|
he1ixx, I appreciate the write ups about your housing plan. My wife and I rent, which isn't likely to change for a while yet, but we're both in agreement about wanting a net-zero home when we finally decide to settle someplace for more than 2-3 years. When you were looking for architects, did you have to find someone who specialized in net-zero design, or are most architects going to be familiar with the concept?
|
# ? Jul 17, 2020 16:28 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 13:59 |
|
Baronash posted:he1ixx, I appreciate the write ups about your housing plan. My wife and I rent, which isn't likely to change for a while yet, but we're both in agreement about wanting a net-zero home when we finally decide to settle someplace for more than 2-3 years. Good question. We started by looking for builders and architects who specialized in net-zero and passivehaus. There are apparently a lot of new technologies and techniques in that space and they are constantly evolving. Because those folks are steeped in it, they tend to keep up with it better than the average architect. It is an entire strata of house building all its own. Depending on your state, it may or may not be more prevalent so like, with Vermont, there are net-zero architect associations (usually look for "energy efficient", "net-zero") to find one of those associations near you (Vermont has a few like "Vermont Green Home Alliance" among others). Once you start down the path, you'll find that architects usually like working with specific builders because they know how the net-zero houses are put together, how heating and cooling systems are designed, how they even do "basic" stuff like put up a wall. Both our architect and builder both mentioned that, if you don't find subcontractors who have done this before, they they will invariably oversize your heating and cooling systems, adding cost etc. They basically can't grok the fact that the house envelope can really be that efficient so they fall back on their standard calculations. One quick story -- our architect said to me a week or two ago "Imagine if you have super efficiently insulated wall that is well sealed and just doesn't leak air. A traditional contractor will come in here and oversize your heating based on standard air leakage. It sounds like that wouldn't be a big deal but what you get is a system that comes on, blasts hot air in order to heat a much leakier space and it ends up not being good for the heating system, it causes temperature spikes in the house and often causes moisture and dampness issues because the temperature doesn't come up slowly." So in a nutshell, the little things end up mattering a lot and having someone who has dealt with it in the design stages before will save you time and money down the road.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2020 01:52 |
|
Is there any proven resource on insulation for roofs? I might want to leave a roof in tip top condiition in the future and I wanna do it right.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 08:06 |
|
I found a cool article in an old swedish paper from 1951 and I don't know where to put it, but it feels kinda alternative/eco/buildling related so I thought of this thread. http://runeberg.org/tektid/1951/0890.html So the article is about, at the time, modern central heating, which was then via a boiler and pipes to carry heat to radiators. Wood was a desireable fuel but wood fired boilers back then had low efficiencies. What did burn wood quite efficiently however was the venerable "kakelugn" a massive type of fireplace that circulated the smoke through channels to extract most of the heat from it. Problems with that is they only heat a room at a time and there'd be a lot of labour keeping them going. So hence this idea, it was called a "heating wall". Basically instead of a fireplace, the house was built around a central brick wall that went through the length of the house. The google translatred article says: quote:Heating wall-central heating. Ration probably refers to firewood rationing in WW2. It sounds like a pretty cool concept and sports some very high efficiencies for such old style tech, and secondary burning of the flue gasses too, that's something I associate with modern boilers. Downside is you can't retrofit this into an existing house really. And chimney sweeping will be a bitch.
|
# ? Jan 12, 2021 13:29 |
|
Oh hey, neat, that sounds like a gasifying stove.
|
# ? Jan 13, 2021 11:53 |
|
The whole interior wall as a chimney/radiator, that's a logical conclusion of the contemporary design, always neat to see something like that.
|
# ? Jan 13, 2021 13:40 |
|
Yeah really, that's very elegant. I've something similar-ish (bench not wall), but the janky hippie version: https://permies.com/wiki/57365/Rocket-Mass-Heater-Builder-Guide
|
# ? Jan 13, 2021 20:59 |
|
cakesmith handyman posted:The whole interior wall as a chimney/radiator, that's a logical conclusion of the contemporary design, always neat to see something like that. The concept seems cool but I think it never took off. I was most impressed that such an old design had a secondary burn of flue gasses, that's a big deal for efficiency. But they are actually very simple to bring into use, basically you need some headroom above the fire and a supply of fresh air that goes there. Really cuts down on the amount of sweeping you have to do as well. My own masonry heater has a chamber like that and some holes infront of the fire chamber that lead air up into that space for secondary combustion. Real simple and no fans required. On second thought, I guess it take off in a limited fashion. In finnish houses there'd be a wall sort of like this with channels to circulate the smoke behind the wood fired cast iron stove. That would be used to retain heat from cooking in winter. During summer you could shut off the channels and open a bypass since then you did not want the additional heat. Swedish masonry heaters (rörspisar) are also very nice, and simple to build. It's a kakelugn but no kakel (tile), kakelugn was a thing for rich people, rörspis was for the everyman. I think anyone who wants a fireplace, should consider this design. Firebricks and render basically. One of these would be simple to redesign a little to add some extra fresh air to the flue gasses and add secondary combustion, to make it even more efficient IMO.
