Jump to content

Why insulate between floors?


Adam2

Recommended Posts

I'm looking at upper floor make up along these lines:

 

20mm tiles

70mm screed

50mm EPS with UFH attached

200mm concrete (in-situ or planks TBC)

100mm service void

12.5mm plasterboard

 

If I put the UFH in the concrete (assuming in-situ concrete) looks like I would save 120mm in floor thickness at the cost of less insulation between floors.

 

The main part of the house is 3 floors will be using ASHP for UFH and MVHR.

 

Would appreciate thoughts on removal of EPS & screed : sensible or crazy ? or of course of there is a different make up I should be looking at.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Concrete is heavy and expensive and that is a very deep makeup for residential.  If it is deflection or sound insulation you are interested in, compare it with timber / engineered joist solutions. 15mm plasterboard is better than 12.5 as it is less likely to sag.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Adam2 said:

I'm looking at upper floor make up along these lines:

 

20mm tiles

70mm screed

50mm EPS with UFH attached

200mm concrete (in-situ or planks TBC)

100mm service void

12.5mm plasterboard

 

If I put the UFH in the concrete (assuming in-situ concrete) looks like I would save 120mm in floor thickness at the cost of less insulation between floors.

 

The main part of the house is 3 floors will be using ASHP for UFH and MVHR.

 

Would appreciate thoughts on removal of EPS & screed : sensible or crazy ? or of course of there is a different make up I should be looking at.

 

Thanks

 

 

imageproxy.php?img=&key=cc55a271c50209a8imageproxy.php?img=&key=cc55a271c50209a8imageproxy.php?img=&key=cc55a271c50209a8imageproxy.php?img=&key=cc55a271c50209a8

 

If you want a solid upper floor ,and i,m not saying that is right or wrong --look at Isotex  or Velox floor systems

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Adam2 said:

If I put the UFH in the concrete (assuming in-situ concrete) looks like I would save 120mm in floor thickness at the cost of less insulation between floors.

  

The main part of the house is 3 floors will be using ASHP for UFH and MVHR.

 

Would appreciate thoughts on removal of EPS & screed : sensible or crazy ? or of course of there is a different make up I should be looking at.

 

 

This will make the UFH very slow to react. Also there will be heat lost to the ceiling below. The optimum concrete / screed or whatever is probably between 50 and 150mm, with a bit of insulation under to stop the heat going downwards.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Adam2, I myself like the idea of concrete because of the acoustic benefits, so i get why you would consider it. Not sure it it would fit your situation but have you considered the Thermofloor  system from thermohouse. There are probably similar solutions. The thing that bothers  me in terms of buildup which you wouldn't get with say posi joists, is the service void. Mind you, I guess it's swings and roundabouts.

 

https://thermohouse.co.uk/thermofloor/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is almost exactly the upper floor build up I have.

 

Exactly as above, without the insulation your UFH will be trying to heat almost 300mm of concrete/screed and react extremely slowly.

 

Ideally use liquid screed and keep the thickness down to 60-70mm, just above the minimum to cover your UFH pipes. This way the system reacts faster and you spend less on screed.

 

You need the screed to put the UFH pipes into, to get rid of it you would need some kind of cast in situ floor, you can do that with the Thermofloor above but this is the kind of unusual way of doing things that builders don't like.

 

Edited by AliG
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Big Neil said:

Thermofloor  system from thermohouse

Ahh that looks good. I was less interested in hollowcore planks due to the irregular floor areas and difficulties in delivery due to site access but these could be good - will research some more.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Adam2 said:

Ahh that looks good. I was less interested in hollowcore planks due to the irregular floor areas and difficulties in delivery due to site access but these could be good - will research some more.

 

 

you cut velox or isotex with a saw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Big Neil said:

 

It's not for long that I had been considering such a floor makeup myself. Why would it be that contractors don't like such an arrangement?

 

Just that they like to always do things the same even if there is a better way, so will need some persuading.

 

Your planned floor is just like mine and not unusual. Most larger builders will have some experience of concrete planks. They simply won't have experience with some of these suggested systems and often they don't want to learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AliG said:

 

Just that they like to always do things the same even if there is a better way, so will need some persuading.

