House Pictures Chat Corner - Show off your house pictures!

  • Erstellt am 2015-11-25 10:27:31

Zaba12

2019-08-02 09:59:43
  • #1
Maybe your energy consultant forgot to enter something or miscalculated. Joking aside, if your highest U-value is already lower than the reference value, how can you be so far above it? That simply doesn't work mathematically. The average of all U-values (of all surfaces) is your Ht value. Do you have any high outliers with a large area somewhere? I would actually be interested now!
 

Lumpi_LE

2019-08-02 11:07:04
  • #2
Yes, the average, area-related, with me you can roughly estimate it as follows: 0.2 walls plus WBZ are 0.25, windows and doors pull it further down to about 0.4, the good roof (with a large area) then raises it again to just over 0.3 and the floor with 0.2 then pushes it slightly towards 0.3. Windows weigh heavily, well we have very large windows, but even if a normal house is at 20%, the Ht for wall and window with your values would be at 0.35, with your WB in the single verification then 0.37. With your values, roof and floor would then have to be twice as large in area as the wall area. maybe that is the case for you, it is just not the norm, hence my skepticism.
 

Zaba12

2019-08-02 11:19:52
  • #3

For me, the upper floor ceiling compensates for the disadvantages of the basement exterior walls. The roof doesn't matter because it is designed as a cold roof on the outside.

Everything else is significantly below and pushes the Ht value just to KfW55 level.

No more info is necessary.

For a change, also a house building picture. Our terrace railing is installed. The fall protection as a double rod mesh fence as well.





 

Lumpi_LE

2019-08-02 11:24:57
  • #4

If you type that through, you get 0.3 ... (with the low WBZ, otherwise 0.33 which would be normal). So miscalculated after all(?)
Well, with reduction against the ground it becomes less, a basement really makes a big difference in such a calculation. I would still get 0.27.
 

Dr Hix

2019-08-03 08:57:50
  • #5


If I remember correctly, you multiply U-value * area and add the results. Then divide this value by the sum of all exterior surfaces and apply the thermal bridge surcharge to this result.



I also get: HT = 0.304

Omitting any coefficients that improve individual values?
 

Zaba12

2019-08-03 10:10:35
  • #6
I have to recalculate again.
 

Similar topics
25.10.2008Is laundry drying prohibited in the new apartment?!10
22.05.2013Feng Shui in the apartment?11
16.05.2014Moving coming up? What to consider when choosing a moving company15
19.10.2017House Building Forum - Would you buy or build a house again?153
11.09.2018Buy an apartment on credit and rent it out37
02.08.2016Only problems with the new tenant of the old apartment because of whitewashing!21
07.09.2016Construction costs and financing for apartment or house132
06.10.2016Rented apartment as a substitute for equity capital11
09.07.2017First an apartment, then build a house?17
04.12.2017Floor plan of a two-family house, ground floor and attic apartment25
24.02.2019Moving into the house - furniture, moving, setting up91
16.11.2017Apartment renovated - unpleasant smell?!12
27.02.2018Too high humidity in the apartment. 60-70% in winter33
05.02.2018Question about renovation (plastering) of an apartment in a residential block.27
14.11.2019Scheduling apartment handover and moving20
28.09.2020Marking furniture for the move - How did you do it?20
15.01.2021Moving - have you arranged for amenities?11
03.10.2021No house, just an apartment: bathrooms tiny11
30.01.2022Unexpected sale of rented apartment. Options?72
13.10.2022National move - long distance - how to find a moving company?108

Oben