|
# ? Jan 14, 2021 05:40 |
|
Absolutely brilliant design for efficiency, only unfortunate thing is the obvious one where it's a likely firetrap for chimney fires and we'd never get it approved under the existing fire code and bulding code (TEK17). Which is a damned shame, something with these kinds of efficiencies ought to be mandatory in wood heated housing. There is a wood-stove floor heating design that's approved, but it has lower efficiencies than this design by a lot.
|
# ? Jan 14, 2021 09:22 |
|
It should be sweepable (the wall that is, rörspisar and such are already sweepable by design), but I read it'd require something like 40 openings for sweeping, so it'd be a lot of work. But with the secondary flue gas combustion, it burns a lot cleaner so you need to sweep a lot less. Also a local company is making something similar, but on a small scale, and claims they got a patent on it. https://www.uunisepat.fi/se/v%C3%A5ra-eldst%C3%A4der/v%C3%A4rmev%C3%A4gg Link in swedish. Basically it's one of these modern radiative heaters fitted with a big chimney block with channels to pass the smoke through for added efficiency.
|
# ? Jan 14, 2021 09:42 |
|
Here's an artice on green building in Finland, article is in swedish but can be google translated somewhat competently. https://svenska.yle.fi/artikel/2021/01/16/dromhuset-ar-byggt-av-lera-betong-och-halm-nykarlebybor-bygger-atervinner-och
|
# ? Jan 18, 2021 12:03 |
|
Found an english article on masonry heaters and this guy seems to be fully cognizant of the importance of extra fresh air for secondary combustion https://www.pyromasse.ca/en/origin.html quote:As the fire burns, air is drawn in through the primary air intake (B), passes up through the grate in the firebox floor (C) and feeds the burning wood load. Due to the internal dimensions of the fire box and its angled ceiling, heat radiating from the fire is reflected off the firebox walls (represented by the droken lines) back on to the fire, helping obtain firebox temperatures of 600 Degrees C. a prerequisite for secondary ignition. This describes the underdraft method of firing. For a comparative description of under and over draft methods of firing, see Firing Instructions. Air from the secondary air intake (D) located in the loading doors, the flame and unburnt gases rush up through the narrow throat in the firebox ceiling (E) and enter the secondary combustion chamber (F). Due to the angled ceiling, the flame, air and gases are pressurised slightly. Once through the throat they expand, tumble and mix, allowing secondary combustion and temperatures in the region of 900 degrees C ( 2,200 degrees F). The hot gases pass over the top of the side walls of the secondary combustion chamber into the vertical flues on both sides of the heater.(G) Drawn by the draft from the chimney, the hot air flows down the flues transferring its heat to the flue walls before entering the chimney at the base of the heater (G). Quite similar to my own heater, except mine does not have a restriction like that. Also some interesting text here, under air and over air. I think most masonry heater designs here are still under air. Not sure it makes that much difference, perhaps to durability, but combustion efficiency should be more or less the same. That kind of design is more reminiscient of more efficient types of wood boilers to me. https://www.pyromasse.ca/en/firing.html quote:When initially introduced to North America 35 years ago the stoves built were fired with under air. This air delivery method allows air to enter below the fire box and rush up through a cast iron grate in the fire box floor. The air enters the centre of the wood load and blows flame upwards in all directions. quote:Today most masonry heaters built in North America are fired with over air. With this method no air comes through the grate which is only used to allow ash to drop and is not necessary at all.
