What is the problem with single-sealed facades?

[ToRy]

I live in a world where I tried to get a picture of the system discussed in the thread by studying facts. I was not interested in mathematicians' personal opinions or ball boys' experiences of playing ball against walls or TV viewers' experiences of parabolas. If you have more personal questions, take them in pm.
..................

I do not consider my questions to be more personal than others' questions or opinions. You expressed an opinion, and I questioned it, even found it incorrect as an opinion in the context. Sorry, but you made your bed, now lie in it....

The fact - as you say you are seeking - is that a house is built and used by people. Builders are not machines that do a task in exactly the same way a thousand times in a row. People install satellite dishes and awnings, people kick balls. People use a house as they always have, especially if no one has mentioned to them that "this facade cannot tolerate any impact, regardless of whether it involves installing things or accidentally knocking something against it." If someone had said this to a potential buyer, I think most would have been cautious. How can one be interested in facts but ignore actual conditions? It is also a fact that it is irrelevant whether the system works in theory if, in that theory, you disregard the theoretical possibility that someone will use the house as one would expect someone to use it. A car shaped like a spear would theoretically probably have very low air resistance and low consumption, but will it work in practice? Where will the theoretical passengers fit?

I can understand that you find it difficult to defend yourself against several who question your inquiries, but at the same time, I understand those who do. As mentioned; you made your bed, now lie in it.

 

[Nyfniken]

Thank you Mikael_L. My thought was that if I had built such a house according to all the rules that the manufacturer advocates, is it then a sustainable system.

Is it enough for it to be mold-free on day 1, do you think?

In the specifications for a house, shouldn't it still withstand minor settlements, be able to close the doors, and have the facade withstand an occasional snowball?

 

[ToRy]

Thank you Mikael_L. My thought was something like if I had built such a house according to all the manufacturer's prescribed rules, would it then be a sustainable system.

Then if the industry today is too incompetent to implement it, I was not interested.

Yes, it could become a sustainable system IF you followed all of Mikael's points to the letter. Satisfied? However, THAT system would not be sustainable in practice, in any way.

Again, the industry is not too incompetent to implement the system. It is obviously the system that cannot be practically implemented.

However, you write a word here that at least I haven't reflected on before to any extent; "....according to all the manufacturer's prescribed rules...."
If you interpret "the manufacturer" as the person/entity/company that originally thought this could work, where is the origin? Who came up with the idea? Or rather; who said "this should work, let's go with it!"? Who should take the blame?

 

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

So you are speaking for the entire industry, if I have questions regarding the civil and military aviation, space, and telecom industry

Well, I naturally do not speak for the industries as such. There is no appointed spokesperson for these. What I do, however, is refer to the industry consensus. I am competent to do this since I am an 'expert' in the field in the sense that it is one of the requirements to obtain a doctorate in it. And I have one. At the institution where I obtained my doctorate at Chalmers, we were involved in, among others, the construction of control computers for the space industry (Arianne), the development of the control system for JAS, the same for the automotive industry, and also telecom with a focus on reliability and safety aspects. So I am well-versed in this kind of reasoning. It is very relevant here, as all such systems typically fail at the interface between technology and humans. (Sometimes you can even turn it around and use it, as in the case with the placement of the JAS control computer.)

Thank you kindly for taking the time to educate us who don't understand better!

Yes, I wouldn't have used words like "don't understand better" myself. Understanding and knowledge are relative concepts and difficult to pinpoint. But sure, no problem. I am obliged by the government to do things like this since I am part of the faculty at a state university, the so-called "third mission." So I actually get paid to talk about these kinds of things at Bygga hus. Imagine that!

 

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

stake.
Jag tror jag förstår hur du funderar.
Du vill veta om det finns något sätt för den fasaden att fungera.


[lista på långtgående steg]

Men helt klart kan nog konstruktionen fungera, rent teoretiskt.

Och med den specen så kan man ju undra om det är rimligt att kalla resultatet "fasad". Jag tycker beskrivningen stämmer bättre på "oljemålning." Dom brukar man inte heller ha utomhus i väta.

