Project Homeownership - Basement, Ground Floor Plan - Tips

Totally bad comparison. We last went on ... over 45 years ago

yes, you are of course right. but I think I have made it relatively clear how I see it. Basically, the Energy Saving Ordinance is to blame.

But if you compare a 25, 36, 45 wall, then the concrete block looks a bit better. Does that mean you agree with me?

Maybe - if I could follow your words (?)

a formwork block can be many things. Whether it’s the Kaiser stones, the wooden stones or the Neopor stones. Since they cannot be compared with each other, I like to call them Neopor.

I think even fewer construction enthusiasts compare formwork blocks among themselves than formwork blocks against other wall building materials; therefore, I lump all the formwork block enthusiasts (some of whom then become users) together as far as a) they are interested in this construction method at all and b) whether they go deeper into it or even become buyers from observers. It is never a mainstream product.

Basically, the energy saving ordinance is to blame

The only one to blame was Bossa Nova

I wanted to say that when you compare the U-value of a wall structure with 35cm Poroton + 10cm ETICS with a Neopor formwork stone of 45cm, the Neopor stone performs better.

However, if you compare 15cm concrete + 10cm ETICS and 35cm Poroton + 10cm ETICS, then of course the Poroton performs better.

That’s what I meant.

Wall thickness is an argument for many home builders, as the plots are not exactly getting larger.

Regards
Red

I wanted to say that when you compare the U-value of a wall construction with 35cm Poroton + 10cm ETICS with a Neopor formwork stone of 45cm, the Neopor stone performs better..

I seriously doubt that: both are combinations of building material and insulation layer; the insulation in the thermal insulation composite system is applied only on one side externally, whereas the formwork stone is practically a thermal insulation integral system with insulation layer distributed on both sides. For the (total) thickness of the insulation layer, with the same material, the arrangement—whether you add 12 cm on the outside or 4 cm inside plus 8 cm outside—makes little difference; thus, the "concrete core" can roughly be equated to a concrete wall behind an ETICS cladding. If you then compare the construction wall layer across that of another building material, concrete looks old-fashioned against an equally thick porous brick.

I hope I haven't mixed anything up or twisted it.

But probably misunderstood me?

I said: with the same type and thickness of insulation material, it almost doesn't matter whether it's only outside or distributed on both inside and outside, and with the same thickness of concrete or cellular brick, the overall result is always worse for concrete than for cellular brick.

I will not read all conceivable apples-and-oranges comparisons in the world, since I am not looking for the answer to the question "how much A + x results in the same or a lower U-value with the same or lower total wall thickness compared to which B + y."

Anyone who could only afford their house under the condition of minimized wall surface area should, by the way, actually be advised against building a house at all by a responsible financial advisor.

But who cares about a comparison of the same strength concrete and porous bricks? What is interesting is what I have to do to have a safe statics and achieve my goal (Energy Saving Ordinance, KFW70-55-40-40+, etc). Then also to which building material I feel attracted?