Does Isover's spacer sleeve provide an air gap (facade board)?

[hul]

That's your interpretation.

Yes, that's how it is. But they clearly state that it will only be weak ventilation, and that's the whole thing you want to avoid.
Which all research has shown as well.

 

[smurfen72]

They didn't mention anything about it corresponding to single-stage sealed facades, which has been claimed in the thread earlier?

 

[Nyfniken]

The quotes above are verbatim. The gist is basically: "With vertical paneling, no air gap is needed because the air gap is built into the facade."

It would be necessary then that there is no drip list halfway, I think. As there is on my facade.

 

[hul]

They didn't mention anything about it being equivalent to a single-stage sealed facade, which has been claimed in the thread earlier?

That they would be equivalent to single-stage sealing is not just what I'm saying but also what research has shown, these articles I've attached in previous posts.

And it’s pretty obvious when you think about it. But I think the problem is that many don't know how an air gap works and its function.
If you don't have a pressure-equalizing layer, then the whole idea of two-stage sealing disappears.

But people seem to think that the air gap is for other things, like solely ventilating away incoming water, etc.

 

[smurfen72]

Strange that isover doesn't know about it because they seem to have missed that the facade will be single-step sealed without vertical battens.

 

[hul]

Strange that Isover is not aware of this because they seem to have missed that the facade will be single-stage sealed without vertical battens.

Yes, but the research world against Isover.
I know whom I stand behind.

Additionally, it's very logical, simple physics

 

[GK100]

You probably won't get any further now hul, there are, of course, limits to both ways of solving the problem. Previously, you haven't been able to indicate at roughly what geometric conditions the slots vertically in the panel become equivalent or sufficient compared to a given opening due to the revered vertical bar.

Perhaps even that both solutions have more unexpected effects in certain cases that are not considered in the evaluations and that bring both advantages and disadvantages. In this case, I see it as quite easy to rely on the experience bank that exists and which has been partly expressed by various writers in the thread, even though some have been truly unstructured.

The question is why you are setting the "world of research" against Isover—is it to seek "weight"? That world, just like others, has a significant variation and can't be blindly used with the belief that it adds value.

 

[Chris983]

I haven't read everything, as much of the thread felt irrelevant, but a few thoughts:

Isn't the panel sitting very loosely if it's hanging on a batten which in turn hangs on another batten?

Isn't it better to take the extra cm for more insulation rather than an air gap?

Personally, I want as little air circulation as possible between the panel and the windproofing since the air in between should get warmer (when less outside air cools it) and thus can carry away more moisture.

 

[hul]

I haven't read everything yet, as much of the thread felt irrelevant, but a few thoughts:

Doesn't the panel sit very loosely if it's hanging on a batten that's in turn hanging on another batten?

Isn't it better to take the extra few cm for more insulation rather than an air gap?

Personally, I want as little air circulation between the panel and the wind barrier since the air in between should become warmer (when less outside air cools it) and can therefore carry away more moisture.

Of course, the panel doesn't sit loosely.

never compromise on the air gap because you want more insulation, without the air gap your insulation becomes worthless in some cases.

if you knew why two-stage sealed constructions are used, you wouldn't say you want a small air gap with little circulation. You might as well have a single-stage sealed construction. Do you know how a two-stage sealed construction works, why they are used?

 

[hul]

You probably can't go any further now hul, there are, of course, limits to both ways of solving the problem. Previously, you have not been able to specify at approximately what geometric conditions the slats vertically in the panel become equivalent or sufficient compared to a given opening due to the cherished vertical rib.

Maybe even both solutions have more unexpected effects in certain cases that are not included in the evaluations and that provide both advantages and disadvantages. In this case, I find it quite easy to lean on the experience bank that exists and is partially expressed by various writers in the thread, even though some have really been unstructured.

The question is, why do you put "the research world" against Isover? Is it to seek "weight"? That world, just like others, has significant variation and is not something you can bring up blindly thinking it will provide value.

Of course, research provides value. How else do you think we move forward?

I don't think you and many with you in this forum know how and why there is a two-stage sealed construction? That's where the problem lies.

Or do you know how it works and why there is a two-stage sealed one?

 

[SBH]

Now I haven't read everything, as much of the thread felt irrelevant, but a few thoughts:

Doesn't the panel sit very loosely if it's hanging on a batten which in turn is hanging on another batten?

Isn't it better to take the extra cm for more insulation than an air gap?

For my part, I want as little air circulation between the panel and the wind barrier as possible since the air in between should get warmer (when less outdoor air cools it) and thus can carry away more moisture.

Doesn't the panel sit very loosely if it's hanging on a batten which in turn is hanging on another batten? depends on how poorly or well you attach the timber.

Isn't it better to take the extra cm for more insulation than an air gap? you might think so but the air gap is not just for insulation. it's also for the panel. especially with today's lousy paints.

 

[SBH]

You're probably not getting any further now hul, there are of course limits to both ways of solving the problem. You previously haven't been able to specify at approximately what geometric conditions the vertical slots in the panel become equivalent or satisfactory compared to a given opening due to the cherished vertical rib.

It may even be that both solutions have more unexpected effects in certain cases that are not included in the evaluations and which provide both advantages and disadvantages. In this case, I find it quite easy to lean on the bank of experience that exists and which has been partially expressed by various writers in the thread even though some have really been unstructured.

The question is why you set the "research world" against Isover, is it to seek "weight"? That world, like others, has significant variation, and one cannot assume that it inherently provides value.

there are those who think research/theory is everything and cannot learn from practical examples, which I think is a shame

 

[Nyfniken]

there are those who think that research/theory is the only thing and cannot learn from practical examples, which I think is a shame

But research is really nothing more than practical examples on a large scale.

 

[smurfen72]

The research showed that airflow decreases with a reduced gap, but from what I recall, it didn't indicate that this would lead to any problem. In practice, the industry typically uses air battens of 8-12 mm, and I haven't heard of a single case that has encountered problems despite such a small gap between the paper and the wooden facade. There are plenty of research reports that point in the direction the funder wants. I have no idea how it is in this case, but I don't blindly trust research.

 

[hul]

The research showed that the airflow decreases with reduced gap, but as far as I remember, it didn't show that this would lead to any problem. The practice in the industry is otherwise to use air battens of 8-12 mm, and I haven't heard of a single case that had problems despite such a small gap between the paper and the wooden facade. There are plenty of research reports that point in the direction that the one paying for the research wants. I have no idea how it is in this case, but I certainly don't blindly trust research.

Of course, you can't blindly trust research. But when the research world unanimously says a wide air gap is needed, you should probably trust them. There are experts who have managed to present research that contradicts this, but I have presented plenty that supports it.

You mentioned 8-12 mm, which is significantly more than what has been discussed earlier. Where there was only venting in the panel, meaning just a few mm of air gap. How are you then supposed to get a pressure-equalizing chamber? Which is the whole point.