never___nude

never___nude t1_isizru0 wrote

Less efficient was poor choice on my part for words, it’s still efficient, just not a high r value to allow for some heat transfer that inevitably happens anyway. My air barrier is beyond what most do, so even though my r value isn’t really high overall, it’s enough to keep us toasty warm without being expensive - it is technically lower than 2x6 construction, but it’s more energy efficient because of sealing and no thermal breaks. The house originally relied on just fir strips, plaster and paint as the barrier and insulation. What most contractors wanted to do was either go with more r value and get there with sprayfoam pretty much, which was the worst thing we could do for the brick. So our method goes like this from outside to inside — regular brick, air pocket, 9x9 structural clay tiles with webbing and air pockets within, render, air pocket, 1” foam board with foil barrier and finally rockwool insulation and then drywall. The foam board doubles as a reverse barrier in the summer when the house is cooler than outside. The fear of over insulation was a concern because lots of new data suggests that allowing that inner brick to be ‘warmer’ in the winter is how it’s meant to work and why it lasts so long, the same research is showing that allowing the masonry house to breathe is another reason it will last so long. Anyway, in the end, there was way more insulation talk and planning than anyone one of us would of liked but it did save us from spray-foaming everything.

1

never___nude t1_is3n6ie wrote

No it’s not but it is very efficient on its design because of all the air pockets help keep it cool in the summer and it’s very slow to fluctuate with temperature swings. I have been advised against making it too efficient because the brick is meant to stay ‘warm’ in the winter. With huge temperature fluctuations (summer and winter) and an airtight house with too much insulation, it will lead to too much thermal expansion and contraction on the bricks and mortar.

3