Replies

1. 
   Guest_ | Aug 16, 2000 08:52pm | #1

   *
   WHY?

   What is it that's so important that you decided that it was a must read and required that you command us to download it?

   Gabe

1. 
   Guest_ | Aug 16, 2000 09:31pm | #2

   *Gene - you're probably better at reading these than I am but are they really using less than 3/8" (9mm)gypsum board for the exterior sheathing?Also, do you know what density they install the cellulose at?I know that when I lived in Sweden for a year in the late 60's that they were using much more energy-conscience house building practices than most of what is built here today so I'm not surprised to see such extensive research being done there. Thanks for the reference.

1. 
   Guest_ | Aug 17, 2000 02:54am | #3

   *Gene,

   Thanks for the good links. I've downloaded about 10 articles off the site and once I've digested them I'll give you some input on what I think.

   View Image © 1999-2000"The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it." Aristotle

1. 
   Guest_ | Aug 18, 2000 05:27pm | #4

   *Gabe. Download the paper and see for yourself. It may or may not be of interest or of use to you. Given the many discussions re cellulose as a VDR I thought their findings might be of interest to many on Breaktime.Bill. I'll hav to get back to you on those questions.Joe. Good hearing from you. There is another paper you might find interesting--I have a copy of it here somewhere: "Moisture Conditions in a North Facing Wall with Cellulose Loose fill Insulation: Construction with and without Vapor Retarder and Air Leakage." Published in Volume 19 of the Journal of Thermal Insulation and Building Envelopes. Authors: Hagentoft and Harderup. GeneL.

1. 
   Guest_ | Aug 18, 2000 06:16pm | #5

   *Gene...This thread should be in the energy folder...I would love to read the articles you are quoting cause I feel homes that breath naturally may be healthier homes and DP may be part of the solution...near the stream,ajRead Kevin's article in crawlspace venting...Joe, glad to see you reading DP info...

2. 
   Guest_ | Aug 18, 2000 06:47pm | #6

   *Bill. There is no mention in the paper of the installed desnity of the cellulose. The authors noted that "There are strong indications [of]... ongoing settling of the loose fill insulation in the roof construction..."The GWB seems to be 13 mm--approximately 1/2-inch. GeneL.

3. 
   Guest_ | Aug 18, 2000 07:05pm | #7

   *adirondackJack, Mea culpa.You can read this paper by downloading it.I had posted a reply to Gabe, Bill and Joe but it doesn't show up. Who is Kevin and where did he post or write on crawl space ventilation? Gabe. Download the paper and see if it is useful or not. Given the amount of pro and con discussion on cellulose being a VDR, I believe any information on the subject is welcomed by most posters on Breaktime.Oh yes, the research was done in private, occupied residences--3 houses. Joe. Good hearing from you. Another useful paper is the second reference given by the authors. I should have a copy soon and will see what I can do about making it available...copyright issues. GeneL.

4. 
   Guest_ | Aug 18, 2000 07:12pm | #8

   *Gene...I read all quickly and it sounds like they are using formulas to predict mold...I didn't find any info that said b there was mold.I concluded nothing either for of against Cells...and find the external condensation plane to be the most important factor in controlling the health of this wall...A breathing wall built right would evaporate moisture and store moisture at levels below mold growth...At least that's what I think is trying to be acheived...Fred always said keep the moisture down in a home...I feel that way too...It's very much site and occupant influenced along with the building practices used in the construction. My few moisture dealings were real people caused...boiling water for hours daily with no lids and no fan running...hours of shower use...wet crawls...near the stream,aj

5. 
   Guest_ | Aug 18, 2000 08:31pm | #9

   *Gene, I only had time to review them quickly and while it's interesting reading, a lot of it is not relevant to real situations here. Construction in scandanavia is considerably more controlled than here. A lot of apples and oranges here. You could misinterpret just about anything in these papers and substantiate with formulaes that don't apply here.Gabe

6. 
   Guest_ | Aug 19, 2000 01:48am | #10

   *Gene - I think the exterior sheathing was shown as 9 mm gwb. The interior was 13. I was more interested in the use of gwb as exterior sheathing with no other indication of materials resisting shear. They may strap with steel or plastic bands. I don't recall Scandanavia being an active seismic - but they do get strong winds and very deep snow loads on roofs.

7. 
   Guest_ | Aug 19, 2000 03:55am | #11

   *Ajack, I know now not to let you read anything of importance. . .

