guckuck2
2019-04-28 06:59:03
- #1
Or in the plaster, if it is not to be painted.
Mineral wool has the advantage of a more ecological image. In a multi-family house, you need (at least) fire barriers because EPS is indeed flammable and drips down like napalm. In a single-family house, irrelevant.
Mineral wool adds mass to the facade compared to EPS. This additionally provides soundproofing. The algae theorists say mineral wool stores thermal energy and does not cool down as quickly on the surface, i.e., the cause of algae on EPS (surface dries more slowly, temperature drops quickly) is reduced.
My last ETICS facade cost a total of €23,000. With EPS 16cm WLG 032 in the Brillux system. Without paint but plaster in “Protect”, so with additives. The house is about 200 sqm (flat roof also with parapet). Mineral wool surcharge would have been about €6,000. Besides more expensive material, there is also the work of doweling. Mineral wool must not get wet; that is its greatest potential for damage. Both during processing and afterwards (also with brick cladding).
Unlike EPS, mineral wool boards cannot be sanded. The risk of seeing the joints of the boards afterwards is higher. As far as I know, they are not available with a step joint either.
All in all: It can be done, but it comes at a price and is not beyond any doubt. Even if the next serious chemical disaster is discovered in EPS, in my opinion, the surcharge for mineral wool is not worth it. I have a neighbor who builds with filled Poroton, very atypical here, and accepts tens of thousands of euros extra for it. Precisely because EPS has a partly bad reputation. But for the extra cost, he could build the whole facade at least twice or have it repainted regularly for the next 50 years. Oh well.
Mineral wool has the advantage of a more ecological image. In a multi-family house, you need (at least) fire barriers because EPS is indeed flammable and drips down like napalm. In a single-family house, irrelevant.
Mineral wool adds mass to the facade compared to EPS. This additionally provides soundproofing. The algae theorists say mineral wool stores thermal energy and does not cool down as quickly on the surface, i.e., the cause of algae on EPS (surface dries more slowly, temperature drops quickly) is reduced.
My last ETICS facade cost a total of €23,000. With EPS 16cm WLG 032 in the Brillux system. Without paint but plaster in “Protect”, so with additives. The house is about 200 sqm (flat roof also with parapet). Mineral wool surcharge would have been about €6,000. Besides more expensive material, there is also the work of doweling. Mineral wool must not get wet; that is its greatest potential for damage. Both during processing and afterwards (also with brick cladding).
Unlike EPS, mineral wool boards cannot be sanded. The risk of seeing the joints of the boards afterwards is higher. As far as I know, they are not available with a step joint either.
All in all: It can be done, but it comes at a price and is not beyond any doubt. Even if the next serious chemical disaster is discovered in EPS, in my opinion, the surcharge for mineral wool is not worth it. I have a neighbor who builds with filled Poroton, very atypical here, and accepts tens of thousands of euros extra for it. Precisely because EPS has a partly bad reputation. But for the extra cost, he could build the whole facade at least twice or have it repainted regularly for the next 50 years. Oh well.