KFW40(plus) standard multifamily house cannot be achieved

  • Erstellt am 2019-09-01 16:57:00

Pinky0301

2019-09-01 19:37:38
  • #1
Thermal bridges flat rate or are they proven?
 

curverbox

2019-09-01 19:56:05
  • #2

Simple calculation 0.03, no individual part calculation
 

Zaba12

2019-09-01 20:14:37
  • #3
You have been saying more often now that it’s not enough, but what exactly is the value? Guessing where it might be missing is also stupid if you don’t know how far it is from the target!

Individual proof of the thermal bridges brings out quite a bit and your profiles are, to put it mildly, lousy. It should have been 0.78 already.

I already have 0.85 for the profiles and 0.6 for the glass for my kfw55 little house. Without individual proof, it wouldn’t have worked with a 55.
 

curverbox

2019-09-01 20:51:19
  • #4
Which value do you mean that you want to know?
 

Zaba12

2019-09-01 21:15:28
  • #5
The average U-value [W/m2K].
 

dertill

2019-09-01 21:51:55
  • #6
um kfw55 and kfw40, in addition to the system technology, output a maximum value for Ht' (transmission losses depending on the average U-value of the components) and for the primary energy demand per m2. Both in relation to a reference house according to the Energy Saving Ordinance: The kfw55 house is not allowed to consume more than 55% of the Energy Saving Ordinance house, and Ht' may, I believe, only be 70% of the reference house. (Kfw40 primary energy 40% and Ht' 55%)

Key point: The reference house has the same orientation, cubature, and window area. It therefore does not matter whether your house is cube-shaped or looks like the Great Wall of China; before the Energy Saving Ordinance and KfW, all are the same. If your energy consultant does not know this, then they also do not know what their software is doing. Simply increasing walls by one meter and seeing what happens does not sound competent to me. And to claim that it is due to the shape of the house is simply false. The Energy Saving Ordinance and KfW are neutral in this regard.

All of this can be found in the freely available Energy Saving Ordinance 2014/2016 Paragraph 3 (Building Balancing) and in the KFW 153 technical minimum requirements and additions in the KfW technical guidelines FAQ.
 

Similar topics
15.12.2019Aerated concrete exterior wall vs. Energy Saving Ordinance13
10.01.2017Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 / KFW55 / Gas + Solar in 201628
13.03.2016How to move from KfW55 to KfW40+?23
24.12.2015Single-family house, Energy Saving Ordinance 2016, developer recommends additional insulation - is it sensible?39
09.05.2016Compliance with the 2016 Energy Saving Ordinance with the following heating14
02.02.2017Construction costs kfw70 vs. kfw55 vs. kfw4030
03.07.2016U-value of windows - differences15
25.06.2016How important is the U-value of interior walls?12
13.04.2017U-value of windows: 1.3 - is an upgrade worth it?16
24.04.2017Experiences Single-Family House KfW55 - Assigning Tradesmen Yourself?20
16.07.2017Energy Saving Ordinance, KFW55, KFW40 or KFW40 Plus19
22.02.2018Financing with KfW or without? Price surcharge from KfW70 to KfW40?12
07.05.2020U-value outer wall 0.26 - is that okay?13
06.11.2018Ytong Energy Saving Regulation 25cm stone thickness allowed - Who has experience?17
12.01.2019Will the Energy Saving Ordinance from 2021 make new construction unaffordable?27
18.12.2019Decision KfW55 vs. KfW40 plus22
20.01.2020Build a multi-family house according to the Energy Saving Ordinance or KFW55?29
03.11.2020Single-family house with KfW55/controlled residential ventilation or Energy Saving Ordinance standard - experiences and opinions?22
09.07.2021Building according to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 or KfW5543
17.05.2023Same price: Kfw55 with Poroton monol. OR Kfw40 with Poroton WDVS?31

Oben