|
Home > Archive > Home Repair forum > February 2008 > wall insulation
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Mark Modrall 2008-02-05, 8:25 pm |
| Hi...
We're having some remodeling done that involves pulling off some
drywall here and there. The house is not very well insulated, and we
were thinking of re-insulating at least the parts that get exposed.
The contractor told me that r-19 is as high as you should go in walls
and that taking a thicker bat of higher r-value would just get
compressed in the wall and lose its efficacy.
It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
insulation in 30+ years.
What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
Thanks
Mark
| |
|
| Mark Modrall wrote:
....
> The contractor told me that r-19 is as high as you should go in walls
> and that taking a thicker bat of higher r-value would just get
> compressed in the wall and lose its efficacy.
For fiberglass in 2x4 wall cavity, that's true.
> It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
> insulation in 30+ years.
Fiberglass is still fiberglass -- can't do much to change that...
> What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
There's a much higher R-factor per inch for solid foam products than
fiberglass although I don't recall the number otomh, it's easily googled
(just I'm not going to bother...  ).
It's more expensive, of course, but then again, you get more, too.
Unfortunately, though, unless you do something about the other areas
that aren't insulated as well, you're not going to see anyways near the
increase in overall effectiveness that you're hoping for.
Depending on what you do have, it could possibly be cost-effective to
simply pull the walls at one time and do it all or investigate the
fill-in systems that don't require access other than small holes to
patch later. That, of course, depends on details not provided as to
what is there now.
--
| |
| benick 2008-02-05, 8:25 pm |
|
"Mark Modrall" <mmodrall@verizon.cod> wrote in message
news:mmodrall-24C687.19423805022008@news.verizon.net...
> Hi...
>
> We're having some remodeling done that involves pulling off some
> drywall here and there. The house is not very well insulated, and we
> were thinking of re-insulating at least the parts that get exposed.
>
> The contractor told me that r-19 is as high as you should go in walls
> and that taking a thicker bat of higher r-value would just get
> compressed in the wall and lose its efficacy.
>
> It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
> insulation in 30+ years.
>
> What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
>
> Thanks
> Mark
Not much you can do about R Factor of insulation in a wall just doing patch
jobs here and there...Now if you were doing a total gut there are things you
could do....Like spraying it with Polyurethane Foam....
| |
| Paul M. Eldridge 2008-02-05, 8:25 pm |
| On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:42:37 GMT, Mark Modrall <mmodrall@verizon.cod>
wrote:
>Hi...
>
> We're having some remodeling done that involves pulling off some
>drywall here and there. The house is not very well insulated, and we
>were thinking of re-insulating at least the parts that get exposed.
>
> The contractor told me that r-19 is as high as you should go in walls
>and that taking a thicker bat of higher r-value would just get
>compressed in the wall and lose its efficacy.
>
> It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
>insulation in 30+ years.
>
> What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
>
>Thanks
>Mark
Hi Mark,
Assuming you'd prefer to stick with batt insulation, Roxul's Flexibatt
is rated at R22. It's a really nice product that's easy to work with
(it doesn't itch like traditional glass batt).
See: http://www.roxul.com/sw47757.asp
If, however, you're looking for maximum R-value and money is no
object, high density close cell polyurethane foam can't be beat, but
it's not something a D-I-Y'er can tackle on their own.
See: http://www.sprayfoam.org/
Cheers,
Paul
| |
| Rick Blaine 2008-02-05, 8:25 pm |
| Mark Modrall <mmodrall@verizon.cod> wrote:
> It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
>insulation in 30+ years.
>
> What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
How much money do you want to spend? Spray foam will get you in the 20s, but
isn't cheap. Spray cellulose is also slightly more efficient than fiberglass and
will also improve noise reduction over fiberglass.
| |
| Edwin Pawlowski 2008-02-05, 9:25 pm |
|
"Mark Modrall" <mmodrall@verizon.cod> wrote in message
news:mmodrall-24C687.19423805022008@news.verizon.net...
> Hi...
>
> We're having some remodeling done that involves pulling off some
> drywall here and there. The house is not very well insulated, and we
> were thinking of re-insulating at least the parts that get exposed.
>
> The contractor told me that r-19 is as high as you should go in walls
> and that taking a thicker bat of higher r-value would just get
> compressed in the wall and lose its efficacy.
>
> It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
> insulation in 30+ years.
>
> What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
>
> Thanks
> Mark
He's mostly right with 2 x 4 framing. There are some foam sheets that can
top that, but they are very expensive by comparison. Fiberglass batts are at
about the limit of technology for that material. If you add framing to make
a 2 x 6 equivalent you can add more insulation.
Insulation depends on air to do the work and compressing thicker batts will
reduce the amount of insulating value.
| |
| Wayne Whitney 2008-02-05, 9:25 pm |
| On 2008-02-06, Edwin Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> wrote:
> Insulation depends on air to do the work and compressing thicker
> batts will reduce the amount of insulating value.
For a given thickness cavity, denser insulation will have a higher
R-value. For a 3.5" cavity, you can get low density (R-11), medium
density (R-13) and high density (R-15) fiberglass batts. So if you
took a medium density 5.5" batt (R-21) and stuffed it in a 3.5"
cavity, you would lose R-value relative to the R-21, but you'd still
be higher than R-13.
Cheers, Wayne
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2008-02-05, 9:25 pm |
| closed cell spray foam about R6 per inch, plus its a self vapor
barrier, and best of all it expands and seals all air leaks, making
for a draft free quiet room, since air leaks carry noise...........
if it were me i would go foam since even though it costs more over
time its bound to pay for itself
| |
| S. Barker 2008-02-06, 3:25 am |
| Fiberglass - R-13/15 in a 3.5" wall and R-19 in a 5.5" wall. Slightly
better with cellulose. The new fangled closed cell foams claim a lot more,
but i'm not up on those.
s
"Mark Modrall" <mmodrall@verizon.cod> wrote in message
news:mmodrall-24C687.19423805022008@news.verizon.net...
> Hi...
>
> We're having some remodeling done that involves pulling off some
> drywall here and there. The house is not very well insulated, and we
> were thinking of re-insulating at least the parts that get exposed.
>
> The contractor told me that r-19 is as high as you should go in walls
> and that taking a thicker bat of higher r-value would just get
> compressed in the wall and lose its efficacy.
>
> It just sounded odd that we haven't improved the r-value of wall
> insulation in 30+ years.
>
> What's the best you can do for wall insulation these days?
>
> Thanks
> Mark
|
|
|
|
|