   This is from the SUMMARY. . .The calculation model was therefore used to simulate the conditions for a design moisture supply of 2 and 4 g/m 3 using a reference climate for Stockholm from the literature. The results show that even for the lower design value, moisture would accumulate and condense in the wall construction. Since high relative humidity would for long periods of time coincide with temperatures feasible for mould growth, the wall construction is not to be recommended.

   How can you expect to be taken seriously when you post drivel like the kind in your previous post?

   View Image © 1999-2000"The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it." Aristotle

8. 
   Guest_ | Aug 19, 2000 01:33pm | #12

   *Gene,

   After reading the article it's still hard to draw a conclusion. Does the lack of the polyethylene vapor barrier or the loose-fill cells the determining factor as to why they had condensation on the inside of the outside gwp.It clearly shows that a design model of 4 g/m3 per day that this type of construction was not adequate to prevent moisture migration. This fact seems to have been both supported through their two years of actual readings and when they used their 5 year model. They also conclude that this type of wall construction will lead to wall damage eventually, this seems to be their major concern.My conclusion is not to use loose-fill cells without a vapor barrier, but I already knew that.Regards.

   View Image © 1999-2000"The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it." Aristotle

9. 
   Guest_ | Aug 19, 2000 08:13pm | #13

   *Bill. Mea culpa. 13 mm was the inside and 9mm the outside. Joe. Thanks for the comments. The most recent paper--1998 on this subject, "Organic Insulation Materials: Humidity and Necessity of a Vapor Basrrier,"is found on page 109 of the Thermal Performance of the Exterior Envelopes of Buildings VII, December 1998. By the bye. Joe Lstiburek argues that "cellulose is not a VDR." GeneL. But then, Harold Orr's finding about cellulose insulated houses built in 1909? in Canada give one pause to reflect. GenerL.

10. 
    Guest_ | Aug 20, 2000 05:05am | #14

    *From b your quote, I'm reading, I quotei "temperatures feasible for mould growth"...I am noting the fact that b no mould was found...I also feel there are many successful installs in our Glens Falls area... I know of no failures other than those I mentioned above...Sorry you still feel the need to personally attack me...but that is what we all have come to expect of you...I will not be posting back to you about this...Pretend I did if it make's it more fun Fusco...near the stream having my shorts torched semi-annually...flame away...aj

11. 
    Guest_ | Aug 20, 2000 05:18am | #15

    *A_jerk,

    The article was about the possible damage to the walls (framing) due to condensation for lack of a vapor barrier. Seems you were looking for mold. . . I showed were it was you bozo. . .

    View Image © 1999-2000"The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it." Aristotle

12. 
    Guest_ | Aug 20, 2000 06:49am | #16

    *Gene...What do you think of DP cells in Upstate New York?near the stream having yet to observe local problems...aj

13. 
    Guest_ | Aug 20, 2000 02:04pm | #17

    *A_jerk

    Do you think that by completely editing your original post that it prevents you from still looking like a bozo? If anything it just confirms it. . .

    View Image © 1999-2000"The first step towards vice is to shroud innocent actions in mystery, and whoever likes to conceal something sooner or later has reason to conceal it." Aristotle

14. 
    Guest_ | Aug 21, 2000 08:36pm | #18

    *Aj. The first energy efficient house I built--1977-- was insulated with 3.5 lbs/cu/ft cellulose.The term Dense/Pac--coined by Richard Munson?-did not exist at thattime. I continued to use cellulose in the houses I did all over the country including NY state, and Canada. I later changed over to sprayed-in polyurehtane(PUR), but blew-in cellulose in the attics. See archives on my use of PUR. GeneL.

15. 
    Guest_ | Aug 21, 2000 10:19pm | #19

    *Gene...So does DP work and does it get moldy and does it need poly and does it perform better than fiberglass?Lots of questions, near the stream,aj

16. 
    Guest_ | Aug 22, 2000 04:20am | #20

    *Thanks Jack, I'm laughing out loud.P.S. - don't flame me or I'll give people your real name and address!-Rob

17. 
    Guest_ | Aug 22, 2000 09:28pm | #21

    *AJ. The archieves will answer many of your questions. DP works, but so does FG if installed properly. The Saskatchewan Conservation House proved than more than 20 years ago. I have heard of mold/fungus forming on cellulose, but do not know if the cellulose was treated or not. Was this posted on BT? I personally have never seen this in 20 years. But it doesn't mean it can't happen. GeneL.