|
# ? Jan 25, 2021 10:24 |
|
Decided to take a look at my masonry heater: You can see the fresh air intake slot if you look carefully (one big hole and not several, remembered incorrectly there). Closer look at the fresh air intake infront of the grille Firebox: Upwards look, hmm, there is a small contraction actually! This thing is made not from firebricks but some kind of industrial byproduct that has a very high thermal capacity and resistance. You can see there is some black here but it's been in use for almost 7 years now and never sweeped. Only the chimney needs sweeping, did that once in 2017 and the sweeper said it was nearly clean anyway. With fireplaces like this, the health hazards of firewood are greately reduced. EDIT: Fired it up, inside looks like this: Outside it looks like this, photo is not the easiest with the grey overcast sky but in real life I couldn't see any smoke either. Usually it just smokes the first couple of minutes until the heat has had time to ramp up. His Divine Shadow fucked around with this message at 11:41 on Jan 25, 2021 |
# ? Jan 25, 2021 11:08 |
|
An episode of the UK tv show grand designs featured a (near) 100% passively heated / cooled house, using the climate battery concept plus being mostly buried under tons of earth like a hobbit house (and insulation). Episode is called: Bletchley 2021 It seemed to work, and helpfully they’d run underfloor heating pipes so they can supplement in the future. Worth a look, though it’s one of the more UK specific and eccentric episodes - and our climate is a hell of a lot less extreme than what you’re dealing with in the US. It’s on channel4.com in the UK, can be found online via other means though for USians, or use a vpn.
|
# ? Feb 7, 2021 12:13 |
|
Whats the concensus on dome houses.
Telsa Cola fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Feb 8, 2021 |
# ? Feb 8, 2021 00:10 |
|
I'm putting some thought into a greenhouse dome large enough to build a house within. I want a comfortable patch of grass my dog can poo poo on in relative warmth in a high alpine valley. Also a tree or two I'll have to bitch about pruning a few times a year after a decade of untended growth. Rig up something to open windows at the top and have a bunch hinged so they can open in arms' reach. Slap a little 600 sq ft cabin inside and enjoy low heating costs. I'm thinking a 60ft diameter would get me what I'm looking for, and possibly make the county scratch their heads over approving anything I bring them. The county I'm looking at has like, 2 pages for land use permit information. 40psf snow load, 115mph wind, 2018 IBC/IRC, requisite soil survey for septic, well permit, utilities inspections, etc. Access permit is $50, mailing address permit is $50, cheap building permit as long as it's not a trailer, which carry very heavy permit fees as a means of keeping people from dragging them into the county. No way in hell I'm getting a loan for the dome, so I'll have to piece it together after I beg the USDA for a rural development loan for the cabin first. It's a couple years away, but that's what I'm daydreaming about. It's going to be a lot of math and glass and manual labor.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 04:47 |
|
Anybody had experience with Earthbag constructions?
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 05:31 |
|
CRUSTY MINGE posted:I'm putting some thought into a greenhouse dome large enough to build a house within. I want a comfortable patch of grass my dog can poo poo on in relative warmth in a high alpine valley. Also a tree or two I'll have to bitch about pruning a few times a year after a decade of untended growth. Rig up something to open windows at the top and have a bunch hinged so they can open in arms' reach. Slap a little 600 sq ft cabin inside and enjoy low heating costs. I'm thinking a 60ft diameter would get me what I'm looking for, and possibly make the county scratch their heads over approving anything I bring them. Have other people done this before? I'd be worried about humidity/moisture, but maybe you can manage that with the windows?
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 05:57 |
|
Humidity is not really a concern at 7500 feet of elevation. Well, not as much as it is at sea level.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 06:03 |
|
I saw a geodesic dome made of bolted together hexagonal acrylic sheets; I don't know the difference between solid acrylic and glass in heat retention other than glass will be better in every way. I don't even know if big acrylic hexes are cheaper than glass but they would be pretty hard to break. Have you considered polythene sheeting? It's a cheaper, much worse version of glass. But it's cheaper. Also a dome or greenhouse without "permanent" foundations counts as a temporary structure in my locale so might help avoid permits. although if they hate trailers maybe that's not much help. Maybe just a glass walled porch facing the sun to trap heat in the house? There is an amusing trend of people in rainy England getting glasshouse/conservatories build onto their house as a connected room, and everyone wilts from the heat in the first summer and replaces the glass roof lol.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 07:04 |
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Have other people done this before? I'd be worried about humidity/moisture, but maybe you can manage that with the windows? It's been done in sweden. https://www.ecorelief.se/ only in swedish tho
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 08:12 |
|
