blown cellulose in studwork

[Simplysimon]

well folks,

just wondering if anyone who has blown cellulose had it blown into the studwork as well. i know it's good for sound deadening but was wondering if it would be good to deaden the sound in the studs. had thought of 63mm cls with service cavity both sides. other option would be 89mm cls, services within studwork and still blown cellulose, any problems with wiring? the 63mm would therefore be air/cellulose/air so changing the soundwave as it moves through partition but the 89mm is a thicker wall, thoghts as to which would be better?

 

cheers

[nod]

1 hour ago, Simplysimon said:

well folks,

just wondering if anyone who has blown cellulose had it blown into the studwork as well. i know it's good for sound deadening but was wondering if it would be good to deaden the sound in the studs. had thought of 63mm cls with service cavity both sides. other option would be 89mm cls, services within studwork and still blown cellulose, any problems with wiring? the 63mm would therefore be air/cellulose/air so changing the soundwave as it moves through partition but the 89mm is a thicker wall, thoghts as to which would be better?

 

cheers

You would be better using MF stud  For better for soundproofing 

[Nickfromwales]

2 hours ago, Simplysimon said:

well folks,

just wondering if anyone who has blown cellulose had it blown into the studwork as well. i know it's good for sound deadening but was wondering if it would be good to deaden the sound in the studs. had thought of 63mm cls with service cavity both sides. other option would be 89mm cls, services within studwork and still blown cellulose, any problems with wiring? the 63mm would therefore be air/cellulose/air so changing the soundwave as it moves through partition but the 89mm is a thicker wall, thoghts as to which would be better?

 

cheers

You're over-thinking it perhaps? Why the fixation with nuisance sound transfer?

 

Rigid acoustic batt in 89mm stud is about as good as it'll get if it's, room to room attenuation on the same floor you're looking for. Boarding and blowing with cellulose would add a lot of extra work too, as the boards would need a hole at the lower and upper voids ( above and below the horizontal noggin ) to fully fill each section x however many sections per the wall length = a LOT of holes to patch up. Main issue here is I doubt if it's physically possible to get the nozzle of the blower in to such a tight space, as if you've ever seen one it's like a huge curved darning needle, about 60mm in diameter, and not very sympathetic to getting into small / compact spaces...

 

Cables in cellulose is a no-no unless seriously de-rated, but if you did one service void one side you could always just then drill services through, but then you would struggle with identifying cables within safe zones on walls ( where a cable rose and then exited the void horizontally to the other side ). Can o' worms there perhaps.

 

Surely the acoustic batt will suffice, but then you still have the option of utilising SB plasterboard both sides, plus you could go to 15mm SB instead of 12.5mm standard PB's if it's bedrooms. If you're happy to 'go mad' then you could always make 2 thinner stud walls, say 50x50mm frame with the vertical 'studs' at 300mm c's, and just couple them horizontally here and there for maximum decoupling. Wouldn't be a pleasant task to try and keep all those skinny frames straight, and plumb though.

 

51 minutes ago, nod said:

You would be better using MF stud  For better for soundproofing 

Yup, and maybe you could do the split stud walls with the metal studs just slightly offset from each other, like one stud wall sitting in the space of the other, eg a pair of 50mm MF's making up a 100mm cavity stud wall but the two never meet other than the occasional strapper at 1200mm height taking the twang out of the wall. Would be a bit of a PITA to insulate with acoustic batt so you'd probably have to use a bit of loose wool at the MF intersections.

 

Would the results be worth all of the aggro is the question... 

  

All these decisions will have knock-on effects too, like not having standard door linings for eg.

[Dan F]

Pretty much the best you can do, without using staggered/double studs, which gets you -59dB Rw is:

- 50mm rockwool

- 2x12.5mm soundbloc on either side.

- Resilient bars.

 

You also need to think about structural and flanking sound transmission, it's not all about how much sound reduction you get through the wall itself.

 

 

[nod]

9 hours ago, Nickfromwales said:

You're over-thinking it perhaps? Why the fixation with nuisance sound transfer?

 

Rigid acoustic batt in 89mm stud is about as good as it'll get if it's, room to room attenuation on the same floor you're looking for. Boarding and blowing with cellulose would add a lot of extra work too, as the boards would need a hole at the lower and upper voids ( above and below the horizontal noggin ) to fully fill each section x however many sections per the wall length = a LOT of holes to patch up. Main issue here is I doubt if it's physically possible to get the nozzle of the blower in to such a tight space, as if you've ever seen one it's like a huge curved darning needle, about 60mm in diameter, and not very sympathetic to getting into small / compact spaces...

 

Cables in cellulose is a no-no unless seriously de-rated, but if you did one service void one side you could always just then drill services through, but then you would struggle with identifying cables within safe zones on walls ( where a cable rose and then exited the void horizontally to the other side ). Can o' worms there perhaps.

 

Surely the acoustic batt will suffice, but then you still have the option of utilising SB plasterboard both sides, plus you could go to 15mm SB instead of 12.5mm standard PB's if it's bedrooms. If you're happy to 'go mad' then you could always make 2 thinner stud walls, say 50x50mm frame with the vertical 'studs' at 300mm c's, and just couple them horizontally here and there for maximum decoupling. Wouldn't be a pleasant task to try and keep all those skinny frames straight, and plumb though.

 

Yup, and maybe you could do the split stud walls with the metal studs just slightly offset from each other, like one stud wall sitting in the space of the other, eg a pair of 50mm MF's making up a 100mm cavity stud wall but the two never meet other than the occasional strapper at 1200mm height taking the twang out of the wall. Would be a bit of a PITA to insulate with acoustic batt so you'd probably have to use a bit of loose wool at the MF intersections.

 

Would the results be worth all of the aggro is the question... 

  

All these decisions will have knock-on effects too, like not having standard door linings for eg.

The density of timber makes it pretty ineffective when it comes to soundproofing A single mf stud is far more effective than using timber 

 

[Simplysimon]

thanks folks,

having lived in old properties with brick partitions and lathe and plaster and newer ones with studs, i'm aware of the marked difference and was trying to reduce noise.

cheers

 

[Nickfromwales]

13 hours ago, nod said:

The density of timber makes it pretty ineffective when it comes to soundproofing A single mf stud is far more effective than using timber 

 

When the two sides are decoupled, I would argue that the improvements would be significant. But yes, as above, I would use the MF but again as 2 staggered walls to make up the one stud wall.  

[Nickfromwales]

13 hours ago, nod said:

The density of timber makes it pretty ineffective when it comes to soundproofing A single mf stud is far more effective than using timber 

 

Please don't shoot my dog because of what I said....

 

[Nickfromwales]

13 hours ago, Simplysimon said:

thanks folks,

having lived in old properties with brick partitions and lathe and plaster and newer ones with studs, i'm aware of the marked difference and was trying to reduce noise.

cheers

 

Tell everyone to be quiet  Works incredibly well in my house with my 4 kids.  

 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't work at all