 

[Mikael_L]

I must admit that I deliberately exaggerated the measures required for the façade system to function. It likely works slightly better than that, but currently, we don't know how much "stress" the single-stage sealed façades can withstand before the problems become a reality.

But you can also look at it differently; if you compare how incredibly quickly we've discovered the flaws with this system and how extensive the issue seems to be after just a few years, we have to assume that there is a significant risk that this building experiment will go down in history as one of the most talked-about in the future. It's a safe bet that people will mention single-stage sealed façades before they say "wooden sills in concrete slabs a'la 70s), asbestos façades, roofs, and ventilation pipes, or chemical emissions from carpet glue on damp concrete ("sick building syndrome").

Somewhere, I find it phenomenally strange that this could be rolled out in such large-scale production right away, and that no one has to take any responsibility for the madness.

 

[Nerre]

As mentioned, if there is a 50% probability that something works, it is usually considered that chance decides whether it works or not.

"I can flip a coin to get heads. Look, it landed that way 50% of the time!"

 

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

Somewhere I find it phenomenally strange that this could roll out into such large production directly, and that no one should have to take any responsibility for the madness.

Exactly. We clearly need the same regulations as on the continent, where they've been inspired by the Napoleonic Code to demand greater responsibility from the builder. If you want to experiment, you have to do it under controlled conditions.

 

[stake]

Well, I'm obviously not speaking for the industries as such. There is no appointed spokesperson for these. What I do, however, is refer to consensus in

Yes, I personally wouldn't have used words like "don't understand better." Understanding and knowledge are relative concepts and hard to pinpoint. But sure, no problem. I am obliged by the authorities to do this, among other things, since I am part of the faculty at a state university, the so-called "third task." So I actually get paid to talk about these kinds of things on Building houses. Imagine that!

Good for you that you're a Ph.D. candidate and have broad experience, unfortunately, it didn't help either you or me in this case as you completely misunderstood what I meant and our discussion here was something I could have done without. On the other hand, it's a discussion forum, so if I only wanted my own opinion echoed back, I would have posed it to my reflection in my boyhood room. I'm not that kind of person.

 

[Enk Projektet]

If more buyers had been critical of this system at an early stage, the industry would likely have stopped this earlier...

 

[Tobias-]

As I understand it: Moisture collects behind the cell plastic that has no chance to be ventilated, and thus rot occurs. The moisture penetrates mainly at the connection to window sills and similar areas. The intention was for the facade to be completely sealed, but as many have pointed out before, it is virtually impossible.

So on the drawing board it probably looked really good, and many architects like the expression of "stone houses" that it conveys. It probably seemed like a great idea before giving it much thought, or rather, they didn't

 

[haavard]

I think the description fits better for "oil painting." They usually don't have them outdoors in the wet.

Perhaps not, but the method is not entirely unknown.

Edvard Munch left his paintings out in rain and snow for years. Some paintings rotted and others cracked and became dull, but without this harsh treatment, the paintings were not genuine Munchs.

http://www.yr.no/nyheter/1.922910
(After about 2/3 of the page)

 

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

Good for you that you are a doctoral student

But now it's not an opinion anymore. Now it's an error of fact. When you're finished, you're a *doctor* not a doctoral student.

 

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

If more buyers had been critical of this system at an early stage, the industry would likely have stopped this earlier...

But as I wrote in the Gothenburg example, it wasn't enough. Many were hesitant, but that's not enough when it's the only option available to buy. You have to be *extremely* critical, and so many have to be that the houses can't be sold other than at a lower (even significantly lower) price.

Those are quite significant demands to make. I don't believe that the market could/would have rectified this situation.

 

[Enk Projektet]

But as I wrote in the Gothenburg example, it wasn't enough. Many were hesitant, but that doesn't help when that's all there is to buy. You have to be *extremely* critical, and so many have to be that you can't sell the houses except at lower (even significantly lower) prices.

That's quite a high standard to meet. I don't believe the market could/would have cleaned up this situation.

Since there's no obligation to buy, of course you have a choice...if the construction companies couldn't sell due to poor construction, I guess they would quickly change...