 

Your planned floor is just like mine and not unusual. Most larger builders will have some experience of concrete planks. They simply won't have experience with some of these suggested systems and often they don't want to learn.

don,t see any rocket scientists in the videos  LOL

downside is you need alot of acrow props --or small trees ,as it shows in a russian video 

Edited by scottishjohn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hers another system for you 

econekt.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ECONEKT.-ICF-Elements-Brochure2.pdf

 

see page 20

construction video of flooring

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdb5MqjSr9Q&index=16&list=PLIwx_CpmS37PPaGLSVS4fa6rEH1gcf5B1

Edited by scottishjohn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll check out service voids later because I can't picture it other than fixing a load of maybe 30/100 timbers to the underside of a concrete floor one at a time. A polystyrene based system i suppose have mostly embedded supports for cross battening so is the same true with this method?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Big Neil said:

I'll check out service voids later because I can't picture it other than fixing a load of maybe 30/100 timbers to the underside of a concrete floor one at a time. A polystyrene based system i suppose have mostly embedded supports for cross battening so is the same true with this method?

ring the agents?

econekt --in glasgow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thermofloor looks like resulting in v thick floors. Have also seen Lewis Deck. Will ask my engineer about the combo of timber joists & ~50mm of concrete on steel planks re floor thickness. If anyone has used this would be good to know if any experience of the "feel" or soundproofing vs solid concrete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

What about decking system? I'm considering this as it'll tie in well with my ICF walls and internal supporting poured walls. Concrete volume is less than precast slabs, and no screed is required. I've played about with the calculator and a 160mm slab will cross my spans with the right reinforcement. Minimal propping required and deck serves as temp working platform. Allowing a 200mm void for the suspended ceiling, means a 360mm total floor build up. You can add mineral wool after services fitted for extra sound dampening.

 

https://www.tatasteelconstruction.com/en_GB/Products/structural-buildings-and-bridges/Composite-floor-deck/Comflor®-60

 

One more thing, you use dovetail nuts in the channels for your service and ceiling hangers.

 

Edited by Conor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Conor said:

and no screed is required

My neighbour has used similar and was very happy as meant he could do a lot more work himself - though he also used EPS + EFH in a screed so still reasonably thick.

 

What are you considering with this approach then for the floor make up? Tin + concrete (with mesh) + ? If no screed I understand that as meaning your finished floor is going on the concrete so no UFH I guess?

 

Not sure how much thinner than pre-cast - mine is looking like 150mm precast the deck looks like it has min 60mm height + concrete on top which I didn't look into but presumably will be ~60 also depending on what span/mesh etc so not too much less than precast?

 

My design is for pre-cast but I'm still interested in alternatives if there may be advantages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Adam2 said:

What are you considering with this approach then for the floor make up? Tin + concrete (with mesh) + ? If no screed I understand that as meaning your finished floor is going on the concrete so no UFH I guess?

 

 

Build up will be: steel deck panels, 12-14mm rebar, mesh, UFH loops (wet rooms only - passive house), C30 concrete, powerfloated.

 

My thinking:

1. Panels are light and easy to handle and cut - we'll have a mezzanine and sunken bath- easier to cut to suit than precast

2. No crane required - safer working, panels can be manhandled then walked on.

3. No secondary screed - time, cost and labour saving.

4. Dovetail fittings and service voids will make fitting of service trays, ducting and suspended ceiling easier.

5. Easily meets and exceeds BC fire and noise requirements

6. DIY - I'm planning on doing as much as possible.

7. My walls will also be poured concrete (ICF and shuttered), will allow the whole lot to be tied in and form a very strong and thermally coherent monolithic structure. Also, with volumes of concrete I'll be ordering along pumps, floating etc, I'm hoping to get a good deal from local concrete firm.

 

Some disadvantages:

 

1. No actual idea of cost yet!

2. Finished floor will require protecting during rest of build process

3. Floating of concrete to a surface suitable for finishing... may require power floating?

4.  UFH will be slow to react... but pipes will be 35mm below surface and not required that often.

 

 

I'm an engineer that works for a large consulting engineer firm... we're always trying to innovate and do things differently, to a higher standard and in a safer way. That's what our clients expect, and I'm carrying that philosophy through to my build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting, the same angle I started from when initiating this thread - thinking of a deck / concrete system but went down the precast + EPS + screed route due to comments relating to downside of not insulating below the UFH. Like you, I figured why use EPS and then have another layer of screed as it involves a lot of cost and makes floors ~90mm thicker. As you say trade-off seems just to be heating reaction times for upper floors - though I notice you mentioned passive house so you'll have less of a requirement than I will I would expect. Will continue to ponder and will discuss with the structural engineer to see how much it may upset his calcs (+architect's detailed design/BR drawings) if we were to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that Lewis deck stuff if i've read correctly says as about an average of 50mm build up on top of joists. Seemed quite good to me. Then the normal rolling of insulation below. they reckon about £20 ish m2 for the corrugated deck and then the screed at circa £15, plus the insulation below of course,

I was thinking of it as a replacement effectively for ply/chip and either spreader plates below or whatever buildup on top.

Edited by Big Neil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...