical compliant house are at circa .16wm2k for walls and floors. besides insulation (and air-tightness) is the best way to ensure your home is a comfortable place to be, so why scrimp on it in the first place?

whats the harm in putting 200mm of ins in the floor? and if you've going for a 150 cavity why not go for a 300mm? at least this forces you to think out the details earlier on and hopefully reduce the heat losses where elements meet as a result.

bartooseboy

This is an area that confuses / irritates / upsets me. How can there not be a definitive answer to (or what i assume to be) a straight forward detailing query??

I have carried out a wee test on this by ringing 2 (well known) insulation manufacturers 3 times each (speaking to a sales rep in 3 different areas) and i have gotten 6 different answers...this actually leaves me flabbergasted. How can a person be sure that they comply with the regs when there is no definitive answer on how to reach them!!


@Bryan F - a 300mm cavity would put extra cost to the foundations (extra excavation, extra concrete, extra reinforcement). Ditto with the wall ties and cavity closers, + extra work to window & door reveals. In the current economic situation that we find ourselves in the first priority is to try to keep costs at a minimum. other than that i agree fully with you but we have got to cut our cloth according to our needs

BryanF

bartooseboy wrote: »

This is an area that confuses / irritates / upsets me. How can there not be a definitive answer to (or what i assume to be) a straight forward detailing query??

I have carried out a wee test on this by ringing 2 (well known) insulation manufacturers 3 times each (speaking to a sales rep in 3 different areas) and i have gotten 6 different answers...this actually leaves me flabbergasted. How can a person be sure that they comply with the regs when there is no definitive answer on how to reach them!!

you don't seem to want to accept what your being told... From the regs http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/BuildingStandards/FileDownLoad,27316,en.pdf

A building shall be designed and constructed so as to ensure that the energy performance of the building is such as to limit the amount of energy required for the operation of the building and the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions associated with this energy use ... .... both energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are calculated using the Dwelling Energy Assessment Procedure (DEAP) published by Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland

the current Regs require a 60% reduction from the base 2005 levels.

So, you have two choices: read and understand the current regulations and become a BER assessor or

you need to get you arch/ BER assessor to do a holistic assessment on your build.

to work out what the minimum building fabric U-value's will be for you design.

@Bryan F - a 300mm cavity would put extra cost to the foundations (extra excavation, extra concrete, extra reinforcement). Ditto with the wall ties and cavity closers, + extra work to window & door reveals. In the current economic situation that we find ourselves in the first priority is to try to keep costs at a minimum.

if your first priority is to keep cost to a minimum then design your building to reduce the amount of energy it will require.

other than that i agree fully with you but we have got to cut our cloth according to our needs

your needs would be best served by making your home super insulated and as comfortable as possible - why not reduce the floor area by X m2(your the QS you tell us), job done, extras covered!

MicktheMan

bartooseboy wrote: »

@Bryan F - a 300mm cavity would put extra cost to the foundations (extra excavation, extra concrete, extra reinforcement). Ditto with the wall ties and cavity closers, + extra work to window & door reveals. In the current economic situation that we find ourselves in the first priority is to try to keep costs at a minimum. other than that i agree fully with you but we have got to cut our cloth according to our needs

If I may jump in here. Most people dont get the chance of building their own house and of those that do very few go on to build a second one. Therefore it would be, imo, important that those that do build should do it right the first time.
Looking at build costs alone without forecasting what it will cost to run the house in comfort in the future is foolish. Imo, future energy costs are going only one way so calculating the extra build cost versus the projected cost saving over, say, 25 years is vital to any decisions one makes.
I come across this scenario nearly daily where people in their newly built houses are regretting not getting things like airtightness, thermal bridging, insulation and ventilation detailing correct when they built. "Why didn't we speak to you before we built" is an all too common question I get regularly.

You have the opportunity now to get it right. Don't let (relatively) small extra costs blind you before you do a 25 year analysis. Also don't forget about the intangable of living in an extremely comfortable home.

BryanF

bartooseboy wrote: »

Hi Guys,

Just looking for your input into the new insulation regs and the options available

http://www.constructireland.ie/images/stories/magimages/Vol05-Iss07/0507-Part-L-Table-02-LARGE.gif this was issued by the DOE last year, I'm not a fan of the wall build-up but you can see the point re U-values

sinnerboy

bartooseboy wrote: »

This is an area that confuses / irritates / upsets me. How can there not be a definitive answer to (or what i assume to be) a straight forward detailing query??

This is exactly what I was asking myself back in 2007. At that time I had been a practicing Architectural Technician for 22 years. Together with many many
others I have been upskilling since.

Compliance with Part L is far more complex than you assume. But the good news is that there are plenty of good people out to to assist if you seek the them out. A good place to start is the SEI BER assessors website. Seek out someone who was a building professional for years before they became a BER assessor.

beyondpassive

bartooseboy wrote: »

This is an area that confuses / irritates / upsets me. How can there not be a definitive answer to (or what i assume to be) a straight forward detailing query??