kicks forts posted:I saw a geodesic dome made of bolted together hexagonal acrylic sheets; I don't know the difference between solid acrylic and glass in heat retention other than glass will be better in every way. I don't even know if big acrylic hexes are cheaper than glass but they would be pretty hard to break. I haven't spent the most time researching window panels yet. I'll likely panel up some north facing spaces with wood for a while before eventually replacing them with some variety of acrylic or vinyl, maybe recycle some glass. I'd probably put in concrete piles for a foundation. The counties out there are rough on trailers because they don't want to be littered with even more trailers. Lots of weird properties out there, but it's not the wild west it used to be. A dome would probably be welcome, it's more about not making yet another eyesore. It's cheap rear end land out there, so it attracts a demographic of crazy people who are probably too deep into UFOs and bigfoot. It's a high alpine valley that's a good deal of scrubland. Those glass walled porch greenhouse things just aren't what I'm looking for, I can't grow a few thousand square feet of grass in something that small. Winters are a bit rough up there and I'm not kidding when I say I want warm grass for my dog to poo poo on in January. I'll settle for better than freezing. I'd love to do a 20 meter diameter dome, but 15 meter would probably get me what I'm looking for, though a little tight.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 08:44 |
|
If it's that cold, glass and wood are best at thermal retention. A traditional agricultural greenhouse shape might be cheaper. Especially if self building with timber. Might be better for squeezing a regular cabin inside and maximizing floorspace. I believe that is what the couple did in the popularised example. There is also a "Dutch" traditional greenhouse design where the walls are flared out rather than 90 degree, to take advantage of refraction.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 09:09 |
|
Have you plugged any numbers into the dome generator calculators? This 6v dome calculator shows a 20m diameter dome requires triangular panes over 2m a side. Basically domes this big are monstrous constructions. cakesmith handyman fucked around with this message at 10:22 on Feb 8, 2021 |
# ? Feb 8, 2021 10:20 |
|
Yes I've seen domeramas' expired certificate site. I leaned more toward a 4/9 3v when I started thinking about this. If the windows wind up needing to be huge, I'll frame smaller triangle shapes together to fit. The glass doesn't need to be one constant piece, and will likely be leftover greenhouse poo poo anyhow. Kicks, I was thinking 2x6 or 2x8 timber for the frame. It's just more cost effective than ordering a steel kit, especially if I wind up just using thin, flexible plastic poo poo for the windows. And yeah, it's cold and dry enough there that it's likely a good enough choice. All still very preliminary. Any actual building is a minimum of a year away. E: there's also that new transparent wood that's in development. CRUSTY MINGE fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Feb 8, 2021 |
# ? Feb 8, 2021 15:32 |
|
CRUSTY MINGE posted:Yes I've seen domeramas' expired certificate site. It's endearingly Geocities isn't it. quote:I leaned more toward a 4/9 3v when I started thinking about this. If the windows wind up needing to be huge, I'll frame smaller triangle shapes together to fit. The glass doesn't need to be one constant piece, and will likely be leftover greenhouse poo poo anyhow. Triangular frames 4.4/4.2m per side. Even subdivided you'll need those 4.2/4.4m lengths as single pieces for strength I guess, unless they're all doubled or tripled up. Kind of feels like the higher v domes make more sense the larger you go, but I'm not a professional dome-guy. quote:E: there's also that new transparent wood that's in development. Haha lol no. Wood treated and bleached then infused with clear resin, plastic or glass would be better/cheaper/infinitely easier to get.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 18:59 |
|
I'll be picking an engineers mind at some point, because the county is probably going to want stamped plans for it. I'll generally take their advice on this. Going to need to talk to one about the cabin itself anyhow, since I'm planning on using cribbed 4x4s for the walls. There's current precedent for it in EZLog cabin kits, but 4x4s bought locally from a mill will be cheaper, and 3/4" thicker than the walls they provide in their premium models. I did the math at one point for 1200sqft of interior space, stacking 4x4s is more expensive than traditional stick framed walls, but stronger and easier to do with little manpower. There's amish in the area, too, and some of them do contract roofing and construction. I would love to do a post and beam structure with hempcrete walls, the insulation value is great, but the lime used is expensive and from some part of France, so it'd absolutely murder the skin-of-my-rear end budget I'll be working on. I might buy land this year for this project. Might. Kinda dependent on some stuff, but there's a chance I wind up throwing in on a big plot of land with a friend so we can share septic and a well. If that pans out, I'll probably be able to start the cabin next year.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 19:42 |
|
I'm with the person upthread who suggested an agricultural-style greenhouse. You could still build your cabin inside, but my assumption is that you would probably get more usable space out of it. Alternatively, you could get away with a smaller greenhouse that butts up against your cabin. Still gives your dog the front yard vibe.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 21:05 |
|
cakesmith handyman posted:Haha lol no. Wood treated and bleached then infused with clear resin, plastic or glass would be better/cheaper/infinitely easier to get. I mean that's what that 'clear wood' was, if I understood it correctly. Bleached 1mm thick wood with hydrogen peroxide, then treated with clear epoxy. It's basically fiberglass with lignin instead of glass fibers.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 22:07 |
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Decided to take a look at my masonry heater: Thanks for the in-depth look at your masonry heater, really interesting. For people in the United States (and really, New England) a good resource is "Masonry Heaters" by Ken Matesz. He runs Maine Wood Heat Company. https://mainewoodheat.com/
|
# ? Feb 8, 2021 23:56 |
|
Liquid Communism posted:I mean that's what that 'clear wood' was, if I understood it correctly. Bleached 1mm thick wood with hydrogen peroxide, then treated with clear epoxy. It's basically fiberglass with lignin instead of glass fibers. Yeah sorry, I punctuated that poorly: cakesmith handyman posted:Haha lol no. Wood treated and bleached then infused with clear resin?
