Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

finehomebuilding.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#121

Post by bombcar »

verisimi wrote: post #93

You can see photos of the finished house here: https://www.finehomebuilding.com/2022/04/19/high-performance... Airtight it may be, but its no thing of beauty - at least not to me. I mean, its ok - but to me it is just channelling the form of a 2 bed flat into a house. I'm feeling claustrophobic just looking at it.. It looks like there are pleasant nature views all around, but all the effort seems to have been towards…

I mean to be honest it looks like a doublewide manufactured home, but cost like a 3400 sq ft. But if it's what you like, go for it I guess.

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#122

Post by JacobThreeThree »

a1371 wrote: post #40

It's interesting to me that hacker news likes building-related content so much, which happens to be my education other than... well, computers. Air tightness is a critical step forward. I'm glad we are talking about it. Thinking more holistically, I would not go with the double-stud wall. You get lots of thermal bridging, and when it gets cold, your outer studs freeze. I know it's considered a straightforward system,…

>Let's build our homes for centuries, not decades, folks!

I agree with you, but unfortunately the incentives in the system penalize constructing high quality buildings. The higher quality the building, the more taxes you pay.

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#123

Post by vkou »

JacobThreeThree wrote: post #122
a1371 wrote: post #40

It's interesting to me that hacker news likes building-related content so much, which happens to be my education other than... well, computers. Air tightness is a critical step forward. I'm glad we are talking about it. Thinking more holistically, I would not go with the double-stud wall. You get lots of thermal bridging, and when it gets cold, your outer studs freeze. I know it's considered a straightforward system,…

>Let's build our homes for centuries, not decades, folks! I agree with you, but unfortunately the incentives in the system penalize constructing high quality buildings. The higher quality the building, the more taxes you pay.

In a world where land is an endlessly appreciating asset, and the house on it is an endless depreciating asset, this can't be a significant concern.

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#124

Post by zemvpferreira »

a1371 wrote: post #40

It's interesting to me that hacker news likes building-related content so much, which happens to be my education other than... well, computers. Air tightness is a critical step forward. I'm glad we are talking about it. Thinking more holistically, I would not go with the double-stud wall. You get lots of thermal bridging, and when it gets cold, your outer studs freeze. I know it's considered a straightforward system,…

I agree with your main point but it's worth it to point out that air tightness is only a consideration in climates with really cold seasons. I live in a roughly mediterranean region (Lisbon) and it drives me up the wall to see people spend fortunes on passive-haus-like builds.

Meanwhile my own home is about 200 years old, built out of stone and lime, has no air tightness whatsoever -in fact it had a 5m2 hole in an exterior wall for most of 2020 and 2021- and I'm perfectly confortable with no environmental heating or cooling. Windows are opened every day of the year.

Good design and a good location beat excellent construction any day of the week.

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#126

Post by b112 »

gruez wrote: post #105
londons_explore wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Burnt teflon flakes off into food. Grab a pan and wipe a tissue around the inside a few times... See the dirt that comes off... That's probably carbon and teflon deposits.

My understanding is that teflon itself is inert, but the combustion/precursor products aren't[1]. Given that, "burnt teflon flakes" should only be an issue if you burnt the pan while cooking but still ate the food. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytetrafluoroethylene#Ecotox...

You burn your pan. Teflon off gasses. The gas is released in air.

The same offgassed chemical is now under the teflon, between pan and teflon, as well as in any cracks, or porous areas of the teflon, more likely now, as teflon has changed its chemical struture.

It's where the gas came from, yes?

So, now you have a pan more likely to crack and chip, with deadly chemicals waiting.

The logic you are employing, is similar to the logic which got a deadly substance, teflon, approved.

OK under some circumstances, but not thinking of the entire picture.

The price? Your health.

The health of all in your house, breathing toxic gas, and eating toxins, for which the young are more susceptible to.

This is classic "what's wrong with the world" stuff. For an extremely mild convenience, use a deadly solution at a whim. Teflon.

People would rather have their food covered in toxic stuff, than use a little oil. Or buy an iron pan, and season it correctly.

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#127

Post by linguistbreaker »

nonameiguess wrote: post #94
bluGill wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the poor quality work I keep hearing that, but those who are in the trade listen to engineers who have done real analysis. What looks good often is bad, what looks bad is often good.

This is amusing to me. My roof was leaking a few years back and I went to check it out and it turns out some of the nails were never covered and they rusted through. The roof tar just didn't extend all the way to the edge (flat roof). My electrical outlets kept going out so I went to replace a few and realized they were installed with the wires connected to the wrong leads. I had some LED lights that are supposed to…

Agreed. See this a ton and i do things myself now simply because i can't trust anyone to do it right...

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#128

Post by __d »

flyingfences wrote: post #106
__d wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the details. Do you know why this isn't done for walls as well? It seems like the cellulose is packed directly against both the interior and exterior surfaces of the walls. Is it simply that hot air rises, and so it's needed more for the roof?

It is done for some walls, but it's much less common. Part of the issue is that, yes, hot air rises, so a lot more moisture will find its way to the roof than to the walls. Part of the issue is that roofs are (traditionally) sealed much more thoroughly than walls (because rain falls on roofs), so the moisture has a harder time getting out. The ventilation channels provide an egress for the moisture below the sealed r…

Ah, yes -- I hadn't thought through the worse outcomes for snowfall.

Thanks!

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#129

Post by abathur »

JacobThreeThree wrote: post #122
a1371 wrote: post #40

It's interesting to me that hacker news likes building-related content so much, which happens to be my education other than... well, computers. Air tightness is a critical step forward. I'm glad we are talking about it. Thinking more holistically, I would not go with the double-stud wall. You get lots of thermal bridging, and when it gets cold, your outer studs freeze. I know it's considered a straightforward system,…

>Let's build our homes for centuries, not decades, folks! I agree with you, but unfortunately the incentives in the system penalize constructing high quality buildings. The higher quality the building, the more taxes you pay.

Land-value tax :)

Re: Detailed Assemblies for an Airtight Small Home

#130

Post by synicalx »

hedora wrote: post #19
synicalx wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume, steam causing moisture build up and associated mould and rot. That's a problem easily solved with a $20 exhaust fan though.

The cost of the fan is dwarfed by labor, and you’re not getting a fan you want to live with for $20. Also, at least in California, you have to hook it to a janky humidity sensing switch that costs more than $20.

I'm just talking about a normal bathroom fan you turn on when you want to have a shower or something. I've honestly never seen one at a hardware store that costs more than about $40. An electrician would take about 15 minutes to install one if you've got a power source nearby, or if you get one with a light built in you could install it yourself by just replacing an existing light fixture with it.

Luckily I don't have the misfortune to live anywhere near California, but that humidity sensor business sounds bizarre. Is that some kind of building-code thing?

Post reply on HN