Do you have Professional input on the construction and buildability side of the project?

bartooseboy wrote: »

@Bryan F - a 300mm cavity would put extra cost to the foundations (extra excavation, extra concrete, extra reinforcement). Ditto with the wall ties and cavity closers, + extra work to window & door reveals. In the current economic situation that we find ourselves in the first priority is to try to keep costs at a minimum. other than that i agree fully with you but we have got to cut our cloth according to our needs

Why would the footings need to be bigger when the loadings are the same?

Theres a negligible cost increase for wallties and window closers, it can be difficult to compromise on interior finishes quality, but you'll end up redecorating or replacing the kitchen in ten to fifteen years, more difficult to do this for the fabric. Ask most people who've built, they'll say they wished they insulated more.

sydthebeat

bartooseboy wrote: »

I have carried out a wee test on this by ringing 2 (well known) insulation manufacturers 3 times each (speaking to a sales rep in 3 different areas) and i have gotten 6 different answers...this actually leaves me flabbergasted. How can a person be sure that they comply with the regs when there is no definitive answer on how to reach them!!

shock horror but sales people actually tell lies / untruths / half truths in order to make a sale. this has been happening for time immemorial.


there is a definitive answer as to how to comply with a regs.
Its called carrying out a DEAP assessment (Dwelling Energy Assessment Procedure)

This assessment will tell you want performance is expected of all your building element in order to comply. This assessment actually allows you to be very dynamic with your material selection. For example you may be intent on using triple glazed 0.8 u value windows. This will afford you the choice of (1) using more glazing in your design for solar gain or (2) applying worse u values of elements wehen compared with double glazed windows.

Ive been working in the industry for 12 years, and have seen the impact of each revision of the regs over the years. By far the most significant has been the co-relation of compliance with part L and the DEAP procedure.
It is not good enough anymore for a client to had a planning sketch drawing to a builder and for a builder to price up in a "this is how i do it" manner. Obviously this lax manner worked highly in favour of builders and not the client as every choice in the build was seen from the point of view of what the "cheapest way" of doing something, or the "quickest".... seldom was the "best way" considered.
Now, with the advent of DEAP, air tightness test, thermal bridge detailing, and technical heating systems... all focused upon by clients who are very aware of fuel costs and the lined between "good" building and running costs.... builders no longer have such a free reign over how they do things. Im not knocking builders out there, because ive learnt more about good building practises and on site methods from seeing "good" builders carry them out. Ive alas also been horrified by some example of bad building carried out by other so called builders.

At the end of the day, these regulations are designed to ultimately protect the consumer.

fclauson

BryanF wrote: »

http://www.constructireland.ie/images/stories/magimages/Vol05-Iss07/0507-Part-L-Table-02-LARGE.gif this was issued by the DOE last year, I'm not a fan of the wall build-up but you can see the point re U-values

don;t start - just playing with my DEAP as you do at this time of night - and if I build to the above complience is compartivly easy

go tighter, warmer, thicker - and it gets harder :mad:

Just updated my psi values from 0.08 default to 0.01 calculated - and suprise suprise - my recognisable renewables goes from 7.7 Kwh/M2 to 4.4 :mad:

So I going from being close to compliance to way off the mark by imporving my thermal bridging values

think I will down grade to single glazing - great that fixes the problem - my renwables are now nicely at 14.4 Kw/M2

No6

Just wait until you try and comply with the carbon coeffecients, oil boilers are going to struggle, no open fires, even stoves unless they are wood burning... a DEAP assessment by a trained assessor before the design is lodged for planning is the only way to determine if it complies or not and then you'll have to stick religiously to the spec used!!

Poor Uncle Tom

It's one way of enforcing a specification.....:pac:

Now the big question....will the penalties for non compliance ever be followed up on?

What happens when Building Control becomes aware that a Commencement Notice has not been submitted for a planning permission where construction is completed? Nothing. Is anyone aware of any case where it has been followed up on?

Having said all that it is the law and we have to comply.

Slig

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

It's one way of enforcing a specification.....:pac:

Now the big question....will the penalties for non compliance ever be followed up on?

What happens when Building Control becomes aware that a Commencement Notice has not been submitted for a planning permission where construction is completed? Nothing. Is anyone aware of any case where it has been followed up on?

Having said all that it is the law and we have to comply.

HA!!! yes, I had a previous project followed up on because there was no commencement notice and the development was completed, admittedly it was a couple of months after the project was fully completed and the only reprecussion was that the building control officer paid a visit to the site.

All in all the developer got off lightly considering that the development consisite of a 42 unit housing development

Poor Uncle Tom

Slig wrote: »

HA!!! yes, I had a previous project followed up on because there was no commencement notice and the development was completed, admittedly it was a couple of months after the project was fully completed and the only reprecussion was that the building control officer paid a visit to the site.

All in all the developer got off lightly considering that the development consisite of a 42 unit housing development

Well then it wasn't followed up on.

When I said followed up on, I meant right through to prosecution, not just that the BCO was aware of it.

just do it

Any new build I see around here still has 100mm cavity with 60mm board. They probably have insulated slab internally, but that's as far as it goes. Regulations are useless without enforcement!