|
# ? Feb 9, 2021 00:00 |
|
Baronash posted:I'm with the person upthread who suggested an agricultural-style greenhouse. You could still build your cabin inside, but my assumption is that you would probably get more usable space out of it. Alternatively, you could get away with a smaller greenhouse that butts up against your cabin. Still gives your dog the front yard vibe. I've thought about this too. There's a handful of failed weed greenhouses in the area and I'm sure the recycling yard is littered with good materials. It ends up being more expensive in materials to build a traditional style greenhouse than a dome, though. Usable square footage is an obvious increase but I'm not as worried about around the edges, that's grass and garden space. I've thought about secondary greenhouses radiating from it, which is a good idea too. Like I said, all of this is very preemptive planning, there's a chance I change my mind on a lot of details based on what ends up being cost effective. If that means a smaller greenhouse over the cabin and a handful of small ones attached and around it, so be it. That transparent wood poo poo was in the news today so it felt relevant. I'd be curious to see how it holds up to a good Colorado hail storm though.
|
# ? Feb 9, 2021 00:53 |
|
Haha wow I just realized 20m wide means a 10 metre tall dome. Wow. I know it doesn't have to be a perfect semicircle but do it anyway. one storey cabin w/a three story chimney.
|
# ? Feb 9, 2021 05:36 |
|
CRUSTY MINGE posted:I'll be picking an engineers mind at some point, because the county is probably going to want stamped plans for it. I'll generally take their advice on this. peanut posted:Pre-cut lumber frames, subfloor, and subroof are assembled in one day
|
# ? Feb 9, 2021 06:20 |
|
More like this than that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-zoB8Z3y3E But with locally milled lumber instead of a shipped kit from the east coast. kicks forts posted:Haha wow I just realized 20m wide means a 10 metre tall dome. Wow. I know it doesn't have to be a perfect semicircle but do it anyway. one storey cabin w/a three story chimney. County limit is 35 feet tall before variance is required. Also why I like the 4/9 domes over 5/9 domes, so more like 9~ meters tall.
|
# ? Feb 9, 2021 14:06 |
|
I was just introduced to a new device that we'll be fitting our sauna wood burning heaters with that are going to Germant, where they have a very strict emissions standard (BlmSchV-2). In order to meet that standard the firebox of the heater is fitted with two 12mm or half inch steel plates like this: They direct some of the air around the fire and let it pass up the sides uncombusted, which means the flue gasses get fresh air for... secondary combustion! Sure you reduce the amount of wood you can fit in the heater, but you increase it's efficiency so it needs less firewood and it will burn cleaner. I think it's genius in it's simplicity. You can put the air holes in the front or the back depending on how you place the plates. His Divine Shadow fucked around with this message at 14:17 on Feb 9, 2021 |
# ? Feb 9, 2021 14:15 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 13:59 |
|
Here's an article from a 1937 swedish technical magazine about various wood burning stoves. It seems wood burning technology was a lot more advanced than I thought back then. http://runeberg.org/tektid/1937a/0448.html quote:Technical Journal quote:Ahlgreen stove, it can be said to have picked up its spacious Noting how figure 6 shows a similar function as the plates I mentioned in my last post. This to me is very interesting, and it shows that if you have an inefficient heater, you might be able to upgrade it rather easily. I've long wanted a wooden cooking stove and it's great to hear how advanced they became, in Sweden at least. But I doubt I will ever have one in my home, too modern and nowhere to put one. His Divine Shadow fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Feb 10, 2021 |
# ? Feb 10, 2021 07:35 |